Either you are enlightened or not enlightened

[Shin]

That's what I feel too, I don't even remember the last time I was bored.

And I'm clearly not self-realized.

[Preetom]

@Shanmugam

I've always been curious about how an enlightened being makes decisions and acts it out. I'll try my best to make the questions as straightforward as I can. Thanks in advance

1) How do you make a decision? 

suppose you see someone here saying something from his ignorance and you decide to state the truth. Does that decision pop up and you find yourself typing simultaneously without any gap of self reflection? Or there are multiple possible thoughts like ''I can either reply to this forum or I could go out for a walk. These will be the pros and cons of this decision so and so...'' and then you 'choose' to type your answer knowing that the other possibilities got 'sacrificed' so that your current decision could be manifested.

2) Are you 'mindful' in all the waking hours? 24/7? 

like feeling every single of your breath or feeling the body as a whole no matter what work you are doing? 

Or do you get 'spaced out' from time to time like everyone else?

like you keep looking at computer screen and an hour passes by without you even being conscious that you were alive

3) Have you ever somehow become 'conscious' during deep sleep?

4) When you are dreaming, does the knowledge that you are not the body-mind still keep intact? Or is Enlightenment only for the 'waking' state and you totally identify with your dream self no matter how much enlightened you are as long as the dream lasts?

5) Is there any doer-ship involved all throughout the day? Or you just 'see' everything happening by itself while your focus lies on the self/consciousness/the background?

Edited February 8, 2018 by Preetom

[Nahm]

@Preetom Imagine you are the divine love and nothing else. And that everything sensed is your illusion.   Hold that perspective to the best of your ability and let thinking fall away. Connect to the heart. Imagine that because you are aware of this, you perceive, naturally, someone asking questions, as an appearance in your own illusion, who is you, infinite love, but doesn’t know it. They think they’re the person in your illusion, so they, of course, have questions.

See the humor in these....? ;

”when I am without my ignorance, will I know it?”

”How can there be infinite intelligence in DNA?”

”When I achieve the ultimate enlightenment, what will I know?”

?

[Preetom]

21 minutes ago, Nahm said:

@Preetom Imagine you are the divine love and nothing else. And that everything sensed is your illusion.   Hold that perspective to the best of your ability and let thinking fall away. Connect to the heart

Thanks for these words!

Let the de-hypnotization begin

[Nahm]

@Preetom thanks for triggering me❤️

[Shanmugam]

3 hours ago, Preetom said:

@Shanmugam

I've always been curious about how an enlightened being makes decisions and acts it out. I'll try my best to make the questions as straightforward as I can. Thanks in advance

1) How do you make a decision? 

suppose you see someone here saying something from his ignorance and you decide to state the truth. Does that decision pop up and you find yourself typing simultaneously without any gap of self reflection? Or there are multiple possible thoughts like ''I can either reply to this forum or I could go out for a walk. These will be the pros and cons of this decision so and so...'' and then you 'choose' to type your answer knowing that the other possibilities got 'sacrificed' so that your current decision could be manifested.

2) Are you 'mindful' in all the waking hours? 24/7? 

like feeling every single of your breath or feeling the body as a whole no matter what work you are doing? 

Or do you get 'spaced out' from time to time like everyone else?

like you keep looking at computer screen and an hour passes by without you even being conscious that you were alive

3) Have you ever somehow become 'conscious' during deep sleep?

4) When you are dreaming, does the knowledge that you are not the body-mind still keep intact? Or is Enlightenment only for the 'waking' state and you totally identify with your dream self no matter how much enlightened you are as long as the dream lasts?

5) Is there any doer-ship involved all throughout the day? Or you just 'see' everything happening by itself while your focus lies on the self/consciousness/the background?

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.

[Preetom]

@Shanmugam

Thanks for answering!

[SOUL]

be·lief

an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.

trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something.

This is the basic definition of belief. So with this in view it is quite easy to see how limiting beliefs can create separation in awareness.

The 'absolute infinite' isn't bound by our beliefs about it, there isn't any line or possibility it doesn't cross of fulfill. To say it "doesn't" or is "not" is establishing a limit in our perception of the infinite, just a limit in our awareness of it and isn't accurate because the infinite is unlimited otherwise it isn't infinite, see? Even if we set up some limit to what we 'believe' about the infinite, by it's genuine nature the infinite crosses that limitation we have set up in our mind. It's just our perception in our awareness of the infinite not being it and isn't the infinite not actually being it.

Yes, it is imaginary, it is an image of the infinite we would have that limits our perception in our awareness of the infinite, they are imagined limits not actual limits. We create these imaginary boundaries when we have beliefs that limit our access or interaction with the infinite, they don't really exist, the infinite really is on both sides of this imagined boundary or limitation, we just aren't aware of it.

Self, as a natural bodily 'sense', and the ego, as a mental construct, set up a separation between itself and everything to create the sense of self and an identity. This separation is perceived in consciousness so transcending the sense of separation and awakening to unity is the same as removing our limiting beliefs about the infinite.

I am not suggesting we should not believe anything or that anyone is wrong for believing something or people shouldn't talk about it at all. What I am doing by speaking on it is bringing to awareness that by what we believe, what we accept as true and accept exists, we create the perception in our awareness of the infinite but not actually perceive the infinite as it is.

That is trying to fit the infinite into our belief box and believing it only exists in our belief box but all that is doing is limiting our perception of the infinite. So, in reality, infinite actually fills all belief boxes that ever are believed and even more, it's infinite, we are only limiting what we may be aware of it as, not limiting what it is.

So in my own experience if I am to talk about anything in teaching to awaken I will choose to speak about becoming aware of our sense of separation and our belief limitations so we may transcend them and be aware of unity in absolute infinite if that is what one intends. I also speak to healing, well being and inner peace, these aren't separate from awakening but they may have different words for who I am speaking to.

You are welcome to talk about whatever you see fit although I will speak my peace as well.

9 hours ago, Shanmugam said:

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.

Hm

[Shanmugam]

@SOUL

7 minutes ago, SOUL said:

be·lief

an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.

trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something.

This is the basic definition of belief. So with this in view it is quite easy to see how limiting beliefs can create separation in awareness.

The 'absolute infinite' isn't bound by our beliefs about it, there isn't any line or possibility it doesn't cross of fulfill. To say it "doesn't" or is "not" is establishing a limit in our perception of the infinite, just a limit in our awareness of it and isn't accurate because the infinite is unlimited otherwise it isn't infinite, see? Even if we set up some limit to what we 'believe' about the infinite, by it's genuine nature the infinite crosses that limitation we have set up in our mind. It's just our perception in our awareness of the infinite not being it and isn't the infinite not actually being it.

Yes, it is imaginary, it is an image of the infinite we would have that limits our perception in our awareness of the infinite, they are imagined limits not actual limits. We create these imaginary boundaries when we have beliefs that limit our access or interaction with the infinite, they don't really exist, the infinite really is on both sides of this imagined boundary or limitation, we just aren't aware of it.

Self, as a natural bodily 'sense', and the ego, as a mental construct, set up a separation between itself and everything to create the sense of self and an identity. This separation is perceived in consciousness so transcending the sense of separation and awakening to unity is the same as removing our limiting beliefs about the infinite.

I am not suggesting we should not believe anything or that anyone is wrong for believing something or people shouldn't talk about it at all. What I am doing by speaking on it is bringing to awareness that by what we believe, what we accept as true and accept exists, we create the perception in our awareness of the infinite but not actually perceive the infinite as it is.

That is trying to fit the infinite into our belief box and believing it only exists in our belief box but all that is doing is limiting our perception of the infinite. So, in reality, infinite actually fills all belief boxes that ever are believed and even more, it's infinite, we are only limiting what we may be aware of it as, not limiting what it is.

So in my own experience if I am to talk about anything in teaching to awaken I will choose to speak about becoming aware of our sense of separation and our belief limitations so we may transcend them and be aware of unity in absolute infinite if that is what one intends. I also speak to healing, well being and inner peace, these aren't separate from awakening but they may have different words for who I am speaking to.

You are welcome to talk about whatever you see fit although I will speak my peace as well.

Hm

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.

[Faceless]

Seems reasonable that to say I am enlightened is a major self deception and is totaly besides the point. 

That ultimate thing, which is truth, self knowing, is not to be achieved through time ‘becoming’ and the various methods, systems, philosophies or what ever. It can never be achieved by the me; it is there; or it is not there. And out of that comes a mind that has no conflict, no sense of striving, of going, moving and achieving.

Freedom from the conditioned conciousness. Freedom from that space between the thinker and the thought where division takes place.

 

 

 

Edited February 8, 2018 by Faceless

[SOUL]

1 hour ago, Shanmugam said:

The post you just made is fine ..  There is really nothing I would disagree with in what you have written

Well, that is so gracious of you, I appreciate the endorsement of an authority on "enlightenment" such as you.

Quote

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.

I came in suddenly, huh? How does someone suddenly post a question? Is there an 'unsudden' way to post a question on a forum? Should I have warned you in a separate reply first that I was going to ask a question so it wouldn't be unexpected?

The purpose of the question is to get an answer about if someone doesn't mirror what you say about it would you conclude they are "not enlightened" since that is in the title of your thread and the message of the post. You have quite an extensive criteria with "enlightenment" and "absolute infinite" that you write about for someone being "enlightened" or "not", so what is puzzling about the question on it?

I have only been examining words and the ideas they represent in our conversations but if you weren't identifying with your words and ideas so strongly you wouldn't see a "problem" with me discussing it with you, there would be no conflict in you about it and you surely wouldn't react to it like this:

Quote

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.

So be it.

Edited February 8, 2018 by SOUL

[Shanmugam]

 

1 minute ago, SOUL said:

Well, that is so gracious of you, I appreciate the endorsement of such an authority on "enlightenment" such as you.

 

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'... 

Quote

I came in suddenly, huh? How does someone suddenly post a question? Is there an 'unsudden' way to post a question on a forum? Should I have warned you in a separate reply first that I was going to ask a question so it wouldn't be unexpected?

 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? 

Quote

The purpose of the question is to get an answer about if someone doesn't mirror what you say about it would you conclude they are "not enlightened" since that is in the title of your thread and the message of the post. You have quite an extensive criteria with "enlightenment" and "absolute infinite" that you write about for someone being "enlightened" or "not", so what is puzzling about the question on it?

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. 

Quote

 

I have only been examining words and the ideas they represent in our conversations but if you weren't identifying with your words and ideas so strongly you wouldn't see a "problem" with me discussing it with you, there would be no conflict in you about it and you surely wouldn't react to it like this:

  Quote

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.

So be it.

 

1

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:

Quote

Why does it have to be so complicated to just accept "I am that I am"? Oh that's right....the 'need' to keep the monkey preoccupied with something.

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.. 

 

[Deep]

@Shanmugam This thread is interesting! 

Yes, I agree with you that enlightenment is binary. I think the problem comes from people defining the ego differently. I think the ego is not just a web of beliefs and concepts, but also an energetic field that makes us feel like an individual. This energetic field is broken during a non-dual experience like nirvikalpa samadhi. After the experience is over, the person returns to egoic consciousness but they know they are God. This is how Ramakrishna talked about a kundalini awakening. After the kundalini rises, the person adopts a fake ego to function. 

In my experience, I have beliefs and I use concepts but I'm detached from them. I still feel like a separate individual from the world. I pretend to believe in things others believe in because I have to function. For example, I pretend to believe in culture, nationality, religion, and politics even though I know they aren't the Absolute Truth. I don't feel overwhelmed by problems in life like the way other people do. I just go wherever God is taking me. 

 

 

[Shanmugam]

12 minutes ago, Deep said:

@Shanmugam This thread is interesting! 

Yes, I agree with you that enlightenment is binary. I think the problem comes from people defining the ego differently. I think the ego is not just a web of beliefs and concepts, but also an energetic field that makes us feel like an individual. This energetic field is broken during a non-dual experience like nirvikalpa samadhi. After the experience is over, the person returns to egoic consciousness but they know they are God. This is how Ramakrishna talked about a kundalini awakening. After the kundalini rises, the person adopts a fake ego to function. 

In my experience, I have beliefs and I use concepts but I'm detached from them. I still feel like a separate individual from the world. I pretend to believe in things others believe in because I have to function. For example, I pretend to believe in culture, nationality, religion, and politics even though I know they aren't the Absolute Truth. I don't feel overwhelmed by problems in life like the way other people do. I just go wherever God is taking me. 

 

 

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:

Quote

Semantic discord is the situation where two parties disagree on the definition of a word or several words essential to communicating or formulating any concept at issue. The two parties basically understand two different meanings for the word, or they associate the word with different concepts. Consequently, their disagreeing on these definitions explains why there is a dispute at all. Semantic discord most often arises due to differences in the cultural backgrounds or professional fields of the communicators. Any word or instance of communication that has its effectiveness reduced due to semantic discord is said to be semantically loaded. Semantic disputes are arguments that arise over terms due to 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:

Quote

 

Ego is a tricky word and it has been used to convey about 3-4 different things... And there has been a confusion because of translations...

1. There is a word called 'Ahamkar'. This word has been used in Yoga, Vedanta and Samkhya. And this 'ahamkar' actually disappears completely after enlightenment. But this word is usually translated as ego in English. Let us look at the actual meaning of the word Ahamkar. Its a compound word consisting of 'Aham' which means 'I' and 'kara' which means 'to do'. The compound word indicates the idea 'I am the doer'.. This idea can only exist in separation or duality. After enlightenment, you can't even find a slight scent of Ahamkara, because duality completely disappears.

2. There is also something called 'Aham vritti'... This is also translated as ego in English. But 'Aham vritti' is actually the self-concept, which too is destroyed completely after enlightenment. It is the story of 'you' that you carry in your head. This story completely loses its focus, importance, significance and power after enlightenment. You only access the self-concept that you have in memory. But there is no active, consistent, solid self-concept which spans from past to future.

3. There is a function in the mind which helps you with social interactions. Its is also referred to as ego. I use the word 'ego' to refer to this. This function is totally necessary for social interactions. It is this function which strives to protect and enhance the self-concept. So by its very nature, ego is defensive. But after enlightenment, self-concept disappears while ego as a function persists. This is why you can notice some kind of defensiveness even in enlightened people. But they defend the truth, instead of defending a self-concept.

4. Freud used the word 'ego' in a totally different way. If you look up his theory about ego, super-ego and id, you will understand what he is saying in his theory.

Note:  This is very important. If you find one teacher saying something about ego which another teacher seem to contradict, then always remember that they are probably using the word 'ego' to mean different things. The above is the quick checklist that you can refer. I have an entire chapter in my book called 'Problem with words' where I discuss certain confusions that tend to happen because of using one word to mean multiple things or using multiple words to mean a single thing. Makes sense? So, when you listen to a spiritual teacher, it is very important to inquire what meaning he is actually giving to a particular word by checking the context.

 

 

[Nahm]

@SOUL @Faceless @Shanmugam  Seems like someone is stating they don’t want help, and someone is trying to help none the less. That semantic discourse, imo, is what’s been at play for the majority of this thread. Any chance you guys would share your personal story of your actual experience of enlightenment? Not so much what it’s like now, or the path, but the experience itself, when it ‘happened’? I think that would allow a much deeper understanding of where each other are coming from. The meanings behind the words would come out. Otherwise, it’s kind of a circle jerk. Not that there’s anything wrong with a circle jerk. Lol I know what is meant by the binary moment, there’s no question about God, the universe, my life, etc after that moment. But most people haven’t had that experience. So there’s a lot of back and forth with out every simply stating what it is we are talking about. Or tell me to piss off, too, that’s cool also. 

[Faceless]

@nahm 

Circle jerk lol good call 

I dont claim to be enlightened. If one says they are enlightened well then u know what that means lol 

my point is simply knowing oneself/thought is what’s important.

Edited February 8, 2018 by Faceless

[Shanmugam]

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

 

 

 

[Nahm]

@Faceless Not trying to push ya, I hear you.

I do want to clarify though, my intention was not a set up so to speak, asking for anyone to state wether or not they are enlightened. I get that. I was hoping we could share our actual enlightenment experience with each other. I’m more interested in that, then who can win the word battle. I’m probably the odd man out in that way right now though. 

[Deep]

@Shanmugam I'm saying various definitions of enlightenment can also be correct. If one feels like they are, then they probably are. 

[Joseph Maynor]

It’s a paradox:

1.  Awakening has no levels.  Reality never changed, so there is no change per say.

But

2.  Dismantling the Ego has levels.  Bad habits, shit beliefs, idiotic Ego attachments, stupid fears and superstitions, backward culture, abusive childhood — all these take the rest of your life to root out and let go.  So, detaching from Ego has levels even after Awakening.  Awakening is just the beginning, the true start of the Enlightenment path.  Now you gotta clean all that garbage out that you have gained the eyes to see.  That’s the real path of Enlightenment.  And that path ain’t dotted with epiphanies and cool states.  It’s the mundane, the void, emptiness, stillness, detachment — all the non-sexy stuff that you don’t wanna do.

Edited February 8, 2018 by Joseph Maynor