Can you be happy without becoming enlightened ?

[Forestluv]

5 hours ago, noselfnofun said:

Was thinking last night could someone live a truly happy life without attaining enlightenment? is there a middle ground on this path? or is it, you will always suffer if you never get to the truth. 

I would be careful about getting too immersed into an "enlightenment story". Within this story all sorts of images and expectations are placed upon enlightenment. Yet enlightenment is like a perfectly clear translucent crystal - it contains nothing and everything.

Who is that "someone" to live a happy life? Is there a someone to become happy or is there simply happiness with no owner? Who is that someone that owns happiness? The psychological self will always perceive through a filter of "what's in it for me? would I become truly happy if I gain enlightenment?". This will produce a distorted and cloudy view. One will not see the clarity within the crystal.

Is not true happiness within the great clear crystal that contains both everything and nothing? Look into a clear crystal and see happiness within that clarity.

If by "happy" you are referring to pleasurable sensations within a mind-body, that is a very different question, imo.

 

[Good-boy]

$500 ticket is a rip-off. ?

[Preetom]

24 minutes ago, noselfnofun said:

What about seekers who spends years on the path but never become self realized? Is there life better off for doing that or not? Would you say all none seekers are not truly happy ?

They couldn't muster up enough will to self-realize and knowingly or unknowingly nested in some intermidiate station.

And no, none seekers are not truly happy. They are only having a pleasant dream currently as they are snoozing while ignoring and denying some major truths in life(like death and catastrophes) and shoving a shit ton of lies under the rug to remain blind to this stuff...as long as this strategy flies before the dream turns into nightmare-which it does sooner or later

Edited April 12, 2019 by Preetom

[Preetom]

1 minute ago, Good-boy said:

$500 ticket is a rip-off. ?

You get to leech off and drain some big guru balls for "spiritual advancement"

How can you complain!

 

 

[noselfnofun]

@Serotoninluv

9 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

I would be careful about getting too immersed into an "enlightenment story". Within this story all sorts of images and expectations are placed upon enlightenment. Yet enlightenment is like a perfectly clear translucent crystal - it contains nothing and everything.

Who is that "someone" to live a happy life? Is there a someone to become happy or is there simply happiness with no owner? Is happiness within the great clear crystal? Look into a clear crystal and see happiness within that clarity.

If by "happy" you are referring to pleasurable sensations within a mind-body, that is a very different question, imo.

 

I agree but don't want to stray from the topic and get into what enlightenment actually is. I assume we have all done the research and work ect. Can there be any found happiness in the story or dream/Maya? what about people with extreme mental strength. Also can you follow this path and find some level of happiness without becoming enlightened 

Edited April 12, 2019 by noselfnofun

[Forestluv]

14 minutes ago, noselfnofun said:

@Serotoninluv

I agree but don't want to stray from the topic and get into what enlightenment actually is. I assume we have all done the reattach and work act. Can there be any found happiness in the story or dream/Maya? what about people with extreme mental strength. Also can you follow this path and find some level of happiness without becoming enlightened 

This is just what is arising for me. . .Notice how you once again asked if one can follow this path and find some level of happiness without becoming enlightened. Part of the enlightenment story is that a person becomes enlightened. Ime, this is a huge distraction. . . Why not just ask if a mind-body can experience happiness? Or if happiness be found within the storyline? Why add in the "enlightenment" bit? It's just a distraction imo. It's reflective of a personality dynamic associating some goodies with an idea of enlightenment. . .  Can a person find some level of happiness without becoming a tree in China? The question doesn't make any sense without the personal association.

At the level of the human/person, I would say "yes". That a mind-body can experience happiness. My mind-body has experienced sensations of happiness, so my direct experience is "yes". . . Yet I would draw a distinction with human/person "happiness" and a transcendental "happiness". 

[SOUL]

I guess it all depend on how one defines 'happy' and 'enlightenment' but someone can experience an enduring joy without being enlightened even though some awakening would take place for this to be.

20 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

I would be careful about getting too immersed into an "enlightenment story". Within this story all sorts of images and expectations are placed upon enlightenment. Yet enlightenment is like a perfectly clear translucent crystal - it contains nothing and everything.

.......um.... so, are you careful about the story images and expectations that include clear translucent crystals and containing nothing and everything? Just asking for a friend.

[Forestluv]

15 minutes ago, SOUL said:

.......um.... so, are you careful about the story images and expectations that include clear translucent crystals and containing nothing and everything? Just asking for a friend.

Of course. I am communicating on the human level. In doing so, I use imagery that human minds can understand to point beyond the imagery. If I communicated with human minds as if they were dog minds - it would be meaningless.

Likewise, I would communicate very differently with a dog, bird or tree - since their relative reality is quite different than that of a human and they would not have the capacity to understand clear crystal imagery - at least not in the way humans might.

I suppose if we want to get more "spiritually correct" I could say. . . "Based on the relative nature of a human mind, one might point to "enlightenment" as being sort of like a clear crystal that contains both everything and nothing. Yet this in and of itself is only a partial truth, since the full truth cannot be described. Any description would be a piece of a more expansive truth and only relative to an organism perceiving it. Even this description is a tiny partial truth. So is that last statement and this statement". . . Yet to me this is never-ending bulkiness, so I tried to trim it down. But yea, your point is essentially that being somewhere in]s not being nowhere. Yes, yet any thing is a somewhere. Any pointer is a somewhere.

[SOUL]

3 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

Of course. I am communicating on the human level. In doing so, I use imagery that human minds can understand to point beyond the imagery.

I would communicate very differently with a dog, bird or tree - since their relative reality is quite different than that of a human and they would not have the capacity to understand clear crystal imagery.

....um...but you caution someone to be careful then give them the very thing you warn about.

[Forestluv]

34 minutes ago, SOUL said:

....um...but you caution someone to be careful then give them the very thing you warn about.

You are not seeing my pointer. To be somewhere, I need to be somewhere. Yes, I am doing my best to point to nowhere, yet I need to be a somewhere to do so. You are saying the other person and I are both somewhere. Of course we are. As soon as one thought or word is spoken, it is a somewhere. I am not saying my somewhere is nowhere and his somewhere is somewhere. Rather, I am pointing out that his somewhere is somewhere. I am aware my somewhere is also somewhere. 

For this realization, I think it is essential to have the direct experience of nowhere. Not in imagery or thoughts. The direct experience of the actuality of nothing. In doing so, a human mind can observe the complete dismantling of all distinctions to nothing and the reassembly of distinctions into everything. I cannot offer a being that direct experience. The best I can do is point to it - and in doing so, it is a somewhere. I am not trying to point to a somewhere I call "nowhere" - that of course would be another somewhere. I am trying to point to the actuality of nowhere and I must be a somewhere to do so.

These realizations come "prior" to the psychological dynamic of associating "enlightenment" to a "person". It would have been of no value for me to address distinctions that are prior to the distinctions of the question asked. 

[Good-boy]

38 minutes ago, Preetom said:

You get to leech off and drain some big guru balls for "spiritual advancement"

How can you complain!

 

 

Ye. I want to leech off these gurus and pay nothing in return. That's how good boy rolls ?

[SOUL]

8 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

You are not seeing my pointer. To be somewhere, I need to be somewhere. Yes, I am doing my best to point to nowhere, yet I need to be a somewhere to do so. You are saying the other person and I are both somewhere. Of course we are. As soon as one thought or word is spoken, it is a somewhere. I am not saying my somewhere is nowhere and his somewhere is somewhere. Rather, I am pointing out that his somewhere is somewhere. I am aware my somewhere is also somewhere. 

For this realization, I think it is essential to have the direct experience of nowhere. Not in imagery or thoughts. The direct experience of the actuality of nothing. In doing so, a human mind can observe the complete dismantling of all distinctions to nothing and the reassembly of distinctions into everything. I cannot offer a being that direct experience. The best I can do is point to it - and in doing so, it is a somewhere.

I see your pointer... but you fail to see my point. You warn about images and expectations then you provide images and expectations.

Your pointer about images and expectations is a very powerful one in recognizing how our ideas and expectations do actually limit and separate us from experiencing genuine joy. If you had said just that or expounded on that point of how those things will either allow us to find joy or hide it from us I wouldn't have asked you that question... for a friend.

Although, you followed it up with some mystical sounding nothing and everything clear crystal stuff. Why set that conceptual expectation? You first part was limitation busting! Then you went and built more limitation in it's place when you had a very empowering insight to start with.

[noselfnofun]

1 hour ago, Serotoninluv said:

This is just what is arising for me. . .Notice how you once again asked if one can follow this path and find some level of happiness without becoming enlightened. Part of the enlightenment story is that a person becomes enlightened. Ime, this is a huge distraction. . . Why not just ask if a mind-body can experience happiness? Or if happiness be found within the storyline? Why add in the "enlightenment" bit? It's just a distraction imo. It's reflective of a personality dynamic associating some goodies with an idea of enlightenment. . .  Can a person find some level of happiness without becoming a tree in China? The question doesn't make any sense without the personal association.

At the level of the human/person, I would say "yes". That a mind-body can experience happiness. My mind-body has experienced sensations of happiness, so my direct experience is "yes". . . Yet I would draw a distinction with human/person "happiness" and a transcendental "happiness". 

True I should of just said body mind, I just didn't know how to phrase it.

[Forestluv]

32 minutes ago, SOUL said:

I see your pointer... but you fail to see my point. You warn about images and expectations then you provide images and expectations.

From one perspective, you are saying somewhere is somewhere - which I agree with. One cannot point from nowhere. Yet, I also see your point and how I can improve my description for this situation, which I have attempted in the below post.

32 minutes ago, SOUL said:

Your pointer about images and expectations is a very powerful one in recognizing how our ideas and expectations do actually limit and separate us from experiencing genuine joy.

That is not quite what I am pointing to. Yet I can see how your pointer would be more helpful in this situation. I have rephrased my description below.

32 minutes ago, SOUL said:

Although, you followed it up with some mystical sounding nothing and everything clear crystal stuff. Why set that conceptual expectation? 

That is not my intention, yet I can see how a mind can view it that way. I appreciate your input. It helps me to see another perspective and how I can develop a more helpful pointer in certain contexts. I've taken your input and have attempted to create a better view from for this situation (written below). Hopefully, it's improved! Thanks for your input. I'm still learning and your perspective is helpful.

 

 

 

[Forestluv]

7 minutes ago, noselfnofun said:

True I should of just said body mind, I just didn't know how to phrase it.

Yea, I didn't mean to jump in and be all "spiritually correct". 

I now better understand the sentiment of your question. I would say that there is a certain type of happiness a person can experience. You asked whether a person could experience "true happiness" along the path. Are you asking about a deeper true happiness than standard personal happiness most people think of. Like the happiness of getting a good job, having free time to watch movies, having a good meal etc.? I would say there is a deeper true happiness than this. Ime, I had "glimpses" of this deeper happiness - a type of peace, stillness, bliss. Yet only glimpses. Ime, "transcending" the self is necessary because it is a more expansive happiness. If I am contracted within the personality construct, happiness will be limited to within that construct. Yet when consciousness expands beyond the personality, a deeper more expansive happiness arises. Perhaps I am just using the term "transcending the personality" and you might be calling it "enlightenment". I don't mean to be a stickler on terms. The sentiment is more important. . . I would say that some type of personal transcendence is correlated with the arising of that deeper / expansive happiness. At least ime. It seems to be the case from what I read about others as well.

[TheAvatarState]

@noselfnofun As long as you're asking the question: "Can I be happy without X?" you're not going to be happy. Let the profundity of that statement sink in. 

Is a dog happy? Yes, almost unconditionally. Not getting caught up in what you don't have appears to be the key. And that can manifest in so many ways...

You must realize you are whole, loving being just the way you are in this moment. What else could possibly complete you? So the question isn't what you could GAIN to be happy, the question is what mental processes do you need to SHED to become the light you always have been! I. E. Enlightenment. So yes, the actualization of the above statements = enlightenment = happiness. 

 

[SOUL]

36 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

Again, you are saying somewhere is somewhere.

No, I'm not saying anything about somewhere or nowhere or anything like that. That's your perception of what I said but not what I said. You warned... then you proceeded to provide what you warned about.. so maybe you were being kind in warning about what was coming... sort of like a trigger warning. haha

36 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

 In this situation, I thought it was not. In hindsight, rather saying "enlightenment is. . . ", I could have said "enlightenment is sorta like. . . ". This would have softened the somewhere. I usually phrase it like that and for some reason I didn't here.

Sure, we can use phrases to portray things metaphorically but it still using images and expectations to describe the indescribable when a description may become a distraction.

36 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

That is not what I am pointing to.

You weren't pointing to that? Why not? It's a very powerful point! I'm glad I made it then. The images, concepts and expectations we have can limit us in experiencing joy.

36 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

That is not what I am setting up, yet I can see how a mind can view it that way. I appreciate your input. It helps me see another perspective and how I can develop a more helpful pointer in certain contexts. . . Notice how my communication with are different than the OP. You both have distinctions, yet in different "places". 

As we grow in awareness and awaken in consciousness our perspective changes. It can happen that the previous perspectives we once viewed from are completely gone and what is obvious to us now in the present perspective isn't a stumbling block but it isn't obvious to a previous perspective and can be a stumbling block.

Awakening to integrate all perspectives is holistic but it's often a challenge to recognize where anyone is on the path so I prefer to speak in the simplest of terms with the least amount of description so as not become a stumbling block distraction..... but you can do whatever you see fit and my friend will just have to accept that. hehe

Edited April 12, 2019 by SOUL

[Mu_]

7 hours ago, noselfnofun said:

Was thinking last night could someone live a truly happy life without attaining enlightenment? is there a middle ground on this path? or is it, you will always suffer if you never get to the truth. 

There are just people who are happier then others. Don’t go down the victim hole or as fast as others. And there are people in the money making game who get enjoyment out of it.  Enlightenment is about finding out who and what we are. Not a path to happiness. It’s generalky a side effect though.  It’s why I suggest a lot of elements that improve happiness in general since who wants to suffer more then necessary.  

[Truth Addict]

@noselfnofun

I'm not enlightened and almost 99% happy.

I suffered a lot in the past (unimaginable suffering for most people here, and still struggling with its consequences), now anything and everything feels perfect, I'm rolling with life like crazy! It's awesome!

It's almost impossible to get me angry, frustrated, sad, etc... Although I'm not perfect, but I have control over most of my emotions, control by surrendering.

Wherever I am, there is peace.

So, yes it's possible. Lighten up.

[Forestluv]

1 hour ago, SOUL said:

No, I'm not saying anything about somewhere or nowhere or anything like that. That's your perception of what I said but not what I said. You warned... then you proceeded to provide what you warned about.. so maybe you were being kind in warning about what was coming... sort of like a trigger warning. haha

I understand what you are saying. I warned and then I proceeded to provide what I warned about. I understand that. 

There is also another "view" that I was pointing to that comes "prior" to the statement above. It is not imagery or conceptual. I think the only way to "see" it is to have the direct experience. It is really hard to point to and I am unable to transmit it to you. I would if I could, yet I clearly can't here. I'm doing the best I can, yet I can't transmit it to you here. . . Yet, that happens to me a lot. I've only met a few people in my life with the direct experience. That is why I often avoid pointing to it - it generally is misinterpreted and causes confusion as has happened here. It is not the fault of the receiver or the tansmitter. It's just so difficult to transmit. Perhaps, words may plant a "seed" in which the direct experience may arise.

1 hour ago, SOUL said:

Sure, we can use phrases to portray things metaphorically but it still using images and expectations to describe the indescribable when a description may become a distraction.

From the orientation you have been speaking, yes. I agree with that.

1 hour ago, SOUL said:

You weren't pointing to that? Why not? It's a very powerful point! I'm glad I made it then. The images, concepts and expectations we have can limit us in experiencing joy.

I agree that this orientation and pointer has a lot of value here. 

1 hour ago, SOUL said:

As we grow in awareness and awaken in consciousness our perspective changes. It can happen that the previous perspectives we once viewed from are completely gone and what is obvious to us now in the present perspective isn't a stumbling block but it isn't obvious to a previous perspective and can be a stumbling block.

Allowing for the existence of a timeline, I also agree with this.

1 hour ago, SOUL said:

Awakening to integrate all perspectives is holistic but it's often a challenge to recognize where anyone is on the path so I prefer to speak in the simplest of terms with the least amount of description so as not become a stumbling block distraction..... but you can do whatever you see fit and my friend will just have to accept that. hehe

I would say that would depend on context. In many contexts, I agree that using the simplest of terms with little description is often beneficial.

I see a lot of value in integrating perspectives and holism. I spend a lot of time in this space and see a lot of value here. Yet in it's truest sense, what I was pointing to is not about integrating perspectives or holism. It's not about using short descriptions or long descriptions. "Here", one word is too many and a million words are not enough. I again go back to the clear translucent crystal. It is not the actual crystal itself. It is not the image of the crystal. It is not conceptually about a crystal and ideas about everything and nothing. It comes prior to that. That which comes prior is doing it's best to express itself. But it can only use words and images to do so here. Yet it is not the words or images. As soon as the mind thinks in words and concepts, it is too late. All distinctions would need to dissolve for the direct experience to arise. To me, the crystal makes sense because of the direct experience of "prior". It's not even "me" that has had the direct experience because it's "prior" to that. 

To see it through a clear crystal, one would need to let go of the image of a clear crystal and that "I" am perceiving it through a clear crystal. It's more like from the clarity of the clear crystal everything arises from nothing. To me, "it" trying to express itself makes sense. Not because my mind can make sense of it, but because the direct experience that comes prior to imagery knows itself. This is the best I can do. Perhaps it may be helpful to someone reading the thread. Perhaps not.