Insights into the path to nothingness (no-self)

[Key Elements]

7 hours ago, FoxFoxFox said:

You are either aware of your enlightenment or you are not. There is no such thing as someone who is not enlightened.

I agree here. That's why I mentioned in this thread that the map is not the territory. Let's explore. But, you know, the spiritual path does involve bodhisattva in some way. What do you think? It's just that sometimes it's not so easy to have a no-mind in the situation. 

[Aakash]

I was thinking about this topic yesterday, since you bought it up. What if you could define bodhisattva as nothingness and buddahhood as your laughing joyful state. I have began questioning whether the term "the buddah went to the highest levels of consciousness possible" but if it was infinity then in a sense, its just an analogy for the action "too seek higher" 

but eventually one has to pass through bodhisattva (nothingness) either way to get to buddahhood! 

[Key Elements]

43 minutes ago, Aakash said:

 What if you could define bodhisattva as nothingness and buddahhood as your laughing joyful state.

Sure, it's just not so easy to do bodhisattva with no-mind and joy. The bodhisattva may not be aware of how to reach the no-mind state. When is it appropriate to do no-mind, and when is it appropriate to show other emotions while doing bodhisattva? That can be challenging. The person who is in buddhahood may have already mastered their emotions. That's probably the difference. 

[FoxFoxFox]

10 minutes ago, Key Elements said:

I agree here. That's why I mentioned in this thread that the map is not the territory. Let's explore. But, you know, the spiritual path does involve bodhisattva in some way. What do you think? It's just that sometimes it's not so easy to have a no-mind in the situation. 

I completely understand where you are coming from because I was there myself at some point. But you might have come across the idea that there is in truth no such thing as a "path to enlightenment". Well this turns out to be true, and i'd say it's very important to understand this as soon as possible. Not paying attention to subtle things like that is why some people spend years and decades searching for enlightenment and never attaining it. They don't "attain" it because it's nothing to be attained. 

So here's how I would put it: Enlightenment is not an event, or occurrence in time. It is always fully present. The mind is not an obstacle to this understanding in of itself, so chasing an experience of no-mind is pointless in regards to enlightenment. The mind can be completely silent, but as long as you believe it to be "your" mind then the point has not been understood. There is no such thing as 'mind'. If you say that there is a mind that is not quiet, then you are admitting that there is a perceiver (you) who is becoming aware of an object (the mind). I'm saying that this is not true. Enlightenment, for lack of a better word, is the understanding of this. 

[Key Elements]

47 minutes ago, FoxFoxFox said:

But you might have come across the idea that there is in truth no such thing as a "path to enlightenment". Well this turns out to be true

Ok. I get what you're saying here, but what are we going to do while we're embodied and living here on earth? It makes sense to me to do bodhisattva in some way, even though all is an illusion because enlightenment literally means no longer suffering/ no suffering and complete peace -- no matter what happens.

[FoxFoxFox]

@Key Elements

First thing I would do is purge all beliefs about enlightenment. Specifically:

All is not an illusion

Saying that "all is an illusion" does not mean that reality itself is an illusion. It's anything but an illusion. Superimposing thoughts on reality, that is the illusion. This is more profound than just removing labels from objects and seeing them as they are. You must also purge more subtle psychological mechanisms. For example, space, time, distance, self, other etc. 

The emphasis on unity you see in various teachings is meant to show this. That there is no separation, or distinction within awareness. Initially, one might become aware of awareness. One then might somewhat erroneously believe that they are awareness and thus become aware of objects and actions. I'm saying that this separation must go. Awareness is the only thing that there ever was, is, and will be. It is only awareness that is becoming aware, and then only of awareness. 

 

Enlightenment does not mean the end of suffering.

For there to be suffering, there needs to be a sufferer. This is not the case. There is only awareness. There is no such thing as suffering to become immune to to begin with. However don't get confused. If by this, you are chasing some supernaturally ability for the body to become insensitive to pain, well there are easier ways to achieve that than becoming enlightened. One could take a painkiller for example. I would say that if you are chasing this "ability", then stop doing so immediately.  Just don't worry about it. Don't go search for suffering your experience and judge your enlightenment by this merit. Trust me it will do you good if you follow my advice.

 

Enlightenment does not mean complete peace, no matter what happens.

The explanation for this is similar to what's been said above. I know many sages and scriptures put a lot of emphasis on the "bliss" aspect of enlightenment, but that bliss is not for the mind. It's for awareness. In other words, you already possess this bliss. It is there all the time. However, do you know this? That is the question. The point again is to stop your constant search for bliss which ironically is the cause for bliss to be obfuscated.

 

So allow me to reiterate: Enlightenment is not an event or happening in space or time. You say that "we" are "embodied" on the earth. I'm saying, are you sure this is the case? It's not the case. This is a belief. This is a superimposition on reality. Understand this.

 

 

[Aakash]

Let me give you my understanding on this so called path to enlightenment 

1 ------ duality                                                              At any given point there needs to be foundations built at certain levels, a bodhisattva who is

2------- duality                                                             determined to create a foundation at that level, commits a vow to do so in regards to non 

3-------awakening                                                        duality, more common problems like lack of food and water aren't considered on this path 

4-------duality                                                                in my opinion, because these are lower psychological foundations.... personally i feel like these

5---- awakening                                                          can only be done in buddahood because in bodhivisattva you haven't reached a full embodyment

experience, where you realise everything is an illusion, including thoughts. as a result you vow to reach nirvana after because there are still things you haven't figured out. YES you are indeed enlightened but have not realised the truest truth or highest. That the character you play in the now is the exact perfection, which is synonymous to completely let go. i think this is the true enlightenment you are talking about and you articulated it quite well. in a way i never thought of before @FoxFoxFox. Hereafter, it's no longer bodhisatvva but just  a genuine thing that you wish to do through embodyment of infinity and so you accept everything. 

There are probably bodhisattvas who have not come to a complete realisation. The thing that leo has done is simply remove all self-decptions which has not been done in the past, kind of! because everyone was relating the lifting of illusions to enlightenment/ the path of enlightenment but they're seperate and in of its essense, not seperate. (meta-paradox) so there is no longer need for the term bodhisattva to create your "own life purpose" just what would normally be left .. how to live a good life and be YOUR buddahood as the character you were meant to be in the now. 

@Key Elements

[Amun]

That is indeed a very interesting diagram, thank you for sharing

[Key Elements]

@FoxFoxFox

Simple question: Should I just sit here in my room? Well...what now?

I get what you're saying, but we're going into more and more definitions. It's going to get too complicated. 

[Key Elements]

@Aakash Same reply for you. 

[FoxFoxFox]

@Key Elements

Say you are sitting in your room. Your room has walls. 

First question is: Are you aware of the wall, or are you aware of your perception of the wall? In other words, do you experience the wall, or do you experience how the wall looks like with your eyes? Also, be mindful that the word "wall" is not the same thing as the object itself.

[Key Elements]

@Amun you're welcome.

[FoxFoxFox]

@Aakash  Sorry friend, could you please reformat your post a bit

[Key Elements]

@FoxFoxFox no, I wasn't thinking about my room or the walls or any material things. I'm asking, "Where should I go to work and make a living?"

I posted it here already. This woman had no choice.

[FoxFoxFox]

@Key Elements

Okay, but let's focus on the question I asked your just now. Just do me the favor

[Aakash]

@Key Elements firstly, can you remind my infinite self .. Mr Leo gura 

that we are indeed ... Living in the 21st century AC loooool! whether we live to admit it or not  

I have a touch screen laptop and am capable of drawing on the screen.. would love to be able to draw my meanings

[Key Elements]

40 minutes ago, FoxFoxFox said:

@Key Elements

Okay, but let's focus on the question I asked your just now. Just do me the favor

What was your question? Please make it simple. If you say that there is no path, why should the question be so elaborated and complicated?

[Aakash]

Let me give you my understanding on this so called path to enlightenment . At any given point there needs to be foundations built at certain levels, a bodhisattva who is determined to create a foundation at that level, commits a vow to do so in regards to non duality, more common problems like lack of food and water aren't considered on this path in my opinion, because these are lower psychological foundations.... personally i feel like these            can only be done in buddahood because in bodhivisattva you haven't reached a full embodyment

experience, where you realise everything is an illusion, including thoughts. as a result you vow to reach nirvana after because there are still things you haven't figured out. YES you are indeed enlightened but have not realised the truest truth or highest. That the character you play in the now is the exact perfection, which is synonymous to completely let go. i think this is the true enlightenment you are talking about and you articulated it quite well. in a way i never thought of before @FoxFoxFox. Hereafter, it's no longer bodhisatvva but just  a genuine thing that you wish to do through embodyment of infinity and so you accept everything. 

There are probably bodhisattvas who have not come to a complete realisation. The thing that leo has done is simply remove all self-decptions which has not been done in the past, kind of! because everyone was relating the lifting of illusions to enlightenment/ the path of enlightenment but they're seperate and in of its essense, not seperate. (meta-paradox) so there is no longer need for the term bodhisattva to create your "own life purpose" just what would normally be left .. how to live a good life and be YOUR buddahood as the character you were meant to be in the now. 

 

stage 1 to 10 of the ox's are foundations for the strange loop cycle of the whole model. 

bodhistavvas who believe they have experienced an awakening can feel inclined to create the neccessary substructures for the world to progress upon that level... 

every duality - technically needs to be addressed in atleast one foundations and then the interconnectivness between religions needs to be addressed. Currently all terms for each stage are seperate in meaning. however they eventually will need to become synonymous 

infinity , god, infinite void etc bhraman , nirvana, allah 

jesus , buddah , monks , gurus, sadghuru , sages ,bodhisatvas < -- -------- are all portraying absolute nothing but in relations to non duality

leo was different because he's work is tailored to self-deceptions! which encapsulates entirely the problem that is difficult to discover when dealing with these paths to ..( insert name here as you feel free too) 

But thats because every foundation is tied to the sayings of that time period, we've only had internet for 50 years so it was only probable that terms were likely to merge eventually. with access to scripts of all religions.. 

so bodhisatvas before provided foundation ... however everyone goes thorugh a point where they say ohh i am enlightened, ohh i have reached nirvana when they are just self decieving themselves. Those who have fully grasped it know that the term in my opinion, bodhisatva and buddahood are will collapse and basically all that  remains is just how to live a good life within the infinity void which is yourself

[Aakash]

Let me rephrase in another way leo's work .. 

Enligtenment states that illusions come from the self 

so no self is the answer

leo states that YOUR MIND is inheritantly a self deception machine lol 

which is the truth, no matter how you arrive and even go with the now! the words you speak etc are all built off the self-delusion if you haven't realised the totality of infinity itself! 

this is where you get zen devils and the advitta trap as we've recently stated 

Buddahood nowadays you can still accept the delusion or illusion but you can work it and still create a good life.. not a life where you seek the infinite forever, just a good life really enjoying watching football or taking a dog for a walk but it can only TRUTH if embodied at the highest level 

what do you guys think? 

[FoxFoxFox]

@Aakash I think a total rejection of all beliefs would be helpful to a seeker. And I mean all beliefs. 

For example, most people believe that they are the one who is seeing through their eyes. I'm saying this is a belief.