Search the Community

we all know the pointings of all the religious texts is towards this non-duality which is confused but investigating that further to find the true-er meaning... as bible/quran say that do good and then you will get heaven and live there eternally heaven = enlightenment / end of the Ego/personal self so once 'someone' gets enlightenment - will 'he/she' now eternally exist in that blissful state after the death of 'their' body? like when mooji or e.tolle's body physically dies in this world, their now 'awakened soul' will not re-attach to another human baby form or something and have to live out life? will that 'awakened soul' just exist (we cannot say what, but will it not be reborn again? live eternally in heaven that is) ? yes, i know before/after enlightenment - chop wood carry water. but wanted to explore this point. another thing is this, it seems "pointless" in a way that if in my current living life, i get enlightenment and then live out the rest of it in a non-dual state only then to be reborn as another human avatar and live a life of suffering again it does seem imperative that enlightenment should be the end of the illusory world finally, i also firmly believe that the mystical/magical/fairtale version of heaven is there to be had as well - if an abiding muslim prays 5 times a day, does good, harms no one, lives selflessly (while still in a egoic mind) i.e. does good deeds, isn't bad to anyone etc. then she/he will attain heaven after their 'death' just like a person experiences their respective beliefs during a psychedelic trip or during a near-death experience - same way upon the death of their physical body, they will experience something in line with their belief - a heaven with flowing rivers of milk, fruits, women, whatever gets you excited i believe that the ending of the personal self ego is the highest level but living out this life of illusion as a pious, kind person such that your soul/consciousness is not guilty and is at peace would equal to getting the next level of existence within the illusion and that would be heaven ... or hell if one holds that belief and they have done "wrong" according to them for which their soul is not at peace (eternal bad trip after death awaits those)

This is by far the most accurate model/map of personal development towards your journey of reaching full enlightenment. If you still go to school/work then you still have not reached stage 8, so it is very crucial that you reach that level of development so that you can physically alter your reality and go towards the next stage.

That's been my experience as well. Going all the way and fully surrendering the self is no small feat. That means anything could happen. You may quit your job and move to a village in a third world country, you may leave your family and children, you may become homeless, you may become insane, you may end up in a mental institution, you may become ostracized by the community. Very very few people are willing to fully surrender and open up all possibilities: in part, because they fear the "negative" outcomes. I've never met anyone that went all they way. The nice thing about psychedelics is you can temporarily experience full surrender and full ego-death. One thing I'm working on is attachment to beliefs and thoughts. Sometimes, I get the sense that thoughts in my head are "more right" than other people's thoughts. Even the thought in this thread that "most people want a little Enlightenment mixed with a little Ego". I can still sense a little bit of identification - that this thought is "more right" than the thought that "most people want full enlightenment and to surrender the ego".

Would you say that Martin Ball is enlightened ? What did he manage to do/stop doing that you didn't yet ? ___________________________________ THE TRULY WISE OLD MONK A young Zen monk was recognized by his teacher as having experienced an initial breakthrough enlightenment (Japanese: satori, kensho). His teacher then told the young man that, for realizing complete, irreversible enlightenment (Sanskrit: anuttara-samyak-sambodhi), he would need to study under a certain wise old master whose small temple was situated in another part of the country. And so the young man set off to meet the old master. After several weeks of travel, he finally arrived at the remote temple. The sentry told him that all the other monks were meditating or working at their daily chores, and sent the young man straightaway to the shrine hall to meet the venerable master. Entering the shrine hall, the young monk espied an old man doing repeated prostrations to a simple statue of the Buddha, softly chanting the name of Buddha Amida (who saves all sentient beings from suffering). The young man was shocked. Having realized from his teacher the basic truth that the Self or Buddha-nature is formless openness-emptiness, utterly transcendent and all-pervasive, he was a bit disturbed to see the old man apparently still caught up in such “dualistic” practices—ritually bowing to an idol and chanting with devotion to a mythical Buddha. And so he came up to the aged monk, introduced himself, and, from his “truly enlightened” perspective, proceeded to lecture the old man on the futility and stupidity of worshiping mere forms. Finally, his brief rant over, he realized that, having traveled such a long way to meet the “master,” he should probably ask the old monk for whatever wisdom he had to share. “So, old man, what can you tell me about full enlightenment?” In response, the master smiled, said nothing, and resumed sincerely bowing in gratitude before the statue of the Buddha, gently invoking the Name of Amida on behalf of all beings…. And, in a flash, the young man fully understood the way of complete spirituality, and he, too, spontaneously began to bow to the Buddha, right alongside the old master.

So coral=full Enlightenment? Abiding non dual awareness?

1)You are proving my point. You shouldn't take me as an authority as well. You are still disagreeing with me because ken wilber said it, not providing a reason( which he still explicitly doesn't ). This proves that for you, if a guru with a lot of followers would say it, it would be true. You are just going here and there looking for authority 2)Also if enlightenment can happen at any stage, by your logic, why look for enlightened behaviour from an enlightened person. Are you saying you suddenly transcend everything? That's ridiculous, think about it 3) For you attachment to beliefs is like, if a more cooler guru would say it, it would be true. So I shouldn't hold my ground just because ken wilber says it? Which he even doesn't. That's attachment to beliefs for you. One day I would say Truth is only One and it's in my direct experience, and you would say I am attached to my beliefs. Am I attached to my beliefs or not? 4) By watching the first few minutes, I know what will be discussed. I don't need to really watch the video. Even if he talks about 3rd tier, thats pure semantics. Anybody could be talking about the same thing with different meaning. My reason is simple, full enlightenment cannot happen at tier 1, because ego is not mature enough to fully see it's falseness. If it was, it won't be at tier 1. Unless you could provide me with examples or some good reason, why would change my stance? I know enlightenment requires a certain degree of maturity, and tier 1 doesn't has it.

1) This not an intellectual debate. Rather than speaking from experience, you are posting ken wilber videos as an authority to prove your point. I am speaking from experience and my understanding of enlightenment is perfect. 2) I have said that you can have minor awakening experiences in tier 1 but not full enlightenment. Rather than stating your reason for a contrary argument, you are posting a ken wilber video. And again the video you posted doesn't seem to refute my point 3) Your definition of research seems to me is blindly following someone. You haven't given me any reason why my reasoning is incorrect I would be very happy to have a proper conversation about this and I am willing to change my stance if you could give me some evidence or reason. You don't seem to be doing that

Full enlightenment without physical death may not exist really. In the beginning Eckhart tells a story about a monk in a monastery, even they may be prisoned in the ego.

Correct, full enlightenment would imply drawing back into the all mind and knowing what the all mind knows. This would require us to be beyond our corporeal form. We may have figured out aspect about the nature of everything, but that doesn't mean we will have access to everything the all mind does. Fitting infinite into finite doesn't work. We are basically forced to experience the various depths of the all mind though until the mind decides its time to draw us back in. This mind is our home

When I read threads here I see a few members that are truly great, they seem to know everything and have an aura of enlightenment about them. However, it still feels like they are refusing to make the very last step to finally become fully enlightened, like they hold something back. Like they are 99% enlightened and not aim any higher that that. At very rare occasions though, I see members who are all in so to speak, 100% , I often notice when facing those posts already after reading the first sentence. I can't nail what's special about them, they just are. They just feel so incredible transparent, honest and full of integrity. I feel their words digs in to my body and deliver silence and truth. What I notice about these posters is that they are not interesting in socialising or sharing ideas back and forth, they often just post one single post and that's it, then they are gone for good. In a way, all of those "One post wonder"- members had a dark picture of life. But it didn't felt dark at all reading them, rather it felt liberating to read them. A few of them decided to commit suicide, others have chosen to stay but they know there is nothing to gain in doing so. They just let the lucid dream continue, but for no reason really. The reason why I don't feel sad reading those dark posts is because I recognise how they desire REAL enlightenment in a way. And if you want REAL enlightenment, you can't really desire any aspect of worldly life, not even "enlightenment" within a body mind, and that explain the dark nature of their posts(which paradoxically aren't dark at all). They were not satisfied to reach a point were they saw through duality. They wanted more(same as less), they were not satisfied with a lucid dream within an agent lost in maya, they wanted FULL awakening. And think about it, first you don't recognise reality as a dream, you believe it is real, then you recognise it's nothing but a dream(maya). You're having a lucid dream by now, but that's not really to be fully awake. If you have a dream at night, and start realising you're in the middle of a dream, you might find it fascinating to be in a lucid dream for a while, but after that initial bliss and freedom of realising you're in a lucid dream, don't you want to quit the game all together, folding up to ten and become fully awake? I can't see how you can stay within a body mind and be fully enlightened, even if you don't identify at all with the body mind that carries you around. Can you? Also, at my most blissful in moments in life, when I really enjoy life the most, thoughts like "Nothing could be better then to be physical dead" have come to my mind. Those thoughts only come when I really experience great happiness in life, I think that is because the supreme creator know that I can handle the truth at that time. Those kind of thoughts never come me, when life isn't that good, then I think of a new car, a new carrier, a new girlfriend or anything other superficial. Elaborate.

Meh. There are two different meanings of "ego", one spiritual, one from analytic psychology. There is no law that says the only correct meaning of "ego" is the psychoanalytic one. Plenty of words have more than one meaning, each for a different context. "Ego" in the context of "ego death" (i.e. in the spiritual context) refers to the limited, separate self doer/thinker narrative. "Ego" in analytic psychology also refers to the conscious, self-identifying portion of the personality. When one identifies with the (analytic psych.) ego as "the self", and then there's an awakening, it is this association that dies. Naturally the archetypes that express themselves through that portion of the personality don't die. Thus there's no (spiritual context) "ego" in full enlightenment, there is however a personality expressed in a "natural state" (psychoanalytic ego complex of archetypes integrated with shadow.) There is now a Self.

Almost all Indian gurus hint that achieving full enlightenment is next to impossible and a spiritual journey can be completed in many lives. Western spiritual teachers speak politically correct language about enlightenment.

I'm confused about the difference between illusion and consciousness. If the self is an illusion, why does it matter to become conscious that it is an illusion? Whether I am conscious of what reality is or not, reality is still reality. Right now, the exact stage of consciousness I have, is reality, isn't it? No matter how I describe it, even if it is illusion, it is exactly what it is. And even my beliefs about it are exactly what reality is as well? When I believe that the earth is flat, the belief of the earth being flat is reality. It is existing, whether it is illusion or not. What is the difference between being fully immerse in it or being conscious of it being illusion? It doesn't change the truth, because the truth is the truth no matter what state of consciousness exists. What does it matter whether a state of reality is what we call "enlightened" or whether it is "non-enlightened", I mean both of them are reality as it is, one including complete immersion and the other does not. Though I guess it is just total immersion in a new state, because at every state one is always totally immersed in reality as it is. Isn't becoming conscious of truth itself changing reality and thus changing the truth? Because to a bird, the truth is being a bird. To an enlightened being the truth/reality is non-duality. Wouldn't accepting reality truly also mean accepting the illusion and the resistance, and isn't that what I already am doing? Isn't it in fact the only thing I can do? No matter what I do, I am surrendering exactly to what is happening, because it is happening. I am surrendering to resistance, to ignorance and non-consciousness. Aren't we all already in a state of not knowing, or just being as we are? Aren't we all absolutely immersed in the present moment? How could we be otherwise? The moment is everything that exists, including illusions about past and future. But these illusions are here, and even if we believe those illusions, that is still reality as it is. There is no way to escape the truth because everything is the truth as it is. Isn't the existence of the chirping bird itself a complete surrender to reality? Isn't everything that happens at all a complete surrender to reality as it is, because that is what reality is! No matter how reality changes, no matter what ignorance ceases to be, it all is at every single stage reality precisely as it is. Isn't us trying to rid ourselves of illusion resistance? But the mind blowing thing seems to be that even the resistance of illusion itself is part of the surrender. I don't know how to put this into words, but isn't suffering itself a surrender to reality because it is reality? When I am a dying child in africa, is that not consciousness being completely immersed in it's creation? Why is immersion any less reality that non-immersion/enlightenment? There is a striving for the end of suffering, but even that striving is illusion isn't it? I guess what I am saying is basically, isn't illusion itself illusion, and thus isn't everything just plainly exactly what it is? Even the change of that which we call enlightenment, isn't that itself just exactly what it is, and the idea of what it is as well just exactly what it is? So when I believe in the outer world and the self, why are we calling these things illusions. The belief in an outer world is nothing but the belief in an outer world, and the total immersion in the belief of an outer world is nothing but the total immersion in the belief of the outer world. Thus the realization of the illusory nature of the self itself is nothing but the realization of the illusory nature of the self. And even the belief that the outer world is reality is nothing but the belief that the outer world is reality! It's all already reality, it is self-describing itself at all times because that's all it can do. It is exactly what exists, just the way it exists, because it cannot be any other way. I don't understand anymore, I am completely confused about enlightenment. Isn't everything that exists enlightenment? What's the point in seeking it other than the seeking it? I don't even k now why I am asking this question it doesn't make any sense. When you say "No, you are confusing ideas with what is actually there!", isn't that still reality as it is? Isn't the confusion about reality also part of reality exactly as it is? My question is, why is any stage of consciousness more truthful than any other when reality cannot help itself but be exactly what it is either way? It always is exactly what it is, including all ignorance, all ideas, all experience, everything. And how am I even able to think about any of this? Wouldn't complete and utter enlightenment just create a huge circle that leads back to unconsciousness? Meaning that complete enlightenment would be such a radically surrender that it would lead back to surrendering to ignorance, limitation, dualism and thus create reality as it is exactly before enlightenment? Wouldn't full enlightenment just lead to becoming an ant again and being completely immerse in the existence of anthood, including that "ignorance" that comes with being an ant? Including total immersion in ego? Wouldn't that mean that the experience of ant is included in total and absolute enlightenment? Wouldn't it be a huge circle that repeats itself into infinity? Isn't that what is already happening no matter what we are?

@tsuki thanks for your reply! I'm not concerned about one tablespoon of enlightenment/ full enlightenment, all I want to do is know what I am. But yeah, I get the sense that the part of me that want's to read is my mind, which is trying to grasp. I have heard it over and over again: "it's the simplest thing". How come I need to read about the simplest thing? Beats me. Waiting for mr @Leo Guras soul crushing hammer of reality to drop on this thread...

If you have Leo’s booklist, go under the consciousness/enlightenment section and keyword search the word “Om”... read that book. A great story but also great insights about a monk who gave up materialism to pursue full enlightenment in a cave and then used that to really serve people as part of his own life purpose. Not just coming back and teaching meditation classs to people who aren’t truly open to the profound d truths of reality and are really just there to release stress after a long day of chimpery.

Thank you so much for taking the time to explain that. I guess I can see how it's useful What about turquoise and coral? Are those supposed to be closer to full enlightenment?

I think it sounds like one of the things that ALL meditators wish would happen to them! Especially interesting is that it doesn't go away when you aren't meditating. And it's above the eyes? Kind of like where your 3rd eye is? Prepare for full enlightenment, Tsuki Moon! *gasp!*

Thanks for the words @Solace. I could definitely do more practice towards being able to accept and love the fears that come up often during my daily life (a lot lately). I tend to put that kind of practice aside as I see only full enlightenment as the solution. Maybe practicing how to handle the "insignificant" anxieties during the daily life (which are really painfull as well) is the key here. Somehow I just realized how the last couple of months really have been an invitation exactly for that. From what I learned even if enlightenment/ego death happens the mind still goes on with "I-thoughts/feelings" etc. But the identification with that "person" that used to be identified with isnt happening anymore. Even though the "true self"/conciousness is still very much alive from my understanding ego death is still a death to be feared. Am I missing something? Can you or someone elaborate? Yes I understand that the ego comes back again. But for that moment of presence, if I would fully let go, it would cease to exist as the identification with it would cease to exist. Also, in that moment, I am assuming time wont be a thing so saying its not a permanent ego death doesnt seem to be relevant or make it easier to let go. Thank you guys for all your words, appreciate it!

What is full Enlightenment? Is it a thought-story or Existential Truth? People create a lot of their own hurdles. Enlightenment work for me was challenging for a couple years, but once I became Existential Truth — all the seeking stopped. Be careful you’re not trying to seek some concept of Enlightenment. Don’t turn Enlightenment into something that it’s not. Some people seem to really get trapped that way. And there’s no way to reason with these people either. It’s like trying to convince a dog to stop tracking a scent that has captured its imagination. It’s just gotta keep following that scent until the issue resolves itself, right. You just gotta let the dog do that.

I'm about 15 minutes in. Having a defeatist thought. If achieving full enlightenment is like winning the Lotto, one in millions chances on it happening, and even Leo can't get there, then what hope is there for me to achieve it? I could spend the rest of my life trying and always feeling like I am failing to reach this highest of states, or I can spend the rest of my life feeding my Ego for happiness. Neither sounds like a solid plan. Again just a thought.

So this one was on LSD. I was on LSD myself when I first watched this heh. I appreciate the authenticity and openness you demonstrated there btw. I wonder what causes this pre-existing tolerance though. Does this have something to do with one or more serotonin receptors not functioning properly? Does my body contain microorganisms that put up resistance to such drugs? If so, can some antibiotics prevent such resistance? And what are the implications of this? Does this affect my chances of having awakening experiences and full enlightenment? It's kind of a bummer though, I was pretty excited to start experimenting with all kinds of psychedelics out there and I love altered states of mind. I guess I'll have to be spending extra bucks for this endeavor .

@NoSelfSelf Nice! really, full on dead? So the two locks/knots in your root? mohksha? or full enlightenment? every chakra has been fully awakened(I thought this was infinitely expandable) and your like one with the infinite consciousness always? Well I would say I have fully awakened to the concept of consciousness for like 8 months, But I have been doing yoga, fasting and working out for a long time. I think my yoga practice has been going for like 5 years, specifically the recent year, much more hardcore. So I think that's helped a lot. The past 8 months I have been really opening the doors to what is possible with yoga, meditation and I have really started doing shatkarma's, especially the jula/sutra neti seems to be huge for me. Also I have learned alot about what consciousnesses really is, and the importance of living in the moment doing whatever it is I do. Before i moved in with my room mate i was doing meditation everyday for like 5 hours a day with yoga every second day or so. also doing fasting. i have been doing lot of intermittent fasting, and multiday, up to 5 days water fasting, over the last 16 months too(i was doing this before i discovered the concept of consciousnesses, I think it lead me to understanding consciousness) anyways i feel like I'm just listing off stuff that is my ego trying to attatch itself to things in the past. But I am just trying to tell u the stuff i have found most helpful. so hopefully u can give me my next best tips.

@MarkusSweden It depends on what you mean by attained "Enlightenment" Someone who has attained a "Full Enlightenment" like the Buddha is a very rare occurence, more than 2500 years have passed since Gautama Buddha attained full Enlightenment. Since then no human being has accomplished such a feat. The buddha himself was said to spend at least 3 eons reincarnating until he attained "Full Enlightenment"

Well, I don’t really see enlightenment as an on or off switch. It’s more of a spectrum, where it can start with one major enlightenment experiences and becoming more and more enlightened as the days go on. I empathize though with Leo’s repetition, despite me also feeling like he can drone on about it too much. What makes self inquiry so hard is not how complex the ideas are, but how repetitive it is to do it. It’s basically trying to do the same thing over and over — but for different areas of your life. That’s why different examples and analogies help — so the same theoretical perspectives can get applied to new practical areas. I’d say there’s a lot of benefit in seeing life more clearly the more enlightenment experiences I have, and I’m starting to enjoy the fact that there’s no such thing as a full enlightenment. That means there would always be something new to figure out along the way and have pleasure in discovering.

It doesn't really matter. As long as you have an I-thought, it will attach itself to egoistic wishes, such as being "more enlightened than others." The problem isn't with not having purity of motivation; it's a rare person, if anyone, who does. The problem is stopping too early and not reaching sahaja. People don't understand how much crap has to be ejected before full enlightenment. Nobody who's on the path isn't dealing with some type of ego issues. I would say, then, that if you're experiencing a serious ego trip that it's actually a good sign, a sign of purification hitting overdrive.