Wayne Wirs: Newly-Minted Enlightened Guy

[Christi]

Hi TI,

 

quote:It appears to me that within this context, they (Adyashanti and his publisher) are using the term 'awakening' for 'enlightenment'.

Yes, Adyashanti does sometimes interchange the terms awakening and enlightenment, as he did in his first book "Emptiness Dancing". Awakening experiences are experiences of the enlightened state... enlightenment is the condition of being awake to That which we really are. We awaken to enlightenment, or more accurately, enlightenment awakens to itself. So I, personally, can forgive Adyashanti for confusing the two terms. Where does awakening end and enlightenment begin? Where does ecstasy end and bliss begin? Where does grace end and benediction begin? How can the realization of eternity happen in a moment of time? At what point does human language fail completely?

 

quote:They are saying that Buddha was 'awakened' and then within that same breath, posing the same question to Adyashanti, implying the same quality of state. I think this is misleading.

I wouldn’t like to judge.

 

quote:It is no wonder people believe that they will enter "a state of constant ecstasy". It says so in the Pali. It says so in many Buddhist teachings and religions. Seems to me that Adyashanti is trying to redefine truth. Is he saying that the Pali is misleading people?

Yes, the Pali texts refer to bliss of the body and the bliss of the mind. I believe that the bliss of the body is what we (here at AYP) would call ecstasy, and the bliss of the mind is what we would call bliss. As Yogani says, with enlightenment, ecstasy and bliss become permanently established. But Adyashanti is talking about awakening and an experience of awakening can happen before ecstasy (the bliss of the body) has even been felt.

During an awakening experience, the normal identification with egoic consciousness falls away and the Self is experienced as it really is. It is an experience of the oneness of all things. The mind becomes stilled and silent and many insights arise. It is incredibly blissful and peaceful. I had my first awakening when I was about 20 years old and it completely blew me away (literally, not metaphorically). It was about 15 years before I was to experience what ecstasy was, and about 3 more years before I experienced whole body ecstasy. It is only recently that whole body ecstasy has become an ongoing aspect of my reality.

If Adyashanti said that a permanent state of ecstasy is never a part of the enlightenment process, then I would simply say that he obviously hasn't reached that stage yet, and maybe when he does, he'll change his mind. But I have never heard him say that, so it's a bit hypothetical.

One thing we are beginning to see which I believe could be clouding the issue around enlightenment, is a number of people basically saying: “I’m enlightened, and my experience is like this, so all enlightened people must experience this too”.  I think this is based on the “top of the mountain” idea of enlightenment. It is the idea that you have either arrived, or you haven’t, and if you have then you know everything there is to know about enlightenment. Obviously, as the process of transformation expands and deepens beyond the initial stages of awakening, this idea begins to erode.

 

quote:Detach, detach..
I understand that journey to enlightenment can be a gradual process or it can come in a flash. However, I still believe that enlightenment has a state of permanency to it. And, like Buddha suggested, don't take anything for granted. It is my right to examine, descriminate and question what I am inclined to.

Absolutely! Everyone has that right, and it is good to question and investigate.  Personally I have found that some aspects of the process of enlightenment come in a flash, and others come gradually. It's a big journey with many layers and depths. Certainly whole body ecstasy could not come in a flash; it would be too much for the body to bear. Awakening experiences can happen in a flash, but the integration of those experiences into the being takes time. The process of the merging of ecstasy and bliss also takes a long time for the body to adjust to the new levels of energy involved and the implications of the process.

Yogani talks about it here:

"As for what is next once inner silence and ecstatic conductivity are coming up, it is a long drawn-out joining of these two, played out as much in our daily activity as in our practices. This gives rise to the "child" of the union, as it were, called "jivan mukti," or "christ consciousness." This is the end game of yoga, and corresponds to what I call "outpouring divine love." It means we increasingly see the world as our own self and act accordingly -- "doing unto others" in service. That, in turn, accelerates our advancement into unity, which is another word for jivan mukti or christ consciousness."

From: http://www.aypsite.com/plus/274.html

 

Christi

[Kirtanman]

Hi Christi, TI & All,

quote:Originally posted by Christi

If Adyashanti said that a permanent state of ecstasy is never a part of the enlightenment process, then I would simply say that he obviously hasn't reached that stage yet, and maybe when he does, he'll change his mind. But I have never heard him say that, so it's a bit hypothetical.

One of the keys here, is that words, and concepts about the meaning of words, can only perform a very minuscule function, in terms of describing enlightenment (or whatever it might be called).

As Paramahamsa Nithyananda says, enlightenment is "ultimate but not final".

Someone once asked Adya about this very thing, during a live satsang, and he clarified that enlightenment is not an experience ... enlightenment is knowing your true nature (original unaugmented awareness, as opposed to any of the forms in conceptual thought we think of as part of our identity).

The person then asked a follow-up question about whether or not opening and expansion continued, and Adya's response was one of the most enthusiastic I've ever seen ... and he said (I'm paraphrasing just a little; this was a few years ago) ...

"It's like being a kid on Christmas morning .... it's like knowing there's this great surprise around the corner ... and not knowing what ... but just knowing it's going to be great!"

The person then asked if "it ever stops?"

Adya managed to seem moved, grateful, excited and full of a sense of the profound all at the same time, and said:

"It never stops!"

That's basically how it is in my experiencing, now, too.

However, the above words can make it sound a bit more dramatic than it is; it feels very normal, and "just the way it is" .... yet beyond wonderful, at the same time.

Part of the confusion comes from terminology combined with experiencing ... and exactly where the "line" is drawn, primarily because words and limited mind have to draw a line somewhere; that's what they do.

And that's the very essence of Maya ... which comes from the Sanskrit root Maa ... to measure.

Being lost in Maya; stuck on the wheel of Samsara ... is simply confusing delineation with that which is actual; in reality, there are no artificial lines.

At a certain point, this is mentally understood and experienced ... a full experience of the oneness of the field of awareness is often called realization.

Then, there's the mental knowing that the one field of awareness is one's true identity, based on intermittent experiences of this awareness from subjective view ... from the vantage point/experiencing of this whole, inclusive awareness.

This is amazing at first, then normalizes ... most meditators (this was my experience) get used to this in meditation (it's known as nirvikalpa samadhi; complete absorption, in yogic systems) ... but for some time, have difficulty maintaining this awareness outside of meditation ... because focus on the various internal and external forms (quote unquote) of life .... thoughts, feelings, other people, circumstances, etc. ... is an inherent aspect of the body-mind ... and because identification of the part of awareness attached to the concept of me is so very strong; we were each and all literally programmed with it, from the time we could understand words and concepts.

Then, the experiencing expands, so that this sense of being the oneness of awareness persists in daily life (call nirvikalpa sahaja samadhi by Ramana Maharshi) ... and again ... intermittently; it's known that "I am all this; all this is my expansion (the states of Sadasiva and Isvara, in Kashmir Shavism; unbound subjectivity and unbound objectivity, respectively).

But there's still, every so often, a sense of being pulled in to identification with form or limited sense of self, in some way.

Then "one fine day" .... though, it seems, some of us notice it, and some of us don't ... it just kind of "morphs" into knowing, absolutely and irrevocably, that I am the awareness; I am not limited by the form in any way .... very literally .... I am the field of awareness ... and its content ... but not any of its specific content.

Specific content vacillates from moment to moment ... including sense of self; how could we *be* any of that; it defies even logic (yet extends infinitely beyond it).

And that is what I would call enlightenment: when the regular, default sense of who I am literally shifts ... and "stays shifted" from some aspect of limited form .... to the space of awareness, itself.

It's easy to verify, if there's enough inner silence.

Notice the physical.

Then, take a step back ... notice the subtly energetic. An easy way to do this: visually note your body, your hands ... and then close your eyes ... and notice that you still have a mental picture of your body, your hands ..... this is the gross (physical/waking) and the subtle (energetic-mental{including thinking}/dreaming) of yogic writings.

Then, the next level (very subtle, in certain Buddhist schools; deep sleep in the yogic model) is deep sleep; if you experience samadhi, you may be able to access it consciously; it's basically the *sense* you have of your mental body, but without the *form* of it ... that's about as close as words can come to describing it.

Behind/Before that is the Turiya state/Nirvikalpa Samadhi .... pure, formless awareness .... the true original experiencer of every moment of your life, now.

Utterly contentless, utterly without limit; the complete space of awareness ... *always*, *ever* the actual, true experiencer .... the light of awareness behind the mind.

It's impossible to be "not this" ... it's only possible not to consciously know we are this ...  because of the identification of part of awareness with form.

When identification with form relaxes enough .... identity literally shifts.

I cannot believe in the limited me thought any longer, and it basically doesn't arise.

Reactions in the body-mind arise, sure .... they go with the body-mind; they have nothing to do with me.

The body-mind can change, grow old and die; whatever; I AM.

Twenty million years from now, this will all be a dim memory, and yet - I AM.

Literally; as these words are written, I AM.

I yet, I appear to be a middle-aged man, with LIVE cranked, sinus issues, and gnoshing on a cheeseburger and a Pepsi as I write this .... but these things have nothing to do with who and what I AM.

Nor do the specifics of your life have anything to do with "you am" either.



I had some sense of "maybe being enlightened" when identificiation was "shifting" from limited form to unlimited awareness .... and the knowing became complete when the shifting became complete.

I (knowing there's no "I" here, actually ... figure of speech ) am comfortable calling this enlightenment ... because it's the point at which liberation is complete.

However, if someone else wants to say "enlightened" in someplace else along the spectrum of consciousness-awareness .... that's fine, too.

I'm just joining in Wayne's sense (as I've been doing for a while now, as some of you may have noticed) .... saying: enlightenment is real; you can have it; it's what we all *are*.

*HOWEVER* (Important However) ... as Adyashanti says:

"If someone tells you they're enlightened, they're not."

I agree.



There's no "I" in the sense that that term is usually defined, *to* be enlightened; that "I" is gone ... yet, what remains is both I and Non-I ... and beyond both; the awareness I AM is living, unbound.

Unenlightenment is simply identifying wrongly with certain aspects of conceptual thinking and self definition.

Let that go .... and enlightenment is always already here; it's just the full field of awareness ... and experientially living *from* that full field ... instead of from the conditioned aggregate of thoughts and feelings thought of as "me".

However, enlightenment literally cannot be described; what it actually is, is beyond the levels of consciousness where words, concepts and discursive thinking occur.

And yet .... there's never been anything else; not really.

Words get in the way; concepts get in the way; literally.

Release all concepts, and what remains is enlightenment .... the enlightenment you are; you don't become enlightened ...... you are enlightenment; all this is enlightenment ..... it's just what's here when the tyranny of the dream of conceptual subjectivity has dissolved.

quote:Originally posted by Christi
One thing we are beginning to see which I believe could be clouding the issue around enlightenment, is a number of people basically saying: “I’m enlightened, and my experience is like this, so all enlightened people must experience this too”.  I think this is based on the “top of the mountain” idea of enlightenment. It is the idea that you have either arrived, or you haven’t, and if you have then you know everything there is to know about enlightenment. Obviously, as the process of transformation expands and deepens beyond the initial stages of awakening, this idea begins to erode.

Very much agreed; I tried to clarify this, above .... but it's tough to do, with words.

There's no real "arrival" ... there's just a shifting of conscious identity from form to awareness.

That formless awareness is what is living every life; unenlightenment is just having a certain amount of attention "frozen forward" in objectivity, and the conceptual prison of the dream of limited self.

Enlightenment isn't attained; it's more melted into; relaxed into; opened into.

And enlightenment is not an experience.

It's a literal shift of identity; at times, I still feel like a "regular person" in terms of where attention and sense of experiencing may focus, during a given moment, now ... but I can no longer believe, at all, that I actually *am* the limited forms (physical, emotional, energetic, emotional) of the body-mind that is physically typing these words.

As many of us do, I spent a bit of time (a yearish; maybe closer to twoish) ... trying to get to the place of the complete shift (which is why it took so long .... ).

And then one day, I noticed the shift had happened .... and the awareness of self literally cannot become identified with limitation any longer.

And so, on the one hand; enlightenment is just a word; words are no longer primary; actuality is primary.

On the other hand, conveying that enlightenment is attainable ... may be helpful is freeing some who are reading this from the conceptual prison of "but I read"; enlightenment is not found there; enlightenment is found here, the moment all ideas are released.



 

quote:Originally posted by Tibetan Ice
I understand that journey to enlightenment can be a gradual process or it can come in a flash. However, I still believe that enlightenment has a state of permanency to it. And, like Buddha suggested, don't take anything for granted. It is my right to examine, descriminate and question what I am inclined to.

Originally posted by Christi
Absolutely! Everyone has that right, and it is good to question and investigate.  Personally I have found that some aspects of the process of enlightenment come in a flash, and others come gradually. It's a big journey with many layers and depths. Certainly whole body ecstasy could not come in a flash; it would be too much for the body to bear. Awakening experiences can happen in a flash, but the integration of those experiences into the being takes time. The process of the merging of ecstasy and bliss also takes a long time for the body to adjust to the new levels of energy involved and the implications of the process.

Yogani talks about it here:

"As for what is next once inner silence and ecstatic conductivity are coming up, it is a long drawn-out joining of these two, played out as much in our daily activity as in our practices. This gives rise to the "child" of the union, as it were, called "jivan mukti," or "christ consciousness." This is the end game of yoga, and corresponds to what I call "outpouring divine love." It means we increasingly see the world as our own self and act accordingly -- "doing unto others" in service. That, in turn, accelerates our advancement into unity, which is another word for jivan mukti or christ consciousness."

From: http://www.aypsite.com/plus/274.html

 

Christi

Yes; again, agreed.

The knowing who we actually are, is permanent once it happens, and is experienced a bit differently, by everyone (some suddenly, some gradually, some noticing after-the-fact, such as I did; I'd heard of this, but couldn't imagine how it could happen; it can. )

All manner of experiences that limited mind might compare to what it's read, and say "Ah ha! Not enlightened yet!" can occur.

Before the identity shift, limited mind can have influence.

After identity shift, they can't; it's literally known-experienced that they don't have anything to do with this that I AM, just as an itch doesn't identify limited self .... unless it's a really major one, of course!!

Even outpouring of divine love is just what original awareness willingly knows-does once the knowing of oneness is complete; once identity truly resides there (and even partially, proportionately, prior to that shifting).

Then ... one is born .... ONE is born, now; Adya mentions in Emptiness Dancing that he left Annie (now Mukti) his wife, a note, saying "Today is my birthday!" on the day of his "final awakening".

The words make it sound like such a big deal.

It's normal.

A lot more normal than the ever-agitated dream of conceptual me could dream of being.

And it's real.

Enlightenment is real.

Enlightenment is all that's real.

And everyone is invited.

You are invited.

Come on home, now.



For ONE, it's where you've alway been; it's who you've always been.

And, for One, it beats the living crap out of the dream of conceptual partiality (aka Hell).

Wake Up!

You're going to anyway.

And not only is it nothing like you imagine.

It's nothing like you can imagine.

It's freedom.

We're all freedom.

Freedom beyond imagination; living unbound; loving unbound; humanity unbound ... expanding into ever-more-complete, ever-more-joyous, creative awareness creating the peace and joy of the beauty of this.

Ya wanna?

Come on IN, the Divine Is FINE!!



Wholeheartedly,

Kirtanman

[Kirtanman]

Here's a conversation that Wayne Wirs had with Adyashanti, which may shed some light on all this:



**
Blog Post by Wayne Wirs - Confirmation With Adyashanti
October 16, 2009

Last week, I went to see Adyashanti who was holding satsangs (talks) in Portland. At the end, during the concluding question and answer portion, I raised my hand and, when called on, approached the microphone…

Social Interactions

I thanked him for devoting his life to helping others even though it must bore the hell out of him (enlightened or not, I’m still a wise ass).

There was a kind of nervous laughter as the crowd suspected that I might be a heckler, but then I clarified it by saying, “To most people here, what you say is absolutely fascinating, but to you, it’s just everyday life. Do you get bored talking about this all the time?”

He smiled and replied something along these lines, “No.” (pause). “Sometimes I do, but now I only teach when I want to. I don’t usually talk about this stuff in my day-to-day life, especially with my family.”

Confirmation: I feel the same way. Even though enlightenment is a relatively new perspective for me, I’m still “Wayne” –there’s just no ego. I don’t think about enlightenment all the time, nor do I go around preaching it on street corners. To my friends, family and anyone else who knew ego-Wayne, I’ll still appear and act pretty much the same–it’s just that my perspective (and values) have changed since I was ego-Wayne.
Conditioned Reactions

I then asked Adyashanti if he still experienced conditioned reactions, specifically, self-consciousness. Then I realized I had to give him a little background–which was not my intention originally–so I plowed on, “This is going to sound cocky as hell, but there it is. I woke up about two months ago, and I’m still getting used to it. What surprises me most, are my reactions. For example, here we are, in front of about 300 people, and, though I feel no ’self’, I’m surprised I still feel a twinge of self-consciousness. Is this just a conditioned reaction? Does it go away?”

He said something along the lines that yes, these are just conditioned reactions, but he doesn’t feel them nearly as much as he used to. He said that his teacher once told him that it takes anywhere from five to 15 years after enlightenment for the mind to settle down.

Confirmation: This gave me an immediate sense of relief, as I have been troubled as to why my body still reacts in a very self-centered way (sudden actions that arise due to circumstances: frustration while driving, reaction to an unzipped fly, reactions to people giving me those curious looks (maybe due to the above mentioned fly), etc.). My mind and body just haven’t settled into it yet.

Three Levels of Consciousness

Then the big one, the one that had been confusing me the most. I asked, “My ‘center’ of awareness seems to shift around a lot. Sometimes I feel this powerful sense of Love and Light pouring through me,” –here he smiled and nodded knowingly. “Other times, I am the Witness, and even other times, I am just ‘here,’ walking, or talking, or thinking–Pure Consciousness. Is this your experience or does that settle down too?”

He replied along the lines, “Yes, there is a flowing,” (referring to himself), “sometimes Love pouring out, sometimes Stillness. This is my experience also. I’m always hesitant to talk about these things though, as I don’t want to give my students something else to cling to.”

Confirmation: This was nice to know. The “flowing” is a wonderful feeling. Additionally, hearing that this is his experience also, lends support to something that has been nagging at me ever since my awakening. I’ll talk about this later though, when the truth of it has “settled” into my brain (understanding comes much easier to me now if I just “relax into the thought” rather than trying to force/figure out a problem).

I thanked him, sat down, and then he closed out the satsang. The next day, I attended his six-hour intensive–though I didn’t have any other questions. It was pleasant, and deep, and funny. Of the big three, Adyashanti is definitely the most down-to-earth.

I left him a copy of Fading Toward Enlightenment, talked to a few people who had approached me about my experiences, and then headed back to my camp.

**

Source: http://waynewirs.com/2009/confirmation-with-adyashanti/

[Kirtanman]

quote:Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice

It is no wonder people believe that they will enter "a state of constant ecstasy". It says so in the Pali. It says so in many Buddhist teachings and religions. Seems to me that Adyashanti is trying to redefine truth. Is he saying that the Pali is misleading people? Adyashanti is a pioneer, bravely forging ahead where no man has gone before in the realm of spiritual interpretation of the theory of oneness or non-duality. Am I wrong?

Adyashanti is just an enlightened guy, from our time and our culture ... mine; anyway ... he's a year younger than I am, and we went to "sister" high schools; he's as "my culture" as one can get .... maybe that's why none of his statements bother me, even a little; Silicon Valley, California is a fairly culturally independent place, even without considering enlightenment.

And, as Adya says at the beginning of Emptiness Dancing, when he woke up ... he woke up out of Zen, too (he had been a practicing Zen Buddhist for close to fifteen years).

He's not trying to redefine anything; he's just trying to indicate enlightenment, as best he can, speaking from his own experiencing in his own words.

Saying something different than sacred writings isn't "redefining truth" ..... truth isn't found in sacred writings; truth is found in experiencing; in experiential knowing; only there .... not in words; not ever.

Sacred writings are like a map to New York City .... even the dot on the map that reads "New York City" .... is *not* New York City; New York City is a loud, congested place with lots of traffic, tall buildings, honking horns, potholes, and many thousands of aggressive drivers who seem to be irritated specifically at you, because they can be.

I know the difference between the dot on the map, and actual New York City, because I've been there.

You may not have been ... but you can go ... and anyone who's had at least a significant experience of enlightenment .... or something "right around" what most people would call it ...... are just trying to help you see/know how to get there (aka here), too.

It's the most important information you'll ever been given ... in this life ... or in any number of them.

The Buddha (Gautama Siddhartha) is a concept.

He may have been an historical person (I don't know; many people seem to think so, though ... and their guess is as good as my non-guess) ... but he's a concept ... a mental form .... now, to/for any of us; maybe somewhat deeper for some ... but if we go "all the way" deep, just as with Jesus, or any other ascended master ... we come to that place where we are the same ... original awareness, unmarred (or "unmaya'd" ) by any conceptual distortions.

Point Being: Adyashanti is alive now; Eckhart Tolle is alive now; Yogani is alive now; I'm alive now; some of the rest of us at the forum are alive now (I don't want to "out" anyone, who doesn't care to say anything about themselves; even Yogani says "no special claims here" ... and I'd say the same; there are no special claims ... just a certain transition of identity and knowingness that I'd been doing a disservice, if I wasn't willing to publicly acknowledge it.)

And it's not like there's "enlightened-dar" {like radar, only regarding enlightenment} per se .... the mind wants that kind of security, but enlightenment cannot be known in the realm of objectivity; it can only be known in your own experience.

As far as you who can trust: all enlightened teachers who are actually enlightened ... say something very, very close to the same thing. If they say enlightenment is anything *other* than identification with awareness and not form ... they may not be enlightened (even the Buddha, when asked if he was a man or a god, replied simply: "I am awake").



I've spent hundreds of hour with Adyashanti; I've talked with him on a few occasions, again just recently. I have a friend in Calfornia who used to be part of Adya's weekly poker game (yes, poker game); I have another friend who ran into Adya and his wife Mukti (formerly Annie) at the Whole Foods grocery store; I've volunteered at his office; Adya and Mukti are the nicest, most normal people you'll ever meet ... and they're as fully enlightened as anyone who has ever walked the planet. And infinitely more enlightened than the concepts of limited mind ... even if those concepts of limited mind are limited mind's conceptualizations of Buddha or Jesus or whoever.

I'm not saying this to defend them; they don't need defense.

I'm inviting you to know what they know; what I know; what others here know by listening to what we're all saying; by looking to where we're all pointing.

When a sage points at the moon, the fool looks at the finger; the wise man, at the moon.

Getting caught up in limited mind's ideas about what somebody said, and comparing it to what somebody else said ... is giving yourself the finger .... when you could have the moon, and sun, and the stars and all that is.

quote:
If I am interpreting this correctly, oneness is the 'apparent indivisibility of seeing and the seen'. Either that or oneness/non-duality theory is incorrectly refering to that 'infinite awarness which encompasses all' as the all. Perhaps we all share the same universal Isvara, but that Isvara seems to be a distinct entity from the world of form.

Interpretation obscures enlightenment.

And TI ... I'm not trying to give you a hard time, here; I'm really trying to help ... you're just circling (it seems) in trying to catch hold to what somebody said.

I recognize this, because I did it for a long time.

Even authoritative sources aren't really authoritative; they don't have the truth ... they can only point to the truth.

YOU'RE the truth; I'm just trying to help you see how to read the map, so you can know this for yourself.

Mental comparison and evaluation won't do it.

I enjoy some of the maps and models of consciousness, because I get how they work based on my own experience.

Prior to that time, I read literally hundreds of books, trying to figure out who is right.

Information is part of objectivity; reality is subjective .... experientially knowing oneself as the oneness of awareness.

From the view of "fully inclusive" ... I Am the full field of awareness, including its content (called Sadashiva in Kashmir Shaivism).

From the view of wholeness of awareness, yet noticing distinction between whole subjectivity and the totality of the content of awareness ... I Am awareness, independent of form).

It's not either-or ... it's both-and.

I can say this with confidence, because I can drop into either aspect at will; it's not a big deal ... normally I don't even think about it (quite possibly because both Sadashiva and Ishvara are on *this* side of thought ... in undivided, thoughtless awareness).

If you'd like to verify all this in your own experiencing, keep practicing, don't fight and don't doubt ..... just relax.

I hope this helps.

Wholeheartedly,

Kirtanman



PS- Some people seem like they want to argue; you (TI) don't seem this way ... you seem like you really want to know. And so, I'm spending this time, not to refute your statements ... but to genuinely try to help you know what you seem to be seeking to know. And so, please know: I fully respect everything you have to say ... and I fully know that no one realizes enlightenment while being stuck in what "somebody said" .... enlightenment doesn't work that way.

Enlightenment is letting go of attachment to form.

[stevenbhow]

Be what you are not who you are.

[Christi]

Hi Kirtanman,

 

quote:quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Christi
One thing we are beginning to see which I believe could be clouding the issue around enlightenment, is a number of people basically saying: “I’m enlightened, and my experience is like this, so all enlightened people must experience this too”. I think this is based on the “top of the mountain” idea of enlightenment. It is the idea that you have either arrived, or you haven’t, and if you have then you know everything there is to know about enlightenment. Obviously, as the process of transformation expands and deepens beyond the initial stages of awakening, this idea begins to erode.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Very much agreed; I tried to clarify this, above .... but it's tough to do, with words.

It's not that hard to do with words. You just say that enlightenment is an ever deepening and ever expanding process. See... easy.

 The danger of not doing so, is that it could lead someone to what Yogani calls "The illusion of having arrived".

Someone could think: "O.K. this is it, I've reached the goal" and give up their spiritual practices. Then they could be hanging out saying: "ecstasy has nothing to do with enlightenment" or "divine love has nothing to do with enlightenment", simply because they stopped their practices at the witness stage: identification of the self with pure awareness (the formless) but still separate from form.

Here is an interesting quote from Yogani on the illusion of having arrived:


"Enlightenment, the direct realization of who we are, is unassuming and does not proclaim itself, except by compassionate assistance offered for the benefit of everyone. Conversely, where there is the assumption of attainment or of having arrived, actions can be distorted accordingly, leading to a rigid teaching, proselytizing, sectarianism, and a shift in focus from spiritual practices to the one who has supposedly arrived. It is a pitfall of the mind commonly found on either the side of the teacher, the student, or both.

When consciousness is identified with the mind, there will be a great need to proclaim victory over the forces of ignorance. This breeds more ignorance, of course. There can be no enlightenment proclaimed on the level of the mind. The functioning of the mind can only be seen as a symptom of the illumination which comes from within, or the lack of it. We may conclude that an inner flow is occurring or not, but we can never proclaim with accuracy that we have arrived, for that is beyond the province of the mind.

By definition, both the cause and the destination of true self-inquiry are beyond the mind, in the abiding inner witness, which never assumes or proclaims anything. It just is.

When there is some proclaiming going on, it is wise to ask, “Who is proclaiming?” and then let go in stillness." [Yogani, Self inquiry, dawn of the witness]


Christi

[Christi]

p.s.

 

quote:Kirtanman wrote:
And so, on the one hand; enlightenment is just a word; words are no longer primary; actuality is primary.

On the other hand, conveying that enlightenment is attainable ... may be helpful is freeing some who are reading this from the conceptual prison of "but I read"; enlightenment is not found there; enlightenment is found here, the moment all ideas are released.

I am sure that conveying that enlightenment is attainable is helpful to many, but continually saying: "All you need to do is relax, and notice that you have always been enlightened all along, is, in my opinion, a more questionable persuit.

It reminds me of another passage from Yogani's Self Inquiry book:

"The premise is that if one engages in this kind of thinking for long enough, then eventually the letting go that results will lead to realization, and the cognition of That which is beyond the play occurring in time and space, which is presumed to have no reality whatsoever. This “realization” can be instant. So it is said. There is an inconsistency in this approach. Not for everyone, but for a large percentage of the population. The problem is that for those who are yet to cultivate abiding inner silence (the witness) this kind of self-inquiry will be largely intellectual. That which is being sought in letting go is a thought object in the mind also. So it is thoughts about thoughts. The mind playing with the mind. It can go on for a very long time....


It is like asking a bird who is yet to grow wings to jump off the top of a building. The bird with fully developed and functioning wings will keep saying to the one with undeveloped wings, “Come on, you can do it. Just jump. Don’t worry about the wings.” Does this make any sense? The wings have to come first. Then we can fly." [p23]

Christi

[Kirtanman]

quote:Originally posted by Christi

p.s.

 

quote:Kirtanman wrote:
And so, on the one hand; enlightenment is just a word; words are no longer primary; actuality is primary.

On the other hand, conveying that enlightenment is attainable ... may be helpful is freeing some who are reading this from the conceptual prison of "but I read"; enlightenment is not found there; enlightenment is found here, the moment all ideas are released.

I am sure that conveying that enlightenment is attainable is helpful to many, but continually saying: "All you need to do is relax, and notice that you have always been enlightened all along, is, in my opinion, a more questionable persuit.

It reminds me of another passage from Yogani's Self Inquiry book:

"The premise is that if one engages in this kind of thinking for long enough, then eventually the letting go that results will lead to realization, and the cognition of That which is beyond the play occurring in time and space, which is presumed to have no reality whatsoever. This “realization” can be instant. So it is said. There is an inconsistency in this approach. Not for everyone, but for a large percentage of the population. The problem is that for those who are yet to cultivate abiding inner silence (the witness) this kind of self-inquiry will be largely intellectual. That which is being sought in letting go is a thought object in the mind also. So it is thoughts about thoughts. The mind playing with the mind. It can go on for a very long time....


It is like asking a bird who is yet to grow wings to jump off the top of a building. The bird with fully developed and functioning wings will keep saying to the one with undeveloped wings, “Come on, you can do it. Just jump. Don’t worry about the wings.” Does this make any sense? The wings have to come first. Then we can fly." [p23]

Christi

Hi Christi,

I agree, completely and enthusiastically, with Yogani's quote, above.

Originally Written By Yogani
"That which is being sought in letting go is a thought object in the mind also. So it is thoughts about thoughts. The mind playing with the mind. It can go on for a very long time...."

"Thoughts about thoughts" is exactly what I, like Yogani, am counseling against.

The main point of my emphasis that enlightenment is always already here is that, well, enlightenment is always already here .... in reality.

However, seekers are not living in and from reality, they are living from conceptual conditioning, either almost wholly, or very fractionally ... but still a little bit in prison is still a little bit in prison.

The context of my comment was:

There's no "I'm there and you're not" in reality; nothing less than the full field of awareness is ever actually here for anyone.

The wholeness of awareness is what everyone's experience actually arises from; it can't be somewhere else.

However, conceptual conditioning has been reinforced in the psyche and in the physical form .... the body-mind ... in the looping of reactive conditioning, recreating more memory and imagination from memory and imagination .... which in turn creates long-term memory of conceptual conditioning ... and even more pertinent ..... specific, ever-vacillating individual conceptual conditioning ... which is literally stored in the body at the protein level.

That's where yoga and meditation come in.

Yes, the wholeness of awareness is always already here.

Most of us, however, require quite a bit of practicing and utter dedication to consistent practicing .... of meditation and yoga .... in order *to* (literally) re-program and re-create our neurobiology, so that we *can* experience the enlightenment and liberation of original awareness that's always already here, consciously and automatically .... effortlessly; that's when the new birth happens ... and that's when conscious creating from the outpouring of divine love (which is experienced much differently than mind imagines; the one that use to be here, at least! It's much more subtle, much more normal-seeming than imagined ... yet that term still fully qualifies, and is fully celebrated).

The fact is: unenlightenment is re-projected every moment, via identification of a small part of awareness with the conditioned reactions of the body-mind.

However, just letting go and mentally know that .... while it helps .... probably won't end the dream .... it's always worth a shot though, any moment it can be sincerely mustered.

At the same time, though, patience is very much advised; for most of us, it's a process, apparently, which gets to the point where you "just do it" ... just practice; just dedicate your entire life to enlightenment ... while, at the same time, letting life be normal.

Enlightenment can't be turbocharged; it's a very organic process, and experienced quite individually, until individuality dissolves ... but even then, the body-mind and its experiences have their own ekarasa ... their own flavor of oneness.

As you've likely seen me write quite a few times:

I fully credit the practices of AYP with facilitating enlightenment, here.

Fully.

AYP Works.

All the way home.

Am I saying "AYP is absolutely necessary for you"? (Anyone.)

Not at all; that can't be known; everyone awakens somewhat uniquely.

However, yogic practices, inquiry and meditation have all been the most powerfully replicable methods to enlightenment, all over the world, and for many thousands of years.

AYP, via its custom combination of pranayama and mantric meditation, combined with inquiry and other AYP techniques, and most importantly, its open-source, open-architecture nature, combined with its living community (this would be *us* ) .... seems to effectively be "Yoga 2.0" ... or, one form of it, at least.

And so, I'm not suggesting that anyone do anything other than continue daily practices; I still practice daily; there's just no goal in doing so; it's something the body-mind does.

My sense of it is:

If those of us who are free, who are home, extend a hand, in the form of sincere words and the liberated awareness writing them ... that liberated awareness is all that's actually here ... and describe in detail how this works ..... it's not that the result will be instant enlightenment .... though it might be .... but it could conceivably shorten someone's total sadhana by months, if not years, decades or even lifetimes.

How many decades-long yogic practitioners, who are not enlightened, are out there.

It doesn't have to be that way.

Enlightenment is just living from the reality of how consciousness actually works; that's all.

Originally Written By Yogani
"That which is being sought in letting go is a thought object in the mind also. So it is thoughts about thoughts. The mind playing with the mind. It can go on for a very long time...."

The entire purpose of my recent posts in this thread is to help the dynamic of the "mind playing with the mind" as Yogani says .... go on for a much shorter time; to help eradicate the confusion that keeps people "practicing in circles" for much longer than needed.

AYP is about refining the technology of yoga; distilling it, making it more efficient, extending it .... that's what we're all about, here.

My comments on the true nature of awareness and enlightenment is simply one small contribution to this overall process.

I hope this is helpful.


Wholeheartedly,

Kirtanman

[Kirtanman]

quote:Originally posted by Christi

By definition, both the cause and the destination of true self-inquiry are beyond the mind, in the abiding inner witness, which never assumes or proclaims anything. It just is.

When there is some proclaiming going on, it is wise to ask, “Who is proclaiming?” and then let go in stillness." [Yogani, Self inquiry, dawn of the witness][/blue]


Christi

Thanks for being rigorous with this, Christi; good stuff is coming out of this dialog.

Yes, of course:

It is wise to ask "who is proclaiming"?

If it's not original awareness itself, it's usually one of two situations:

*An ego that wants to be seen as enlightened (wants the recognition that only ego cares about, which obviously can never have anything to do with enlightenment; enlightenment literally can't conceive of the separation which could project that desire.)

*An ego who wants to be enlightened (finished with the journey; able to say "this is it", and so on).

If it is original awareness itself, it's not really proclaiming; more natural expression.

That's what Adyashanti does, what Wayne is doing, what Yogani is doing, what others of us are doing.

Ego ... illusion .... can be very tricky ..... just as it can produce claims of "premature enlightenment" ... it can produce hesitation to say anything about enlightenment; just as it can produce a false sense of attainment .... it can produce a false sense of non-attainment.

If enlightened awareness somehow arises via a body-mind that uses the words "I" and "enlightened" in the same sentence, or seems to be conveying that sense, in a way that another body-mind might take exception to .... the beauty and power of what is being said can be obscured by the clouds of limited mind.

AYP has always been an attainment-averse community ("expression-wise", I mean); that's good .... none of this is about attainment.

Yet, at the same time .... it can potentially be quite helpful for some of us, other than Yogani, who have now realized the fullness of the process, to simply acknowledge realization of the fullness of the process ... and as Yogani has said many times, as Adyashanti has said, and as I am saying:

And so, it simply continues.

quote:Originally written by Yogani
Both the cause and the destination of true self-inquiry are beyond the mind, in the abiding inner witness, which never assumes or proclaims anything. It just is.

Which is the essential point of what I'm saying in this thread: the stillness beyond the mind is always, already here. At a certain point in practicing and its results, conscious identification shifts from the dream of being the body-mind to knowing and experiencing life as original awareness, living unbound.

To keep silent about this would be to succumb to ego from the other side ... something that is simply can't happen, now.

Extending the invitation is important as well; it's part of what the stillness does, now.

That's part of the shift as well ..... from reaching for the extended hand ... to being the extending hand.

It's not an ego thing; it's not a mind thing; it's beyond and before both; it's just how original awareness operates.

Original awareness can't not know its completion any more than the dream of partiality can not think it is partial.

Would we be better off if original awareness appearing has Yogani had not said anything about the possibilities of yoga? Or if original awareness appearing as Adyashanti had not expressed and confirmed liberation and enlightenment, as Adyashanti?

I have a friend in California who used to attend satsang with Adyashanti when he literally would have eight or ten people attend regularly.

Well, about three years back ... I was spewing "Adya" right, left and center ... and finally my friend spoke up and said something like:

"You speak so highly of Adyashanti; why? I just don't see it ...."

I gave him my reasons (this was back when I had them .... ), along with my experiencing of Adya's consciousness, and the truth of what he expressed.

"Long story short" ... it came out that my friend, who was also our same age (Adya's and mine) ... felt like a peer of Adya's ... and when Adya began to express realization .... my friend felt uncomfortable.

And, in my conversation with him, he said something that I deeply, deeply respected ... he said:

"You know what it is? I'm jealous of him. I used to feel like we were basically even, and now he's saying he's 'there' ... and I want to be there, too! I guess, that's pretty egoic, huh?"

My response was along the lines of:

"Well, I wouldn't actually *say* that, but technically speaking, well, I guess so .... but ... that's actually awesome to realize; now, you can just let that go, and see how it goes ..."

He was a big Tolle fan, and I mentioned liking both Adya and Tolle because they're so similar in teachings, outlook and consciousness, and my friend said:

"Yeah, they actually are .... I guess I really need to give Adya another look ..."

Did he? Did it work out well?

I actually don't know; I moved from California shortly after that, and lost touch with him.

And please note: I'm not saying you (Christi) or anyone else, is doing this, or thinking this .... my point isn't with how this relates to what's going on here, but rather that any time enlightenment is realized, that "a prophet is without honor in his own country" ... and I'm talking about it from (in this case) Adya's standpoint.

I heard this story from my friend; I've heard similar ones from Adya .... sometimes it can seem that one is proclaiming ... when One is actually inviting.

I would seem reasonable to say that of all the body-minds that enlightenment has come to seem to be emanating through .... that it's likely that not a single one of them has been universally accepted by limited-mind as enlightened ... because limited-mind can only presume some semblance of individuality, somehow saying "I am enlightened" ... but if those words are used, and enlightenment is genuine, it's not limited mind using those words; it's original awareness.


And it is like that; there's really no "I" in the usual sense to even be enlightened; enlightenment is the cessation of that idea.



The difference is:

If it's "I AM ... and you're not" .... that's proclaiming.

If it's "I AM .... we all AM ... and I AM writing is inviting I AM reading to know, too" ..... that/this is inviting.




If there's any exception to take with what I'm saying here, it might be with phrasing ... but not with intent; an invitation is being extended, that's all.

The awareness actually reading these words and the awareness writing these words is the same awareness.

Which is all I'm actually saying, here.



It's part of the way it's all happening, that's all; there's no decision ... and no one to make it.

Someone asked Adya in a satsang why he teaches, and he responded:

"I have no idea; I realize that you may have a hard time understanding that, but it's true; I have no idea".

"Like that."

Wholeheartedly,

Kirtanman

[Tibetan_Ice]

Hi Christi and Kirtanman
  Thank you very much for this discussion. I am still here. I'm carefully preparing my next set of questions and dealing with a strange phenomenon.

  Towards the end of reading your posts last night, a void opened up in the back of my head level with my eyes and a strange formation of light presented itself. It looks like the total accumulation of all galaxies in a sort of a squashed triangular shape surrounded by an immense void. It is a constant vision, that is, it's not going away. I see it as I go through my daily activities, even as I sit here now. Then, last night (this morning), I woke up at 5:00 am wide awake. My usual waking time is 7:00 am. So I lay in bed and tried to go back to sleep. I just lay there in bed, kind of watching that strange light galaxy conglomeration for a while and tried to fall back asleep. After I while, I realized my body was sleeping but I wasn't. It was a surprise. My alarm went off and my body "woke up".

  Anyway, like I have indicated, I'm still working on my next set of questions, but in the meantime, I found this next quote by Ken Wilber that I thought I'd present because I'm wondering if this is the AYP witnessing state or something else..

quote:
So Who Are You?

by Ken Wilber

The witnessing of awareness can persist through waking, dreaming and deep sleep.

The Witness is fully available in any state, including your own present state of awareness right now.

So I'm going to talk you into this state, or try to, using what are known in Buddhism as "pointing out instructions."

I am not going to try to get you into a different state of consciousness, or an altered state of consciousness, or a non-ordinary state.

I am going to simply point out something that is already occurring in your own present, ordinary, natural state.

So let's start by just being aware of the world around us.

Look out there at the sky, and just relax your mind; let your mind and the sky mingle.

Notice the clouds floating by. Notice that this takes no effort on your part.

Your present awareness, in which these clouds are floating, is very simple, very easy, effortless, spontaneous.

You simply notice that there is an effortless awareness of the clouds.

The same is true of those trees, and those birds, and those rocks.

You simply and effortlessly witness them.

Look now at the sensations in your own body.

You can be aware of whatever bodily feelings are present-perhaps pressure where you are sitting, perhaps warmth in your tummy, maybe tightness in your neck.

But even if these feelings are tight and tense, you can easily be aware of them.

These feelings arise in your present awareness, and that awareness is very simple, easy, effortless, spontaneous.

You simply and effortlessly witness them.

Look at the thoughts arising in your mind.

You might notice various images, symbols, concepts, desires, hopes and fears, all spontaneously arising in your awareness.

They arise, stay a bit, and pass.

These thoughts and feelings arise in your present awareness, and that awareness is very simple, effortless, spontaneous.

You simply and effortlessly witness them.

So notice: you can see the clouds float by because you are not those clouds-you are the witness of those clouds.

You can feel bodily feelings because you are not those feelings-you are the witness of those feelings.

You can see thoughts float by because you are not those thoughts-you are the witness of those thoughts.

Spontaneously and naturally, these things all arise, on their own, in your present, effortless awareness.

So who are you?

You are not objects out there, you are not feelings, you are not thoughts-you are effortlessly aware of all those, so you are not those.

Who or what are you?

Say it this way to yourself: I have feelings, but I am not those feelings.

Who am I?

I have thoughts, but I am not those thoughts.

Who am I?

I have desires, but I am not those desires.

Who am I?

So you push back into the source of your own awareness.

You push back into the Witness, and you rest in the Witness.

I am not objects, not feelings, not desires, not thoughts.

But then people usually make a big mistake.

They think that if they rest in the Witness, they are going to see something or feel something-something really neat and special.

But you won't see anything.

If you see something, that is just another object-another feeling, another thought, another sensation, another image.

But those are all objects; those are what you are not.

No, as you rest in the Witness-realizing, I am not objects, I am not feelings, I am not thoughts-all you will notice is a sense of freedom, a sense of liberation, a sense of release-release from the terrible constriction of identifying with these puny little finite objects, your little body and little mind and little ego, all of which are objects that can be seen, and thus are not the true Seer, the real Self, the pure Witness, which is what you really are.

So you won't see anything in particular.

Whatever is arising is fine.

Clouds float by in the sky, feelings float by in the body, thoughts float by in the mind-and you can effortlessly witness all of them.

They all spontaneously arise in your own present, easy, effortless awareness.

And this witnessing awareness is not itself anything specific you can see.

It is just a vast, background sense of freedom-or pure emptiness-and in that pure emptiness, which you are, the entire manifest world arises.

You are that freedom, openness, emptiness-and not any itty bitty thing that arises in it.

Resting in that empty, free, easy, effortless witnessing, notice that the clouds are arising in the vast space of your awareness.

The clouds are arising within you-so much so, you can taste the clouds, you are one with the clouds.

It is as if they are on this side of your skin, they are so close.

The sky and your awareness have become one, and all things in the sky are floating effortlessly through your own awareness.

You can kiss the sun, swallow the mountain, they are that close.

Zen says "Swallow the Pacific Ocean in a single gulp," and that's the easiest thing in the world, when inside and outside are no longer two, when subject and object are nondual, when the looker and looked at are One Taste.

You see?

TI

[Christi]

Hi Kirtanman,

 

quote:
Thanks for being rigorous with this, Christi; good stuff is coming out of this dialog.

You know me K-man, always rigorous! There is too much at stake in terms of human evolution to not be.

 

quote:Originally written by Yogani:
Conversely, where there is the assumption of attainment or of having arrived, actions can be distorted accordingly, leading to a rigid teaching, proselytizing, sectarianism, and a shift in focus from spiritual practices to the one who has supposedly arrived. It is a pitfall of the mind commonly found on either the side of the teacher, the student, or both.

I thought that was an especially interesting couple of lines. I had to look up the word proselytizing as I didn't know what it meant.

 

quote:Originally written by Yogani:
It is like asking a bird who is yet to grow wings to jump off the top of a building. The bird with fully developed and functioning wings will keep saying to the one with undeveloped wings, “Come on, you can do it. Just jump. Don’t worry about the wings.” Does this make any sense? The wings have to come first. Then we can fly."

K-man,
How do you know that people who do not yet have the wings to fly with, are not going to follow your advice, and attempt to jump from the nest before they are ready? What's the clean up plan for the kundalini messes that often follow?

Christi

[Anthem]

quote:
How can we distinguish between someone who is truly enlightened and someone who is perhaps a very intelligent spiritual marketer-person that only got a taste and is claiming to be enlightened? Or how do you know that the person even had a valid experience?

Hi TI,

Getting back to your original question which I think is extremely valid. I am not sure we can be absolutely certain and would suggest it doesn't matter.

We all have an innate ability to recognize the truth of "the Absolute" (insert whatever word is meaningful for you) prior to the guessing mind getting involved. If the words of a given individual ring true for you and you feel they are expanding then that is the value right then and there.

I have found 6 year olds to be "enlightening", I find a number of perspectives here in this forum expanding, Wayne Wirs words certainly deepened the witnessing here as have Yogani, Adyashanti, Byron Katie and a host of others along the way.

We have to be discerning for ourselves, in the end we alone are responsible for our spiritual path and the inner wisdom in our hearts, (not the guessing mind), is our guiding light. If our desire is true for the right reasons, the right answers will come along. If we are all about getting a better ego, then we will certainly get side tracked easily.

 

quote:Or better yet, how can we determine that someone is enlightened when the experience of enlightenment that they describe as proof of enlightenment is very similar to psychic experiences by un-enlightened people? (The void, past lives, remote viewing..)

From my perspective, way too much emphasis on experiences which although nice signs of progress are ultimately a dime a dozen. Experiences are not accurate measures of a person's inner condition or our own inner condition on a daily basis. Plenty of people have had experiences of the void, absolute, witnessing, ecstasy, bliss etc. few are likely "enlightened" whatever that means to you. It is likely a unique definition for everyone and as we all know once a definition is used, it can only ever at best be a shade of the living reality which is always flowing and changing.

Since experiences are fleeting, more importantly, what is the current state of mind of a person/ body on a daily basis? How much "me" is in the equation of every action and word? Is the energy of the individual flowing continuously in the direction of the greater good or is it subtly seeking to validate "i/ me". Is love apparent in action?

These are more precise measures from my perspective and at best, only accurately applied to ourselves.

[Kirtanman]

Hi Christi & All,

quote:Originally posted by Kirtanman
Thanks for being rigorous with this, Christi; good stuff is coming out of this dialog.

quote:Originally posted by Christi
You know me K-man, always rigorous! There is too much at stake in terms of human evolution to not be.

Agreed wholeheartedly; as I'm sure you know, that's the basis for everything I'm saying here, as well.

quote:Originally written by Yogani:
Conversely, where there is the assumption of attainment or of having arrived, actions can be distorted accordingly, leading to a rigid teaching, proselytizing, sectarianism, and a shift in focus from spiritual practices to the one who has supposedly arrived. It is a pitfall of the mind commonly found on either the side of the teacher, the student, or both.

Yes, emphatically agreed; I attempted to address this in my last post; perhaps I was not completely clear, regarding my views on this dynamic.

Yogani uses some key terms in his statement above, which clue us in to exactly what he is talking about:

"assumption of attainment or of having arrived"
"actions can be distorted accordingly"
"supposedly arrived"
"a pitfall of the mind"

... in a nutshell, Yogani is referring to non-actual enlightenment, not to actual enlightenment.

Limited mind isn't only subject to pitfalls; it basically is a pitfall.

If you care to re-read my dialog with Tibetan Ice, this was my main point of emphasis: turning to any forms in mind, any concepts, any latching on to statements made in books ... is much, much more likely to occlude and preclude enlightenment, than it is to facilitate enlightenment.

The past is a concept; all ideas about enlightenment are concepts; they have nothing at all to do with what we're discussing here.

That's why I am repeatedly warning against the fallacy of trusting in any conceptual mental forms, related to enlightenment.

If nothing else, Christi, maybe you can take some solace in the fact that this dialog of ours will hopefully at least serve to emphasize the points that you, Yogani (per his writings you're quoting) and I, would all say are very important for anyone interested in enlightenment to be clear concerning.

And that's one of the main reasons I very sincerely appreciate your rigor, in questioning; we're truly on the same page, as far as the importance of emphasizing the very items you're expressing concern about, thanks again!



The only aspect of this discussion I'm a bit unclear about, is that the very points you're raising, are points that I feel I've repeatedly addressed, presumably in the same way you would like to see them addressed (meaning: I feel I've warned against the very things you're raising as concerns) .... and so I'm not sure what the specific basis for your concern is, based on what I'm saying in this thread. If you can do anything to clarify this, it will be greatly appreciated (and may well serve to shorten the "back and forth", here).

quote:Originally posted by Christi
I thought that was an especially interesting couple of lines. I had to look up the word proselytizing as I didn't know what it meant.

I was pretty sure I knew, but looked it up, just to be sure:

proselytize: "to convert or attempt to convert as a proselyte; recruit."

What's a "proselyte"?

"A new convert to a doctrine or religion."

(Just to clarify for anyone who may not care to look it up. )

Did you (Christi) point out that term (proselytizing) because you see some proselytizing apparently happening, in this thread?

If you do see such, please point it out; I fully concur with Yogani, and presumably with you, that this is not something we'd like to see, nor is it something that would be helpful to anyone; I'll gladly join in helping to eradicate any proselytizing, and/or any misperceptions concerning proselytizing, in terms of the dialog in this thread, as best I can.



And, regarding the term proselytizing, it turns out, my definition had indeed morphed a bit over the years, while still remaining relatively accurate, I'd say.

Prior to looking up the term "afresh", I probably would have defined proselytizing as:

"to annoy in the name of God."

quote:Originally written by Yogani:
It is like asking a bird who is yet to grow wings to jump off the top of a building. The bird with fully developed and functioning wings will keep saying to the one with undeveloped wings, “Come on, you can do it. Just jump. Don’t worry about the wings.” Does this make any sense? The wings have to come first. Then we can fly."

Again, wholeheartedly agreed.

Truth is always inherently helpful and uplifting.

Stating truth is always inherently helpful and uplifting.

"The wings have to come first, and then we can fly."
~Yogani

Yes, this is true; on every level of consciousness ... and brings us to the opportunity for an important clarification .... which I will do my best to state clearly, yet again:

*Enlightenment is a description for conscious experiencing of the full field of awareness, including identifying primarily with (and "as"), and living subjectively from original unagitated awareness (aka self, aka true nature, aka pure bliss consciousness).

*Unenlightenment is a description for unconsciously identifying solely with various remembered aspects of objectivity (thoughts, feelings, conditioned memories, body, limited mind, personality, relationships, possessions, beliefs, etc.), and thereby misperceiving and experiencing self to be partial and unwhole.

*In unenlightenment, original unagitated awareness (aka enlightenment) hasn't "gone anywhere"; if it wasn't always already here, nothing else at all would be, or could be; appearances arise display and subside within a single field. This isn't simply non-dual or metaphysical philosophy; if you prefer the single field of reality to be indicated by scientific and/or mathematical symbolism, simply talk to any qualified quantum physicist. They may be unclear on the consciousness aspect, but will certainly verify the non-duality of reality. Reality can't be dual; it can only be perceived as dual.

*The terms Enlightenment and Unenlightenment, as defined above, are just that: terms, definitions; indicators which can hopefully help to demystify some of the many misconceptions surrounding enlightenment ... which is nothing more nor less than consciously knowing-living as original unagitated awareness.

*I'm not suggesting anyone should attempt flight before growing wings; that's one of the least enjoyable experiences the "pre-winged" can have. It's very different to say, "Hey ... made it home; it's doable ... you can, too!!" ... than it is to say "I am enlightened; follow me; I shall lead you; I have attained".

If you hear anyone saying such things, it is best to arise and move quickly ... filled with enthusiasm and gratitude for the inherent sense of truth which motivates the movement ......... in the opposite direction.



*If you notice the vibe of what Wayne Wirs is saying, and how he is saying it; what Adyashanti is saying and how he is saying it, and what I am saying and how I am saying it .... all we're saying is: enlightenment is real; it's wonderful, in a normal and real way; you can actually have it, too; all you have to do is drop all your ideas about it ... and everything else.

*It's the part after the "dot dot dot" which usually requires some time with yoga (or equivalent spiritual disciplines) and meditation.

*This is because the misconceptions of partiality are literally encoded into the neurobiology of the body-mind; yoga is the science of eradicating these misconceptions (which take the forms of energetic blocks which are eradicated from neurobiology and neuropsychology, via the processes of re-creation which are facilitated by yoga practices, and the kundalini which awakens and arises from yoga practices, based around a foundation of deep meditation).

*It's not about attainment or arrival on the part of any individual; enlightenment is the result of the dissolution of the concept of individuality.

*Adyashanti says: "I am a window; look through me, not at me." "Like that." I could care less if anyone perceives "Kirtanman" as enlightened or not, other than to point out that there's not actually a Kirtanman to be enlightened, and so, having such a misconception would inherently obscure reality.

*I'm not interested in my enlightenment; I'm interested in yours.



*The mind-trap that Yogani and I, along with others, are pointing to, is: premature presumption of enlightenment always involves activity of limited mind .... if you think you're enlightened, you're not. If you care if anyone thinks you're enlightened, you're not. If you have any interest in positioning yourself as enlightened, you're not.

*What exactly does "limited mind" mean? It means focus on form (thoughts, concepts, beliefs, ideas, energies, feelings, perceptions). That's why neo-advaita is so problematic. Neo-advaitins run around saying: "This is it!!" And limited ego-mind goes "Oh, okay, awesome; I am free!!"

And then, somewhere between a couple of minutes and a couple of days elapse, and the newly faux-advaitin, faux-liberated ego-mind starts feeling like: "But this *sucks*; I was led to believe it was *good*; I'm still a bundle of desires, fears, doubts and conflicts! But Sri Swami Neoadvaitananda says I'm now free, and that all the great swamis were just dressing up what's always already here. Crap."

*And so, I will do my best to be very emphatically clear:

I am not saying or suggesting or promoting or teaching anything that is even the tiniest bit like the above-described neo-advaitin view.

*What I am saying is: the true "This Is It" is that the full field of original, unagitated awareness is what is always already here; for anyone who is not living from this place, I am saying this by way of encouragement.

*What I am saying is this:

*Not at all long ago, I did not experience or live from or know myself to be this full field of original unagitated awareness myself.

*Then I had experiences of this, then identity began to shift to this original awareness, intermittently at first and then with more stability; recently it has stabilized here, and sense-of-identity with the limited self no longer arises.

*I can tell you ... I am telling you ... from living experiencing now, that everything {accurate } that has ever been written about the utter freedom of no longer dreaming I'm a limited body-mind, and knowing I am liberated, infinite awareness .... is true, and that it can be fully known in your living experiencing, too.

*As most AYPers who have followed my posts, and/or my presence here at this forum know, this living experiencing of complete liberation is a fairly recent occurrence.

The implications of this are:

AYP Works; AYP Worked For Me; AYP Can Work For You, Too.

(And I am not saying the process must involve AYP, or even anything all that similar ... just that for most of us, there is a process ... and there are many processes in many traditions proven to work to restore original, liberated awareness to the full knowing of itself.)

*I have been very fortunate in that, after a few years of sporadic fits and starts with yoga and meditation, I discovered and began practicing AYP a bit over three years ago, and it has worked out very, very well for me. There's been a fairly consistent "liberation-ward" trajectory reflected in my posts over time, and in the many, many many words those posts contain.

*Recently, as I noticed somewhat after the fact, identity literally shifted to the formless awareness; just as you feel like "you" in whatever way you do ... possibly a few readers experience self/non-self (the view/subjectivity life is actually lived "from"; the experiencer of all your experiences) as formless awareness ... most readers, though, are presumably feeling somewhat identified with form.

*Sense of identification with form is unenlightenment; it is the dream occuring within reality.

*When I say "identification", I mean "the general feeling that feels like who you are".

*And so, what's moving here ... what is writing these words .... is love; that's all. Enlightenment is real; enlightenment is all that's real. It's available for all of us; it's just the complete living-knowing of how consciousness actually works, as opposed to living as a tiny slice of conceptuality, dreaming you are separate from your own original wholeness.

*All I am doing here is offering encouragement, to help others who may not be living as liberation yet, to shorten their journey home, if possible; to invite you all to the the living experiencing of this beautiful, yet simply real, liberated reality as soon as you are fully willing.

*Creating this full willingness in your own life is what meditation and yoga practices (and other accurate spiritual practices and paths) are for, and what they help facilitate.

"You become a living invitation."
~Adyashanti

*And so, there is seeking, there is releasing, there is finding, there is knowing; there is liberation ... and there is liberating ... inviting; that's all.



*Outlining this can only be helpful; all spiritual teachers from every tradition, throughout history, and all around the world ... especially those teachers of the kind that most of us here seem to resonate with, and certainly including Yogani .... are each, all and only saying the same thing.

*Perhaps an example will help. Imagine we are Advanced Exercise Practices. We acknowledge that there are a lot of good exercise systems out there, yet we see the opportunity for improvement by creating an environment of "open source development", to try to make the good exercise techniques and frameworks we know of, even better. Because we're about Exercise, our goal, instead of "Enlightenment" is a loosely understood, often mystifying, often somewhat distorted condition known as "Health" ... that those who haven't realized the full benefits of Advanced Exercise Practices can only conceive of, since they don't know Health in experience.

I'm simply saying: complete Health is real; there is a point at which Health is experienced, 100%, and it can't be not-known when it happens; it is real, and having it ... being it ... is who and what we each and all actually are now. I am telling you all this for one reason: I feel an inherent arising of invitation to you (you, reading these words) to enjoy Health, too; you, of course, can have it too; Health is what you actually, ever are; a lifetime of conditioned conceptuality has just helped to insure you don't consciously know this. That's where practices, where awareness, and where accepting invitation ... can all be helpful.

*I am emphatically NOT saying anything along the lines of "don't exercise" (practice); that would be like saying "you're all already Health; regardless of your current condition ... don't exercise!" That would be counter-productive to the invitation I'm extending, and it is not something original awareness could, let alone would, ever say.

*There's still exercise (in actuality: daily practices) here, even though it's not done to gain anything; Health is living this life, now ... it's more an arising of action in the body-mind, inherently arising from the original awareness of Health I AM.

*Once again: just as ego might claim "premature enlightenment" ... it is also only ego which would be afraid to invite, or which would feel that truth and invitation should not be expressed. Full knowing, enlightenment, or whatever one might care to call it, erases all doubt and confusion, including of the types described in this paragraph.

*However, I agree with you (Christi) that not falling into the types of mind-traps which Yogani has warned against is something that is important enough to emphasize and clarify. I hope that I have done so sufficiently in this post; if you (Christi) still feel "otherwise", please say so, and we'll continue the discussion ... something I'm truly happy to do.

quote:Originally posted by Christi
K-man,
How do you know that people who do not yet have the wings to fly with, are not going to follow your advice, and attempt to jump from the nest before they are ready? What's the clean up plan for the kundalini messes that often follow?

Christi

I'm not sure if you mean:

"How do I know that "people who do not yet have wings to fly" are not going to follow the advice I'm giving ..... and so, they're going to jump before they are ready? (despite my advice against doing anything of the sort)."

(meaning: You understand I am not advising anyone to do anything before they are ready, yet you are concerned my statements might still be misunderstood, and that jumping may happen, anyway.)

OR, if you mean:

"How do I know that "people who do not yet have wings to fly" might not follow the advice that you believe I am giving ...... and which could possibly mean "jumping before they're ready?"

Please clarify, if you can.

And I'll try to do the same:

*I am not advising anyone to "jump" anywhere.

*I'm just inviting everyone to know that enlightenment and liberation are real, to understand that original unagitated awareness is the ground of being, and it is true nature, and that noticing what's real, combined with practices, can help to produce the simple beauty of this living freedom in all of us.

(I have quoted a line from Daniel Odier's book Tantric Quest, in the past: "Just jump in; that is the great yoga!" ... but that simply means: engage with life; don't be hesitant, or let fear determine your actions ... because that is what reinforces unenlightenment. I think that's very different than what you're talking about, here.)

*I do agree with Yogani's point that "flying without wings" is neither wise nor useful. "Flying without wings" is an analogy for the error of thinking that one is enlightened, or that "this is it" can be understood or realized, when thinking or other forms in awareness are used as any kind of a benchmark. Original unagitated formless awareness *is* the set of wings with which we fly home ... and everywhere else, too; it's the freedom beyond imagination that is true nature ... soaring happily in the skies above the clouds of limited thinking and conceptual conditioning.

*It is then that we become Kecharins .... "travelers in the sky"; the reality of original unagitated awareness we ever are, now.

*Knowing this (enlightenment; true nature) might take some significant practicing, or "spiritual journeying" ... it took a lifetime of reinforcement to feel like the "you that you feel like" when you start meditation and yoga; it will likely take some undoing to no longer be bound by those misconceptions which literally form physically-based protein-encoded memory.

The Good News Is: Yogis & Yoginis figured out how to re-format and re-program the body-mind to be a conscious vehicle for the awareness we actually are, as opposed to simply being an unconscious repository for memory, imagination and misconception.

*It took me a few years. It may be able to be a shorter period for you (anyone reading), because understanding of how to go about it all is continuously clarifying.



In closing, here's a video from Adyashanti that I feel gets to the very essence of what we're discussing here, very very nicely, directly and powerfully.

VIDEO: Adyashanti on Chasing Enlightenment

Please Note: If you're not familiar with the name Adya mentions a couple times in the video (about a guy who was seeking enlightenment ... and, despite that ... how he actually found enlightenment, anyway ... ) ... he's saying Bankei.

I truly hope this is helpful.

Wholeheartedly,

Kirtanman

[Kirtanman]

quote:Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice

Hi Christi and Kirtanman
  Thank you very much for this discussion. I am still here. I'm carefully preparing my next set of questions and dealing with a strange phenomenon.

 
Hi TI,

You're very welcome; thanks for engaging in this dialog.

The galaxy-phenomenon perception is likely somewhat interesting, but anything of that type I ever experienced (a bit over a year ago, I experienced vivid, perfectly formed geometric shapes in my third eye; about three and a half years ago, when my third eye first opened, the "star" that is sometimes seen in meditation was present all the time, with eyes open or closed, for a few weeks).

Ultimately, nothing that's a form matters all that much; all the wide varieties of energetic flux we each and all experience aren't important in and of themselves; it's just part of the overall process; everyone's is different.

The Ken Wilber quote, on the other hand, is potentially very, very useful ... it points directly to what I've been saying about original, unagitated awareness .... subjective awareness; experiencing awareness.

One aspect of the quote I really like is the way he describes how noticing appearances in awareness, such as clouds and sky, is an effortless activity.

Just as our senses have a relaxed restful-yet-alert natural state .... this is exactly what original unagitated awareness is experienced as being like ... exactly.

Notice your sense of sight right now.

Stop reading for a moment.

Relax the focus of your vision, and just notice, in the relaxed-yet-alert effortless condition of seeing, when you are just "taking in" the sights in your environment, without focus on any particular thing.

Now, do the same with your hearing; just take in, without focusing on any one sound ... the sounds in your environment, in the relaxed-yet-alert natural state of your hearing.

The natural state that is talked about is exactly the same thing ... with resting, non-focused awareness.

Just as your seeing has a natural state, without focus, relaxed-yet-alert, as does your hearing ...... so do awareness.

Relaxed vision feels open, yes?

Relaxed hearing feels open, too, yes?

Relaxed sight is not any of the things it sees.

Relaxed hearing is not any of the sounds it hears.

Relaxed awareness is not any of the thoughts it notices.

There is a natural relaxed-yet-alert state for all senses ... including mind.




Wholeheartedly,

Kirtanman

[Tibetan_Ice]

Hi Everyone
  The purpose of this discussion is not to denigrate anyone's experiences nor dismiss anyone's achievements so far.

  The purpose of this post is to explain my definition of 'enlightenment' and in doing so, help to point out why I feel so many people are falling short of this 'final permanent state' of being, and why I don't believe most of the people in the world who claim to be, or appear to be enlightened are enlightened.

  What is 'enlightenment', 'being awakened', 'cosmic consciousness', 'self realization', 'God Consciouness', 'Nirvana', 'Nagual -Carlos Casteneda', the Tao, presence, the Now, or what ever you want to call it?

  I have no idea, yet I have many ideas.

  Omni-present, Omni-potent, Omni-Omni for all time and creation.

 If you are realized, then in my mind, you should have these characteristics, all of them, even if you do not use them or have ever exhibited these characteristics:

 You can 'be' everywhere or anywhere at any time. You can commune with any and all beings in creation, at any time, for you are 'all'. You love everyone and everything because you are everyone and everything and you love yourself.

 You are super intelligent, for you know all, everything. All knowledge from all time is readily available. You can beat any computer at chess, understand string theory (and whether or not it is true), understand atomic reactions, you know what the past was and what future will be, there is no mystery left in existence. You understand the chakras, kundalini, the levels of kundalini, the planes of existence, reincarnation, karma, the void, life..    

 You are super powerful, unimaginably powerful. You can walk on water, walk through walls, fly through the air, heal any disease, bring people back to life, know the thoughts of others, know what the future will bring, you can materialize gems from prana, become invisible, take any form you wish, for you are omnipresent and omnipotent. You have endless energy and the knowledge and power to create and destroy. You can create universes (or destroy them) in the blink of an eye.

 You realize that all of these abilities are nothing special because life is but a dream; a child at play. Existence is a cartoon world and 'you' are not the Bugs Bunny you think you are. You are the one with the remote control.

 That is my definition of 'enlightenment'.

 Anyone who reduces my definition of enlightenment to anything less is suspect and, in my eyes, has not yet realized the omni-potent omni-present state.

 Anyone who redefines my definition of 'enlightenment' into fewer components, such as the oneness theory that has at its roots a 'unitary consciousness' as the sole process for enlightenment, I would say is missing the 'intelligence' and the 'power -energy' components of enlightenment.

  Note: "I'm not saying that the experience of unitary consciousness is not valid, it is entirely valid, for I have experienced that type of experience myself during heart viewing meditations. And Patanjali does say: "Focusing with perfect discipline on the heart, one understands the nature of consciousness." But understanding the nature of consciousness is a far step away from my definition of enlightenment.

So now you can see my reluctance to accept a lesser definition of 'enlightenment'. So now you can see my reluctance to accept anyone's teachings that distill or reduce 'enlightenment' to  incomplete components.


TI