Female enlightened master Rajini Menon on attaining enlightenment by virtuous conduct

[dwai]

 

1 hour ago, manitou said:

Assumedly the atheist has no god-dualism to shed. 
 

 

That is a BIG assumption imho/IME. 
Atheists, I’ve found are usually reacting to younger age trauma wrt religion — they might have had dogmatic parents/family, strong guilt/sin/fear based indoctrination, been punished by authority figures (teachers ), to name a few.

 

Atheists, typically (or at least those I’ve encountered) become so as a reaction to strong religiosity — so their dualism is a negative dualism. And usually as a result, they tend to throw out spirituality along with the religious concepts. So, God-based approaches are discarded as superstitious, and inquiry based approaches too are discarded. Even if an atheist goes down the path of an inquiry based approach, their conditioned skepticism has them second-guessing and rejecting positive experiences thereof. 
 

Of course, there are many exceptions to this as well. 

[Lairg]

On 3/12/2021 at 8:48 PM, Ajay0 said:

attaining enlightenment just through adhering to virtuous conduct and behavior.

 

At the risk of stating the obvious there are some other preconditions to first stage enlightenment:

 

- personal karma resolved

- minimum proportions of higher sub-plane substance in the physical, emotional and mental bodies

- control of the mental body

- alignment with specific higher beings

- intent to move from isolation to union

- other factors including cosmic cycles and group karma

 

For second stage enlightenment there is also a requirement for control of the heart

 

[manitou]

4 hours ago, Lairg said:

Perhaps it is worth distinguishing a Theist from a Deist,   Thus the a-theist believes that there is no God, while an a-deist believes there is no Force

 

A lot of atheists seem to me to be deists.

 

 

It seems to me that no-Force is still a dual concept.  If one looks at the intelligence needed for the embryo (or any seed) required to develop into its form, the intelligence is contained within the cells of the embryo.  The only thing that distinguishes a fingernail cell from an eyeball cell is how the cells line up next to each other while developing!  What incredible intelligence!  Same with trees, or bees, or knees.  The template is from the inside to the outside, not the other way around.  All of life, looked at with these eyes, is unfathomable and mind-blowing.  And BTW, how is it that any item retains its form?  Why don't the atoms just fall apart?  Is there an intelligence contained within the lamp on my desk?

[Ajay0]

On 2/19/2022 at 7:05 PM, freeform said:

That’s not quite what she says. 
 

‘Progress towards’ and bringing about enlightenment are two very different things.

 

 

Wholesome virtuous behavior progressively leads to the foremost.~ Buddha AN 10.1

 

Here, the Buddha himself had also stated that virtuous action progressively leads to the foremost, that is enlightenment. This teaching is exemplified by Rajini Menon, who had no Gurus or spiritual masters, and only had adherence to her inner conscience as a moral guide for thought, speech and action.

 

Yes, the Buddha had also advocated a variety of methods like mindfulness practice, vipassana , meditation for people who are inclined to such practices . But that does not take anything from his saying that virtuous behavior is potent enough to lead to the foremost, which is nirvana or enlightenment.

 

  I am also interested in the spiritual and social implication of this teaching as it would mean that atheists and agnostics and those of the LGBTQ spectrum, who  adhere to values and virtuous conduct, are not spiritually degenerate as some theists put them to be.

 

[MIchael80]

2 hours ago, Ajay0 said:

 

Wholesome virtuous behavior progressively leads to the foremost.~ Buddha AN 10.1

 

Here, the Buddha himself had also stated that virtuous action progressively leads to the foremost, that is enlightenment. This teaching is exemplified by Rajini Menon, who had no Gurus or spiritual masters, and only had adherence to her inner conscience as a moral guide for thought, speech and action.

 

Yes, the Buddha had also advocated a variety of methods like mindfulness practice, vipassana , meditation for people who are inclined to such practices . But that does not take anything from his saying that virtuous behavior is potent enough to lead to the foremost, which is nirvana or enlightenment.

 

  I am also interested in the spiritual and social implication of this teaching as it would mean that atheists and agnostics and those of the LGBTQ spectrum, who  adhere to values and virtuous conduct, are not spiritually degenerate as some theists put them to be.

 

Human beings are not capable of wholesome virtuous behaviour. Only after a good amount of spiritual practices and inner transformation is there a slight dawning of such conduct.

Before,  there is only behaviour based on trauma, karma, social conditioning etc.

[freeform]

4 hours ago, Ajay0 said:

Buddha himself had also stated that virtuous action progressively leads to the foremost

Yeah - as Michael says above - we’re ordinarily only capable of what Daoists call inferior virtue.

 

If your actions are calculated or contrived in any way… if there’s any ‘self’ in your action - then it’s not pure virtue.

 

You may stand to let a pregnant lady take a seat on the bus - but there’s usually a background of self in such an act. A part of you feels good being seen to do a benevolent gesture… a part of you wants the thanks from the pregnant lady.

 

Would you be kind to a person that just stole from you - or called you names? If not then there is still ‘self’ in your virtue.

 

I’m a strong believer in being virtuous (even if it’s not perfect). In fact most traditions will have a specific code of conduct. This helps to shape one’s mind through external means. In combination with spiritual practice this helps true virtue to blossom. True virtue is indeed selfless.

 

4 hours ago, Ajay0 said:

atheists and agnostics and those of the LGBTQ spectrum, who  adhere to values and virtuous conduct, are not spiritually degenerate as some theists put them to be.

I would 100% agree with that  

 

[Indiken]

 

If true virtue is:

 

14 minutes ago, freeform said:

True virtue is indeed selfless.

 

Then what you should do with the pregnant lady ?

 

 

 

 

[MIchael80]

3 hours ago, Indiken said:

 

If true virtue is:

 

 

Then what you should do with the pregnant lady ?

 

 

 

 

It is not what....but from "where" the action comes. 😊

[Indiken]

1 hour ago, MIchael80 said:

It is not what....but from "where" the action comes. 😊

 

What do you mean "where" ? 

Edited February 23, 2022 by Indiken

[Cleansox]

1 hour ago, Indiken said:

 

What do you mean "where" ? 

See the last post from @freeform, it is stated there. 

[manitou]

I think true virtue is something that happens post-enlightenment.  From that point of view, you and the pregnant lady are one and the same.  To give to her is to give to yourself.  The individual 'I' is gone, while one is in consciousness. No accolades needed.

[Indiken]

3 minutes ago, Cleansox said:

See the last post from @freeform, it is stated there. 

 

Could you cite specifically ?

 

I see only mind as to "where" in that post.

 

 

[Cleansox]

12 minutes ago, Indiken said:

 

Could you cite specifically ?

 

I see only mind as to "where" in that post.

 

 

I know, technically he stated where the action should not come from, as in the sense of self. 

 

What is left is no-self. Se also the post by @manitou above. 

[Indiken]

17 minutes ago, manitou said:

I think true virtue is something that happens post-enlightenment.  From that point of view, you and the pregnant lady are one and the same.  To give to her is to give to yourself.  The individual 'I' is gone, while one is in consciousness. No accolades needed.

 

So, if I sit and she stands it is the same in virtue as if she sit and I stand when we are Enlightened ?

 

[manitou]

9 minutes ago, Indiken said:

 

So, if I sit and she stands it is the same in virtue as if she sit and I stand when we are Enlightened ?

 

 

 

We are all straw dogs.  Who's doing the judging?

 

 

 

Edited February 23, 2022 by manitou

[Cleansox]

14 minutes ago, Indiken said:

 

So, if I sit and she stands it is the same in virtue as if she sit and I stand when we are Enlightened ?

 

No, if you sit and she stands, you are one inconsiderate bastard. 

Enlightened or not. 

[Indiken]

3 minutes ago, manitou said:

We are all straw dogs.

 

What do you mean - that we are straw dogs, or that choices are made for us, or something else ?

 

3 minutes ago, manitou said:

Who's doing the judging?

 

When ?

[freeform]

52 minutes ago, manitou said:

I think true virtue is something that happens post-enlightenment.  From that point of view, you and the pregnant lady are one and the same.  To give to her is to give to yourself.  The individual 'I' is gone, while one is in consciousness. No accolades needed.

This is spot on. 
 

Though I don’t think we agree on what ‘enlightenment’ means - there’s a point where one transitions from self identification to something else - and that’s where you and the pregnant lady are the same.

 

At this stage your actions are able to be truly ‘spontaneous’… meaning they come from something other than ‘the self’… or the acquired mind in the terminology I generally prefer.

 

When it is true virtue, there is no correct and incorrect action - that is not a filter that is necessary any longer. All action, despite appearances, have a positive effect on the Ming or Karma of the people the sage touches.
 

This is quite rare of course. Many people claim they’re at that stage of development because it’s a perfect cover for their selfish behaviour… This is where they make sleeping around with students and buying Rolls Royces a sort of ‘crazy wisdom’… where it’s anything but that. 
 

But the real thing does happen from time to time…

 

 

[Indiken]

34 minutes ago, freeform said:

This is spot on. 
 

Though I don’t think we agree on what ‘enlightenment’ means - there’s a point where one transitions from self identification to something else - and that’s where you and the pregnant lady are the same.

 

At this stage your actions are able to be truly ‘spontaneous’… meaning they come from something other than ‘the self’… or the acquired mind in the terminology I generally prefer.

 

When it is true virtue, there is no correct and incorrect action - that is not a filter that is necessary any longer. All action, despite appearances, have a positive effect on the Ming or Karma of the people the sage touches.
 

This is quite rare of course. Many people claim they’re at that stage of development because it’s a perfect cover for their selfish behaviour… This is where they make sleeping around with students and buying Rolls Royces a sort of ‘crazy wisdom’… where it’s anything but that. 
 

But the real thing does happen from time to time…

 

 

 

So if a person in truly ‘spontaneous’ manner starts to beat the pregnant lady instead of letting her to sit, he is a sage and does a positive effect on the pregnant lady's Ming or Karma ?

 

Edited February 23, 2022 by Indiken

[dwai]

10 hours ago, freeform said:

True virtue is indeed selfless

I'd put it as True Virtue is unselfish. Depending on which tradition one is coming from, Self and "no-self" are defined and approached very differently. Sri Sri Ravishankar says this --

 

Quote

Man has a tendency to own things. When he owns something small, his mind stays small. His life gets stifled and his whole consciousness is immersed in his house, car, spouse, children, etc. A recluse leaves his home and goes far away. There also he starts owning his asana, rosary, books, concepts and his knowledge.

The owning has simply shifted from objects and people to ideas and practices. But a wise one knows that he owns the sun, the moon, the stars, the air, all of space and the Divine in its entirety. When you own something magnanimous, your consciousness also becomes magnanimous! And when you own something small then all the small negative emotions start coming up such as anger, greed, etc.

 

[dwai]

2 hours ago, Indiken said:

 

So if a person in truly ‘spontaneous’ manner starts to beat the pregnant lady instead of letting her to sit, he is a sage and does a positive effect on the pregnant lady's Ming or Karma ?

 

Why would a person "spontaneously" start to beat the pregnant lady (or anyone for that matter)? Why do you think that violence is a natural action that arises spontaneously? That kind of violence is a result of an animalistic, survival instinct.

[Lairg]

11 hours ago, freeform said:

A part of you feels good being seen to do a benevolent gesture…

 

I once ran a workshop on meeting the Personal Will.  The Personal Will operates the human personality for its own purpose: self-esteem. 

 

No one in the workshop managed to meet the PW.  They were given illusory experiences.  They saw themselves in a mirror, met the Christ, had "streets paved with gold" experiences, etc.   I stopped the workshop.

 

That was on the Friday night.  One woman was aware of her failure and told me she meditated for hours each night to get past the illusions.  On the next Wednesday at 2 am she saw her PW and realized that all her life, her many good deeds were done to make her feel better.   The PW was investing in its self-esteem.

 

The PW is very valuable.  It requires the human to learn to control its environment - to make the PW safe.  The PW drives the human to control its physical desires, emotional desires and lower mental processes.

 

The PW must be tamed before first stage enlightenment as that requires controlled access to higher mental functions - above the level on which the PW exists

 

Approaching first stage enlightenment the PW must be transformed from running the human self-defense systems to becoming creative.

 

In Western esoterics the PW is sometimes called The Dweller on the Threshold.

 

 

 

 

Edited February 23, 2022 by Lairg

[Indiken]

 

7 minutes ago, dwai said:

Why would a person "spontaneously" start to beat the pregnant lady (or anyone for that matter)?

 

I wanted to make sure that I understand what @freeform tells in his post.

 

@freeform states, if I understand correctly, that:

 

3 hours ago, freeform said:

At this stage your actions are able to be truly ‘spontaneous’… meaning they come from something other than ‘the self’… or the acquired mind in the terminology I generally prefer.

 

When it is true virtue, there is no correct and incorrect action - that is not a filter that is necessary any longer. All action, despite appearances, have a positive effect on the Ming or Karma of the people the sage touches.
 

 

Logically it means(to me), that when a person's action is " truly ‘spontaneous’ ", that means that the action comes not from "acquired mind" and that is "true virtue".

 

So, I presume, that what action is done, does not matter anymore, because "there is no correct and incorrect action". 

 

So, it does not matter if you beat or caress another person, as long as two statements above are logically true.

 

7 minutes ago, dwai said:

Why do you think that violence is a natural action that arises spontaneously?

 

I think a person is able not to do action based on decision which is defined as violence. For example, when someone beats him, he can just relax his muscles and wait.

 

3 hours ago, Indiken said:

So if a person in truly ‘spontaneous’ manner starts to beat the pregnant lady instead of letting her to sit, he is a sage and does a positive effect on the pregnant lady's Ming or Karma ?

 

It looks like you interpreted my question in your own way. Your statement does not make sense to me. I am not sure how your word "natural" is related to my question. Could you clarify ?

 

7 minutes ago, dwai said:

That kind of violence is a result of an animalistic, survival instinct.

 

I think "instinct" is not an useful concept if you want to modify the human behavior, because it gives a feeling that "it is what it is, so accept it".

[natural]

1 hour ago, dwai said:

Why would a person "spontaneously" start to beat the pregnant lady (or anyone for that matter)? Why do you think that violence is a natural action that arises spontaneously? That kind of violence is a result of an animalistic, survival instinct.

 

I both abhor the premise of beating anyone, and appreciate that kind of violence is a result of of a base instinct.

[-ꦥꦏ꧀ ꦱꦠꦿꦶꦪꦺꦴ-]

@Indiken I think by “spontaneous” they mean giving up your seat without any intentions of looking good, feeling good, gaining merit etc, just doing it. Not “spontaneous” as in any random action.