Who are other people seeking enlightnment?

[Hello from Russia]

I just don't get it. I get everything except this.

I have no problem with accepting other people that we usually refer to as "normies". People, who live pretty ordinary human-like lives, relatively speaking. It's pretty easy to see them as some sort of bots or AI's running on a script of my own infinite imagination. Even before I had any spiritual insight I kinda viewed most people this way (no offense, other people)

But when it comes to this vast domain of spiritual schools and spiritual people who "seek enlightenment" or already obtained it or claimed to obtain it I just don't get it.

It's too much mindfuckery here. How come these people look for awakening when it's supposedly dedicated for me only as only I can awake, in my own subjective experience? 

Let's say it's a neat backstory, indeed, just like everything else. The problem is that these people have such close awakening experiences as me, they can relate to me. A lot of people are even more "advanced" than me and I experience profound stuff way after them. The insights look almost identical, when we sit with such people and kind of "compare" our experiences.

How come they can have these experiences? How come other people appear to have deep existential insights too? How come they can seemingly "awaken" too?

If everything is my imagination, does awakenings of other people are genuine at all? Especially since they appear to have almost identical experiences as me? 

How to grasp this mindfuckery?

I can easily understand the existence of various spiritual traditions where the main goal is just enhanced human capabilities - better health, better psychic powers, more wise forms of living. But traditions that chase enlightenment is just beyond my comprehension.

Please, help.

 

Edited February 16, 2022 by Hello from Russia

[Breakingthewall]

simplifying everything by comparing it to a computer game, and thinking that reality can be understood by the egoic mind in a linear, simple, direct way, without any mystery, is in my opinion a poor approach

Edited February 16, 2022 by Breakingthewall

[Batman]

"I" or "me" never awakens. Only YOU awaken. There are no other people who are trying to awake, that is precisely the illusion. Only YOU can awake.

Get who YOU are, and why this is so. Enlightenment is not obtainable - how could you obtain what is already so (the Truth)? YOU can only become directly conscious of it (of YOU). The obstacle is that YOU think that you are a "me" or "I" that can get somewhere, obtain something, or achieve the state or enlightenment you seek. 

When you continue to think in duality, and hold that there are other people who look for enlightenment, you are just perpetuating the illusion that you have a life story of your own, and that others have life stories of their own as well. It is a common obstacle and Enlightenment is paradoxical, so watch out for all this uncovered assumptions, ways of thinking and relating, beliefs, etc. 

YOU are already YOU. There are no others. There is no separation. All relationships are illusion. YOU are not the body, or the mind, nor YOU are located anywhere. YOU are not an experience, perception or any thing at all, not even all things. YOU are absolutely Nothing, which appears as everything. Nothing is not some vacuum, or a place with no-things, because then it would be something. It really is Nothing, which means that it cannot be distinct from anything. If it was distinct from anything it is not, it wouldn't be Nothing, it would be something that is distinct from something that it is not. Nothing has no quality to it, no limit, nothing that can distinct it from any thing. It is the source for all distinction. Everything, or every thing, are distinctions that exist as a function of Nothing. 

Edited February 16, 2022 by Batman

[Forza21]

1 hour ago, Batman said:

"I" or "me" never awakens. Only YOU awaken. There are no other people who are trying to awake, that is precisely the illusion. Only YOU can awake.

Get who YOU are, and why this is so. Enlightenment is not obtainable - how could you obtain what is already so (the Truth)? YOU can only become directly conscious of it (of YOU). The obstacle is that YOU think that you are a "me" or "I" that can get somewhere, obtain something, or achieve the state or enlightenment you seek. 

When you continue to think in duality, and hold that there are other people who look for enlightenment, you are just perpetuating the illusion that you have a life story of your own, and that others have life stories of their own as well. It is a common obstacle and Enlightenment is paradoxical, so watch out for all this uncovered assumptions, ways of thinking and relating, beliefs, etc. 

YOU are already YOU. There are no others. There is no separation. All relationships are illusion. YOU are not the body, or the mind, nor YOU are located anywhere. YOU are not an experience, perception or any thing at all, not even all things. YOU are absolutely Nothing, which appears as everything. Nothing is not some vacuum, or a place with no-things, because then it would be something. It really is Nothing, which means that it cannot be distinct from anything. If it was distinct from anything it is not, it wouldn't be Nothing, it would be something that is distinct from something that it is not. Nothing has no quality to it, no limit, nothing that can distinct it from any thing. It is the source for all distinction. Everything, or every thing, are distinctions that exist as a function of Nothing. 

nice said. But what about POV? Leo says that "your POV is the only one, anything other doesn't exist" like solipsism says. Consciousness is one, but can't it experience different POV at once?

[allislove]

@Hello from Russia

There is the confusion that a person awakens. Awakening is not personal, awakening from identification yourself with just person to the whole experience, to everything... in cryptic words we may say ?

[Tim R]

Quote

Upon seeing the morning star, Gautama became Shakyamuni Buddha when he was, is and will be awakened to His TRUE SELF and said, says and will say, “I was, am and will be enlightened, together with the whole of the great earth and all its sentient beings, simultaneously.”

From the Denkōroku, written in 1300 by Keizan Jokin Zenji

 

Quote

“Moreover, Śāradvatī­putra, whenever a great bodhisattva being holds the view that these are virtuous phenomena, these are non-virtuous phenomena, these are specific phenomena, these are non-specific phenomena, these are mundane phenomena, these are supramundane phenomena, these are contaminated phenomena, these are uncontaminated phenomena, these are conditioned phenomena, these are unconditioned phenomena, these are common phenomena, or these are uncommon phenomena, and then apprehends, defines, and engages in ideation and scrutiny with respect to them, that, Śāradvatī­putra, is called the deluded mind which great bodhisattva beings might have with respect to all things. If you ask why, it is because there are no sentient beings, because sentient beings are non-apprehensible, because sentient beings are non-arising, because sentient beings are unceasing, and because sentient beings are in fact emptiness. The same goes for living organisms, lives, living creatures, individuals, humankind, human beings, actors, creators, petitioners, instigators, experiencers, experiencing subjects, and knowers,because they are not perceived, because they are non-apprehensible, because they are non-arising, because they are unceasing, and because they are in fact emptiness."

From the Daśa­sāhasrikā­prajñā­pāramitā

 

Quote

"The world has been fully awakened to by the Tathagata. From the world, the Tathagata is disjoined. The origination of the world has been fully awakened to by the Tathagata. The origination of the world has, by the Tathagata, been abandoned. The cessation of the world has been fully awakened to by the Tathagata. The cessation of the world has, by the Tathagata, been realized. The path leading to the cessation of the world has been fully awakened to by the Tathagata."

From the  Itivuttaka, 112th teaching

[Batman]

2 hours ago, Forza21 said:

nice said. But what about POV? Leo says that "your POV is the only one, anything other doesn't exist" like solipsism says. Consciousness is one, but can't it experience different POV at once?

There is no such a thing as POV. There is only Nothing (or Consciousness if you like), which can take the shape of appearances. Creating a distinction between one POV or another, is to divide Consciousness and therefore isn't ultimately true. "Experience can be misleading", and in an existential context it is misleading because the nature of Experience or POV it totally different than the experience itself. 

What you are actually asking is whether Consciousness can take the appearance of something other than the appearance that appears Now? But you already know the answer to that, because appearances are morphing all the time. Now you might ask, can Consciousness form an appearance which isn't molded around a specific body-mind? Well, notice that the body-mind also morphs, and never persist as a the same body-mind throughout life. Now you might insist that the appearances are morphing around a specific body-mind which even though is not really fixed, it has some fixation to it, like the DNA of the body. But even that will break eventually, so what prevents Consciousness from appearing as whatever body-mind?

Lets backup a bit. When you were an infant, you had no conception of an other, did you? Actually, you didn't even conceive of your self. That conception came later on, when you learned to distinct your self from other "selfs". As an infant, you perceived the sight, sound, smell, touch or taste of animated objects, but you had no idea that those are "others". Again, somewhere along your conceptual development, you molded your perception in a way that distinct "your" body from the body of other life forms, such as humans or other animals. I can only assume that this is taking place for almost everyone very early in childhood, when the child is frequently called by a name (using sound), until eventually he learns to associate the sound of his name with the speaker's intention to grab his attention. This is the cornerstone of the self, when the brain learns how to create a conceptual distinction between self and other. 

So we see, that prior to the conception of self, all there was were appearances. There was no POV. When self is conceived, over time the appearances are regarded as something that happens to the self conception. What's missed here, is that self is also an appearance - albeit a misleading one. Over time, a complex social world is constructed in the mind, including many many self-views and relationships to others. This creates the feeling sensation that one is in the body, or is the body-mind, and that this body-mind is "my life, my story". The more complex the self-view is, and the more rigid the mind is, the more condensed or contracted is the feeling that "I am a separated being separated and located in or as the body-mind". 

Solipsism is only true if the refers to Consciousness as the one Mind that take the shape of every appearance. You could equate this with the capacity to dream. Lets postulate that we can dream the appearances of a world within our minds from a multiple "POV's". Is there really a difference between the POV's? No. They are all made up of the same source - mind/thought, which took their shape. There never was multiple POV's, only thought. The division between the POV's is a construction, an illusion. 

This is very hard to see on the level of human experience because it is so rich and incredible. The mind twitches in agony in the attempt to grasp that every. single. appearance. is. Nothing. including. the. appearance. of. mind. itself. 

There is no division between POV's. There never was. It is all one unified Consciousnesses that tricks itself to think that there are. Which is incredible. And genius. And brilliant. The seeming division is necessary to create the illusion of not being one, single, whole.

[Forza21]

12 minutes ago, Batman said:

There is no such a thing as POV. There is only Nothing (or Consciousness if you like), which can take the shape of appearances. Creating a distinction between one POV or another, is to divide Consciousness and therefore isn't ultimately true. "Experience can be misleading", and in an existential context it is misleading because the nature of Experience or POV it totally different than the experience itself. 

What you are actually asking is whether Consciousness can take the appearance of something other than the appearance that appears Now? But you already know the answer to that, because appearances are morphing all the time. Now you might ask, can Consciousness form an appearance which isn't molded around a specific body-mind? Well, notice that the body-mind also morphs, and never persist as a the same body-mind throughout life. Now you might insist that the appearances are morphing around a specific body-mind which even though is not really fixed, it has some fixation to it, like the DNA of the body. But even that will break eventually, so what prevents Consciousness from appearing as whatever body-mind?

Lets backup a bit. When you were an infant, you had no conception of an other, did you? Actually, you didn't even conceive of your self. That conception came later on, when you learned to distinct your self from other "selfs". As an infant, you perceived the sight, sound, smell, touch or taste of animated objects, but you had no idea that those are "others". Again, somewhere along your conceptual development, you molded your perception in a way that distinct "your" body from the body of other life forms, such as humans or other animals. I can only assume that this is taking place for almost everyone very early in childhood, when the child is frequently called by a name (using sound), until eventually he learns to associate the sound of his name with the speaker's intention to grab his attention. This is the cornerstone of the self, when the brain learns how to create a conceptual distinction between self and other. 

So we see, that prior to the conception of self, all there was were appearances. There was no POV. When self is conceived, over time the appearances are regarded as something that happens to the self conception. What's missed here, is that self is also an appearance - albeit a misleading one. Over time, a complex social world is constructed in the mind, including many many self-views and relationships to others. This creates the feeling sensation that one is in the body, or is the body-mind, and that this body-mind is "my life, my story". The more complex the self-view is, and the more rigid the mind is, the more condensed or contracted is the feeling that "I am a separated being separated and located in or as the body-mind". 

Solipsism is only true if the refers to Consciousness as the one Mind that take the shape of every appearance. You could equate this with the capacity to dream. Lets postulate that we can dream the appearances of a world within our minds from a multiple "POV's". Is there really a difference between the POV's? No. They are all made up of the same source - mind/thought, which took their shape. There never was multiple POV's, only thought. The division between the POV's is a construction, an illusion. 

This is very hard to see on the level of human experience because it is so rich and incredible. The mind twitches in agony in the attempt to grasp that every. single. appearance. is. Nothing. including. the. appearance. of. mind. itself. 

There is no division between POV's. There never was. It is all one unified Consciousnesses that tricks itself to think that there are. Which is incredible. And genius. And brilliant. The seeming division is necessary to create the illusion of not being one, single, whole.

wow! 
i've never seen such well written text about topic so complex!  Thank you!

How did you get those insights? it's incredible! So basically you confirm what Leo says? But honestly, your explanation makes so much more sense. Leo often close his replays with " your experience is the only one"  which technically may be true, but it's still confusing as hell.

[Nahm]

What if you’re not a person and there’s no enlightenment?

[Batman]

@Forza21 Thanks.

The mind "here" was mostly affected by Ayahuasca visions which verified that "I" never existed, and that I never was this character appearance, which is only a speck, a blip, in the play of Consciousness.

But the mind here is also tripping hard and exploring itself for a few years on Psilocybin, LSD, Ketamine, and DMT. The mind here greatest enjoyment is exploration of mind. It is like an addiction of this mind. It is too much fun for it. It is "insights escapism". The mind also practices meditation, contemplation and yoga, but none of those practices ever produced the insights and clarity of Psychedelics.