Enlightenment

[xabir2005]

Natural progression implies something that is inherent in the universe. I think it is a group dynamic that was created by Buddhists. A Buddhist map to realize a Buddhist point of view. Not in anyway understanding the real dynamic system of the cosmos.

 

 

ralis

Natural progression means nothing is inherent (inherent means fixed, static, entity). I am not exactly sure I understand what you are trying to point out.

[三江源]

It has to do with how the realizations sink into the deepest depth of consciousness and transforms our subconscious propensities.

 

So there is a process of deepening enlightenment. And this process will remove the manifestation of being 'asshole' from a much deeper root cause... from our deeper dispositions and fetters.

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks Xabir. I agree with you. Deep, deeper, deepest.

 

Transformation at root, finding the root, reaching that level,is the journey.

[Marblehead]

here it is in more words, from Xabirs section from Norquist:

 

Which is why Enlightenment isnt enough.

 

There is no refinement inherent within this.

 

So you can have the enlightenment and still be as dysfunctional as ever, you just hold a different relation to the dysfunctionality.

 

Well, I would point out that I do not agree with this. Sorry but that's just the way it is.

 

I do not agree with his understanding of the concept word "consciousness". (I just don't want to make a big deal about my disagreement.)

 

It is my opinion that an enlightened person would follow Te (Virtue), and totally avoid vice. We need to keep the concept of enlightenment separated from the concept of delusional.

 

Peace & Love!

[Marblehead]

Excellent point! Enlightenment can and will exasperate any neurotic condition. I have met many enlightenment seeking junkies that are dysfunctional and can never deal with the everyday realities of the world.

 

 

ralis

 

I suggest that these people were not enlightened but rather delusional. There are medical terms for these conditions.

 

Peace & Love!

[Marblehead]

Imagine being a complete asshole changing into a fetter-less Arhant.

 

Just saw this post!

 

this is precisely what I am imagining!

 

I know how to be a complete asshole and I assure you, that is not enlightenment.

 

Peace & Love!

[Astral_Anima]

Natural progression implies something that is inherent in the universe. I think it is a group dynamic that was created by Buddhists. A Buddhist map to realize a Buddhist point of view. Not in anyway understanding the real dynamic system of the cosmos.

 

 

ralis

 

Thank You, this is what I am starting to notice as well. It seems enlightenment is listening to the buddhist teachings long enough to become convinced that it's true and hold strong conviction, however I see no understanding of physics or any natural laws. Truth encompasses ALL, including the physical. Renunciation of the physical is escapism and denial (and is rather immature).

 

Again there seems to be no way to judge whether one is enlightened or not. One says "Oh you can tell by his "realizations", but one cannot objectively observe another's realizations. The only way to know what one has realized is to ask them and decide whether to trust what they're saying is true (or find some way to test them). However in this case it seems as long as you can talk like the buddha talked, by using paradoxes, vague concepts and confusing terminology to make people believe you are intelligent or wise (pseudo intelligence), then you are enlightened. Without any objective observable results that occur from "enlightenment" one can never truely map where one is or what one has achieved.

 

In Taoist alchemy, there is a system, a hypothesis that "if you do this, this will happen". This can be tested on multiple people and most (if not all) people who follow the system will get similar (if not the same) results. Yoga is very similar. In fact in Kundahlini Yoga there is a process that one follows and there are ways of mapping where you're at. Heat/cold sensations at the base of the spine, the sensations moving up and down the spine, visions, siddhis...these are all ways of mapping your progress. This is a system, anyone can follow it and get similar results; you can tell how developed you are. Eventually because of things like siddhis other people can objectively observe you and see for themselves how advanced you are in your practice. Science would likely even be able to track subjective experiences (as long as they were the same/similar experiences) using technology. I'm sure there's some way to observe or measure kundahlini or the arousal or energy as it is a natural phenomena in our environment.

 

Enlightenment, however, has yet to be accurately defined and when it is one must find a way to measure an achievement. Obvious since enlightenment is a process there is a change going on at some point. If that change is happening in our objective reality then it should be observable. Now is enlightenment just a belief system? Or can you actually perceive everything you claim to know? For example I can indoctrinate myself in a Christian environment and begin to believe in "God" and make up stories of how I know he exists, or I'll say something stupid like "Oh I just KNOW"; but if I actually see him/her and develop a process in which others can do the same...then thats diff. The thing is, enlightenment seems, to me, to be about finding TRUTH, which is what i'm all about so I am attracted to the goal, however I believe that the truth is objective. Regardless of what you think about gravity, it exists, regardless of what you think about how a tree functions, it functions the way it does. This is why the concept of "direct perception" appeals. However it seems the only thing that "enlightened" people are enlightened to...well I don't even know that, but it definately doesn't seem like they're any closer to understanding reality. If so then we should have already made MAJOR scientific breakthroughs. If anything Einstein was enlightened, his theory of relativity helped shape our advancement in understanding the world better.

 

So since I haven't quite gotten a concrete definition of enlightenment, what is the goal of the practices that lead to enlightenment? Why would one want enlightenment? What does it bring you? What benefit?

Edited August 1, 2010 by Astral_Anima

[Procurator]

 

So since I haven't quite gotten a concrete definition of enlightenment, what is the goal of the practices that lead to enlightenment? Why would one want enlightenment? What does it bring you? What benefit?

good questions. and as usual those r answered with nothing but nonsense.

 

for starters u need to understand that "enligntenment " is a false construct. a misunderstanding , a fake western wordconstruct. there is no such word in the original teaching.

 

further, the end result of buddhist trainig is to stop suffering. hope the benefits of it are obvious.

[xabir2005]

Thank You, this is what I am starting to notice as well. It seems enlightenment is listening to the buddhist teachings long enough to become convinced that it's true and hold strong conviction, however I see no understanding of physics or any natural laws. Truth encompasses ALL, including the physical. Renunciation of the physical is escapism and denial (and is rather immature).

A spiritually enlightened being does not deny or escape from the physical...

 

Spiritual enlightenment and the material are not opposing stuff.

 

It's just that they are two different sciences.

 

Like art and mathematics are two different but non-contradictory subject.

 

Again there seems to be no way to judge whether one is enlightened or not. One says "Oh you can tell by his "realizations", but one cannot objectively observe another's realizations. The only way to know what one has realized is to ask them and decide whether to trust what they're saying is true (or find some way to test them).

Once you familiarize yourself with the maps and what enlightenment is about, you will find that it is actually very easy to find out not only whether he is enlightened, but what level of enlightenment he is in...

However in this case it seems as long as you can talk like the buddha talked, by using paradoxes, vague concepts and confusing terminology to make people believe you are intelligent or wise (pseudo intelligence), then you are enlightened. Without any objective observable results that occur from "enlightenment" one can never truely map where one is or what one has achieved.

Experiential realization is very different from 'being clever'.

 

You will be able to tell who is just 'being clever', and who is speaking from experience... it is vastly different, I assure you.

 

But yes, we cannot 'know' for certain someone elses experience but with the right maps we can almost know with total accuracy what the other person is experiencing based on his own description of his experience.

 

In fact you can name any enlightened teacher, and if I happen to know him/her, I will definitely be able to tell you what stage he/she is at. That is how clear the map is... It is that universal.

In Taoist alchemy, there is a system, a hypothesis that "if you do this, this will happen". This can be tested on multiple people and most (if not all) people who follow the system will get similar (if not the same) results. Yoga is very similar. In fact in Kundahlini Yoga there is a process that one follows and there are ways of mapping where you're at. Heat/cold sensations at the base of the spine, the sensations moving up and down the spine, visions, siddhis...these are all ways of mapping your progress. This is a system, anyone can follow it and get similar results; you can tell how developed you are. Eventually because of things like siddhis other people can objectively observe you and see for themselves how advanced you are in your practice. Science would likely even be able to track subjective experiences (as long as they were the same/similar experiences) using technology. I'm sure there's some way to observe or measure kundahlini or the arousal or energy as it is a natural phenomena in our environment.

Kundalini experiences are not the same as enlightenment...

 

But enlightenment is just as 'testable' as Kundalini - that's why Thusness stages applies universally, people all over the world are experiencing the same realization, experience, enlightenment. Everyone can also follow the practices stated and gain the same results.

 

Anyway, if you're talking about external observance, here's something you'll be interested in, it shows how different meditative states show up in different brain waves, and I think this is the closest you can get to 'testing someone's enlightenment' but even that is not a fool proof way, simply because you may enter those states without realization (but very unlikely to have stable experiences without realization).

 

Here's the link to "Ken Wilber Stops His Brain Waves":

 

Oh btw, Ken Wilber is at Thusness Stage 4/Non Dual level of Realization.

Enlightenment, however, has yet to be accurately defined and when it is one must find a way to measure an achievement. Obvious since enlightenment is a process there is a change going on at some point. If that change is happening in our objective reality then it should be observable.

Only in brain waves as far as I know.

Now is enlightenment just a belief system? Or can you actually perceive everything you claim to know? For example I can indoctrinate myself in a Christian environment and begin to believe in "God" and make up stories of how I know he exists, or I'll say something stupid like "Oh I just KNOW"; but if I actually see him/her and develop a process in which others can do the same...then thats diff.

Exactly, enlightenment is reproducible by anyone, and there are time tested techniques that result in predictable realization. It is a science. It is not a belief. It is an experiential realization.

The thing is, enlightenment seems, to me, to be about finding TRUTH, which is what i'm all about so I am attracted to the goal, however I believe that the truth is objective. Regardless of what you think about gravity, it exists, regardless of what you think about how a tree functions, it functions the way it does. This is why the concept of "direct perception" appeals. However it seems the only thing that "enlightened" people are enlightened to...well I don't even know that, but it definately doesn't seem like they're any closer to understanding reality.

Enlightened beings have realizaton of the nature of consciousness/mind.

If so then we should have already made MAJOR scientific breakthroughs. If anything Einstein was enlightened, his theory of relativity helped shape our advancement in understanding the world better.

You may be surprised that Quantum Physics is only beginning to have basic understandings of what the mystics and contemplatives realized since ages ago.

 

Nevertheless, I prefer to treat science and spirituality as two different things - for pragmatic, practical purposes. Like rather than studying the link between mathematics and art... why not just study each on its own, it will be more practical.

So since I haven't quite gotten a concrete definition of enlightenment,

I have already given you a rather concrete definition of (spiritual) enlightenment...

 

what is the goal of the practices that lead to enlightenment? Why would one want enlightenment? What does it bring you? What benefit?

According to Buddha, it is the freedom from all sufferings, ignorance, the delusion of being a separate self existing in a concrete universe, suffering, attachments/clinging, freedom from craving/anger/etc. Edited August 1, 2010 by xabir2005

[Astral_Anima]

good questions. and as usual those r answered with nothing but nonsense.

 

for starters u need to understand that "enligntenment " is a false construct. a misunderstanding , a fake western wordconstruct. there is no such word in the original teaching.

 

further, the end result of buddhist trainig is to stop suffering. hope the benefits of it are obvious.

 

aHAH! Finally a real answer, lol. So the goal of Buddhism is to end suffering. Since, according to you, "enlightenment" is a fake concept that doesn't really exist, i'll assume that what people mean by enlightenment is the end of suffering(and yes the benefits of such are obvious, lol). Would this be an accurate assumption?

 

Also by "suffering"...does one mean ALL suffering? physical, emotional, etc? That would mean the eradication of guilt, shame, fear, helplessness, sadness, envy, etc?

[adept]

Why have all these so called levels? Aren't these just more constructs?

 

ralis

 

 

I was about to say the same. It seems to be more confusing than I originally thought.

[Procurator]

, i'll assume that what people mean by enlightenment is the end of suffering(and yes the benefits of such are obvious, lol). Would this be an accurate assumption?

i dont think so. the ppl simply dont know what they r talking about . as u noticed u asked them a straight question and they answer in obfuscations.

 

 

 

Also by "suffering"...does one mean ALL suffering? physical, emotional, etc? That would mean the eradication of guilt, shame, fear, helplessness, sadness, envy, etc?

yes that is correct.

[xabir2005]

Hi TianShi,

 

Enlightenment as a word does not exist in Buddhism.

 

The equivalent word the Buddha always used is 'Awakening', and I prefer this term because it is more accurate and meaningful experientially. There can be no liberation without awakening, without realizing the true nature of reality/mind/consciousness.

 

Buddhism's awakening is all about waking up from our dream/delusions into the true nature of our consciousness... it is not an intellectual enlightenment, or any theoretical type of understanding.

 

However I use 'enlightenment' more often because most forummers here come from a western background.

Edited August 1, 2010 by xabir2005

[ralis]

Thank You, this is what I am starting to notice as well. It seems enlightenment is listening to the buddhist teachings long enough to become convinced that it's true and hold strong conviction, however I see no understanding of physics or any natural laws. Truth encompasses ALL, including the physical. Renunciation of the physical is escapism and denial (and is rather immature).

 

in this case it seems as long as you can talk like the buddha talked, by using Again there seems to be no way to judge whether one is enlightened or not. One says "Oh you can tell by his "realizations", but one cannot objectively observe another's realizations. The only way to know what one has realized is to ask them and decide

 

It seems that one's internal psychological filters, which are complex systems determines what type of information or propaganda one allows to be integrated. Problems arise when certain tenets are accepted that deny physical realities. Further, the use of trance (abuse of) can convince the true believer beyond any doubt that physical reality is an illusion.

 

 

[xabir2005]

I was about to say the same. It seems to be more confusing than I originally thought.

It is not as confusing as you thought.

 

However, we should not underestimate the subtlety of spirituality...

 

Enlightenment is not a one-final-event thing... there are different 'levels' of realizations.

[Birch]

"Because I really am fed up of being an asshole."

 

Why? Really, I'm not sure you are an asshole. Not from what I've read here.

 

I think that if people are assholes they are because they don't feel good. They're in pain and suffer. Plus we've spent all this time telling them that to feel good (or be taken care of) they have to go get/find/do something outside themselves. But that's total BS.

 

I suggest that if you can ease someone's suffering without creating more then that person will stop being an asshole.

 

I think because you can't think your way through it, one technique is to drop thought (or thoughts of self - which is supposed to be one of those roots of the problem - per those Buddhist people, it's one way). Another technique could be to send love through yourself so you finally realise you are the person who feels it, and you can do that any time. It's never been outside or dependent on anyone else. Of course if you've been conditioned enough, this will take some practice which is why I think the Buddhists go faster there by just dropping it.

 

I think that the techniques are just techniques and knowing which one to use when is probably a good idea. I prefer the Taoist ones, also just sitting relaxing in the emptiness of all words and ideas and meanings.

[ralis]

 

 

 

 

 

You may be surprised that Quantum Physics is only beginning to have basic understandings of what the mystics and contemplatives realized since ages ago.

 

Nevertheless, I prefer to treat science and spirituality as two different things - for pragmatic, practical purposes. Like rather than studying the link between mathematics and art... why not just study each on its own, it will be more practical.

I have already given you a rather concrete definition of (spiritual) enlightenment...

 

Actually I am not surprised you would include the worn out Quantum Mechanics argument to prove your point. You use the first statement to prove your argument as being true. Then you separate physics (which is what you are basing your argument on) from spirituality as being separate from your argument. Can't have it both ways.

 

ralis

Edited August 1, 2010 by ralis

[Marblehead]

 

I think because you can't think your way through it, one technique is to drop thought (or thoughts of self - which is supposed to be one of those roots of the problem - per those Buddhist people, it's one way). Another technique could be to send love through yourself so you finally realise you are the person who feels it, and you can do that any time. It's never been outside or dependent on anyone else. Of course if you've been conditioned enough, this will take some practice which is why I think the Buddhists go faster there by just dropping it.

 

 

Nice post Kate.

 

And yes, I agree. Love yourself, y'all!!!

 

Peace & Love!

[Astral_Anima]

"A spiritually enlightened being does not deny or escape from the physical..."

 

Ok I must be confused, I thought what we know as the physical reality was labeled an "illusion" and "not real", is that not a denial of "Physical reality"? Personally I believe that spirituality IS science and that both seek to understand the universe. To separate them, to me, would be silly.

 

As for the maps, again i'm questioning the validity of anyone who "claims" enlightenment. How do we know the Buddha was what we call "enlightened"? Did he have anything to show for it besides what he thought of the world? I mean he set forth a system in which people can eliminate suffering. So sure, anyone would want to follow that, pretty much everyone suffers to some degree, and especially back then there was alot of vulnerable people who weren't very educated. Perhaps this knowledge did indeed give them comfort and hope and maybe even helped them to eliminate needless suffering. However I've done my own meditation on suffering and have found a startling conclusion. Since I suffer seeing/knowing others suffer, the only way to eliminate suffering is to free everyone from suffering. And then again suffering is subjective in nature, how do you define suffering objectively. Minor suffering like bug bites are almost unavoidable, but when it comes to major suffering the causes don't seem to be in the mind, they seem to be in the environment, in the physical world in which we live via slavery and oppression. That is not in the mind, and yes it's possible to suppress your discontent and become complacent, however this is repression and is a form of escapism.

 

The concept of "non-dualism" is again, a confusing one. It may very well exist in a "spirit realm" but THIS world is dualistic. If one views the world as "non-dualistic" then technically he could kill everyone male and rape every female on earth and never receive any karma because there's no difference between virtue and vice. in fact if there's no dualism then everything is one...but it's not. Maybe if you bring your consciousness to the level of the universe or down to that of the smallest particle then maybe all things are one or the same, however even then you can't deny that there are diff patterns of those same things, or if you're looking from the perspective of the universe there are diff things that you consist of. For example our "consciousness" is that of a human. We are one human. However there are billions of cells that make us up. there are diff organs, tissues, etc that make up this one human. So in reality there IS dualism but it can be said that from the macro or micro level it's less easily perceived. Maybe i'm misunderstanding this idea of "non-dualism", maybe you can help me better understand it.

 

Enlightened beings have realization of the mind and consciousness...ok...is that it? certainly thats not all there is in life. To say they have ultimate or complete truth would then be a lie and thus false advertising on the parts of the monks who love to write and sell books to self-help junkies.

 

Ok and now Enlightenment has a new meaning. It's now "freedom from all sufferings, ignorance, the delusion of being a separate self existing in a concrete universe, suffering, attachments/clinging, freedom from craving/anger/etc." Already, this is stating that the physical reality is a "delusion", thus denying phsyical reality. Freedom from craving? haha, if people were free from craving they wouldn't exist, desire is what drives all action. Desire is freewill, without desire we have no freewill. If your goal is to eliminate freewill and become a puppet with no desire to do or not do anything then I think everything is in a new light.

 

Also, again on trust of enlightened ones... "enlightened" is a title that gives one authority to a spiritualist. Anyone who has the title of enlightened can control masses of people at a time, it's a very powerful term, but it's also a self-appointed one. Look at Supreme Master Ching Hai ( godsdirectcontact.com ), she is a self proclaimed enlightened master who's teachings have contradicted eachothers several times, yet she has millions of followers. Sounds like like modern Christianity but with an "eastern" twist.

 

My point is that there's money and power in being called "enlightened". Thus without an accurate OBJECTIVE way to judge someone, there's the constant risk of abuse of power and MASS deception. Plus if someone understood the nature of reality they should have limitless powers. At least Christ raised the dead and healed the sick and walked on water. If thats not transcendental i don't know what is.

 

Thank you everyone for your continued efforts to help me understand this. Regarless how I come off I am very thankful for all of your imput. Keep it coming

-Astral

[adept]

I prefer the Taoist ones, also just sitting relaxing in the emptiness of all words and ideas and meanings.

 

I like this too. Simple and without all that extra baggage of other 'systems'.

[adept]

Thank you everyone for your continued efforts to help me understand this. Regarless how I come off I am very thankful for all of your imput. Keep it coming

-Astral

 

You raise some very interesting points. I have come to similar contradictions of late, it's just I find it hard to put into words what I actually DO think.

You have worded your posts very well, much better than I could of.

Maybe this doubt that we have can be a catalyst for finding what the hell it's really all about.

Thanks for your posts. I'm enjoying reading them.

[C T]

What is the true worth of a bar of soft steel?

 

A bar of soft steel costs 10 dollars.

 

Made into nails, its potential worth multiplies, maybe then it could be worth a hundred dollars (assuming).

 

Made into surgical instruments, it could be worth two hundred dollars.

 

Made into balance springs for distinctive clocks and watches, its value increases even more.

 

Again, we ought to ask, "What is the true value of soft steel?"

 

Enlightenment - what is its measure? How useful is it?

It could be useless, discarded even when found.

Some choose to hone it like a blacksmith who turns cheap metal into precious swords and shields that can protect.

 

Enlightenment - some use it as a precious sword to cut through attachments and delusions, self-cherishing and cravings for gratifications without end. Some use it to shield against the onslaught of discursive thoughts and habitual behavioral patterns that binds one to neurotic repetitiveness.

 

Some see it as the beginning of a lifetime of service to humanity.

 

Some discover that upon 'waking up', life is just the way it is... the nature and luminosity of one continuum, yet this continuum does not in any way diminish the reflected luminosity, just as the moon can reflect in a million pools and puddles, in clean water as well as stagnant cesspits, yet its luminous nature can never be tarnished.

 

Some choose to ignore it, and hence it becomes less valuable than an empty milk carton.

 

As some sort of final analysis, it could be said Enlightenment is nothing, worthless... its what one does with it that gives it meaning.

Edited August 1, 2010 by CowTao

[Aetherous]

I really like that understanding, CowTao!

[Marblehead]

 

As some sort of final analysis, it could be said Enlightenment is nothing, worthless... its what one does with it that gives it meaning.

 

 

I accept that.

 

A while back I got into the understanding of replacing dualistic thoughs with the concept of what was useful or useless 'to me'. That way I did not have to place a value on a thing but rather was able to consider its usefulness 'to me'. Even if a thing had no value to me it could very possibly be the most valuable thing to someone else.

 

A things value is determined by the worthiness of that thing to any individual and as with nearly everything in this universe, things will have different value for different people.

 

Peace & Love!

[Astral_Anima]

CaoTao- Again it seems to be described as a subjective experience, some sort of undefined realization. By your definition I'm already enlightened on many levels because i've had many life changing realizations. However subjectivity has no place in trying to define a concept. You're basically speaking in riddles, which honestly doesn't help anyone to understand what you mean unless they already understand what you mean, lol.

 

It's small and fuzzy and moves around and sumtimes it eats grass and sometimes it poops and some people think it's pretty while others think it's ulgy, some like it's colors.... Can you tell what i'm thinking of/trying to describe?

[C T]

Anyone interested in broader perspectives on the concept of Enlightenment?

 

Some clips to ponder over:

 

Ken Wilber on Seeking Enlightenment:

 

Menoftheinfinite - Enlightenment:

 

What is Enlightenment? (by Soulfetcher) :

 

 

(Talk about subjectivity....)

 

 

There are many more if one bothers to search.