Spiritual Enlightenment: what is it/what it is.

[YmirGF]

Well, when you find yourself actually in Heaven, face to face with God, you tend not to come away from it feeling ambivalent.

But the real fun begins when one leaves thoughts of god well behind, it's a comforting stop-over, but no one would really want to live there.

 

[crowfeather]

But the real fun begins when one leaves thoughts of god well behind, it's a comforting stop-over, but no one would really want to live there.

It wasn't about 'thoughts of god'. What does it take to give you think-addicts a sense of what happens when you step outside your skull and into Reality?
Clearly, it is not possible.

 

[YmirGF]

It wasn't about 'thoughts of god'. What does it take to give you think-addicts a sense of what happens when you step outside your skull and into Reality?
Clearly, it is not possible.

Careful, you're showing your true feathers... Perhaps it's just me, but I would expect an enlightened being to be a bit more understanding and considerably less judgmental.

 

[godnotgod]

Your error involves thinking it is reasoning. It is not. There is no reasoning in Truth. Truth precedes reasoning, and remains unaffected by it.

Yes!....exactly, though the human mind likes to think otherwise.

I would not say that there is no reasoning in what we call 'Truth', but that there is no reasoning in Reality, and that the realization of Reality is beyond the spheres of Reason, Logic, and Analysis.

 

[godnotgod]

Enlightenment includes the realization that no human concern is even Real.
.

And yet The Buddha made human suffering, and the way out of suffering, the focal point of his teaching.

 

[godnotgod]

Careful, you're showing your true feathers... Perhaps it's just me, but I would expect an enlightened being to be a bit more understanding and considerably less judgmental.

You must realize that Enlightenment is not a matter of opinion.

 

[crowfeather]

Careful, you're showing your true feathers... Perhaps it's just me, but I would expect an enlightened being to be a bit more understanding and considerably less judgmental.

You've been watching Hollywood gurus. The real thing isn't like that at all.
I've done all the understanding I'm ever gonna. When you're dealing with mollusks, there are limits.

 

[crowfeather]

And yet The Buddha made human suffering, and the way out of suffering, the focal point of his teaching.

He was a bright lad. Humans really hate suffering, so it's a surefire way to arouse interest.
For my part, suffering is a surefire way to gain insight and advancement. I positively welcome it.
That's not to say I enjoy it, but what an opportunity it always is.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

Your error involves thinking it is reasoning. It is not. There is no reasoning in Truth. Truth precedes reasoning, and remains unaffected by it.

Yeah, but to discover Truth, at least objective/scientific Truth, we have to reason. Cave man discovered that a round wheel ALWAYS rolls better than a square one through reason. Flat earthers are ALWAYS wrong forever due to the lack of reasoning. And politics continues to show that billions of people think they can reason without thinking. Reasoning is rational thinking.

 

[YmirGF]

You've been watching Hollywood gurus. The real thing isn't like that at all.
I've done all the understanding I'm ever gonna. When you're dealing with mollusks, there are limits.

Hehehe.... So, we can conclude that compassion isn't one of your strong suits either. Instructive.

 

[Father Heathen]

No. I sleep very soundly, lately. But coming here, to this 'Religious Forum', it does rather pain me the way many of you atheist/leftists misbehave.

I think you confuse straw men of your own making with actual people. Speaking of atheists, the irony is that many of them are probably much closer to god than you could hope to be, as those who confuse their own ego for god couldn't be further from him.

 

[YmirGF]

I think you confuse straw men of your own making with actual people. Speaking of atheists, the irony is that many of them are probably much closer to god that you could hope to be, as those who confuse their own ego for god couldn't be further from him.

Faux enlightenment at its most delusional perhaps?

 

[Tony L Smith]

He was a bright lad. Humans really hate suffering, so it's a surefire way to arouse interest.
For my part, suffering is a surefire way to gain insight and advancement. I positively welcome it.
That's not to say I enjoy it, but what an opportunity it always is.

Yeah, I think suffering implies a surrender to an opening to move from one place to another, while pain without the suffering is a dead end.

 

[crowfeather]

Reasoning is rational thinking.

Go ahead; be a rational thinker. I'm not twisting your arm.
It's real rational to never be alive because you'd rather think you're being rational.

 

[YmirGF]

Go ahead; be a rational thinker. I'm not twisting your arm.
It's real rational to never be alive because you'd rather think you're being rational.

So, your version of so-called "enlightenment" also gives rise to unbridled arrogance?

 

[Kirran]

It is actually interesting how effective the ego and the mind can be at "co-opting" spiritual experiences. Quite a few people come on RF who very genuinely believe themselves to be enlightened, to be avatars of the divine, to be tasked with giving the world a message from the divine, etc. They generally refer to some experience/s they have had and so on. It seems to me those must be genuine experiences which have in some ways opened up their consciousness, only for their egos to kind of grab hold of it. Part of their road, I suppose. But I suppose that is the value in sangha, in guru-disciple relationships, in being part of a tradition - it forces some perspective.

 

[YmirGF]

It is actually interesting how effective the ego and the mind can be at "co-opting" spiritual experiences. Quite a few people come on RF who very genuinely believe themselves to be enlightened, to be avatars of the divine, to be tasked with giving the world a message from the divine, etc. They generally refer to some experience/s they have had and so on. It seems to me those must be genuine experiences which have in some ways opened up their consciousness, only for their egos to kind of grab hold of it. Part of their road, I suppose. But I suppose that is the value in sangha, in guru-disciple relationships, in being part of a tradition - it forces some perspective.

I could not agree more, @Kirran
(BTW: The aardvark left a few minutes ago and has almost made it out of the driveway!)

 

[Kirran]

I could not agree more, @Kirran
(BTW: The aardvark left a few minutes ago and has almost made it out of the driveway!)

Hmm, might have changed address by the time it gets here - I'm moving to a monastery next month :/

 

[godnotgod]

A bit of a non-answer. For a second, I thought you might actually give a better answer. Oh well...

There is no 'better' answer. Enlightenment is beyond all words; beyond all descriptions. All one can do is either tell what it is not, or silently point to it. It is an inner experience, not one of intellectual objectivity, and because of that, the thinking mind must first cease all of its activites.

Enlightenment is simply to see things as they actually are, rather than to see them as the mind thinks they are.

The thinking mind creates concepts about Reality, and then attempts to make Reality fit its conceptual framework. Science must be understood within the context of Reality, and not the other way around.

 

[YmirGF]

There is no 'better' answer. Enlightenment is beyond all words; beyond all descriptions. All one can do is either tell what it is not, or silently point to it. It is an inner experience, not one of intellectual objectivity, and because of that, the thinking mind must first cease all of its activites.

Enlightenment is simply to see things as they actually are, rather than to see them as the mind thinks they are.

The thinking mind creates concepts about Reality, and then attempts to make Reality fit its conceptual framework. Science must be understood within the context of Reality, and not the other way around.

A considerably better effort than that provided by @crowfeather but still, not particularly persuasive. I guess a good exit question would be, "What makes you so sure that you are competent enough or capable of offering any cogent answers about enlightenment?" @crowfeather is welcome to answer that one too.

Another really good question is, "How can those of us in the cheap seats discern who actually knows what they are talking about?"