Here's why is impossible to be "bored" or craving artificial stimulation if you Awake

[Javfly33]

9 minutes ago, integral said:

 

On/Off bing bang enlightenment unlocked and achieved. ?

It would be great, but I usually have a hard time believing people off the internet. 

But if is true he would not care that we don't believe him I guess.

He could be some of that genetic freaks Leo talks about ?

[integral]

5 minutes ago, Javfly33 said:

But if is true he would not care that we don't believe him I guess.

He could be some of that genetic freaks Leo talks about ?

I do believe him, its I dont think we should define enlightenment as a specific state. 

[Water by the River]

Well, it is, like often, not either/or. How to integrate all these diferent perspectives? Even Full Enlightenment develops. The Awakenings before that also. Or as Ken Wilber said: From experience, to plateau, to permanent. Yet, Enlightenment is a decisive shift, or realizing/being/understanding for the first time fully the nature of ones True Being and of Reality.

Daniel Brown, Pointing out the Great Way: PATH WALKING: ENHANCING THE REALIZATION [after Full Enlightenment]

Just as certain conditions serve as obstacles to maintaining enlightenment, other conditions, properly understood, serve to enhance it. Theterm path walking (lam 'khyer) pertains to the type of lifestyle, behavior, and specific practices engaged in after enlightenment that serve to enhance and consolidate the realization as an enduring condition of mind.The term lam hhyer means "to walk along a path." A traveler who crosses over a mountain needs a plan for discovering the new territory. Likewise, the practitioner whose mind crosses over from seeming individual consciousness to the enlightened mind is more likely to stabilize and consolidate the realization with a plan for everyday behavior and activity. The path-walking instructions provide that plan."

So again from peak to plateau to permanent.

"Tashi Namgyel lists a variety of everyday situations that best serve to enhance the realization. These include when there is attachment to ordinary experience, when the practitioner is caught up in passion and hatred, when the practitioner is meditating and is finding it very difficult to settle the mind, and when the mind is so much at rest and happy in everyday life that he or she is less likely to recognize the real nature of idle thoughts (TN, pp. 619-20). The best time to practice is when there are passions (hhu phrig), and especially when these passions are intense (drag po; TN, p. 619). In short, any difficulties (dka ngal) encountered in everyday life become good vehicles for consolidating the realization, and the more intense the better.

Awakening already brings a lot of bliss, but not yet all tools necessary to move towards freedom from suffering/psychological resistance.

Basis-/Full-/Great Enlightenment (different names for different traditions, basically understanding/realizing what one really is and what Reality is) brings for the first time the possibility for sustaining bliss by dissolving progressively the hangover/remains of the separate self during/over(!) the following years/life-time. Awakening does not bring that potential yet fully, because there is still somebody who "awakens". And of course most remaining "hang-overs" of the separate-self will let themself know by what they do best: Causing suffering. But now, after Enlightenment, there is a tool available to work with what has not already been dissolved: Looking into their essence, AND into the being doing the looking. 

Even Ken Wilber said in the Interview-Audio series Kosmic Karma on the question of Tami Simons: Anybody 24/7 permanently in realization, including deep sleep, with zero lapse? Answer by Ken Wilber: A clear no.

But that is not a bad thing. Enlightenment gives the chance the reorient the remaining character/body-mind fully (or as much as possible) during the rest of ones lifetime. And when the remaining character is not aligned or has a lapse and goes into separation again: clearly noticed by suffering. Suffering and fear reduce dramatically, and a door/method is opened up to progress towards dissolving what remains of bliss/fear/suffering, or the remaining character which is not yet fully aligned.

Ken Wilber gave a description on the possible (longterm) enlightened outcomes, depening on the character. 

Ken Wilber, The Eye of Spirit, Chapter: The Eye of Spirit:

Ken Wilber also wrote in "One Taste" that one can remain an enlightened jerk. Or that realized Dzogchen adepts are sometimes depicted as looking incredibly bored (seen IT, done with it). Nisargadatta smoked a lot until it finally killed him. Adi Da ran quite some cult. The list of less-than-integral Enlightenment-expressions is long....

But also the enlightened archetypes of the link above are possible. So it depends a lot on the personality that was there before Enlightenment. There seems to be a huge variability.

And the soul ripens also after Enlightenment, over many lifetimes (Christopher Bache, LSD and the Mind of the Universe: Diamonds from Heaven, Dustin DiPerna: Earth is Eden, and Jürgen Ziewe). Enlightenment is not the end of the soul, just the end of the "separate-soul". There seems to be a long path also afterwards, and not just the crude Nirvana-extinction-gameover of early Buddhism. Buddhism developed a lot towards that view in the following centuries/millenia (see Rainbow Body for example).

Selling Water by the River

Edited August 22, 2023 by Water by the River

[integral]

4 hours ago, Water by the River said:

Awakening already brings a lot of bliss, but not yet all tools necessary to move towards freedom from suffering/psychological resistance.

The normie enlightenment state lol

[integral]

@Water by the River Thank you for the explanation, very helpful. 

[UnbornTao]

On 8/22/2023 at 4:08 PM, Javfly33 said:

I see, so the point is to pursue the actual truth, the one that is useless to pursue.

?

There are not two truths. Use and value relate to you, not to what's true.

Want to know it irrespective of what it does for you.

Edited August 24, 2023 by UnbornTao

[UnbornTao]

@Water by the River Your posts are grounded on too much hearsay and external references imo.

Edited August 24, 2023 by UnbornTao

[Javfly33]

2 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

There are not two truths. Worth and value relate to you, not to what is the case.

You'd simply want to know it irrespective of what it'd do for you.

I guess I´m a selfish twat and I´ll never get enlightened then 

[Yimpa]

On 8/22/2023 at 10:10 AM, integral said:

You cant learn how to play piano at a high level by inducing it with a drug, just like you cant induce a high level of being with a drug or spontaneous enlightenments states.

Wrong. (Read the video description as well)

I was also classically trained. It’s true that us dogmatically trained music players have a difficult time improvising.

Edited August 23, 2023 by Yimpa

[Water by the River]

4 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

@Water by the River your posts are grounded on hearsay and references to what others has said. Are you afraid to stand on your own two feet? Me too, at times.  

hey, I have a new idea. Instead of referencing what others have said, I reference what I have already said: 

"I will continue posting mainly these old texts (because they show the universality of these realizations over the centuries). Sometimes telling about "ones own" experience is ok, but if one does it all the time, it can easily become self-importance boosting, or can come across as such."

And to avoid hearsay is why I use quotes with sources.

For the two feet: The nice thing is when one actually gets to realize what all texts and teachers are talking about, that then one can stand on ones own feet. It is exactly because of that that I find a high resonance with these texts & teachers I quote and refer to, and feel very much "at home" quoting them. There is no need for reinventing the wheel. There are many good wheels already.

I do like finding the deep structure similiarities of the systems/pointers in an integral way. Because in choosing a path, I always looked for deep structure similiarities between the spiritual traditions. Maybe that is useful for some...

 

Selling Water by the River 

[Carl-Richard]

47 minutes ago, Water by the River said:

There is no need for reinventing the wheel.

Oh no, don't rob the New Agers of their only speciality! ?

[integral]

3 hours ago, Yimpa said:

Wrong. (Read the video description as well)

I was also classically trained. It’s true that us dogmatically trained music players have a difficult time improvising.

LOOOOL did you sit infront of a piano and spontaneously learn how to play? No you practiced for years and are enhancing your skills will LSD. State is a extremely useful thing, we are in agreement on that.

Also if thats you well done your a bad ass baby. ?

[Guest Bazooka Jesus]

@Water by the River

Been meaning to ask you, which one of Ken Wilber's books would you recommend as a starting off point for a noob such as myself? I am ashamed to say that I've never read anything by him, but your relentless recitation of Wilberisms has managed to make me curious... plus I listened to his BATGAP interview today, and he does sound like a smart mothereffer.

Any tip?

[UnbornTao]

6 hours ago, Javfly33 said:

I guess I´m a selfish twat and I´ll never get enlightened then 

Nonsense. Of course you can.

[UnbornTao]

On 8/22/2023 at 2:40 PM, Carl-Richard said:

You should re-read what I wrote above about Neo-Advaita. There are benefits to conceiving of things the way you're doing right now, but it's just another language game. If you recognize that it's just a language game, you can subscribe to other language games as well without problems. In other words, you can describe things as a process and also not a process. Because there is utility to both descriptions.

It's not for no reason that people talk about enlightenment as a process (with a start and an end result), and you do understand that reason: people meditate and learn various things that give them insights, shifts in perspective, and which eventually lands them in a place which we call "enlightenment". Is it the same for everyone? Is there a mandatory step by step recipe you need to follow? No, but these are things people do and that we associate with enlightenment, which can be conceived of as a process with a start and an end result. 

If you want to be thoroughly consistent in your skeptical approach to describing reality, you should go all in and not say anything, because that is already "delusion" from the perspective of the Absolute (and you save yourself the performative contradictions). But again, you want to say things, so you need a language game, and I'm saying you might as well use multiple language games in a way that is rational and not get religiously stuck on just one.

You misinterpret my points, fitting them into belief systems. I'm coming at this from a grounded experiential inquiry, not just cosmologies.

Language is going to be used. Irrespective of language though, this matter is literarily unconceivable. The less stuff you make up about it, the better as it stands in the way of open investigation. It is false that enlightenment is a process, a place, a state, a perception, an emotion, or an attainment, as these are relative.

The main selling point of any practice is the promise to get you there, and that place is presently unknown to you. Whatever you conceive of enlightenment -- ideas, images, fantasies -- is false and not it. No practice can get you there. Ultimately, you are conscious -- and to the degree to which you are -- or not, no matter your ideas on this subject.

I know this doesn't sound like good news. I'm saying there's nothing you can do within the dream to wake up. You can't manipulate your way into enlightenment. You'd be using dream stuff as a way to wake up, so to speak.

Despite this, waking up is paradoxically possible for you. It's possible for you to become conscious of your nature and that of existence.

Edited August 25, 2023 by UnbornTao

[Water by the River]

21 minutes ago, Bazooka Jesus said:

@Water by the River

Been meaning to ask you, which one of Ken Wilber's books would you recommend as a starting off point for a noob such as myself? I am ashamed to say that I've never read anything by him, but your relentless recitation of Wilberisms has managed to make me curious... plus I listened to his BATGAP interview today, and he does sound like a smart mothereffer.

Any tip?

Wilber, "One Taste". And maybe start at the entries for march.

And then "The Simple Feeling of Being"

Selling Water by the River

[UnbornTao]

On 8/23/2023 at 5:40 PM, Water by the River said:

hey, I have a new idea. Instead of referencing what others have said, I reference what I have already said: 

"I will continue posting mainly these old texts (because they show the universality of these realizations over the centuries). Sometimes telling about "ones own" experience is ok, but if one does it all the time, it can easily become self-importance boosting, or can come across as such."

And to avoid hearsay is why I use quotes with sources.

For the two feet: The nice thing is when one actually gets to realize what all texts and teachers are talking about, that then one can stand on ones own feet. It is exactly because of that that I find a high resonance with these texts & teachers I quote and refer to, and feel very much "at home" quoting them. There is no need for reinventing the wheel. There are many good wheels already.

I do like finding the deep structure similiarities of the systems/pointers in an integral way. Because in choosing a path, I always looked for deep structure similiarities between the spiritual traditions. Maybe that is useful for some...

 

Selling Water by the River 

Hearsay comes from others. When you believe a communication instead of experiencing it for yourself, that's hearsay. If you do, why provide so many quotes from others? Why not speak from experience?

This may be done as a way to safeguard oneself and to be validated since communications don't come from your experience but another's, and you don't know whether they're true or not. This behavior heavily relies on the work of others and lends itself for confusion. Believing and parroting others should not be confused with personal understanding.

As this work deals with one's experience, that's where it begins and ends. Intellect is nothing compared to experiencing the truth for itself. It's easy to fall into intellect. Ultimately, this work is aimed at personally experiencing what's true, so responsibility is an essential component of this inquiry. This requires standing alone, on your own two feet. For example, on your deathbed, your ideas about truth make no difference. Either you are conscious, and therefore from death, or not. Can you see what I'm pointing at? 

Reinventing the wheel allows for understanding its nature and function from the ground up. Doing this provides the possibility of mastery and change. It seems to me like you are stating: "Why contemplate for myself if others can provide me with the answers?"

Believing is much easier and popular. That's probably why the serious contemplation demanded of this work isn't soberly considered by most people, much less undertaken.

Edited August 25, 2023 by UnbornTao

[UnbornTao]

On 8/23/2023 at 6:29 PM, Carl-Richard said:

Oh no, don't rob the New Agers of their only speciality! ?

Responsibility is a fundamental principle here. Nobody will do it for you, not even their communications. Even if they are true, they are received as hearsay until experientially validated by each of us individually. You confuse believing in others with personal understanding.

Edited August 25, 2023 by UnbornTao

[Inliytened1]

Just now, UnbornTao said:

That mindset misses the key principle of responsibility. Nobody will do it for you, not even their communications. See? You confuse believing with real understanding.

I haven't read the entire dialogue between the two of you...but I think where he is coming from is that anything can be turned into a dogma.  Even if you are enlightened and everything you say is absolutely true, you come off as a preacher - so it's better to say nothing at all.  Plus - and this is my own little addition - If you are God then really what is the point anyway?  You are talking to dream characters. 

@Carl-Richard am I onto something here?  

 

 

[UnbornTao]

On 8/23/2023 at 10:19 PM, Inliytened1 said:

I haven't read the entire dialogue between the two of you...but I think where he is coming from is that anything can be turned into a dogma.  Even if you are enlightened and everything you say is absolutely true, you come off as a preacher - @Carl-Richard am I onto something here?  

Because I'm blunt and straightforward. I may also come across as a righteous motherf***er with an inflexible stance on this matter. Well, there's a reason for that. Try to see through the arrogance to listen to the points I'm making.

My main point: you wake up by waking up, there's no way around that.

 

Edited August 25, 2023 by UnbornTao