Can someone become enlightened through meditation?

[UnbornTao]

58 minutes ago, Lila9 said:

I don’t remember giving you any authority. I don’t even know you or trust you or take any advice from you. I don’t perceive you as enlightened or awakened at all, so don’t force your assessment on me. This is disturbing.

Haha, okay then.

Edited August 1 by UnbornTao

[Breakingthewall]

2 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

Jeez. And you call J. Krishnamurti fake.

Why do you think that guy is fake? Analize. Maybe you are right. I ve some doubts about what he said, but in another hand some agrees with many experiences I have had.

Edited August 1 by Breakingthewall

[UnbornTao]

15 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Why do you think that guy is fake? Analize. Maybe you are right.

Magic  Fantasy-ridden and is referring to perceptive experience. May have had a genuine glimpse or perhaps state change but it seems to me his mind is heavily filtering it through a bunch of stuff. But it is soothing nevertheless.

Edited August 1 by UnbornTao

[Breakingthewall]

2 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Magic  Full of fantasy and is talking about perceptive experience. May have had a genuine glimpse or perhaps state change but it seems to me his mind is heavily filtering it through a bunch of stuff. But it is soothing nevertheless.

The guy talks about how after a week-long meditation retreat he had an experience of total enlightenment, which produced a definitive change in his perception of himself.

There are two things that seem doubtful to me, first when he says that reality is light. This is a way of perceiving reality that is true, but not unique. The manifestation of the pure light of existence is something recurring in mystical openings, but you can also perceive reality as life, intelligence or emptiness.

Second, when he talks about the moment in which the mystical opening occurs, the revelation of the nature of reality, he does so vaguely, repeating: no words can define, blah blah. This is true for everything, including the taste of lemon juice, but we must try to define and explain it as precisely as possible. I see the feeling that he describes as real, that a complete and permanent opening would be toxic and deadly, you cannot be both individuated and total. Seems doubtful when he says: then the silent companion manifested himself and I was him. There is no hidden companion, there is something closed that opens, and recognizing oneself as the unfathomable, not as "someone" who from that moment on is always there.

[UnbornTao]

@Breakingthewall The bottom line is, where is the clarity regarding the presumed direct consciousness?  What I hear is fantastical rhetoric and too much this and that, intellect, experience and state.

Hey, why not revisit someone like Ramana afresh?

Edited August 2 by UnbornTao

[Breakingthewall]

24 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

The bottom line is that I don't hear clarity from him

He's describing a moment of opening. He explains quite good some parts and others not so. I told you what I saw doubtful, because I know what he's talking about. 

The guy has been meditating for 30 years with surprising and quite strange results, interdimensional trips, telepathy and more. I checked him because Waterriver always mentions it.

I understand when listening to that story the gap that opens in reality, how one first perceives reality and oneself as the pure light of existence, even could be intelligence or emptiness, and how at a given moment reality opens and shows itself its heart, what It is, what you cannot think or remember but that seems like it is going to burn you, to produce cancer because it is radioactive, the immutable and unfathomable that at this moment I can only evoke in a distant way, the last experience of that kind was about a month ago, which means that it lost its transparency a long time ago, although some imprint in the constant vibration always remains.

If you are in spirituality, the thing is hit and hit, be obsessive in the determination to break the barrier. meditation, psychedelics, whatever is necessary as many times as necessary.

Edited August 1 by Breakingthewall

[Sugarcoat]

3 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

What's needed is consciousness on your part.

You don't have to hate anything. As a matter of fact, having an open relationship towards our experience is functional and freeing.

Yes, wanting to know it. 

I think the word consciousness is a bit vague sometimes people use it in different ways so it’s not so clear what is meant

For me hating existence played a role in dissolving identifications at least for me that’s why I mentioned it. It fuels effort you’ll just try and try and try to get rid of it and in some way it will give in. It’s not the same as enlightenment but I’d say it’s down that path. Maybe one doesn’t need to hate but at least have some passion. But yes you’re right it’s better as a human to be open to our experience as you say, it’s more pleasant that way.

Edited August 1 by Sugarcoat

[UnbornTao]

@Breakingthewall then I would describe it clearly as what it is. Why add fuss and so much embellishments? This only lends itself to more fantasizing.

Edited August 1 by UnbornTao

[UnbornTao]

16 hours ago, Sugarcoat said:

I think the word consciousness is a bit vague sometimes people use it in different ways so it’s not so clear what is meant

That's up for grabs. At some point, rumors and intellect have to be set aside so that a direct encounter is sought after. Direct is being in the same location as the subject being addressed, to speak metaphorically.

Quote

For me hating existence played a role in dissolving identifications at least for me that’s why I mentioned it. It fuels effort you’ll just try and try and try to get rid of it and in some way it will give in. It’s not the same as enlightenment but I’d say it’s down that path. Maybe one doesn’t need to hate but at least have some passion. But yes you’re right it’s better as a human to be open to our experience as you say, it’s more pleasant that way.

Yeah

Edited August 2 by UnbornTao

[Sugarcoat]

1 minute ago, UnbornTao said:

Being in the same location as the subject being addressed, to speak metaphorically. Figuring these things out intellectually is a rather minor aspect of this work.

Sure

[Breakingthewall]

14 hours ago, Sugarcoat said:

For me hating existence played a role in dissolving identifications

Hating the lie is a good point to open yourself to the truth 

12 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

@Breakingthewall then I would describe it clearly as what it is. Why add fuss and so much embellishments? This only lends itself to more fantasizing.

you focus on the form, not the content. forget the embellishments and see what is correct or incorrect in what he says.

 

14 hours ago, Sugarcoat said:

think the word consciousness is a bit vague sometimes people use it in different ways so it’s not so clear what is meant

Conciousness is very ambiguous term, it implies being aware of something, but it is used to describe reality. The question is: is there reality if you are not aware of it? Or put another way, is there existence outside your field of consciousness? For me it is obvious that yes, since my field of consciousness is limited, and it is also obvious that reality is self-aware, a rock floating in intergalactic space is aware of itself in a way incomprehensible to us, space-time is aware of self, and gravity.

Reality is infinite planes of consciousness/reality superimposed, and my field of consciousness is one among infinities, the tip of an infinite iceberg, formed by an infinite number of self-aware holons in turn formed by an infinite number of holons, infinitely. Each atom is infinite, and a human in turn is a holon that is part of another holon, which in turn is part of another so on to infinity. Let's say that the material of everything is reality becoming aware of itself in a certain way that, by virtue of the unlimited intelligence that it is, organizes itself in more and more complex patterns at unimaginable levels. Without end to infinity? It's impossible to represent that by the mind. 

[Husseinisdoingfine]

No! You have to insert a tube up your ass and shove a bazillion pounds of psychedelics up there.

[UnbornTao]

2 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

you focus on the form, not the content. forget the embellishments and see what is correct or incorrect in what he says.

It's something other than a simple communication with some other purpose. A state is being referred to. Doesn't sound like an enlightenment experience, and there is no content when it comes to this.

[Sugarcoat]

2 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

Conciousness is very ambiguous term, it implies being aware of something, but it is used to describe reality. The question is: is there reality if you are not aware of it? Or put another way, is there existence outside your field of consciousness? For me it is obvious that yes, since my field of consciousness is limited, and it is also obvious that reality is self-aware, a rock floating in intergalactic space is aware of itself in a way incomprehensible to us, space-time is aware of self, and gravity.

Reality is infinite planes of consciousness/reality superimposed, and my field of consciousness is one among infinities, the tip of an infinite iceberg, formed by an infinite number of self-aware holons in turn formed by an infinite number of holons, infinitely. Each atom is infinite, and a human in turn is a holon that is part of another holon, which in turn is part of another so on to infinity. Let's say that the material of everything is reality becoming aware of itself in a certain way that, by virtue of the unlimited intelligence that it is, organizes itself in more and more complex patterns at unimaginable levels. Without end to infinity? It's impossible to represent that by the mind. 

I agree with most. The only thing I’d say tho is that point about reality being aware of itself. I don’t know but isn’t it so that the only thing that is aware is the self. Awareness implies duality. The self being aware of reality. So with no self, it’s not reality aware of itself, it’s nothing at all, not even a reality (a separate reality) nothing happening. And everything simultaneously. I’ve heard non dual speakers say this.