real enlightenment

[YmirGF]

In that case you and I must be colour.

I would be interested in your perspective if you wish to expand.

Well, I certainly do not believe in the drivel that Ben D is peddling. That much is assured. In my opinion, the imagined concept of "Universal awareness/universal oneness" is one that is perceived from a standpoint of ignorance. It is a relative viewpoint that has its basis in erroneous notions as to the nature of self/personality. Unlike others I do not see self as being illusion, but rather, as the very basis of reality.

That said, I no longer subscribe to the concept of "enlightenment" as it is commonly understood in the spiritual sense. There is no barrier between the individual and their "enlightened" aspect, save those they alone erect.

In my view, so many are wasting time and effort thinking outside the box of their own creation without recognizing that there is no box to begin with. Get rid of the that box (of preconceived notions) and understanding begins.

 

[Onkara]

Interesting.
I am not clear what "universal awareness" is, so cannot comment.

I feel uplifted to read your words I quote below. Who or what is the doer or actor?

hat said, I no longer subscribe to the concept of "enlightenment" as it is commonly understood in the spiritual sense. There is no barrier between the individual and their "enlightened" aspect, save those they alone erect.

In my view, so many are wasting time and effort thinking outside the box of their own creation without recognizing that there is no box to begin with. Get rid of the that box (of preconceived notions) and understanding begins.

 

[YmirGF]

Interesting.
I am not clear what "universal awareness" is, so cannot comment.

I misquoted Bendy. The text has now been altered.

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

That said, I no longer subscribe to the concept of "enlightenment" as it is commonly understood in the spiritual sense. There is no barrier between the individual and their "enlightened" aspect, save those they alone erect.

In my view, so many are wasting time and effort thinking outside the box of their own creation without recognizing that there is no box to begin with. Get rid of the that box (of preconceived notions) and understanding begins.

I used to be obsessed with the idea of "enlightenment" before I could admit to myself that I wasn't actually very interested in embodying it. A good thing, as I see retrospectively that dwelling "there" would be far less interesting than what I am currently working onwith.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

In my view, so many are wasting time and effort thinking outside the box of their own creation without recognizing that there is no box to begin with. Get rid of the that box (of preconceived notions) and understanding begins.

Let us clearly understand what it is you are trying to convey here....

You say many are wasting time thinking outside the box (of preconceived notions) when in fact there really is no box to begin with.

How can someone think outside of the box of their preconceived notions when there is no box of preconceived notions to begin with?

You say that if they get rid of the box (of preconceived notions) then they begin understanding.

How can someone get rid of the 'box' if there is no box?

 

[YmirGF]

Let us clearly understand what it is you are trying to convey here....

You say many are wasting time thinking outside the box (of preconceived notions) when in fact there really is no box to begin with.

How can someone think outside of the box of their preconceived notions when there is no box of preconceived notions to begin with?

You say that if they get rid of the box (of preconceived notions) then they begin understanding.

How can someone get rid of the 'box' if there is no box?

It is because they think there actually is a box to think outside of, my friend. IF you remove the preconceived notions about reality, theoretically only reality remains.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

It is because they think there actually is a box to think outside of, my friend. IF you remove the preconceived notions about reality, theoretically only reality remains.

Thank you, let us proceed methodically to further clarify....

These people try to think outside a box of preconceived notions about reality,.... to what end? Is it because they think their preconceived notions about reality are wrong or what?

Concerning your preconceived notion/theory that if you remove preconceived notions about reality, only reality remains,.... are you excluding that as one to be removed also?

 

[YmirGF]

Thank you, let us proceed methodically to further clarify....

These people try to think outside a box of preconceived notions about reality,.... to what end? Is it because they think their preconceived notions about reality are wrong or what?

Concerning your preconceived notion/theory that if you remove preconceived notions about reality, only reality remains,.... are you excluding that as one to be removed also?

Nope. The "divesting" trend gives way to the realization that things are just not how they initially seem. One stops projecting onto reality, in favor of being an alert observer.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Nope. The "divesting" trend gives way to the realization that things are just not how they initially seem. One stops projecting onto reality, in favor of being an alert observer.

That's rich YmirGF, what you are trying to convey is the basic zen teaching as others always do and have always done.

Conceptualizations about reality (preconceived notions) actually obscure reality, when the mind ceases conceptualizing about it, reality may be realized directly.

Now there are many ways to attempt to convey the teaching, but it always involves words which in themselves are concepts that require the reader to use their mind conceptually to understand.

Therefore this apparent contradiction should be explained to the more astute student who picks up on it. The most common way is to acknowledge the irony and point out that in this instance, the teaching (using conceptuaizations) is only a temporary expedient to teach the student to drop conceptulizations. Once they realize that reality is not what they has thought it was, then a whole new change takes place.

There is also the raft metaphor that is attributed to Buddha.

While the Tathagata, in his teaching, constantly makes use of conceptions and ideas about them, disciples should keep in mind the unreality of all such conceptions and ideas. They should recall that the Tathagata, in making use of them in explaining the Dharma always uses them in the semblance of a raft that is of use only to cross a river. As the raft is of no further use after the river is crossed, it should be discarded. So these arbitrary conceptions of things and about things should be wholly given up as one attains enlightenment.

So next you don't have to say "nope", just use the 'raft' story.

 

[YmirGF]

So next you don't have to say "nope", just use the 'raft' story.

So, rather than work things out for myself, I should rely on boring stories from the past? Do try to remember that I haven't touched a book on Buddhist thought in well over 30 years. I don't much care what those books have to say. I am fairly confident that I can express myself well enough without their help.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

So, rather than work things out for myself, I should rely on boring stories from the past? Do try to remember that I haven't touched a book on Buddhist thought in well over 30 years. I don't much care what those books have to say. I am fairly confident that I can express myself well enough without their help.

So long as there is a 'you' having to work things out, then you are still far from understanding what 'you' really are! If your ongoing conceptualizing were to be stopped, even for a brief moment, then reality is there waiting, there is nothing to be worked out.

So far as you're not into reading books these days, join the club, but speaking for myself, it is with the greatest humility and gratitude that i acknowledge the extraordinary wisdom conveyed by the masters of the mystical sciences of all ages, as well as the grace that allowed me both the access and understanding.

Concerning your boast of being able to express yourself without their help, then with due respect that explains why you come across as a self-opinionated shallow intellect drive-by sniper on these sorts of threads. If you would like to seriously engage in erudite discussions, then you are welcome to do so, but if your intentions is to merely to snipe because there is nothing of substance you have to give, then you open yourself up to presenting as an ignoramus and an embarrassment.

 

[Willamena]

So long as there is a 'you' having to work things out, then you are still far from understanding what 'you' really are! If your ongoing conceptualizing were to be stopped, even for a brief moment, then reality is there waiting, there is nothing to be worked out.

So far as you're not into reading books these days, join the club, but speaking for myself, it is with the greatest humility and gratitude that i acknowledge the extraordinary wisdom conveyed by the masters of the mystical sciences of all ages, as well as the grace that allowed me both the access and understanding.

Nicely said.

 

[YmirGF]

So long as there is a 'you' having to work things out, then you are still far from understanding what 'you' really are! If your ongoing conceptualizing were to be stopped, even for a brief moment, then reality is there waiting, there is nothing to be worked out.

Unlike you Ben, I don't pretend to have the answers. That aside, I have done what you recommend. It's not that big a deal. Perhaps when "you" have been ensconced in that view a bit longer, you might just understand what I am babbling about.

So far as you're not into reading books these days, join the club, but speaking for myself, it is with the greatest humility and gratitude that i acknowledge the extraordinary wisdom conveyed by the masters of the mystical sciences of all ages, as well as the grace that allowed me both the access and understanding.

I don't recognize any masters, Ben but I am happy that you find their work edifying. Some of us just don't need it.

Concerning your boast of being able to express yourself without their help, then with due respect that explains why you come across as a self-opinionated shallow intellect drive-by sniper on these sorts of threads.

Ah, I get it. Franky, I see your ranting as rather shallow too. So, I suppose that makes us equal.

If you would like to seriously engage in erudite discussions, then you are welcome to do so, but if your intentions is to merely to snipe because there is nothing of substance you have to give, then you open yourself up to presenting as an ignoramus and an embarrassment.

Trust me, Ben, I am not embarrassed and I do not give a rat's hindquarters if some of you think what I am saying is foolish. I simply do not buy into your worldview. Sorry. As I have said before, ten years ago you would have found me to be in perfect sync with your understanding. I no longer see reality from that narrow focus and am in a position to state that what many of you are perceiving isn't what it seems -- by a long shot. It's far richer than you dare imagine.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Sorry YmirGF, but your post is riddled with implications that you just don't understand what is being said to you.

One has to wonder if there really is any point in wasting any more time with you if you are unable to grok the essential gist of the basic teachings concerning enlightenment.

But in case there is a spark of intuitive faculty sufficiently developed, here are the essentials stripped of verbosity....

There is no 'I' realizing enlightenment, not this life time, not next, and not ever, the 'I' is an illusion that arises from conceptual thinking. So long as you think or claim that you have realized enlightenment, you are simply deluded.

Got it?

If you want to argue contrary to this understanding, then you are encouraged to go ahead and provide facts and/or reason, but try and stay on topic and avoid ad hominem attacks on others.

P.S. Any ad hominem considerations in this post are only a temporary expedient and hopefully will go the way of the raft after the far shore of the river has been reached.

 

[YmirGF]

Sorry YmirGF, but your post is riddled with implications that you just don't understand what is being said to you.

No Ben, it's quite the contrary. I understand what you are saying rather well. You just don't like the fact that I dare disagree with you.... and therefore all the sages throughout the ages since you mirror their understanding so perfectly. Obviously, I must be the one who "doesn't get it". Trust me, Ben, I get it.

One has to wonder if there really is any point in wasting any more time with you if you are unable to grok the essential gist of the basic teachings concerning enlightenment.

My dear fellow, I have no difficulty *groking* the essentials of enlightenment dogma. What part of "I simply do not buy into your worldview", did you not understand? Likewise, I no longer buy into enlightenment dogma. Sorry.

But in case there is a spark of intuitive faculty sufficiently developed, here are the essentials stripped of verbosity....

There is no 'I' realizing enlightenment, not this life time, not next, and not ever, the 'I' is an illusion that arises from conceptual thinking. So long as you think or claim that you have realized enlightenment, you are simply deluded.

Got it?

Thank you, Master. Your knowledge is so utterly pristine and perfect that I sit in rapt awe awaiting your next utterance. Seriously though, Ben, I do not agree with enlightenment dogma anymore. Is that a problem for you? You totally dismiss my comment that as little as 10 years ago I would have been echoing every word you have said... and never given it a second thought. Again... for those with limited attention spans - I no longer subscribe to the enlightenment dogma. Got it now?

If you want to argue contrary to this understanding, then you are encouraged to go ahead and provide facts and/or reason, but try and stay on topic and avoid ad hominem attacks on others.

P.S. Any ad hominem considerations in this post are only a temporary expedient and hopefully will go the way of the raft after the far shore of the river has been reached.

I hope they do too, Ben. I think that one thing that must rankle you is that one who once held very similar beliefs as you hold, no longer subscribes to those beliefs. That must be an uncomfortable prospect for you to ponder. I would go so far as to say that you cannot think of any good reasons why a person would abandon enlightenment dogma. It is, so obviously, correct. Look at all the people who have chattered about it over the ages. In theory, they cannot be wrong. Can they?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Again... for those with limited attention spans - I no longer subscribe to the enlightenment dogma. Got it now?

Of course, always have since the getgo, but it always seemed too silly to take you to task, and considered you were just acting the scallywag (in the playfully mischievious sense), why else would you be spending much time and energy to drop by threads dealing with enlightenment to bad mouth the mystical traditions that implicate the ego as a temporary phenomenom in the ultimate unfoldment towards enlightenment.

So now, since you persist,... here are just three questions which deserve unambiguous answers given your very brazen opinions on this subject.

1. Do you consider enlightenment is possible?

2. Do you consider enlightenment is possible without the 'sacrifice' of the 'I' on the way?

3. Do you consider yourself enlightened?

 

[YmirGF]

1. Do you consider enlightenment is possible?

I do accept that it is possible, however I think it is highly improbable. My working premise is that I could very well be quite wrong and that "enlightenment" is as billed.
I once thought it was and my experience seemed to reflect exactly what the books said... for awhile... actually for quite a long while... (decades, in fact).

2. Do you consider enlightenment is possible without the 'sacrifice' of the 'I' on the way?

Yes. I think the notion of removing the "I" is somewhat erroneous. There are indeed great transformations that occur, but there is simply no loss of identity. I will state, for the record, that one does realize that the ego as it is customarily defined leans that it is not the "captain of the ship". It is in three-dimensional reality and necessarily so as it is the main focal point through which three dimensional existence is assimilated.

3. Do you consider yourself enlightened?

In all honesty I cannot claim something I do not believe in. That would be a little bit silly. I prefer to think of "enlightened" as being an appellation ascribed to the individual by others rather than something that is claimed by oneself. It's sort of like the "wisdom" tag.

I guess the major difference in our perspectives is that I see the ego as being something that is included in the overall psyche and adds richness to said psyche. Being, in my view, is an endless adventure and none of the parts are left behind. More importantly, there is no point beyond which there is no further change. We are a part of an ever-expanding reality in more ways than one.

 

[Thief]

I was 'driving by'...thought I might 'take a shot' at this.

from another thread...in response to a metaphor of climbing mountains
compared to enlightenment....

I quote myself.
"The metaphor is not properly used.
People climb mountains for a variety of reasons.

When they get to the top...the typical proclamation would be...
"I did it!"
Mountain climbing is basically an ego trip.

The only exception I know would be the effort of Moses.
He was eighty years old.
He went up on the mount to meet God.
He went there to die.
He had no intention of anything else.

Yes I can...I can speak of intention... as the effort made...shows it.

Moses had no preconceived notion what would happen...
except that he would die.
He went to meet his God.

This is about as selfless as one can be...when mountain climbing.
No accomplishment...no reward...no return...

Funny, it didn't work out that way."

 

[Onkara]

I like the analogy, Thief
If Moses was graced enlightenment (or Self-realisation) Why did Moses later kill people?

I see a difference between recognising God's commands and becoming Self-enlightened. How would one be able to tell either person apart?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I do accept that it is possible, however I think it is highly improbable. My working premise is that I could very well be quite wrong and that "enlightenment" is as billed.
I once thought it was and my experience seemed to reflect exactly what the books said... for awhile... actually for quite a long while... (decades, in fact)

Thank you for your refreshing candor YmirGf, your experience of decades ago is not unusual if you had been engaged in any religious practice such as yoga, meditation, deep prayer, contemplation, etc., or perhaps even just deep speculation about life. However as the saying goes, the first rain drops portend the coming storm, but are not to be mistaken for it.

Yes. I think the notion of removing the "I" is somewhat erroneous. There are indeed great transformations that occur, but there is simply no loss of identity. I will state, for the record, that one does realize that the ego as it is customarily defined leans that it is not the "captain of the ship". It is in three-dimensional reality and necessarily so as it is the main focal point through which three dimensional existence is assimilated.

It is apparent that your understanding/interpretation of what enlightenment means is different to my understanding, so therein lies lies the difference of opinion. Suffice to say that for me enlightenment means liberation from ego identification, but that does not mean there is an extinction of self identity, just that it no longer identifies with a singular mortal body..

In all honesty I cannot claim something I do not believe in. That would be a little bit silly. I prefer to think of "enlightened" as being an appellation ascribed to the individual by others rather than something that is claimed by oneself. It's sort of like the "wisdom" tag.

Fine, my own understanding is that an enlightened being wouldn't necessarily know if they were enlightened, and nor probably would the unenlightened while they were still incarnate,..besides which they are no longer long for this world after realizing enlightenment though myths may be created in their memory in history.

I guess the major difference in our perspectives is that I see the ego as being something that is included in the overall psyche and adds richness to said psyche. Being, in my view, is an endless adventure and none of the parts are left behind. More importantly, there is no point beyond which there is no further change. We are a part of an ever-expanding reality in more ways than one.

YmirGF, differences in perspective are not a problem so long as there is mutual respect shown to each other for we indeed are all part of a single reality that has brought us into being and nurtures us still,...for there is yet lots of mystery to be unveiled.

Cheers