quote:

---

Originally posted by 1cleverPretense

greetings all,

Somewhat confusing but very interesting discussion so far. Started off with:

Let us discuss to see what doesn't change after enlightenment. Enlightenment expands our self to the universal self, makes us more compassionate, peaceful, undisturbed and divine.

But what are the things that does NOT change post enlightenment?

Frankly, I haven't a clue. I am just (hopefully) beginning on this way of seeing and understanding and practicing. But I sometimes tend to think it resembles the difference between being asleep, dreaming, and being awake. Basically a clearer awareness of what self really is, and of its phenomena. What doesn't change would be obvious. Still, only a long-shot guess.

However, this worries me:

..(A teacher/guru) joked once that the people who were coming to him were giving up vegetarianism, putting on weight, and dying of heart failure. He thought that was just fine. He said, 'You can't not be in grace. Everything about you is totally absolutely perfectly appropriate. All the things you think are wrong with you are absolutely right.' That was enormously liberating to hear. I realized how caught up I had been for such a long time in trying to perfect the character, trying to have some Big Bang awakening experience, trying to get rid of all Joan's neurotic little habits, trying to turn into somebody better, trying to make something (other than this) happen."


I dunno. Fine line between grace and free license, at least to my false sense of self/ego. Especially when left to my own de/vices. I accept the notion that "It's all good" and we need to just acknowledge and accept that. However, is forward motion/refinement in terms of our conduct (niyama/yama) to be thrown out on the premise that we "can't not be in grace"? Also, regarding "trying to make something happen", I thought that is what the lessons were about - making some thing happen within (whether one defines it as removing veils, unlocking a door, etc.). Guess I am confused by that statement, but again I may be too sensitive or opinionated at this stage.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

.. I have looked at a handful of masters lives somewhat, the ones who became realized (as opposed to the ones who were born realized, like Bhagavan Nityananda and etc.) and see that they appear to carry over certain personality characteristics. The vehicle is an energetic conglomeration of karmic events that seems to have an expression, a life of its own to live out, even if the Divine Self is shining through in full force.

I agree that strong traits/impressions carry over. They seek expression, true. However, I'd question their validity to do so upon a whim or impulse without consideration, or at least reflection, upon their affects upon self or others. I know this life is to be lived and enjoyed, but I guess I am not at the place where I can let it all hang out without concern. I hope that I haven't misread any of the ideas contained in the above. If so, I apologize. Perhaps I am still overly sensitive and opinionated at this point of development.

Any helpful responses are appreciated. Thanks..

Be Well
shervin

---