What is Enlightenment? (rewritten/edited)

pseudonymous

Obtuse Kineticist
Messages
362
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
Maine
What is Enlightenment? (rewritten/edited)
What is Enlightenment?

One of my favorite periodicals is Andrew Cohen's What is Enlightenment? magazine. Like Parabola, I can count on very thoughtful essays, interviews, and points of view. I remember there was an issue discussing enlightenment specifically, and the dozen or so spiritual leaders from global disciplines gave a dozen or so different definitions. Some were similar, and some were quite varied. I read this issue after I had come to see myself as awakened, so it was an interesting dialogue between me and the writers/interviewees. I noticed a lot of similarities to my own experiences, but also noted in the articles, and in my interactions lately, that enlightenment - with its multiple definitions - no longer appeals to me as a pointer to my own awareness.

Claiming that you are enlightened or awakened in any public forum is kind of like running for president. You can expect the snipers to come out of the woodwork to scrutinize every word spoken, and every action done. The motive behind this is not very deep - it is to take you down in an appearance scandal. You can have conceptual discourses about enlightenment or awakening to your heart's content, but mention you are enlightened or awakened, and the dialogue will quickly deteriorate to a rote debate. I was able to read others' definitions of enlightenment or awakening with an open mind so long as they were coming from a place of experience. But if they were just repeating what they had read, or been taught, then the person left the conversation. You cannot have a practical dialogue with someone who does not experiencially know what is being referred to.

I have walked a rather unprecedented path these past 9 years. From the beginning of my journey to Self awareness I have been guided solely by direct communication between me and that which I am a part of. But it began many years earlier in that I am an explorer by nature. As a child I was always questioning the status quo, or consensus reality. As an adult I knew the mundane world did not satiate my need to see what lay beyond the horizon. I journied 14,000 miles on a horse to get the pace of the rat race off of my back. At 3 miles per hour a person can contemplate beyond the next familial responsibility and employer demand. So when it came time for me to be called to Self awareness, the idea of exploring through my own senses and perceptions, without the boundaries of pre-formed destinations, came naturally to me.

I do not think most people realize how virtually their entire personal reality has been defined, not by them, but by others. From the first cognition of language - the female gendered person pointing at herself, and telling you, the infant: "mommy", to this very day, you have likely had reality defined by others. The entire educational system is set up on the premise that you need to be told what consensus reality is. Well for mundane lives this is likely necessary, but when a person enters into the world of Self discovery, it becomes a tremendously difficult handicap for most aspirants to overcome. That transition from believing words, to experiencing what the words mean in metaphysical experiences is hard to navigate. Some never do and die with their lives being a collection of concepts in cardboard boxes...where eventually time and space run out.

What is enlightenment? I have had many dialogues, and backed away from many more debates regarding this word over my 4 years online. Prior to that, the word never really entered my thoughts. Why it became an important word in my present understanding has to do with how I arrived at awakening, and recognizing that the word was not applicaple for someone not versed in traditional disciplines. I was guided to have the experience of transcendent meditation. Over a period of a few months I began to feel impulsed to dabble into meditation. I did not read about it, nor did I ask anyone's advice. Truth is, since it was prior to owning a computer, and me living in a very non-spiritual environment, I did not have anyone to ask. Today I know that I was very fortunate to not have anyone set boundaries by defining what meditation was or was not.

I began my meditation discipline by lying down. I had seen pictures of the ramrod straight back lotus position, but it was very uncomfortable for me. I was impulsed to feel certain parts of my body with my mind - which I later found was a great way to manage pain. Eventually after a few trippy wormhole type experiences, energy body parts slipping out of physical body parts, and far out energy expanding states, I slipped into the void. I know now to call it the void, but at the time I didn't label it at all. I simply went what I referred to as "pre-form". My body and my chatterbox thoughts, and the world around me dissolved (over a period of an hour in the first experience) into one substance...one undifferentiated state. I in this seemingly infinite environment just witnessed the joy of it...the wonder of it...the absolute non-activity and non-defining of it. I simply was, and it simply, was perfect.

Once the affects of these experiences started spilling into my day, my life changed dramatically. I was aware of the experience of the present moment - where my awareness would brush up against objects, but my mind would not chatter out a long litany of definitions and past experiences. I emanated a presence. With exploration and experimentation I began to control its manifesting to incorporate its affectiveness into my healing and teaching service. I knew what others were feeling or thinking like they were nearly transparent (although this is not an area I have devoted much exploration to, aside from discerning motives of others).

Just as quickly as the meditation practices began, they abruptly ended in me not being impulsed to do them anymore. Shortly thereafter I discovered (or was led to) the discipline of contemplation. The natural evolution of this seemed self-evident to me. I had discovered what the illusion was, and what my relation to it was, and now I was being guided to experience the properties of the Self that realized its separateness from creation. Thus I began the second half of the journey to Self awareness - my recognition of being a cell of the creating organism (active principle) contained within a sensual form that had been created from the pre-differentiated substance that is the passive principle.

Having witnessed pre-form in transcendent meditation I knew I was separate from it. As I was still learning from my experiences, and expanding in awareness, I knew that my state of Witness was not that of pure consciousness, or omniscience. I only state these perceptions because they became part of my sharing of my experiences when I got this computer and began to have communication with other spiritual people. Eventually finding myself in more advanced forums, I soon learned that for many it was like a race - or a beauty contest, where one concept was used to "prove" the other concept was erroneous. Of course when everyone's eyes and ears are closed, all imagined themselves victorious in these skirmishes, but nothing was shared.

I began to share my perceptions, and being a newbie to the world of the conceptual intelligensia, I was repeatedly told (often very colorfully) that I did not know anything and was completely incorrect in my perceptions. If I tried to explain my reasoning to not accepting their truths as my truth, I was almost always met verbatim with, "some day you will understand." That always appeared to me to be the indicator that negotiations were called off, and that I was dismissed. It wasn't until a few years of frustration that I began to realize that these folks were not using their own words. After hearing the standard paint-by-numbers, rote quotable quotes, and debating tactics used over and over I soon knew I was dealing with people that had no experience of awakening, but an arsenal of words and definitions of meanings of definitions, to defend what they believed it was.

So again, I return to that issue of Cohen's magazine where the global "experts" defined enlightenment in slightly, but often dissimilar ways. They, like all enlightened people, have several things in common. First, although they may sparingly quote from their teachers or their philosophy's writings, they mostly communicate using their own words. An experienced person will relate their experiences to another in their own language. An inexperienced person only has other people's experiences to draw from, and have to either quote them openly, or quote them covertly hoping no one sees they are borrowing their heavily defended beliefs. Secondly, an enlightened person will never tell you that your version of enlightenment is wrong, unless you have challenged their's first. Then a dialogue ensues if both parties are mature, or a debate if either party is not.

So you can see that I cannot answer the question, "what is enlightenment" in a conclusive way. I can only give you my perceptions of my own awakening, which happen to be based on my personal experience. My perceptions may be limited, however, in decribing those experiences. Over the past few years I have come to discover the folly of using words already established in religious or spiritual traditions to describe my own journey. They often cannot be seen or heard outside of the context of whatever the listener has been told to define them as. I no longer refer to myself as enlightened, because it is simply a word with too much baggage attached to it. There are many different definitions of it across different traditions, and it creates a distraction from what has been for me, a very authentic experience of awakening from a body-centric consciousness.

One thing about being awakened is that a person should never be concerned about their appearance. If you are extra careful to dot all your i's and cross all your t's in fear that someone might think less of you, then you are attached to your projection. I smoke. I masturbate. I murder the english language daily. I am intimately familiar with the taste of my foot. I am heavily weighted with a sense of humor that often I am the only appreciative witness of. And yes, I am awakened, too. None of my varied human characteristics or foibles detract from my experience and emergent properties.

©2004 DC Vision
 
In Buddhism there are three levels of understanding the self.

The first is that there is a self.
Once someone comes to this realisation, they are ready for the next, which is that there is no self. The third and final level is that the self is dependently arisen and that it neither is nor isn't, nor both, nor neither. This may sound ridiculous, but this is the most concise and popular way to say it.

Your understanding of the self sounds like the second level, and it can be easy to cling to such a realisation, that the self does not exist.
This is perhaps the trickiest issue in all spirituality. Progress has been made and complacency is liable, now more than ever, to set in.
I urge you to not to become complacent and to continue to investigate your realisations and whether you are truly at the pinnacle of your journey.

What drew my attention to this is your statement:
One thing about being awakened is that a person should never be concerned about their appearance.
Hmmm.....
I have tried this. I have always tried to rebel against the definitions and boxes people attempt to place me in, but for some reason it has never worked.

The simple fact is that we are here, the self does have a place and appearance does make a difference. Appearance is an illusion, and so is self, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Everything is an illusion, but that doesn't mean enlightenment is the antithesis of illusion. Enlightenment is the transcendence of illusion. It's like, you can either run away from the world and live in your own perfect reality, but that would be an isolated reality, which is not enlightenment. Enlightenment is not running away as critics of spiritualists think. They claim meditation is a form of escapism where one tries to hide from the crude realities of life, and indeed many people treat it as such. But the meditation that leads to enlightenment is not about further dividing reality into 'your perfect world of enlightenment' and 'everything else'.

So when you say that an enlightened person is not concerned with appearances, I agree to an extent. Just because any representation of themselves is an illusion doesn't mean it doesn't have an effect.

I know my self is an illusion, but I also know it matters to other people and that I won't get a job if I don't take care of it. There are practical considerations to be aware of, and they cannot be denied any more than the effects of the illusory self.

I think the whole debate over the nature of the self rests on the simple question, 'What is your definition of real?'
I'd like to hear what your answer to this is? :)
 
samabudhi,

thankyou for starting a dialogue here.

I urge you to not to become complacent and to continue to investigate your realisations and whether you are truly at the pinnacle of your journey.
as my writings tend to go all over the place it might have been missed that i referred to the discovery of Self, within the present moment consciously, as the halfway point for me. it is in my experience where i became aware of my relationship with the passive principle - that which all form arises out of. it was my experience during awakenening to Self, that i was not a part of the form arising, but was a part of the active principle that was incarnating into form. all of form it seemed to me was sensual tools for the active principle to become cognizant within, which lent to its slow evolution of conscious awareness.

bear in mind that this is the "message" that i got from that which guides me - which i have assumed to be the influence of an organism (active principle) over its cell (my Self) - i really hate to do any labelling beyond that, because for me it would be conjecture - i simply have trusted whatever it is that guides me because it got me down what appears to be a path others have experienced, and with just a relationship between me and it as the tool...i find that very inspiring, but i have never been "asked" by it to label it beyond "that which guides me".

likewise, please bear in mind that it has been very difficult for me to find a language to describe my experiencial findings because i simply do not have any traditional learning under my belt. the wording i now use is solely based on my interactions online with people of like interests in Self awareness - and as can already be demonstrated, sometimes their definitions (such as me being enlightened, and backing it up with eastern anecdotes) is sometimes rather limited. i can only assume a person knows what they are talking about since i am not inclined to do any research beyond my own contemplations. that has become part of my journey - to continue to access what has gotten me this far, and not distract my Self with too many definitions that are not of the making of that which guides me.

that said, i have been led into a different area of inquiry than how many levels Self has - except so far the discovery of Self in relation to the passive principle, and Self in relation to the active principle. whenever i hear what i am guessing to be eastern definitions, such as:

The first is that there is a self. Once someone comes to this realisation, they are ready for the next, which is that there is no self. The third and final level is that the self is dependently arisen and that it neither is nor isn't, nor both, nor neither.

it simply is not very practical to what i have experienced. for me - there is only Self (including other Selves), and the form it inhabits in order to become sensual, and evolving in its consciousness. i get the message that it did not choose to be incarnated, but that it is a part of its evolution from no consciousness to consciousness of it Self. that sounded familiar to me, as it is pretty much the same story for we humans - we did not choose to be here, but in being here is the potential to awaken to Self. and i was "told" (for lack of a better word - how does one label manifesting thoughts being placed in their mind by something greater in awareness?) that it believes that it (the active principle) did not set this evolution ball into motion, but that it is subject to it just like we (Selves) are as its cells.

it is my assumption, opinion, what have you, that when a person gets to that transcendent state via eastern traditions where they first come into contact with the passive principle (void, whatever label fits), they have had boundaries set for them by the teachings they adhere to. i was not handicapped like that (that is not a judgmental expression) so that when that which guided me gently eased me out of the "unity"/"oneness" (insert comfy label) and made me aware that i was separate from it, i first came into realization of Self - not as no thing, and not as one with all things - but as a witness to all things...and the Self is not a thing - it is a creator of things (that is the most practical wording i have).

so those described levels of Self realization by you do not mean anything to me experiencially. there is only two on my path so far...realization of Self in relation to passive principle, and realization of Self in relation to active principle. i am still exploring both to some degree, but primarily the relationship and communication of Self to active principle with the tool of contemplation (which i on average am doing 5-8 hours a day) these days. meditation for me has become somewhat needless, as i already made the discovery that i was led to make within its parameters - that i was a Self having a sensual dream within a big sensual dream.



What drew my attention to this is your statement:
Quote:
One thing about being awakened is that a person should never be concerned about their appearance.
Hmmm.....
I have tried this. I have always tried to rebel against the definitions and boxes people attempt to place me in, but for some reason it has never worked.

for me it is not about being a rebel (although i am at times). when i say a person should not be concerned about their appearance i mean that they should not become distracted by such exoteric fluff as "an enlightened person does not have emotions", and "an awakened person does not need to eat or breath or sh*t or piss" etc etc. the world is full of people's definition of what being awake or asleep is, and allowing them to distract from your awareness of your Self - over fear of what you might appear like to another - is folly.

to give an example...i am a healer. i make that staement as a result of what i have accomplished in my healing practice. i also smoke. i have been told "you cannot be a healer and smoke". well i smoke, and i have been quite successful as a healer. i cannot worry about my appearance to the person who thinks that because i smoke i am not a "true" healer. healing has nothing to do with appearance - it has to do with abilities. in the same vein, enlightenment and/or other awakened states has nothing to do with appearances, but has to do with the state itself - and not the state of appearance the person is in.

that does not mean that there is not a certain amount of responsibility to "while in rome, do as the romans do". you have to live within the societal expectations to be a body in the world...but you do not have to live within emotional/mental expectations of others in Self awareness...only in societal awareness is appearances important.



I know my self is an illusion (i have tried to edit out the "bold" text in the response, but am unable to...seems to be a glitch. what follows is my response to your statement here)

i am taking that statement out of context, but i wanted to make sure you knew that i think that your Self is the only thing that is not an illusion. its sense of itself as part of the dream - yes, illusion - but awakened, it becomes aware that its Self and the illusion are separate. i think the reason it believed that it was discovered as part of the illusion is that it never took that step back from the experience of "pre-form" in meditation, and experienced itself as part of that undifferentiated substance that all of creation arises from. there was a witness, and i am grateful that that which guides me made me aware of it so that i would not be chasing after the beginning of the evolution of consciousness, but am instead looking to where it is evolving to.

that is the limitation of buddhism to my experiences - it supposes a return to latency and pure (no differentiated) consciousness is our highest attainment. i still say that is attachment to the passive principle, and denial of our Selves as the active principle that seems over the past 10+ billion years to become more Self aware in more complex vehicles. this is an organism that is extending outward into exploration and discovery, and not an organism that appears to be desirous of curling back into fetal position. once it is discovered that these gross physical bodies (and the suffering) are no longer necessary to be sensual (conscious), then what lies over the next horizon?


'What is your definition of real?'


reality (or what is real) is whatever the Self perceives at that moment. we give form its reality by perceiving it. so we can perceive what is real as illusion (if we discover that the appearance of a thing does not equal our perceptions of it) or we can perceive what is illusion as real (if we have not discovered what lies beneath appearances).

let me know if i need to dig a little deeper on that...i am desirous of outdoor activity presently, so i may not of given it enough calories yet.

dcv-
 
as my writings tend to go all over the place it might have been missed that i referred to the discovery of Self, within the present moment consciously, as the halfway point for me.
I guess you could equate that with what Buddhists call a stream-enterer; someone who has found the path, and has chosen to walk it / someone who has discovered that there is illusion and decided that it needs to be uncovered in order for one to be happy/enlightened.

likewise, please bear in mind that it has been very difficult for me to find a language to describe my experiencial findings because i simply do not have any traditional learning under my belt. the wording i now use is solely based on my interactions online with people of like interests in Self awareness - and as can already be demonstrated, sometimes their definitions (such as me being enlightened, and backing it up with eastern anecdotes) is sometimes rather limited. i can only assume a person knows what they are talking about since i am not inclined to do any research beyond my own contemplations. that has become part of my journey - to continue to access what has gotten me this far, and not distract my Self with too many definitions that are not of the making of that which guides me.
I understand. Thing is that many people have walked this path, and they usually end up talking to each and sharing what they have learned, if not their conclusions, then at least their methods.
Why reinvent the wheel? Learning a bit of terminology here and there isn't that difficult. It helps SO much if you can express certain key points where a hundred words of explanation and a few metaphors would otherwise be needed. I'm also against learning reels of information, so I just skim and pick out the best parts, the essence of things. I try to stick to books that offer practical value, such as meditation techniques. For interest, the path you're walking is called 'Pratyekabuddhayana', the path of the solitary Buddha.

One thing about being awakened is that a person should never be concerned about their appearance.
the world is full of people's definition of what being awake or asleep is, and allowing them to distract from your awareness of your Self - over fear of what you might appear like to another - is folly.
Agreed. "Over" fear, important. Never say never. :)

healing has nothing to do with appearance - it has to do with abilities. in the same vein, enlightenment and/or other awakened states has nothing to do with appearances, but has to do with the state itself
Yes, but having certain abilities would undoubtable change one's appearance, however subtly. Being in such an advanced state of mind as enlightenment would surely be visible through one's appearances, not intentionally, but naturally.

i am taking that statement out of context, but i wanted to make sure you knew that i think that your Self is the only thing that is not an illusion. its sense of itself as part of the dream - yes, illusion - but awakened, it becomes aware that its Self and the illusion are separate. i think the reason it believed that it was discovered as part of the illusion is that it never took that step back from the experience of "pre-form" in meditation, and experienced itself as part of that undifferentiated substance that all of creation arises from. there was a witness, and i am grateful that that which guides me made me aware of it so that i would not be chasing after the beginning of the evolution of consciousness, but am instead looking to where it is evolving to.
This can only be solved with a definition. Tell me what you consider the self to be, and I will attempt to prove that it does not inherently exist.

that is the limitation of buddhism to my experiences - it supposes a return to latency and pure (no differentiated) consciousness is our highest attainment. i still say that is attachment to the passive principle, and denial of our Selves as the active principle that seems over the past 10+ billion years to become more Self aware in more complex vehicles. this is an organism that is extending outward into exploration and discovery, and not an organism that appears to be desirous of curling back into fetal position. once it is discovered that these gross physical bodies (and the suffering) are no longer necessary to be sensual (conscious), then what lies over the next horizon?
Buddhism does not seek to further the self's cause of exploration and discovery, nor does it seek to hamper it. It attempts to transcend this pointless activity which only ever leeds to more suffering under the false promises of happiness.
Why do we do what we do? Because we think it'll bring us happiness. That is what everybody wants, to be happy. Yet everything we have ever done, and will ever do only brings us to the end of such temporal happiness and to the doorstep of more suffering. This is thye endless cycle which we call samsara. There is no point in following the will of the self, because it is only being driven by blind reaction to it's environment and it will only ever succeed in passes the time.
If one is to be free from the limiting nature of the self (which by definition stands for limitation (self is over here, other is over there)), then one is to fully comprehend this most vexing (because of our identification with it), yet simple of problems. The self will always strive for what is best for itself. If it didn't we wouldn't be here. Yet to survive as human being we need to suffer in order to be motivated to support this form. If we didn't have suffering, we wouldn't be conditioned toward fear, we wouldn't seek to do work (suffering) and we'd just veg out on the sofa and die.

It's late. A definition of self would help a lot here, and if you're going to use 'passive/active principle', then a definition of those too. (thanks, I know you don't like definitions.)

reality (or what is real) is whatever the Self perceives at that moment.
So if there is no consciousness (means of perception) then something doesn't exist? What about moments after the big bang? There was no consciousness, only matter and energy. How's this one: 'Something is real if is subject to cause and effect.' In other words, it can exert a force on something else, and it can have a force exerted on itself.
 
Why reinvent the wheel?

because that which guides me guided me this way. why stop the process because it has been done before with different perceptions from different explorers? i trust that which guides me, because as you can see - it does seem to know what it is doing, assuming i have gotten this far, and am still a work in progress. it has to do with why do we share - for me it is out of a need for communing, and not from a need of learning from other people. i get my book learning from the original writer without having to read its pages. that is cool for me, and hopefully would be cool for others...considering its affectiveness.

For interest, the path you're walking is called 'Pratyekabuddhayana', the path of the solitary Buddha.

thankyou for sharing this. you cannot imagine how nice it is to know that there are others out there. when the world does not offer up points of reference often, sometimes my only solace to the ever-present wondering if i am completely delusional, is finding out that others have walked this way before me - even if we have never met. it goes back to that need for me to commune...to know i am not alone in my calling.


Yes, but having certain abilities would undoubtable change one's appearance, however subtly. Being in such an advanced state of mind as enlightenment would surely be visible through one's appearances, not intentionally, but naturally.


as i have awakened i have found that detachment is a very natural process which requires no doing on my part. that is why i do not tend to own my historical scripted Self - i allow it its daftness because my experience has been that it fades out slowly on its own. it is why i found great displeasure in me getting into a pissing contest with you on another thread - when i know better than to do that - but managed to let it go fairly easily, knowing these echoes of emotionalism are going to resurface from time to time. it does not diminish my awareness to fall on occasion, and i know a year ago, five years ago, etc...there would have been very different reactions.

mamma raised a scrappy bunch of boys and girls...sometimes they like to still wrestle. i can find humor in that, though. i never would allow those spurts to distract from the love i feel for you, or anyone else. i am used to people looking at me in my immediate environment with that "look at the pretty lights" look on their face. i know i give off presence when i am just being my Self. it is a blessing hopefully that spills forth in some measure. but i still enjoy just being a dipsh*t. it appeals to me, and keeps me humble. this presence i feel is not my possession...and whoever placed it in my care might come looking for it realizing they left it with the wrooooong steward.:D


This can only be solved with a definition. Tell me what you consider the self to be, and I will attempt to prove that it does not inherently exist.


i actually just wrote and essay "the active & passive principles" which might to some degree address the Self. please bear in mind that I am a high school dropout, and therefor not going to be a worthy sparring partner in philosophical word games. i simply do not have the depth. dialogue with me in as simple practical language as you can, and i will hopefully keep up with you. our interactions on these forums is what gives me material in which to contemplate with, and i would not want to miss out on an important idea because it went over my head.


i think my new essay may address the rest of your queries and points, too. if not, let me know and i will attempt to dig a little deeper. i am presently trying to edit some of my other several dozen essays in order to get them streamlined and with less baggaged words, so i may be busy over the next few days, and answer your posts sporadically. but i appreciate the dialogue here.

dcv-
 
Hi Pseudoanonymous and everyone else.

I'm leaving Taiwan and heading back for South Africa unexpected early, so I'll lose my half decent connection. I don't know how often I'll be able to visit again, so sorry for that. Hopefully I'll get me dream job working at an Internet Cafe. :D

I really would like to continue this conversation, so I'll be back as soon as I can.

Best Wishes

Cheers :)
 
samabudhi said:
Hi Pseudoanonymous and everyone else.

I'm leaving Taiwan and heading back for South Africa unexpected early, so I'll lose my half decent connection. I don't know how often I'll be able to visit again, so sorry for that. Hopefully I'll get me dream job working at an Internet Cafe. :D

I really would like to continue this conversation, so I'll be back as soon as I can.

Best Wishes

Cheers :)
Namaste samabudhi,

be safe on your journey!
 
samabudhi said:
Hi Pseudoanonymous and everyone else.

I'm leaving Taiwan and heading back for South Africa unexpected early, so I'll lose my half decent connection. I don't know how often I'll be able to visit again, so sorry for that. Hopefully I'll get me dream job working at an Internet Cafe. :D

I really would like to continue this conversation, so I'll be back as soon as I can.

Best Wishes

Cheers :)
Kind Regards and best wishes for a safe journey. Will look forward to hearing from you again!
 
Back
Top