i understand enlightenment?

[Zeldor]

Hi, I just came down from around a week long high. During the final part of this high, which was around an hour ago, I felt like I "grasped" enlightenment. It was probably the happiest experience in my life, and this is what I appeared to have grasped:

Basically that all is one and one is all. This includes paradoxes like everything is nothing and it is also wrong to say everything is nothing. That the Absolute Truth is wrong, is partial, does not exist, does exist, is absolutely true, can be intellectually understood, and can't be intellectually understood. That I am enlightened and not enlightened. It also included a bunch of other things that can be derived using this logic.

I am going to stop using this logic to save time. But using this logic will also not save time. This is confusing.... but it is also easy to grasp...…… WTF!

I have a couple of questions.

1. Am I correct? Is this logic only partially true?

2. Is this a enlightenment experience?

3. Is this the furthest I can intellectually understand enlightenment?

4. Why am I not enlightened? (Even though intellectually I know I am enlightened).

I may edit this post to add further questions.

Thanks in advance for any help you may provide.

 

Edited September 9, 2018 by Zeldor

[SoonHei]

5 minutes ago, Zeldor said:

can be intellectually understood, and can't be intellectually understood.

Wow!

 

I don't even know what to say haha.. I am at the exactl Current point right now!!!

 

 

 

U said u just coming off the high, I am currently high , just on weed but I have done deep contemplation on weed before so I can go quite deep, understanding wise

 

About ur line I quoted, I totally understand reality/truth intellectually as well! 

The only thing you and I are unable to do I is "experience" IT

 

Reason experience is in quotes is because get this: what we as who can experience is the contents of the container, that's all infinite possibilities and all called experience

The intellectual understanding is a content within this container

 

Therefore, what becoming the container truly "feels" like cannot be explained by words or understood Intellectually as it is something outside of the contents of the container

 

And what we normally experience is the contents of the container

 

 

We are the container

Become the container

The sustainer

The beholder

The infinite

The eternal

The All

God is the Greatest!

[Leo Gura]

@Zeldor That's good! (And also not good )

But there is still probably more.

Do you have abiding nondual awareness? Or was it just a peak state that has since passed?

Are you conscious of what you are?

Are you conscious of what other people are?

Are you conscious of why reality is?

Are you conscious of what God is?

Are you conscious of Infinity?

Are you conscious of what death is?

Have all metaphysical questions been answered in your mind?

[Dodo]

9 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

@Zeldor That's good! (And also not good )

But there is still probably more.

Do you have abiding nondual awareness?

Are you conscious of what you are?

Are you conscious of what other people are?

Are you conscious of why reality is?

Are you conscious of what God is?

Are you conscious of Infinity?

Are you conscious of what death is?

Have all metaphysical questions been answered in your mind?

Are all the answers Mu? 

[Leo Gura]

@Dodo

[SoonHei]

But it really can be so easily intellectually understood (minus the direct experience of it) 

Picture A blank empty Adobe canvas (the checkered box pattern indicating all layers are removed)

That's what nothingness is

 

What your idea of nothing is, is a layer which is added onto that black canvas!

So if I imagine pure darkness/blank empty space, that's a layer of reality and therefore not the absolute

 

The absolute is that canvas, empty of all layers

 

Am I right @Leo Gura

[SoonHei]

That checkerboard background is the blank empty nothingness that I am referring to.

[Zeldor]

@SoonHei lol, that's pretty cool, the last line describes part of what I felt pretty well. Are you saying that my understanding was the understanding that there is infinite content within the container that is all the same/different? And that actually being enlightened is becoming the container where all these experiences are actualized. That when you become enlightened you have a constant pathway to witness all these experiences. If this is true, does becoming enlightened mean that not only do you understand the fundamentals of what reality is, but all the ways reality could be, like you would know all that there is to learn. Even though it all appears the same, that it is all also different and that there are individual aspects to be understood? That all Is one also means one is one and not all?

@Dodo I know your response wasn't directed at me, but is Mu an advanced form of skepticism. Like skepticism that's even skeptical of itself?

https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-mu-in-zen-449929 (are links allowed? This is where I "learned" what mu is).

@Leo Gura I definitely don't think I became enlightened, if I did, then I would be kind of disappointed because that experience wasn't the most amazing experience that I think is possible(: I think for all your what questions, I would say they're all the same, but as I explained in my first paragraph that they also may be individual aspects that I need to understand independently from another, which means I definitely have more work to do. Yay? For your why reality is this way, I think that's because it has to be this way, that all the other ways it could be would limit it and then it wouldn't be absolute. I am definitely not conscious of infinity.

[Leo Gura]

@Zeldor Sounds like you got a nice glimpse but not a permanent awakening.

Are you still identified with your body/mind? What do you identify as?

Are you conscious that you are immortal?

[Zeldor]

@Leo Gura I don't know if i'm misunderstanding something here, but I don't claim to be enlightened, or to even understand this aspect of enlightenment, I just understand it "better" than how I've previously understood it.

To your first question, I have no idea what I should identify with, but if i'm being honest, I identify most with being a mind. I still want happiness even though happiness is a concept and different from just being, which is closer to what I should be aiming for? To your second question I think that depends on what I identify as. If I do identify with anything then my identification will probably collapse but I will still exist? As you've said in the past, I don't think I could explain why I exist, but if we go off the assumption that I do, then I think you'd have to go "back" to the origin of existence. Since I think existence is the same as non-existence, I don't think there was ever a origin of existence. I think that the only way existence couldn't exist is if it was non-existence, and since non-existence is existence, that means existence has always existed. Since I exist now, that means that I probably have existed for all eternity and probably will keep on existing for all eternity.  Of course if someone pointed a gun at me i'd probably be scarred and try to run away. I think I have an "ok" model that explains why i'm immortal but I haven fully "embodied" the idea. I also can't really explain why I think non-existence = existence, but i make that claim on the logic derived from All is One.

[Leo Gura]

@Zeldor Keep doing the work, grasshopper.

You've only seen a few hairs of the ox's tail.

[RichardY]

@Zeldor i understand enlightenment? No,... you don't.

[Nahm]

@Zeldor Great work. It’s nice to relate to others on nonduality. ?

[Zeldor]

@Nahm Thanks(:

[Mu_]

20 hours ago, Dodo said:

Are all the answers Mu? 

No, I am Mu.

Edited September 10, 2018 by Mu_

[Mu_]

On 9/9/2018 at 3:24 AM, Zeldor said:

Hi, I just came down from around a week long high. During the final part of this high, which was around an hour ago, I felt like I "grasped" enlightenment. It was probably the happiest experience in my life, and this is what I appeared to have grasped:

Basically that all is one and one is all. This includes paradoxes like everything is nothing and it is also wrong to say everything is nothing. That the Absolute Truth is wrong, is partial, does not exist, does exist, is absolutely true, can be intellectually understood, and can't be intellectually understood. That I am enlightened and not enlightened. It also included a bunch of other things that can be derived using this logic.

I am going to stop using this logic to save time. But using this logic will also not save time. This is confusing.... but it is also easy to grasp...…… WTF!

I have a couple of questions.

1. Am I correct? Is this logic only partially true?

2. Is this a enlightenment experience?

3. Is this the furthest I can intellectually understand enlightenment?

4. Why am I not enlightened? (Even though intellectually I know I am enlightened).

I may edit this post to add further questions.

Thanks in advance for any help you may provide.

 

Congrats those are some deep recognition's.  What you've said so far in this thread sounds like wisdom within the umbrella of enlightenment which don't forget is just a word.  Why do you think your not enlightened?  What measure do you use to determine this?  Its a deep rabbit hole this stuff And its all fluff.  Based upon what you've shared so far I'd say if your really interested in going "deeper"  "Feel" into the nature of free will and its opposite.  Did you have a realization or did it arise, is there a thinker or do thoughts arise.  Do you feel or are things felt.  Leave all answers open, but live each possibility, find out what remains.  I get the sense that you have knowledge, but the felt side of these realizations are not grounded or tangible.  Again all this is up to you and optional.  If at any point you freak out on this journey, just remember to be a treat others with decency and find gratitude in it all.

Edited September 10, 2018 by Mu_

[Zeldor]

@Mu_ Wow, so you're saying that I should try to feel things along with understanding them? Do you think feeling is another way of saying "becoming directly conscious of"?

[Zeldor]

@Mu_ So I think I have a conceptual answer for what is free will.  I read in a book somewhere that free will is the ability to choose whether to look inside or out. I think it is more than that, I think it is the ability to choose what to be directly conscious of or what to "feel". So everything and nothing is already happening around me but I haven't "chose" to be conscious of it. I don't know if I am actually "choosing" to have these realizations though. Can you choose to be directly conscious of not choosing or choosing? Or both simultaneously?

[Mu_]

7 hours ago, Zeldor said:

@Mu_ Wow, so you're saying that I should try to feel things along with understanding them? Do you think feeling is another way of saying "becoming directly conscious of"?

Yes, feeling and experiencing as your full livingness is a very different vantage point then the knowledge.  It may not necessarily bring you more happiness, but you may find that finding more happiness is not as important as it once seemed and the result is something very interesting

Keep pondering my above questions and feel into them, whats your experience.

[Dodo]

11 hours ago, Mu_ said:

No, I am Mu.

I stand corrected (actually sitting down)