|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
no.thing
USA
16 Posts |
 Posted - Jun 21 2013 : 1:31:23 PM
|
I've been following AYP for about a month now and I believe this is a good system. It's the only system of spiritual practices I've ever followed. I don't really like following systems and my first response to them is to deeply question them. In fact, the questions apply not just to AYP but to yoga and other spiritual approaches as well. I want to bring up a few questions here, not out of being a jerk or resisting things needlessly, but just out of genuine curiosity. I genuinely respect AYP and I hope nobody is offended... inquiring minds want to know. :)
It seems to me that the first thing we should all do is to ask whether enlightenment, which is the goal of all this business, even exists. In the past, I used to read U.G. Krishnamurti, who was pretty adamant about that particular issue. He said nothing special had happened to him and no bolt of lightning was ever going to come out of the sky and strike anybody, so we should all just give up now. (Given that, I always wondered why I sometimes felt like a bolt of lightning had struck me after reading his stuff...)
It's also worth noting that some other well-respected and well-known sages never accepted the role of guru, even if they didn't go so far as to say that enlightenment did not exist, like Ramana Maharshi for instance. Ramana Maharshi also did not seem to think highly of most specific practices that are supposed to bring enlightenment.
On the other hand, there are the gurus who do accept that role and who do give out practices, sometimes piecemeal over the course of years and in exchange for compensation. It seems to me that even if you do accept that enlightenment exists, then you have to ask whether those practices can lead to enlightenment. Has that ever been demonstrated? Where is the proof? For instance, Paramahansa Yogananda seems to be that type of guru. So does he have any self-realized students? Are there any self-realized students of AYP?
I have little doubt that many of these practices are powerful and can lead people to a greater sense of peace and well-being. But there's always the matter of the final goal. Of course we can say that "attainment" of the goal consists of giving up all attempts to attain it, etc. etc., but if that's the case, then why do any practices at all?
Keep in mind that I say this as someone who continues to do practices and finds them valuable. It may well be that answering these questions is not possible or desirable. But to be fully honest, I feel like these questions need to be asked.
Any thoughts? |
|
|
kami
USA
921 Posts |
Posted - Jun 21 2013 : 2:59:31 PM
|
Hi no.thing,
Actually, these are perfectly valid questions. Most of us have these same questions, so no worries.
And there are no "standard" answers. It all depends on what each of us is drawn to. Why, for instance, do you continue to practice? What do you expect to get out of it?
Whether practices and/or gurus are necessary is a highly personal thing. In terms of enlightenment, ask everyone on these forums what that means and you will get as many responses! Some will say enlightenment is having infinite energy, and all sorts of siddhis, some will say it is all about energetic/Kundalini experiences, some others will say it is the end of suffering, and some will state that it is knowing one's true nature. Whatever the case may be, we are drawn to practices and/or gurus because there is the rising of the sense that there is something more to existence than being born, going through ups and downs, aging and death.
Whether one ever needs a guru or practice depends upon where he/she is in terms of identification as that individual. Those that "hold" that identification loosely are ripe enough to shed it with just a little nudging - like Ramana Maharshi. Those that are deeply identified need practices and/or gurus to help shed it gradually. Practices like kriya yoga, AYP, etc make us "ripe" enough for the process of "realization". Neo-advaitic teachings of "do nothing" are not applicable to the majority of seekers, simply because so few are ripe for it.
While Maharshi never had a guru, he never said that should be the case for everyone. His repeated statement was, "God, Self and the guru are the same. The external guru is merely the vehicle for the process" (paraphrasing). Most of us go through the stage of needing an external guru, until there is seeing/knowing of the guru within.
While practices are needed for most of us, there is also the subtle trap of becoming the meditator or the one that practices, merely shedding one mask for another. Hence, it is said that eventually, even practices need to be let go of. Practices are like a ladder, aiding the climb up beyond the mundane. But to finally drop into the no self (or no.thing ), one will have to let go of the ladder. And that includes the expectation of enlightenment or self-realization - who becomes or needs to become enlightened? There will be no "one" that comes back realized/enlightened. If there is, there has been no realization. This is why UGK and others say that as long as there is someone wanting to "get" realized, it is not going to happen, no matter how spectacular the energetic experiences.
Not sure if this makes any sense.
|
Edited by - kami on Jun 21 2013 4:35:31 PM |
 |
|
|
no.thing
USA
16 Posts |
Posted - Jun 21 2013 : 7:19:25 PM
|
Thanks for that, kami... that does sound reasonable and sort of instinctively makes sense. These practices do seem to be laying the groundwork for something, yet I also get the feeling deeper down that they are a hindrance in some way, even a form of self-deception - despite being helpful. That's really the sense I get when I try to be honest about it.
What it comes down to is, why would someone need to do practices in order to be what they already are? Either they are not really that thing, or the practices are unnecessary... although I think I'm a little too chicken to really go with that conclusion right now, so I'll probably stick with my meditation for now, haha!! |
|
|
|
CarsonZi
Canada
3189 Posts |
Posted - Jun 21 2013 : 7:36:27 PM
|
Hi no.thing,
quote:
Originally posted by no.thing
What it comes down to is, why would someone need to do practices in order to be what they already are? Either they are not really that thing, or the practices are unnecessary...
My take on it is this...
Yes, you already are "The Unspeakable Truth" or whatever one wishes to call "That." BUT, you can't mentally trick yourself into *living* this Truth... we all must do the work. That's how practices are helpful. We can't think ourselves into enlightenment.
Just my take.
Love!
Carson 
|
|
|
|
kami
USA
921 Posts |
Posted - Jun 21 2013 : 7:46:51 PM
|
Hi no.thing,
We are already That, yes. But do you know that? By knowing, not intellectually, but experientially, where there are are no more ups/downs, good/bad, like/dislike, etc? Do you live in a state of equipoise and equanimity? If you do, then you don't need practices.
Although we are already That, that truth is obscured by layers and layers of conditioning. Practices are for removing those veils so that we come to see what we are. As Carson says, one cant "think"into being enlightened..
Much love.
|
|
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - Jun 21 2013 : 7:47:59 PM
|
Hi no.thing
Your mind will make up things like "it's a hindrance, or self deception", because it feels threatened.
That's because your mind is the cause of the whole problem to begin with.
"why would someone need to do practices in order to be what they already are?"
Because our mind causes us to not know what we really are. Words are just representations of reality, but the mind thinks it can fully understand reality through words, and it manipulates words and believes it can manipulate reality in the same way.
It doesn't want to be told it is delusional because it thinks it is important, and the word-constructed reality it imagines, fits perfectly with the word constructed logic it has built.
Then to re-enforce that, it looks for things in the real world to confirm it is right, and ignores those things that don't.
So meditation breaks down that false construct, and we begin to see we are not what our mind thinks we are.
Then we find we have been wasting a lot of energy on that illusion, and life gets better. |
|
|
|
no.thing
USA
16 Posts |
Posted - Jun 22 2013 : 10:37:03 PM
|
Thanks for that, Etherfish and kami.
I just get the feeling that the whole thing is a very interesting paradox. Although doing practices is unnecessary, they help. Or maybe you could say that life consists of doing practices whether you like it or not. I don't know, haha.
Anyway, in practical terms, I'm still doing my practices until I get struck over the head with a lightning bolt - an event I don't honestly expect to happen. Ha... |
|
|
|
Bodhi Tree
2972 Posts |
Posted - Jun 22 2013 : 11:56:32 PM
|
This lesson will blow your mind if you dig AYP practices and the AYP vibe in general:
"Getting Enlightenment"
http://www.aypsite.org/120.html
Just one quote from the lesson:
"Will we ever experience enlightenment in the future? No. We never will. We can only experience it in the present. That means today."
Boom! You're already enlightened today, and maybe tomorrow you will be a little more enlightened...with no ceiling in sight. No such thing as final enlightenment...only a perpetual path that changes based on conditions and receptivity to eternal truths that wish to manifest. Can I behold the miracle of a butterfly and share in that wonder with another person? To me, that's a flavor of enlightenment. Can I give something with no expectation of return? Another flavor of enlightenment. At best, enlightenment is just a temporary description of a stage of evolution, but to try to confine the infinite potential of divinity to a concept of final attainment would be foolish, I think. 
Godspeed on your journey. |
Edited by - Bodhi Tree on Jun 23 2013 12:00:07 AM |
|
|
|
mr_anderson
USA
734 Posts |
Posted - Jun 25 2013 : 11:22:18 AM
|
Dear No.Thing,
I have laid out my personal understanding, (from direct experience of the path I love, and tread: Advaita), of what is meant by “Moksha”. Of course words are just notions, and nothing I say is definitive truth, I am simply attempting to point to the truth. I don’t like the term enlightenment, it’s too nebulous. Moksha is attained by disidentification with the body and mind, which are temporary and subject to change, and realization of our true identity, formless consciousness.
I think that realization of one’s true identity is the starting point on the path of Advaita, and the end point/on-going process is coming to firmly abide in that realization, so one’s life becomes an uninterrupted experience of “firmly abiding as the Self (consciousness/awareness)”.
Here we contrast untruth and truth, and explain how to move from untruth to truth:
1. The false beliefs we hold, on both a mental and energetic/felt level, appear to indicate we are separate physical bodies in an external, physical world.
2. In fact the sense of a separate self and external world are nothing more than appearances in consciousness/awareness.
3. When sleeping, a world of characters and places arises within the dreamers imagination, and furthermore the dreamer imagines himself to be within this world.
4. Those characters, places, and even the sense of a dreamer who is in the world, owe their existence to, and are made out of, the dreamer’s imagination.
5. The waking state is no different from a dream. Its sense of a separate self and external world are merely appearances, which owe their existence to, and are made out of, consciousness/awareness.
6. Consciousness/awareness, like the dreamer who is imagining himself in the dream world, is the experiencer and imagin-er, to which the experiences in the waking state arise.
7. Anything and everything one can be aware of is an object.
8. That which knows such objects, but is not itself known, (consciousness/awareness), is the subject.
9. It is the knower, not the known.
10. By learning to recognize the knowing aspect of experience, basic consciousness/awareness, and pay attention to it, the sense of ‘being an experiencer who is having an experience’ is eradicated, and one is left as pure experiencing, without the sense of a separate experiencer or external experience.
11. Thus it is clearly experienced that everything is simply an appearance that is made out of, and not separate from, awareness.
12. One realizes that one is formless consciousness/awareness itself.
13. One realizes that the apparent external world and body-mind are also formless consciousness/awareness itself.
14. Thus the term: Not-two, Ad-vaita.
This realization for me has come in three stages:
1. Realizing/experiencing that one is the formless witness to which all experiences arise (subtle duality – witness/witnessed)
2. Realizing/experiencing that the witness (formless consciousness) and experiences arising to it are not separate (non-duality)
3. Realizing/experiencing that everything is made out of one substance (formless consciousness), and that external reality has no existence apart from its formative substance (formless consciousness). I would say describe this perhaps as unity or oneness.
This realization does not abide in my experience. I.e. Inquiry and Meditation on the Self allow the obstructions that prevent clear-seeing of the truth to dissolve for a time. However, vigilance is required, or mis-identifications and all manner of foolishness arise.
Furthermore, the realization is a deepening. Enlightenment is a scale, simply realizing your are witnessing your thoughts, and don’t have to believe them: that’s a measure of enlightenment. The very fact that you are drawn to spiritual practices is most likely a sign that you already have some measure of enlightenment.
The sadhana simply serves the purpose of helping the obstructions to dissolve. Gradually, this formless freedom that you are, is noticeably the ground of all your experiences.
”First, one awakens to personal freedom: the realization that you are formless consciousness itself. As consciousness, you are free of body-mind identity.”
“Then, there is the awakening to non-personal freedom. This is the birth of a vast non-personal Love for the whole, for all beings and all things. It is the realization that you are the whole. Therefore, a freedom that is in any sense personal seems pale in comparison to a love, which is so much greater.This is a phase of surrendering any and all personal attachments to the greatest good, the Self. As self-centered concerns dissolve, a love that is all-inclusive sweeps you up into its arms and into a new life of service, celebration, and love.” - Adyashanti
Disclaimer: I believe as has been mentioned, even the above is not the end point. It goes on indefinitely. The above is really just the beginning. Some talk of 'realizing the absolute', which goes beyond this. All I'm able to offer above is my limited personal experience, but I think it's a good starting point.
|
Edited by - mr_anderson on Jun 25 2013 1:34:21 PM |
|
|
|
mr_anderson
USA
734 Posts |
Posted - Jun 25 2013 : 1:56:01 PM
|
and finally with regard to the paradox of practice/non-practice, enlightenment/non-enlightenment, it could not have been described better here:
"This was Dogen's basic koan. After years of practice and some awakenings and maturation, Dogen, still young, became obsessed with wha tmight be called a 'natural' koan. That is a spiritual puzzle that has not been assigned or found in a book, but arises naturally within oneself. For Dogen it was 'if, as all the Patriarchs have taught, we are all inherently Buddha-nature from the beginning, why do we have to work to realize this?' He became so obsessed with this question that it was all he could thing about, day and night, for years, until he had a great satori that set it to rest. What was his answer? Well, there would be two levels to that - an absolute and a relative - of course! At the absolute level there is no expressing the answer - in a sense all questions arise because of our involvement in dualistic perception, and so when we have a deep awakening, especially in the context of a particular inquiry, then that question is answered by being illuminated by a higher context that resolves the delusion that gives rise to the question in the first place. On a relative level, Dogen tried to formulate his 'answer' philophically as well. He expressed it as the famous phrase 'practice/enlightenment', which for him meant that we misunderstand what practice is. From one point of view we approach practice as a means to a goal, but deeper still we practice because practice is the way enlightenment actualizes within relativity. Practice is enlightenment, enlightenment is practice."
"From another point of view then, we do not work to become enlightened, we simply work/practice to actualize or express our current enlightenment. And the quality and enlightenment that we have now is manifest in our understanding or what we are 'doing' when we practice. There is, in fact, no separation. If we believe there is a distance between us and the goal, however, and we practice to bridge that gap, then that is our current level of enlightenment, and our practice is the actualization of that understanding. There is nothing wrong with that. This is also the context from which the next stage will naturally ripen, and then that is our practice/enlightenment. Still no separation. All practice has some measure of enlightenment actualized within it. Even our first glimmer of wanting to be a better person, wanting freedom from suffering, believing something beyond might be possible, longing for God, or Love, or Awakening, is enlightenment actualizing."
-Excerpt from the Primordial Ground
http://www.mountainrunnerdoc.com/pr..._part_2.html
|
|
|
|
no.thing
USA
16 Posts |
Posted - Jun 26 2013 : 9:42:21 PM
|
| Thanks for that. This sentence does seem to explain the issue: "And the quality and enlightenment that we have now is manifest in our understanding or what we are 'doing' when we practice." I guess everything is a form of practice... or looked at from another perspective, maybe practice is not even practice. If you really wanna twist your brain into a pretzel. |
|
|
|
cosmic
USA
821 Posts |
Posted - Jun 28 2013 : 6:11:12 PM
|
Hello no.thing,
When I was in 4th grade, my math teacher had a chart on the board with everyone's name on it. Whenever we did well on a test or homework, she put a gold star next to our name. This was a great motivator and gave us something to enthusiastically strive for.
Where are my gold stars now? Probably in the trash. But I can multiply like nobody's business.
I see enlightenment the same way
Namaste
cosmic |
|
|
|
Bodhi Tree
2972 Posts |
Posted - Jun 29 2013 : 7:18:51 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by cosmic
Where are my gold stars now? Probably in the trash. But I can multiply like nobody's business.
LOL, cosmic.  Superb comparison. Gold stars for everyone! |
|
|
|
no.thing
USA
16 Posts |
Posted - Jul 01 2013 : 1:39:42 PM
|
| Nice. |
|
|
|
cosmic
USA
821 Posts |
Posted - Jul 04 2013 : 7:41:27 PM
|
|
|
|
|
no.thing
USA
16 Posts |
Posted - Jul 09 2013 : 5:03:18 PM
|
I've just found another really nice explanation of this issue. In a book called "The Handbook for Goats" (apparently not a particularly well-known publication, but an amazing one), Robert Peck says it this way...
"There are two starting paths for growth: discipline and trust. The path of discipline is self-directed. The path of trust is outer-world directed. Discipline plus vital energy leads to action. Awareness plus vital energy leads to trust. Both paths must ultimately be mastered. The higher path integrates the two paths yet is neither."
You can see it in context here: http://www.personaldevcenter.com/Pu...oats/ch1.htm |
|
|
|
Zanyan
USA
54 Posts |
Posted - Jul 09 2013 : 7:21:29 PM
|
Thank you for your clarity, mr. anderson.
quote:
3. Realizing/experiencing that everything is made out of one substance (formless consciousness), and that external reality has no existence apart from its formative substance (formless consciousness). I would say describe this perhaps as unity or oneness.
Yes.
quote:
This realization does not abide in my experience. I.e. Inquiry and Meditation on the Self allow the obstructions that prevent clear-seeing of the truth to dissolve for a time. However, vigilance is required, or mis-identifications and all manner of foolishness arise.
Isn't that the truth! I've preferred to learn this the hard way.  In the past, I'd get to stage #2 above and figure I didn't need practices (this idea has become pretty prevalent). I apparently liked to play that game with myself. Now, in the direct experience of: form does not differ from emptiness, emptiness does not differ from form, objects (including thoughts, feelings, etc.) are not separate from Awareness, they do not arise "in" awareness, all arisings *are* awareness (how did I not see this before? ), back to the mantra...
|
Edited by - Zanyan on Jul 09 2013 7:23:27 PM |
|
|
|
mr_anderson
USA
734 Posts |
Posted - Jul 09 2013 : 7:43:55 PM
|
Hi Zanyan,
Thanks I'm glad you liked it.
Yes - I have definitely fallen into the "I don't need practices anymore" idea before during awakening experiences. I think a good definition of enlightenment is when during dreaming, deep sleep and waking hours your are constantly experiencing your identity as the non-dual Self.
Sri Krishna Atmananda Menon when asked "How can I know when I am established in my true nature?" said "When the thoughts, feelings and percepts never take you away from yourself". I.e. a non-stop experience of oneself as the non-dual reality, the screen, upon which the play of body, mind and world is projected. |
Edited by - mr_anderson on Jul 09 2013 7:44:40 PM |
|
|
|
Zanyan
USA
54 Posts |
Posted - Jul 09 2013 : 8:20:22 PM
|
quote:
I think a good definition of enlightenment is when during dreaming, deep sleep and waking hours your are constantly experiencing your identity as the non-dual Self.
Very good definition to keep in mind. My teacher, who I believe was, never stopped practices. I have just been a stubborn sort.  (Or maybe she did stop practices and she also learned the hard way. Who knows?)
quote:
Sri Krishna Atmananda Menon when asked "How can I know when I am established in my true nature?" said "When the thoughts, feelings and percepts never take you away from yourself". I.e. a non-stop experience of oneself as the non-dual reality, the screen, upon which the play of body, mind and world is projected.
Beautiful. Thank you. |
|
|
|
Jim and His Karma
2111 Posts |
Posted - Jun 17 2014 : 9:32:56 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Zanyan objects (including thoughts, feelings, etc.) are not separate from Awareness, they do not arise "in" awareness, all arisings *are* awareness (how did I not see this before? )
Another (perhaps clearer) way of saying that is that nothing arises; anything apparently arising is just the externalization of a shift in one's attention.
If you mush your arm down on a piano, you hear many notes. If you listen closely, you can pick out absolutely any song within that mush...it's just a matter of shifting one's attention. The big mush of notes doesn't ever change; it's absolutely static. But our perspective picks and chooses, which creates the impression of change, time, and continuity.
Everything is like this. Attention shifts and we think something has changed. |
Edited by - Jim and His Karma on Jun 17 2014 9:36:36 PM |
|
|
|
Ayurveda60
Greece
1 Posts |
Posted - Jun 23 2014 : 02:54:32 AM
|
| I was searching the internet for articles about meditation and i came across this site http://www.andrewcharalambous.co.uk/. Check it it has brilliant articles. |
|
|
|
Zanyan
USA
54 Posts |
Posted - Jun 23 2014 : 1:48:50 PM
|
quote:
Another (perhaps clearer) way of saying that is that nothing arises; anything apparently arising is just the externalization of a shift in one's attention.
*pinggggg* Thanks, Jim. |
|
|
|
Will Power
Spain
415 Posts |
Posted - Jun 24 2014 : 4:08:30 PM
|
When he was asked about his goal, Lahiri Mahasaya answered: Eternal tranquility.
|
|
|
|
parvati9
USA
587 Posts |
Posted - Oct 20 2014 : 12:00:07 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by no.thing
It's also worth noting that some other well-respected and well-known sages never accepted the role of guru, even if they didn't go so far as to say that enlightenment did not exist, like Ramana Maharshi for instance. Ramana Maharshi also did not seem to think highly of most specific practices that are supposed to bring enlightenment.
...
It seems to me that even if you do accept that enlightenment exists, then you have to ask whether those practices can lead to enlightenment.
I have little doubt that many of these practices are powerful and can lead people to a greater sense of peace and well-being. But there's always the matter of the final goal. Of course we can say that "attainment" of the goal consists of giving up all attempts to attain it, etc. etc., but if that's the case, then why do any practices at all?
Keep in mind that I say this as someone who continues to do practices and finds them valuable. It may well be that answering these questions is not possible or desirable. But to be fully honest, I feel like these questions need to be asked.
Any thoughts?
Hi No.thing
Very good questions. Each must pursue their own path. In my opinion, enlightenment exists. Assuming that it does exist, is it worth striving for? And what exactly IS it? One definition of enlightenment would be: freedom from [unnecessary] suffering. If we accept that definition of enlightenment, then what is unnecessary suffering? And on and on it goes ... the questions are seemingly endless. Another way to view enlightenment is - an experiencial knowingness in which all such questions are finally dropped.
IF enlightenment actually exists, and IF it brings an end to suffering or even significantly diminishes suffering, then it is a worthy goal? Undoubtedly many spiritual seekers would answer that question in the affirmative.
Your issue is perhaps more with the value of practices than with a definition of enlightenment. However, it is suggested that one define the goal one is pursuing, in terms that are personally meaningful. Then, one can evaluate which practices are suitable in the pursuit of that goal, as one has defined it.
Many of those on a so-called spiritual path choose to pursue practice(s) in order to progress towards enlightenment. Whether or not those practices are helpful would depend upon how the individual views enlightenment ... i.e., what they imagine enlightenment to be. The crux of the issue is that the ostensibly enlightened masters often tell us that enlightenment is beyond the mind and beyond imagination. Whatever we may imagine enlightenment to be - it is not that.
I believe Ramana felt that self-inquiry is for only the ripest spiritual seekers, and that it is the fast track to enlightenment. That said, how do we become ripe for self-inquiry? Is there a catalyst, some method of becoming more ripe? I believe even Ramana consented to the necessity of practices for those not directly ready for self-inquiry.
In my imagination, my spiritual path has been as a practitioner of self-inquiry for several lifetimes. In those, as well as for some time in this life, Ramana Maharshi has been regarded as my guru. While still regarding Ramana as a dear friend and precious teacher, I am no longer consciously engaging in self-inquiry. Self-inquiry has become more or less habitual and whether or not it is occurring without my conscious intention, is a matter of speculation.
My path has lead to a very close walk with Jesus. I am finding more than I ever thought possible in my relationship with Him ... as well as in embracing The Presence Process as taught by Michael Brown. Only speaking for myself here, practices often result in a case of spiritual bypass. Intense emotional reactions in my daily life have become such an issue for me, that it absolutely must be met and dealt with. As opposed to bypassed. TPP has proven, for me, to be the fast track to peace, and perhaps enlightemnent as well. However that remains to be seen.
Just my 2 cents.
love
parvati |
|
|
|
omyoga
India
2 Posts |
Posted - Jan 01 2015 : 06:46:11 AM
|
I liked all inputs are improved my knowledge. This is best I read here:
"Realizing/experiencing that everything is made out of one substance (formless consciousness), and that external reality has no existence apart from its formative substance (formless consciousness). I would say describe this perhaps as unity or oneness"
Thanks for all...
-Om |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
Questions about spiritual systems in general...
