Who Becomes Enlightened?

[Hemi]

Er... first post. Sorry for the length. It's not a light topic; I tried to keep it concise, but it's philosophy.  Also, this is the philosophy of enlightenment. I get the difference between thinking about the concept of truth vs direct awareness of the self. This is a mental circle-jerk, but it's fun and interesting, so here it is anyway.

I’ve heard a lot of people say “you don’t attain enlightenment; there’s nobody to be enlightened.” Many instructors really harp on this point. I get the gist of this as a helpful pointer for the grasping ego, but I don’t know that I entirely agree with it as a true statement. That's what this post is all about.

 

First, enlightenment. I like Leo’s analogy of it being like The Matrix. The truth is not that you’re an ego trapped within the matrix, but that you are The Matrix. The matrix (your true self) isn’t a giant machine, but is the infinite nothingness in which all exists. I’m seeing the world from one person’s perspective, and mistakenly imagining that this person is all that I am, but the truth is the little me is just me experiencing myself through a story.

The trick with that is becoming aware of the matrix as the matrix. I’ve heard this same analogy as a TV screen, but again, you are the screen. There’s nothing really conceptual that captures that last part of nothingness observing nothingness, which I think is what makes the journey so hard.

 

Second, the brain/body is (in)deterministic. There’s no comprehensible concept of “choice” or “will” in a purely material universe, not to mention there’s no way for our brain to act independently of all outside influences.

I’m a programmer, so it’s easy for me to think about determinism in a technical context. A light switch doesn’t have choice; a calculator is a fancy series of light switches; a chess playing computer is really just an extension of the same concept. QM and relativity are a bit more mind bending, but are also entirely logical and (in)deterministic. Given a set of inputs, you get a known output (or probability in the case of QM).  The only differences with our brain is that it’s a very advanced, purposeful computer, and it has a heck of a lot inputs; so many inputs that it appears to act independently of its surroundings.

So, basically, our brain/body is a sort of natural automaton. Some combo of my DNA, childhood, friends, family, pressures, failures, successes, books I’ve read, things I’ve watched, and an unimaginable myriad of other factors brought me to where I am today, practicing mindfulness and self-inquiry, going on and on about philosophy, and posting to this forum. Enlightenment is non-duel, all one, monism. I don't know that I'm entirely convinced of this yet; philosophically, it seems possible to me (at the moment) that consciousness and matter could have separate objective existence, and consciousness could somehow influence matter (dualism). But, either way, materialism doesn't lead to "choice," and the ego only mistakenly believes its in control.

 

So, given these, what is enlightenment really? Who is there to become enlightened? I see two ways of looking at it, which both seem true.

1) My true self. Awareness that I am the nothingness in which all things are. “God.” This can only be direct awareness; the infinite observing the infinite. Any kind of conceptualization of this is a blinder. This is the typical guidance on the topic, and I can see how this is necessarily so.

2) This little automaton. Just like Google stores facts, analyzes, and “learns,” so does my mind. The experience of self-awareness itself escapes the mind, but the idea/thought/concept of awareness doesn’t entirely escape the mind. If it did, none of us would be able to think about this stuff enough to talk about it. I imagine it’s somewhat like waking from and remembering a dream, where your waking consciousness gets enough hints and ideas of the dream to know that it happened. Whether that's an accurate analogy or not, I don't know, but it necessarily seems like something in the finite has to shift for anybody to ever be aware that reality is infinite.

 

So, “there’s nobody to become enlightened?” I don’t know about that. No true self, no consciousness, but something in the brain necessarily shifts. I (ego) may never directly know truth, but I would have to know the idea of truth. That's not even mentioning the tangible little-self changes.

 

Agree? Disagree? Thoughts?

[doronshadmi]

Hi Hemi,

In this medium (the forum) we are talking about X, which is not the same as directly being aware of X, so our communication is limited to analogies about X, which is not X in itself.

Some question/answers (verbal_symbolic) analogy:

Question: "What is Silence?"

Subjective answer: "Sunday before sunrise"

Objective answer: "The lack of sound waves"

Direct answer: No answer is given (one simply keeps silence).

So being aware about X is not the same as being aware of X.

Some visual_spatial AND verbal_symbolic analogy:

Please imagine an endless non-composed line (notate as L).

 L vibrating upon infinitely many scale levels.

By being aware of L through one of its vibrations, one understands L as a collection of vibrations (one is unaware of L).

By being aware of vibrations through L, one is aware of vibrations right from their non-composed substance. 

Meditation is exactly the practical exercise that enables one to directly be aware of L in its simplest form (endless non-composed straight line).

No thoughts (where thoughts are forms of vibrations) are present at L's direct awareness.

If one enables to keep L during vibrations, one is no longer restricted to L awareness in terms of collections (one becomes enlightened).

Please be aware, all what is given above is no more than analogies about enlightenment, unless one actually practices meditation that enables to develop awareness beyond thoughts during thoughts.

At the first stage enlightenment is recognized only in the domain the observer (subjective experience (I am that)).

At the second stage enlightenment is recognized also in the domain of the observed (objective experience (You are that)).

At the third stage enlightenment is recognized without domains (ALL IS THAT)).

-----------------------

Let's use the keyword Life.

Life (in its relative aspect) is an endless story of questions and answers, which are like the two legs of one (absolute) unified organism in an endless journey of progression.

 

 

Edited October 26, 2017 by doronshadmi

[ajasatya]

@Hemi Reality becomes conscious of Itself.

if you think and elaborate too much, you're walking away from IT. when you perceive thoughts about enlightenment, let go of them if you want to experience IT instead of philosophizing. philosophizing won't take you very far.

[Nahm]

@Hemi there was not a who to begin with. 

[Shohrat Shankar]

Deal with realities!

[Nahm]

@Hemi “Some combo of my DNA, childhood, friends, family, pressures, failures, successes, books I’ve read, things I’ve watched, and an unimaginable myriad of other factors brought me to where I am today”

When you see literally visually and literally hear the actual reality of now, which is you, and all of that is revealed to be your own illusion, you’re free of it, because the you product of it never existed. You are the one. You are eternal and behind it all. All suffering was an experience of the prior misunderstanding, and is therefore also gone, with the illusion. 

[Bichu Krishnan]

This is exactly where I am stuck in self enquiry. I guess we have to get direct experience to get a conclusion.

[Nahm]

@Bichu Krishnan before the nonduality experience we are calling a few second delay ‘now’, but it’s not the now. The delay is thinking & beliefs. Meditation and inquiring, going within, letting go of thinking & beliefs, no thinking, wham! Now.