|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
 Posted - Sep 23 2008 : 10:15:24 AM
|
Newpov said:
The lesser or greater attainments of heaven or realization are not contingent on agreement by the earthly majority that these attainments are meritorious or non-illusory, are they?
It's pretty simple: the illusions are illusions, and the non-illusions are not. No heavenly-vs-earthly dichotomy changes any of it. In fact, the heavenly-earthly dichotomy is just more illusion.
CarsonZi said:
I'm not defending SwamiG in any way, in fact I find her quite disturbing. But you sound soooooo cynical about things. "Let it go" is good advice for ALL of us.
It may surprise you, CarsonZi, but I'm not cynical in the least, believe me. In fact I'm passionate, which is arguably the opposite to cynical. I'm passionate for truth and for the elimination of the false.
I love what I do. Like a cop loves busting up a drug-ring, or a doctor loves giving the antibiotic that makes a child survive pneumonia, or a scientist loves to participate in the elimination of smallpox.
I don't work alone. The truth is coming out about all this. Facing it can be hard. Much is invested in untruth. Divesting is painful. The Idolatry of living human beings never has been pure, spiritual or even virtuous and never will be. All Indian and Eastern tradition nothwithstanding. And allowing people to idolize you has never been pure, spiritual or even virtuous and never will be. That's just the way it is. 
No-one is 'fully realized'. All who say they are are deluded. All of them.
|
Edited by - david_obsidian on Sep 23 2008 10:20:08 AM |
 |
|
|
CarsonZi
Canada
3189 Posts |
Posted - Sep 23 2008 : 10:23:38 AM
|
Truth can be relative David. In the search for absolute truth you may be deluding yourself in thinking that it actually exists.
P.S. I don't think there has been a single "god realized" guru/teacher/whatever, that has ever called him/her self "fully realized". Christ, Buddha, Yogananda, Muhammad, no one I have ever read about has claimed as such. As far as I can tell the only people calling these guru's "fully realized" are people who follow one of these individuals. |
Edited by - CarsonZi on Sep 23 2008 10:28:04 AM |
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Sep 23 2008 : 10:27:51 AM
|
This is true, but my search is not for absolute truth. What I say is true in the same way that it is true that eating your children out of curiosity is not OK.
|
|
|
|
CarsonZi
Canada
3189 Posts |
Posted - Sep 23 2008 : 10:28:47 AM
|
Not for YOU it isn't ok, but that doesn't mean it isn't ok for someone somewhere! And that makes your truth relative. ALL truth is relative! You can be passionate for truth all you want, I am too, but that doesn't make you (or me) an authority on what actually IS truth, or false. The only way we here on the forum can come across even remote truths is by dialectic conversation. And by saying outright "this is the truth, end of discussion" you aren't helping anyone here. There are no ABSOLUTE truths, and even if there were, I doubt anyone would take one person's word here as being IT. There has to be discussion about this stuff. Please be a little more flexible. Be passionate all you want, but don't automatically write off what other people have to say just because you see things differently. All perspectives are truthful according to the person with that perspective. And the only way to change someones perspective is through unemotional dialectic conversation. Please don't insist that you know THE truth. That defeats the whole purpose of having discussions. Acting as such you might as well be claiming yourself that you are "fully realized".
In Love,
CarsonZi
|
Edited by - CarsonZi on Sep 23 2008 1:49:52 PM |
|
|
|
newpov
USA
183 Posts |
Posted - Sep 23 2008 : 10:34:40 AM
|
David,
Ladders to heaven... always the ladders... the never-ending journey of perception and the never-ending choices to renounce more superficial things in favor of the deepening....?
You suggest, "In fact, the heavenly-earthly dichotomy is just more illusion." Oh really? The Undivided created its evident contradiction, the illusory ego which categorizes, thereby creating for each of us a life of False Choices. Is the will of Creator or creature mere illusion?
"In the beginning God created heaven and earth." Isn't this a concise statement laying out the Reality of Will, and therefore choice of personal direction to be faced and made at innumerable points in our lives and in the lives of the angels?
As a beginner I would like to get to know you, David. Please email me as and when you might have an interest. For like you, I would increase my passion (in order to climb my ladder) but would also endeavor to stifle my tendency to issue pronunciamentos! 
Brian
|
Edited by - newpov on Sep 23 2008 12:18:24 PM |
|
|
|
Scott
USA
969 Posts |
Posted - Sep 23 2008 : 12:45:32 PM
|
quote:
No-one is 'fully realized'. All who say they are are deluded. All of them.
David, I believe in what you're doing here. But maybe you should explain more about how you reached this conclusion? Is it through logic or belief? |
|
|
|
CarsonZi
Canada
3189 Posts |
Posted - Sep 23 2008 : 1:47:06 PM
|
Just to clarify, I never meant to say that I think that there ARE people that claim to be "fully realized" and are so. I was meaning that I don't think that there are any "fully realized" folks out there calling themselves "fully realized". What I was trying to say was that the only people calling a specific person "fully realized" are followers of that individual. The individual themselves do not call themselves fully realized. Jesus did not, Buddha did not, Yogananda did not, none of these people called themselves "fully realized". I agree that anyone out there calling themselves fully realized are deluded. Yes, all of them. But that does not change the fact that the people that probably were, by many definitions of the words, "fully realized" or "god realized" or "enlightened" or whatever, never claimed to be as such. Only their followers claimed them to be. Sorry if I seem to be contradicting myself, but I think fellow forumites might have got the wrong impression about my previous postings here. Hope this clarifies a bit.
In Love,
CarsonZi |
Edited by - CarsonZi on Sep 23 2008 1:55:19 PM |
|
|
|
brother neil
USA
752 Posts |
Posted - Sep 23 2008 : 4:51:01 PM
|
By being banned from the website one of you asked him
"Were you also humiliated publicly?" being humiliated is a choice of perception in my opinion. I have had people laugh and talk about me, sometimes I felt humiliated, other times I did not. Lately my concern of others opinions has decreased so for me I would not be humiliated by being banned, but please I am not trying to sound all mighty and all knowing. The reason I talk about me is because that is what I have experienced.
as far as becoming enlightened, another poster said we have all been at one time or another, I would have to say I agree with this. anyone here have children, the first time you held them you were probably enlightened, you were stillness becausee you cannot describe, you were in action because you picked them up. outpouring divine love because for a moment you cared about nothing more. If we have not been enlightened for a moment then I would ask is it in you? If the one/creator/god is in you, the guru is in you, then enlightenment is in you as well. We seek what we already are but for some reason have a block that will not allow us to accept.
I firmly believe most everyone, if not everyone, has had a state of enlightenment. I might have posted before but will say again. I hated my father for a long time and for some reason, before all this yoga stuff, I sat down in anger, frustration, and just gave up. My anger about him transformed and I dont know how. It happened from one instant to the next and that understanding will never be taken away. Maybe it was not a moment of "enlightenment" but whatever that moment of clarity was, if I could live my life in that state I would take it in a moment. I do believe I can and I do believe I will, Maybe it will be when I get out of my own way.
as far as the teachers, if they are not for you my suggestion would be to let it go and move on. I read in a book called remember "Whatever rings true in your heart keep that and let the rest go without judgement", as they say "humility is the key to the kingdom of god"
i am not so sure that this post is directed at anyone on here more then it is directed to myself. if it dont ring true, let it go, let it .... Let ...... L ........................................................
thanks for your time brothers and sisters
i am love, i am peace, i am joy, i am of the one
i am neil
|
Edited by - brother neil on Sep 23 2008 9:18:39 PM |
|
|
|
newpov
USA
183 Posts |
Posted - Sep 23 2008 : 5:22:03 PM
|
Hi all,quote:
Carson: I don't think that there are any "fully realized" folks out there calling themselves "fully realized"...
...people that probably were, by many definitions of the words, "fully realized" or "god realized" or "enlightened" or whatever, never claimed to be as such.
Yes. Humility would attest to their realized nature.
"Fully realized" types most likely prefer to fly low beneath the radar of public relations and acclaim, shunning guru worship in an effort to avoid unhealthy dependency relationships. This strategy protects their immediate families, not to mention their own privacy rights, and moreover throws the responsibility for spiritual development right back onto the devotee, where it belongs. I think now of Yogani.
But I imagine a others may consciously decide to sacrifice their personal lives to public access and scrutiny, or even open themselves to the dangers of adulation, assassination or death by other means, if they calculate that a greater service will be rendered in their so doing. I think now of Jesus, or possibly Martin Luther King, or Ghandi, or John, the protagonist in Yogani's Secrets of Wilder novel.
Possibly Yogani will decide to go public someday if or when he feels conditions are right for that; perhaps the Wilder novel reflects this dream of his, among others.
newpov
|
|
|
|
mufad
44 Posts |
Posted - Sep 23 2008 : 6:09:04 PM
|
Hi Friends,
Thanks for the replies.
See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4PZL7wg_g4 and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqOwPteS_Xg - is that instant enlightment or what !
Laughter is evideced with swamiG and her sages. SwamiG traces her leinage from papaji (Sri H.W.L. Poonjaji) the master who gives instant enlightment in the above videos.
My theory right now (subject to change) is that an opening of the heart center can be induced by people in a certain state and this can be confused as enlightment. This opening causes laughter as the consciousness shifts from the mind into the heart and later settles into stillness - which is assumed to be realisation as there is no mind and thus no thoughts resulting in stillness. But since there is no bliss and no purification has preceded this state, the form is still subject to anger and karma is still at work - so it is not the end of suffering, just no mind no ego kind of realisation.
Would like to know more about how the heart center, stillness, absence of bliss and presence of uncontrollable laughter relates to enlightment,
Thank You,
Mufad.
|
|
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - Sep 23 2008 : 6:49:31 PM
|
I don't think uncontrollable laughter is enlightenment. looks like fun though!
CarsonZi wrote "There are no ABSOLUTE truths"
i have to disagree there. Absolute truths are simple. It's only when man tries to make complex statements that there seem to be no absolute truths.
There is sunlight; there are planets and galaxies; mankind lives on earth; there is love, hate, warmth, cold.
Keep it simple and there is a lot of truth.
|
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Sep 24 2008 : 10:22:55 AM
|
David, I believe in what you're doing here. But maybe you should explain more about how you reached this conclusion [that noone is fully realized]? Is it through logic or belief?
Hi Scott,
well, I'd like to .... but what I am afraid of is that I have so many ways of approaching this that I don't know where to start and will go in all directions.
Maybe I should focus first on a more narrow question: why do I believe that no-one is fully awakened? Well, let me turn it around -- I don't see a shred of evidence that anyone is, or ever has been, and everything I see in the world and life would suggest that it isn't going to happen.
Imaging an isolated tribe that has no concept of music. It might be possible for them to be exposed for the first time to music and musicians, mythologize them, and then have a concept that such-and-such a guy is 'fully musical'. But a true musician will laugh at the idea that he is 'fully musical', or indeed that any musician is or will ever be. Likewise, artists will chuckle at the concept of being 'fully artistic', mathematicians will laugh at the idea of someone being 'fully mathematical' and so on. The parameters of possible development in any of these areas is infinite....
Likewise, in a world in which 'spiritual awakening' is properly understood, the notion of being 'fully awakened', or fully spiritually developed, is silly. I would say that I arrived at this vision through experience and reason.
It wouldn't be important that the notion is false and ultimately silly, except that the notion is a major tool of culthood.
The Yoga world that has come to us from India is wrapped up in culthood. There is the big question of what I mean by culthood, and why people get into it, and so on, but I'll avoid that for now. But culthood is system of behaviors that are ancient, unconscious, near-universal throughout societies, and not nearly as pure and helpful as they are believed to be. Yoga itself, in its pure sense, has nothing to do with culthood whatsoever. Culthood obscures Yoga, and puts snares on yogis. Many very strong yogis are not purified of the presumptions and energies of culthood.
When I say 'culthood', I don't at all necessarily mean 'cult' literally. I'm talking about the unconscious and primitive system of energies on which 'cults', AND MAJOR RELIGIONS TOO, are based. Good yoga schools have elements of well-managed culthood, and bad yoga schools have elements of rotten culthood. That's the way it goes.
I advise anyone getting into yoga to understand culthood and sidestep it. As they get to understand it, they will understand that most of these major public gurus are not what they think they are, and are not as they represent themselves. They are just the priestly heads of cultic groups, vastly overestimating and over-stating their levels of purity and development. People's ignorance serves these people nicely -- if followers see the cultic heads as 'fully awakened', the followers will be easier to manipulate, and it will be easier to develop and maintain a large following.
Know the truth and the truth will set you free of all of this.
|
Edited by - david_obsidian on Sep 24 2008 10:37:51 AM |
|
|
|
CarsonZi
Canada
3189 Posts |
Posted - Sep 24 2008 : 10:43:10 AM
|
Etherfish:
You REALLY think that there are absolute truths? What you said above in example of absolute truths are not truths at all in my eyes. You said "There is sunlight; there are planets and galaxies; mankind lives on earth; there is love, hate, warmth, cold" These are in fact illusions. NOT absolute truth from my perspective. You may feel warm one minute, but warmth is relative, as is cold. One person may feel cold in the same environment where another may seem hot. (take for example the Yogi kundalini test of drying off wet blankets in the freezing winter with their bodies) And if you break things right down, planets and galaxies are really nothing at all. There is more open space between the particles making up the universe then there is matter clumped together. I'm not really trying to make this particular point, I see it as silly as I'm sure you do too, but my point really is that everything is in fact relative. There are no absolutes. No right, no wrong, no single correct statement can be made. EVERYTHING is relative. All the statements you made were simply that...statements. Not statements of fact (for everyone), just statements. You said "There is sunlight". Yes, there is sunlight. Not everyone knows this though, and so for some people, there is NO sunlight. This does not change the fact that whether or not they are aware of the sunlight, it does exist, but that to me is beside the point. You can't convince someone that the sun exists and is an absolute truth if they have never seen it. So the line between absolute truth and relative truth to me is unwalkable. The platitudes that could be considered by some to be absolute truths have to be so general and so vague that they are useless in debating anyways. Anything that could be of value to humanity is going to be a relative truth. Can't be any other way from my perspective.
In Love,
CarsonZi |
|
|
|
CarsonZi
Canada
3189 Posts |
Posted - Sep 24 2008 : 10:51:47 AM
|
David,
Can you give us an example of a guru or whatever that claims to be "fully realized" please? I can't think of one.
In Love,
CarsonZi |
|
|
|
newpov
USA
183 Posts |
Posted - Sep 24 2008 : 11:30:52 AM
|
Hi all,
David writes, quote:
why do I believe that no-one is fully awakened? Well, let me turn it around -- I don't see a shred of evidence that anyone is, or ever has been, and everything I see in the world and life would suggest that it isn't going to happen.
What child can judge the mind of an adult? Likewise, what man can judge those higher on the ladder of spiritual attainment? Are these proper questions to ask?
Does this link add to the discussion?
http://www.aypsite.org/260.html
newpov |
Edited by - newpov on Sep 24 2008 11:34:22 AM |
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Sep 24 2008 : 2:06:16 PM
|
What child can judge the mind of an adult?
A child can judge the mind of an adult to be perfect and beyond the possibility of further development. But an adult is less inclined to do so.
Newpov said:
You suggest, "In fact, the heavenly-earthly dichotomy is just more illusion." Oh really? The Undivided created its evident contradiction, the illusory ego which categorizes, thereby creating for each of us a life of False Choices. Is the will of Creator or creature mere illusion?
Sorry, I should have said, 'The heavenly-earthly dichotomy CAN BE just more illusion."
|
Edited by - david_obsidian on Sep 24 2008 3:20:04 PM |
|
|
|
CarsonZi
Canada
3189 Posts |
Posted - Sep 24 2008 : 2:59:36 PM
|
Boy did this thread ever get off topic. Probably my fault. Sorry Mufad
In Love,
CarsonZi |
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Sep 24 2008 : 3:14:03 PM
|
Carson said:
an you give us an example of a guru or whatever that claims to be "fully realized" please? I can't think of one.
Carson,
there are quite a number of gurus who have stated explicitly in some way or another that they are 'fully-realized'. Adi Da is one, Meher Baba is another, Sri Chinmoy is another and the truth is, there are many more. Krishnamurti comes close in calling himself the 'final flower'. It is not always easy to dig up explicit references because these things are often said at places or times, or in 'internal' books or newsletters of the groups around such people.
But fully-explicit statements that one is 'fully realized' are a drop in the bucket among more generalized marketing of oneself as fully realized. The truth is that it is somewhat gauche to EXPLICITLY state that you are 'fully realized' and is usually not the best way to self-promote. You might get away with it, but you'll probably only get fanatics for devotees if you do. If you want more than fanatics for devotees, you need to be a little more subtle in your priestcraft and self-promote as 'fully realized' in an implicit, not an explicit way.
There is an easy process to IMPLICITLY marketing yourself as 'fully realized'. First, you mythologize the 'fully realized' guru or master. If you live in India, an enormous amount of groundwork has already been laid for you in this process. The whole 'Siddha Tradition' is there waiting for you as a package. If you have come from India to the West in the 20th century, you are in a place where less groundwork has been done, but this works both for and against you, and if you are creative, you can do it. One strategy is to convert people's mythologization of Jesus (the Christ) into their mythologization of the 'realized master'. Then do some magic tricks, get a mythology of miracles going and so on. There are great opportunities if you are creative! If you were Krishnamurti, it was all done for you already by the Theosophists.
Having the mythology of the fully self-realized master cultivated, then, if you just 'act the part', the devotees will read it between the lines that you are 'fully realized'. Just get the dynamics of culthood going in your organization, and it will develop its own momentum. Cultivate your 'favorites', and make sure a high premium is placed on pleasing you. Prune as needed -- those who question you or just don't seem to 'get it' that you are 'fully realized' need to be kept out of positions of power, or even nudged out of the organization itself. Your good devotees will will state it EXPLICITLY to each other, or even outside the organization, that you are a 'fully-realized' master; and because you haven't sated it yourself, you'll be off the hook for public challenges. You can have your cake of being a person-idol, in the mythology of the 'fully realized' master, and eat your cake in not having to answer any challenges that you are fully-realized.
You can even cultivate the mythology of yourself as 'fully-realized master' while you make some 'attempts' to repudiate the mythology -- attempts that are highly visible but half-hearted, ineffective and even unconsciously (if not consciously) saboutaged by you. Then you even get credits for being humble, and not wanting to be idolized, while you remain both inflated and idolized and you keep your pedestal and empire.
This strategy sounds ingenious and cunning. But the unconscious working of the human political mind is very shrewd. For the human political mind, coming up with something as devious as this is child's play -- even almost literally -- children in the playground are already as devious as this.
This more politically subtle path is the path that the vast majority of gurus/masters etc. take in their self-mythologization. Those who implicitly fashion themselves as 'fully enlightened' are many, while those who explicitly state it are are very much in the minority, but do also exist.
|
Edited by - david_obsidian on Sep 24 2008 5:37:56 PM |
|
|
|
CarsonZi
Canada
3189 Posts |
Posted - Sep 24 2008 : 3:36:01 PM
|
| You basically just said the same thing I have been saying all along David. I said "I agree that anyone out there calling themselves fully realized are deluded. Yes, all of them. But that does not change the fact that the people that probably were, by many definitions of the words, "fully realized" or "god realized" or "enlightened" or whatever, never claimed to be as such. Only their followers claimed them to be." This does not mean that I am trying to say that any Christ or Buddha out there was fully realized even though they never said it as such, but merely that their followers were the ones putting them on pedestals not them. And I can't believe you think you aren't cynical after writing that posting. Go back and read it again. To ME that's as cynical as you can get. I can't imagine what you must think of Yogani. |
|
|
|
CarsonZi
Canada
3189 Posts |
Posted - Sep 24 2008 : 3:52:03 PM
|
I just did a google search on "fully enlightened guru" and 2 pages came up. A total of 87 (with many repeating) links. Only one of them was a person claiming that "hopefully within 2 years I will be fully enlightened and will become a fully enlightened spiritual guru". It was posted on a gambling website my work computer blocked so I couldn't read more. Sounded pretty "enlightened". I think if a MILLION hits actually DID come up, they would have been followers saying that their master was "fully enlightened", not masters telling their students "I'm fully enlightened".
In Love,
CarsonZi
P.S. Tried "fully enlightened master" and got 167 (many repeating ) links. And the only remotely relevant one I could find was a newspaper talking about Sai Maa being bestowed the title of "jagatguru" for the first time in 5000 years by the Vaishnav Saint Society. Nothing about her claiming it. Only others projecting it onto her. |
Edited by - CarsonZi on Sep 24 2008 4:24:03 PM |
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Sep 24 2008 : 4:02:39 PM
|
I just did a google search on "fully enlightened guru" and 2 pages came up. A total of 87 (with many repeating) links.
I should have used double-quotes not single-quotes. Bad example on my part. (I've edited away my mention of the google search.) If you are interested, by searching for "fully enlightened" + guru (quotes around one and not the other) you can get a lot of hits on pages written from the POV of the mythology of the fully enlightened guru.
Carson, it looks like we actually have a lot of common ground then.
No, I'm not cynical. (There is a certain amount of wicked humor in my prescriptions for self-mythologizing yourself, but I don't mean it cynically. ) I do know that the enlightenment process is real, and that's where the real value is. I probably have quite a lot of common ground with you in that. Many wonderful things are happening, and there are great opportunities. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with the notion and business of spiritual groups either.
In many respects though, the standards of public gurudom in yoga are not high, and there is much that is greatly in need of reform in it as a whole. I don't feel I'm cynical in noting this. I don't feel down or miserable or angry about it. I believe I'm just a realist in noting this.
Among those involved in the world yoga, there is a growing realization of these problems. As time goes on and our awareness increases, it becomes more difficult for people to continue with fraud and/or self-aggrandisement in gross or subtle ways. Things have already improved a lot I THINK since the advent of the internet (no numbers on that). This is good news, just as it is good news that it is more difficult for cholera to get a foothold because we have good sanitation.
|
Edited by - david_obsidian on Sep 24 2008 4:31:10 PM |
|
|
|
CarsonZi
Canada
3189 Posts |
Posted - Sep 24 2008 : 4:15:56 PM
|
We do have much in common David, I think we both know this. I personally think that any guru worth following would never call himself a guru, and anyone actively looking for students has delusions of grandeur. We can agree on that I think. I DO have a problem with spiritual "groups" as such though, as I see spirituality as individual and when you organize sprituality you get religion (organized) and THIS I have MAJOR problems with. But that's kinda beside the point really. All I am trying to say is that "fully realized" is a catagory we who aren't "fully realized" place on those who are further along the spiritual "process" then ourselves. There is no need to put the labels WE put on them, as THEY don't label themselves as such either. THEY know they have further to go, only WE don't know that they know that. God that was hard to spit out. Hope it makes some kind of sense to you.
In Love,
CarsonZi
|
|
|
|
Scott
USA
969 Posts |
Posted - Sep 24 2008 : 4:58:57 PM
|
Thanks for responding, David.
quote:
Imaging an isolated tribe that has no concept of music. It might be possible for them to be exposed for the first time to music and musicians, mythologize them, and then have a concept that such-and-such a guy is 'fully musical'. But a true musician will laugh at the idea that he is 'fully musical', or indeed that any musician is or will ever be. Likewise, artists will chuckle at the concept of being 'fully artistic', mathematicians will laugh at the idea of someone being 'fully mathematical' and so on. The parameters of possible development in any of these areas is infinite....
It'd be helpful to have a concrete definition of enlightenment from you to be able to discuss this analogy.
quote:
Likewise, in a world in which 'spiritual awakening' is properly understood, the notion of being 'fully awakened', or fully spiritually developed, is silly. I would say that I arrived at this vision through experience and reason.
I've also come to believe it through experience, but reason tells me that I can't say definitively that full spiritual development is silly. Because I haven't met everyone, haven't seen everything, haven't finished my path yet.
So my bringing this up is more about keeping the concept of truth pure, than it is about arguing for full enlightenment.
quote:
Culthood obscures Yoga, and puts snares on yogis.
I agree. |
|
|
|
newpov
USA
183 Posts |
Posted - Sep 24 2008 : 6:49:15 PM
|
| Fellows, when will you tire of discussing definitions and categories..... |
|
|
|
mufad
44 Posts |
Posted - Sep 24 2008 : 7:36:20 PM
|
Hi Friends,
What does being "fully ralised" mean ? Yes that question is related to the topic here.
If you see See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4PZL7wg_g4 and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqOwPteS_Xg the student there starts laughing on gaining an experience that they think is Realisation.
The video that I posted at the start of this topic - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nv5nIxTPifQ - shows a student entering stillness after Diksha - few days after this experience he was declared as "fully realised" by guruSwamiG - and was given the title of sage. He has stated that the stillness felt has remained ever since that experience - though anger, bliss, energy movements come and go.
If realisation is like Awakening from sleep, then we have only two states, deluded or realised as in sleeping or awake. When the illusion falls away, one awakens from the dream, realisation is said to have taken place.
I am not sure how purification and meditation techniques help, but masters like adyashanti say that awakening can happen in an instant "Like That"
When we say that "no one is fully realised" my guess is we are referring to the dream state, within the dream no one is fully perfect because the sleeper can continue to make a better self in the dream, but when awakening takes place, it is seen that the dream self was an illusion, then there is no more awakening after having awakened from the dream. Realisation then is to see things as they truly are and not as we think they are.
My theory right now (subject to change) is that an opening of the heart center can be induced by people in a certain state and this can be confused as enlightment. This opening causes laughter as the consciousness shifts from the mind into the heart and later settles into stillness - which is assumed to be realisation as there is no mind and thus no thoughts resulting in stillness. But since there is no bliss and no purification has preceded this state, the form is still subject to anger and karma is still at work - so it is not the end of suffering, just no mind no ego kind of realisation.
I invite your comments on that,
Thank You,
Mufad.
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
stillness vs bliss
