The four categories of people in the world and spiritual life

[dwai]

In our experience we will find four categories of individuals in this world --

1. pāmara -- The spiritually blind
2. vishayi -- The spiritually inept
3. jigñāsu -- The spiritual seeker
4. mukta -- The (spiritually) liberated

 

Isn't it strange to encounter some people who seem to be completely oblivious to spirituality in their lives, and live day-to-day in the quest of sense pleasures, wealth and the acquisition of more and more of the same? There is no scope for spirituality in these people, rather they move from sense reaction to sense reaction. Such people operate from the lower three chakras, but mainly the second and third chakras --- sensual desires and power/wealth/control/ego. Such people are called "pāmara" in the Vedantic traditions. 

 

Then we find many others, who are caught up in their lives and livelihood, though with a tinge of spirituality. These people have some spiritual inclination, even it is a token lighting of a lamp or candle at a place of worship or a daily prayer. These are called "vishayi". 

 

Then we find the rarer few who are genuinely driven by a thirst for spiritual knowledge, albeit with varying degrees of intensity. Such people undertake spiritual practices and maintain a regular practice etc. This category is called "jgñāsu" (the seekers). 

 

Finally, far and few are the muktas, the liberated ones. They shine their light and show us the way to move from darkness of ignorance to the light of knowledge and Self-realization. 

 

Would love to read some thoughts on this subject  

 

[rex]

There’s a parallel with the four competencies.

 

pāmara - unconsciously incompetent

vishayi -  consciously incompetent

jigñāsu - consciously competent

mukta - unconsciouly competent

 

[dwai]

56 minutes ago, rex said:

There’s a parallel with the four competencies.

 

pāmara - unconsciously incompetent

vishayi -  consciously incompetent

jigñāsu - consciously competent

mukta - unconsciouly competent

 

Nice. Very nice!  

[Nungali]

More  categories of 4 for my collection

 

'Spiritually inept'  is an interesting one ;     a person tries to be 'spiritual' but they just are not any good at it    

[forestofclarity]

Can it also map onto the Panchadasi's seven stages?

 

pamara: ajnana and avarana

vishayi: vikshepa

jignasu: paroksha-jnana, aporoksha jnana, 

mukta: soka nirvritti, tripiti

[dwai]

2 hours ago, forestofemptiness said:

Can it also map onto the Panchadasi's seven stages?

 

pamara: ajnana and avarana

vishayi: vikshepa

jignasu: paroksha-jnana, aporoksha jnana, 

mukta: soka nirvritti, tripiti

Indeed. That is the source  

 

[old3bob]

ah the dubious and often slippery slope of putting folks in boxes, with Sanskrit based names or otherwise....

 

btw, the so called lower 3 chakras are just fine when used in what one might call the proper way..it is the 7 below the root or below the 1st that should be mentioned as being far more problematic or demonic.  As most know it is widely taught that lord of the  1st chakra is the  Mahadeva of very great importance in Hinduism, Lord Ganesha!

 

  

Edited June 17, 2020 by old3bob

[Boundlesscostfairy]

What is after spiritually liberated?

 

Spiritual Supreme?

 

Spiritual Brahman? 

 

Spiritual God..or Goddess? Deity perhaps?

[Jadespear]

Taoist texts also put forth a similar concept, based on the comprehension that all life evolves into higher forms.  From the bottom to the top:

 

Bottom - Evil men

   next -      Little men

     Next -      Gentlemen

        Next-       Sages 

           Top-        Immortals 

 

So, eventually everyone evolves into Immortals, within the human kingdom.  

 

Descriptions: 

Evil men - people who basically enjoy hurting others, extremely selfish

Little men - people who are more or less guided by greed and improving their own viewpoints, selfish

Gentlemen - people who understand morality and are guided by propriety and seek to improve their friends and families lives 

Sages - people who truly understand righteousness and endeavor to learn and guide others when able through scholastic means     on all subjects and endeavor to unite closer to the Tao.

Immortals - god like beings who are deeply knowledgeable in the workings of the Tao and offer support/interaction with all other beings.   Possess miraculous abilities and save people.

 

The interesting thing is at any point along this scale of description anyone can be "spiritually conscious" or "liberated" etc. etc.  so classifying someone as that is not the point because that is only a quality of someone, not the whole the picture.  This scale above - describes people by how they act and by who they are on the inside.... so to me it is more useful.

 

There are plenty of stories of black magicians, and evil sorcerers to show that just because someone has knowledge "spiritual liberated, or whatever " about something doesn't mean they are any less evil because of it or that they are somehow measured differently in spite of that.  

 

Another scale is an even easier one:

 

1.  Stupid people. ( yes I'm sorry to say it like this, but they're out there )

2.  Somewhat bright people 

3.  Clever people

4.  Wise people 

 

[liminal_luke]

On 16/6/2020 at 11:37 AM, dwai said:

 

Isn't it strange to encounter some people who seem to be completely oblivious to spirituality in their lives, and live day-to-day in the quest of sense pleasures, wealth and the acquisition of more and more of the same? There is no scope for spirituality in these people, rather they move from sense reaction to sense reaction. Such people operate from the lower three chakras, but mainly the second and third chakras --- sensual desires and power/wealth/control/ego. Such people are called "pāmara" in the Vedantic traditions. 

 

 

In my mind, spirituality and sensuality are not at odds.  A well-made eggs benedict is one of life´s great spiritual indulgences.  Pleasure can be a doorway to spirit rather than a wall blocking entry.  Pain can be too but I prefer pleasure.  Likewise, wealth and power do not disqualify a person from spiritual achievement (a clumsy phrase but I trust you know what I mean).  

 

Jesus porportedly said "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."  I guess even the son of God can get it wrong sometimes.  Unlike the vast majority of human beings, I don´t think God judges us based on the size of our bank accounts.

Edited August 28, 2020 by liminal_luke

[Cleansox]

38 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

I don´t think God judges us based on the size of our bank accounts.

But perhaps based on how we got that money? 

 

Although, with Christianity, you never know. 

[dwai]

50 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

In my mind, spirituality and sensuality are not at odds.  A well-made eggs benedict is one of life´s great spiritual indulgences.  Pleasure can be a doorway to spirit rather than a wall blocking entry.  Pain can be too but I prefer pleasure.  Likewise, wealth and power do not disqualify a person from spiritual achievement (a clumsy phrase but I trust you know what I mean).  

The categorization was more for those who don't see any spirituality at all...just wanton materialism/consumerism/sensuality. 

If wealth and power are acquired via dharmic means, then certainly there is no disqualification. 

50 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

Jesus porportedly said "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."  I guess even the son of God can get it wrong sometimes.  Unlike the vast majority of human beings, I don´t think God judges us based on the size of our bank accounts.

Our actions (and underlying motivations) qualify/disqualify us more than the fruits of those actions. 

[neti neti]

5 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

 

In my mind, spirituality and sensuality are not at odds.  A well-made eggs benedict is one of life´s great spiritual indulgences.  Pleasure can be a doorway to spirit rather than a wall blocking entry.  Pain can be too but I prefer pleasure.  Likewise, wealth and power do not disqualify a person from spiritual achievement (a clumsy phrase but I trust you know what I mean).  

 

Jesus porportedly said "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."  I guess even the son of God can get it wrong sometimes.  Unlike the vast majority of human beings, I don´t think God judges us based on the size of our bank accounts.

 

It's symbolic language.

 

The rich man is proud. Far too engrossed in material aspects of life to have a chance at searching out the kingdom within.

 

The poor are the meek and humble.(but rich in spirit)

 

Edited August 28, 2020 by neti neti

[liminal_luke]

22 hours ago, neti neti said:

 

It's symbolic language.

 

The rich man is proud. Far too engrossed in material aspects of life to have a chance at searching out the kingdom within.

 

The poor are the meek and humble.(but rich in spirit)

 

 

I know.  It´s just that I think the symbolism is misleading and actually harmful.  The symbolism furthers the erroneous idea that egoic pride and humility are correlated with money.  They aren´t.  Rich people are just as likely to be humble as the poor; poor people are just as likely to be proud as the rich.

 

This erroneous idea is embedded deeply in our culture.  Many "spiritual" people are averse to money because they think it´s bad -- "the root of all evil."

[dwai]

2 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

I know.  It´s just that I think the symbolism is misleading and actually harmful.  The symbolism furthers the erroneous idea that egoic pride and humility are correlated with money.  They aren´t.  Rich people are just as likely to be humble as the poor; poor people are just as likely to be proud as the rich.

 

This erroneous idea is embedded deeply in our culture.  Many "spiritual" people are averse to money because they think it´s bad -- "the root of all evil."

 

No "thing", in and of itself is good or bad (as we bums know). It is our own attachment to that which is good or bad. The coca plant is neither good or bad. It's "fruits" (coca leaves) can be used to produce medicine or highly addictive drugs. 

 

And like the coca plant, money too can be an addictive drug.  

Like the great bards of Pink Floyd once sang, 

Spoiler

Money, get away
Get a good job with good pay and you're okay
Money, it's a gas
Grab that cash with both hands and make a stash
New car, caviar, four star daydream
Think I'll buy me a football team

Money, get back
I'm all right Jack keep your hands off of my stack
Money, it's a hit
Don't give me that do goody good bullshit
I'm in the high-fidelity first class traveling set
And I think I need a Lear jet

Money, it's a crime
Share it fairly but don't take a slice of my pie
Money, so they say
Is the root of all evil today
But if you ask for a raise it's no surprise that they're
Giving none away, away, away

 

[old3bob]

True Guru 1st sees the Self by the Self in all beings - and all the rest of the changing states 2nd, 3rd,  4th,  5th,  etc., thus the most important is the 1st while the rest is also taken into account as to where a soul is at... 

 

this is one of the powers of the Guru that is hidden in plain sight, for if they could not see your essence which would also help you see it, and otherwise became fixated on seeing you as being this or that category it would reinforce the limits of that category...  

Edited August 30, 2020 by old3bob

[old3bob]

a "something" weapon intended for evil and thus forged by evil is so in and of itself...

[neti neti]

2 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

 

I know.  It´s just that I think the symbolism is misleading and actually harmful.  The symbolism furthers the erroneous idea that egoic pride and humility are correlated with money.  They aren´t.  Rich people are just as likely to be humble as the poor; poor people are just as likely to be proud as the rich.

 

This erroneous idea is embedded deeply in our culture.  Many "spiritual" people are averse to money because they think it´s bad -- "the root of all evil."

 

Fair enough, but I've studied it extensively and never found it misleading or contradictory for that matter.

 

The "good book" is largely misquoted and well out of context at that, probably due to reader biases. People can take one line out of any text and do the same, but it never ceases to amaze me how it seems to be habitually done with the Bible... almost purposefully at times.

 

It's quite specific about the LOVE of money being the root of all evil. Not too much to argue about there, imo... just gotta take a look around.

Edited August 28, 2020 by neti neti

[neti neti]

Anyways, didn't mean to go off topic with that...

 

I suppose the rich and prideful man in this example would fall under #2: spiritually inept-- consciously incompetent

[dwai]

12 minutes ago, neti neti said:

Anyways, didn't mean to go off topic with that...

 

I suppose the rich and prideful man in this example would fall under #2: spiritually inept-- consciously incompetent

I think it could be #1 just as easily. But if the prideful part is reduced, then can also be #3 and when it’s gone, can be #4.

 

After all, what is the greatest wealth of all? Is it not Self-realization? 

[Master Logray]

Blind - 40%

Inept - 40%

Seeker - 18%

Liberated - 2%

[Apech]

11 hours ago, neti neti said:

Anyways, didn't mean to go off topic with that...

 

I suppose the rich and prideful man in this example would fall under #2: spiritually inept-- consciously incompetent

 

 

I've found the general attitude in the buddhist community is that it is karma and so if you are rich in this life its through the accumulation of some good deeds in the past - so wealth applauded rather than denigrated.  of course the yogi or monk seeks liberation and so tends to own nothing or little for themselves.  Also the vajrayana was specifically developed to allow those surrounded by sensual pleasure and riches - such as kings - to be able to practice.

 

 

[neti neti]

2 hours ago, Apech said:

 

I've found the general attitude in the buddhist community is that it is karma and so if you are rich in this life its through the accumulation of some good deeds in the past - so wealth applauded rather than denigrated.  of course the yogi or monk seeks liberation and so tends to own nothing or little for themselves.  Also the vajrayana was specifically developed to allow those surrounded by sensual pleasure and riches - such as kings - to be able to practice.

 

Interesting points. Thanks, apech. The general Hindu attitude, IMHO, is that... whether sought after by devotion/mantra, or uninvited blessings manifesting through karma yoga... for material gain in this world, one must work for it in one form or another.

 

In contrast, the highest teachings express the reality that providence has made true happiness, wealth and abundance available at any time, at no cost and with zero effort.

 

Perhaps this principle is why yogis/monks tend toward firstly advocating the "path of naught".

 

Edited August 29, 2020 by neti neti

[Jadespear]

On 8/29/2020 at 8:59 AM, neti neti said:

 

Interesting points. Thanks, apech. The general Hindu attitude, IMHO, is that... whether sought after by devotion/mantra, or uninvited blessings manifesting through karma yoga... for material gain in this world, one must work for it in one form or another.

 

In contrast, the highest teachings express the reality that providence has made true happiness, wealth and abundance available at any time, at no cost and with zero effort.

 

Perhaps this principle is why yogis/monks tend toward firstly advocating the "path of naught".

 

.....providence may have provided those things but----

.... zero effort?

 

..... don't think so.... why else do people cultivate themselves for years?

 

....more like tremendous effort, to make oneself more aware of their internal nature by tuning out the entire external world.  

[neti neti]

On 9/2/2020 at 9:50 PM, Jadespear said:

.....providence may have provided those things but----

.... zero effort?

 

..... don't think so.... why else do people cultivate themselves for years?

 

....more like tremendous effort, to make oneself more aware of their internal nature by tuning out the entire external world.  

 

I am, before effort. No external, no internal, before words.

 

I exist as one with providence.

 

Awareness, my true nature, naturally.

 

How much effort would you suggest I muster in order to be? 

Edited September 13, 2020 by neti neti