"We Are All Already Enlightened"

[Otis]

Dear friends,

 

We've all heard the phrase many times: "we are all already enlightened".

 

Sounds good, but it does seem to be in contradiction to almost everything else I hear about enlightenment: attainment, lifetimes of refinement, etc. Or is it?

 

Help me out guys. What does that phrase mean, and do you think it's a valid point? If it is valid, then how does that concept shape your path and your actions?

[Sloppy Zhang]

Well you may already know that you are enlightened, but do you know that you are enlightened?

 

I think some of the wording you used, "lifetimes of refinement" is key. You've got to make that realization a realization.

 

And to do that, you gotta work at it.

 

This might be a bad analogy, but here goes: if you're a human that has full use of their faculties, you can already run. You might be able to run for quite some time. Can you run a marathon? Can you run across a continent? You are already a runner. You are already where you want to be. But you still have a lot of work to do to get to where you want to be.

[RyanO]

I have to be quick so I don't have time to elaborate my views on the subject, but I thought I'd link a very interesting piece by Daniel Ingram:

 

The Do Nothing And You Are Already There Schools.

 

It's from his book Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha, which is available on pdf for free from his site. He has some rather biting criticism of such an approach.

 

It's pretty interesting, as I've always been more on the you're already enlightened side (and still am in many ways), but his approach and tone are rather refreshing.

[Medhavi]

I think that most people, who would say something like that, could never justify the misery that is in the mundane world. Of course, the follow up reaction to someone pointing to that issue would be

"But that is the problem! We have to recognise that we are all already enlightened first!"

 

Then I would ask how they would go about that.

 

And that is when people would come up with a myriad of answers, depending on their background.

All leading to the conclusion that something of a practise, ranging from critical thinking to the most obscure practises would have to precede such a realisation.

 

As such, any such conversation would just lead back to the normal state, as it is.

Hard work is required, no matter what.

 

The phrase only reveals that the one issuing such words has some opinion of what enlightenment is.

There is, of course, the danger of being "inspired" by such a statement to move into complacency.

Hopefully for not too long.

Edited February 2, 2011 by Medhavi

[thelerner]

To me it means- Stop seeking outside yourself, look within.

[fizix]

To me it means- Stop seeking outside yourself, look within.

I agree this is most important....

 

can the all seeing eye see itself?

 

yes, because it looks inside out.

[devoid]

I'm not!

[Medhavi]

To me it means- Stop seeking outside yourself, look within.

I think that approach is way too popular, even if there may be a grain of truth in it.

The danger lies in association. Since it is generally hard to define exactly what constitutes "myself", most people, in my experience, interpret this statement in the sense of the "inside world-outside world" dichotomy.

 

I think that thought penetrates more than one dimension, if through all of them, I don't know for sure.

One possible interpretation of the old maxim "As above, so below" is to see thoughts reflecting through several planes of existence. Would it therefore be wise to only turn inward and reject the "outside" world? Why would we exist in this world if we preferred to just shut our eyes to sensory experience as additional information that may help us in our lessons?

Edited February 2, 2011 by Medhavi

[XieJia]

Taking the path with enlightenment in mind;

that notion itself led you astray. The enlightenment state is beyond that of the mind or any perception or conception. Enlightenment cannot be achieved; and the word is empty of any meaning.

 

To take the concept of self and to pursue enlightenment is like a giant snake eating its own tails. So there's make the statement of "You are already enlightened." as the notion to put that part of us at rest.

 

I would dare to speculate that the notion is a misinterpretation of our true nature which is that of the 'Bodhi', the knowing which is the different thing from the you or I.

 

Enough of my babbling; practice...

And you will see that the you is not so you either.

 

Good luck and wish you success on your journey.

[Jetsun]

I think it's all about the nature of our consciousness, in effect most of us feel trapped and constricted or unenlightend because we identify with things, but practises like meditation can show that all identifications are groundless, under scrutiny they are shown to be imaginary or created and they fall apart, therefore if we could clearly see that all what we identify with isn't real then we would see that ultimately our consciousness is free already because we don't have to identify with anything at all. The problem is that so many of our identifications are so subtle or so deeply ingrained in our subconscious they are hard to uproot and see them for what they really are.

 

Those people that say that they are already enlightened so they don't need to do anything are missing the point, they are still full of identifications so they haven't made any real meaningful realisation yet, you need to work at removing your identifications and letting go of all you have aquired, well most people do anyway.

Edited February 2, 2011 by Jetsun

[gendao]

Realizing that "you" don't exist is termed Enlightenment.

 

But whether "you" realize it or not..."we" don't really exist, regardless.

 

So in truth, there is never anyone to realize this to begin with - and really no one to ever "become" Enlightened.

 

Technically, "you" cannot become Enlightened, as there technically is no "you."

 

 

 

The biggest confusion in these Advaitan (nondual) sayings are the varying meanings of "you"...a concept that no longer even exists in nonduality.

Edited February 2, 2011 by vortex

[Vajrahridaya]

The potential is always there, no matter if you're a sentient in hell or heaven, it's just making it real 24/7 that the practice is about. The practice is just about removing the veil of ignorance of what already is, both inside and outside all the time, forever.

 

But yeah, it's still rare to really get that for most people on Earth at this time. So, it shouldn't be an intellectual excuse to not do the inner work.

Edited February 2, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[Owledge]

We've all heard the phrase many times: "we are all already enlightened".

Mere playing with words and meanings. Sometimes used by 'spiritual authorities' that like themselves saying this, not empathizing too much with people who don't have the same path as they have. You can make yourself more interesting by uttering seeming contradictions.

Or let me explain my thoughts this way: Sayings like that should have footnotes attached to them and then the saying itself removed.

[thelerner]

I think that approach is way too popular, even if there may be a grain of truth in it.

The danger lies in association. Since it is generally hard to define exactly what constitutes "myself", most people, in my experience, interpret this statement in the sense of the "inside world-outside world" dichotomy.

 

I think that thought penetrates more than one dimension, if through all of them, I don't know for sure.

One possible interpretation of the old maxim "As above, so below" is to see thoughts reflecting through several planes of existence. Would it therefore be wise to only turn inward and reject the "outside" world? Why would we exist in this world if we preferred to just shut our eyes to sensory experience as additional information that may help us in our lessons?

 

Good stuff. I'm reading some early kabalistic writing and much of is on the 'As above, so below', and seeing the sacredness in the everyday, because it really is there, just a plane away

[Birch]

I don't know what enlightenment is. The saying is like a letter, dropped in your path, from someone who "knows" better than you. Who would do such a thing? A crazy person? What for?

 

I consider (so far) "enlightenment" as an experience. A shift in perspective - one goes from "in here" and "out there" to "everything" and neither "in here", nor "out there." But that "everything" cannot be known as an experience, I'd just be switching one for another one.

 

I personally prefer "lesser" enlightments. Things like understanding human origins (yeah the alien stuff again, apologies) and actual on the ground stuff to ensure that my limited perspective doesn't get me hurt, maimed, killed, bankrupt and to the contrary helps make for a nice life all round (you know, the health, happiness, blah blah blah).

[Owledge]

Yes, one should not forget the various meanings of the word. I think the use of the word in the term "Age of Enlightenment" doesn't refer to a different thing than in spirituality, but to a 'lower' step of it.

And it might also be 'enlightening' in this regards that the accurate translation for the word "philosophy" is the "love for wisdom". Because it is interesting examining the meanings of the words wisdom and enlightenment and their differences and similarities.

[John Zen]

Enlightenment is an Attitude

 

A post I wrote a little ways back. I think it fits with this quote.

[Gerard]

Dear friends,

 

We've all heard the phrase many times: "we are all already enlightened".

 

It only means that you neeed to work hard to peel-off layers of karma to reveal the true self. It ain't an easy task for sure, but well-worth all the effort.

 

Just meditate more and keep going.