s1va

For the sake of this post, let's assume starting from (before) Lao Tzu, Buddha, Adi Shankara, other prophets..... to ... Ramana Maharishi...... to ............. today (those that say they are enlightened) and have a huge following, that give lecture, have written books or scriptures (were written later based on their teachings), are all enlightened. Now that we made that assumption, do all these enlightened masters agree on any one single thing? If so, what is it? Some say world is illusion and just like bubbles, some other say yeah it's illusion but there is one truth behind it, some say no it's no illusion, it is very real, there are many things, only this moment is true...... Pray to one God, many Gods, don't pray to God, Just be, accept, surrender, observe, live in the present, knock and it will be opened, be still and know who you are.... - we reincarnate, all is per karma, some don't agree or the karma or reincarnation topic is not even worth talking about..... - do practices, yoga, alchemy, do self enquiry -- don't do any of these, they are all useless. Many say there is no suffering after enlightenment. There is no unanimous agreement on this also. If the enlightenment is the same state that all of them attained, then how come they all don't agree on any single thing? If I ask this question, then I am told, "This state can not be described by words neither can it be taught to anyone." Then why did all of these people give lecture about enlightenment, or life. If none of them can describe or communicate it, what is the point of all these lectures, teachings and books?

Thanks for the honest response. The thing that prompts the change, breaks the chain, or moves the cloud obscuring. I was trying to understand that if it is a replicable process. It is puzzling why that radical acceptance or 'letting go' happens at a certain point of time, what prevented it from happening earlier?

I am puzzled. Just on previous post, you mentioned the importance of the individuals own experience vs. what is learned or a philosophy or system. Right next post, you say everyone's idea on this website seems 'weird and abstract'.... and compare it with Taoism. Ideas are just ideas. Every one expresses what they know. They say it the way they see it. what's wrong with this? Should others ideas comply to your understanding of Taoism? All these ideas add to the discussion. I wouldn't label something weird and abstract so quickly. When you qualify it with 'everyone' on this site, that also seems over generalization.

The chain or the loop 1) potent glimpses tastes 2) compulsion to strive 3) exhaustion 4) stillness, silence 5) back to step 1 You do acknowledge the existence of this chain or loop. You have described it accurately. Something changed from that chain or loop. Now, rather than striving you allow. What prompted this change that brought about the 'letting go'? Did that 'letting go' just happen, or is it a result of all your prior strivings?

@silent thunder - Your words are so beautiful. The experience I described came about when the trying and wanting stopped momentarily. How did the trying and wanting stop momentarily? I don't know. Why on that day? I don't know. Can I consciously give up wanting, trying and striving again? No, as dwai points out rightly, that itself is wanting and the road block. @dwai: I get what you say or I think I get it. So, it should boil down to striving without wanting. But striving or trying cannot stop. I think you would agree. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks to these beautiful responses. I am looking for something more at this point. What brought about the sudden change, the momentary state of utter surrender and acceptance? Should I sit and wait for it to happen again without trying or striving? Would that not prove I am a puppet under the control of fate? Let's go back to Gita itself, it is unique. The enormity of the outer situations bother Arjuna. He is shattered. He wants to renounce the world. Shall we tell him, don't strive, don't fight to win the war? Just accept the misery of this situation? Accept, take sanyas. Listen to your heart, if it says get away from this war, then you should... That was not what was told... He was told to strive... fight the war, something clearly he disliked at the point. ( At some level, I feel where this is going to go next, but I am missing something somewhere) I think we all will agree that effort and striving are needed (wanting is different). Correct me, if I am wrong. Without striving we can't live or as much breathe. We live, eat and move around because we keep trying and strive. One can listen to statements like, give up wanting. Or like the statements from Gita - Atman alone is real, everything else is unreal. Atman cannot be burned, it can't be cut with knife. It is eternal. I have read these many times. Though it helped many times when I needed, it has not brought forth the transformation. It's like how Swami Vivekananda says in his book Raja Yoga, I can hear 1000 sermons and learn nothing. They may be the best sermons ever given. Next question that comes to mind: Is physiological and nervous system transformation or awakening needed and mandatory to bring about such states, or to even read and take some real value from scriptures or sermons? Is striving for yoga, the answer? 'Give up wanting' is understood by mind, or so it thinks. Such understanding has not brought about any transformation. Is acceptance, just settling for what life hands over? Is it prarabdha karma that determines whether the wanting will stop or not (or who becomes a karma yogi and who doesn't)? If so, and this is fated, we just wait for such state to happen? We become stitha prajna when we do.... Then why should Krishna even talk about it? My question is also about what to do in the mean time? Accept and be in the clutches of sukha and dukha caused by external circumstances?

Do you really mean those words? No such inquiry until one is 100% self honest and self reliant. how to become 100% self honest and self reliant? can it happen in the absence of inquiry?

Are you using chrome browser? I experienced the same issue. I had to go to advanced settings in chrome browser, from the content option, clear all the cookies for the site thedaobums. Then exit the browser out completely. Make sure, it is not running in the background. This cleared the problem for me. It is frustrating Like Hotel California... you can check in any time.... can't check out....

-

It's not getting lost. I wouldn't agree with that either. It is more like ignorance of who we truly are and getting carried away. When the ignorance is gone, like the cloud covering the sun, the sun shines.

I was just talking about the game part on the last lines of bob's post. I thought he was taking about the game of search that every one undergoes to find their true nature. Assuming that was that. I added, that every one has to play, sooner or later. I meant evolutionarily, all of us will go through this process of unfolding and get enlightened. The 'search and unfoldment' that each one undergoes eventually -- this I called game. People can run away, become politicians, rulers, this and that, forget completely about who they are and why they are here. get carried away on family life, etc. But, life has this knack of bringing people back in the game. I guess, bob wrote that those who think they are not playing, are also still playing, they just don't know they are playing. Because this is the only game known in the universe. I hope this explains

I will add: If we refuse to play, we will be made to play (sooner or later). every one has to play --conciously.

Last night, I was reading "Tibetan Yoga of Dream and Sleep". The author says, if you meet some one that has never tasted salt, it is impossible to describe in words, to convey the taste of salt, to that person. If a person has tasted (experienced) salt already, then yes, we can talk to them about salt.

I need to go chop wood.

You mean, the 'not it's don't go away -- it is both 'not it's and 'not not it'. then the question can come, are there many 'not not it's? isn't the whole point of doing 'not it' 'not it'... to get to 'not not it' and see that the 'not not it' itself is all the 'not it's?

I would think so. word meaning also. 'not it' 'not it' 'not it' 'not it' ............. ...... until reaching that which is not 'not it'.

I am curious, why the guilt? (offtopic: lately, there is some shift on my perception, I inquire and wonder about this 'guilt' thing. when is guilt healthy and when does it get excessive, unhealthy or not constructive) on topic: Does food have any connection with guilt? How do Daoist connect food with the emotions of the mind?

Instead of wording, what was the thing that all the enlightened masters agreed and advocated. I was thinking, may be look at what is the underlying agreement on that which they thought was 'not it', or 'not the way'. I think taking this approach, we can find common things on negation, or what they said is not true. The state they experienced cannot be communicated. What can be communicated is what is not that state. Does "Neti Neti" come out of this? Would all agree on this negation, what we see or think is not what it is.

I request that you modify the last option to "None of the above. Just a human mortal in this life time .so far..." Things can change any moment. We are still living this life. How can we conclude we will be just human in this lifetime? This life time is not over yet. No one knows what's in store next moment.

I am on the pool. All here are fellow swimmers or aspiring swimmers. Perhaps you are teaching me some strokes.

I guess you can't help but remind chopping wood.

Had the author said, Shankara failed to address so and so.... I would say, this is author's opinion and respect that. But, he said Advaita failed to address.... Advaita is not animate (no life or 'chaitanya', it can't get up and address). Advaita just means "not two" (a-dwaita). How can this "not two" address any issue? Neither Shankara nor the Neo-Advaita teachers author quotes, hold sole proprietorship on Advaita. Advaita as philosophy, has been there long before Shankara. May be the author thinks Advaita and Shankara are synonymous. Even if Shankara failed to address something, I doubt he might come back in the form of Shankara to address the issue . I just meant that we have to move on, from battles that are over, for our own sake. philosophies can't fight, only people or mind engages in such battles.

Wow. I am glad I read through that whole thing.

I think this addresses the question really well. To me, it seems almost all of them would agree on that list, except if I were to write that list, I would take out the "-Human beings are a single species".

Though our mind wants to believe otherwise, and tries to find common things among all these, bottomline 'Many do not agree', as you stated. I guess, it's better we face this reality of 'disagreement' rather than trying to find commonalities. What is even more shocking is, that many would not accept that there are other approaches to reach that state. Many say this is the right path. When questioned about other ways, some of them, outright disagree or say it is not effective.

Oh.. That's not expansion, it is taking it to a whole new dimension of a complicated maze. who knows? the answer may be there, if we can solve it. Why not simply forgive? We need to forgive ourselves, there is no progress without that. In order to forgive ourselves, we need to forgive all others. It is a package deal, we can't get the former without the latter.