Shanmugam

1. Truth has no levels. Truth/Reality is all there is. There is no disagreement here 2. This is where there is a problem. I will elaborate a little bit here... a) Each person's mind has a hard nut to crack. It is like an outer layer. (Bad habits, shit beliefs, idiotic Ego attachments, stupid fears and superstitions, backward culture, abusive childhood, religious conditioning etc )... b) The real glimpse of enlightenment - some people may say that they are beginning to awaken here.. c) Actual enlightenment - (I am not going to define it this time) you cannot bypass this... d) Lifelong deepening of enlightenment - this happens automatically for the rest of your life.

@Nahm I don't mind the circle jerk... .. I have asked @SOUL an important question; waiting for his reply..

@Shin Did you make this? very funny!

Probably! This issue regarding the words keeps coming up again and again.. I had realized long back that many arguments and debates stem from the fact that people choose to define the words differently. This is something that has to be realized once and for all. From age 15, I was curious about the fact that there are so many contradictory traditions for different things in the world. It has always amused me. Later I realized that it is because of semantic discord: It is because of this, Buddhism and Vedanta became two different traditions. I have explored that deeply in my book in trying to prove that Buddhism and Vedanta originated from Samkhya or a proto-tradition. I have also written about ego in detail in another post:

First of all, I never claimed as an authority for anything, and I never will. There are certain things which I have highlighted many times in my blog and the posts I have written in this forum: 1) Follow your own light; don't consider anyone as the only or infallible authority. 2) No one is infallible, including enlightened people. All I said was there is really nothing that I would disagree with in your post. Anyone has the right to agree or disagree, right? Does that give any implication that I claim to be an authority? I don't endorse authorities at all! I am just trying to be a friend.. that's it! I don't compare myself with others, in terms of superiority or inferiority. I have no reason to do that. It is actually an irony that you are associating the word 'authority' with what I have said, when I have been criticizing all the so-called 'authorities'... I used that word because your post appeared in a thread that already had a lot of replies and your question was a just a one-line question without any context (like quoting a part of what I said). Your post was just this single line: 'So if I have a different personal experience of it than you say it is are you going to tell me I'm "not"?'.. I had no idea if you were referring to a specific post I had made recently or something I said in the original post... What is the big deal about the word 'suddenly' anyway? Maybe there is a communication problem here... The only thing I want to stress in this thread is 'You are either enlightened or not enlightened'... But I never said that it is strictly based on my description and it strictly has to mirror everything that I said.. I have given enough explanation for it in previous posts... But I know what enlightenment is.. And it is binary. You can go back to the wine example by Osho. No matter how many times you deny it, what is implied in the statement 'Either you are enlightened or not enlightened' is not going to change. Because that is true.. But it may offend people who consider themselves to be enlightened and still looking for the next level of enlightenment. (there is lifelong deepening but it happens on its own accord. It is not based on an agenda or will). Just by saying this, I am not claiming to be an authority. In fact, I have already repeated many times that great people like Ramana Maharshi and Osho said the same thing. . I also mentioned that Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev who is quoted often in this forum also says the same thing. And I also know the pitfall in preaching that enlightenment is not binary. You still don't know why I said 'The best help you can do to people is to not to open your mouth anymore'? Ok.. Remember the following post?: This post you made was on a thread that was started by me on Dec 19, 2017. The thread was inactive for a long time until there was a comment from @Deep on Jan 10, 2018. This time the discussion was totally different. Your post 'suddenly' appeared with no context, the moment I posted the cover for my next book. And here is what you said: For a second, I couldn't figure out the context because I was discussing something totally different with Deep. Then I realized that it is actually for the original post. I had posted the original post with a detailed description of enlightenment in two other places as well: In my blog and in Quora. The post was intended for total newbies who are wondering what enlightenment is all about. In fact, the post begins with the following lines: "I am sharing an answer that I wrote in Quora. Hope people find this useful, especially the newbies in this forum"... When I am writing a post for newbies, do you expect me to just write 'I am that I am' as the description of enlightenment? Reply to this question. You can see how the conversation continued after that. You complained about using too many words. So the sentence 'The best help you can do to people is to not to open your mouth anymore' is based on something that you said. If words are the problem, then it is best to not open your mouth. Correct? I am talking about silent teachings..

@SOUL The post you just made is fine .. There is really nothing I would disagree with in what you have written... But just look back on our previous conversations and see what exactly started the whole thing... First, you had already assumed that whatever I said were my beliefs. That is not true... What I am trying to do in general is actually very different. Simply put, I wanted to write about non-duality in such a way that it appeals mainly to skeptical people and scientifically minded people.. I have a blog and I write answers on Quora too. I usually talk about simple things keeping the level of seekers in mind. I want to keep everything culturally neutral. My main intention when I started my blog was to raise awareness of scientific study on spiritual enlightenment. But gradually I started getting comments and emails and I finally ended up writing a book. I planned none of these and I never even thought all these things were going to happen in the last one year. You suddenly came in and asked me 'So if I have a different personal experience of it than you say it is are you going to tell me I'm "not"? I didn't understand the purpose of your question at all. Anyway, what I simply did was to describe the exact change that happened to me after my duality ended. And the following were my exact words: "When you feel no separation from the rest of the existence, when you don't have a boundary in your experience that creates an 'I' and an 'other', when you no longer feel trapped inside an identity, when you feel no conflict or split inside the mind, when you feel fulfilled and in peace, when there are forgiveness and acceptance and when you also realize that all these words that I have mentioned so far still haven't captured the truth, the seeking has ended." And you responded by saying 'Well, you are describing many varieties aspects of this "absolute truth" and "enlightenment", even in this passage that I quote here as well as in the opening post and throughout the thread.' I was not describing many varieties of the absolute truth. In fact, everyone knows the limitations of language when it comes to describing it. I am simply putting my experience into words... You also asked me 'Does everyone's experience of it have to mirror your descriptions exactly or you will say they are "not"?' And I gave you a very clear reply for that too: First of all, I don't know any foolproof way to confirm somebody else's enlightenment. And anybody who has realized the truth wouldn't be looking for my validation either. So, there is no need for such a question. Second, the way they describe it can be different depending on their word choices, the meaning they give to those words and the ability to articulate. But when someone describes how they experience the reality every moment, I have many times noticed the truth and authenticity of what they are saying. The words don't have to be same but they can still hint what they are pointing to. There were a few more posts after that. But I wasn't sure what exactly your intention was and what you were trying to prove. You need to understand why I say enlightenment is binary. I am not sure how you understood it. Let us say someone gets a glimpse of the truth. He is so excited about the glimpse and he now starts to teach everyone about how to get enlightened... He will certainly mislead people. And if he hears that enlightenment has many levels, it certainly gives him a license to teach even though he is not ready yet. In fact, everyone certainly crosses a line where he completely transcends the duality. This is enlightenment. And no one can bypass this line. Keeping this in mind, almost everyone else including Ramana Maharshi said 'either one is enlightened or not enlightened'.. If you say that this is wrong, you are saying Ramana Maharshi is wrong. You are saying Osho is wrong. But Why? What exactly is the problem? A person going beyond duality is one thing. The same person attempting to guide others is a different thing. Once you are enlightened, your problem is over. You are no longer seeking. But when you try to communicate with others and explain certain things to others, you need to keep many things in mind. All that matters is how helpful the guidance is to someone who is seeking... Do you know what sounded so weird to me? I was talking about writing a book on historical Jesus and his teachings in a different thread.. The book is mainly intended for people who are conditioned by Orthodox Christianity. My only intention was to write a book in such a way, which can make an orthodox Christian to question his beliefs and conditioning. Even if the person who reads it gets just a little spark or interest to explore the non-duality further, the job of that book is over. Got it? In fact, I thought of writing the book because of a friend that I know. She is also a Christian but she is going through a very hard time... But you came on that thread suddenly and said "Why so many words? Why can't just say 'i am that I am''.. I just ended our conversation with sarcasm. And you came on this thread with almost the same tone. And you are still trying to prove something.. What exactly is the problem? And why are you keep assuming that all these are my beliefs? Are you a mind reader? When I write something, I don't write it based on what I believe in. I write it based on what I know.

In 2008, I kind of asked similar questions to two people who were teachers... I communicated with them via email. And I had read in a book of Osho that an enlightened person never dreams during sleep... I was a seeker at that time trying to figure out all these things with the same curiosity that you have now. So, I naturally asked a question to one of those teachers who is Joan Tollefson (You can look her up, she is well known) .. But she replied that she did get dreams during the night. And recently I also read a talk by Ramana Maharshi in which he also says he had dreams at night... ... But there are people who actually never dream. In our same actualized.org forum, a member (Anna) once said that she never dreams at night. Now let us look at the confident statement by Osho: 'An enlightened person never dreams'... Is it true? The truth was probably Osho never dreamed. . This is just one example. I have seen so many such things which are generalized to all enlightened people based on something that occurred to only a few, whether enlightened or not enlightened. And this is also something which I usually state many times. Anyway, the questions are centered around trying to intellectually understand certain things like the feeling of doer-ship and many other things. Because my reply is going to be only through words and I have no idea what those words will really convey to you. Anyway, I will try. 1) The decisions are made using 'intellect'. It is the faculty which is responsible for making decisions. And intellect is still there in my brain. . But there is no dilemma and no regrets. I have never asked myself 'oh shit, what have I done? I shouldn't have done that'. Whatever that has been done is complete and over! This is what I meant when I said there is no internal conflict. But I have taken more than an hour to type just a single post in a thread. And I may take breaks in between if I feel like. Nothing is predictable. 2) Mindful of breath? I never worried about such things after enlightenment. When you were learning to drive a bicycle, you had to pay attention to balancing and people would have told you not to shake your hips. Do you pay attention to all those things now when you drive a bicycle? But I don't have a monkey mind though. My thoughts are very much conscious, channeled towards some specific topic. Beleive it or not, thoughts about past is very rare (only used for things that are essential.. I had to think about the past now when I was writing this post)... And I almost never think about the future. It is only other people around me who remind me that there is a future... . It is not an exaggeration. And when I am deeply thinking about a certain thing, I obviously won't pay attention to less important things which are happening in front of me. . I sometimes get random thoughts too. 3 and 4) When I sleep, I am not conscious of my body. The intellect is shut down during deep sleep, so there is no decision making. But consciousness is very much awake. It is just that there is nothing to be conscious of. But waking up from sleep certainly doesn't feel like I am transitioning from one state to another state. And even in dreams, I am not identified with anything. 5) No doer-ship at all. But anyway, it is completely useless to ponder over such things.

@Joseph Maynor @MarkusSweden @Ocean Joseph! I am going to give a try again, just to share my thoughts, just to let you know the way things are going in this conversation and other conversations where you are a part of. But I have absolutely no doubt regarding one thing. I know you have studied a lot. I have seen a lot of the threads started by you. And I am in agreement with many things that you have said over the last few months. And you may have very deeply understood about projections and how somebody psychologically projects things. And I assume that your definition of the word projection is what is universally accepted in Psychology: "Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others". I know it happens a lot. But do you notice that you are using this 'projection' as an objection in almost every thread where somebody disagrees with you? Do you notice that two people in the same thread have already pointed this out to you? If you feel like I am getting on your nerves even a little bit as you are reading this line, then just slow down. And this is not a projection. What I just said was something that can happen to anybody, because these lines are obviously talking something about you and there might be an immediate tendency to react and defend. Please notice that I have used the word 'might' in the last sentence and that is highlighted in bold. It is to remind you that I am not projecting, but I am stating a possibility. In other words, I am saying something that I am not certain about you. Because, anyway, I am not a mind reader and I know could be totally wrong. . But what I know for sure is the fact that a typical human being always want to defend himself. Of course, I appreciate your honesty. I see you are being honest and straight forward. But I see a lot of seriousness in your posts. Again, this is not a projection. You may be probably having a good laugh over all these threads and laughing your ass off while drinking whiskey after you log off. And you may be a wonderful guy who takes everything easy. I have no idea. But just in case there is a 0.001 possibility that you are indeed being very serious, my suggestion would be at least notice it and become aware of it. Again, I am not trying to control you. I am not trying to force my values on you. I am just making a very casual conversation like a friend. I am neither preaching you nor advising you. But I am trying to say to you exactly what you seem to be trying to explain here. Let me quote what you said in one of the posts in this thread. Now, don't jump to conclusions. I am not saying that you are trying to look smart. (Just in case if you misunderstood me ). I don't even see that as a possibility. So, that is not the reason why I quoted those lines. I quoted those lines because of the phrase 'Trust me, I did this for way too long myself, so I get it '... You are hitting the nail on the head here. I see the genuineness in this line. And this is exactly how I felt when I read some of your posts. This is exactly why I wrote a long post quoting you in another thread. . Because, you reminded me of certain things that I thought of doing for way too long myself. But does saying all this means that I am trying to show that I am wiser than you? No.. Trust me... I don't have that intention at all. And I don't even want to say that you are projecting this on me. . I am just being honest. I know very well that I don't know you in real life. You may be a lot different from what is being glimpsed here. Because, while you know what you did starting from your childhood to till date, while you know every step that you have walked, I don't know even a single thing about you. You may be the most wisest person on the earth. Anyone can possibly be! There are 7 billion people on the earth, each having lived their life in totally different ways. Even a husband and wife living in the same house sometimes don't understand each other... So, it will be certainly impossible to try to make assumptions about a human being that I haven't seen for the entire life! That is the reason why I sometimes write posts against making assumptions about people. I try to choose the words very carefully to make sure that they don't bring up different connotation or say something that I never intended. I hope I have written this post in such a way that it leaves no room for you to say that I am trying to project, trying to control you or trying to force my values on you.

Excellent! Actually, an enlightened person doesn't really decide to become a teacher one day. It just happens that way. If you are walking on a street and if you see a person who seems to have lost his way, your natural response will be to show him the way. It all starts very gradually like that. Becoming a guru may sound attractive to a seeker but after enlightenment it will be clearly seen not only as one of the most boring jobs but talking about it to others would seem to be an impossibility. This is not an exaggeration. I have read a quote somewhere it goes like this: Before enlightenment, a person has a lot of idea on what to teach, but he has not really seen through the illusion yet. But after enlightenment, a person has no idea what to say about it... This is one of the other reasons why I actually opened this thread. If a person thinks enlightenment is not binary but thinks that there are multiple levels of enlightenment, he will think 'ok, I understand many things that I never understood before. And anyway, I will keep reaching higher and higher levels of enlightenment and it doesn't end. So Let me start preaching others!'... But this is not how everything begins. I think Eckhart Tolle is quite honest about how he became a teacher. He talks about it in the book 'The Power of Now' in the beginning. If you read that you will get an idea. Of course, people who have already started teaching will object to this. That will be the most expected response. That is why I took my time to articulate as much as I could in this thread to give some idea about how enlightenment really feels like.

Everything that is happening is indeed the expression of the truth or the absolute reality itself... There is no question about it. When anybody thinks, says or does something, it is indeed an expression of the absolute. But there is this wrong notion 'I am the doer', which is so deep rooted. To put it in the language of a devotee like Rumi, St.John of Cross or Kabir, whatever seems to be happening is the divine expressing itself, a play of the absolute that happens according to God's will. But this God is just another name for the absolute. It is not a person but a poetic personification.

Your last post was indeed a question that ended with the question mark. And I am just making sure that the question has been understood properly and answered completely. In other words, I am making sure that the communication is properly happening between both of us.

Ok.. I think I understand what you are saying. Correct me if I am wrong. A person who is enlightened is certainly not identified with an 'enlightened identity'. A person who still considers himself as 'enlightened one' is still stuck in an identification and certainly not liberated yet. But please note than I am talking about something which goes on inside a person's mind, not something that a person says. It is very important to understand the difference between the two. Because, one thing that I am noticing again and again in this forum is this: People very quickly tend to assume something about others. And I feel this has gone way out of control. . As I have mentioned in a couple of earlier posts in this thread, an 'enlightened person' is indeed an oxymoron. Because, this so called enlightened person is not identified with anything; He doesn't even see himself as a person. As far as he is concerned, he is absolutely nothing, just an emptiness. He doesn't have any kind of need to define himself to himself. Does this make sense? But I will tell you what someone will come and say. Suddenly somebody will quote this message and say that all these are my beliefs, all these are concepts that I am identified with or that I am projecting something on something. . This is what I mean when I say 'people are so busy in making assumptions about other people'. What happened in my life was like coming to a full circle. So, to be really honest with you, whatever that people are trying to do here are something I myself have done at some point. And this is very clear and obvious to me. There is no question about it. . But I understand. At every step in one's journey, there is always a temptation to show off at least a little bit of what has happened in one's progress. They are probably very excited about their new recent insight, that they somehow assume that almost every person that they interact with still haven't seen that new insight yet. In other words, there is an overconfidence which implies 'You people haven't understood what I have understood'. And this probably happens again and again in every step of one's journey. Because, the duality is very deep rooted. Many teachers would say 'You can awaken this very moment'; but that is only a pointer! It is only said to indicate that what they are searching for is already there.. It is a gentle reminder to make sure that a person always understands enlightenment as not something that has to be gained or achieved. But in reality, this apparent journey of a seeker is actually too long; and there is always a resistance to the progress at every step. Almost at every step of the journey, the ego tries to take credit for it and somehow reassert the existence of the illusory self. It doesn't want to go away that easily. It wants to say to the world 'I got it'!... Have I answered your question completely?

Can you please elaborate? I am not sure if it is a coincidence but this is the second post in a row that I am replying to, which somehow makes me realize that I still have to improve my English comprehension.

You are welcome buddy

Welcome to the forum .. Sorry, I didn't really understand what you said though. By the way, I am not a native speaker of English. English is my second language. So, I am not familiar with many expressions or colloquial phrases..

@SOUL Here is what you are trying to do. You are creating an imaginary problem and then trying to offer a solution for the imaginary problem... What the hell do you mean by 'limiting beliefs'? What the hell in my posts indicate that all these are beliefs? Stop fooling yourself and other people in the forum. The best help you can do to people is to not to open your mouth anymore and not to try to appear too smart. You are the one who is trying to create limitations here. Do you see that? I have noticed almost a dozen of your posts in this forum (while replying to many people here, not just mine) which have only one implication. The underlying message is always 'You shouldn't have said that'.

@Faceless Yes.. Osho was a person. Check my last post for the links..

@Heart of Space Sure.. Most of his books are available for free online. He didn't write them but those books are the collections of his transcribed talks. I will give you a crash course on how to read his books for free. If you go to this link, you will find the complete timeline of his talks and you will also find the name of the books: http://www.sannyas.wiki/index.php?title=Osho_Events You can just copy the name of the book and search in google by adding the word 'pdf'. You can also read all his books for free in this online library: http://www.osho.com/iosho/library/the-books . You would need to register for free there if you want to read more pages. It is free registration. Read his books casually, as if you are listening to your friend gossiping. If he sounds like a jerk, don't mind and treat him like one of your close friends who always talks like a jerk. He lies a lot and he admits it. He didn't care about factual accuracy and he admits it too. His main intention was to crack the hard nut that surrounds people's minds. That hard nut is made up of years and years of conditioning. You can enjoy many adult jokes and interesting stories.

Good question ... I am waiting to see your reaction after I tell you his original name... Do you know Rajneesh?

wow, I missed that quote in this thread the first time it was posted.. Thanks for bringing it back. I love that quote too.

@SOUL @Heart of Space Something that I want to add here.. I was exposed to very deep teachings when I was too young. And I totally misunderstood them, until I came across Osho's books when I was about 18 or 19 years old. And he indeed was a genius. He was also probably the only teacher who has created different impressions about him on different people. One group would think of him as a dangerous, fraudulent cult leader who was as evil as devil. Another group would think of him as the greatest spiritual guru of this century. In fact, if a person reads a random page from a random book of Osho for the first time, it is very much possible that he would put that book down and hate him for the rest of his life. But after reading Osho, everything that I had learnt before made perfect sense to me. And three years after reading Osho, everything that I read from Ramana Maharshi, Nisargadatta Maharaj, Eckhart Tolle and many others made perfect sense to me as well. And let me tell you what Osho did and how he taught. During his initial years, he talked about Jesus; Christians gathered around him and became his disciples. He talked about Krishna; Vaishnavas became his disciples. He talked about sufis; many muslims became his disciples. He talked about yoga; and many people who were inclined towards yoga became his disciples. He did that for every tradition for many years. Then suddenly one day he stopped giving public talks. So much illegal things happened during two years when he was in public silence. Many people committed crimes and many people left. After two years he started to talk again. And his talks were so different this time. Do you know what he said? He said that he couldn't talk directly to people because each person was conditioned according to his own tradition. Nobody listened when he started to talk the first time. So, he went their way and started talking about their traditions. People were attracted. Once he found enough people to pass his teachings to next generation, he wanted to get rid of unwanted people. So, he went silent for two years. Many people left as he expected. He then started criticizing about everyone, including Jesus, Krishna and even Buddha. It is a trick again. But this time no one left! And he could teach them directly and bluntly. This way, he appealed to many people and he also busted many myths. I will talk more about him when I find time. The only way to show my gratitude towards Osho is to keep passing the light he gave me. He saved me from suicide and I want his vision to come true.

@Heart of Space thank you for your love

If you feel like it is not a problem for you, then its fine.. No problem. Not everyone goes through the same problem... As I said, what I write is strictly based on my own experience - from the time I was starting out as a seeker till this date. That is the only choice I have. And people who have the same personality as me would find many of these things certainly helpful. Above all, I have seen an older version of my 'old little self' in many people I have come across. So, sometimes I do see exactly what they are going through.