Enlightenment fixation missing Truth/Understanding

[Terell Kirby]

Getting a lot of juice from Leo’s posting on Buddhist notions of Enlightenment as of late. The Buddhists seem to designate one state of consciousness (that of nirvana and pure formlessness) as the end game.

• Buddhists are ultimately stuck in duality and do not recognize ontology as a serious concept in spiritual matters. The possibility of reality being an ontological tautology is dismissed as a distraction from the pursuit of nirvana-this is a huge mistake). They don’t recognize Oneness properly, let alone Infinity.
• What is Enlightenment? It’s an achievement a particular state of consciousness. This can come with or without a proper understanding of the substance of reality itself, or an understanding of construct awareness or self deception. To the Buddhist-these things can be reduced to emptiness understanding is seen as an a distraction to attaining nirvana.
• The Buddhist is resisting Truth. One, on a more everyday level- that just because someone has reached this Enlightenment state, doesn’t mean they are safe guarded from epistemic corruption of the human mind and language. Secondly, they are resisting the truth that Enlightenment itself is an experience within Consciousness that has been turned into a limited epistemic frame, in which human biases have been projected upon and turned into a dogma. That dogma prevents them from understanding reality, which is the same to say realizing God.

also noting that there has been a new embrace of this kind of thinking in Western culture (even pop culture). It’s an upgrade from Christian fundamentalism, but is not free from self deception and numerous forms of corruption. It also does nor properly deconstruct science; Stage Orange has taken transcendental meditation and has turned it into a tool for self help based in science, reducing suffering/pain so you can live a productive human life, understanding reality isn’t even thought about.

[Breakingthewall]

The problem with Buddhism is that it differentiates between the false, maya, and the true, nirvana. Supposedly, for some reason, we are trapped in something negative whose essence is suffering, and we must reach something positive, which is liberation from the wheel of reincarnations, the nirvana. These reincarnations are not infinite, since they will end; that's why they began. Why? And why are they negative? Perhaps the only negative aspect is being a Japanese human in the 12th century, but there may be infinite other dimensions of existence. Oh no, there are only four: demigods, animals, demons, and humans. It sounds like a superstitious nonsense. Besides, emptiness is the goal to achieve, which is superior to wholeness. IMO, it's wrong and a negative philosophy in it's essence 

Edited Saturday at 01:52 PM by Breakingthewall

[Terell Kirby]

4 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

The problem with Buddhism is that it differentiates between the false, maya, and the true, nirvana.

Not only does it create false distinctions between these-but also fails to distinguish each as mental constructions.

And so, it never investigates how the mind constructs reality, and what’s behind the entire process.

[Breakingthewall]

15 minutes ago, Terell Kirby said:

Not only does it create false distinctions between these-but also fails to distinguish each as mental constructions.

And so, it never investigates how the mind constructs reality, and what’s behind the entire process.

when Leo talks in his blog about Buddhists, or those who meditate in search of emptiness and equating that with enlightenment, being wrong. Well, who meditates in search of emptiness? That makes no sense. You seek openness, and there are people who believe that emptiness promotes openness since the mind is closed by energetic barriers. This may be true, it depends on the person.

The absolute is not on the mental plane. You cannot understand the absolute since understanding is a structure that occurs within the absolute; you can open yourself to it. The absolute is what you are; there is nothing to understand. You can understand many things, but not the absolute.

When someone says they understand reality and that it is God imagining it, or that reality is a infinite mind, they are wrong. That is not the absolute; it is an egotistical mirage. Completely closed in a cause-and-effect vision in which God is the cause. The cause of what? Of reality? So there is God on one hand, that is something, and reality, something else, on the other hand. Well...and God creates it for a reason or dreams it up. All of this is a closed structure. Enlightenment is real, but of course, if you're stuck in a delusional structure, you can't intuit it. 

Edited Saturday at 02:13 PM by Breakingthewall

[Leo Gura]

@Breakingthewall Dude, you don't know what you re talking about. Just stop.

[Breakingthewall]

28 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

@Breakingthewall Dude, you don't know what you re talking about. Just stop.

im talking about a limited vision. Reality is unlimited, but it's your site, ok, I won't argue about this topic if you don't like 

[gettoefl]

1 hour ago, Breakingthewall said:

when Leo talks in his blog about Buddhists, or those who meditate in search of emptiness and equating that with enlightenment, being wrong. Well, who meditates in search of emptiness? That makes no sense. You seek openness, and there are people who believe that emptiness promotes openness since the mind is closed by energetic barriers. This may be true, it depends on the person.

The absolute is not on the mental plane. You cannot understand the absolute since understanding is a structure that occurs within the absolute; you can open yourself to it. The absolute is what you are; there is nothing to understand. You can understand many things, but not the absolute.

When someone says they understand reality and that it is God imagining it, or that reality is a infinite mind, they are wrong. That is not the absolute; it is an egotistical mirage. Completely closed in a cause-and-effect vision in which God is the cause. The cause of what? Of reality? So there is God on one hand, that is something, and reality, something else, on the other hand. Well...and God creates it for a reason or dreams it up. All of this is a closed structure. Enlightenment is real, but of course, if you're stuck in a delusional structure, you can't intuit it. 

Mostly agree. Awakenings are mental; they are the mind making sense of what you are and how you relate to reality. They can be described, explained, understood. Difficult to put into words and communicate but possible if the speaker and the listener are ripe and receptive. So with this said, awakening is really nothing. You get it and you've got it and life trundles on.

Now if you are serious, the work begins. All your life you have been misidentifying yourself, taking yourself to a physical, psychological entity. Awakening has told you what you are and now you need to step out of the false and rise into the true. This is a gradual and arduous process because the false you is dogged and resilient. It will fight you every step of the way and you have programmed it this way to not let it be tampered with or weakened. Every moment is an opportunity for practice. I either represent real me or false me. That is a mental distinction of course. Now I need to put it into action. Love is a good way if I know what love is. I see that every moment in life is either an ask for love or an act of love. Asks are when people seemingly do bad stuff; they are really asking for love to be shown them. Acts are when people act in line with their true nature. This is something to cherish and celebrate. Gradually imperceptibly miraculously, the false loses its grip and you become who you are.

[Terell Kirby]

2 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

When someone says they understand reality and that it is God imagining it, or that reality is a infinite mind, they are wrong. 

That could be the case, but it could also be the case that they are pointing to something that is not being understood or grasps due to assumptions and dogmas of Buddhism or some other limited paradigm.

How would you know unless you did a deep, personal inquiry into the question itself and deconstructed the paradigm? Allegiance to a spiritual school or a single path is what makes inquiry less enticing. It is easy for the mind to deny, hide behind a false sense of certainty about its worldview.

It can always be the case that one who’s making accusations, misses that those accusations are coming from the very thing it seeks to demonize: ego

Edited Saturday at 04:42 PM by Terell Kirby

[Breakingthewall]

9 minutes ago, gettoefl said:

Gradually imperceptibly miraculously, the false loses its grip and you become who you are.

Yes you are the reality perceiving itself. The thing is how deep can you perceive yourself. 

When I said above that the absolute cannot be understood, I meant that the substance of reality cannot be understood because it is not comprehensible since it is the source of understanding, but one can understand how it acts, how it develops. But how acts is not what it is, it's a different dimension. What reality is can be perceived, but not understood, how could it be? 

[gettoefl]

3 minutes ago, Terell Kirby said:

That could be the case, but it could also be the case that they are pointing to something that is not being understood or grasps due to assumptions and dogmas of Buddhism or some other limited paradigm.

How would you know unless you did a deep, personal inquiry into the question itself and deconstructed the paradigm? Allegiance to a spiritual school or a single path is what makes inquiry less enticing. It is easy for the mind to deny, hide behind a false sense of certainty about its worldview.

It can always be the case that one who’s making accusations, misses that those accusations are coming from the very thing it seeks to demonize: ego

What he is saying is that the absolute can't be put into words or ideas although yes as pointers they may be useful. All you can do is be what you are.

[gettoefl]

2 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Yes you are the reality perceiving itself. The thing is how deep can you perceive yourself. 

When I said above that the absolute cannot be understood, I meant that the substance of reality cannot be understood because it is not comprehensible since it is the source of understanding, but one can understand how it acts, how it develops. But how acts is not what it is, it's a different dimension. What reality is can be perceived, but not understood, how could it be? 

Agreed. You can certainly be what you are however. How could you not? Even here you are doing that. But you are putting your hands over your eyes every moment.

Edited Saturday at 04:48 PM by gettoefl

[Breakingthewall]

5 minutes ago, Terell Kirby said:

That could be the case, but it could also be the case that they are pointing to something that is not being understood or grasps due to assumptions and dogmas of Buddhism or some other limited paradigm.

How would you know unless you did a deep, personal inquiry into the question itself and deconstructed the paradigm? Allegiance to a spiritual school or a single path is what makes inquiry less enticing. It is easy for the mind to deny, hide behind a false sense of certainty about its worldview.

It can always be the case that one who’s making accusations, misses that those accusations are coming from the very thing it seeks to demonize: ego

If reality is a mind, what is that mind? We call mind the ability to imagine, understand, and conceptualize. Is that reality? Sure? Reality is an ability? What is the substance that supports that ability? 

[Terell Kirby]

1 minute ago, Breakingthewall said:

If reality is a mind, what is that mind? We call mind the ability to imagine, understand, and conceptualize. Is that reality? Sure? Reality is an ability? What is the substance that supports that ability? 

These are all questions for YOU to contemplate. Step 1 

[gettoefl]

1 minute ago, Terell Kirby said:

These are all questions for YOU to contemplate. Step 1 

He has told you the answer with his questions. Mind is a 2-bit toy slapping its content all over reality so that it cannot be seen. Spiritual work is stripping this away.

[Breakingthewall]

8 minutes ago, gettoefl said:

Agreed. You can certainly be what you are however. How could you not? Even here you are doing that. But you are putting your hands over your eyes every moment.

You can fully perceive what you are, but you can't understand it because what you are is before than understanding.

What means understanding? See the structure of something, how it works. It's always limited, you can't fully understands nothing because it's ultimate nature is beyond understanding, is not originated. You can understand that it's not originated, but not what it is because to understand you have to put yourself above and it's impossible in the case of ultimate reality 

[gettoefl]

4 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

You can fully perceive what you are, but you can't understand it because what you are is before than understanding.

What means understanding? See the structure of something, how it works. It's always limited, you can't fully understands nothing because it's ultimate nature is beyond understanding, is not originated. You can understand that it's not originated, but not what it is because to understand you have to put yourself above and it's impossible in the case of ultimate reality 

You can understand perfectly what you're not. At which point you can identity with what is not that and move slowly but surely towards it by overlooking what you thought to be you but what was never you.

Edited Saturday at 05:01 PM by gettoefl

[Breakingthewall]

1 hour ago, Terell Kirby said:

These are all questions for YOU to contemplate. Step 1 

I already did and I can tell you the answer: ultimately understanding is impossible because you only can understand what is contained in your mind, and absolute reality is not contained in your mind, but your mind is contained in absolute reality, or better it's made of the absolute reality. If you want to open yourself to the absolute, you must let go of what you value most: your mind. If you don't and are greedy, then you will remain going around in an endless circle.

You think you understand things. For example, you see a bird and you think you understand it because you know how it works. But to what extent do you understand it? You can understand that its nature is divine and perceive that nature, but you cannot understand that nature because it is not comprehensible, it's the being, the reality, you, the absolute. The absolute is just absolute, you can understand that it's absolute, but nothing else, but understanding that it is is absolute understanding. Anything else is relative understanding, then it is a possibility between infinite possibilities, aka zero. It depends what we understand as understanding 

Edited Saturday at 05:54 PM by Breakingthewall

[vibv]

3 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

Well...and God creates it for a reason 

Yeah. The reason being exploring (aka understanding) itself.

[Breakingthewall]

2 minutes ago, vibv said:

Yeah. The reason being exploring (aka understanding) itself.

And? He already did? Or maybe he needs more exploration? If its infinite it will never fully explore itself (aka understanding), then he could stop right now if the reason is that 

[gettoefl]

11 minutes ago, vibv said:

Yeah. The reason being exploring (aka understanding) itself.

You read it wrong. He was saying that's impossible.