UnbornTao

I'm sorry you think that. Nice twist to the name

Becoming directly conscious of your nature or the absolute nature of existence. I'd avoid trying to sort this out into a playbook or anything like that. Whatever's ultimately true is the goal with that. @Sugarcoat @PurpleTree you guys have no patience

I see, thanks for that.

Enlightenment is always a sudden increase in consciousness. It is not a process, even though what precedes it may contribute in some ways - such as by being open and wanting to know. That's the "direct" aspect. Everything you think about in relation to this matter will involve some kind of process, which is fine. Again, that is largely irrelevant to enlightenment itself. It may affect the body-mind, and these are side effect that come after the fact. Sure, the physical world we share works a certain way, as does your body. They aren't random occurrences. This belongs to the relative domain. You can't work your way around gravity, for example. One should actually set aside everything they think they know about awakening and confront their experience as it is - contemplating, usually, the very one they are (or take themselves to be).

@Razard86 How are you holding state? When one's human self dies, what state will he or she be in? See, could you be sleepy and enlightened? The question would be irrelevant in the first place. The notion of "state" doesn't really directly apply to consciousness, as the latter precedes the former. Would you be less (or more) awakened if you got drunk, or if you hit your head on the bathroom counter - or fell in love? There might be degrees of awakening, but those seem more related to the depth of a person's consciousness than to the truth itself. We're most likely already assuming ourselves to be "persons," too, to whatever degree. State itself is relative. I think you might be referring to (altered) mind states, which are invariably a function of biology - unless you're holding state differently - but how could they be absolute? State involves process and can (and does) change, because it's about perceptive-experience. For example, Sugarcoat brought up the brain. I propose that there's no such thing as "state" without a brain. But again, maybe we're using these terms differently. It's like the hardware and software of a computer, while consciousness is the electricity - so to speak.

No. And I do. The brain is part of the body. Beyond speculating, notice that no ending of activity needs to take place, nor is it necessary to engage in yet another process. It's simply recognizing what's already the case. You may think of yourself as needing to be 'fixed' first before being "worthy" of such a "grandiose" event, but that's not necessary. It's what you are now. You’re making up a requirement in your mind, whereas "getting it" is the only indispensable one. And if you're Leo, you're shit out of luck getting a new haircut.

Why would rewiring the body be necessary for enlightenment? In my view, it'd be like asking for a new haircut before waking up from a dream.

I'm not familiar with his work but I've heard of him and read some of his poems. Interesting person. Why do you ask?

@Sugarcoat Definitely, I recommend checking out his poetry: Haha.

Just that it might be communicating something deeper, different from what we think. It's poetry, after all. We're supposed to be a bit perplexed by it, and hopefully experience something new.

Ask Kabir. Yes, it sounds like that's what he's referring to. But where's your sense of the mysterious?

No, you!

@rudirotbart Are you a troll or a past user? Using AI?

That's sensible, although you can also read others' accounts, at least to seed in your mind the possibility - for example, Ramana. But hey, you can pursue it yourself too, this is what will make a difference in the end.

Oh yeah, I just equated spirituality exclusively with awakening here due to OP's framing. Psychedelics can definitely help with those things, and they can also facilitate insight into the relative domain - enhancing awareness, sensitivity, learning, and so on - but those are about you: healing yourself and improving your experience in some way. What is true, on the other hand, is independent of you. They can't produce an experience of the absolute, just as drinking coffee within a dream won't wake you up from it. Every method is confined to the dream, as if - this is just a metaphor. I wish there were a pill that one could just take and get enlightened as a result, but there isn't. Enlightenment is neither an effect nor a result, and it is neither perceived nor experienced.

At best it might provide us with an interesting notion or possibility. The reason engaging in these discussions is so appealing is that exchanging beliefs is easy. It seems to offload responsibility from our shoulders. We simply make up our minds one way or the other and "pick" the system that feels most agreeable to us. In the end, what have we actually become conscious of by doing that? The result is just a guess or conclusion. It is better to stay open and investigate these matters experientially.

I'd add that possibility is open-ended. That applies to context too, in the way I'm holding it as 'possibility.' But a context obviously has to be particular. It can't not be nothing, or anything. Otherwise there would be no use for the term/distinction. But it is not a thing - it is neither objective nor found, it isn't formed, and it seems to precede perception. Language is language, not something else. What is that particular context? Not the content of language, such as symbols or metaphor, but what allows you to think about such distinctions in the first place? We may say that Mind is the larger "house," without which the subcontext - in this case, Language - can't manifest. But I don't know.

Why do people care about this in the first place, and what do they get out of it? Essentially, it's the dissemination of a belief system. Whatever is true - notice that this is left as an open question - must be personally realized.

Could you clarify what you are afraid of again? Also, what do you mean by nondual states?

You can always inquire into what you are, beyond any particular character or behavioral pattern you're engaged in. In ancient China, there were enlightened warriors who fought and killed in battle. We can distinguish between what one is conscious of and how one lives life. The things you could do prior to awakening remain the same - the difference lies in consciousness of what you are. Please don't take the example out of context.