I am enlightened. Sincere seekers: ask me anything

[Forestluv]

2 hours ago, winterknight said:

To have a correct understanding, for whatever that's worth.

Yes, indeed. 

[winterknight]

35 minutes ago, Mikael89 said:

@winterknight Would you take painkillers if you had severe severe physical pain?

Yup!

[graded24]

@winterknight  Useless question coming through.. 

There is often a discussion/debate about whether the ground of being is Emptiness (as Buddhist describe it) or Awareness (how Advaitans describe) and some even say this Awareness is empty. 
I have an understanding of Awareness being the background. Do you have any thoughts on what you understand to be Emptiness? 

[graded24]

3 minutes ago, Mikael89 said:

@graded24 My answer would be that Awareness and Emptiness are the same thing. But let's let winterknight answer.

Are you familiar with Hameed Ali's (A H Almaas) work?  He talks about how there are realizations beyond Nonduality. He, and others seem to too, make a difference between awareness and emptiness 

[winterknight]

17 minutes ago, graded24 said:

@winterknight  Useless question coming through.. 

There is often a discussion/debate about whether the ground of being is Emptiness (as Buddhist describe it) or Awareness (how Advaitans describe) and some even say this Awareness is empty. 
I have an understanding of Awareness being the background. Do you have any thoughts on what you understand to be Emptiness? 

The awareness that is the actual Ground -- and this will be recognized perfectly when your search is over -- is not the normal awareness that you are familiar with. The awareness you're familiar with is subject-object awareness. There is something that is aware of that subject-object awareness. That "awareness" is actually beyond all opposites, beyond even awareness and unawareness, beyond time and space, etc. -- and so the Buddhists call it emptiness, since no quality or content can be ascribed to it.

But is indeed the same "thing" (though some Buddhists would disagree -- some people always disagree...).

Edited December 2, 2018 by winterknight

[graded24]

9 minutes ago, winterknight said:

The awareness that is the actual Ground -- and this will be recognized perfectly when your search is over -- is not the normal awareness that you are familiar with. The awareness you're familiar with is subject-object awareness. There is something that is aware of that subject-object awareness. That "awareness" is actually beyond all opposites, beyond even awareness and unawareness, beyond time and space, etc. -- and so the Buddhists call it emptiness, since no quality or content can be ascribed to it.

But is indeed the same "thing" (though some Buddhists would disagree -- some people always disagree...).

The same kind of people who engage in these debates also make a distinction (as a way to counter the advaitan narrative) between two kinds of awareness.. First, awareness that has the I in it.. as in, it is aware that it is. Second kind, where it is aware but has no I in it. They call the second one the deeper kind. I think Nisaragadatta also spoke along similar lines.  

[winterknight]

17 minutes ago, graded24 said:

The same kind of people who engage in these debates also make a distinction (as a way to counter the advaitan narrative) between two kinds of awareness.. First, awareness that has the I in it.. as in, it is aware that it is. Second kind, where it is aware but has no I in it. They call the second one the deeper kind. I think Nisaragadatta also spoke along similar lines.  

Yes, that's exactly the same distinction I made above. The awareness with the "I" in it is subject-object awareness. The awareness that is beyond that has no I in it.

[Ananta]

4 hours ago, graded24 said:

First, awareness that has the I in it.. as in, it is aware that it is. Second kind, where it is aware but has no I in it. They call the second one the deeper kind. I think Nisaragadatta also spoke along similar lines.  

Yes, Nisargadatta used the terms Consciousness and the Absolute.

You also could say, the experiencing witness and the non-experiencing witness (although witness, in that sense, would be figuratively speaking).

One could also use "reflected" awareness vs "pure" awareness, but regardless, it's the meaning behind the words that matters. 

Edited December 2, 2018 by Anna1

[graded24]

@winterknight The Teachers often point out by giving real life examples of how Happiness is when in a moment of desirelessness, Self, which is happiness itself,  experiences itself. It is marked by the absence of the ego self.. or at least it is not center stage.

Though it makes sense for some cases, what doesn't fit in this understanding of Happiness is, some of the happiest moments of my life, as i am sure must be true for many others, were when i had finally achieved something great, and hence felt unique and special. Sure a desire was met, and as such it was a moment of lack of desire.. but this moment is also marked by a strong presence of Ego, a sense of superiority and uniqueness. You know, like scoring more than everyone in an exam.  Indeed, these moments become the defining moments for many as we want to get back to that high again and again.. and our mind thinks "well if being a little unique and special made me so happy, if i work hard enough, one day i will be unique and special enough that i will get the ultimate happiness".. so it becomes a life long pursuit. 

Do you have an insight into this? How come those moments, laced with the strongest presence of ego, were also the happiest? 

[winterknight]

20 minutes ago, graded24 said:

@winterknight The Teachers often point out by giving real life examples of how Happiness is when in a moment of desirelessness, Self, which is happiness itself,  experiences itself. It is marked by the absence of the ego self.. or at least it is not center stage.

Though it makes sense for some cases, what doesn't fit in this understanding of Happiness is, some of the happiest moments of my life, as i am sure must be true for many others, were when i had finally achieved something great, and hence felt unique and special. Sure a desire was met, and as such it was a moment of lack of desire.. but this moment is also marked by a strong presence of Ego, a sense of superiority and uniqueness. You know, like scoring more than everyone in an exam.  Indeed, these moments become the defining moments for many as we want to get back to that high again and again.. and our mind thinks "well if being a little unique and special made me so happy, if i work hard enough, one day i will be unique and special enough that i will get the ultimate happiness".. so it becomes a life long pursuit. 

Do you have an insight into this? How come those moments, laced with the strongest presence of ego, were also the happiest? 

They're not really the happiest. It's the story that we tell ourselves that they are. That's how we rationalize all our striving. We're validated in this way of thinking by our family (which rewards us with affection and recognition when we achieve) and by society.

These moments you mention are marked by a strong pleasure of achievement. But think about all the pain that it took to get there. And once you're there, the pleasure lasts -- how long? And then you're striving again. And then there's the chance of failure. And even if you succeed, it could be taken away from you. Even if you're "unique and special" at what you do, and are the best for a while, your powers could be taken from you by circumstance or by illness or by someone better, or by any number of things outside of your control.

The happiness we experience even in these pleasurable moments is the pleasure of the Self, but it is marked on either side by the mental circumstances that surround it -- that is, by the story we tell about it. What makes it pleasure is that it is in contrast to the pain on either side, so it stands out. All that agony and uncertainty -- and ahh, the release of success stands out by comparison.

Ramana Maharshi gives the example -- with respect to all pleasures, and achievement pleasures are no different -- of someone going from the cool shade of a tree into the blazing hot sun, just to have the pleasure of coming back under the tree.

That contrast between the searing sun and the cool shade is what makes for pain and pleasure. It's what makes that achievement stand out in our memory, too, and that's why we label it 'happiest.'

The enlightened one, by contrast, simply stays in the shade. As you can see, this is quite different. You don't get the contrast. But the contrast is because there's a ton of pain mixed into things.

None of this to say you shouldn't strive, but we should be clear that this is not in fact the source of real happiness.

[Bauer1977]

OK Winterknight, I will give you a try as I appear to have reached a point spiritually that I am unsure how to approach. 

While mediating the last several weeks, I appear to have come to the doorstep of what people call Ego death. Lately I have tried to resolve a few uncertainties in my mind as a part of this conundrum. Like that of free will and acceptance of the NOW in every moment. Thru various spiritual experiences I have absolutely no doubt that time and free will are both illusions. I won't get into those in detail here, but a spiritual experience is as definitive a level of proof that we can possibly expect. So given that, I do believe whole heartedly that we, as Ego, do not control anything in our experience except for the will power that we possess. Which I view in practice as just being a choice we have with regard to our level of acceptance of any given situation and moment.

Having said that, the idea of surrendering complete and total control of my life, and my individuality to God has proven difficult. I am very hesitant. I believe I have had many lives prior to this one. I also believe I have an old soul that has been around for a very long time. And it makes me feel that surrendering my will to God would mark the end of a very long legacy that included these lifetimes, a lot of effort, and a lot of suffering. These are the thoughts that enter my mind as resistance, obviously from Ego. I am trying to let go in every way that I have ever read about, but this task has so far been fruitless. I honestly have no ideas on what I can do to overcome the resistance of Ego on this, and to just let go. And I know this resistance is a very serious strong type that I have never encountered before. As not only do I feel doubts, but I feel a real lack of desire and will to even try to overcome this step. So Ego has definitely dug in here, which I guess is to be expected from what I have read. 

So given that, and given that you have seemingly been thru this surrendering.... can you offer any advice on how to push thru this and accept my true reality/nature as the source?

Cheers, Ron

[winterknight]

1 minute ago, Bauer1977 said:

OK Winterknight, I will give you a try as I appear to have reached a point spiritually that I am unsure how to approach. 

While mediating the last several weeks, I appear to have come to the doorstep of what people call Ego death. Lately I have tried to resolve a few uncertainties in my mind as a part of this conundrum. Like that of free will and acceptance of the NOW in every moment. Thru various spiritual experiences I have absolutely no doubt that time and free will are both illusions. I won't get into those in detail here, but a spiritual experience is as definitive a level of proof that we can possibly expect. So given that, I do believe whole heartedly that we, as Ego, do not control anything in our experience except for the will power that we possess. Which I view in practice as just being a choice we have with regard to our level of acceptance of any given situation and moment.

Having said that, the idea of surrendering complete and total control of my life, and my individuality to God has proven difficult. I am very hesitant. I believe I have had many lives prior to this one. I also believe I have an old soul that has been around for a very long time. And it makes me feel that surrendering my will to God would mark the end of a very long legacy that included these lifetimes, a lot of effort, and a lot of suffering. These are the thoughts that enter my mind as resistance, obviously from Ego. I am trying to let go in every way that I have ever read about, but this task has so far been fruitless. I honestly have no ideas on what I can do to overcome the resistance of Ego on this, and to just let go. And I know this resistance is a very serious strong type that I have never encountered before. As not only do I feel doubts, but I feel a real lack of desire and will to even try to overcome this step. So Ego has definitely dug in here, which I guess is to be expected from what I have read. 

So given that, and given that you have seemingly been thru this surrendering.... can you offer any advice on how to push thru this and accept my true reality/nature as the source?

Cheers, Ron

Yes, don't surrender if you don't feel like surrendering. Instead, relentlessly self-inquire into who wants to surrender. Who is it that is trying to surrender?

[Bauer1977]

1 minute ago, winterknight said:

Yes, don't surrender if you don't feel like surrendering. Instead, relentlessly self-inquire into who wants to surrender. Who is it that is trying to surrender?

Me as Ego is trying to surrender. 

[Bauer1977]

Should I be trying to adopt the perspective of me as the source instead?

[Ananta]

9 minutes ago, Bauer1977 said:

And it makes me feel that surrendering my will to God would mark the end of a very long legacy that included these lifetimes, a lot of effort, and a lot of suffering. 

Thing is, your will is already god's will, although I know it doesn't feel that way.

 

[winterknight]

14 minutes ago, Bauer1977 said:

Me as Ego is trying to surrender. 

That's an intellectual answer. Self-inquiry is not about trying to "think" your way to the answer. You know that you are. This is obvious. The point of self-inquiry is to find out where that knowledge is coming from, or what it is. Follow the link I gave above to see what that's like.

Right now you are saying that you are having trouble surrendering. That means you are identifying yourself with the one who is trying to surrender -- in other words, you think the one who wants to surrender is "I." Who is that I?

When I ask that, I don't mean for you to "think about it" and come up with an intellectual answer like "me as ego," but to hone in on the feeling of "I"...that steady, unquestionable knowledge that "I am"... are you the surrenderer? Who is watching the one who attempts to surrender and the one who resists? 

10 minutes ago, Bauer1977 said:

Should I be trying to adopt the perspective of me as the source instead?

It's not about adopting perspectives at all. It's about inquiring into the very obvious, plain-as-day fact that "I know that I am." What is that I? You need to trace that feeling/knowledge to where it comes from.

Edited December 2, 2018 by winterknight

[graded24]

20 minutes ago, winterknight said:

They're not really the happiest. It's the story that we tell ourselves that they are. That's how we rationalize all our striving. We're validated in this way of thinking by our family (which rewards us with affection and recognition when we achieve) and by society.

These moments you mention are marked by a strong pleasure of achievement. But think about all the pain that it took to get there. And once you're there, the pleasure lasts -- how long? And then you're striving again. And then there's the chance of failure. And even if you succeed, it could be taken away from you. Even if you're "unique and special" at what you do, and are the best for a while, your powers could be taken from you by circumstance or by illness or by someone better, or by any number of things outside of your control.

The happiness we experience even in these pleasurable moments is the pleasure of the Self, but it is marked on either side by the mental circumstances that surround it -- that is, by the story we tell about it. What makes it pleasure is that it is in contrast to the pain on either side, so it stands out. All that agony and uncertainty -- and ahh, the release of success stands out by comparison.

Ramana Maharshi gives the example -- with respect to all pleasures, and achievement pleasures are no different -- of someone going from the cool shade of a tree into the blazing hot sun, just to have the pleasure of coming back under the tree.

That contrast between the searing sun and the cool shade is what makes for pain and pleasure. It's what makes that achievement stand out in our memory, too, and that's why we label it 'happiest.'

The enlightened one, by contrast, simply stays in the shade. As you can see, this is quite different. You don't get the contrast. But the contrast is because there's a ton of pain mixed into things.

None of this to say you shouldn't strive, but we should be clear that this is not in fact the source of real happiness.

So, the distinction to be made is between Pleasure and Happiness? 
What is the key distinction ? That pleasure has it's opposite (pain) but Happiness does not? 

[winterknight]

7 minutes ago, graded24 said:

So, the distinction to be made is between Pleasure and Happiness? 
What is the key distinction ? That pleasure has it's opposite (pain) but Happiness does not? 

Yes, basically. To be precise, though, happiness as it used by most people in ordinary language essentially means a kind of pleasure -- that is, it's the happiness that is the opposite of unhappiness.

But when I use happiness, I mean the real happiness that is our true nature, and is unchanging, and is beyond pleasure & pain, and has no opposite.

[Bauer1977]

13 minutes ago, winterknight said:

That's an intellectual answer. Self-inquiry is not about trying to "think" your way to the answer. You know that you are. This is obvious. The point of self-inquiry is to find out where that knowledge is coming from, or what it is. Follow the link I gave above to see what that's like.

Right now you are saying that you are having trouble surrendering. That means you are identifying yourself with the one who is trying to surrender -- in other words, you think the one who wants to surrender is "I." Who is that I?

When I ask that, I don't mean for you to "think about it" and come up with an intellectual answer like "me as ego," but to hone in on the feeling of "I"...that steady, unquestionable knowledge that "I am"... are you the surrenderer? Who is watching the one who attempts to surrender and the one who resists? 

It's not about adopting perspectives at all. It's about inquiring into the very obvious, plain-as-day fact that "I know that I am." What is that I? You need to trace that feeling/knowledge to where it comes from.

Ok, thanks. I hadn't realized there was a link there at first. I am new to the site. I will give it a try. I appreciate your help.

[Bauer1977]

19 minutes ago, Anna1 said:

Thing is, your will is already god's will, although I know it doesn't feel that way.

 

This is true I know.... but its relinquishing that ownership of it that I am finding so difficult. I will try the Self-Inquiry technique that Winterknight pointed me to. Seems like it might offer a path to a deeper level of mediation at the very least.