Are you enlightened?

[BaguaKicksAss]

Why on earth would anyone care about anyone else's beliefs???

[Rara]

I practice cultivation for self improvement and connection with the divine, but not for enlightenment. I respect the folks who do though, and have met some very awesome people with this goal.

 

Maybe you'll end up enlightened that way

[Cheshire Cat]

DAO rain TAO, what is that!?

 

Enlightenment!!

[Rara]

Enlightenment!!

 

Holy crap! I gotta get me some of that!!

[Unlearner]

Why on earth would anyone care about anyone else's beliefs???

 

The question I'm asking does not have to do with the beliefs themselves, but the nature of accepting them as beliefs and not as Truth itself.

 

However, to answer your question more directly, I'm simply curious, that's all

[Marblehead]

Why on earth would anyone care about anyone else's beliefs???

Hehehe. Because we enjoy proving them wrong and ourself right. Human nature for many of us.

 

The question I'm asking does not have to do with the beliefs themselves, but the nature of accepting them as beliefs and not as Truth itself.

 

However, to answer your question more directly, I'm simply curious, that's all

I understood what you were asking but the wording was such that BKA and I am sure others, found it to be prying into his beliefs.

 

Don't ask me that question. Hehehe.

[Boy]

...

Edited November 3, 2013 by Boy

[skillzLeet]

Belief is useless. Knowledge, firm knowledge. Like the ground you are standing on, which is physically made of the stuff. After truth, can there be any going back? Falsehood is innately distinct from truth by its transient nature. Truth abides.

 

There is a reason for decay and entropy and the modern understanding of science will render all such things clear shortly. It will take a single burst of transmitted enlightenment to the right hard working souls to switch on that aspect of things, there are plenty of us who specialise in the intricate fields and as versatile as human beings are we are also like insects: directed toward a specific purpose. You know when you attempt to act against your nature, that you feel off centre. Consider that the honeybee has a pollen collector built into its leg.

 

 

Nothing ever disappears. Even decay and disappearance are an illusion: that which decays, is merely changing form. Its 'ripe' form was itself a form of decay of the 'dirty' form before it. When something fades off into empty space, it is still there. Such is conservation of energy.

 

The universe expands to make more room, all that empty space is not remotely empty. In fact it contains the sum of all past actions. The past cannot be deleted, the past abides eternally encoded into the fabric of the Present. Look into black hole physics and the nature of decay is made manifestly clear. The spiritual nature of the universe is unraveled by the exploration of the physics of black hole boundaries and the encompassing yet similar nature of the observable universe event horizon.

 

Anyway I do not claim to be enlightened but let's put it this way: from a Vedic astrology point of view, I have a very convenient place of observation. Enlightenment with a capital E I'd define as total cessation of all questioning or total purity. It's a grand task, isn't it? But according to some of the past teachers this is the age of mass enlightenment. Let us see! All is Love

 

 

Also: Nirvikalpa is quite common. I have so far spoke to one person on the internet. He entered it in a monastery somewhere in the far East. The tradition there is that when a monk enters Nirvikalpa, they go again, and again, and again. Until it seeps in. Once is great but it's definitely not the final product.

 

 

The reason why I can speak so surely is that after the experience a supremely divine white light cut two lines into my hand with laserpoint precision as if it were a DNA program that found its completion point. They have been there ever since and every time I look at my hand I am amazed, awestruck, dazzled and I still don't really quite grasp the depth or brunt of what this entails.

 

 

Good post!

 

Can I ask how you managed to find Nirvikalpa samadhi? Was it by following a certain system?

[fluidity]

This should sum up most of what I have to say in response to this:

http://thetaobums.com/topic/28469-atheism-is-realist-buddhist-definition-just-like-theism/?p=479394

 

Please don't take this as me being hostile, I don't mean it in that way, but it does not seem like you are a scientist yourself, so I'm curious as to why you have such strong conviction in it. You have several good points, but overall it appears as if you follow science devoutly as it's handed to you in books and classrooms, so how is it that you can accept such things of which you have no experience whatsoever as being "knowledge" without regarding anything for belief?

 

 

Somewhere deep inside, one "put it all together". The rest of myself is catching up, hence I have next to no idea what really to do or say.

 

 

There are a few things I can point to. One time I was looking at some special relativity equations while tripping my head off during Kundalini awakening, I noticed there was a kind of yin-yang to their form.

 

For instance -

 

You can 'mirror' it. Flip it over, square it, add (v/c)^2 to both sides to take out that pesky 1-(v^2/c^2) and you get

 

(1/y)^2 + (v/c)^2= 1

 

Or you could leave it as

 

(1/y)^2 = 1 - (v/c)^2

 

Which if you perhaps look, you might see what I am pointing to!

 

Or if I write it as

 

(a/b)^c + (a/b)^c = k

 

And when you look at EVERY equation of physics, there is this very same magical yin-yang thing. If you square something here, there is always a complementary something somewhere else. So I saw the silly yet magnificently grand beyond comprehension nature of this and laughed myself into a coma. I went and looked at random papers on the web and everywhere I went, no matter how complex or intricate the equations, no matter how abstract the symbols, no matter how "intelligent" or "basic" the equations or terms were, they all bore this yin-yang and clearly they were all of a single substance.

 

 

It was then that I realised that I was on a planet full of talking monkeys. These were not merely just equations. They were art. Just art. Then I noticed that the entire thing was a single Artwork. And I was part of it. Art, looking at art. The symbols, despite the serious "look guys, we really need to spend billons of pounds and smash some particles together as fast as we can for some reason" mode of thought, were just a bunch of cleverly shaped squiggles on a piece of paper. Another arbitrary set of squiggles on a piece of paper could be The Meaning of Life and Everything As Such but well, beauty is in the eye of the beerholder after all.

 

 

There was this understanding, let's say. Of an infinite number of Earths, equally identical to the last pixel, each existing in this incredible space which was the Infinite of the Infinite. So you have one Earth here, then in every single direction (keep in mind we are talking Infinity) there is another Earth at the precise 'edge-of-the-universe'. At the edge, each Earth was one pixel different, just one. Then it became clear that I am eternally existent and I am this. If I change a single pixel, I instantly "translocate" to the Earth which bears that next pixel difference in the space of all spaces/objects/phenomena. In such a sense, I do not ever move although there is the appearance of such.

 

 

So in this moment, the idea of both determinism and free will were seen to be enclosed in something quite beyond both and wholly inexplicable.

 

 

 

 

Also, I'd like to say one thing. There are some questions which can be answered once and for all, which never change; e.g. "2+2=?"=>"4". But there are also questions which can only be answered by the very creation of a flow along the 4th dimension.

 

We human beings happen to be the answers to some of those questions - we are the 4 dimensional process, which is the answer to the question that spawned us. When we die, the answer is known: it is the entire worldvolume, or self, you could say - a kind of treatise.

 

Now just as 2+2=4 we can say that the answer to some question = {[x_a,y_a,z_a,t_a]---->[x_b,y_b,z_b,t_b]}

And you are born trying to answer it;

To the universe/Omniself the full nature of the question is known;

to yourself, it is "What am I?"

 

There are probably quite a few such questions. Probably many more, maybe some questions need a 5 dimensional flux, 6, 7, 11tybillion, who knows.

 

One such question for example is this: "Can I jump onto this object?" - The answer is only known by Doing

 

P=NP?

"If the solution to a problem can be quickly verified by a computer, can the computer also solve that problem quickly?"

Edited September 30, 2013 by fluidity

[fluidity]

Here's an article which indicates that science may have just proven the tangible existence of Chi:

 

Seeing light in a new light Scientists create never-before-seen form of matter

Harvard and MIT scientists are challenging the conventional wisdom about light, and they didn't need to go to a galaxy far, far away to do it.

Working with colleagues at the Harvard-MIT Center for Ultracold Atoms, a group led by Harvard Professor of Physics Mikhail Lukin and MIT Professor of Physics Vladan Vuletic have managed to coax photons into binding together to form molecules – a state of matter that, until recently, had been purely theoretical. The work is described in a September 25 paper in Nature.

The discovery, Lukin said, runs contrary to decades of accepted wisdom about the nature of light. Photons have long been described as massless particles which don't interact with each other – shine two laser beams at each other, he said, and they simply pass through one another.

"Photonic molecules," however, behave less like traditional lasers and more like something you might find in science fiction – the light saber.

"Most of the properties of light we know about originate from the fact that photons are massless, and that they do not interact with each other," Lukin said. "What we have done is create a special type of medium in which photons interact with each other so strongly that they begin to act as though they have mass, and they bind together to form molecules. This type of photonic bound state has been discussed theoretically for quite a while, but until now it hadn't been observed.

"It's not an in-apt analogy to compare this to light sabers," Lukin added. "When these photons interact with each other, they're pushing against and deflect each other. The physics of what's happening in these molecules is similar to what we see in the movies."

Click for article: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2013-09/hu-sli092513.php

Edited September 30, 2013 by fluidity

[Unlearner]

Somewhere deep inside, one "put it all together". The rest of myself is catching up, hence I have next to no idea what really to do or say.

 

 

There are a few things I can point to. One time I was looking at some special relativity equations while tripping my head off during Kundalini awakening, I noticed there was a kind of yin-yang to their form.

 

For instance -

 

You can 'mirror' it. Flip it over, square it, add (v/c)^2 to both sides to take out that pesky 1-(v^2/c^2) and you get

 

(1/y)^2 + (v/c)^2= 1

 

Or you could leave it as

 

(1/y)^2 = 1 - (v/c)^2

 

Which if you perhaps look, you might see what I am pointing to!

 

Or if I write it as

 

(a/b)^c + (a/b)^c = k

 

And when you look at EVERY equation of physics, there is this very same magical yin-yang thing. If you square something here, there is always a complementary something somewhere else. So I saw the silly yet magnificently grand beyond comprehension nature of this and laughed myself into a coma. I went and looked at random papers on the web and everywhere I went, no matter how complex or intricate the equations, no matter how abstract the symbols, no matter how "intelligent" or "basic" the equations or terms were, they all bore this yin-yang and clearly they were all of a single substance.

 

 

It was then that I realised that I was on a planet full of talking monkeys. These were not merely just equations. They were art. Just art. Then I noticed that the entire thing was a single Artwork. And I was part of it. Art, looking at art. The symbols, despite the serious "look guys, we really need to spend billons of pounds and smash some particles together as fast as we can for some reason" mode of thought, were just a bunch of cleverly shaped squiggles on a piece of paper. Another arbitrary set of squiggles on a piece of paper could be The Meaning of Life and Everything As Such but well, beauty is in the eye of the beerholder after all.

 

 

There was this understanding, let's say. Of an infinite number of Earths, equally identical to the last pixel, each existing in this incredible space which was the Infinite of the Infinite. So you have one Earth here, then in every single direction (keep in mind we are talking Infinity) there is another Earth at the precise 'edge-of-the-universe'. At the edge, each Earth was one pixel different, just one. Then it became clear that I am eternally existent and I am this. If I change a single pixel, I instantly "translocate" to the Earth which bears that next pixel difference in the space of all spaces/objects/phenomena. In such a sense, I do not ever move although there is the appearance of such.

 

 

So in this moment, the idea of both determinism and free will were seen to be enclosed in something quite beyond both and wholly inexplicable.

 

 

 

 

Also, I'd like to say one thing. There are some questions which can be answered once and for all, which never change; e.g. "2+2=?"=>"4". But there are also questions which can only be answered by the very creation of a flow along the 4th dimension.

 

We human beings happen to be the answers to some of those questions - we are the 4 dimensional process, which is the answer to the question that spawned us. When we die, the answer is known: it is the entire worldvolume, or self, you could say - a kind of treatise.

 

Now just as 2+2=4 we can say that the answer to some question = {[x_a,y_a,z_a,t_a]---->[x_b,y_b,z_b,t_b]}

And you are born trying to answer it;

To the universe/Omniself the full nature of the question is known;

to yourself, it is "What am I?"

 

There are probably quite a few such questions. Probably many more, maybe some questions need a 5 dimensional flux, 6, 7, 11tybillion, who knows.

 

One such question for example is this: "Can I jump onto this object?" - The answer is only known by Doing

 

P=NP?

"If the solution to a problem can be quickly verified by a computer, can the computer also solve that problem quickly?"

 

Those are some interesting observations. There are just a few things that I'd like to add for you to consider, if I may.

 

1) Knowledge of the universe attained through the scientific method is based on experimenting on that which is external to us. However, can we ever really "know" anything outside of ourselves? We must rely on our senses, on specialized equipment, on sets of assumptions that are required to progress, such as the assumption that the universe even makes sense in the first place. All of these are mere reflections of the universe, not the universe itself, so is it really appropriate to say that there is no need for belief?

 

2) Mathematics is a language, pure and simple. It is a means to express certain ideas in a very precise way, but its entire existence is only an imaginary construct developed by humans and has no real connection to the physical universe itself. However, we can progress this construct to new levels which tend to reflect similar properties of the actual universe by utilizing assumptions (you could compare this to belief), which establish limitations on the capabilities of the construct, but also direct it to assume a more precise form which can be utilized for practical purposes. In other words, to make no assumptions leaves the construct in a formless, infinite state; to make assumptions about it results in limitations, but that which can be used to further explore the depths of the construct itself. Thus, the goal of any mathematician is to discover new concepts within the construction of mathematics while making as few assumptions as possible.

 

These are just ideas to consider. I think you have some very good insights. You said that you are training to be a physicist, yes? May I inquire as to what your focus is? I majored in math and physics when I was in college a few years ago (my interest is in quantum and nuclear physics mostly), and currently I'm now going for a degree in electrical engineering for my job.

[chegg]

Flolfolil wrote:

a couple people here seem to think they are, but also seem far less "advanced" than people who keep their mouths shut

 

According to the Anthroposophy guy (Steiner), going on the path to enlightenment and the various steps along the way can (and usually do) occur out-of-order. Quite often, via some external trigger, people can get enlightened first and then seek the path afterwards.

 

This may be why some people seem far less "advanced". Enlightenement does not always make you an instant guru nor would it gaurantee your salvation after death (but I'm just speculating here).

Edited October 30, 2013 by chegg

[BaguaKicksAss]

Yes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I've been dying to type that ever since this thread started! I'm sort of surprised no one else has already

[deci belle]

Everyone has this mind right now. It is not necessary to experience the sudden to activate enlightening being because your own aware nature is already thus. The sudden is the result of such activity, and so are all the classics of the authentic traditions extolling the nature of perception.

 

As for having a real body (true self) at death… The reason people don't know their life is because they don't know their death (until it is too late). There is no ultimate identity of self in or out of time because awareness is selfless even as you read these words (or not). Your own essential nature is nothing other than just this uncreated selfless aware nature.

 

The experience of sudden enlightenment is the experience of death itself of the individual conscious awareness (there is no other death to speak of). That is how we know there is no self; that death does not exist; that life has never begun; that there are no two minds. The transition between having a self and not is seamless.

 

Jesus said that those who give up their lives will have everlasting life. This is precisely what he was referring to. It not some other life; some other time. Furthermore, buddhahood is not conferred by sudden enlightenment; neither is anything attained by complete perfect enlightenment. Spiritual powers are something else altogether independent of realizing your real body before you die.

 

Instead of considering the enlightenment or not of others, consider the fact that your natures are no different than enlightened people …you just don't know it. Why not? Consider that instead and dispense with so many trivialities about something you know absolutely nothing about.

[Seth Ananda]

No.

[9th]

 

This fall when I gave my lectures on the Lotus Sutra I said that outside the mind there was no Lotus Sutra and outside the Lotus Sutra there was no mind. Thinking what you heard to be strange, you have written to ask me to explain to you the principle I expounded and to tell you of any other pertinent matters. In this letter I shall deal largely with the import of what I said, and ask you to read and reread what I write, in the hope that it will prove to be to your satisfaction.

 

I do indeed always say: Outside the mind there is no Lotus Sutra and outside the Lotus Sutra there is no mind. Outside the ten stages of existence there is no mind and outside the ten stages of existence there is no Lotus Sutra. This is the ultimate and absolute principle. It is not limited to me, but all the Tathagata of the three periods, and all learned sages everywhere, when they have reached the ultimate understanding, have all preached the same way. The essential purport of the text of the Lotus Sutra speaks gloriously to this effect. There are eighty-four thousand other gates to Buddhism, but they are all provisional teachings and cannot be regarded as other than expediencies. When this ultimate is reached, all sentient beings and all Tathagata of the three periods, mountains, rivers, the great earth, and the Lotus Sutra itself, all bespeak the Dharma principle that all things are a non-dual unity representing the true appearance of all things.

 

This is the fundamental principle of Buddhism. We have indeed the 5,418 texts of the Tripitaka, that detail the limitless mysterious meaning spoken by Shakyamuni Buddha. We have the sudden, gradual, esoteric, and indeterminate methods. But their ultimate principle is reduced to the 8 volumes of the Lotus Sutra. The ultimate meaning of the 64,360-odd written characters of the Lotus Sutra is reduced to the 5 characters in its title: Myoho-renge-kyo. These 5 characters are reduced to the 2 characters Myoho [Wondrous Law] and the 2 characters Myoho return to the one word mind. If one asks to where this one word, mind, returns: "The horned rabbit and the furry turtle cross to nowhere mountain." What is the ultimate meaning? "If you wish to know the mind of one who laments in the midst of spring, it is at the time when the needle is stopped and words cannot be spoken."

 

This One Mind, derived from the two characters Myoho mentioned above, when spread out includes all the Dharma worlds of the ten directions, and when contracted returns to the no-thought and no-mind of the self-nature. Therefore such things as "outside the mind no thing exists," "in the three worlds there is One Mind alone," and "the true appearance of all things," have been preached. Reaching this ultimate place is called the Lotus Sutra, or the Buddha of Infinite Light; in Zen it is called the Original Face, in Shingon the Sun Disc of the Inherent Nature of the Letter A, in Ritsu the Basic, Intangible Form of the Precepts. Everyone must realize that these are all different names for the One Mind.

 

One may ask: "What proof is there that the five characters Myoho renge kyo point to the fountainhead of the one mind?" These five characters, just as they are, immediately serve as proof that can readily be substantiated. Why? Myoho renge kyo is a title that sings the praises of the mysterious virtues of the One Mind. It is composed of words that point to and reveal the inherent character of this One Mind, with which all men are innately endowed.

 

To be more speficic, look at calligraphy and painting. Or better, when someone says that so-and-so has a genius for peforming on the biwa or the koto, if we ask just where that genius lies, nobody, no matter how eloquent or gifted of tongue he may be, will ever be able to explain it in words. We cannot teach this uninherited talent to the child that we cherish. But when this mysterious spot is touched upon, it operates unconsiously, emerging from some unknown place. The mysterious nature of the mind with which all people are endowed is like this.

 

You may laugh or gossip when you read this letter, but is this not a strange thing, endless as a thread from a reel, that reveals its activity without a trace of error in any one you meet? But if you ask what thing is this that acts freely in this way, and look inward to seek it there, you will find that it has neither voice nor smell. Furthermore, it is empty and without traces, and if you think it is something like wood or stone, being free and unattached, it will change endless times. If you say it is in existence it will not be there; if you say it is in non-existence it will not be there either. This place, where words and speech are cut off, this free and untrammeled place, is provisionally called the Wondrous Law (Myoho). The Lotus (renge), while its roots lie in the mud, is in no way soiled by the mud, nor does it lose the wonderful scent and odor with which it is blessed. When the time comes for it to bloom it sets forth beautiful blossoms. The Wondrous Law of the Buddha mind is neither sullied nor does it decrease within sentient beings and it is neither made pure nor does it increase within a Buddha. In the Buddha, in the common man, among all sentient beings it is in no way different. To be sullied by the mud of the five desires is to be just like the lotus root lying covered by the mud.

 

 

- Hakuin Ekaku,

The 25th day of the Eleventh Month of Enkyo 4

(C.E. 1747)

[Tibetan_Ice]

Everyone has this mind right now. It is not necessary to experience the sudden to activate enlightening being because your own aware nature is already thus. The sudden is the result of such activity, and so are all the classics of the authentic traditions extolling the nature of perception.

 

As for having a real body (true self) at death… The reason people don't know their life is because they don't know their death (until it is too late). There is no ultimate identity of self in or out of time because awareness is selfless even as you read these words (or not). Your own essential nature is nothing other than just this uncreated selfless aware nature.

 

The experience of sudden enlightenment is the experience of death itself of the individual conscious awareness (there is no other death to speak of). That is how we know there is no self; that death does not exist; that life has never begun; that there are no two minds. The transition between having a self and not is seamless.

 

Jesus said that those who give up their lives will have everlasting life. This is precisely what he was referring to. It not some other life; some other time. Furthermore, buddhahood is not conferred by sudden enlightenment; neither is anything attained by complete perfect enlightenment. Spiritual powers are something else altogether independent of realizing your real body before you die.

 

Instead of considering the enlightenment or not of others, consider the fact that your natures are no different than enlightened people …you just don't know it. Why not? Consider that instead and dispense with so many trivialities about something you know absolutely nothing about.

 

"Everyone has this mind right now. It is not necessary to experience the sudden to activate enlightening being because your own aware nature is already thus. The sudden is the result of such activity, and so are all the classics of the authentic traditions extolling the nature of perception."

 

This sounds neo-advaitan.

The authentic traditions teach about the inseperability of emptiness and awareness, or emptiness and clarity, or emptiness and perception. Without the emptiness part, awareness has no room to spontaneously manifest perceptions.

 

As for having a real body (true self) at death… The reason people don't know their life is because they don't know their death (until it is too late). There is no ultimate identity of self in or out of time because awareness is selfless even as you read these words (or not). Your own essential nature is nothing other than just this uncreated selfless aware nature.

 

The ultimate identity of self is that you are everything. Self is not a good term because it implies a division between self and others.

 

The experience of sudden enlightenment is the experience of death itself of the individual conscious awareness (there is no other death to speak of). That is how we know there is no self; that death does not exist; that life has never begun; that there are no two minds. The transition between having a self and not is seamless.

 

While consciousness is aware, awareness is not necessarily conscious nor is it dependant on consciousness. Using the term "conscious awareness" implies that "unconscious awareness" also exists, when in fact awareness (inseperably joined with emptiness) far surpasses consciousness.

 

If there were not 'two minds' as you put it, when Buddha became enlightened, we would all have become enlightened. This obviously did not occur.

 

Jesus said that those who give up their lives will have everlasting life. This is precisely what he was referring to. It not some other life; some other time. Furthermore, buddhahood is not conferred by sudden enlightenment; neither is anything attained by complete perfect enlightenment. Spiritual powers are something else altogether independent of realizing your real body before you die.

 

Where exactly did is it written that Jesus said that?

I can find:

John 3:16 - #1 Eternal Life Bible Scripture- Jesus

"For God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.

 

And this:

Matthew 10: "If you cling to your life, you will lose it; but if you give up your life for me, you will find it."

And this:

 

"He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for My sake will find it." (Matt. 10:39) "and He died for all, so that they who live might no longer live for themselves, but for Him who died and rose again on their behalf." (2 Cor. 5:15) "I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me." (Gal. 2:20) – Jas 3.1 Feb 6 at 21:04

 

 

So if you are saying that Jesus said that giving up one's life is dwelling in awareness thereby realizing eternal life, I would beg to differ.

 

Spiritual powers are part and parcel of the realization of the inseperability of emptiness and awareness. They are powers of the heart, the sacred heart. Don't dismiss them as balderdash.

 

Instead of considering the enlightenment or not of others, consider the fact that your natures are no different than enlightened people …you just don't know it. Why not? Consider that instead and dispense with so many trivialities about something you know absolutely nothing about.

 

The mind, that which knows, cannot grasp enlightenment for it is beyond mind, beyond consciousness.

The reason why people are not enlightened is because they attempt to grasp the ungraspable with consciousness, not knowing that there is something more profound which can realize their natural state. It lives in the sacred heart.

 

TI

[Brian]

I am enlightening.

[BaguaKicksAss]

No.

 

How do you know?

[Marblehead]

I am delighted. Is that close enough?

[C T]

I am delighted. Is that close enough?

is that like putting the lights out?

 

when caffeine is removed from coffee, its called 'de-caffeinated'.

 

and a tyre that has gone flat, a deflated tyre.

 

you get the drift.

 

[Marblehead]

Hehehe. I wasn't ready for a response like that. You did good.