I find the concept of Enlightenment problematic

If the 'real one' is sought then seek that which is seeking.

'What we are looking for is what is looking'. St. Francis of Assisi.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: Rosinitiate
The 'manufactured' reality is constructed out of ideas and words - concepts. But what is there really?
What is actual?
Words describe objects in time and space but look now at what there is.
And then look to see what is seeing in this moment?

Can the seer and the seen ever be separate?

As above, so below. That is pretty much a universal certainty, beyond that, well....speculation.

All I know, is that I don't know nothing. Does Mario really knows he's a 128 bit graphic or does he jump on that Koopa Troopa with intent?

a reply to: Itisnowagain

I see, a sense of permanence gives one a sense of security, that deals with fear. Something that one cannot "lose" would thus abate desires.

I see my journey as a never-ending staircase with landings - whenever I make a breakthrough, I reach the next landing, the next level, and then, continue to climb. I do not think that I would be satisfied remaining at one level - despite the fact that I might fall every so-often, and indeed I have, when I reach the next landing, I cannot fall back past that point. I feel that we also suffer in order to get what we want, and when we do get what we want, there will always be something else.

What purpose does one have if they are totally satisfied? I look forward to all the ups and downs, they are apart of life.

Apparently, within the spiritual doctrines describing the experience of enlightenment, there are actually levels that are beyond enlightenment, where the "striving" does not end. It explains that those whom are enthralled by "bliss" are actually "stuck" at the first level.

The highest level describes complete mastery of the mind, which I find to be interesting:

www.sacredteachings.org...

In my quest, I have found that the mind must be a slave, and used like a computer, and when it comes to actions, I should be able to make my decisions by thinking multilaterally, as opposed to thinking one thought at a time, taking many variables into account in order to make a choice.

Enlightenment is different for everybody. The truth is that nobody can really define it. It's something that must be experienced rather than explained. I also feel that most of the people who claim to be enlightened are not.

originally posted by: SystemResistor

I see, a sense of permanence gives one a sense of security, that deals with fear. Something that one cannot "lose" would thus abate desires.

Problem is the sense of permanence you speak of is illusory and not real at all. So what happens when you go through life believing in the delusion anything is permanent and not transitory? Well, like you say below you fall down... well, other's believing in this falsehood of permanence... don't get back up or spring right back like nothing happened. Families become destroyed, people commit suicide, turn to crime or drugs as a way to make it by or escape. If they understood, that everything they worked their whole lives to achieve could come crashing down at any moment from an event beyond their control... they would understand impermanence and make friends with it. One's demeanor changes from a controlling tyrant trying to be safe in ones ideological bubble of permanence... into a person that is relaxed, c'est la vie, whatever happens happens, and the struggle to keep a constant vigil to maintain control over things that naturally arise and pass ceases. If someone wishes to live their life in such a manner that's their choice to do so... but they are unaware of the ease and peace that letting go brings. Some are so comfortable in their false bubble of permanence, that they take what they have and the people in their life for granted, these are people extremely adverse to change... and when it happens? are completely devastated, or fight tooth and nail against anything that would change the world around them. This occurs in politics a lot. For example: Never mind a persons personal right to love who they want to... I'm not comfortable seeing gay couples/families in MY restaurant, MY grocery store, MY controlled little reality. So they fight against this change they don't want to see or experience... trying to use politics as a personal remote control instead of a tool to help make EVERYONE'S lives better. Life is so much more simple and peaceful not trying to macro or micromanage everything.

I see my journey as a never-ending staircase with landings - whenever I make a breakthrough, I reach the next landing, the next level, and then, continue to climb. I do not think that I would be satisfied remaining at one level - despite the fact that I might fall every so-often, and indeed I have, when I reach the next landing, I cannot fall back past that point. I feel that we also suffer in order to get what we want, and when we do get what we want, there will always be something else.

What purpose does one have if they are totally satisfied? I look forward to all the ups and downs, they are apart of life.

Certainly, we progress and we grow but being adverse to change is neither growth nor progress, but either a regression desiring for what once was, or the other direction; craving something one feels they are lacking. This is the condition of trying to be satisfied. Desire and craving leads to an idea of satisfaction upon getting or achieving what one desires, then the struggle to cling to whatever that may be and keep it in a state of permanence is suffering and dissatisfaction. Contentment with one's situation no matter the circumstance, is freedom from all of this struggle of futility. A car is a car whether it cost 500 dollars or 500,000 makes no difference the basic function and purpose is the same... as long as it has fuel and runs pressing that rectangle will get you where you want to go. There have been studies that show the poorest in various societies are the most happiest... now why do you suppose that is? It doesn't mean they don't care or don't try like anyone else, it means what is most valuable to them they already have... and can never be taken away, unlike those who only see value in objects and chase the silliness known as status.

I have my passions and I share them with others, I build things, I design things, I create things for others to enjoy, and I lend my encouragement and support to promote my friends efforts and give them my voice when they feel lost and helpless... at the same time, I am very mindful of what my motivations and intent are and the kama that arises from everything I do with my body and speech as well as those I am in close contact with. I understand our interactions and their intentions so well from decades of practice, people think I can read minds. This of course is not the case, but understanding the human condition and what we face or desire on a daily basis is something I am very intimate with.

It's a lot like movies. How many of them tell the exact same story when distilled down, beyond the individuals, the place, the time, all the things to be distracted or enamored by to make you immersed or blind to the situation as it really is? I could say a wonderful young man named David bright in spirit with resolve to not be alone, ran across this free spirited young lady that loved art and had a flair for the dramatics, they were somewhat polar opposites in the way they did things but they clicked and got along very well. Then as the summer was about to end he was accepted to MIT and she to BCA, though they loved each other the desire to live out their dreams for the future tore them apart and they went there separate ways, several years later at a symposium they stumbled across each other and reunited, both just happened to live in the same city and they got married and started a family. If you strip away all the non essentials it's boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy gets girl back... the classic frame of all such stories stripped to it's bare bones.

Well, to me this is what enlightenment really is, it is all the distinctions and dualities stripped away to expose the underlying truth. The pain that David had on losing his love after summer was over... is the same pain as everyone else has had in the same situation. We believe it is somehow different because it's a different person in a different place or a different time. But no pain is pain, loss is loss. Understanding this brings compassion, experiencing this brings empathy. So while others are mired in the details and getting lost in the story line, I am seeing the bare bones of the situation. Understanding my experiences and others experiences and drives common to all people, conditioned and unconditioned brings a clear insight of reality into the nature of the problem at hand and being able to do so allows me to act or respond with exactly what is needed in the moment while others lost in the story want to know why David didn't chose another college, wonder how they met to further muddle the clarity of the situation etc etc. of course there are many facets and situations to life and this is why the first glimpse into reality or enlightenment is not the end but the beginning.

I still have a few fetters binding me in ignorance, but fortunately I am not ignorant to what they are and also have enough skill in direct application of practice to remove them. I have to admit, I am a lot like the blindass monk that said you will find me in the brothel or in the ale house. Is it right that I simply refuse to look into a few things that I don't want to see the reality of? Perhaps, perhaps not. But it allows me a foot in both worlds, one of austerity and one of indulgence but it is not as mindlessly deluded as it once was.

Happiness is a state of mind. One need not be rich or poor to be happy.

In the broader scheme of things, there really is no enlightenment. What's to enlighten, a pure soul with no limitations? But In the physical or human part of ourselves (where we hold our focus for now), enlightenment is simply seeing beyond our own bull# ... our beliefs, our stories, our perfected identities, our lies, our truths.

It's quite possible for enlightenment to occur and to remain in body, on Earth. Though it would be challenging existing here at this point of enlightenment. There are a number of folks, myself included, moving through this now. It's a difficult transformation that takes place naturally after the initial awakening and conscious choice to move beyond limitation.

It's not for the faint of heart because it rips you apart, bit by bit, lie by lie ... enlightenment rolls in in waves, wave after wave until your consciousness is free of limitation. And once you think you've released all you possibly can, well another wave comes in from some other lifetime you don't even remember, and pow, you're faced with more to release.

It's all about seeing who you are underneath all the aspects you've created through thousands of lifetimes.

And .... every human will eventually go through it, it's natural. Some choose to take longer and relish in the duality of this lovely planet.

i don't get it either. there's a reason we have a physical plane. separation and subjectivity give us a chance to learn something new. without it we are all just awareness being aware of itself for the sake of being aware of itself. this "plane" is fundamental to consciousness and every time i see someone preaching that we need denounce it i cringe a bit.

i think it just comes down to people getting a big head over becoming "spiritual" any time i hear these people speak the level of self righteousness is palpable.

a reply to: blujay

When one is in an altered state, and there is no "polarity imbalance" or "duality" then one "rides a wave" continually, and enlightenment is marketed as being a state of "bliss" - however, what I am attempting to do here, is to look at the definitions of the words themselves, and in that sense, there is duality in enlightenment for the fact that it assumes that some are "enlightened" and others are "not" - it makes a clear distinction between two kinds of states, this being an inherent duality.

I see things in a far more complex sense - I believe that we can look at our emotions and feelings like we look at electrical circuits, when one is out of balance, then, they will "oscillate" between different states, being energetically instable. If they have a well balanced body and mind, then, their systems run efficiently. The goal is to work on ones being, so that all positives balance all negatives, and when this happens, one can generate sufficient energy to avoid feeling things that are uncomfortable or unsavoury.

a reply to: AVoiceOfReason

Many like to say that this world is a prison when there are "negative" beings that create and feed on "duality" and some also like to say that it is a school when duality is a "program".

The answer is thus enlightenment and then "escape" to a better world.

This is a problem because the point is supposed to be that we can make the world a better place, and now we are supposed to escape it?

"Oh, lets become enlightened co-creators, only we have to escape the prison of Earth because for some strange reason we are unable to change it for the better."

originally posted by: SystemResistor
a reply to: blujay

there is duality in enlightenment for the fact that it assumes that some are "enlightened" and others are "not" - it makes a clear distinction between two kinds of states, this being an inherent duality.

I bolded the problem word. Inherent is "a thing in itself" a thing in itself would be beyond duality, for there to even be the possibility of enlightenment there must be an ignorance, for ignorance to exist there must be an enlightenment. They are both dependent upon each other, they both are dependent origination's of the other. The step outside of the two is the thing in itself, the primordial state before ignorance or enlightenment. There was non distinction between good and bad, because neither were known. It's like if I asked a cave man which is better a walkie talkie or a CB radio? Cave man would not know what the hell I was asking him, walkie talkies and CB's did not exist to him before I asked him about them. The cave man now knowing about walkie talkies and CB's has to experience thought about them and discern which is good and which is bad.

Before religion we did not make a distinction of good or evil, it just was and was not at the same time... the potential for either to arise was always there as soon as the concept of right/wrong, good/bad was born... and when one was born the other arose simultaneously. But they were always there waiting for a concept which is what they both depend on to exist, they both must exist together or become one but are inseparable in either case existing or not existing.

We were animals, without a conscience to our actions... as being right or wrong in the moral sense. But when the first person had the concept of: a good or bad, like Frankenstein fire bad! because it brought pain. With that idea of a good, and a bad, we developed a right, and a wrong or morals. There is no right or wrong way, we have just become conditioned or civilized by; the concept that there is a right, and a wrong way, or good, and bad, an easy way, and a hard way... all of those are synonyms branched from the same concept, a thought of duality, a separateness of distinctions, from something else. This is this, and that is that, and it spreads out, and out, and out, and becomes very complicated; when it is just: A&B that arose from a C and before the C? It just was: what it was, it neither existed or didn't exist.

We can attach to 1000's things on either side of the distinction line... call them good, call them bad, or anything thing else... it wont change it, in any way shape or form, only it's concept changes. I could call the sun, kitty kitty pow pow... people could laugh, scoff, scream, and yell "It's the sun you idiot!" Well whether it's called; sun, kitty kitty pow pow, or whatever else... it will not change what it does known or unknown will it? This is what Socrates was pointing at when he was asking people if they actually knew anything. Our whole house is built on top of concept after another concept, until we gain full experience of it and when that happens we realize we know absolutely nothing about it, but empty concepts and that personal experiences, and beliefs may vary.

originally posted by: SystemResistor
e.

Firslty, what is wrong with reincarnating on Earth?

Secondly, what is wrong with the physical senses?

Thridly, is living in a continuous state of bliss a constructive thing?

1) I don't think there is a problem with such a thing. The sort of problems I can foresee though would be ending up a repetitive cycle where you have 'graduated' from and yes I think good work could be done with such knowledge, but to put it lightly, what about yourself and your growth? I would think a series of experiences would add up to others figuring such a thing out while still on earth and educating themselves before moving on (maybe they would prefer it to another place to reincarnate if this happened).

I believe for knowledge to work, we must continue to grow and strengthen. I see no absolute future without repetition (history repeats itself - I don't want that!) if all things stay in one place. We need to expand our forefront and change our experiences. I would not give up hope though if I were to be subjected to the same place over and over each time I reincarnated - I would surely find a way to survive or moved my species/people/kind whatever, forward.

2) There is nothing wrong with the physical senses. I do think our senses are relative to what may need to be rather than what is. Our experiences matter, and I think we tread lightly for a reason. Rather than go full force without proper understanding, it is better to muddle in the primordial soup and expand on the proper way to learn instead of finding failure repeatedly.

I truly believe the human senses are capable of shedding light onto where we come from/what created us. If not for what we may use them for, then for some larger understanding I'm incapable of sustaining on my own.

3) I believe "Ignorance is bliss, to an extent." whereas I almost want to reverse it for what you stated. However, I have often felt sully because I felt I could remain in a state of awareness, or perpetual knowledge, this is likely because I feel alone. Without another to teach/teach me, learn from/share with, grow/refine circumstance, I feel I have no purpose. I think we are able to live in such a state [bliss] forever if we find it, we find it hard to accept, almost like it's causing insanity, to believe it can be achieved alone. I personally feel like just emoting with such a background of perpetual emotion is not enough. I seriously want people to have what I have, experience it for themselves yes, but be capable of obtaining what I have now - It may sound close minded but I say to myself "If I can now, why can they not?" How can one derive pleasure from seeing another out of the loop? One who feel inferior when I think of them not inferior? This path only seems to draw the same feeling towards myself, so either I'm not ready to move on, or I need to bring those along who are everything as I know we are all 'one'.

I draw from a mismatch of beliefs, I think you are all a figment, it's true you know. How about that? You are a construct, a test, my own test. I chose who I surround myself with, the activities that define me. I choose to see what my eyes of intent want to see and nothing else. I limit myself to only one view at a time and am headstrong against competing views. So is this life a visual, spacial, sensory expression of what your soul has grown to be? A sort of mirror?
Not all your desires get fulfilled in this existence but there is your intent and how you decide to view the world. Are we an embodiment of soul? Do we choose or is it a lesson so we can choose a path afterwards? Are all experiences valid, so are they wrong, right? Are there consequences, lasting effects? We don't know and due to that we dare to not care. Free reign to dominate, yes dominate. Me over you would be best, my knowledge over your ignorance suits my goals doesn't it. Yeeesss My wealth buys all, even those delicacies we all covet. Ahhh we are subject to desire are we not? Who is in control of desire? Is it something else to dominate, can it be used to dominate? So many ideas, must write them down...but not anyone can read them. Yeeeesss must keep secrets, hide developments and dominae with them.
So you want to be here sober? Are you taking this life seriously? Enjoy this life whenever it is possible man, enlightenment and bliss I have felt in the arms of a woman that I loved in the innocence of youth, that day is long gone.

Another interesting point is that enlightenment assumes that one is not perfect due to desires, and has to be enlightened in order to find himself again. Is this not similar to the concept of man being born with "sin"?

Apple:
Sin > Jesus

Duality:
Desire > Enlightenment

Are we just seeing the same pattern, is the doctrine no different to any other religion?

Again, as mentioned, it is the concept and its teachings that are in question, and how this concept is received by the general populace.

a reply to: SystemResistor

Another interesting point is that enlightenment assumes that one is not perfect due to desires, and has to be enlightened in order to find himself again. Is this not similar to the concept of man being born with "sin"?

The story of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden is the story of when the whole became two.
There is never ever really two. There is just wholeness but the whole seemed to separate itself and in doing so was banished from paradise. The one that feels divided from paradise is seeking paradise. It believes it is somewhere else but you never really left the Garden of Eden (the presence of God). You are ever 'present knowing' the 'present arising', maybe you have not realized this yet.

The present is all there is - the seer and seen are one.

originally posted by: SystemResistor

Again, as mentioned, it is the concept and its teachings that are in question, and how this concept is received by the general populace.

All ideas (concepts) are problematic.
What is there when there are no ideas about anything?

There is just this. What is 'this'? Not any thing in particular.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain

originally posted by: SystemResistor

Again, as mentioned, it is the concept and its teachings that are in question, and how this concept is received by the general populace.

All ideas (concepts) are problematic.
What is there when there are no ideas about anything?

There is just this. What is 'this'? Not any thing in particular.

I've heard it called the manure of experience. It sure becomes a very fertile ground for all sorts of idea's and concepts to grow doesn't it?

a reply to: SystemResistor
You're trying to understand something that has nothing to do with the mind, from the standpoint of the mind. It can be pondered and picked apart mentally 'till the end of time and never understood. But I see the puzzle you are playing with, it's fun to try to figure out. Good luck!