Restless Soma

Death (the tumbling force, public) => Wisdom => Topic started by: Definitive Journey on September 30, 2008, 06:13:16 PM

Title: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: Definitive Journey on September 30, 2008, 06:13:16 PM: “There is no path to enlightenment.
It lies in all directions at all times.
On the journey to enlightenment,
you create
and destroy
your own path
with every step.”

Jed McKenna
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: Michael on September 30, 2008, 08:27:43 PM: Good traditions, like Tibetan Buddhism, have a more sophisticated understanding.

Quote
There is no path to enlightenment.

This is both true and not true.

Not to perceive the paradox in this, I consider to be one of Krishnamurti's mistakes.

Tibetan Buddhism explains this best. There are two practices, which differ in name and exercises, but which it is well recognised are only two sides of the same coin.

On the one hand - it is all here right now all around us and always has been.
On the other hand you have to struggle along a path to arrive at that realisation.

It goes like this:

First, despite it all being there, here and now, people do not know that, and so it is a truth and a realisation that is not available to them. Thus it is plain arrogance and stupidity for these people to wander about claiming a realisation they don't possess.

Second, sane people begin the 'path to enlightenment' which has been laid down by many much wiser than us.

Third, after following the path to enlightenment sufficiently, they have a realisation - samadi. This realisation demonstrates to them in no uncertain terms that enlightenment has been theirs all along. That in fact the path was meaningless. They always existed in enlightenment, and it was only a trick of the eyes-mind which blocked that realisation.

Thus the paradox - we have to walk a long road to discover we didn't need to go anywhere.

However, in my view, that is not the end of the story - enlightenment is only the realisation of reality. There is further to go than that.

I should point out that the 'path to enlightenment' is not what I call the Path. The Path is the Walk of the Enlightened, not the road to it. But still, the road to it has to be a part of the Path. This involves a thousand year old debate in Hinduism, about whether the 'world' is not just delusion, but in fact contains within it a secret passageway, such that the 'world' can be utilised in a clever way to pass out of the delusion.

Where do I stand? I say, when you have experienced samadi, you can do and say what you please, but until then, follow the road laid out, which means: choose struggle over good and bad luck.

You know the saying that most people live within good or bad luck, but you can drop all that, by choosing a life of struggle, and discovering it is the most fabulous of joys. Life is like a muscle, it need to be exercised to be enjoyed.

If you have discovered the joy of developing a skill through to a very high degree of expertise, you won't need to be told these things.

You will know the difference between the joy of reaching the top of a mountain, and the joy of eating ice-cream. And you will also know all that striving and effort never really went anywhere - it was a pleasure unto itself!
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: Definitive Journey on October 01, 2008, 09:10:20 AM: ~

Good stuff, Michael.

I'll come back to this, as well.

I suppose being extremely busy is good job security...

z
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: Definitive Journey on October 02, 2008, 12:12:40 PM: Quote from: Michael on September 30, 2008, 08:27:43 PM

First, despite it all being there, here and now, people do no know that...

Quick question if I may....Was this line supposed to read, "First, despite it all being there, here and now, people do NOT know that..."?

I read this as people do NOT know, but as I went to reply, I noticed this is not what was said.

Thanks!

z
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: Michael on October 03, 2008, 09:02:44 AM: I meant not, but no is fine also
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: Definitive Journey on October 04, 2008, 11:50:37 AM: ~

Michael, great post, yet I’d like to add a few comments if I may…

Ah, ‘The Path’ and ‘The Work.’

Seems there’s always much discussion concerning these two. Seems the discussions on these topics always gets bogged down in semantics; ‘Walking The Path or Being the Path,’ ‘What Is the Work and How is it accomplished,’ etc., etc.

What occurred to me many years ago, but was hammered home by Tolle’s work, was this: When one is Present, in the Here and Now without Internal Dialogue, I AM the Path. The Work is also thus engaged, regardless of what The Work entails. It seems it’s the job of the thinking mind to change this scenario from Being the Path to Walking the Path. Similar to The Work. The thinking mind loves to speculate on what The Work is, How the Work is to be accomplished, etc., etc.

At times we are just Present, and post to one another on discussion groups. At other times we borrow the Present Moment of the Past to relate to what we are discussing, Here and Now. That’s fine as well. What seems to occur though, and when we really get our ‘tit in the ringer’ as we say, is when the thinking mind pulls us too much to the past or future and we get tangled in semantics.

Quote from: Michael on September 30, 2008, 08:27:43 PM

On the one hand - it is all here right now all around us and always has been.
On the other hand you have to struggle along a path to arrive at that realisation.

I would agree with this, but in my own personal experience as well as what I’ve viewed from most I converse with, your first point is almost always either left out completely or touched on very briefly. Your second point is always the bone of contention. I’ll even go so far as to say that within your own post, Michael, you’ve done this. A brief mention of the first point, then several lines concerning the Path, etc., etc. If you’ve managed to accomplish sufficiently this first point, yes!

To truly understand the first point you addressed, you have to be Present. Only at that point (AP position, etc., etc.,) can one Know that ‘it’s all here right now all around us and always has been.’ Without this ability to be Present, one’s ‘struggle along a path’ is an intellectual exercise; it’s the thinking path not Being the Path.

For me, this is what Tolle emphasizes in his works. It’s not surprising in that he’s dismissed by many; hey, it’s a shot to the intellect! Some are very intellectual, and heaven forbid one put that aside or move beyond it. This, or its touched on briefly, a bit of a realization, some conceptual thinking of what he mentions, then disregarded. Hey, no-one wants to do this! Being Present is hard work! It’s much more enjoyable to lolly-gag around in our thoughts.

This is the point I’m getting at, especially when I mention that there’s a difference between walking the path and being the path. I suppose I haven’t been clear as to my own thoughts on this (to others). When one is Present, one is ‘Being the Path.’ When one starts to think about it, not correct thinking but the thinking most of us do, the situation changes to ‘Walking the Path.’

Unless this first point you mention is addressed, and practiced to a sufficient level, the rest of what you mention concerning The Path just falls on deaf ears. It becomes an intellectual exercise.

z
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: daphne on October 04, 2008, 05:47:19 PM: What occurs to me is that the only ones who get "bogged down in semantics" are the ones who constantly talk about semantics! For me its quite simple.. whether I walk the path or am the path.. same thing really.. admittedly though it does provide for much discussion! :)

Without any internal dialogue we are no-thing, no path and no walking to question (my opinion of course! - and not necessarily bad. We are however 'here' experientially.. for what? Happy vegetables!
Mind you.. I recently had a walk in a rain forest... vegetation survival there was amazingly violent! Had never seen a 'strangler fig' before.. wonder what it's internal dialogue was all about! "Feed me"!! :D

Perhaps the work is the path? The work of becoming 'conscious'? perhaps 'conscious' is really what is meant by 'enlightened'?

Zam... ever wondered whether you were perhaps an intellectual in disguise? :) or am I perhaps projecting here.. yet again ::)

Personally, I find Tolle too much in the 'feel good' category of 'self-help'.. good psychology there, and it has it's place in the manner of things, though I don't know about it being 'spiritual', but then.. I have a different semantic of self-help and spiritual. and I also like 'thinking' about it! ;)
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: daphne on October 04, 2008, 05:47:58 PM: I dig the smilies!!
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: Definitive Journey on October 04, 2008, 06:33:20 PM: ~

Hi Daph!

Great comments, will get back to you on this with a bit more depth tomorrow. Ang and I are preparing for a fire ceremony that shall last into the night; drumming, rattles, dancing, the works! Celebrate we will!

Zam

P.S. Oh, you are quite correct, I'm a hopeless intellectualizer! I'm learning, understanding and experiencing more and more though!
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: Definitive Journey on October 05, 2008, 05:09:54 PM: ~

Quote from: daphne on October 04, 2008, 05:47:19 PM
What occurs to me is that the only ones who get "bogged down in semantics" are the ones who constantly talk about semantics!

Join the club then! (Since you felt the need to comment on this dirty little “S” word!) Hmm….well, it seems many who discuss anything, (Shamanism discussions, Spirituality, Aikido, etc., etc.,) are going to 'get into' semantics.

Quote from: daphne on October 04, 2008, 05:47:19 PM
For me its quite simple.. whether I walk the path or am the path.. same thing really.. admittedly though it does provide for much discussion! :)

Right on. I beg to differ, but maybe it's just semantics, eh? ::)

Quote from: daphne on October 04, 2008, 05:47:19 PM
Without any internal dialogue we are no-thing, no path and no walking to question (my opinion of course! - and not necessarily bad. We are however 'here' experientially.. for what? Happy vegetables!

I’m unsure about this. I was following a link the other day, and arrived at a site that was speaking of some bush peoples who resided in south Africa. It spoke of the fact that they had no concept of ‘time,’ and to me, time and the ID are intimately related. They seem to be getting along right fine.

Quote from: daphne on October 04, 2008, 05:47:19 PM
Mind you.. I recently had a walk in a rain forest... vegetation survival there was amazingly violent! Had never seen a 'strangler fig' before.. wonder what it's internal dialogue was all about! "Feed me"!! :D

I suppose that's is better than, "Eat me, eat me!" I'll, um, well, just leave that alone....

Quote from: daphne on October 04, 2008, 05:47:19 PM
Perhaps the work is the path? The work of becoming 'conscious'? perhaps 'conscious' is really what is meant by 'enlightened'?

Perhaps! Nah, not perhaps. It's all just semantics! :P

Quote from: daphne on October 04, 2008, 05:47:19 PM
Zam... ever wondered whether you were perhaps an intellectual in disguise? :) or am I perhaps projecting here.. yet again ::)

Gracious sakes Daph! Are you projecting yet again? That's ok. Just don't project 'yet another way,' that's frowned upon. Is being an intellectual as asset or a liability? Both? Ugh....the Semantics, the Semantics!

Quote from: daphne on October 04, 2008, 05:47:19 PM
Personally, I find Tolle too much in the 'feel good' category of 'self-help'.. good psychology there, and it has it's place in the manner of things, though I don't know about it being 'spiritual', but then.. I have a different semantic of self-help and spiritual. and I also like 'thinking' about it! ;)

"Feel good?" Like Dr. Feelgood? Hehehehehe.......I've always loved that phrase; "S/he's just a bit to 'feel good' for my taste."

What's your difference between self help and spiritual? Curious Dr. Feelgoods want to know!

But then again, it could just be Semantics! ;)

z
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: ≈*≈ on October 05, 2008, 08:36:09 PM: Quote from: daphne on October 04, 2008, 05:47:19 PM

Personally, I find Tolle too much in the 'feel good' category of 'self-help'.. good psychology there, and it has it's place in the manner of things, though I don't know about it being 'spiritual', but then.. I have a different semantic of self-help and spiritual. and I also like 'thinking' about it! ;)

Daph, which of Tolle's works have you read?
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: daphne on October 05, 2008, 10:04:23 PM: Quote from: Panthera on October 05, 2008, 08:36:09 PM
Daph, which of Tolle's works have you read?

Hi Ang! The Power of Now. Was first when I heard of him (if I recall right). I have not read A New Earth other than bits and pieces here and there. I also enjoy reading interviews of the authors (and also listening - utube: the modern mecca!! :D ) Sometimes quite a bit more of the author comes through in those. Here is an interesting one with Tolle. Enjoy! :)

http://www.wie.org/j18/tolle.asp?page=1 (http://www.wie.org/j18/tolle.asp?page=1)

I also enjoyed reading Conversations with God (Neale Donald Walsh) the first book. After that the others he wrote seemed rather the same. With this one, I both read and listened to it on tape too. I found that an interesting expereince - visual versus auditory. I found that parts I 'heard' I had missed 'seeing', and vice-versa.
The Celstine Prophecy was another, great the first time, though rather lacking in ithose that came after. Thats just me, Ang.
Another good author I enjoyed in the same genre is Deepak Chapra.

In a way, it is good that there are many different authors, since very often the style of a particular book is also what draws one to read it. For eg.. I really can't stand Gary Zuckov's 'style' of writing - lol - thank god for diversity eh!?! :P
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: daphne on October 05, 2008, 10:34:05 PM: Quote from: Quantum of Solace on October 05, 2008, 05:09:54 PM
~

Join the club then! (Since you felt the need to comment on this dirty little “S” word!) Hmm….well, it seems many who discuss anything, (Shamanism discussions, Spirituality, Aikido, etc., etc.,) are going to 'get into' semantics.
Not always, Zam. Sometimes its not semantics. Depends really on whether one 'uses' semantics to make a point, or whether there is a discernable difference in meaning. :)
Quote
Right on. I beg to differ, but maybe it's just semantics, eh? ::)
No, not just semantics. To some there is a difference, to others there isn't. The point is what is it personally to the one talking? In this example, for me there was no difference. For you there is. So that gives us something we have learned about each other.
Quote
I’m unsure about this. I was following a link the other day, and arrived at a site that was speaking of some bush peoples who resided in south Africa. It spoke of the fact that they had no concept of ‘time,’ and to me, time and the ID are intimately related. They seem to be getting along right fine.
If it was about the Kalahari Bushman, they do have a concept of time; its just that it is different to our western concept of time. At its most 'basic', 'time' is a sense of movement. They have that, in the seasons that come and go, and the people that birth and die.
For me, the ID is more than just the thoughts we are aware of fleeting through our minds. I sometimes think we have taken the concept of ID as a hindrance too literal. Without some sort of ID, the bushman would not survive.

Would you expand on "time and the ID are intimately related"?
Quote
I suppose that's is better than, "Eat me, eat me!" I'll, um, well, just leave that alone....
Yes ;)

Quote
Perhaps! Nah, not perhaps. It's all just semantics! :P
Maybe, maybe not.
Quote
Gracious sakes Daph! Are you projecting yet again? That's ok. Just don't project 'yet another way,' that's frowned upon. Is being an intellectual as asset or a liability? Both? Ugh....the Semantics, the Semantics!
Don't tire yourself with all that semantics, zam!
If we take some spiritual masters as example.. its all projection anyway! lol
Quote
"Feel good?" Like Dr. Feelgood? Hehehehehe.......I've always loved that phrase; "S/he's just a bit to 'feel good' for my taste."

What's your difference between self help and spiritual? Curious Dr. Feelgoods want to know!

The operative word in my post on this was "personally". For me the self-help feel good is something that would reinforce the positive feelings of 'goodness'. It is to do with our psychological health and well being and interactions with others and our environment. Often we find ourselves in agreement with what is said and it brings understanding and helps put in perspective, "relationship".

Spiritual is what effects a change, something that I can point at within myself and actually experience the change within myself. It may not necessarily be what is spiritual to another. Thats why 'judgment' is truly a waste of energy and time.

To give you an example.. years ago I read a book called Earth: The Only Planet of Choice. Was a channelled book.. can't remember by whom. Anyways.. while reading this book, there were places that I felt anything but "feel good" in it. I persevered (instead of throwing the book away) and through that, with what we call doing The Work ( ;) ) Something was 'changed' within me. That which had previously bothered me (to put it mildly), no longer did. Genuinely no longer did. For me, that reading was spiritual - ie, it effected a 'change' in me.
Quote
But then again, it could just be Semantics! ;)

z

[/quote]
Nope, to me not "just" semantics. Was actually transformational. :)
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: Definitive Journey on October 06, 2008, 08:44:56 AM: ~

Great discussion Daph! Thank you, again!

Any points that I addressed previously, I'm sure, were lost in the flux of my drippy sarcasm.

I'll take another wack at it later on, as you make some great points and asked of me a few questions.

I've now got to skip off to work, humming Pink Floyds song, "Comfortably Numb." :D

z
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: ≈*≈ on October 06, 2008, 08:46:28 AM: Thanks Daph! :)

Quote from: daphne on October 05, 2008, 10:04:23 PM

... I also enjoy reading interviews of the authors (and also listening - utube: the modern mecca!! :D ) Sometimes quite a bit more of the author comes through in those.

I enjoy those, as well ... have you checked out Oprah's Souls Series ... there are a couple of goodies on that:

http://www.oprah.com/article/spirit/inspiration/pkgoprahssoulserieswebcast/20080512_oaf_oss_archive

Quote from: daphne on October 05, 2008, 10:04:23 PM
In a way, it is good that there are many different authors, since very often the style of a particular book is also what draws one to read it. For eg.. I really can't stand Gary Zuckov's 'style' of writing - lol - thank god for diversity eh!?! :P

Yes ... there are a few that I try to read and can't get through the first 10 pages ... heh! But, yes ... diversity is a great thing! I'm just beginning Star Woman, by Lynn Andrews. Have you ever read any of her books?
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: daphne on October 07, 2008, 08:28:58 AM: Quote from: Panthera on October 06, 2008, 08:46:28 AM
Thanks Daph! :)

I enjoy those, as well ... have you checked out Oprah's Souls Series ... there are a couple of goodies on that:

I have just finished reading Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion... was fascinating!
I haven't watched Oprah in some time. I wonder if she ever had Richard Dawkins on her show...

Quote
Yes ... there are a few that I try to read and can't get through the first 10 pages ... heh! But, yes ... diversity is a great thing! I'm just beginning Star Woman, by Lynn Andrews. Have you ever read any of her books?

I read some Lynn Andrews some years ago. Had a couple of friends who were keen on her stuff at the time. It was ok, though not really what I was into at the time.
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: Definitive Journey on October 07, 2008, 08:43:04 AM: ~

Quote from: daphne on October 05, 2008, 10:34:05 PM
Sometimes its not semantics. Depends really on whether one 'uses' semantics to make a point, or whether there is a discernable difference in meaning.

Now we're getting somewhere! (Where that is, I have no idea!) Agree with ya', and 'twas the point all along, lost somewhere in the sarcasm. ;)

Quote from: daphne on October 05, 2008, 10:34:05 PM
If it was about the Kalahari Bushman, they do have a concept of time; its just that it is different to our western concept of time. At its most 'basic', 'time' is a sense of movement. They have that, in the seasons that come and go, and the people that birth and die.
For me, the ID is more than just the thoughts we are aware of fleeting through our minds. I sometimes think we have taken the concept of ID as a hindrance too literal. Without some sort of ID, the bushman would not survive.

You know, I can't find that darned link again. Can you expand on, 'time is a sense of movement?' I have an inkling on this, but would like to know if we're discussing the same idea's and concepts ;)

Yea, the ID is a big topic. Some refer to the mind, some say thought, some say ego, bla, bla, bla ;) There's a meaning of each, but won't get into that here. Concerning the ID as a hindrance, that's tricky. If one is using the mind as a tool, using it correctly, using it in balance with everything one is do-ing, then no hinderance needed. What I'm specifically discussing is ego. ...and one reason I use the words ID and ego interchangably is that what I see is the incorrect use of the mind, and mostly ego. (Again, myself as well here. I'm not excluded in any way!)

Quote from: daphne on October 05, 2008, 10:34:05 PM
Would you expand on "time and the ID are intimately related"?

Like I mentioned above, more specifically the ego as opposed to the internal dialogue.

Time is the fuel for the Ego. The stronger the ego, the more time runs your life. Most every thought you think is then concerned with past or future, and you sense of self depends on the past for your identity and on the future for its fulfillment.

Now again, this is internal time, not the external time. We already discussed that somewhere; The New Earth thread, if memory serves me correctly.

z
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: ≈*≈ on October 07, 2008, 05:18:47 PM: Quote from: daphne on October 07, 2008, 08:28:58 AM
I have just finished reading Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion... was fascinating!
I haven't watched Oprah in some time. I wonder if she ever had Richard Dawkins on her show...

I just watched one of his speeches at Berkeley,CA. I like his message :) ... I don't know if he's ever been on Oprah, would be interesting to watch her interview him, though.

So what other books have sparked that flame inside you, or fascinated you (or, anyone else if you all would like to share) ? :)
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: littlefeather on October 07, 2008, 09:13:52 PM: Quote from: daphne on October 05, 2008, 10:04:23 PM
I really can't stand Gary Zuckov's 'style' of writing - lol - thank god for diversity eh!?! :P

For me, Gary Zukav is one of those writers like you mentioned that the first book is good and the rest, not-so-god. I really liked the first book I read of his, (don't know if it was his actual first book written though) The Seat of the Soul, came at a perfect time for me, but anything else of his I have read since then, just doesn't seem to have the same ring to it, the same effect. I feel the same way about the Prophecies as well. But I do like the movie even though it doesn't nearly compare to the book.

So I'm wondering, is it that the succeeding books aren't as good, or maybe we've changed a bit (spiritually) because of and/or since reading the first one? Possibly a little of both.

Quote
Personally, I find Tolle too much in the 'feel good' category of 'self-help'.. good psychology there, and it has it's place in the manner of things, though I don't know about it being 'spiritual', but then..

I do kinda agree with you on the Tolle stuff. It feels as though something is missing to me. I can't quite put my finger on it, but I find him almost dry, or oversimplifying perhaps.

I have been reading a lot of Ken Wilber lately and while I do find the need to wade thru a lot of extra stuff, he has some good ideas and an interesting way of presenting them, too.
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: Michael on October 08, 2008, 03:04:16 AM: Quote from: Quantum of Solace on October 04, 2008, 11:50:37 AM
Unless this first point you mention is addressed, and practiced to a sufficient level, the rest of what you mention concerning The Path just falls on deaf ears. It becomes an intellectual exercise.

I will get back to this subject, but just for now:

It's not an issue of semantics for me. I use words to describe some things I do.

It is nice to get the words right for the moment, but the moments keeps changing.

I do not agree with your above statement. That is not how I see the two approaches.

You are speaking about those who choose to only think about spiritual matters. That has nothing to do with what I am talking about. If you only think about these things, then you haven't begun, and you are on no path at all.

Thinking about these practices and their consequences is important. We have arrived at that juncture - we are no longer on the road of our earlier predecessors who engaged directly with the work, and never availed themselves of the 'relief' that accompanies the participation of the mind. I speak of 'relief' in its perspective terminology.

It does have something of value to offer in this whole process.

I will get to this later, but the two methods, are the path of samadhi and the path to samadhi.

Both involve much work, except it would be inappropriate to describe the first one as 'work'.

Just on Presence: I'm unsure to the extent of Tolle's definition of this term., except I know he applies the concept of immediate awareness to it - ie. 'being present'.

It has another meaning. People who realise the implication of their presence. This is beyond 'being present', it means that when one is present in any situation, one brings one's power and one's obligation. When DJ said that CC could be 'shifted' by DJ's mere presence, he was not just speaking about his 'being in the moment', although that is a part of it. He was referring to his personal power - his shakti. But that is too big a topic for this space.
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: littlefeather on October 08, 2008, 06:45:40 AM: Quote from: Michael on October 08, 2008, 03:04:16 AM

It is nice to get the words right for the moment, but the moments keeps changing.

:)
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: daphne on October 08, 2008, 07:24:31 AM: Quote from: Quantum of Solace on October 07, 2008, 08:43:04 AM
Can you expand on, 'time is a sense of movement?' I have an inkling on this, but would like to know if we're discussing the same idea's and concepts ;)

I don't know whether we discussing the same ideas and concepts; can really only discuss from my own perspective, and I have found that 'understanding' of ideas and concepts is very tied up with my own experiences of those same ideas and concepts. When it comes to 'experiences', we tend to interpret them so they have meaning to ourself, though not necessarily to anyone else.. hence all the 'discussions' that often lead to conflict. :) In those cases, I have found that the conflict is my own, when different meaning is applied to my previous understanding in the attempt to come to some new understanding.

With 'time is a sense of movement', whether it is 'internal' time, or 'external' time, I find it difficult to differentiate. Having co-opted the "time is an illusion" cliche, I find myself not really understanding that. It sounds nice :) but what does it really mean, to me? My mental make-up is to take something and explore it to my satisfaction. Right now, 'time' to me is a sense of movement. I am aware of 'time' whether it is within the memory of one thought moving to another, or the digestion of my food and subsequent expulsion of same. Saying "time is an
illusion' doesn't really help me at the moment; maybe after my explorations, it will.

For me, it is a sort of awareness, time. The only time I am not aware of time, I am really not aware of anything. And yet, paradoxically, when I am aware and present, I am also not aware of time; of time 'passing' that is; though I am aware of movement, the rhythm of life.
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: daphne on October 08, 2008, 07:48:02 AM: Quote from: Quantum of Solace on October 07, 2008, 08:43:04 AM

What I'm specifically discussing is ego. ...and one reason I use the words ID and ego interchangably is that what I see is the incorrect use of the mind, and mostly ego. (Again, myself as well here. I'm not excluded in any way!)

Like I mentioned above, more specifically the ego as opposed to the internal dialogue.
There is a problem with talking about 'ego' (and 'mind'). Without 'ego' you would not be able to discuss ego with me! Usually, what we mean when we talk about ego is all the negative stuff attached to ego. And so we spend fruitless time :D not to mention semantics :D in the distraction of 'ego'.

Perhaps less concern about ego?
Quote
Time is the fuel for the Ego. The stronger the ego, the more time runs your life. Most every thought you think is then concerned with past or future, and you sense of self depends on the past for your identity and on the future for its fulfillment.

"Time is the fuel for the Ego".. sounds fancy!
Personally I believe in a strong ego; it is the part (so to speak) of me that interacts. The ego could also be called the self - depends on usage of words and meaning. Now whether that is the real self, or false self or any other particular self, lol, could get very bogged down in all those selfs!! Usually though, what we mean by 'ego' is in the applying of a derogatory term to someone else! :P

Our sense of identity depends on many things; ego included. Even calling ourselves 'spiritual beings having a human experience' is an identity we have fostered.
Our brain has evolved to allow us a perception of past and future. When we deride that, what we are actually saying is that the human being has devolved and not evolved (and there are a number of theories on that too!!) With our sense of self 'depending on the past for your identity and on the future for its fulfillment.' - what we are actually saying is that our sense of self is linked to memory. Future is as much 'memory' as is past (taking the other thing - 'time is an illusion' into account - heh)
Well yes.. I see sense of self linked to memory - without that I do not see we would have a sense of self. If we were 'reborn' literally every moment - the blinking in and out of existence - there would be no continuity of 'self' (false, real, or otherwise) So.. we need an ego to even be aware of that!

What do you see as the "incorrect use of the mind'?
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: daphne on October 08, 2008, 07:50:53 AM: Quote from: Panthera on October 07, 2008, 05:18:47 PM

So what other books have sparked that flame inside you, or fascinated you (or, anyone else if you all would like to share) ? :)

I've forgotten most of them.. usually its the current book I'm reading. :)
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: daphne on October 08, 2008, 08:02:56 AM: Quote from: littlefeather on October 07, 2008, 09:13:52 PM

So I'm wondering, is it that the succeeding books aren't as good, or maybe we've changed a bit (spiritually) because of and/or since reading the first one? Possibly a little of both.

I've wondered the same thing. Sometimes I think that it's because the actual 'message'.. if there is one, is often received in the first experience of reading. Thereafter its often repetitious. Some authors manage not to repeat - ie different facets are presented in the different books. Others repeat the same thing. I suppose a lot depends on what one gets out of the reading.

Quote
I do kinda agree with you on the Tolle stuff. It feels as though something is missing to me. I can't quite put my finger on it, but I find him almost dry, or oversimplifying perhaps.
Well.. my finger is quite clear; he is dry to me and kind of happy clappy. Not enough 'meat' for me.. so to speak - I like works that make me think and figure out for myself (mea culpa projection me!) :D
Quote
I have been reading a lot of Ken Wilber lately and while I do find the need to wade thru a lot of extra stuff, he has some good ideas and an interesting way of presenting them, too.
Yes. He's rather 'way out there'! I enjoy that kind of stuff!
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: Michael on October 08, 2008, 09:32:27 AM: Moving to the details.

The word ‘enlightenment’ now conjures up an area of personal investment - it is a chess piece in the game of thinking about other people. This is a big investment, and thus enlightenment becomes a dispute. To win a point.

Over on the other side, there are two samadhis. The big samadhi and the little samadhi.

Leaving the big one aside as it needs no introduction. Little samadhis are tasters.

The two approaches: the path of samadhi, and the path to samadhi.

In the path of samadhi, we employ these little samadhis. You first have to have one, and recognise it. They are moments of complete inner suspension - no thoughts and no attitude.

They say you either understand this immediately, or you do the path to samadhi.

Stop a moment, and think, is their anyone you dislike?

Yes?
Then your not ready for the 'path of' samadhi. Apply yourself to the ‘path to’.

Actually that’s not really how it works. What happens first is that we don’t have a clue. All we can do in that case is to take the ‘path to’. We have no option. Once we have experienced the first realisation, that by suspending thoughts and attitude, the world changes. This is little samadhi. We know about it, we just have to do it.

At that point we practice both the path of and the path to. We don’t give up the path to, although many do - some don’t need it, and others forget what happened. It’s not recommended. Best to practice both.

The path of: here is an example. At any moment in your day, but best when going for a walk on your own. Switch off your mind and feel the world directly - unfiltered. No thoughts of self or others - use your eyes and ears and take it all in, while being aware that you are alive. That’s pretty much how it goes, except there are forceful or gentle methods to switching off.

The path to: examples. The best example is the practice of acting for no reason. Go into the yard and move stones from one area into a pile, then move them back from the pile to the original area - try to get it back exactly as it was originally. Relax and get into it - watch each stone carefully. Say hello to each of them - feel how heavy each is. Pause often and just gaze at the stones.

Here’s another. Buy a packet of crisps, and crunch them all up into tiny pieces before you open the pack. Then eat one tiny piece at a time.

Another - count down from 1000, slowly, in your own mind.

There are thousands of exercises to be explored on the path to. It really is a lot of fun, and the only reason anyone who knows these exercises doesn’t do them is because they lack spunk - they are lazy and weak.
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: littlefeather on October 08, 2008, 11:33:45 AM: Quote from: daphne on October 08, 2008, 08:02:56 AM

Well.. my finger is quite clear; he is dry to me and kind of happy clappy. Not enough 'meat' for me.. so to speak - I like works that make me think and figure out for myself (mea culpa projection me!)

LOL
Dry and happy clappy... that's a hilarious finger you've got there.D I guess I like that, too. Rather than tell me how it is, I like a book to force me to figure it out for myself. One reason I love don Juan so so much!

Quote

:DYes. He's rather 'way out there'! I enjoy that kind of stuff!

Yeah he is way out there isn't he? Kinda whacky, but I love the way he writes!

I have a good snippet of one of his chapters on the shadow, makes some good points, I even sent it to my mom and she liked it!
8) :o
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: ≈*≈ on December 08, 2008, 01:05:25 AM: I've been reading Jed McKenna's books and working on an exercise he names Spiritual Autolysis ... it's similar to Recapitulation, but you write, and write, and write ... (I'll post some examples in another thread) Anyway, I found this article he wrote ... I think it may be in one of the books as well. He's all about "the truth" ... beliefs are just that, beliefs, not even remotely related to truth. Most "beliefs" boil down to nothing, zero, nada ....

... imagine how much personal power you could harness, by clearing all that so-called "spiritual" attachment out of your attic, and focusing on really Seeing. Anyway ....

"Being critical of Buddhism isn’t easy.

Buddhism is the most likable of the major religions, and Buddhists are the perennial good guys of modern spirituality. Beautiful traditions, lovely architecture, inspiring statuary, ancient history, the Dalai Lama — what’s not to like?

Everything about Buddhsim is just so… nice. No fatwahs or jihads, no inquisitions or crusades, no terrorists or pederasts, just nice people being nice. In fact, Buddhism means niceness. Nice-ism.

At least, it should.

Buddha means Awakened One, so Buddhism can be taken to mean Awake-ism. Awakism. It would therefore be natural to think that if you were looking to wake up, then Buddhism, i.e., Awakism, would be the place to look.

::: The Light is Better Over Here

Such thinking, however, would reveal a dangerous lack of respect for the opposition. Maya, goddess of delusion, has been doing her job with supreme mastery since the first spark of self-awareness flickered in some chimp’s noggin, and the idea that the neophyte truth-seeker can just sign up with the Buddhists, read some books, embrace some new concepts and slam her to the mat might be a bit on the naive side.

On the other hand, why not? How’d this get so turned around? It’s just truth. Shouldn’t truth be, like, the simplest thing? Shouldn’t someone who wants to find something as ubiquitous as truth be able to do so? And here’s this venerable organization supposedly dedicated to just that very thing, even named for it, so what’s the problem?

::: Why doesn’t Buddhism produce Buddhas?

The problem arises from the fact that Buddhists, like everyone else, insist on reconciling the irreconcilable. They don’t just want to awaken to the true, they also want to make sense of the untrue. They want to have their cake and eat it too, so they end up with nonsensical theories, divergent schools, sagacious doubletalk, and zero Buddhas.

Typical of Buddhist insistence on reconciling the irreconcilable is the concept of Two Truths, a poignant two-word joke they don’t seem to get, and yet this sort of perversely irrational thinking is at the very heart of the failed search for truth. We don’t want truth, we want a particular truth; one that doesn’t threaten ego, one that doesn’t exist. We insist on a truth that makes sense given what we know, not knowing that we don’t know anything.

Nothing about Buddhism is more revealing than the Four Noble Truths which, not being true, are of pretty dubious nobility. They form the basis of Buddhism, so it’s clear from the outset that the Buddhists have whipped up a proprietary version of truth shaped more by market forces than any particular concern for the less consumer-friendly, albeit true, truth.

Yes, Buddhism may be spiritually filling, even nourishing, but insofar as truth is concerned, it’s junkfood. You can eat it every day of your life and die exactly as Awakened as the day you signed up.

::: Bait & Switch

Buddhism is a classic bait-and-switch operation. We’re attracted by the enlightenment in the window, but as soon as we’re in the door they start steering us over to the compassion aisle. Buddhists could be honest and change their name to Compassionism, but who wants that?

There’s the rub. They can’t sell compassion and they can’t deliver enlightenment.

This untruth-in-advertising is the kind of game you have to play if you want to stay successful in a business where the customer is always wrong. You can either go out of business honestly, or thrive by giving the people what they want. What they say they want and what they really want, though, are two very different things.

::: Me Me Me

To the outside observer, much of Buddhist knowledge and practice seems focused on spiritual self-improvement. This, too, is hard to speak against… except within the context of awakening from delusion. Then it’s easy.

There is no such thing as true self, so any pursuit geared toward its aggrandizement, betterment, upliftment, elevation, evolution, glorification, salvation, etc, is utter folly. How much more so any endeavor undertaken merely to increase one’s own happiness or contentment or, I’m embarrassed to even say it, bliss?

Self is ego and ego is the realm of the dreamstate. If you want to break free of the dreamstate, you must break free of self, not stroke it to make it purr or groom it for some imagined brighter future.

::: Maya’s House of Enlightenment

The trick with being critical of so esteemed and beloved an institution is not to get dragged down into the morass of details and debate. It’s very simple: If Buddhism is about enlightenment, people should be getting enlightened. If it’s not about enlightenment, they should change the sign.

Of course, Buddhism isn’t completely unique in its survival tactics. This same gulf between promise and performance is found in all systems of human spirituality. We’re looking at it in Buddhism because that’s where it’s most pronounced. No disrespect to the Buddha is intended. If there was a Buddha and he was enlightened, then it’s Buddhism that insults his memory, not healthy skepticism. Blame the naked emperor’s retinue of tailors and lickspittles, not the boy who merely states the obvious.

Buddhism is arguably the most elevated of man’s great belief systems. If you want to enjoy the many valuable benefits it has to offer, then I wouldn’t presume to utter a syllable against it. But if you want to escape from the clutches of Maya, then I suggest you take a very close look at the serene face on all those golden statues to see if it isn’t really hers."

-Jed McKenna
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: ≈*≈ on December 12, 2008, 02:33:58 PM: Quote from: zenandnow on December 08, 2008, 10:01:43 AM
People tend to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Buddism is about awakening. Christianity is about becoming Christ Consciousness.

This is not what peopl talk about though. Itis not what people write books on either. It is not what they talk about in church. It doesn't even matter if we have in our own personal inventory ALL that the churches/Buddhists talked about, what it meant, and what they called it...because none of it matters to the end goal.

"Getting" what Buddha did..."getting" Jesus did...*that* is what it is about. To do that people need to look beyond the words and NOT make it mean something it doesn't mean.

Buddha was a guy describing his experience as it occured for him. Jesus was a guy describing his experience as it occurred for him.

I am infinitely more attracted, by nature, to people describing their actually experience as it occurs for them rather than the words they use...and rather than all the people describing the people describing their actual experience...or describing how another described their experience. It is just too removed...loses life...loses that *umphf* that makes it alive.

The more removed things get...the less "aliveness" we feel. Just an observation. Bringing it forward...saying notice.

If you can't see past all the BS of the church and "get" what Jesus is saying... or past the Buddhism to "get" what Buddha did...then ya ain't going to get it through ANY subsequent books, methods, or ways. McKenna got it...not because he read other's books...he got it because he looked at what occured. You can't get it from Mckenna's book if you can't get it directly. The universe is right here, touching you at literally every point of contact...and it is telling you everything you ever needed to know.

Love you.

This has always fired up my questioning nature ... has anyone here, anywhere, read any books by Jesus or Buddha? Or are we to just "have faith", or "believe" that all of those disciples and monks were channeling these "great" beings? Just something we might want to toss around.
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: littlefeather on December 12, 2008, 02:46:56 PM: Quote from: Panthera on December 12, 2008, 02:33:58 PM
This has always fired up my questioning nature ... has anyone here, anywhere, read any books by Jesus or Buddha?

Nope, haven't read a word by either one of them. I have, though had a few convos with JC, in dreaming and visions. Enlightening, as you may expect. ;)
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: ≈*≈ on December 12, 2008, 03:15:45 PM: Quote from: Valle on December 12, 2008, 02:46:56 PM
Nope, haven't read a word by either one of them. I have, though had a few convos with JC, in dreaming and visions. Enlightening, as you may expect. ;)

hey ... I have an interesting story...
Yesterday a guy from the power company, John, came to my house to do an overall check of my AC/Heating system to determine why I was paying out the nose on my power bills. Anyway ... he was a very nice older gentleman, very thorough. He found the problem and stayed there until I could get the project manager (the HOA sued the builder and they're doing some repairs in our complex) to my house .... and they repaired it right there and then! I was definitely feeling the "flow". Then, as he left, he said, "So you Know the Lord." I was a little stunned, until I remembered the table in our dining room with the sacred heart candle, homemade rosary, dead pet pics, candles, and dried up palm leaves, which I'm sure was what he was referring to. I said, "Yes, I Know the Lord."

So ... "you Know the Lord" as well! ;)

:-*
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: Jaharkta on December 12, 2008, 07:02:57 PM: Quote from: Panthera on December 12, 2008, 02:33:58 PM
This has always fired up my questioning nature ... has anyone here, anywhere, read any books by Jesus or Buddha? Or are we to just "have faith", or "believe" that all of those disciples and monks were channeling these "great" beings? Just something we might want to toss around.

I do think it's possible to channel great beings ... but it is rare.
A Course In Miracles is allegedly channeling someone who almost comes out and says he is Jesus, but leaves a margin for the imagination. Something purportedly named "Raphael" (the Archangel) used to come through in automatic writing I did years and years ago, but I still think that was some liar -- or self-delusion.

As for the New Testament, I read it for the first and last time in my late 20's/early 30's, with an occasional periodic return to Revelations since. I was astonished at how little Jesus was actually quoted in the NT. When you look at the editions who red-letter actual quotations by him, it gets driven home quickly. Not to mention how few of his years are highlighted. It's a disappointing text that way, and I can only think that what actually happened, was taught, and was stated-as-precepts got lost in some political shuffle.

So, not only do I agree with your point, that one must rely on the 'word' of others/intermediaries, but observe that even the 'sanctioned' text has very little content.

Quote from: Panthera on December 12, 2008, 03:15:45 PM
hey ... I have an interesting story...
Yesterday a guy from the power company, John, came to my house to do an overall check of my AC/Heating system to determine why I was paying out the nose on my power bills. Anyway ... he was a very nice older gentleman, very thorough. He found the problem and stayed there until I could get the project manager (the HOA sued the builder and they're doing some repairs in our complex) to my house .... and they repaired it right there and then! I was definitely feeling the "flow". Then, as he left, he said, "So you Know the Lord." I was a little stunned, until I remembered the table in our dining room with the sacred heart candle, homemade rosary, dead pet pics, candles, and dried up palm leaves, which I'm sure was what he was referring to. I said, "Yes, I Know the Lord."

So ... "you Know the Lord" as well! ;)

:-*

That's a great story, A! :)
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: Definitive Journey on December 14, 2008, 01:41:39 PM: ~

Quote from: Panthera on December 08, 2008, 01:05:25 AM

"Being critical of Buddhism isn’t easy.

Heh.

I was scanning through Jed's first book looking for something and found a bit more concerning thoughts on Buddha.

I changed his work around a bit to fit the Toltec belief system, as over on my list there are just some die hard Toltecs.

We'll see how well that goes over....

<<<chuckles>>>

~

>>> "...as I think a don Juan was about, also." <<<

Why? Why? Why?

Anyone familiar with the story of Buddha standing alongside the road?

Goes something like, "If you see Buddha standing alongside the road, kill him."

Anyone familiar with this?

Well, let's just change the name. "If you see don Juan or don Genero or Silvio Manuel or any other metaphorical or analogical name along side of the road, kill them."

Make sense?

"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Seek what they sought."

Basho

`Kill the Buddha,' which will now be `Kill don Juan,' is a sign that has been left by a previous traveler. It has a very specific application. It has meaning at one particular juncture that one comes to on the path, rather late in the journey. It means nothing before you reach this particular place. Then, the time comes when you're there and the next thing you're supposed to do isn't exactly clear to you. In fact, the wrong thing seems quite correct and is extremely tempting.

And then, as if from nowhere, this absurd little phrase about killing don Juan pops into your head and your heart swells with inexpressible gratitude, and you know what to do and danger of slipping back into a coma is averted.

What does it really mean though?

It means further. At a very exact point in the journey when it would be very easy to sit down and think you're done, it means `Get up! You're not there yet. Don't be deceived. Don't be sentimental. Don't be complacent. Keep moving. You think you're there but you're not. You're still seeing two where there's only one. That image you're kneeling in front of whoever it is, whatever it is-is just another projection of your own bullshit. Kill the fuckin' thing and keep going.' That's what it means.

"Carlos said...," "Don Juan did...,"

Kill them. Kill them right now in your mind. Why is anyone daydreaming about them anywho?? Take something they mention and go do it.

Zam

P.S. The bit about Buddha was borrowed from Jed McKenna in Spiritual Enlightenment - The Damdest Thing.

Seems to fit perfectly with don Juan as well.

~

Second adaption ;)

I sometimes wonder if I would make a good Nagual, but I don't think so. Or maybe I'd be a great one, depends how you look at it.

My emblem would be a graphic depiction of don Juan's head lanced on a pike, complete with dripping blood and dangling viscera.

The motto beneath the emblem would be "DIE!" Students would line up outside my door after not-doings to come in and tell me their experiences and as soon as the first one opened his mouth I'd start shrieking at the top of my lungs, "You're not him! You're not the real guy! You're just the dream character!" "You're supposed to be dead! Why aren't you dead? Why are you coming to see me? You're the problem! Get out and come back when you're dead. That's the guy I want to talk to, not a stupid dream character. Now GETOUT!"

<<<chuckles>>>

z
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: Definitive Journey on December 14, 2008, 02:59:31 PM: ~

Ah, more 'stuff' from good ole' Jed. Always liked this part in regards to 'suffering.'

"But what about suffering? The Buddha said..."

"Stop."

If I allowed students to steer these dialogs with their questions, all of our time would be spent going in every imaginable direction but forward. Students, quite naturally, think that it's important to understand. They think that it's vital that their information be correct and precise. They think that this is like school where you have to understand one thing before you can understand the next thing. But all that is about knowing and this is unknowing. All this so-called knowledge is exactly what stands between the seeker and the sought. I can certainly understand their perspective in all this, but I am always amazed when I see other teachers of this stuff letting students drag them up hill and down dale with questions that don't advance the cause. Waking up isn't a theoretical subject one masters through study and comprehension, it's a journey one makes-a battle one fights.

Teachers want to be popular and appear wise, so they answer whatever questions anyone thinks to ask, as if they were teaching the next generation of teachers rather than helping people wake up.

And, having said that, I am also constrained to say that this journey-this battle-has yet to even begin for Andrew. His many years of meditation and spiritual education do nothing to alter the fact that he has yet to take the First Step on his own journey. The First Step is the main thing. That's what everything I teach is really about. Take the First Step and the rest will most assuredly follow. You can traipse about the stage playing a spiritual role and you can meditate and renounce and be selfless and earn merit and burn karma year after year, lifetime after lifetime, and still not take that First Step.

That really sums up the state of awakening in the West where spirituality is a recent cultural transplant with many intoxicating blossoms but no established root system. In her book Halfway Up the Mountain: The Error of Premature Claims to Enlightenment, Mariana Caplan has this to say about the Sirens' song of enlightenment:

"The most common, widely-held fantasy about enlightenment is that it is freedom from suffering, the transcendence of pain and struggle, the land of milk and honey, a State of perpetual love, bliss, and peace. Enlightenment represents the collectively shared dream of an idealized and perfect world of pure beauty and joy. It is not only New Age fantasy; it is the secret wish of all people. It is our shared dream of salvation. But it is only a fantasy."

In short, like most spiritual seekers, Andrew never signed up for enlightenment at all, but for a heaven-on-earth fantasy called, in this case, Nirvana. The question is, once disabused of the fantasy; does the seeker's enthusiasm automatically transfer to the reality? In other words, if you ordered a hot fudge sundae with whipped cream and a cherry, would you be just as happy if the waiter gave you a poke in the eye with a sharp stick?

Probably not.

So now Andrew wanted to throw the Buddha at me, but I have no use for the Buddha, and, though he didn't realize it yet, neither did Andrew.

"Suffering is irrelevant," I told him. "Compassion is irrelevant. To begin with, neither one of us has the slightest idea what the Buddha said because he didn't write it down and get it notarized. And since he's not here to explain, we're on our own."

Andrew was wide-eyed at this heresy. I sensed that he was thinking about getting up and leaving.

"Hey, this is good news. What I'm saying is that you don't have to rely on the highly suspect teachings of someone who's been dead for thousands of years. You can rely on yourself. If Prince Siddhartha made it on his own, you can too, right? The Buddha was just some guy who got serious and figured it out for himself, so maybe that's his real teaching-that you can figure it out for yourself. Maybe the point isn't that he was some sort of deity or superman, but that he wasn't. That he was just a guy like you or me."

Andrew was rocking back and forth slightly, agitated.

"As to suffering," I continued, "forget it. It's a non-issue. Suffering just means you're having a bad dream. Happiness means you're having a good dream. Enlightenment means getting out of the dream altogether. Words like suffering and happiness and compassion are just bags of rocks. Eventually, you'll have to set them down if you want to keep going."

Spiritual Enlightenment - The Damdest Thing
Jed McKenna
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: ≈*≈ on December 21, 2008, 11:48:52 AM: In dreaming awhile back ... I think I posted it somewhere here, or maybe over on sister forum, not sure ... anyway I was on a boat, jumped off, started treading water. I realized I was dreaming and knew I could breath under water, so down I went. I've been doing this quite frequently, and have also been taking the same action into "normal reality". I'm realizing that line fading as well. When Fear is removed from the equation ... there are no more "equations" ... you "jump, or burn" .... there are no demarcations.

Recipe For Failure

"This day before dawn I ascended a hill
and look'd at the crowded heaven,
And I said to my spirit
When we become the elders of those orbs,
and the pleasure and knowledge of every thing in them,
shall we be fill'd and satisfied then?
And my spirit said
No, we but level that lift to pass and continue beyond."

-Walt Whitman –

Kamiel came prepared. He carries a bulging, well-worn, triple rubber-banded notebook full of thoughts, ideas, and questions accumulated during several years of reading spiritual books, attending spiritual gatherings, and participating in spiritual internet discussion groups.

"A lot of teachers," he informs me, "say that the necessary first step in awakening is dissatisfaction; a gnawing discontentment on the feeling level. Is that what you mean when you talk about intent?"

Most of Kamiel's reading in recent years has centered on the works of Ramana Maharshi, Nisargadatta Maharaj, Ramesh Balsekar, Jean Klein and that whole crew. He seems philosophically inclined toward the peculiar brand of non-duality and neo-Advaita Vedanta that attracts a growing audience these days. Its allure seems based on its simple core truth; not-two.

While not-two is not exactly true, two is exactly not true, and therefore succinctly marks the endpoint of dualistic thought - you'd think. Where non-dual enthusiasts go astray is in trying to erect a philosophical structure atop this simple truth. Truth is always simple and never provides the basis for any philosophy, but Kamiel is determined to believe that his ramshackle non-dual philosophy is structurally sound. I've explained to him that you can't build a philosophy of This on a foundation of Not-This, but he is quite attached to his improbable little edifice and not yet ready to decamp. Which is perfectly fine.

Waking up is a stop-and-go journey. It takes a lot of hard work to reach a plateau like non-duality and pausing to rest and acclimatize before moving on is part of the process. Non-duality may not be the final destination new arrivals might suppose, but getting there is an impressive and challenging feat and the views are rewarding in all directions. What's more, I like Kamiel and generally enjoy talking with him. He asks good questions that elicit interesting answers. I'm usually limited to speaking in monologues rather than dialogues, but it's the student who calls the tune and Kamiel makes a good job of it.

"Well," I respond after thinking about his question a bit, "I guess it's a matter of degree. Let's try out a new analogy. I'm making this up on the fly so bear with me. Here's the situation: You're sitting in your skyscraper office a hundred stories off the ground thinking about how successful you are and how your life is just grand. With me so far? In terms of satisfaction, you're very satisfied. You have it all; fancy office, great views, the respect and admiration of those around you, everything you ever wanted. Okay?"

"Okay."

"So, you're like that - happy, content, well satisfied - for however long; months, years, decades. But then one day, for whatever reason, dissatisfaction begins to creep in. Something about your office starts to bug you. It starts with little things. You're dissatisfied with your curtains; they don't go with the credenza at all. `What was I thinking?' you wonder. `How could I have been so blind?' And now that you're looking more closely, it's obvious that the carpet is a fiasco and the artwork is just an embarrassment. One minute you're happy, the next minute you're very, very dissatisfied. Extremely dissatisfied. This office is simply not an accurate outward representation of your inner professional. You've outgrown it."

"It actually sounds like a pretty cool office."

"Yeah, well, that's what everyone else thinks; your friends, colleagues, your family. They think you've got it made and that you're nuts for wanting to mess with it. Of course, you're only dissatisfied when you're in the office. You pretty much forget about it when you're anywhere else. Right?"

"Right."

"And you're following the analogy, right? These things can be a bit wobbly the first time out. Your office represents your relationship to the larger questions of life and your dissatisfaction represents..."

"Got it."

"Good. So what's the answer? What do you do about this very dissatisfying office of yours?"

"Uh, I don't know," he shrugs. "Redecorate?"

"Yeah, that sounds right. But this time you're going to be very serious about it. You're going to bring in a top-notch decorator and strip the place down to the floorboards and start from scratch. You're not going to be a mere dabbler; you're going all the way with this. You're a serious professional and you deserve a serious office. See what I mean? See how what started as a gnawing little dissatisfaction has grown into a life-transforming event?"

"Okay," he says dutifully.

"So that's what you do. You go out and buy books and magazines on interior design. You talk to people and attend lectures and events. You hire the best decorator you can find; someone you resonate with deeply. You yourself are being transformed by this experience. You yourself are growing, developing, expanding. It's very challenging, but you're taking a no-nonsense approach. It's slow going, but little by little change is occurring. Your office is starting to look and feel like a genuine outer representation of your inner professional. It may take years to get it right, but nothing will stop you. This is too important. In fact, it has become one of the most important things in your life, right up there with home and family. See what I mean?"

"Yes," he says eagerly. "The master decorator represents the guru and the redecorating process represents the spiritual transformation we undergo when we truly begin to challenge our beliefs and seek higher knowledge. What started out as kind of a gnawing dissatisfaction has grown into the impetus for important change, and although it might seem like a bad thing at first, this is how the process of change works. This is how we develop, how we grow."

"Exactly," I say. "Nobody acts from contentment. We need problems to solve or else we vegetate. That great office was once something we strived to get, then it was achieved and enjoyed in contentment, but then discontent sets in to let us know that it's time to move on."

"So," says Kamiel, "that's what the teachers are talking about when they discuss the dissatisfaction needed to spur us on, right? It might seem bad or uncomfortable, but it's really a good thing?"

"Sounds right," I say.

"And that's the sort of determination and focus that's required in order to awaken from delusion? To become truth-realized?" He smiles, excited, like he's just now getting the big picture. "So that's what you mean by purity of intent!"

I smile back. "twig no. That's what I mean by recipe for failure."

His dismay is instantly apparent. I've cut him off in the first rush of a new grokking and now he's confused and hurt. I did this intentionally. I didn't allow myself to be drawn into this "A lot of teachers say..." conversation just wanting to make a point; I wanted counterpoint. That's what the dialogue has been up until now because I wanted to make a clear distinction. This is the critical distinction between seekers and finders. This is where the line is drawn; a line the existence of which "a lot of teachers" don't even suspect.

"That's the sort of pathetic, half-assed approach that is absolutely certain to keep you confined to your current state. That's the sort of approach that everyone takes and that's why they fail."

He visibly and audibly gulps. "Oh."

"The very people and institutions that are supposedly dedicated to waking us up are doing exactly the opposite. They are lulling us into a more comfortable sleep. That's what we really want and that's what they really provide." He doesn't seem pleased.

"Oh, God...well then... then what drives the process of true awakening?"

"Purity of intent, but what does that really mean? Okay, you're back in the office again, totally satisfied with everything. Life is great. Okay?"

"Yeah."

"Okay. So now dissatisfaction starts to creep in on you, but this time the dissatisfaction stems from the fact that you smell smoke."

"The building is on fire now?"

"Wake up and smell the coffin, Kamiel. The building has always been on fire, you were just repressing that knowledge until now. But now you're aware of it and it's causing you some dissatisfaction. Quite a lot, in fact, and more with every passing moment. Now for the first time you realize that the flames are right outside the door and the temperature is rising. Acrid black smoke is pouring in. The door bursts into flames. There is no exit. Now you're very, very dissatisfied with your office. In fact, you're starting to hate your office quite profoundly. See how this dissatisfaction - this gnawing discontentment on the, uh, feeling level - is of a more immediate and compelling nature then the dissatisfaction brought on by the decor?"

He nods mutely.

"Sure. Now your dissatisfaction with your office is quite intense. Searing, really. In fact, your dissatisfaction is so intense that it feels like you're on fire, like you can't stand to be in your own skin, like anything would be better than more of this. Now you have no thought at all for career, home, or family. Due to a change in your personal circumstances they've all been reduced to complete irrelevance. Beliefs and concepts disappear and even death is suddenly small. You're very focused now. You're in the moment; very present. The flames are feet away. Your dissatisfaction with your office is well beyond anything even a master redecorator could handle for you, agree?"

He nods.

"And there's no return, is there? No going back. The fire is here. It's a fact. Do you see that?"

He nods again.

"And you're completely alone in all this. There's no rescue. Your office is engulfed in flames and there's no one here to save you. Not Jesus or Buddha or the Pope or your mama. This is your dissatisfaction. This is your problem. This is your agony. This is you about to burn to death, okay?"

"Okay."

"Okay. So what do you do?"

"Huh?"

"Your world is burning. The whole office is in flames. You're in a hope-less, no escape situation. The pain has started and will only get worse. I think we can safely say that your dissatisfaction is now quite pronounced. What do you do?"

"Christ, I don't know. Go out the window?"

"Really?"

"Hell, I don't know. What else?"

"Yeah, I guess so. You're in this inferno of an office while outside the window is blue sky, white clouds, and freedom from suffering. That seems like the only possible solution given your very dissatisfying circumstances. But-"

"But what?"

"Well, that's not Hollywood glass in those skyscraper windows. You start flinging yourself against the window but it doesn't give. Your dissatisfaction is of such intensity that you might break bones and crack your skull from hurling yourself desperately against the window, all to no avail."

"Yeah, then what? What happens?"

"Well, the obvious thing is that you might simply perish in the hellish inferno. No law against dying."
He looks at me desperately.

"Or, maybe you have some object that allows you to break the window out. Or maybe the sheer intensity of your – what are we calling it, dissatisfaction? - allows you to break through the unbreakable window. So, boom!, you blow out the window. Now there's nothing left in the equation but you, the raging fire, and a hundred story plummet to the sidewalk below. Everything is suddenly quite simple. Perhaps for the first time, your life is perfectly clear."

"Yeah? Then?"

"Burn or jump, I guess."

"Burn or jump?"

"Do you see another option?"

"Burn or jump," he says flatly.

"When you become so dissatisfied with your office that the hundred story plummet and the sidewalk seem like the better option, so dissatisfied that you actually hurl yourself out the window, then you know the level of dissatisfaction necessary to awaken from delusion."

He is silent for several moments, head bowed, thoughtful. "I guess dissatisfaction isn't the right word."

"Maybe not," I agree. "I call it purity of intent, but that doesn't really capture it either."

"And that's something every enlightened master went through?"

"You say it like there are countless enlightened masters dotting the spiritual landscape, but there are extremely few, and now you know why."

"Jesus..." he mumbles, seemingly sincere in his effort to truly appreciate what he's just been told. "Jesus."

I deliver the moral of the story in three easy pieces. "The price. Of truth. Is everything."

"Jesus."

E-Book Bonus Content
from SPIRITUAL ENLIGHTENMENT: THE DAMNEDEST THING
by Jed McKenna
Title: Re: Path of Enlightenment
Post by: ≈*≈ on April 27, 2009, 07:03:45 AM: ~.~