PDA

View Full Version : Is enlightenment a trap?



JinRaTensei
06-16-2016, 03:41 PM
This is a matter which has been bothering me for a long time now and I wish to bother thou with it as well. ^^

Is enlightenment congruent to death, a trap layed out by the (spiritual and materialistic) elite to protect their own standing and power?

The more I dive into different spiritual practices the more I disagree with the concept of renunciation which is taught in many of them. (Gnosticism, Buddhism, Hinduism to just name a few of the most common)

In short the concept of renunciation taught by those practices sets the goal for the scholar to renounce all desires and to serve others and the higher good entirely without personal ego.

Such practices are opposed to shamanism, alchemy etc because the usage of substances and "not normal" states of consciousness is seen as a fooly.

But if one thinks those concepts through to the end it means that your highest goal is not just becoming a slave (bound to "the good" but nevertheless bound) but more so becoming an empty shell, an avatar/vehicle for "love" without anything left.

Not even the personal choice or desire to be good and fair to others is left. No cultivation to higher realms no exploration just nothing. It is not even the same as being dead but the same as not existing at all.

Those teachings use the "hookline" that one needs to renounce this world and this life and become tranquil without desire and I personally absolutely agree.

But the goal is not elavation to higher realms or mastery but becoming a eternal servant of god.

Basically saying that there is nothing more in "life" than helping others to ascend to a point were they themselves can also help others...so fundamentally there is just this big "circle jerk" of helpers and helping. Which means that at the ultimate end without any people left to help there is also no reason to continue to exist and they all become one with god...which leads to my next problem with this teaching.

To me love is bliss and the goal but not becoming one with god because becoming one with god is the same as death.

Those practices do not seem to realize or mention that becoming one with love/god does not mean that you are embedded in the highest state of love but that you are nothing.

We have free will for a reason but the ultimate goal is the complete opposite of free will and therefor spirit.

If you are one with "the whole" you can not experience or feel love because there is no you but just "the whole". Being part "of the whole" without being able to do/be anything is the same as doing and being nothing, worse than being dead.
It also means that their is no ascension after this world/dimension/reality. It means all the "higher beings/entities/ascended masters" are idiots or hoaxes.

In those practices everything about freedom, free will, spirit is considered as fooly and just ego. A sort of "test" which god gave us or we ourselves gave us through karma.

I can not understand how those practices believe that god (the supposed creator of all) just wants holy slaves. Good, kind, loving yes but still slaves.


I think free will and freedom is love and something completely different from ego.

I do not want to serve god eternally, I rather just be dead. I want to help others and devote my life for "the good" because I want to do so and not because I have to.

To me such a god seems more cruel than any archetype evil like Satan, Lucifer, etc.

And this seems to be the problem with most spiritual practices except for shamanism and alchemy. Those practices ultimately just see two paths. The path to eternal glorious servitude without even the chance to take a walk and enjoy your surroundings or the other path straight to hell and hurting others for ones own benefit.

I want to take neither. To me shamanism feels much more like real love and freedom.
To me I do not believe that using substances means having ego and flaws.
To me god would never take freedom away more than any devil could, because freedom is love

To me enlightenment as practiced in most spiritual teachings is a frightening never ending hell no matter how cosy it may feel.

PS: Strangely the spelling correction is not working for this thread so please excuse any mistakes I will try to edit them as I see them.

Awani
06-16-2016, 03:58 PM
Good subject.

The thing about renunciation usually goes for those that want to be monks. It does not apply to the rest, not the same level at least.

Also all those spiritual practices are wrong. LOL.

Shamanism is the source of them all and the only way forward if spiritual peace is the goal. But everyone is different. This is just how I feel.

Enlightenment is not a trap. Desire for enlightenment is.

I will reply more later. Too much for an iPhone post. LOL. Many things to consider about what you wrote.

:cool:

JinRaTensei
06-16-2016, 04:40 PM
Shamanism is the source of them all and the only way forward if spiritual peace is the goal. But everyone is different. This is just how I feel.

I feel the same way, although my "feeling" is sadly not grounded in experience like yours...but still I can not explain it but shamanism for me feels like breathing out, freedom whereas the others feel more like holding your breath and avoiding the joy and beauty of this world.


I will reply more later. Too much for an iPhone post. LOL. Many things to consider about what you wrote.

I am really looking forward to it :)



Enlightenment is not a trap. Desire for enlightenment is.

If you do not mind I would really appreciate if you would expand a little on this point as well, because I do not really grasp this point or have a different opinion in this moment. Simply spoken what if we look at enlightenment without the desire for it would it not still be the same trap?
Yes your path may be the "right" one by renouncing desire for it but in the end you still would be the same slave at least considering most spiritual practices/doctrines?

Awani
06-16-2016, 04:44 PM
If you want a child you have to find a woman willing to make one.

If you accept love and follow your heart a child will appear.

That is the best allegory I can think of now about just reaching enlightenment rather than have desire for it.

But what is enlightenment? Want to open that can of worms? LOL.

As for Shamanism and not having any experience: if it feels right it is. ;) And what is a shamanic experience? You may already be having it by floating toward its concepts.

:cool:

JinRaTensei
06-16-2016, 04:55 PM
Damn you dev writing so little but making me ponder about it so much XD.

I will certainly have to come back to this later!

Andro
06-16-2016, 06:53 PM
Depends on how you define 'enlightenment' and 'god'.

If 'enlightenment' means 'moving up' the 'corporate ladder' of this VR Universe game mindfuck, then to me, it is definitely THE trap.

You can read my home page (linked in my signature) for more on my thoughts on this issue.

If 'god' is some 'entity' that needs/has to be 'served', then it's a fake/pretend god/demiurge and not even worth shitting on, let alone playing its silly games and perpetuating the predatory food chain.

For me, leaving aside nearly all known nomenclature (Shamanism, religions, emotions, practices, etc...) - there are only 2 primordial paths left, which are, in my view, impossible to reconcile.
Friends will be lost, new companions will be found and lives will change dramatically the closer this realization is.

1. The Path of Attainment: 'Climbing the corporate ladder', 'enlightenment', 'serving god', progressing in the VR/Game, 'awakening' from one dream to another (while remaining asleep), etc...

2. The Path of Return: Complete 'alchemical' transmutation of 'Body' & 'Soul' into code-less, UN-Created Spirit. Waking up, for real.

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

JinRaTensei
06-16-2016, 07:20 PM
If 'god' is some 'entity' that needs/has to be 'served', then it's a fake/pretend god/demiurge and not even worth shitting on, let alone playing its silly games and perpetuating the predatory food chain.

This describes pretty much how I have felt for many years without any kind of validation from "spiritual sources". And yes validation is something which needs to be shed as well but until you reach the point to be truly able to forge your own path one needs different sources and validation/refusal to create own discernment, imo. (Validation as in experiencing "truth" and not as in acceptance from others)
It feels very good for me to hear those thoughts from another person I respect.


2. The Path of Return: Complete 'alchemical' transmutation of 'Body' & 'Soul' into code-less, UN-Created Spirit. Waking up, for real.

Obviously nobody can know what this waking up would look like but just to clarify because I am pretty sure you do not mean what I am understanding from this right now. In your opinion would this code-less, UN-Created Spirit be a whole as in the "circle jerk" I mentioned before or would it mean that "you" would still be some version of "you" and although connected still independent in your deeds and mental processes ?

Very much like the metaphor used in the matrix trilogy that you would be unplugged from VR and able to experience "real reality" as some kind of independent entity and not like unplugging from VR to become a part of source as in a part of a mass without any "you" left?

Because the later would just be some kind of death again? And it would mean the highest goal would be to finally and eternally become nothing/stay dead. Which would make VR not sound so bad anymore.
But I doubt this is what you mean and said and rather is what I am understanding of it now. ^^

Andro
06-16-2016, 08:02 PM
Very much like the metaphor used in the matrix trilogy that you would be unplugged from VR and able to experience "real reality" as some kind of independent entity and not like unplugging from VR to become a part of source as in a part of a mass without any "you" left?

Actually, I was surprised that in the Matrix sequels they didn't also reveal that the so-called 'real world' is also a VR layer.

In the end, the only 'One' who completed the 'Hero's Journey' and took the 'Path of Return' was (IMO) Neo, who exited the silly 'man' vs.'machine' (or 'organic machine' vs. 'inorganic machine') war-games altogether.

And although those people in 'Zion' were screaming in the streets "Neo saved us", etc - Neo only 'saved' himself, but he allowed the 'games' to continue, only without him and his Mirror Counterpart, Agent Smith. In a sense, they both truly completed their journeys, unlike everyone else in the trilogy.


Because the later would just be some kind of death again? And it would mean the highest goal would be to finally and eternally become nothing/stay dead. Which would make VR not sound so bad anymore.

The only thing that 'dies' is the 'VR Code-Self' which we perceive ourselves to be. Who or what we truly are, is Code-Less & UN-Created and can therefore not 'die' or be 'deleted', no matter what.

zoas23
06-16-2016, 08:45 PM
Some of the most interesting ideas on the subject were expressed here by "Markosthegnostic" (who hasn't been around in a long while).

I don't like at all some of his references (specially K. Wilber)... but such thing doesn't matter at all to me, I simply love his post... and it's perfectly clear for me.
source: http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?2872-freedom-from-the-god-concept (post #3 there):


Well, there are many God concepts, and these are Ideas about God. Ideas are intellectual constructs, but constructed of what? Consciousness. Only if we choose a common model about God, wherein we can agree that the archaic word 'spirit,' is translated as 'consciousness,' can we even discuss God, the Idea of God, and the experience of God. Like a math problem in which one must first reduce numbers to the lowest common denominator, we have to reduce scriptural stories from purportedly historical events to mythic events which are enacted in consciousness, but not in space-time. Then the mythic events need to be reduced (as John Shelby Spong has done) to its cultural symbolism. The New Testament's gospels, according to Spong, follows the Jewish liturgical calendar. The actual rituals (not the mythic insertions) hold at least four levels of interpretation according to Jewish exegetical analysis (Plain, Allegorical, Midrashic, Mystical) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pardes_(Jewish_exegesis) . Most people are confused by the levels. When Jesus allegedly says "I am the vine, you are the branches..." the meaning is not 'Plain,' it is at least "Allegorical,' for example. But meanwhile, the famous 'I AM' statement in John 14:6 ",Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, and the truth, and the life: no one cometh unto the Father, but by me," if taken in its 'Plain' level makes a whole lot less sense, and looks megalomaniacal. But, if it is a statement made from Pure Being, then it is a statement which describes the truth of each and every one of us, which we must individually realize. Otherwise, it merely puts Jesus on a pedestal to be worshiped like a Greek demigod. It becomes a meaningless statement altogether if (1) Jesus existed historically, and was therefore a normal human being like all others (barring any typical myth of parthenogenic birth), or (2) if Jesus never existed historically, but is a literary creation of many wisdom teachers.

So, I would say that the 'god concept' is not eliminated, but rather that the direction of consciousness to experience God in some capacity is removed from an historical, or even a mythical level, and narrowed to a transpersonal level of the psyche, which can then be experienced directly. A mystical experience of the "high subtle" (K. Wilber) or "low causal," or "high causal" plane, will seriously reduce (Sabikalpa samadhi) or eliminate (Nirvikalpa /Asamprajnata samadhi) the individual, transient identity so that all that remains is the Universal "I AM" in its intuitively self-existent, non-verbal mode. Paul had "high subtle" experiences of being "caught up to the third heaven," but he retained an individual identity with which he "heard" "unutterable" (ineffable) things. Meanwhile, in the NT, Jesus remains the only one who has "high causal" or 'God-consciousness.' For Paul (as Albert Schweitzer pointed out in The Mysticism of Paul the Apostle), there is ONLY Christ-mysticism for Paul, not God-mysticism as one finds in the East.

The great difficulty in all the 'religions of the Book,' is that individuals confound their ego with the "I AM," the Jungian or Advaitic Self. It is called blasphemy in the NT, and the sin of 'shirk,' or 'association with God,' in Islam. It is a grave error to proclaim the truth of one's ultimate identity in God, and Jews, Christians and Muslims have always condemned their mystics for any such proclamations. This truth must only be expressed by the occult gesture of placing upright index finger to closed lips, in the gesture of Silence. Reducing this Idea to verbal, vibrational, or written expression is forbidden because most individuals will immediately interpret the exhortation, or revelation as pertaining to an individual's ego, and thus be introducing a lie into the most holy of secrets.

As to "out there," in consciousness, which has no extension in space-time, the notion of location (inner or outer) is meaningless. In fact, this very discussion is meaningless to anyone who still conceives of God as an 'Old-Bearded-Guy-in-the-Sky." Those mythological images (Zeus/Deus/Iesous/YHWH) will simply prevent a person from transcending their immature images, concepts, and beliefs. The anthropomorphizing of God with human attributes may be necessary for those who need a 'personal' God, but those who seek to realize the transpersonal God will reject these (like the Islamic '99 Names') along with mythic images. It then is a matter of 'stripping away,' all attributes, which are idolatrous illusions. The path becomes 'apophatic,' (Via Negativa) instead of 'cataphatic' which posits attributes - even Light or Love. The closest thing to God may well be the moment-to-moment experience of taking a breath (which is why in Greek the word for air and spirit is pneuma). Every 'inspiration' is life, every 'expiration' is death, and God is experienced in the moment between both, first inwardly, then outwardly, then - no difference remains.

I would add something myself, but I can't add much when Markos said it so incredibly well.

JinRaTensei
06-16-2016, 09:06 PM
Actually, I was surprised that in the Matrix sequels they didn't also reveal that the so-called 'real world' is also a VR layer.

Actually that would have been a epic cliffhanger and solid basis for another sequel...but maybe the metaphor would have been to powerful/dangerous
for those who wish to keep us at bay.


The only thing that 'dies' is the 'VR Code-Self' which we perceive ourselves to be. Who or what we truly are, is Code-Less & UN-Created and can therefore not 'die' or be 'deleted', no matter what.

I think I understand you much clearer now, thank you! Curious thought this "true reality" seems to be a one way street or why would such a being not return to VR to liberate his fellow men. Maybe it is the understanding that one needs to save oneself, maybe it is lack of interest or even ability. But pondering about it I doubt a VR "controller/top elite/whatever they call themselves" could bury,disinform or hide this information if a being from "real reality" would want the information to spread.


You can read my home page (linked in my signature) for more on my thoughts on this issue.

Having some strange personal issues today I neither can see any signature nor do a spelling correction but I will gladly look up your HP as soon as my laptop decides to show some mercy XD.

dev


If you want a child you have to find a woman willing to make one.

If you accept love and follow your heart a child will appear.

In this allegory enlightenment or the child would still be "the problem" or death.
I think I grasp most of what you mean by your statement but the child itself is the problem no matter how it came to be.
But than again you explain the critical point.


But what is enlightenment? Want to open that can of worms? LOL.

A true and very subjective can of worms. So in your example there is only a problem with the child if one views enlightenment as taught in those spiritual practices.
If one would take enlightenment as a more simple concept of "total awareness" of some kind and not as becoming part of "the whole" without anything left of you than it makes sense to me.

Awani
06-16-2016, 09:19 PM
I am really looking forward to it :)


I got home too late so Andro beat me to the punch. I would have said the same thing (but with different words). And what he said about The Path of Return is - IMO - the shamanic path.

Although I differ in the thinking of this path's definition:


Complete 'alchemical' transmutation of 'Body' & 'Soul' into code-less, UN-Created Spirit. Waking up, for real.

If this is achieved it might as well be the end result of the VR world, meaning that God creates Man and Man creates God. UN-Created Spirit creates VR and VR creates UN-Created Spirit. Like the Ouroboros.

And if this is not the case then UN-created Spirit created VR, which makes VR part of UN-created Spirit. I see all these things as less dualistic and I don't see less value in waking up, than waking up for real. Both are the same. Even if they are different in intensity.


But the goal is not elavation to higher realms or mastery but becoming a eternal servant of god.

Why would you not want to be a servant of yourself? ;)


I do not want to serve god eternally, I rather just be dead. I want to help others and devote my life for "the good" because I want to do so and not because I have to.

If you want to help others and devote your life for "the good" then you are serving god, IMO.

As for eternity, well not much you can do about that. LOL!

:cool:

Awani
06-16-2016, 09:22 PM
In this allegory enlightenment or the child would still be "the problem" or death.

I don't understand your statement.

The allegory was just to show how you can achieve something without desire. No problem involved.

As for what is enlightenment: when you reach a state of being that absolves you of all existing

Good luck with that. LOL!

:cool:

JinRaTensei
06-16-2016, 09:33 PM
zoas23

Lol sry somehow your post got overseen by me until now but it is indeed very informative and fitting to this subject...so much so that I can not even form any response or opinion about it now because that would just be reacting without reflecting.


The great difficulty in all the 'religions of the Book,' is that individuals confound their ego with the "I AM," the Jungian or Advaitic Self.


A mystical experience of the "high subtle" (K. Wilber) or "low causal," or "high causal" plane, will seriously reduce (Sabikalpa samadhi) or eliminate (Nirvikalpa /Asamprajnata samadhi) the individual, transient identity so that all that remains is the Universal "I AM" in its intuitively self-existent, non-verbal mode.

As far as I have grasped this comment until now he describes with "I Am" what I am looking for. ^^
It seems, imo, to be the complete opposite of becoming "a whole" in god but becoming your truest self with god in you.

The "I am" allthough completly removed from ego is still some version of "I" and "being" and therefor it is not becoming a eternal slave.At least to the point of understanding I have right now of this post.

Thank you again zoas23!

Awani
06-16-2016, 09:34 PM
but becoming your truest self with god in you.

YES! :)

:cool:

Andro
06-16-2016, 09:43 PM
Why would you not want to be a servant of yourself?

Because any 'self' that requires 'serving' is an 'imposter' self.

We all have these 'imposter' selves, to various degrees.


UN-Created Spirit creates VR

In a certain sense yes, but it's a complex correlation that would require a level of elaboration for which I currently do not have the time or the patience, and I also don't have enough synthesized knowledge to present it in a philosophically coherent manner that's not a 100 pages long...


VR creates UN-Created Spirit

'UN-Created Spirit' isn't and cannot be 'created' (or destroyed), hence the term. Sometimes referred to as 'Holy Spirit', 'Spiritus Mundi', etc...

Awani
06-16-2016, 09:48 PM
Because any 'self' that requires 'serving' is an 'imposter' self.

I was just having fun. Why so serious? :)


'UN-Created Spirit' isn't and cannot be 'created' (or destroyed), hence the term. Sometimes referred to as 'Holy Spirit', 'Spiritus Mundi', etc...

This is probably so, still in the last year I have started to suspect it isn't... it is maybe hard for us here on Earth to imagine such things because it is hard not to think linear. What came first: chicken or egg

The egg came first AND so did the chicken. When time and linear events occur in a space that is not bound by linear movements or time (or even paradox) then all things are possible.

It still means that the UN-Created Spirit is uncreated and indestructible, yet it is the end game of all it has created, just as it is the beginning of all that has been created.


...a complex correlation that would require a level of elaboration for which I currently do not have the time or the patience, and I also don't have enough synthesized knowledge to present it in a philosophically coherent manner that's not a 100 pages long...


If you can't understand it without an explanation, you can't understand it with an explanation.
― Haruki Murakami

:cool:

JinRaTensei
06-16-2016, 09:50 PM
I don't understand your statement.

The allegory was just to show how you can achieve something without desire. No problem involved.

As for what is enlightenment: when you reach a state of being that absolves you of all existing

Good luck with that. LOL!

:cool:

I meant it regarding to enlightenment being eternal servitude according to "those" spiritual practices. So without having a different interpretation of enlightenment than "those" enlightenment or the child would ultimately still be eternal servitude no matter if with or without desire. Because it would still lead to becoming " a whole" and devoting your life to pure servitude for "the good" without the chance to want or not want to be "good" because the "you" which could make this decision would no longer exist.




I got home too late so Andro beat me to the punch.

No worries I forgive you in my great kindness XDXD.


If you want to help others and devote your life for "the good" then you are serving god, IMO.

Maybe but the difference, which to me is a huge difference, is that I can choose to do so and not have to do so and not be able to choose at all in the first place since the "you" which could do so according to "those" spiritual practices would have to go.




Originally Posted by JinRaTensei
But the goal is not elavation to higher realms or mastery but becoming a eternal servant of god.
Why would you not want to be a servant of yourself?

Because according to "those" spiritual practices there would be no "I" to serve and no goal/path other than serving which would mean I would not truy serve myself because I myself do not just want to serve.

Awani
06-16-2016, 09:55 PM
I was trying to find a reply to your post but these words are in the way of my brain: servitude - good - choose

Because - IMO - those things don't exist in the states of mind we are talking about.

You keep mentioning "those" spiritual practices... but I thought we both agreed that they are rubbish. ;)

:cool:

Andro
06-16-2016, 09:56 PM
but becoming your truest self with god in you.YES! :)

1. Again, it depends on which 'god' we're talking about.

2. The 'truest' self IS the true/UN-Created 'god'/'Spirit'. The 'fake self' nevertheless caries the 'true self' in it.

To use alchemical terminology, the 'fake self' (of the 'false creation', see ICH and other authors) comprises the superfluities in the Great Work, which need to be either discarded or transmuted. 'Terra Damnata' :)

JinRaTensei
06-16-2016, 10:02 PM
You keep mentioning "those" spiritual practices... but I thought we both agreed that they are rubbish.

We do and I also "got" what you said and agree I was trying to explain my former post because it was unclear in its synthax and you asked me what I meant.
But truly no need to mention "them" anymore ^^

Awani
06-16-2016, 10:03 PM
The 'fake self' nevertheless caries the 'true self' in it.

Indeed. That is why we can all connect directly if we decide to go that far (although it is inevitable for those that do that, even if they decided it or not).


I was trying to explain my former post because it was unclear in its synthax and you asked me what I meant.

Ok. ;)

:cool:

Andro
06-16-2016, 10:06 PM
I was just having fun. Why so serious? :)

Same reason you are having fun. Serious is my fun sometimes.


What came first: chicken or egg

One never came, the other one always comes and goes.


If you can't understand it without an explanation, you can't understand it with an explanation.
― Haruki MurakamiExcellent. Saves me the effort.

JinRaTensei
06-16-2016, 10:21 PM
1. Again, it depends on which 'god' we're talking about.

2. The 'truest' self IS the true/UN-Created 'god'/'Spirit'. The 'fake self' nevertheless caries the 'true self' in it.

I think I understand. From now on I will use the expressions " VR god" and "Uncoded god" which I think will make it easier to understand what is meant.

I was mostly referring to VR god up to thise point because "those practices which shall not be named" ^^ have no concept of uncoded reality and therefor god. Since they view this reality although "unreal" as the true and last stepping stone towards god which again would be just a more sophisticated illusion as far as I am understanding now.

zoas23
06-17-2016, 07:32 AM
zoas23

Lol sry somehow your post got overseen by me until now but it is indeed very informative and fitting to this subject...so much so that I can not even form any response or opinion about it now because that would just be reacting without reflecting.

As far as I have grasped this comment until now he describes with "I Am" what I am looking for. ^^
It seems, imo, to be the complete opposite of becoming "a whole" in god but becoming your truest self with god in you.

The "I am" allthough completly removed from ego is still some version of "I" and "being" and therefor it is not becoming a eternal slave.At least to the point of understanding I have right now of this post.

Thank you again zoas23!

One of the most interesting parts of the post by Markos, which I simply quoted is:

This truth must only be expressed by the occult gesture of placing upright index finger to closed lips, in the gesture of Silence.

There's a tale I love, "The Purloined Letter (http://xroads.virginia.edu/~hyper/poe/purloine.html)" by Edgar Allan Poe. You probably know it.

The cops need to find a letter that belongs to an important person, a politician who is probably the King of England if my memory serves me well. The contents of the letter are not disclosed in the tale, but it seems that it's a letter that this politician (or King) wrote to a lover and it would be a scandal if its content is disclosed to the general public. Well, that's only the "excuse" of the tale anyway...

The thing is that a thief stole the letter and is blackmailing the "politician"... and the cops have searched for it in the whole of the house of the thief, they have looked in the strangest places possible... they investigated all the clothes of the thief... under the wooden floors, inside the furniture... and they can't find it. They don't know where else the thief could have hidden the letter.

So they hire the private detective Dupin... and when they explain him the situation, they have this amazing dialogue:


"And what is the difficulty now?" I asked. "Nothing more in the assassination way, I hope?"

"Oh no; nothing of that nature. The fact is, the business is very simple indeed, and I make no doubt that we can manage it sufficiently well ourselves; but then I thought Dupin would like to hear the details of it, because it is so excessively odd."

"Simple and odd," said Dupin.

"Why, yes; and not exactly that, either. The fact is, we have all been a good deal puzzled because the affair is so simple, and yet baffles us altogether."

"Perhaps it is the very simplicity of the thing which puts you at fault," said my friend.

"What nonsense you do talk!" replied the Prefect, laughing heartily.

"Perhaps the mystery is a little too plain," said Dupin.

"Oh, good heavens! who ever heard of such an idea?"

"A little too self-evident."

By the end of the tale, after long explanations, the detective Dupin visits the house of the thief and as soon as he enters he sees a writing table with some letters of little relevance (probably taxes, spam letters, etc)... and the "special" letter was there too, the thief had simply put it in a very usual envelope and left it in the most obvious place and at plain sight. The cops had been unable to find it because it was located in a place that was "too self-evident"... it wasn't even "hidden". The situation was so simple that the cops could not find the solution (they assumed that it was "hidden", but it had been all the time in front of their eyes).

The first lines of the Emerald Tablet, even without caring which translation you choose say mostly the same concept:


Tis true without error, certain & most true.
That which is below is like that which is above & that which is above is like that which is below to do the miracles of one only thing

I liked it how Markos included a reference to this gesture, which I relate to the idea of Sub-Rosa: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub_rosa

The wiki article says:

The idea of Horus being linked to the rose probably arises from Greek and Roman cultural cross-transmission of myths from Egypt. Firstly, the rose's connotation of secrecy dates back also to Greek mythology. Aphrodite gave a rose to her son Eros, the god of love; he, in turn, gave it to Harpocrates, the god of silence and a Greek name for a form of Horus, to ensure that his mother's indiscretions (or those of the gods in general, in other accounts) were not disclosed.

That's an exoteric explanation... but you can be like a Dupin and say that Isis/Venus gave the Rose to his son Eros (remember the role of Eros in Plato's symposium, specially in the words said by Socrates -i.e, his "Daimon")... and Eros gave it to Harpocrates (isn't this God representing mankind there?).

The secret symbols of the rosicrucians (http://www.levity.com/alchemy/secret_s.html) contain this image:

http://www.levity.com/alchemy/images/s_s_01.gif

And Andro said:

The 'truest' self IS the true/UN-Created 'god'/'Spirit'. The 'fake self' nevertheless carries the 'true self' in it.

And Austin Spare (http://hermetic.com/spare/focus_life.html) said:

I bring a sword that contains its own medicine: The sour milk that cureth the body. Prepare to meet God, the omnifarious believing,-Thyself the living truth. Die not to spare, but that the world may perish. Nature is more atrocious. Learning all things from Thee in the most sinister way for representation: from thy thought to become thereafter. Having suffered pleasure and pain, gladly dost thou deny the things of existence for freedom of desire-from this sorry mess of inequality-once so desired. And is fear of desire. The addition of the 'I' of a greater illusion. Desire is the conception I and induces Thou. There is neither thou nor I nor a third person-loosing this consciousness by unity of I and Self; there would be no limit to consciousness in sexuality. Isolation in ecstasy, the final inducement, is enough-But, procreate thou alone! Speak not to serve but to scoff. Hearest thou, heaven's loud guffaw? Directly the mouth opens it speaks righteousness. In the ecstatic laughter of men I hear their volition towards release. How can I speak that for which I have necessitated silence? Salvation shall be Unsay all things: and true, as is time, that speaketh all things. Of what use are hints or stage whispers? True wisdom cannot be expressed by articulate sounds. The language of fools-is words. In the labyrinth of the alphabet the truth is hidden. It is one thing repeated many times.

I'm sorry to quote so many different things... but I think you are asking yourself:

How can I transcend dualism without transcending dualism?

"God" in "you" or "you" in "God"? If you manage to stop thinking in a dualistic way for a second, you'll see that the two options are the same option. It is not a matter of belief, but a matter of perception.

Awani
06-17-2016, 09:47 AM
Since they view this reality although "unreal" as the true and last stepping stone towards god which again would be just a more sophisticated illusion as far as I am understanding now.

Yes, but allegedly only. I mean no one here "know" really. But this way of thinking is the way that seems to make the most sense based on direct experience and philosophical ponderings.

When you post a question (as you often do, and it is valid questions) we all answer it, but in the end our answers are meaningless. You have to find your own answer. Personally by trying to answer a question I understand my own thinking so that is very helpful for me... and why a forum is a good "thinking-tool".

I just wanted to point out that don't assume anyone here, or elsewhere, knows what the fuck they are talking about. One persons direct experience can't translate to another.

:cool:

JinRaTensei
06-18-2016, 12:17 PM
Yesterday I had (one of many) "enlightening" experiences on a personal level, so objectivly it might just be coincidence.

I am currently reading a deeply philosophical manga called "Vagabond" about the life of Japans most famous samurai, " Miyamoto Mushashi"

I was reading a specific part where Mushashi fought his greatest battle, Mushashi vs 70 other skilled samurai, and won. He was hurt in the process and not sure if he ever could follow the path of the sword again. The following was said by "Takuan" a monk which acts as Mushashis vehicle for introspection in their conversations.

" Maybe the heavens want you to put down your sword". This can be seen as a symbol for letting go anger, conflict or general "spiritual fire" with which I personally deal right now myself.
As I was pondering about this line a fly landed on the table in front of me. I looked at the fly and without any compassion, since it was "just" a fly I picked up a knife which was also laying on the table and struck the fly. I did not kill the fly but cut off one of its wings and thereby rendering it unable to continue living.
My strike was light and precise and the knife used was a good " higher grade" knife which I had been using for a year now without any damages to the knife.

Strangely while striking the fly with this light but fast strike on a wood table the knife just broke in two. This should not be possible.
I was instantly "hit by lightning" and "understood" the heavens want me to put down "my sword" or "fire".
As I realized this I looked at the clock and the time was 3:33 pm.

Maybe coincidence but I do not believe so. So somehow right than and there something changed inside of me and I was deeply ashamed of striking the fly.


zoas23


The cops need to find a letter that belongs to an important person, ...

Strangely no matter how much I feel to express my opinion to this I somehow feel it is lacking and that somehow this is the excact same thing.
It is so obvious and yet complex, right in front of my eyes and yet never in my sight.

I can not say anything else than I think I understand or maybe I do not understand what you explicitly meant...but still I understand.


I liked it how Markos included a reference to this gesture, which I relate to the idea of Sub-Rosa

Allegorically this is exactly what I am feeling. The things I want to express are "hidden" by the nature of themselves without me wanting to hide them. I feel words can not unveil those "truths". Silence is maybe not just secrecy but also the most honest expression men can give sometimes.


That's an exoteric explanation... but you can be like a Dupin and say that Isis/Venus gave the Rose to
his son Eros

Just out of curiosity since to my knowledge the archetypes Isis/Venus are mostly referred to as being female, although I assume they are like all "gods"
androgynous. Was there a specific reason that you refer to them as "his" and not "her" or am I interpreting to much into this?


I'm sorry to quote so many different things... but I think you are asking yourself:

How can I transcend dualism without transcending dualism?

Yes this hits the point quite well! To be more exact I am trying to find a path which is similarly "good" for me as for others and in "common" dualism this is not the case. I want to be free and kind, unrestrained by everthing except for my morals.

dev


When you post a question (as you often do, and it is valid questions) we all answer it, but in the end our answers are meaningless. You have to find your own answer. Personally by trying to answer a question I understand my own thinking so that is very helpful for me... and why a forum is a good "thinking-tool".

I just wanted to point out that don't assume anyone here, or elsewhere, knows what the fuck they are talking about. One persons direct experience can't translate to another.

Thank you for pointing this out! I do not wish to "justify" or rebuke so if this comes across as this it is simply to my inability to express it clearer.

Even if I wanted I could not "assume" anything which is said by more experienced members as "my" truth, even if it comes across as just that often since this is the first time I express explicitly what my true standing is on this.
I validate or falsify information given in this forum as one expression of many. I know there is no definitive answer to anything in a relative reality but I can still pick up puzzle pieces for my own "life picture" if I deem the experience/member as honest.

If you dev would tell me that you encountered a tiger and it was fierce big and orange/black striped I would not assume that this is what all tigers must be like. Nor would I assume that if I encountered a tiger it had to be the same. But if I believe you, and obviously I do, I know that your experience is what a tiger could express itself like. So if I encounter an animal in my life which is lets say kind, big and striped black/white I would think maybe this could be "my tiger" although your tiger looks different. But by understanding your tiger I can understand my own tiger better or even be able to recognize it.

Awani
06-18-2016, 01:16 PM
That story you told about the fly is a perfect example of, in my opinion, looking at the world with shamanistic eyes. Reading the code. Very nice. No comment necessary.

Now you just got to implement what you learned from it. I expect in a short time you will be tested, and you will have an experience where you have a chance to put your new knowledge into practice.

I have no doubt this will happen, but beware... the test usually appears in a way you least expect.

Btw Mushashi is cool.

:cool:

Awani
06-18-2016, 01:20 PM
3+3+3=9

9 in numerology is: humanitarian, tolerant, universal love, least judgemental etc.

:cool:

JinRaTensei
06-18-2016, 01:53 PM
Wow thanks dev this means a lot to me and I am not just saying this to be polite in any way!
I "guessed" that such experiences could be part of the shamanic path but always put it off as "just" being me "talking" to the universe...why have I come to the understanding of "just" accepting such experiences as a granted insignificance in the first place o0.
You saying this is an expression of the shamanic path which I truly want/need to walk is another "puzzle piece" which I "needed" right now and here and that without holding your words for the absolute.


Now you just got to implement what you learned from it. I expect in a short time you will be tested, and you will have an experience where you have a chance to put your new knowledge into practice.

I have no doubt this will happen, but beware... the test usually appears in a way you least expect.

I am really looking forward to it and yet I also do not care in the sense that even if the test will not come it will not change the mindset I have right now...which probably already is part of the test.

I also think I understand what you mean by in the way I least exspect the test to occur since only in this way it will truly test my "soul" and not my opinions I am "holding" on to. The things which are there without actively "holding" on to them are the things which are true expressions of yourself so a test which is easily recognizable is not a "true test" but rather something akin to a school exam, just a questioning of "learned" facts and not expression of your deeper self.


Btw Mushashi is cool.

This opinion makes you cool as well XD. I love eastern literature. It was the first kind of literature in my youth which showed me values which I personally saw much more resonating with how I wanted to be in those days contrary to western literature.


3+3+3=9

9 in numerology is: humanitarian, tolerant, universal love, least judgemental etc.

This "fits the shoe" I am currently living perfectly and is thankful information for me. Since the sources I used to express numerology usually talk about sequences of 3 as an expression of the trinity of mind,soul and body. Or the unity of the divine with the "earthly"

Your explanation gives, to me, a better and more "grounded " understanding of this.

I assume for numerology you use sources/ ways of interpretation from the Kabbala ?

PS: My spelling correction is still not working for no reason I can see, which strangely also forces me to be much more aware of the things I put out into the world...
but still for others my misspellings is rather a burden than a test so no excuses and an honest apology XD

Awani
06-18-2016, 02:32 PM
Well talking to the universe is what shamanism is about IMO.

No particular source. Just from knowing the numbers. Used to be into numbers many years ago, not so much now, but I still count all numbers I encounter by habit... as well as read all signs backwards to see if I find subliminal messages. Two manic traits. LOL. Although it only takes a second.

Lennon was obssesed with Love and #9 so he must have viewed 9 the same way. Of course I am sure there are many schools on the matter. But what I said before is how I see 9.

Your spelling mistakes, if any, are minor. There are far worse cases. ;)

:cool:

JinRaTensei
06-18-2016, 03:08 PM
Just a little side note from someone who went to college in the subject of psychology


Two manic traits. LOL.

Name the opposite of a maniac or psychopath...curiously enough there is none or maybe in non scientific terms it would be called "hero"

Psychologically speaking "Hitler" and "The Buddha" are almost the same. Both are absolute tyrannts. Both sought absolute control.
The only difference Hitler sought absolute control outwardly and the Buddha sought it inwardly.

So naturally you must have some manic traits if you are going in almost the complete opposite of the maniac/psychopath which, in short, needs or wants to avoid all feeling and responsibility contrary to the shamanic path which I assume seeks to embrace and conquer all feelings and take full responsibility for ones actions.

zoas23
06-18-2016, 08:51 PM
As I was pondering about this line a fly landed on the table in front of me. I looked at the fly and without any compassion, since it was "just" a fly I picked up a knife which was also laying on the table and struck the fly. I did not kill the fly but cut off one of its wings and thereby rendering it unable to continue living.
My strike was light and precise and the knife used was a good " higher grade" knife which I had been using for a year now without any damages to the knife.

Strangely while striking the fly with this light but fast strike on a wood table the knife just broke in two. This should not be possible.

I know a perfect quote related to this experience... Austin Spare again:


You are conscious of the gay Butterfly you observe and are conscious of being "You": the Butterfly is conscious of being "itself," and as such, it is a consciousness as good as and the same as yours, i.e., of you being "you." Therefore this consciousness of "you" that you both feel is the same "you"? Ergo, you are one and the same-the mystery of mysteries and the most simple thing in the world to understand! How could you be conscious of what you are not? But you might believe differently? So, if you hurt the Butterfly you hurt yourself, but your belief that you don't hurt yourself protects you from hurt-for a time! Belief gets tired and you are miserably hurt! Do what you will-belief is ever its own inconsistency. Desire contains everything, hence you must believe in everything-if you believe at all! Belief seems to exclude commonsense.

There is no doubt about it-this consciousness of "Thee" and "Me" is the unwelcome but ever ready torturer-yet it "need not be so" in any sense! Is it not a matter of Fear? You are fearsome of entering a den of Tigers? (And I assure you it is a matter of righteousness-(inborn or cultured)-whether you enter voluntarily or are chucked in, and whether you come out alive or not!) Yet daily you fearlessly enter dens inhabited by more terrible creatures than Tigers and you come out unharmed-why?


I don't have much to add to that quote, other than remembering that Psyche in Greek also stands for "Butterfly"...

The fly, the butterfly, the tiger, you...




zoas23

Strangely no matter how much I feel to express my opinion to this I somehow feel it is lacking and that somehow this is the excact same thing.
It is so obvious and yet complex, right in front of my eyes and yet never in my sight.

I can not say anything else than I think I understand or maybe I do not understand what you explicitly meant...but still I understand.

Allegorically this is exactly what I am feeling. The things I want to express are "hidden" by the nature of themselves without me wanting to hide them. I feel words can not unveil those "truths". Silence is maybe not just secrecy but also the most honest expression men can give sometimes.

I love the tale of Poe because of that issue... at least my experience has always been that the most "hidden" things are not hidden at all... the tale is perfect: the cops couldn't find the letter because they were looking for a hidden thing... and it was there in front of their eyes all the time.

The quote of the Emerald Tablet is so explicit that we often forget to read it in an extremely literal way: "That which is below is like that which is above & that which is above is like that which is below to do the miracles of one only thing".

This part of the Tablet is so simple that we often forget it and we don't even seem to read it... or we become like the cops of the tale of Poe and start looking for the most bizarre metaphors in the strangest places... And maybe it is expressing something so "easy" that we often don't see it even if it's in front of our eyes.



Just out of curiosity since to my knowledge the archetypes Isis/Venus are mostly referred to as being female, although I assume they are like all "gods" androgynous. Was there a specific reason that you refer to them as "his" and not "her" or am I interpreting to much into this?

LOL... English is my second language (my main one is Spanish)... and whilst all the Latin languages (French, Spanish, Italian, etc) are by far more *genderized* than English, the usual "possessive" word we use doesn't change depending on the gender... So I often write "his" when I should write "her"... a typical unconscious mistake I often make in English due to my native language. Take it as a typo, it wasn't a deep secret related to the androgynous nature of the "Gods"...

Though... the idea of Isis/Venus is a metaphor... or an Archetype that only makes sense if it is used to arrive to THE ONLY Archetype which is neither male or female.

A quote I often bring, by Wittgenstein and some people will begin to puke if I bring it even one more time: " My propositions are elucidatory in this way: he who understands me finally recognizes them as senseless, when he has climbed out through them, on them, over them. (He must so to speak throw away the ladder, after he has climbed up on it.) He must transcend these propositions, and then he will see the world aright."

So... yes... I think this is valid for all the posts in this thread: maybe they are like a ladder that will only make sense once it is thrown away... since what we say is always an incredibly bad definition of something that, by definition, can't be said.

Unrestrained by everything except for your morals?

Again I thought of Austin Spare and his "definitions" in the Book of Pleasure:

The words God, religions, faith, morals, woman, etc. (they being forms of belief), are used as expressing different "means" as controlling and expressing desire: an idea of unity by fear in some form or another which must spell bondage-the imagined limits; extended by science which adds a dearly paid inch to our height: no more.

Kia: The absolute freedom which being free is mighty enough to be "reality" and free at any time: therefore is not potential or manifest (except as it's instant possibility) by ideas of freedom or "means," but by the Ego being free to recieve it, by being free of ideas about it and by not believing. The less said of it (Kia) the less obscure is it. Remember evolution teaches by terrible punishments-that conception is ultimate reality but not ultimate freedom from evolution.

Virtue: Pure Art

Vice: Fear, belief, faith, control, science, and the like.

Self-Love: A mental state, mood or condition caused by the emotion of laughter becoming the principle that allows the Ego appreciation or universal association in permitting inclusion before conception.

We sometimes want anarchy and cops... but we finally have to choose one way or the other.

Voltaire
12-08-2016, 01:49 AM
This is a matter which has been bothering me for a long time now and I wish to bother thou with it as well. ^^

Is enlightenment congruent to death, a trap layed out by the (spiritual and materialistic) elite to protect their own standing and power?




The kabbalah teaches that the 'ego' is pain and suffering.
That the ego is our response to keep us away from things that hurt us.
It also makes us despise everyone that is not "us".

It is the "self" and as a result is extremely "selfish".

In order to transend to the higher realms of the multiverse you must realise the truth about yourself, your relativity to everything that is not you, and what you TRUELY are.

That said, you are correct. The elite make this transformation whilst keeping their ego, that is why they act to selfishly and in such an "evil" manner (at least that's how we perceive it (not saying it is or isn't, just commenting on its perception)).


If we all realised our egos and transended we would see each other as ourselves ("love thy neighbour as thy self") and there would be no selfish acts in the world, we'd all be lovely to one another and 'it' would be good.
We would also not fear death, and would embrace each leap, as it may be the next leap home (quantum leap).
As it is we all retain our egos, try and scrape together as much material as we can around our nests, eat all we can, consume until we burst, orgasm as much as possible; with as many different people as will let us, then fear until we die.


I'm not trying to sway you in one direction or another about your ego. It is yours, and your relationship to it is key.
It's also positioned exactly opposite to god, and is his gift to us; without it we would all be 'One'.
One mass hive entity that had no individuality or personality: the same as how bees are effectively all just one brain, resonating through different shells.

The journey is to understand your ego, realise its truth, and seperate from it.
But this should not be confused with seperating from your own individuality, your soul.
That is the key.
Otherwise you become one of these elite hive-minds; who all think they're one person, but have been tricked into becoming one large entity. (avoid at all costs new-age hippies and people who talk about "being one" and "at one with oneness"... it's a trap)

Awani
12-08-2016, 01:57 AM
(avoid at all costs new-age hippies and people who talk about "being one" and "at one with oneness"... it's a trap)

I disagree and I am certainly not a new-age hippie. It has got nothing to do with hive-mind. Yes, you are right some people apply this way of thinking to a sort of mask (call it new-age hippie or whatever), but this is not the case for the individual. Sheep are attracted to crowds/groups. For instance you can have solitary serial killer and then you can have Obama who orders the death of people with support from millions - but it is only the serial killer that is "evil". Same with "being one"... although I prefer to use the term "merge with the Mystery". You can have a hippie cult that achieve nothing with being one, and then you can have the individual who reach Nirvana.

:cool:

Kiorionis
12-08-2016, 02:16 AM
Same with "being one"... although I prefer to use the term "merge with the Mystery". You can have a hippie cult that achieve nothing with being one, and then you can have the individual who reach Nirvana.

Depends on how well you know the programming language, I guess. You either play the game or design it ;)

Awani
12-08-2016, 02:20 AM
You either play the game or design it.

Yes, but most probably it was designed first and then played... so it is actually impossible to design it whilst playing... that is how it was designed. ;)

:cool:

Voltaire
12-08-2016, 03:14 AM
You either play the game or design it ;)

Or get played..



although I prefer to use the term "merge with the Mystery". You can have a hippie cult that achieve nothing with being one, and then you can have the individual who reach Nirvana.


I'm not sure what you mean.
When they actually acheive "oneness" metaphysically, (not just talk about it), their thoughts are all synced. They feel others thoughts, and as such if they have a thought the hive doesn't like it is moderated out. like standing in a room talking about something the other 100 people don't like: you feel pressure to conform.
This pressure is what actuates the "hive-mind". This is the mob-mentality that creates their "oneness".

Actual non-duality in the hyperdimension is more like a firewall. The illusion of duality keeps us locked into our "selves".
Once you bypass that, you become an entity outside of what you know of yourself today.
You then become a being of light in the neversphere, understanding that you are everything else, your perspective is just fixed to your own soul (a soul that was once what we call "god" before it split into the consciousness that now inhabits every atom in the cosmos).

I have a feeling you will disagree with me further, but what I'm saying is quite accurate.
Cognitive dissonance will rarely allow anyone to accept it, though.

Awani
12-08-2016, 03:36 AM
Yes then I agree. I know all this. ;)

:cool:

Kiorionis
12-08-2016, 04:31 AM
Or get played..

True, but I like to think that playing the game necessarily means the game is playing you at the same time.

Just like enlightenment. If you search for enlightenment, then enlightenment will search for you (in a manner of speaking).

Funny thing is, my mother always told me that if I ever get lost, "just in the same spot until you're found".

ArcherSage
12-08-2016, 05:04 AM
It is about oneness, which is the purpose of alchemy to find the Prima Materia, that which binds all things together and all things derive from.

Awani
12-08-2016, 12:24 PM
True, but I like to think that playing the game necessarily means the game is playing you at the same time.

"Make the money, don't let the money make you
Change the game, don't let the game change you" - Macklemore

It also works as:

Make the game, don't let the game make you
Change the game, don't let the game change you

:cool:

Andro
12-08-2016, 01:01 PM
Actual non-duality in the hyperdimension is more like a firewall.

I need your definition of 'hyperdimension'. Just to get a baseline.


You then become a being of light in the neversphere

I will also need your definition of 'light' and of 'neversphere' - to better understand what you mean.


what I'm saying is quite accurate.

How do you know?


Cognitive dissonance will rarely allow anyone to accept it, though.

Merely talking about it (or even thinking about it via the conscious mind's channels/receptors), already distorts/corrupts 'it', IMO.


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

Voltaire
12-08-2016, 08:36 PM
How do you know?


I have been outside this dimension.
I'm not talking about a dream I once had, or a "metaphorically I was outside this dimension, while I sat cross legged on my bedroom floor"... I mean I navigated out of my mind, left my body, and found the place we go outside that (where our soul goes when our bodies die).
It's something that is very hard to explain, and generally tends to bring a lot of flak and scrutiny if posted about on an online forum.
For this reason it's something I'd rather PM about.

If I were to tell you everything, dissonance would kick in and you would not believe it. (similar to the scene in Dr.strange, where he meets the ancient one for the first time)
And unfortunately people never do believe it (why would they? most things talked about on the interwebs are gross ficticious imaginarium contructs, rarely do we find miracles of truth);
if you were to listen objectively, however, the information would be of massive use to you.
To anyone, in fact.
I could tell you how to get there yourself, if you wished to go; how to navigate the realm there, if you wished for some directions for the afterlife, or just tell you about it's physical properties to help you better understand the properties of our current dimension.


It's not new information, however. It's something you already know. We all do. You just don't remember at this place in space-time.

When I went to the "hyperdimension" (the place our soul exists outside our mind-body) I remembered the place, I had intuitive feelings about things, I had emotion.
These are all things our soul can feel.
It seems our mind-bodies have evolved AROUND those abilities of the soul, and over time shaped our vessels to fit accordingly.

As I've said you have no reason to trust this information as gospel, but if you did keep it in mind it would surely help you at some point on your journey.
But as this is someone else's thread, I'd rather not hijack it - and will happily continue talking about it by PM.

Awani
12-08-2016, 09:48 PM
It's something that is very hard to explain, and generally tends to bring a lot of flak and scrutiny if posted about on an online forum.
For this reason it's something I'd rather PM about.

Well you have come to the right place then. We have a lot of posts and threads on this subject bordering on over exposure almost. So I wouldn't hide in PM.

I and a few others have posted pretty private things very openly.


I have been outside this dimension.

I have as well on multiple occasions and I know a few in this forum who has too (but I cannot verify anyone elses experience). And each person has done it in different ways.


But as this is someone else's thread, I'd rather not hijack it - and will happily continue talking about it by PM.

Just create a new thread.

:cool:

Awani
08-15-2017, 08:39 PM
zoas23 mentioned in another thread that he does not think Ayahuasca can achieve enlightenment. This is true, because enlightenment is what is faced at the threshold of the experience... enlightenment is something one befriends. Something one lets in to one life, like a new lover. It is not something one becomes.

I think enlightenment is very misunderstood in this sense. Do I claim to be enlightened? All I know is that the Light is on. ;)

:p

Schmuldvich
08-15-2017, 09:12 PM
zoas23 mentioned in another thread that he does not think Ayahuasca can achieve enlightenment. This is true, because enlightenment is what is faced at the threshold of the experience... enlightenment is something one befriends. Something one lets in to one life, like a new lover. It is not something one becomes. I think enlightenment is very misunderstood in this sense.
Well put!

"Enlightenment" (oh how I hate this word!) is something we come to know, not 'become'.

Ghislain
08-16-2017, 06:57 PM
I have only flitted through this thread and so if I repeat someone else's post I apologise in advance.

In reply to the OP, I believe life to be a test, and one we will keep repeating until a certain outcome is reached.

Imagine, if you will, that we could bare children into another world where they will stay until they reach a maturity that allows them to live in peace with everyone else. So now you can be sure that the individual entering your society will be free from lust, gluttony, greed, sloth, wrath, envy and pride; is this enlightenment? Can you imagine what a world like that would be like to live in?

Now think of the technology we already have today, think of life support and virtual reality; in the not too distant future this could be realised, our children could live virtual lives over and over until they realise what is best for them and the society they are about to live in. Then and only then will they be ready to join us.

War is a test, famine, disease, crime...etc is all a test; money and other material things are temptation. How will you react to it? Time is virtual, everything you see including your own avatar is virtual.

We are all children, god is not a person but a society. You will be judged and the meek shall inherit the Earth. ;)

Ghislain

Warmheart
08-16-2017, 07:11 PM
It seems that the word "enlightment" is definitely connected to some highly dangerous practices, which dissolve the very essence of practitioner into the nothingness. Their "enlightenment" can be compared to the overdose of alcohol or cannabis - the condition of total unawareness.

On the other hand, there is a path to much higher awareness, where not only you don't lose your ego, but you seem to start comprehending so much more about this world as well as your position in it.

From how I see it, there are many kinds of Initiations and some authors randomly pick some such Initiation and call it "enlightenment". Let's say someone purified Muladhara and Svadhistana and acquired some mystical experience - he started to push this experience as "enlightenment" and he pushes agenda of "abandon your ego, etc.", and thus he can't move above that point himself, as he needs to have good self-awareness to purify Manipura. Such teachers are themselves caught in illusion of "enlightenment".

Surely purifying those 2 lower Chakras is possible by abandoning yourself (or as they say - dropping off one's desires), surely you will get some great mystical experience from that, but then you are stuck and can't move any further. Simply because you denied existence to the self.

That's how I see it. There are so many unusual things in existence, I feel it is very stupid to abandon it all and dissipate in some "entity" forever, killing any desire to do anything.

Awani
08-30-2017, 02:53 PM
Imagine, if you will, that we could bare children into another world where they will stay until they reach a maturity...

We are all children... You will be judged and the meek shall inherit the Earth. ;)

It fits with the Bible:


Jesus, however, said, "Let the little children come to me, and stop keeping them away, because the kingdom from heaven belongs to people like these."

:p

Ghislain
09-01-2017, 06:05 AM
Yes, but Jesus is of the trinity and hence god the son, thus society...and sending the children too soon is like sending cakes that are doughy in the middle ;)

Society doesn't want doughy children lol

Ghislain