|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4514 Posts |
 Posted - Nov 19 2009 : 6:12:46 PM
|
Hi Kirtanman,
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Christi
What we could say, is that unity consciousness (which Kirtanman and Wayne Wirs are describing) is an initial stage of enlightenment, and that there are further stages beyond that. I referred to this a while ago in another thread as the stages of spiritual unfoldment beyond the realization of advaita.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Christi - could you please re-cap what you mean by this?
I recall you posting about it before, but I don't recall the details, nor am I sure I fully understood the explanation, at the time.
I believe there are three aspects to the transformation of the human being beyond the unity stage.
The first aspect is the continued refinement in the subtle sensory perceptions. This is, I believe related to things like empathy, compassion, clairsentience, clairvoyance, clairaudience etc.
The second aspect, which is related to this, is the integration of the higher dimensions of consciousness. I believe this is related to some of the supernatural abilities that are sometimes talked about such as the ability to perceive past lives or the ability to commune with angels or Gods. As my Kundalini Yoga teacher once said to me: "I live amongst the Gods".
The third aspect is the continued increase in the illumination of the subtle body and the ability of the subtle body to receive and transmit divine energy. Yogani talks in the main lessons about being able to sit in your room and transform the lives of people for miles around. I have met one man who could transform the lives of people pretty much anywhere in the world just by thinking about them. Yogani has talked about this as well.
So gradually, there is a subtle change in our senses to the point where we are literally living amongst the Gods, and healing energy is pouring out of us (through the crown, the heart and the eyes) and is transforming everyone who we touch and others all over the world and in other worlds.
I believe this isn't something that is desired, or sought after; it is just a process, which happens and is the destiny for each one of us.
Christi |
 |
|
|
Tibetan_Ice
Canada
758 Posts |
Posted - Nov 19 2009 : 10:17:24 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
...
The third aspect is the continued increase in the illumination of the subtle body and the ability of the subtle body to receive and transmit divine energy. Yogani talks in the main lessons about being able to sit in your room and transform the lives of people for miles around. I have met one man who could transform the lives of people pretty much anywhere in the world just by thinking about them. Yogani has talked about this as well.
...
|
|
|
|
Anthem
1608 Posts |
Posted - Nov 19 2009 : 11:06:47 PM
|
| Who wants to be a superman yogi? Some good fuel for inquiry... |
|
|
|
stevenbhow
Japan
352 Posts |
Posted - Nov 19 2009 : 11:13:38 PM
|
Hi Christi,
Thanks for the interesting post. But I wonder about people who have developed psychic abilities, Deeksha, ect, and yet still don't seem to have obtained Unity of Consciousness (great description btw).
Are they just examples of people that for whatever reason are extremely receptive to psychic energies in the same way that some people are more open to deep and blissful meditations?
If this is a natural process like you say then I can't wait to see where modern spiritual teachers like Yogani, Adyashanti, and Eckhart Tolle will be in the future. |
|
|
|
Tibetan_Ice
Canada
758 Posts |
Posted - Nov 19 2009 : 11:27:52 PM
|
Hi Everyone. :)
Although Adyashanti says that is impossible to describe the nature of reality and that we are not capable of imagining what it is that we are, that it is unspeakable and unexplainable, he goes on to speak about it and explain it anyway. :)
In "The End of Your World" by Adyashanti he says:
quote:
The problem with defining awakening is that upon hearing each of these descriptions, the mind creates another image, another idea of what this ultimate truth of ultimate reality is all about. As soon as these images are created, our perception is distorted once again. In this way, it's really impossible to describe the nature of reality, except to say that it's not what we think it is, and it's not what we've been taught it is. In truth, we are not capable of imagining what it is that we are. Our nature is literally beyond all imagination. What we are is that which is watching - that consciousness which is watching us pretending to be a separate person. Our true nature is contiually partaking of all experience, awake to every instant, to each and every moment.
In awakening, what's revealed to us is that we are not a thing, nor a person, nor even an entity. What we are is that which manifests as all things, as all experiences, as all personalities. We are that which dreams the whole world into existence. Spiritual awakening reveals that that which is unspeakable and unexplainable is actually what we are.
I don't have any trouble visualizing or imagining "partaking of all experience, awake to every instant, to each and every moment". I may not experience that but I can certainly imagine it.
To me it means that you can be anybody (or anything) at any time. You can experience what they experience. You know their thoughts, their memories, their likes and dislikes. You possess all of their knowledge, their belief systems, their intuitions. You've 'lived' billions of lives. If you want to know the theory of relativity, you simple move your attention to Einstein. If you want the experience of being Elvis, you can be Elvis, in the blink of an eye. Heck, you could be the Beatles, Mick Jagger, and Janis Joplin all at the same time!
One can only imagine that after a while, it might get to be pretty boring and meaningless though. Perhaps that is why some people say that the real miracles are the little selfless things we do in life as human beings.
The thing that I am greatful for is this. During the time I decided to take a break from the I AM mantra and AYP practices in August, I was seeing layers upon layers of visions/planes/beings/scenes all going whizzing by rapidly. I was not impressed and after a while it was kind of disconcerting. I thought that that wasn't meditation. It was like being caught in some kind of expanding reality vortex and it had no meaning to me. And it didn't feel the greatest either, I felt like I was being overtaken and was going to lose myself. I thought it was just scenery in a giant TV vacuum machine that was going to eventually suck me out and burn me up.
But now I'm thinking that perhaps I was experiencing the expansion into the natural state, only I had no idea that that is what was happening. Do you think it is possible to experience enlightenment and not realize that that is what was happening?
So now I am contemplating what has been said here. If this was the kind of expansion required to attain enlightenment, then I know that it is reproducible because that experience of expansion was occuring every day for weeks during meditation. The other observation is that AYP techniques with a few additional techniques were causing it to be reproducible.
It does remind me of my favorite buddhist poem:
To Abide in Awareness
Without a center, without an edge;
The luminous expanse of awareness
That encompasses all--
This vivid, bright vastness:
Natural, primordial presence.
Without an inside, without an outside
Awareness arise of itself, as wide as the sky,
Beyond size, beyond direction, beyond limits--
This utter, complete openness:
Space, inseparable from awareness.
Within that birthless, wide-open expanse of space,
Phenomena appear--like rainbows, utterly transparent.
Pure and impure realms, buddhas and sentient beings,
Are seen, brilliant and distinct.
As far as the sky pervades, so does awareness.
As far as awareness extends, so does absolute space.
Sky, awareness, absolute space,
Indistinguishably intermixed:
Immense, infinitely vast--
The ground of samsara,
The ground of nirvana.
To remain, day and night, in this state--
To enter this state easily--this is joy.
Emaho!
Shabkar
:)
TI
|
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Nov 20 2009 : 01:15:34 AM
|
Hi TI,
First: thanks for this post, and all of them .... direct, honest dialog is never a problem.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Ok. Let's create a new term. Let's call it enGoddenment. :)
quote:
Originally posted by Kirtanman
you seem to be saying that liberation isn't enough, or isn't complete, and that somehow "godlike powers" represent a higher level of enlightenment ... or enGoddenment .... or whatever; is that what you're saying?)
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Yes, it isn't enough. If you are liberated (your word), then you should be able to materialize your body into my living room and drink some yogi tea with me. You should be able to transport me to a far away land and be back for dinner. Right?
I do drink yogi tea, but for me, the infinite key to visiting your living room would likely involve Kayak.com and use of a major credit card.
And I was beginning to lean toward the term "liberated" as having less connotations than "enlightened" ... but maybe not.
And, I would say that this portion of our conversation gets to the very heart of any confusion, in terms of understanding each other, here.
I would say no .... what I'm calling enlightenment does not involve any supernatural powers, inherently ... although what you're calling "engoddenment" presumably would.
Meaning: many people conceive of enlightened masters, or godlike masters, as having the ability to perform physical siddhis ... and they use this as "evidence of", and "criteria for" enlightenment.
And I think this is the source of the reason you've not been sure about some of the advaitic teachers, either ... I don't know that any of them ever displayed, or had the slightest interest in siddhis or superpowers.
I've never seen these things listed as a basic criteria for enlightenment, anywhere ... where did you get the idea that they would be involved?
And again: it's not about the definitions ... it's about actual experience.
And, in the context of our conversation here, I'm just attempting to convey mine .... which has zero involvement with any siddhis, superpowers, akashic records access, and/or special abilities to transcend basic physical law.
So what *do* I mean, when I refer to "liberation and enlightenment"?
Simply that what I'm calling enlightenment involves an utter living knowing of non-dual true nature ... what I call "original, unaugmented awareness" (among a few other things. ).
There are major clues all over various sacred and yogic writings ("yoga is the cessation of mind modification") ... but until the full power of the identity shift takes place, it's impossible to understand what's being said ... because all words can do is point to what's being said ... primarily in terms of saying what it's *not* ... but when identity is still attached primarily to form, the benefits of the type of enlightenment I'm referring to likely seem confusing at best (they sure did to me, at least!).
It's like: "Okayyyy .... so ... there's no me; there's .... just awareness .... great; sounds kinda empty, and/or maybe boring .... if that's all it is .... what's the big deal?"
Kind of?
Again, that's how it seemed to me, initially.
Then, over the last (roughly) couple of years ... I went from experiences of nirvikalpa samadhi (a fancy term for "no form whatsoever, yet awareness remains") to sahaja nirvikalpa samadhi (a fancy term for experiencing daily life in unitive awareness; no subject-object division ... simply the wholeness of awareness, and the manifestations within it).
Sometimes, I use the illustration of awareness "dialing open" .... from the constrictions of thoughts, feelings, memories and imagination .... to the openness of full presence now, with zero sense of artificial division.
Without that artificial division, in a strange-yet-normal way ... everything literally feels like "me" ... the words appearing on my monitor right now ... and the monitor ... are no less me than "my tongue" ... or the song coming through my computer speakers ..... it's all part of the perfect harmony of this perfect moment .... a very normal moment ... and enjoyed fully, because there's no "me" feeling any of the zillions of little conflicts or vacillating thoughts that "me"s usually experience (the "me" ultimately being a deeply conditioned concept of partiality, that isn't actually real).
However, until very recently, while this could be a sustained experience, every so often, there would be a sense of "falling back out of" unitive awareness, and into feeling like, well (at the time) *me*.
It was problematic; mentally I knew I wasn't this set of conditioning ... but the experiencing of it still arose.
I basically "considered myself enlightened" (an ironic term if ever there was one), over the last several months ... never in an "I am and you're not sense", regarding anyone "else" .... but purely in a "considering how experiencing matches up to what I know of the nature of enlightenment ... there's enlightenment here".
Which was still about a hundred thousand times too much self-reference about it, to be accurate or pertinent.
Then, several weeks ago, there was a major shift ... qualitatively, quantitatively and revelationally.
Qualitatively
I'm not "in" awareness; I am awareness.
It's not a shift from limited mind to unlimited mind; it's a shift from limited mind to ........... nothing at all.
It can't even really be described as enlightenment, really.
On the great spectrum of unenlightenment to enlightenment, this is ...... simply not on that spectrum; or any other.
Almost more than awareness, the beingness itself feels like space .... yet also feels like the stuff in it ... but there's no sense of the personal ... even though awareness lives primarily via this given body-mind ... though it's known that that's a perspective thing (the world looks a bit different out of just your left eye, than just your right eye; likewise, awareness experiences "this body" differently than "that body" ... yet it's felt as one awareness ... though not in a supernatural way at all ... more in a recognition way).
Beneath the ever-changing confluence of personality, thoughts, feelings and conditioning, awareness animates every life .... and the unitive nature of that awareness is felt ... ekasparsa (one touch) ... ekarasa (one taste; one flavor; one essence).
I'm sitting here smiling, as I write this; utterly grateful, yet with no object of gratitude .... how limited mind could ever have dream there could be anything more marvelous than this moment ..... is just amazing ... in a happily, peacefully beautiful way.
It's not at all because of what's going on in this moment ...... it's because it's this moment ..... which is a slightly different moment than the moment I was so grateful for a moment ago.
A couple of nights ago, I was really sick (I hear about Adyashanti being sick, several years ago, and thought "Hmph; if he's enlightened, how come he's sick?"
Same reason I was: form does form stuff; body-minds get sick; it doesn't have anything to do with enlightenment.
Form can only relate enlightenment to form, somehow.
Our true nature is not form (though includes it) ... our true nature is the awareness experiencing the manifestation of the part of itself called "form".
And so, the form typing these words was enthusiastically vomiting the other night. One round was completed, and the body-mind was about to, um ... "arise" ... and stagger back to bed .... but as soon as I/body-mind was standing .... guess what?? .... *more* .... enthusiasm .... needed to be .... immediately expressed ....
And so, while anyone in the vicinity likely perceived a goat with sinus congestion engaging in unnatural congress with a poorly-working vacuum cleaner .... and while my abs engaged in another round of involuntary uddiyana (or whatever that's called), and my mouth, throat and nose wer{CENSORED FOR THE GOOD OF HUMAN KIND}iping up the floor, I had the passing thought:
"You'd think I could find *something* to be less than pleased about, here ..."
(I couldn't)
"... or some ... preference for a more ... pleasant ... circumstance ..."
(I couldn't)
"... or some sense of wishing this moment was different ....."
(How could I? It was perfect; utterly ... not "perfect better than"; literally perfect: complete.)
The reason "I" couldn't, is quite simple: there's literally and actually no experience of "I" ..... awareness experiences what's going on; there truly isn't preference.
It's like taking a step back .... where everything occuring in form feels like a sense, or a limb ... yet not a self.
Adyashanti says: "The world is not my concern; it is myself."
That's how it feels.
The Shiva Sutras say that (in enlightenment) "the body is the perceptible" ... all form is the body; it does what it does; awareness experiences the totality of the moment .... not the "me" (concept of body-mind) in "the world" (all that which is separate from "myself").
It's all one; what happens happens; human life continues as human life .... yet there is utter harmony with all, every moment.
Utter harmony.
I have pleasant tears forming in my eyes, as I write these words.
"The peace which passes all understanding" is real ... the Bible phrases it that way .... because true peace *specifically* and *completely* surpasses understanding .... meaning: in the realm of understanding, of form, it is not possible to experience.
The same with "freedom beyond imagination" (a phrase that came to me a while back) ..... those three words don't mean "really, really great freedom; they mean "the freedom that is only experienced beyond imagination; here, now .... in the midst of the unity of all that is real, now; this that we each and all actually are, now."
There is only now.
Past and future are concepts held in mind, now; mental form ... arising, displaying and subsiding, now.
Seeking and finding both resolved themselves into the actual.
There is no more "my life" .... simply living, unbound.
Loving.
Wholeness.
Giving.
Connection.
And yet, there's no "being excited about it" ..... it's so much deeper than that; so infinitely more vast .... yet only here, only now.
It's all those concepts arising from the concept of "me" that obscure the divine light illuminating everything, now .... the complete beauty and harmony of life living unbound is revealed; liberated and enjoyed.
I was recently putting some attention on a body-part that didn't feel so good (in connection with the sickness I mentioned) ... attention alone heals.
And I noticed: in the past, there would have been a slight sense of conflict regarding "healing me" .... now, there's the knowing that this body-mind has nothing to do with a "me" ... and healing enables it to serve in its natural role of connectedness with the whole ..... just as a tree does, or a cloud does, or a stream does, or a bird does ... or the sun does, or a leaf does, or a molecule, a galaxy, a hamster, a weed ........ as everything except for the distortion of the wholeness of consciousness called the human ego, does.
Wholeness is natural; conflict is the dream.
Quantitatively
Pure bliss consciousness, outpouring of divine love, 24/7.
Only peace; only awareness; only simple, pleasant peace; only goodwill and loving for all.
That might sound like "quite the list", if there was a "me" living it ... but "I" am not living these things; these qualities arose when the conceptual "I" finally dissolved completely.
Revelationally
Which brings me (quote unquote) to the "revelationally" portion of this post:
This "enlightenment" isn't about the experience; experiences come an go; moments, lifetimes; eons .... they all come and go.
This "enlightenment" (or whatever it can be called) .... is about the dissolution of the limited experiencer.
When it's gone, it's known to be gone ........ it was never real in the first place.
And in this space of aware I-less-ness ........ all the promises of the world's sacred teachings are simply how it is.
Peace which passes all understanding?
Check (no non-peace; no one to be non-peaceful).
Freedom beyond imagination?
Check (no imagination; without it, the freedom is inherent).
Pure bliss consciousness?
Check (limited self-concept really was blocking it, all this seeming-time).
Outpouring of divine love?
Check (not as a quality; as this that I am; life connects with life ... look around you; the whole universe is just this .... as I Am ... as we all are ... we are the conscious experiencing of life connecting with life .... the utter freedom of it .... the simple and real joy of it .... when the dream of separation and partiality finally ceases to arise; when enough attention finally rests again in natural balance, now ... conscious of its true nature as the experiencing consciousness of all this, now).
Can you (anyone reading) open your heart .... rest in silence ..... and let yourself take in the magnitude of this .... in and as the silent awareness you actually are, now?
It's everything.
It is worth everything.
It is liberation.
There is no more birth and death (body-minds die; I don't) .... a body-mind dying is like a cell dying to a human body-mind system; not even noticed.
There has never been a subjective death; it's not possible.
Form arises, displays, subsides ... whether as a rainbow, a human life, or a Universe.
There is no death; only change in display, and ever .... I Am.
And as I've said quite a few times, now:
"You am", too; really.
In the realm of form ... I know what I need to know when I need to know it.
In the realm of form .... I fill the Universe.
In the realm of form .... I am the one power .... divine love ... natural fountaining forth as peace, bliss; simple good-cheer, simple intentioning for the uplifting into conscious wholeness for all.
There is nothing else to have, know, be or be about.
There's no one to "get" or "have" enlightenment.
Enlightenment isn't an object; enlightenment is what happens when all duality ... including the concept of enlightenment ..... dissolves; completely.
As Adyashanti says:
"I'm like a friendly old dog now, wearing my master's slippers; but somehow, they fit perfectly."
It's like:
Game over.
Battle over.
Living unbound now.
Lovingly.
Wholly.
Freely.
On one level, "I" died (or, per above ... "changed") ... on another, I am born, now.
And now.
And now.
And so, that's all my very kirtanmaniacal (i.e. "not exactly brief ...  ) way of saying:
"Okay .,... so maybe some feel this is a "limited version" of enlightenment; that's perfect, too."
However .... given a choice between every siddhi ever mentioned .... or this exquisitely real moment, lived as the awareness-filled space of wholeness loving now ..... whoever wants "siddhis" is more than welcome to them; any powers in form are nothing in relation to knowing self as the fulness of formless awareness including all form, now.
Form is subsidiary to the formless; they can't be compared.
Liberation is living, eternally, infinitely, in and as the formless awareness we each and all are, now.
And, I've got a bit of sinus drainage (or, rather "body-mind" does) .... and my left toes are asleep because I sit in a weird way when I write posts, and I have a kink in my right shoulder .... and there's never been a moment, lived by anyone, ever, anywhere, more perfect than this one.
Reality is perfection.
I do understand how strange, or "over the top" some or all of this may seem to you (TI) and some people reading .... because I was there (trying to understand the formless using the tools and perspective of form) not long ago, at all.
Which is the major point behind everything I've been saying:
If I can do it (experience the full identity-shift involved in enlightenment), and "do it" utilizing a core set of yogic practices, centering around AYP -- so can anyone reading.
It may well be that discussion about it won't end up being productive ... which is fine.
My point is simple:
Hey, everyone: enlightenment is real; it's here; it's attainable; you can have it, too.
There are quite a few enlightened teachers around .... but not too many yogic practitioners who have recently shifted into actual enlightenment, that I know of (Wayne Wirs and I being a couple of exceptions) ... and so, when Wayne made the statement "one of the reasons I'm talking about enlightenment is to let people know it's possible" (or whatever he said; I'm paraphrasing his original statement) ... I felt a sense of "Hey, yeah! Encouragement is good ...." .... and so, I added my voice to his sentiments, as well.
I didn't know it would turn into a dialog like this .... and it's quite perfect that it did; if nothing else, I'd say that AYP is about clarification .... and as long as we all maintain a vigorous commitment to the actual and beneficial, we can create clarification in real-time (irony noted ), as we're doing here.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
If we (you and I) are God, why wouldn't we have all the powers? Doesn't mean we would use them, but doesn't 'liberation' mean you have attained perfection in God?
My answer would be: actual perfection in God is substantially different than imagined perfection in God.
What are "all the powers"? Powers as a concept of God is conceived to have? What would necessarily be true or useful about any of those, except those which love, uplift, nourish and empower?
In experiencing here, God is a term for the completion of formless awareness .... including its knowing of itself as the source of formless and form, both.
Unitive Awareness
Clarified Mind
Divinized Life
Has been called:
Father
Son
Holy Spirit
Or
Awareness
Energy
Matter
Or
Spirit
Mind
Body
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
You're trying to sell me on the idea that the neo-advaitists' enlightenment is the same as "perfect union with God", or God realization, or enGoddenment, aren't you? Maybe it's true. I don't know that for sure. How would I know? I certainly don't feel it.
I'm actually not trying to sell you on anything.
And quick clarification of terms:
No one I'm referring to is a "neo-advaitist" (or, more accurately: "neo-advaitin") .... I'm not at all a fan or promoter of the "neo-advaita" philosophy, which basically says:
"All this is it, including your current condition of internal conflict, torment and confusion; so just accept it, and be done with it."
The acceptance part of that is the only thing good about it; the rest "not so much".
I subscribe more to the traditional advaitic (used loosely and literally - advaita is just Sanskrit for "non-dual"; I'm not referring to Advaita Vedanta, the philosophy of Adi Shankaracharya, but more the advaitic tantric yogas, such as Kashmir Shaivism, and {I would say, as well} AYP; the Kabbalah, etc. -- and advaita (not neo-advaita) teachings ... which come in many different forms ...... and which I consider as those where the teacher is teaching from non-duality ... and simply teaching what the experiencing of non-dual enlightenment is like, and (usually) a bit about how to get t/here.
This includes teachers like Nisargadatta Maharaj, Ramana Maharshi, Swami Lakshmanjoo, Abhinavagupta (and most/all of the sages of Kashmir Shavism), Paramahamsa Nithyananda, Adyashanti (and I would say), Yogani ... and well as those of us here, including myself, promoting these same views, which are, simply:
The living experience of reality, and how to get here.
The two defining qualities are:
*Speaking/teaching from direct experience.
*Describing how to get to this place of direct experiencing, as experienced/known directly.
The other two approaches I've seen, are:
*Dualistic (God is god, you are not, and what we say about it all is true, including all the fantastic stories about great, super-human beings in a galaxy/country far, far away; oh, and by the way: tithe ... yes, to us; check payable to ....... ).
*Mixed Dual/Non-Dual ("This is it, and so is your pathetic, suffering-filled life, and any effort to the contrary is just more delusion; enjoy!" <---- NEO-ADVAITA, or, as I prefer to call it: FAUX-Advaita).
Mixed Duality/Non-Duality, and Duality can be accurate descriptions of lived experience *if* they are accurately integrated into the greater framework of non-dual reality.
Simply put:
The formless is non-dual; form is obviously dual; experiencing mind is obviously a mixture of the two ...... the fulness of what we are is the being-awareness living this full spectrum consciously now.
The spiritual path is usually started "fully dual" ... and bit by bit, silence (non-duality) arises (advaitadvaita - dual/non-dual, mixed), and finally, is seen-known-living as true nature, experiencing its creation of its universes of gross (physical) and subtle (mental/energetic) form (living non-duality, which includes duality and mixed duality/non-duality).
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
To me, this sounds like a strange statement coming from you. Aren't you enlightened?
Maybe by some definitions, maybe not by others.
For one, there's really no one here to be enlightened or unenlightened .... the dissolution of very duality projected by the idea of the separate self is simply gone.
"Enlightenment" may or may not be the best term for that, and, as I've said repeatedly, in agreement with Yogani:
"No special claims, here."
I truly mean that; it's not double-speak (i.e. I'm not saying "I'm enlightened, but no special claims" ..... I'm saying: "Enlightenment is possible" ... which is different than saying "I'm enlightened".)
However, the *main* aspect that likely makes "I'm enlightened" an inaccurate statement, is that it does imply there's some sort of a static line or level .... and it's not like that, at all.
It's the realization that what I actually *am* is not what I thought/pseudo-lived for "my whole life" .... "I" if it can be called that, is inherently of an utterly different nature than what was always perceived .... but that utterly different being hasn't "gotten anywhere" ... it literally just woke up to what it *is*).
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Can't you access the Akashic records and find examples for yourself in the blink of an eye?
Um ...... nope.
I'm not even sure, exactly, what the Akashic Records are supposed to be (aren't they that division of Atlantic that released albums by a few indie bands before folding in the late nineties? )
Seriously: I know "Akasha" is the Sanskrit word for space, and Akashic records are allegedly the imprinted records of everything ever said or done on this planet (if I recall correctly), that enlightened {I guess; taking your word for it, here, truly} beings can allegedly access, etc. etc.
I don't know anything about stuff like that; I don't care anything about stuff like that.
If you read the words of Nisargadatta, or Ramana, or Adya ..... none of them do, either.
Nisargadatta said it well, when someone asked him if he "knew" the weather in New York (they were in Mumbai, then Bombay).
He responded something like: "Whyy are you concerned with such things? If I want to know the weather in New York, I can look in a newspaper."
The questioner persisted, and asked about whether or non he could cultivated the ability ... and he responded:
"Of course; anything is possible with training. However, I have no interest."
I remember when I first started "getting" that the guys who seemed *really* and *actually* enlightened didn't even *care* about all the fantastical stuff that my mind was sure must be part of the deal.
My mind was kind of disappointed.
But there was also a part of me that just kind of felt the authenticity behind their words.
Theirs wasn't an imagination gratifying, storybook enlightenment ... theirs was a *real* enlightenment.
Remember: I know Adyashanti (not super well, but I know him ... as in "hung out talking in the parking lot after satsang, off-the-record chats" ... which were very undramatic ... and very real.)
I saw that *something* in his eyes; in his consistent unflappability.
I saw it in Annie (now Mukti), Adya's wife (who I've actually talked with, one on one, much more than I have with Adya; she's a sweet, nice and authentically enlightened woman).
I picked up on it from Yogani.
And now, I'm offering it, too, by simply saying:
Liberation is real.
It's not supernatural.
It's not full of the fantastical stuff the mind imagines.
But it is real.
And it is liberation.
But only utterly.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Basically, what I believe you are trying to prove to us is that you are God
Er ..... that would be a ... *NO*.
I'm not trying to prove anything to anyone.
And, to quote Paramahamsa Nithyananda:
"I'm not here to show you that I am God; I'm here to show you that you are God."
Like, seriously.
Nothing ..... not a single word .... out of the many, many ..... that I've written in this thread ......... have the intention of eliciting any perception about Kirtanman, at all.
Not even the tiniest bit.
You may have heard the expression:
"When a finger is pointing at the moon, the wise man looks at the moon, and the fool, the finger."
I'm not calling you a fool, TI ... for one, I wouldn't ... and for two, you're certainly not a fool, in anyway ..... but, please notice:
ALL I'm doing is pointing to the moon, and saying: it's right here, and it's yours, too!!
That's all; I'm not only not pointing at myself, and say "see this about me" .... I'm not pointing at myself at all ........ I'm solely, only pointing out what is possible for you.
As I said in another post in this thread:
I don't care about my enlightenment; I care about yours.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
you have all these characteristics and powers (which you would never use)
I do??
What might those be??
Seriously: no powers, per se; and the only characteristics here are the beauty of the absence of the conceptual self, which most assuredly is not "mine", it's ours ..... and the only difference between what's going on here, and what's going on in anyone reading (if there is a difference in experiencing) .... is that I know this consciously, whereas you may not yet; we are not different -- only our experiencing may be different. There is a great chain of extended hands uplifting us all, and when the uplifting occurs, the hand turns around and extends, naturally ... seamlessly.
If you want to know what it's all about, just take my hand ... or see where it is pointing .... so that you, too, can know and enjoy for yourself ... and find yourself naturally extending your hand, too.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
yet your mind writes these very human-limited statements that really make me wonder.
My statements may seem that way because your mind (apparently, based on what you write) has a pre-conceived standard concerning what an "enlightened" person should look or sound like.
Please: drop that (not for me; for you -- so that you can see clearly.)
As Adyashanti says: I am a window; look through me -- not at me.
I'm guessing that you put a lot more "stock" into my statements than I do.
I'm just a guy from one angle; formless liberated awareness from another.
So are you; so is everyone.
Knowing this eliminates all suffering, fear and allows natural, infinite freedom to be experienced and enjoyed, every moment, now.
If this sounds appealing; keep practicing, drop judgments, pay attention (to your own experiencing) ... and before long, you'll be encouraging others to know this, too.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
I'm not being disrespectful here, I hope you realize. It is the same phenomenon I found with Adyashanti. Inconsistencies.
I understand; I'm not worried about respect or disrespect either way, but I get the sincerity in your words, and I thank you; and same to you ... only respect here, as well.
The inconsistencies are due to your preconceptions, not to anything related to the actuality of liberation.
The actuality of liberation is nothing like the mind imagines, nor can imagines.
It is real, and it doesn't involve anything fantastical, as far as I know ... and yet, it's so infinitely much more ... and less .... than any powers could ever be.
Power is a quality of form.
Form serves the formless.
The formless is the subjective side ... the experiencing awareness ... I Am ... no different than you ... no different than anything .... awareness is just One ... not fragmented and fabricated into the million little pieces of the conceptual me.
None of us actually is ever the conceptual me ... we just think we are ... until that dream dissolves, and the liberation of our true nature as formless awareness is revealed, now.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
I don't understand it. Do you think that they made up the fact that Jesus rose up from the dead?
I don't know.
My sense of it (intuitive sense; the primary operating-aspect of consciousness, now) .... is that a very sublime and powerful symbolism may have been distorted by looking at the "finger" of the form of the stories and symbolism, rather than the "moon" of where the symbolism is pointing.
There's no such thing as immortal form, outside of imagination .... as Tolle says "even the Sun will die".
Even the Sun will die ... and still, I Am.
Form dies (changes), the formless is living unbound.
Knowing this is liberation.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Can't you check it out yourself and let us know? Seriously..
Nope. Seriously.
Allow yourself, if you like, to get *really* rigorous with what is actual.
What "happened" with Jesus, presuming Jesus "was historical", is .... what?
It's a thought, in your mind .... now.
All "past" is a thought, in your mind, now.
It all happens now, and only now.
What Jesus is, or was, is conceptual.
Even your meeting with Jesus is conceptual ... because it is a memory, now ... a mental form ..... conceptual.
That doesn't mean unreal per se .... it just means "not changelessly real" in the same way experiencing awareness is changelessly real.
Ever-changing you is trying to understand ever-changing concepts with the ever-changing vacillations of ever-changing conceptual mind.
Jesus himself counseled to build your house upon the rock of true nature ... not on the shifting sands of vacillating conceptuality.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
"Seek ye first the Kingdom of Heaven and all things will be added onto you". Have you ever wondered what "all things" might be?
I used to.
Now I know.
"All things" is the one field of original awareness, and all things, which it contains.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
This statement is not very humble in my humble opinion.
I'm not concerned with humble nor non-humble.
It's not about humility; it's about accuracy.
I invite you to re-read that statement again, and picture a happy, easy neutrality from me; I'm simply speaking of my experience of it.
I'm not saying anyone else is wrong; I'm saying I have an experiential confidence in the beauty and truth of that teaching; that's all.
It's interesting; you want impressive power on the one hand, and humility on the other ..... when all I'm saying is:
It's really awesome, here in the real; c'mon ... check it out; you're it, too!!
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
If you 'know', have all things been added to you?
I didn't mean "know" in a non-humble way .... just in a .... "this is my experience", way.
In the original Hebrew-Aramaic oral tradition of Christianity, kingdom is "Malkhut", equivalent to Muladhara, root, in Sanskrit ... the home of Shakti, or as Hebrew terms the Holy Spirit, manifested divinity: Shekinah.
The "heaven" that it is the kingdom of is known as Chokmah ... pure silent awareness; Shiva.
Seek ye first kundalini, and manifested divine activity ... and your identity as pure formless consciousness (Shiva) ... and ultimately, the union of Shiva and Shakti (all these things) shall be added to you.
Jesus was simply guiding people concerning where and how to focus their efforts.
Even more simply:
If you seek first the "kingdom" ... is you prioritize enlightenment ... the reward is both immeasurable and unimagineable.
You discover ... it is revealed .... that you know the truth, the truth makes you free .... and you actually are the truth that makes you free.
This is, indeed, far greater than any other "all these things" that limited mind can imagine.
And they're not "mine" any more than they're yours; they're yours .... everyone's, 100% as much as "mine" ..... there is no mine ... there's only *ours*, only *us*, only *this* ............ that's what anyone who is saying anything about it is trying to tell you.
The mind can't understand it.
The heart has to take a swan dive into the infinite ...... and drown in the sea of undying gratitude, bliss and peace.
"Good work if you can get it."
And it beats the crap out of any imagined version of enlightenment, let me tell ya!
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Do you ever seriously take a look at what you are writing?
Not if I can help it!
(You see how much I write; do you have any idea how much *work* that would involve?? )
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
I'm not attacking you here, I'm just pointing out these very simple ideas that pop into my head when I read some of things you write.
See -- we're not so different after all; that's exactly what I do, with what you write .... only what I write doesn't even qualify as "ideas" .... it's just ... writing.
Enlightenment and liberation may be very poor terms to use; ditto God, and many others; too much cultural, linguistic and conceptual baggage attached to them.
I'm inviting everyone to the experience of something very real, very simple; very beautiful; that's all.
It seems you may have seen me use the word "enlightenment" ... and started measuring ... "Hm ... doesn't look so enlightened to me .... hmm ... that sounded almost enlightened .... but .. whoa ... definitely not that!!"
I'm here, splashing in the pool, saying "swimming is real, and it's fun ... c'mon in; the water's fine!!"
And you're (and truly; no disrespect intended, ever ... this is just a tongue-in-cheek, yet pertinent illustration) ... seemingly ... saying:
"But I read that in 'enliquidment' you walk ON the water .... not swim IN it ... how can you say you're 'enliquided'??"
As the start of the Guns N Roses song Civil War (the movie quote) says:
"What we have here .... is a failure ... to communicate ....."
I'm not saying anything about "enliquidment" (though "guilty as charged" for using the word) ... and I'm not defining "enliquidment" .... I'm just saying that splashing around in the water is a lot more fun than debating whether the water is real .... and once we complete swimming lessons (enough practices/inquiry) .... we all get to know the fun of swimming, if we're willing.
Pride, humility, powers, siddhis ....... really aren't pertinent.
Limited mind always makes it far more complicated ... and less real ... than it actually is.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Who are you trying to convince here? Me or you?
Neither; convincing has never entered my mind, here (in this dialog); no kidding.
A different view just arises, to share .... offering some possibly different perspective, is all.
While mind is trying to figure it out, the opportunity to actually live it is passing you by.
By focusing on the conceptual, you miss it.
Wondering about whether siddhis is real, who has them, what they mean, etc. .... is exactly like wondering about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin:
Simply not pertinent to anything other than some closed-looping that limited-mind finds entertaining.
It (reality of siddhis or lack thereof) has no bearing on enlightenment ..... period.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
It is one thing to have a clever argument that prevents the display of siddhis, but it is another thing to possess those siddhis and hide them or pay them no notice. I think the latter would project more of an attitude of confidence, not denial, would it not? Caution is always advisable. The biggest siddhi the world has seen so far is the atomic bomb, and look at how many people that killed..
You lost me; either I don't have the requisite discernment siddhi ..... or it's getting late, here.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Again, I guess you don't access the Akashic records, have never taken part in any healings, have never seen great distances from the heart.. etc.. Is that what you are saying? I have and I'm not even enlightened.
Akashic records: correct, I haven't.
Healings: depends on how you define; maybe .... but not in any dramatic/impressive ways.
Seeing great distances from the heart: Not sure what this means.
I've had some interesting experiences, but they were all less-directly-related to liberation than I could have imagined.
Now, the interesting experience is reality.
All the "amazing" stuff, and/or metaphysical stuff is interesting enough while it happens, but it is subsidiary .... infinitely so ... to liberation itself.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Are you denying the existence of miracles and superpowers?
Not at all; neither am I confirming them; I'm simply uninterested in them.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Why wouldn't superpowers exist, espescially since all form is created from the 'wholeness of awaress'?
I don't know; decent question, though.
I experience it all as living the miraculous every moment .... we are the biggest miracle of all ..... dreaming we need to look for miracles.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Have you no control when you are in a state of 'wholeness of awareness'?
None. If there was a me, and especially if it had control, I would no longer be wholeness of awareness, but an effect of it/myself.
Has the ocean control concerning how it "waves"?
Form is effect.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Have you never seen that thought is created from the divine and filters down into manifestation and manifests to the degree of energy it was given? Control the root, control the form. Isn't that the formula?
Kinda-sorta.
Hey, at least now we're discussing some things I can comment on ...... "progress"!!
Wholeness of awareness is/I am.
Original, still awareness.
Movement happens; emanation.
Creation occurs from the building-blocks of conditioning and/or creative thought.
Formation (specific creation) is structured from the building-blocks of creation.
Expression/manifestion is the gross/final display; it dissolves ... back to original whole awareness, now.
Every moment, every perception.
With enough inner silence ... the full cycle of thought/perception/creation is experienced, now.
It's a major clue.
Wholeness of awareness has never been "gone".
There's just been inordinate focus on its own creations.
Really.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Further, you keep putting words in my mouth and seem to be coloring me in shades that I am not, nor did I realize that perhaps others were perceiving me like that. Just because I quote a source doesn't mean I accept it. I merely present forms.
My apologies; I didn't mean to do that; I was taking you at what I understood to be "face value" ..... you said something like "I didn't realize there were this many levels to consciousness, until I saw this" .... which I took to mean that you were promoting this model as fact, while discounting others .... specifically those with fewer levels.
I also took this to be an implicit endorsement of the person who created that model.
I didn't mean it insultingly toward you or him .... I was asking why, given the dynamics (very proven model, vs. less-proven, based on time alone, if nothing else) ... you seemed to be putting so much "stock" in that particular model.
That's all.
I admit that my view is colored a bit by the fact that the simple/traditional model seems real and complete, based solely in experience .... and that therefore, more complex ones may be occluding rather than helpful ..... but I also know that I can't know what might be helpful for someone else, at the level of mind/specific view.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
If there is no truth in them, how would we know unless we had knowledge about those forms?
Per what I wrote above, part of liberation is living experience of the range of the formless and of form ... all of it.
I'm not saying George Boyd's model is wrong; I don't know if it's right or wrong; it just seems unnecessarily complex, and he seemed to be speaking of it from the standpoint of still being within it; I'm not.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_IceDuring some meditations I've experienced massive images of planes upon planes of existence. I was wondering if you've experienced the same.
Yes, I have; it's strange, now that you mention it; they all kind of resolved, simplified and smoothed out, I guess you could say; it's kind of an angle/view thing, I guess; dramatic and vast on the way "up" (i.e. the very scenery AYP and thousands of years of sacred teachings advise *against* paying attention to); simple and beautiful, just being here.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Here you are grouping Yogani and Adyashanti together and making it seem like I'm opposed to Yogani, or that I'm opposed to Advaita teachings.
Um .... not at all, actually.
I said: please look at those who ... and I quote .... "describe enlightenment".
My point was: those who I know of, who describe enlightenment from the standpoint of experience .... any of them .... Adya and Yogani were just two examples of "normal enlightened guys who I happen to know" ..... describe it as being very simple.
That was my entire point.
No politics; no aspersions cast .... it never crossed my mind that my words might be interpreted like that.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Truth is truth, no matter what the source.
Yes, but the character of the expression can vary a bit, while the underlying essence is clearly the same.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
How can you judge truth by the source from which it came?
I don't judge truth.
Truth doesn't need to be judged; neither does anything else.
I've learned that there's a certain "vibe" to enlightened people that matters a lot more than any specific words they use.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
However, truth has no contradictions or inconsistencies.
But, as Carson pointed out .... they can *appear* to, in the realm of duality.
If you're in a boat being kicked up and down and back and forth by waves ... and you're trying to measure exactly how far you are from shore ... and you've convinced yourself you're not moving ........ the beach can look mighty inconsistent.
As Adyashanti says: a flame never dances the same way twice.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Now please don't hate me.
I don't hate anyone.
Nothing you've written has caused the tiniest flicker or disturbance; really.
It's all conversation; it's all fine.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
The tone in this post is becoming somewhat disconcerting as I do not want to argue, nor do I want be at odds with you or offend you.
Well, if you don't want to argue, I presume you won't.
I won't argue, you can't be at odds with me, and you can't offend me .... so no worries on that level.
I'm truly enjoying this conversation.
I'm weird that way.
Plus, this body-mind enjoys conversing.
Have you noticed?
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
The novelty of talking to an 'enlightened' person has not worn off and surely an 'enlightened' person has the detachment and presence of mind to deal with my mild challenges.
"Enjoy it while it lasts!" .... the way AYP is going, it hopefully won't be any kind of a rarity for long, and it may well include *you*.
Hopefully it will ..... the only way it won't is if your sincerity vanishes (doubtful, it would seem) ... or, if you stop practicing.
"PS" ..... what challenges?
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
And, I'd still like to ask you some questions, like, do you practice Adyshanti's methods or AYP's or have you quit practicing?
I never practiced Adyashanti's methods; he didn't have methods when I hung out with him; just teachings.
I don't practice "core" AYP, but "core AYP" led directly to what I do tend to practice daily .... and so, AYP was a very direct part of all yogic benefits realized here.
Yogani isn't kidding when he says "the guru is in you" .... it's true.
The inner guru is pratibha, higher intuition ... and when it guides you to do something different than direct teachings, you *know* .... and it was quite some time (well over two years, maybe closer to three) before I made any "inner guru" modifications at all .... and they're very close in "type" to AYP, just slightly different in form.
They're not practices now .... but as activities, they keep happening.
That may sound strange, but it's true .... and every "enlightened person" I've known or known of, does the same.
Part of it is, as Yogani says "for the good of all" ... but it my case it's more that that's the way it naturally happens, as opposed to a conscious altruism (and it may be that way for Yogani, too; you'd have to ask him) ... and stopping the activities would be more unnatural than continuing them, so the natural flow is for them to continue.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Again, thank you for the very stimulating conversation. :)
:)
TI
Thank you; very sincerely!!
You were worried about offending me, and I've been digging the mutual sincerity, the whole time I've been reading-writing.
The sincerity is where we meet; sincerity is what gets us home.
As Adya's teacher Arvis Justi said:
"Only the phonies don't get enlightened."
Wholeheartedly,
Kirtanman
|
Edited by - Kirtanman on Nov 20 2009 01:22:22 AM |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4514 Posts |
Posted - Nov 20 2009 : 07:09:55 AM
|
Hi Steven,
quote:
Hi Christi,
Thanks for the interesting post. But I wonder about people who have developed psychic abilities, Deeksha, ect, and yet still don't seem to have obtained Unity of Consciousness (great description btw).
Are they just examples of people that for whatever reason are extremely receptive to psychic energies in the same way that some people are more open to deep and blissful meditations?
Yes, I believe that some of these aspects can develop (and usually do) to a certain degree before the realization of unity consciousness. As you mention, the ability to transfer energy (diksha, or shaktipat) can come fairly early on. Also some limited psychic powers and a degree of radiance can develop before the unity stage.
From my own experience it is possible to have glimpses of the higher (celestial) realms before unity consciousness has become fully established, but I don't believe that the celestial realms become fully integrated in the awareness until after that stage.
So it isn't a clear cut thing in the sense of, this happens and then that happens. Very little in the process of spiritual awakening is really like that. It is more a process which is never ending, and always deepening in love.
quote:
If this is a natural process like you say then I can't wait to see where modern spiritual teachers like Yogani, Adyashanti, and Eckhart Tolle will be in the future.
Some people are acting as spiritual pioneers, such as the ones you mentioned. And they are helping to show the way to everyone else. But as I see it, it's really about all of us... our common destiny.
All, as one, united, in love. It doesn't get much more magical than that.
Christi
|
|
|
|
stevenbhow
Japan
352 Posts |
Posted - Nov 20 2009 : 5:53:51 PM
|
"Some people are acting as spiritual pioneers, such as the ones you mentioned."
Yeah, I feel like we are finally seeing some examples of truly Western teachers taking place. Not that there is anything wrong with the old Eastern style Guru/Master traditions, but it is nice to know that you can obtain realization in you living room and afterward still go grocery shopping. |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Nov 20 2009 : 8:27:11 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by stevenbhow
"Some people are acting as spiritual pioneers, such as the ones you mentioned."
Yeah, I feel like we are finally seeing some examples of truly Western teachers taking place. Not that there is anything wrong with the old Eastern style Guru/Master traditions, but it is nice to know that you can obtain realization in you living room and afterward still go grocery shopping.
Hi Steve, Christi & All,
Steve (I forget if you go by Steve or Steven; please let me know if you have a preference .... ) .... what you wrote above is exactly what I intended (and to intend) to convey with my original statements of encouragement, regarding enlightenment.
As some of you know, I've been drawn to spend a fair amount of time in the last couple of years, studying not only the world's mystical and yogic traditions ... but the correspondences between them, as well.
What I've found is: they're all simply symbol-sets of how consciousness actually is, and works.
We all actually are the consciousness that all enlightenment teachings (by whatever name "knowing and living our true nature" may be called) point to, and that all yogic teachings (by whatever names they may be called, including those found in Western esoteric traditions) help us reveal in our own experience.
As Kashmir Shaivism (Abhinavagupta, specifically) puts it so wisely and succinctly:
"What is not here is not anywhere."
The only difference between now, and other places and times, as far at the "spiritual journey" is concerned .... is that culture, and therefore, most (so-called) invidual lives are more externalized, and run at a faster pace.
On the one hand, this is less conducive to noticing how the fullness of consciousness is, and operates ...
... yet on the other hand, the contrast can be more dramatic, and highlight what needs to be seen.
Enlightenment really is for us all, and is who and what we each and all are, now.
Wholeheartedly,
Kirtanman
|
|
|
|
Tibetan_Ice
Canada
758 Posts |
Posted - Nov 20 2009 : 11:55:05 PM
|
Hi Kirtanman, :)
Thank you so much for the time and attention. :)
This morning as I sat in my SUV drinking my morning coffee before work, I looked out at the park and the trees in front of me. My consciousness became crystal clear, I had no thoughts and I could see the entire forest in the park through big eyes. I call it big eyes because it is silent, it is crystal clear, it does not feel like me, there is this love there for everything and there is an expanded periphery of vision. Since I've been communicating with you I've noticed that occaisionaly I will shift into this state like something that is way bigger than me is looking through my eyes. Then, when that effect goes away, I feel like a stiffled little me, cloudy and small and irrelevant. It is very interesting..
quote:
Originally posted by Kirtanman
And I think this is the source of the reason you've not been sure about some of the advaitic teachers, either ... I don't know that any of them ever displayed, or had the slightest interest in siddhis or superpowers.
This is helping my understanding tremendously. What I've realized is that it is possible to obtain siddhis through practices and not be enlightened and that it is possible to be enlightened and not obtain any siddhis.
quote:
Then, over the last (roughly) couple of years ... I went from experiences of nirvikalpa samadhi (a fancy term for "no form whatsoever, yet awareness remains") to sahaja nirvikalpa samadhi (a fancy term for experiencing daily life in unitive awareness; no subject-object division ... simply the wholeness of awareness, and the manifestations within it).
Kirtanman, if you don't mind me asking, what techniques did you use to enter nirvikalpa samadhi? (And if you say mantra repetition, how long is the duration of one repetition of the mantra; 1/2 second, 5 seconds etc). Or did you use steady concentrative focusing of attention style meditation?
quote:
A couple of nights ago, I was really sick (I hear about Adyashanti being sick, several years ago, and thought "Hmph; if he's enlightened, how come he's sick?"
There is always a danger that the mind reads something or hears about something, stores it latently and then manifests it at an opportune time. I believe that the fact that Gopi Krishna wrote about his harrowing experiences with kundalini has led to a manifestation of "if you don't get sick you don't have kundalini" type of group thought-form consciousness.
quote:
Form can only relate enlightenment to form, somehow.
Isn't that what siddhis are for? :)
quote:
And so, while anyone in the vicinity likely perceived a goat with sinus congestion engaging in unnatural congress with a poorly-working vacuum cleaner .... and while my abs engaged in another round of involuntary uddiyana (or whatever that's called), and my mouth, throat and nose wer{CENSORED FOR THE GOOD OF HUMAN KIND}iping up the floor, I had the passing thought:
"You'd think I could find *something* to be less than pleased about, here ..."
This is just too funny! Made me laugh :)
quote:
I was recently putting some attention on a body-part that didn't feel so good (in connection with the sickness I mentioned) ... attention alone heals.
Eckhart Tolle does say that placing consciousness in the body, on each part of the body before bed for example, is a way to heal the body.
quote:
Form is subsidiary to the formless; they can't be compared.
Form is the dualistic opposite of the formless; they need each other. See, I just compared them and identified a relationship between them. :)
quote:
If you read the words of Nisargadatta, or Ramana, or Adya ..... none of them do, either.
However, Nisargadatta did heal people earlier on and so did Ramana... Haven't heard of Adya or Tolle doing that..
quote:
Nisargadatta said it well, when someone asked him if he "knew" the weather in New York (they were in Mumbai, then Bombay).
He responded something like: "Whyy are you concerned with such things? If I want to know the weather in New York, I can look in a newspaper."
The questioner persisted, and asked about whether or non he could cultivated the ability ... and he responded:
"Of course; anything is possible with training. However, I have no interest."
Yes, but Nisargadatta did recognize that miracles exist (from I Am That):
quote:
Questioner: A friend of mine, a young man about twenty-five, was told that he is suffering from an incurable heart disease. He wrote to me that instead of slow death he preferred suicide. I replied to him that a disease incurable by Western medicine may be cured in some other way. There are yogic powers that can bring almost instantaneous changes in the human body. Effects of repeated fasting also verge on the miraculous. I wrote to him not to be in a hurry to die; rather to give a trial to other approaches.
There is a Yogi living not far from Bombay who possesses some miraculous powers. He has specialised in the control of the vital forces governing the body. I met some of his disciples and sent
through to the Yogi my friend’s letter and photo. Let us see what happens.
Maharaj: Yes, miracles often take place. But there must be the will to live. Without it the miracles will not happen.
Nisargadatta also said this:
quote:
Q: Are you also free from causality? Can you produce miracles?
M: The world itself is a miracle. I am beyond miracles -- I am absolutely normal. With me everything happens as it must. I do not interfere with creation. Of what use are small miracles to me when the greatest of miracles is happening all the time? Whatever you see it is always your own being that you see. Go ever deeper into yourself, seek within, there is neither violence nor non-violence in self-discovery. The destruction of the false is not violence.
You said:
quote:
What "happened" with Jesus, presuming Jesus "was historical", is .... what?
It's a thought, in your mind .... now.
All "past" is a thought, in your mind, now.
It all happens now, and only now.
What Jesus is, or was, is conceptual.
Even your meeting with Jesus is conceptual ... because it is a memory, now ... a mental form ..... conceptual.
Actually, I have a living relationship with Jesus. He is always there. I can ask him questions and he answers me, mostly with thumbs up or down but sometimes he produces scenes/objects/visions that have meaning in them or at a future time, become evident.
And, (I haven't told anyone this because I'm sure that it would put them over the edge and write me off as a looney tune,) but, in a past life I was at the crucifixion.. In that life Jesus healed my legs so I could walk once again... At the crucifixion, I saw three crosses on the hills. I was about 100 yards away from them. The sky was dark dark blue/black and full of ominous clouds. At one point, there appeared this brilliant white light in the sky and I knew that he had died. There was hardly anyone there and I thought, "we didn't really know who he was". I had to shut that past life regression down because it was just too incredulous.).
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
It is one thing to have a clever argument that prevents the display of siddhis, but it is another thing to possess those siddhis and hide them or pay them no notice. I think the latter would project more of an attitude of confidence, not denial, would it not? Caution is always advisable. The biggest siddhi the world has seen so far is the atomic bomb, and look at how many people that killed..
You lost me; either I don't have the requisite discernment siddhi ..... or it's getting late, here.
All I am saying here is that within the limits of my new understanding of enlightenment, is that it seems to be possible to have unity consciousness and not have any siddhis. But hearing a reason for not admitting siddhis could mean, either that person has siddhis and does not wish to focus on them, or they do not have siddhis and they are hiding that fact.. And now I realize that perhaps it is probable that awakened people don't have siddhis and don't want them or aren't interested in them. I guess they may be scared of them too and their consequences. But I've always thought that healing was a good thing although I have read that healing can be construed as interfering or even depriving the sick person of a valueable learning experience whose purpose may have been to help them burn karma or become enlightened.
quote:
Seeing great distances from the heart: Not sure what this means.
It is a really easy technique. You assume easy posture, close your eyes and then pretend you are viewing the immediate surrounding environment from your heart. You feel it with the heart. I practiced this a few times. The first time I did this on the bank of a glorious river/trees/blue sky, suddenly an opening of crystal clear vision appeared directly before my face and I could see two people who were sunbathing about 100 yards away from this opening as if I was 3 feet from them! I call this heart viewing. It is a relatively easy siddhi for me. I was also doing a lot of heart meditations at the time.
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_IceDuring some meditations I've experienced massive images of planes upon planes of existence. I was wondering if you've experienced the same.
Yes, I have; it's strange, now that you mention it; they all kind of resolved, simplified and smoothed out, I guess you could say; it's kind of an angle/view thing, I guess; dramatic and vast on the way "up" (i.e. the very scenery AYP and thousands of years of sacred teachings advise *against* paying attention to); simple and beautiful, just being here.
I guess I should have mentioned that I've experienced massive images of planes and planes of existence go whizzing by my third eye, like I was in a huge TV vacuum cleaner that was going to suck me out and burn me up. I believe that is what happened to Yogananda Paramahansa Yogi when he got his first taste of cosmic consciousness (and Gopi Krishna too - the expansion thing) But, now I'm thinking that the shift to unity consciousness is very subtle.
quote:
Truth doesn't need to be judged; neither does anything else.
For us mere mortals sitting at the base of the mountain looking up, we need to judge how much rope we will need, how much food to bring, what kind of clothes to wear and whether or not the weather is going to be good. I agree, once on the mountain top, who cares..
quote:
As Adyashanti says: a flame never dances the same way twice.
Gee, blow torches look pretty consistent to me.. :)
How does he know? Has he ever filmed it and millions of others to compare it to? That is like saying that no two snowflakes are exactly the same. Well, how do they know? That is something that is beyond empirical proof as it is impossible to check billions and billions of snowflakes. That becomes the safe haven: You can say anything you'd like within the aegis of unverifiable 'truths' and nobody can prove you right or wrong.. But really, with billions and billions of snowflakes, chances are that there are many that are exactly the same.
quote:
I don't practice "core" AYP, but "core AYP" led directly to what I do tend to practice daily .... and so, AYP was a very direct part of all yogic benefits realized here.
What was your routine? Did you do deep meditation? When you repeated the mantra, did you focus on it and release (the bubble technique) or did you treat the mantra like the object of concentration? Did you stretch the mantra out for 10 seconds or more, or did you just intend the mantra and watch it make it's way from the light down to manifest into the coarser and coarser levels of consciousness until it became a subvocalization?
And the last thing, did you write about your experience of awakening here on the forum? The exact experience? I tried to find it but you've written so many posts that I could not find it in the hours that I spent, nor have I found it yet. I'm looking for a story that begins with "I was sitting at the table, drinking my yogi tea, when all of a sudden..." :)
Again, thank you for the correspondence. I really appreciate your help and good nature.. :)
:)
TI
|
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4514 Posts |
Posted - Nov 21 2009 : 11:08:19 AM
|
Hi Kirtanman,
quote:
I can't really comment without being a bit more clear on what you're saying, other than to say that, as far as I know/am experiencing, enlightenment (which I'm basically using, as I believe Wayne is, too ... as a term for the permanent shift of identity from the concept-me to concept-free awareness, in ongoing experiencing) is different from "unity consciousness", at least as I've heard the term used, before.
Sorry, I forgot to reply to this at the time.
As I understand it, witness consciousness is what happens when identification shifts from identification with the content of the mind, to the awareness within which all form arises. So we no longer believe we are any conditioned form, but are that within which conditioned form becomes manifest. In the witness stage, there is still separation because for there to be a witness, there must be something which is witnessed. So in this stage we could still say things like: "My body/ mind did such and such, but it didn't affect me at all."
When the witness stage becomes established 24/7 there is the permanent shift of identity from form to pure awareness. Yogani has called this the first stage of enlightenment.
In unity consciousness (as I understand it), there is an expansion of consciousness beyond the witness to a state of oneness. The apparent separation between awareness and it's content dissolves and there is no longer a dissociative process between form and formlessness, between awareness and the content of awareness. We could no longer talk about the body and mind (or the sun, moon or stars for that matter), as separate from who or what we really are. Form is seen as the manifestation of the formless; arising from it, being supported by it, and dissolving back into it, whilst never being separate from it. This is where the Buddhist expression "form is formlessness, formlessness is form" comes from.
Christ consciousness as I understand it is the same thing as cosmic consciousness. As I mentioned above, it is the expansion of awareness to include the subtle celestial. I also believe (as I mentioned in another thread) that the subtle body becomes fully illuminated during the transition to Christ consciousness. This is why people sometimes recieve teachings from masters appearing in a body of divine glory, or celestial form, as TI is describing above with reference to Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ has simply attained Christ consciousness and is now able to appear at will to people using an illuminated form made up completely of divine light.
We know from what Adyashanti says that what he refers to as awakening (or sometimes as enlightenment) is possible without the development of ecstasy as a 24/7 experience. In Yogani's Self Inquiry book he says that full enlightenment is not possible without the merging of ecstasy and bliss, so we can tell from this that what Yogani calls full enlightenment must be something further down the road from what Adyashanti is talking about. Personally I would say that Adyashanti is talking about unity consciousness when he talks about awakening and when Yogani talks about full enlightenment he is referring to Christ consciousness.
This is not to say that Yogani is at a higher stage of realization than Adyashanti, or vis-versa, just that one is pointing people to one stage of awakening, and another, to another stage.
We could delineate further grades, or stages to the process of awakening (as I believe the Kabbalists have done). But for me, these few are enough for now.
I hope that helps to explain what I mean by the terms I am using.
Christi
|
|
|
|
Parallax
USA
348 Posts |
Posted - Nov 21 2009 : 11:33:16 AM
|
Thank you all for the amazing insights...I bow to you all...
Much Love to You
|
|
|
|
alwayson2
USA
546 Posts |
Posted - Nov 21 2009 : 3:58:28 PM
|
You just need to distinguish between naked, clear, vivid awareness versus the thoughtstream.
Even Ramana Maharishi said his thoughtstream STILL EXISTED, and within still contained many "evil" thoughts.
But the thoughtstream is just a rope pretending to be a snake. |
Edited by - alwayson2 on Nov 21 2009 4:17:57 PM |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Nov 21 2009 : 4:59:28 PM
|
Hi Christi,
Thanks for this; it was very helpful (I wasn't sure how clearly I was going to end up "getting" what you were saying, but I feel like I pretty much do, now).
Just as my words may (and, per some of the discussion elsewhere in this thread, do) end up sounding far different than what I intended to convey ... this is true for all of us (from either the writing side, the reading side, or both) .... and, since you and I have posted back and forth here at the forum, and have read a lot of each other's posts ... I was fairly confident that you weren't saying something as "confusingly different" (to me, I mean; not saying you were being confusing .... solely that I was confused! ) ... as it seemed like, to me.
This post cleared up about 95% of that confusion; and so, I really appreciate the extra bit of time you took to clarify.
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
When the witness stage becomes established 24/7 there is the permanent shift of identity from form to pure awareness. Yogani has called this the first stage of enlightenment.
Yes ... this part, at least, syncs up with the recent shift in my (quote-unquote) experience / identity-shift that I've been outlining ... at length .... in this thread.
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
In unity consciousness (as I understand it), there is an expansion of consciousness beyond the witness to a state of oneness. The apparent separation between awareness and it's content dissolves and there is no longer a dissociative process between form and formlessness, between awareness and the content of awareness. We could no longer talk about the body and mind (or the sun, moon or stars for that matter), as separate from who or what we really are. Form is seen as the manifestation of the formless; arising from it, being supported by it, and dissolving back into it, whilst never being separate from it. This is where the Buddhist expression "form is formlessness, formlessness is form" comes from.
Yes, this also. Qualitatively, this is very different from "the witness" or "being in awareness" simply becoming permanent, and identity/self therefore "feeling like awareness".
There is a fundamental shift, both quantitatively (permanent change in sense of identity, rather than temporary shift in state) and qualitatively (the very nature of experiencing shifts in a way that is far more subtle-yet-normal than limited mind can conceive of as "enlightenment" involving .... yet in a way that is utterly pervasive, complete and life-changing, as well).
It's very much a "must be experienced to be understood" thing.
As I mentioned a little while ago in that thread --> Shanti's Movie Screen illustration, along with her Harmony poem, both go a long way toward simply clarifying this, I'd say.
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
Christ consciousness as I understand it is the same thing as cosmic consciousness. As I mentioned above, it is the expansion of awareness to include the subtle celestial.
Any more detail you can provide on this would be appreciated.
And please know: I'm not just "grilling you for detail" for the heck of it .... as you know, I'm "into" understanding the correspondences between various maps and models, because having/communicating those correspondences clearly can offer two major benefits to those on the path to revealing enlightenment in their own experience, namely:
*Clarity on how consciousness works, and how different planes of consciousness can be experienced, can be gained much more clearly, via the experiencing of a more full range of consciousness, which arises from the expansions of consciousnesses resulting from continued practices -- combined with a clearer understanding of the "overall framework". Currently, there's a lot of detail on some aspects of "yogic unfoldment" ... and less on others, and so ... clarity on some of the correspondences can be helpful to us all, in terms of the overall "knowledge-base", if you will.
(And, since I've "dissed" knowledge a lot, recently/in this thread, I'll clarify: what I'm referring to above is more along the lines of "a quick glance at the map" ... which is easier when one understands some of the nuances of reading slightly-different types of maps ... and so ... "hence this discussion". )
Understanding where/how the "same things are being said" ... or not .... can serve as a powerful resource, helping any map-glances to be quick, as opposed to (anyone) falling into the trap of "but I read here" and "but then, I read there" ..... while not understanding that the two different sets of written expression (whether forum post, book, or ancient wisdom tradition .... or a combination of the three ..... ) ..... may be expressing states/planes of consciousness that are essentially the same .... but simply illustrated in different ways, and from different angles.
Which is all my Kirtanmaniacal way of saying:
"Ah ha! It seems we may not be far apart on our perceptions of enlightenment/post-enlightenment/unity consciousness/etc. .... after all! Good deal ...."
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
I also believe (as I mentioned in another thread) that the subtle body becomes fully illuminated during the transition to Christ consciousness. This is why people sometimes recieve teachings from masters appearing in a body of divine glory, or celestial form, as TI is describing above with reference to Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ has simply attained Christ consciousness and is now able to appear at will to people using an illuminated form made up completely of divine light.
If you wouldn't mind, could you please get just a bit more specific on what you mean here, when and how it might happen, etc.
What I'm still not quite "getting", is this:
When ground of being/"being the screen" is the experience, and is the sense of self ... along with the sense of knowing/completion which is "part and parcel" of it ... there's sense of potential relative development, which will, of course, continue to unfold/flower (as Adyashanti said, so enthusiastically: "It never stops!" ... every moment is a new creation).
For instance, are you saying that "after enlightenment" ... that there's still (in, as you say, your belief) this full/further illumination of/in subtle form, which occurs, as part of the "set unfolding" for each/all of us (as I believe you said)?
The reason for my question:
I've never heard any of the non-dual sages who I resonate with mention this sort of thing at all (one way or the other; it's simply not mentioned) ......... which doesn't affect any sense I have of whether it's true, or not .... again: my purpose is purely to "connect the dots" as best I can .... the goal being not to gain further clarity for myself (there's really no sense of need for that; there's very much an ease with "what's going to unfold is going to unfold", with zero concern for the details) ...
... but to be able to clearly communicate how one set of experiences/consciousness/development is likely to occur .... in the same way that Yogani/AYP has done, to date (and which many of the other teachers many of us resonate with have, as well ... although AYP has done a specifically clear/straightforward "no frills" job of it, I'd say, especially for those of us in and from modern Western culture (i.e. Kashmir Shaivism has done the same, but for those unfamiliar with Sanskrit, and/or the symbolism of the various deities, etc. ... its models can still seem exotic, foreign and/or confusing; however, Kashmir Shaivism is essentially "AYP, 10th Century Kashmir Style ).
As well as to bring clarity to the specific areas, that a few of us here (with/at AYP) are beginning to experience, more fully (other than "just Yogani").
<--- Which isn't a commentary on "who is where", consciousness-wise, in any way; I'm simply saying that the characteristics of enlightenment as Yogani outlines them, used to be well outside the experience of any other AYPers ... or, at least any who discuss such things publicly ... until very recently.
Now, that more of us are stepping into the experiencing of these things, we can offer additional clarity on some of the nuances .... and, it sounds as though what you're saying, with your sense of what unfolds after unity consciousness ... may well help that additional clarity.
However, I'm not quite "grokking" it all, just yet ..... hence all these questions.
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
We know from what Adyashanti says that what he refers to as awakening (or sometimes as enlightenment) is possible without the development of ecstasy as a 24/7 experience.
I'm not sure that's exactly the case, as much as that Adyashanti doesn't emphasize the experiential characteristics, in detail ... per the fact that he purposely emphasizes, and says that he feels the need to emphasize, that "enlightenment is not an experience".
I don't see that as "right or wrong" as an approach, per se .... and I've found the combination of what Yogani says, and what Adya says, to be helpful, in combination.
My point is: knowing Adya's teachings fairly well, I don't think that the fact that he doesn't emphasize ecstasy or bliss as part of enlightenment, doesn't mean that he's specifically stating that enlightenment is "is possible without the development of ecstasy as a 24/7 experience".
I would say he's very likely simply not commenting on the felt, experiential aspects at all.
I've been at several live satsangs where people have asked him, in more detail, about the "felt experiencing" ... and he always confirms that bliss, ecstasy, peace, love, stillness, etc. .... are "part of the program" ... in a very similar manner to what Yogani says, in my view ... while always (Adya) still emphasizing that enlightenment is knowing your true nature, and is not tied to the qualities or feeling tone (a Buddhist term he sometimes uses) of any experience.
I get why Adya feels the need to do this; many people have magnificent experiences .... and/or a sustained set of them, or a shift in state .... that turns out not to be permanent, and they realize (as the experiences shift/fade/change ... as experiences always do) that they weren't "enlightened" after all.
Adya has emphasized this, per his own experiences, prior to enlightenment ... where, many times, something so marvelous would happen, and he would feel like: "THIS has GOTTA be it!!"
And he says that the "greatest grace" he had been given was this "little voice" that would (effectively) whisper: "No; not yet ..... keep going ...."
I can concur with this, 100%.
My unfolding was very similar, including several "THIS has GOTTA be it!!" experiences .... which, candidly, are laughable in retrospect .... especially the idea that any single experience, or set of them .... could "mean I was enlightened".
Fittingly, as I've mentioned .... the permanent identity-shift happened so subtly ... that I essentially "realized" (it) after-the-fact!
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
In Yogani's Self Inquiry book he says that full enlightenment is not possible without the merging of ecstasy and bliss, so we can tell from this that what Yogani calls full enlightenment must be something further down the road from what Adyashanti is talking about. Personally I would say that Adyashanti is talking about unity consciousness when he talks about awakening and when Yogani talks about full enlightenment he is referring to Christ consciousness.
Again, I respectfully disagree ... not in any "he's right, and he's wrong" OR in any "no, he's farther along, he's less so" (notice I'm not naming names; I have only the greatest sense of affinity, friendship and respect with both Yogani and Adyashanti, and they've both had very direct bearing on (literally) every meaningful aspect of my/non-my life and experiencing ... including (quote-unquote, though still actual) enlightenment ... and so, for me "they're both right!" (Not "about anything" ... just ... both right. ).
And So:
Again, I would say that Adyashanti and Yogani both experience enlightenment in essentially the same way, and that they just articulate their experiencing and views of enlightenment, in slightly different ways .... with Adyashanti having a repeatedly-stated priority of avoiding discussion of the experiential nuances .... which could give the impression that Yogani and he are talking about two different levels of enlightenment/consciousness .... when they're actually referring to the same thing:
Knowing yourself as formless awareness, as opposed to any limitation of form, thereby precluding any "relapses" into misidentification with the distortions of the ego-idea, and so, living each moment free from the distortions of the ego-idea.
Any other description or emphasis is nuance, rather than talking about a different level of being/enlightenment, I would say.
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
This is not to say that Yogani is at a higher stage of realization than Adyashanti, or vis-versa, just that one is pointing people to one stage of awakening, and another, to another stage.
Again, my view is: "pointing to the same stage; articulating somewhat differently."
If you still feel the way you do (that they're pointing to different stages), I'd be curious as to why (as in: I'd genuinely like to discuss it; I don't have any attachment to my current view ... I'm always about clarity/actuality).
A key reason I feel the way I do is:
Enlightened people tend to consistently behave, and express themselves, especially if they're teaching about enlightenment, in a very similar and consistent manner.
If you look at the words of Yogani, Adyashanti, Nisargadatta Maharaj, Ramana Maharshi, etc. ... allowing for slight nuances of culture and specifics, to me they express themselves, and "what enlightenment is", in a manner that is (to me) essentially identical.
Another key reason for my view, is:
Current experiencing here syncs up, pretty much exactly, with how the four teachers named above, and several others with whom I resonate, have described enlightenment ... and so, the sense of "sameness" in the essential teaching seems the same .... along with the fact I can now confirm its accuracy.
One of its main qualities is: a sense of completion; of knowing, and of actually being the experiencing awareness which is prior to (a "super-set", if you will) and beyond all states and levels.
Which isn't to disagree with the model/view of yours we're discussing, by the way .... it's to say that formless awareness is the ground of being, and all states/levels/experiences/forms arise from it ... which, it seems to me, you're saying as well.
If you don't see this the same way, I'd just like to understand your view more clearly.
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
We could delineate further grades, or stages to the process of awakening (as I believe the Kabbalists have done). But for me, these few are enough for now.
I agree; more delineation often leads to confusion, actually .... which may seem a bit at odds with some of the other things I've said in this post, but it's not ... the clarity I referred to is more about how the pieces fit ... connecting the dots, as I said .... in order to outline the clearest possible map, for us all.
An accurate map from (for example), San Francisco to New York ... will involve some major points along the way .... but (hopefully! ) won't (and needn't, which is my point) involve mapping every yard/metre of highway along the way, in exceptional detail.
There's a lot of imagination about "what happens" or "what might" on the "way" to enlightenment .... which limited-mind loves to gorge itself into stupor on .... and often, either miss entirely that the whole point is know our true nature, what we actually are ......... and/or ...... become lost and looping in aspects of the "journey" which may not be pertinent, and, in many cases, not real, in anyway.
And, I'm saying all that in the spirit/presumption that we're in agreement that it's about providing an accurate map, and helping other yogis and yoginis to avoid some of the pitfalls.
THAT is one of the most wonderful aspects of being alive now, and of being able to even have this discussion (Yogani mentions what I'm about to say, in the lessons, as well) .... we're no longer caught in the narrow "information silo" which has limited most spiritual-journeyers, throughout the entire history of the world.
We have to opportunity to provide not only encouragement ... but a simple, accurate and direct map home, as well.
Thanks again, Christi; again: your post was truly very helpful!
Wholeheartedly,
Kirtanman
|
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Nov 21 2009 : 10:32:16 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Parallax
Thank you all for the amazing insights...I bow to you all...
Much Love to You
_/\_
|
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Nov 22 2009 : 4:19:20 PM
|
Hi TI,
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Hi Kirtanman, :)
Thank you so much for the time and attention. :)
No worries; this conversation is being created by both of us, you know.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
This morning as I sat in my SUV drinking my morning coffee before work, I looked out at the park and the trees in front of me. My consciousness became crystal clear, I had no thoughts and I could see the entire forest in the park through big eyes. I call it big eyes because it is silent, it is crystal clear, it does not feel like me, there is this love there for everything and there is an expanded periphery of vision. Since I've been communicating with you I've noticed that occaisionaly I will shift into this state like something that is way bigger than me is looking through my eyes. Then, when that effect goes away, I feel like a stiffled little me, cloudy and small and irrelevant. It is very interesting..
Yes ... I believe it was Meister Eckhart (German Christian Mystic from the middle ages, from which Eckhart Tolle took the first part of his name) who said:
"The eye through which I see God, and the eye through which God sees me ... is the same."
Ken Wilber calls it "Big Mind"; different teachers describe it in various ways ... but it's effectively the "trailer" (preview) to an experiencing of life with much more peace, equanimity and relaxed expansiveness.
That experience, and the recent arising of it, is all due to resonance occurring within what you actually are, now.
None of this is outside you; none of this.
The "stifled little me" (good-term, by the way, for all non-aware consciousness; we've all "been there", fer shure ...! ) is your incorrect idea of yourself ... but it's been so methodically reinforced, essentially every moment of your remembered life (i.e. every moment except this one) that it takes a bit of unclutching (yoga practices and inquiry ... including simple noticing/relaxing/releasing).
Once there's a sense that this is true, there's usually the experience of "I want to be done with this stifled little me!" .... which is more protest and confusion from the stifled little me.
Just be easy with it all.
The relaxed vastness is a good sign.
quote:
Originally posted by Kirtanman
And I think this is the source of the reason you've not been sure about some of the advaitic teachers, either ... I don't know that any of them ever displayed, or had the slightest interest in siddhis or superpowers.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
This is helping my understanding tremendously. What I've realized is that it is possible to obtain siddhis through practices and not be enlightened and that it is possible to be enlightened and not obtain any siddhis.
Yes ... you get it!!
The two (siddhis, enlightenment) are essentially unrelated .... and it's so easy for limited mind to misinterpret "otherwise".
Siddhis seem amazing and miraculous, so does enlightenment ... and so, it must be part of the same thing; actually, thought ... "not".
All form, whether a flake of dry skin on the tip of your nose .... or performance of the most magnificent miracle, happens within ... and is dependent upon the original awareness we each and all actually are, now.
This is a great way to say it, too ("it is possible to obtain siddhis through practices and not be enlightened and that it is possible to be enlightened and not obtain any siddhis"); if I'd been able to do so .... this would have been a much shorter conversation!
As in: we're both bringing good stuff to the table here; true enlightenment dialog is about mutuality; connection ... never a one-way flow.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Kirtanman, if you don't mind me asking, what techniques did you use to enter nirvikalpa samadhi? (And if you say mantra repetition, how long is the duration of one repetition of the mantra; 1/2 second, 5 seconds etc). Or did you use steady concentrative focusing of attention style meditation?
Nirvikalpa Samadhi is more a "natural result" of meditation, than something one enters by using any technique.
The duration of mantra ... or even the specific mantra itself, has nothing to do with it (experiencing nirvikalpa samadhi) .... truly.
Nirvikalpa Samadhi (maintaining awareness without any form to reflect it ... including object, subject or perception) is a fancy term for a very simple reality:
Thought-self has been conditioned to identify with form for a lifetime (body, feelings, thoughts, "others", and so on) .... and this conditioning to identify with form has been deeply reinforced, moment-by-moment in nearly every moment of life.
And thus, it has created the memory of a sense of self being a body-mind ... partial, alone, separate, incomplete.
The experiencing body-mind can't help this; it's essentially a GUI (Graphic User Interface) .... your computer "desktop" (main screen), or your web browser appears as it is programmed/coded to appear.
Same with the body-mind ... including the incorrect sense of limited self.
The Good News: reprogramming is possible, as evidenced by the world's mystical and yogic traditions all around the world and throughout all of history .... and as currently verified by neuroscience.
Neuroplasticity was considered, until the last handful of years ... to be the exception (with respect to certain changes/modifications which take place in the brain, in response to activity and environment).
Now, neuroplasticity .... and bioplasticity .... are known to be the rule.
The body-mind is literally programmable.
You want enlightenment?
You *are* enlightenment.
As I've been saying in this thread; original awareness ... and its related full-spectrum experience of consciousness, from the infinite formless through to the finite physical ... and back home again ... {to the infinite formless now} .. is what is always already here.
The only difference between (so-called) enlightenment and (so-called) unenlightenment, is that "in enlightenment" ... the original awareness, and the full spectrum of consciousness, is experienced consciously.
In "unenlightenment" .... attention/awareness is dreaming that objective consciousness (focus of attention outward, focus on form) is all there is, now. This is reinforced by the ever looping dream of memory now (aka "the past") and imagination now (aka "the future").
And so, the *only* difference between enlightenment and unenlightenment is how much of the full range of original awareness is experienced now.
As memory can faux-confirm for you, you've spent a lifetime programming and being programmed to experience unenlightenment (aka attention artificially weighted toward externalization).
This would be fine, except it involves the perception of suffering.
And life is so much nicer without suffering (which is all enlightenment is: freedom from the misperception called ego, and its effects, aka suffering).
The "antidote" is inner silence.
As inner silence melts away the freezing of identification with form .. it is experienced that, for one ... division between "subject, object and perception" is artificial.
Experiencing this is called savikalpa ("with form") samadhi.
Then, as inner silence/awareness expands (is experienced) a bit more, and more conditioning is melted in its living light ..... it is experienced that awareness does not require an object (never did, actually .... ) ... which is called nirvikalpa samadhi, asamprajnata samadhi, pure bliss conciousness, nirvana, "a nice way to enjoy eternity for a few minutes now", etc.
Enlightenment is simply the restoration of the natural state, the natural balance that from the side of duality, could be called "the union of the pairs of opposites" (aka objectivity/subjectivity) ... which, when balanced, don't exist .... i.e. when there's a certain balance between oxygen atoms and hydrogen atoms ... we no longer think/ speak of/ experience "hydrogen atoms" and "oxygen atoms" .... but rather .... water.
And so ..... "practices replace the errant code of memory-imagination with the elegant and correct code of original-awareness-now" .... literally.
Simple, formless awareness ... experienced at first as inner silence and/or presence now ... gives way to noticing the pure formlessness of the gap between every perception (see Vinjnanabhairava Tantra and/or Yoga Spandakarika for details) ... and the dissolution of the artificial division of subject-object-perception (savikalpa samadhi) ... and the dissolution of the perceived inability to disengage awareness from form and remain conscious (nirvikalpa samadhi) .... and finally, the dissolution of the perceived inability to enjoy the freedom of the full range of original awareness you actually are, now (enlightenment).
All those conditions/experiences/knowing (<- in the case of the last item) ... are the same ... it's just a matter of how much attention is artificially weighted toward the objective/"external") ......... enlightenment has never been absent; it is simply not consciously known.
Awareness/Silence literally reprograms the body-mind .... it changes neurochemistry, which changes endocrine function ... which changes the experiencing and the capabilities of experiencing flowing through-as a given body-mind, now.
Just as taking up a new sport changes brain and body, or learning a new language, or learning to play a musical instrument ... changes brain and body.
Meditation and yoga (including bhakti, inquiry, kundalini-related practices, and so on) ... change brain and body, and created a realization-rich and enlightenment-capable environment.
Once this happens, enlightenment is experienced ... it was always already here, anyway.
Enlightenment isn't *reached* .... unenlightenment is de-bugged*!
(*"De-bug" is a software term, for any who may not know: it simply means "fixing errors, so that the software program functions as it is designed to function".)
And so, how did I "enter nirvikalpa samadhi?"
AYP Deep Meditation.
That's it.
No kidding.
In the beginning of meditation practice, the energy of a specific mantra can be experienced as different from another .... but ultimately, it's not the mantra the matters ... being ... without the infusion of inner silence/awareness, as Abhinavagupta says "merely articulated sounds, not having the power to bend even a blade of grass".
It's the *process* of mantra meditation .... taking a lifetime of unceasing focus on form ... and practicing focus-release (mantra-pause, mantra-pause ... even if the pause isn't noticed at first ... it works its way in .... because the silence *is* the underlying awareness we actually are).
And so, consistency with daily practices in what matters.
This isn't simply the "AYP Party Line", by the way; it's just that from the side of the completion, "how it all actually works" seems a lot more obviously and simple.
All of this is about how consciousness actually is, and works; there's no magic to it ... and no magic bullet. If you want to develop muscle tone and mass ... engage in resistance training; if you want to optimize it, factor in a balanced aerobic/cardio routine, as well.
If you want enlightenment, sit and meditate twice daily, as per AYP or similar program guidelines; watching-breath meditation, or some of the other modifications Yogani has posted in the new lessons can certainly work equally well.
It's not about the form of the meditation as much as it is about what you're doing with your mind; allowing silence to peek through ... and focusing on a single form (mantra, yantra, breath, etc.) ... to break the incessant yammering of discursive thinking, at least for a little while, each day.
If you used muscles randomly in daily life ... not much happens.
If you simply do reps with free weights for a few months ... an amazing amount happens.
"Like that."
quote:
Originally posted by Kirtanman
A couple of nights ago, I was really sick (I heard about Adyashanti being sick, several years ago, and thought "Hmph; if he's enlightened, how come he's sick?"
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
There is always a danger that the mind reads something or hears about something, stores it latently and then manifests it at an opportune time. I believe that the fact that Gopi Krishna wrote about his harrowing experiences with kundalini has led to a manifestation of "if you don't get sick you don't have kundalini" type of group thought-form consciousness.
Ah ... sorry .......... I didn't even *remotely* mean it like this; it wasn't connected (my sickness and Adyashanti's).
I had meant to circle back and clarify .... but managed not to.
What I meant was:
Per all the siddhi-related aspects of the discussion, I (rightly or wrongly) anticipated a "if you're enlightened, how come you got sick?" question ... primarily because *I* used to have that same question .... and so, I mentioned Adya's illness, and my ego-memory's reaction at the time, in passing ... and (as I think I did say) ... a pre-comment to the fact that illness goes with the body-mind; and enlightenment does not preclude illness in the body-mind.
quote:
Originally posted by Kirtanman
Form can only relate enlightenment to form, somehow.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Isn't that what siddhis are for? :)
I think it's more "that's what siddhis are *from*" ...
(Form relating enlightenment to form.)
Things like siddhis get "kicked around", in mind, because form presumes enlightenment has got to be like regular life-in-form, only infinitely better.
It is .... via realizing the utter independence of true nature *from* form ... not by developing super-powers with relating *to* form, which have nothing to do with knowing true nature, and are more likely to prevent enlightenment than reveal it.
Why?
Again: siddhis make it very tough to release all ideas of separate self, entirely.
They're best ignored.
Go for the gold of enlightenment; then, if siddhis are still of interest, you can approach that interest with full awareness and knowing self.
Otherwise, you may gain great powers .... but lose the only siddhi that actually matters: enlightenment itself ... by becoming even more mired in the universes of form.
It's not worth it.
That's why yogic writings warn against siddhis so strongly.
quote:
Originally posted by Kirtanman
And so, while anyone in the vicinity likely perceived a goat with sinus congestion engaging in unnatural congress with a poorly-working vacuum cleaner .... and while my abs engaged in another round of involuntary uddiyana (or whatever that's called), and my mouth, throat and nose wer{CENSORED FOR THE GOOD OF HUMAN KIND}iping up the floor, I had the passing thought:
"You'd think I could find *something* to be less than pleased about, here ..."
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
This is just too funny! Made me laugh :)
Awesome; I like it when that happens ....
quote:
Originally posted by Kirtanman
Form is subsidiary to the formless; they can't be compared.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Form is the dualistic opposite of the formless; they need each other. See, I just compared them and identified a relationship between them. :)
You're speaking of definition; I'm speaking from actuality.
And I'm not saying your view is wrong ... on any level involving form, what you write is true.
The absolute ... source ... true nature .... is where your statement above is not true.
Form requires the formless.
The formless does not require form, except in duality.
quote:
Originally posted by Kirtanman
"Of course; anything is possible with training. However, I have no interest."
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Yes, but Nisargadatta did recognize that miracles exist (from I Am That):
Yes, I know; that was the point of my quote as well, basically.
Sure, miracles can exist; sure, "anything is possible with training" .... and, enlightenment is unrelated .... and ... there seems to be a theme of the "very clearly enlightened" not having any particular interest in miracles or siddhis.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Nisargadatta also said this:
Q: Are you also free from causality? Can you produce miracles?
M: The world itself is a miracle. I am beyond miracles -- I am absolutely normal. With me everything happens as it must. I do not interfere with creation. Of what use are small miracles to me when the greatest of miracles is happening all the time? Whatever you see it is always your own being that you see. Go ever deeper into yourself, seek within, there is neither violence nor non-violence in self-discovery. The destruction of the false is not violence.
Thank You, Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj; that's exactly what I've been trying to say!
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
And now I realize that perhaps it is probable that awakened people don't have siddhis and don't want them or aren't interested in them. I guess they may be scared of them too and their consequences. But I've always thought that healing was a good thing although I have read that healing can be construed as interfering or even depriving the sick person of a valueable learning experience whose purpose may have been to help them burn karma or become enlightened.
Fear has nothing to do with it; if there's any fear experienced in enlightenment, it's an extremely temporary natural reaction of the body-mind .... for example, if you're driving, and another car almost hits you ... there can be a rush of fear in the body-mind ... but that has nothing to do with me (actual experiencing awareness).
Conceptual-mental fears don't exist in enlightenment, because they're an effect of the mistaken idea called "limited self".
When the dream of partiality disappears .... so does conceptual fear.
And so, non-interest in siddhis isn't fear-based .... it's more, as Adyashanti says:
"I know what I need to know, when I need to know it" .... which could just as well be said: "I have whatever I need to have, if and when I need to have it."
If I don't have it ... it means I didn't need it.
This applies to money, relationships, siddhis .... you name it.
Basically, ego-self is a reaction of the body-mind, trying to control everything, including its own experience ... because it mistakenly connects them with survival (whatever that might be .... ).
If something is going to be in charge of your life "mistaken idea of a separate self which can only be reaction from past conditioning" ... or "ego" for short .... *might* not be the best choice (quote-unquote).
Another "Adya-ism" I love:
"Life knows what it's doing."
In a nutshell: you don't have to figure out siddhis or healing or right or wrong or anything else; your own best thinking can't give you an answer anyway .... it doesn't know; it can't know ...... it's a walking iteration of "2+2=3" ... and 2+2 does not equal 3 ... no matter how much one demands or manipulates that it be so.
And so .... the entire iteration of 2+2=3 is seen to be a false equation ... and is released.
Then/now ... "Ahhh .... Peace".
It's very nice; the whole "it's real" thing helps it be experienced as even better.
And reality is whole.
All reality contributes to the whole ....... all reality; look around you:
Trees do it; birds do it; oceans do it; bees do it ..... etc. etc. etc.
The only thing in the entire universe that *doesn't* do it is the erroneous idea of *needing* (money, power, siddhis, chocolate, justification, a great high, a good lay, a bad motor-scooter, pleasure, pain, a teddy bear .... you name it; the list is endless) ....... called the human ego.
When it finally dissolves .... there's no limit to what is possible .... yet .... no thinking about what is possible, either; what would be the point; I am possibility .... Shakti (ability) is my shine.
What's needed is here.
Acorns create oaks which create acorns.
Enlightenment creates enlightenment.
If siddhis are needed for creating enlightenment, I have them; if they're not ... they literally don't cross my mind; why would they?
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
But, now I'm thinking that the shift to unity consciousness is very subtle.
I never thought I'd use the following two words together, but:
Good thinking!
And ... it's a bit tough to find the best words for what goes on with enlightenment (not one of my favorites, in the first place ....) ... but unity consciousness can be a bit problematic, as well.
Unity consciousness is a relative term, as far as literal meaning .... the opposite of duality consciousness (and oxymoron, if ever there was one ... ).
However, original awareness is .... original.
It precedes everything, including unity and duality.
There's no unity/non-unity ... there's just awareness ... formless, original.
All arises from this that I am ... including consciousness; including unity.
And yet, not in as nearly a big-deal way as it might sound.
It's more like this:
Imagine spending all your life thinking you're the content of your eyesight ... you are what you see.
Then, you feel that there's more to it that that ... and it would be ridiculous to say you are what you see; it's obvious: you're your eyes.
Then ... it seems yet deeper .... not your eyes .... your ability to see, itself.
But no ... yet a bit deeper ..... it's not the eye that sees ... not even the sense of sight itself ... but the underlying experiencing awareness.
And so, you could have said (instead of "unity consciousness") "sight consciousness" ... and I could have said: "Well, that's a relative term; both sight and sight consciousness arise from the actual, original awareness ... which is what *actually* sees."
It's a "full spectrum of awareness/nature of awareness" thing ... not a big-deal, supernatural thing.
quote:
Originally posted by Kirtanman
Truth doesn't need to be judged; neither does anything else.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
For us mere mortals sitting at the base of the mountain looking up, we need to judge how much rope we will need, how much food to bring, what kind of clothes to wear and whether or not the weather is going to be good. I agree, once on the mountain top, who cares..
1. There are no mere mortals; or mortals for that matter ...... it's a dream; spiritual teachings have been shouting that from the rooftops for millenia, now ... and it's true.
2. Wrong end of the mountain. As Adyashanti also says ..... the enlightened are those sitting at the bottom of the mountain, passing out the rope, and pylons and supplies ... and saying "Have fun; see ya back here when you figure out there's nothing at the top that's not here at the bottom ...".
*Seriously*.
Enlightenment isn't where we end up; it's where we start ........ that's why I call it original awareness.
quote:
Originally posted by Kirtanman
As Adyashanti says: a flame never dances the same way twice.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Gee, blow torches look pretty consistent to me.. :)
Oy.
Dude.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
How does he know? Has he ever filmed it and millions of others to compare it to?
You hear that?
Yeah ... that.
THAT is the sound of Kirtanman methodically bonking his own head on the computer table in front of him.
Bonk
Bonk
Bonk
Ahhh .... much better.
Now then, let us continue .........
And .... that's what I get for paraphrasing.
Here's the original quote:
You may say my teaching is confusing
because I am not consistent. But I say:
"Does a flame ever leap up from the fire
exactly the same way twice?"
The radiance of truth and life
does not fit into conceptual pockets.
It is always leaping out in celebration of itself.
~Adyashanti, My Secret Is Silence, p.127
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
And the last thing, did you write about your experience of awakening here on the forum? The exact experience?
Not yet.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
I tried to find it but you've written so many posts that I could not find it in the hours that I spent, nor have I found it yet.
With respect for the effort you made …. an overview of my awakening/realization is not worth spending hours looking for …. creating your own awakening/realization, however, is worth whatever it takes.
Whatever it takes.
Nothing else matters .... not even a little.
"PS" ... the most detailed overview I've given of the *process* ... how the unfolding went and tends to go ... is in this thread ...... I think it's in one of the posts to Christi, but I don't recall for sure.
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
I'm looking for a story that begins with "I was sitting at the table, drinking my yogi tea, when all of a sudden..." :)
.. people are gonna think we have some clandestine sponsorship deal with Yogi Tea ....!!
I get what you mean, though:
"I'm looking for a story that begins with "I was sitting at the table, drinking my yogi tea, when all of a sudden...
.... I remembered … it was time for my morning meditation session .... because I knew that daily meditation .... developing experience of inner silence, is the most important pillar of any path to enlightenment .... and ..... *voila* .... in less than a decade .... actual enlightenment!!
And .... what's even more amazing .... upon realizing enlightenment, I noticed .... an interest in writing posts, an affinity for sitting around and chanting in Sanskrit at high volume, enjoyment of the music of LIVE and Matisyahu, enjoyable conversations with friends and family; a tendency toward dorky humor ... in short ... everything is exactly like always ... except, now, it's all perfect.
"THE BEGINNING"
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Again, thank you for the correspondence. I really appreciate your help and good nature.. :)
:)
TI
No problem; likewise.
And it's fun.
And it beats the crap of me all of sudden having to sit around in an orange robe in full lotus, telling you to come back after you do a hundred thousand prostrations around the AYP Site.
And I'm not "guru-fying" myself, by the way.
It's more like I'm .....utterly joking.
If anything ... "via the siddhi of cyber-osmosis" ... I've received Yogani's non-transmission of *Non*-Guru-ness.
The guru is in you .... the rest of us are just good friends.
_/\_
Wholeheartedly,
Kirtanman
|
Edited by - Kirtanman on Nov 22 2009 4:22:31 PM |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4514 Posts |
Posted - Nov 22 2009 : 4:46:24 PM
|
Hi Kirtanman,
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Christi
Christ consciousness as I understand it is the same thing as cosmic consciousness. As I mentioned above, it is the expansion of awareness to include the subtle celestial.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any more detail you can provide on this would be appreciated.
The subtle celestial is the home of angelic beings, ascended masters and other higher beings. It is a range of subtle realms extending from above the physical to the infinite realms of pure spiritual light. So someone in a Christed state of consciousness has access to all these realms of being. This is what my yoga teacher meant when he said "I live amongst the Gods".
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Christi
I also believe (as I mentioned in another thread) that the subtle body becomes fully illuminated during the transition to Christ consciousness. This is why people sometimes recieve teachings from masters appearing in a body of divine glory, or celestial form, as TI is describing above with reference to Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ has simply attained Christ consciousness and is now able to appear at will to people using an illuminated form made up completely of divine light.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you wouldn't mind, could you please get just a bit more specific on what you mean here, when and how it might happen, etc.
What I'm still not quite "getting", is this:
When ground of being/"being the screen" is the experience, and is the sense of self ... along with the sense of knowing/completion which is "part and parcel" of it ... there's sense of potential relative development, which will, of course, continue to unfold/flower (as Adyashanti said, so enthusiastically: "It never stops!" ... every moment is a new creation).
For instance, are you saying that "after enlightenment" ... that there's still (in, as you say, your belief) this full/further illumination of/in subtle form, which occurs, as part of the "set unfolding" for each/all of us (as I believe you said)?
Yes, only I wouldn't say "after enlightenment", I would say: "as part of the ever-unfolding process of enlightenment, there is a continued illumination of the subtle body which occurs for all of us".
quote:
I've never heard any of the non-dual sages who I resonate with mention this sort of thing at all (one way or the other; it's simply not mentioned) ......... which doesn't affect any sense I have of whether it's true, or not .... again: my purpose is purely to "connect the dots" as best I can .... the goal being not to gain further clarity for myself (there's really no sense of need for that; there's very much an ease with "what's going to unfold is going to unfold", with zero concern for the details) ...
Yes, I've never heard any advaita teacher talk about the Christ consciousness stage of human spiritual transformation. I guess it is either that they stopped practicing at the unity consciousness stage, and so never progressed beyond that, or they don't mention it, as they don't want to give their students more stuff to cling onto.
It is spoken of occasionally by other teachers though, Yogananda springs to mind, some Sufi teachers, and it is well documented in the Gnostic Christian tradition.
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Christi
We know from what Adyashanti says that what he refers to as awakening (or sometimes as enlightenment) is possible without the development of ecstasy as a 24/7 experience.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure that's exactly the case, as much as that Adyashanti doesn't emphasize the experiential characteristics, in detail ... per the fact that he purposely emphasizes, and says that he feels the need to emphasize, that "enlightenment is not an experience".
I don't see that as "right or wrong" as an approach, per se .... and I've found the combination of what Yogani says, and what Adya says, to be helpful, in combination.
My point is: knowing Adya's teachings fairly well, I don't think that the fact that he doesn't emphasize ecstasy or bliss as part of enlightenment, doesn't mean that he's specifically stating that enlightenment is "is possible without the development of ecstasy as a 24/7 experience".
That's quite possible. But Adyashanti does talk about specific experiences such as bliss and ecstasy, and I was basing what I said above on this one line from his book "The End of Your World":
"... people think, "When I spiritually awaken, when I have union with God, I will enter into a state of constant ecstasy". This is, of course, a deep misunderstanding of what awakening is." [Adyashanti]
It's difficult for me to work out what he means by that line if, for him, enlightenment is a state of constant ecstasy. At the beginning of this thread I suggested that he is talking about an awakening experience of the non-abiding (his phrase) variety. But if he is actually talking about a permanent state of self-realization, then all I could conclude is that he is talking about a state of unity consciousness, before the process of purification has reached a permanently ecstatic level.
Either that, or he actually means something like: "People think that when they awaken, they will be living in a state of constant ecstasy. This is of course true, but it is not the way that I like people to think about awakening as I'm an advaita teacher..."
quote:
Again, I respectfully disagree ... not in any "he's right, and he's wrong" OR in any "no, he's farther along, he's less so" (notice I'm not naming names; I have only the greatest sense of affinity, friendship and respect with both Yogani and Adyashanti, and they've both had very direct bearing on (literally) every meaningful aspect of my/non-my life and experiencing ... including (quote-unquote, though still actual) enlightenment ... and so, for me "they're both right!" (Not "about anything" ... just ... both right. ).
I think you misunderstood me here. As I said above, I wasn't saying that one was right, and the other wrong, or that one was further down the road than the other. So we both agree on that. What I was saying is that the state of consciousness that Adyashanti seems to be pointing people to, and the state of consciousness that Yogani seems to be pointing people to seem to be different.
Yogani's statement that full enlightenment is something that cannot occur except as a result of a long drawn out union between ecstasy and bliss, resulting in Christ consciousness (his words), just doesn't sound like what Adyashanti is talking about, which doesn’t seem to require any prerequisites at all on an experiential level. If it does, Adya is keeping very quiet about them.
Because of the higher levels of ecstatic radiance that are experienced at the Christ consciousness stage, masters at this level have to be careful who they allow to come close to their physical form (or their spiritual form if they have allowed their physical sheath to drop). So enlightened masters at this level often live in seclusion and try to remain anonymous.
quote:
Which isn't to disagree with the model/view of yours we're discussing, by the way .... it's to say that formless awareness is the ground of being, and all states/levels/experiences/forms arise from it ... which, it seems to me, you're saying as well.
Yes, I believe formless awareness is the ground of all being, whether you are living in a state of unity consciousness or a state of Christ consciousness, whether you are living in the physical realm or the heavenly realms or whether you are living in a body of divine glory or a regular physical body. So we are not talking about a further shift in identity, just a further expansion of consciousness to include the heavenly realms, a further illumination (to divine levels) of the subtle body, and a further refinement of sensory perception. This is, I believe, when the siddhis that TI is talking about become a normal part of the divine life.
So what TI is calling Engodment, is what I (and I believe a lot of spiritual teachers from many traditions) would call Christ consciousness, and what you are calling enlightenment is what I (and I believe many others) would call unity consciousness.
I hope this helps to further clarify.
Christi
|
|
|
|
alwayson2
USA
546 Posts |
Posted - Nov 22 2009 : 7:07:02 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by alwayson2
You just need to distinguish between naked, clear, vivid awareness versus the thoughtstream.
Even Ramana Maharishi said his thoughtstream STILL EXISTED, and within still contained many "evil" thoughts.
But the thoughtstream is just a rope pretending to be a snake.
You guys make it too complicated. IMO, there is no such thing as stages to enlightenment. See my reply up above.
P.S. All psychic powers without exception are solely the result of chakra work. Atleast thats what Robert Bruce, the astral projector, says. |
Edited by - alwayson2 on Nov 22 2009 7:24:32 PM |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Nov 22 2009 : 7:23:29 PM
|
Hi Christi,
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
"... people think, "When I spiritually awaken, when I have union with God, I will enter into a state of constant ecstasy". This is, of course, a deep misunderstanding of what awakening is." [Adyashanti]
It's difficult for me to work out what he means by that line if, for him, enlightenment is a state of constant ecstasy.
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
What I was saying is that the state of consciousness that Adyashanti seems to be pointing people to, and the state of consciousness that Yogani seems to be pointing people to seem to be different.
Yogani's statement that full enlightenment is something that cannot occur except as a result of a long drawn out union between ecstasy and bliss, resulting in Christ consciousness (his words), just doesn't sound like what Adyashanti is talking about, which doesn't seem to require any prerequisites at all on an experiential level. If it does, Adya is keeping very quiet about them.
Ah ... I think I can help (I think I understand the apparent discrepancy, now ... and I don't think there is one).
One of Adya's more well-known quotes is:
"Enlightenment is not an experience."
... and I think the line you quoted above is simply a re-statement of that.
Yogani outlines a model of enlightenment taking place in three general stages:
Stage 1 - Bliss
"It is unshakable, always positive no matter what is going on around us, and it has the feel of eternity in it as well. Most important, it is our awareness standing alone, independent of body, breath, mind, emotions, senses and all external events. It is the proverbial "rock" that will not wash away in the storms of life.
Once our sense of self has become that inner silence, where have we gone? Everywhere, and nowhere. Pure bliss consciousness is a mystery. Yet, it is what we are in our essential nature.
We experience it as bliss, a complete unending happiness. Our consciousness is the source of bliss. Our consciousness is bliss. No one has to take my word for it. As we meditate each day, we gradually come to know what pure bliss consciousness is. As the psalm says, "'Be still, and know I am God.'"
Stage 2 - Ecstasy
"While bliss emanates from our consciousness, ecstasy arises in our body. Ecstasy is the result of prana ravishing us in delicious ways."
"Activation of the experiences of bliss and ecstasy through advanced yoga practices corresponds to the first two stages of enlightenment, which have been discussed in previous lessons – the rise of inner silence and the rise of ecstasy, best done in in that order."
Stage 3 - Union
"The third stage of enlightenment comes following the union of bliss and ecstasy in divine romance inside. While this is going on, we tend to get the descriptions jumbled, because both pure bliss consciousness and divine ecstasy are present at the same time, joining inside us!
What comes out of this union of the masculine and feminine polar energies inside?
We have described the third stage of enlightenment as "unity," where we see all as an expression of the One that we have become.
That One is pure bliss consciousness coexisting within all the (ecstatic) processes of nature.
When it gets to this stage, we become a channel for an unending flow of divine love. We act for the good of all, expecting nothing in return, because we perceive all as an expression of our own self. In this stage, personal need is expanded to encompass universal need.
This is enlightenment, divine love naturally manifesting through us, born of the union of pure bliss consciousness and divine ecstasy inside us."
~Source: AYP Main Lesson #113
http://www.aypsite.org/113.html
I would say (as anyone can verify for themselves, by reviewing both Yogani's and Adyashanti's teachings) ... that Yogani and Adyashanti are pointing to, and teaching from, the same union/unity consciousness, aka enlightenment.
One of the reasons I feel comfortable saying this, is that this union/unity consciousness ... as described above in Yogani's words ... is my own experiencing/knowing/loving/being, as well.
And, it can most certainly be all of ours ... because it is what we each and all ever are, now.
_/\_
|
Edited by - Kirtanman on Nov 22 2009 7:26:05 PM |
|
|
|
Tibetan_Ice
Canada
758 Posts |
Posted - Nov 22 2009 : 7:38:43 PM
|
Hi Kirtanman :)
quote:
Originally posted by Kirtanman
Nirvikalpa Samadhi is more a "natural result" of meditation, than something one enters by using any technique.
The duration of mantra ... or even the specific mantra itself, has nothing to do with it (experiencing nirvikalpa samadhi) .... truly.
Nirvikalpa Samadhi (maintaining awareness without any form to reflect it ... including object, subject or perception) is a fancy term for a very simple reality:
Thought-self has been conditioned to identify with form for a lifetime (body, feelings, thoughts, "others", and so on) .... and this conditioning to identify with form has been deeply reinforced, moment-by-moment in nearly every moment of life.
And thus, it has created the memory of a sense of self being a body-mind ... partial, alone, separate, incomplete.
...
awareness ... experienced at first as inner silence and/or presence now ... gives way to noticing the pure formlessness of the gap between every perception (see Vinjnanabhairava Tantra and/or Yoga Spandakarika for details) ... and the dissolution of the artificial division of subject-object-perception (savikalpa samadhi) ... and the dissolution of the perceived inability to disengage awareness from form and remain conscious (nirvikalpa samadhi) .... and finally, the dissolution of the perceived inability to enjoy the freedom of the full range of original awareness you actually are, now (enlightenment).
I think we may be having a communication breakdown. Your definition of Nirvikalpa samadhi is not the same as some that I've read..
Is Nirvikalpa Samadhi the same as the "Nirbikalpa" in Autobiography of a Yogi? Here is the quote:
quote:
Numerous bewildered seekers in the West erroneously think that an eloquent speaker or writer on metaphysics must be a master. The rishis, however, have pointed out that the acid test of a master is a man's ability to enter at will the breathless state, and to maintain the unbroken samadhi of nirbikalpa. Only by these achievements can a human being prove that he has "mastered" maya or the dualistic Cosmic Delusion. He alone can say from the depths of realization: "Ekam sat" - "Only One exists".
When you enter nirvikalpa samadhi, are you breathless? How long can you remain breathless?
I decided to Google 'nirvikapla samadhi' and guess what? I can't copy anything from this one, so here is the link:
http://www.indianetzone.com/38/nirv..._samadhi.htm
In there, not only does it say that nirvikalpa samadhi is the last stage of kundalini meditation, it says that you can only maintain nirvikalpa samadhi for 21 consecutive days before you can no longer come back into your body..
And in this next link, the siddhis are mentioned (they keep coming back):
link: http://www.experiencefestival.com/n...madhi/page/3
quote:
jivanmukta: (Sanskrit) "Liberated soul."
A being who has attained nirvikalpa samadhi - the realization of the Self, Parasiva - and is liberated from rebirth while living in a human body. (Contrasted with videhamukta, one liberated at the point of death.) This attainment is the culmination of lifetimes of intense striving, sadhana and tapas, requiring total renunciation, sannyasa (death to the external world, denoted in the conducting of one's own funeral rites), in the current incarnation.
While completing life in the physical body, the jivanmukta enjoys the ability to reenter nirvikalpa samadhi again and again. At this time, siddhis can be developed which are carried to the inner worlds after mahasamadhi. Such an awakened jnani benefits the population by simply being who he is. When he speaks, he does so without forethought. His wisdom is beyond reason, yet it does not conflict with reason. Nor does he arrive at what he says through the process of reason, but through the process of ajna-chakra sight.
But let's stick to Yogananda's explanation of "nirbikalpa samadhi" if that is the same as nirvikapla samadhi. Again, in Autobiography of a Yogi, it says:
quote:
In the initial states of God-contact (sabikalphi samadhi) the devotee's consciousness merges wit the Cosmic Spirit; his life force is withdrawn from the body, which appears "dead," or motionless and rigid. The yogi is fully aware of his bodily condition of suspended animation. As he progresses to higher spiritual states (nirbikalpa samadhi), however, he communes with God without bodily fixation, and in his ordinary waking consciousness, even in the midst of exacting worldly duties.
In one post called "Simply Tired" by Ananda (here in the Satsang Cafe), he says
quote:
the sense of the small self or persona vanishes during nirvikalpa samadhi (been there done that and as Adyashanti says about it "big deal!")
I guess that is where I differ. If Nirvikalpa samadhi is the final stage of kundalini meditation, the ability to die at will, to quit breathing and experience the totality, to me, that is a very big deal. To me, it means that you've arrived. How can anyone dismiss that state and say 'big deal' about it?
On the other hand, (and I guess this demonstrates that I'm a liberal thinker :), perhaps you don't have to die to experience nirvikalpa samadhi???
Is it like Eckhart Tolle says "Intense present moment awarenss"?
When I do "intense present moment awareness", my breathing stops (because I'm concentrating so darn hard) and an opening opens up for a split second. It is a large dark cave of infinite space and there is something sitting off to my right, which resembles a dark clay body sitting in lotus position. Is that me? Also, when I play the game called "I wonder what my next thought will be" as told by Tolle, my breathing stops and another cave opens up where my thoughts will appear when they come out of the light. My breathing also stops. The problem is that I can only maintain that intense breathless state for a few brief seconds. Sometimes longer during intense concentrative meditation. Is that it?
So it's not like rewriting the software on the computer, it's like pulling out the power chord.. :0
And finally, just because I'm always on the lookout, I found this little passage dismissing Oneness as a final stage of enlightenment:
link: http://www.guruswamig.com/beyondoneness.html
quote:
Yes Oneness is the Bliss of feeling totally Connected and in Sync with God ... One feels themselves as expanded and in Love with the Universe... This is the time where the seeker wants to mistakenly quit and remain --- After all there is still a me that is merged in God... One feels light and special -- gliding along in Bliss and Love with thier ideas of Compassion and Saving the world.... Everything is brighter and life is beautiful --- yet within this are still ups and downs that come and holding it all in place is the expanded ego that feels as if it has become a Co-Creator and has found it's Divine Self... This is what most **** strive**** after .... To be a special hand of God...
YET this is a far cry from Realization and entering into Enlightenment... In Realization there is dissolving into 0---- And True Freedom remains...
This is why seekers need a Sat Guru that has gone the Whole of the Journey versus one that speaks from Oneness... Oneness while the highest state in duality doesn't hold a candle to the Pure Clear Light of Realization... 0 point balance.... As wonderful as Oneness is to leave a Sadhaka there is to leave them in eventual suffering... At first one is enamored of the Oneness Bliss... It is like a honeymoon but it isn't Realization.... Therefore the Guru's and Sages continue to give Guidance to go forward beyond this most attractive point of bliss...
(bolding in the above quote is mine.)
All this reminds me of the Pink Floyd song from Dark Side of the Moon where it says:
quote:
"Us And Them"
Us and Them
And after all we're only ordinary men
Me, and you
God only knows it's not what we would choose to do
Forward he cried from the rear
and the front rank died
And the General sat, as the lines on the map
moved from side to side
Black and Blue
And who knows which is which and who is who
Up and Down
And in the end it's only round and round and round
Haven't you heard it's a battle of words
the poster bearer cried
Listen son, said the man with the gun
There's room for you inside
Down and Out
It can't be helped but there's a lot of it about
With, without
And who'll deny that's what the fightings all about
Get out of the way, it's a busy day
And I've got things on my mind
For want of the price of tea and a slice
The old man died
:)
TI
|
|
|
|
Anthem
1608 Posts |
Posted - Nov 22 2009 : 8:25:08 PM
|
"I" or "me" can never be "enlightened". We are the pure awareness behind "I" and "me", not actually the "I" and "me" that we so often confuse ourselves with as has been discussed throughout this thread. You are not "John Smith", that is simply a make believe story that we witness.
The second part of the equation is that "enlightened" or "enlightenment" doesn't exist, it is a word, or a temporal idea, an attempt to define the undefinable. It is like putting water in a jar and calling it the ocean, the description can never do it justice.
What point along a continuum are we defining as enlightenment? For another example, a line spreading to infinity in either direction, what part of it is "the line"? It is all arbitrary. Holding on to ideas of "attainment" is a sure way to slow the flow. The statement "my elightenment" is just another experience along the way, but already a sign of inherent identification at some level with the story of "enlightenment".
|
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Nov 22 2009 : 10:37:35 PM
|
Hi Anthem,
quote:
Originally posted by Anthem11
"I" or "me" can never be "enlightened". We are the pure awareness behind "I" and "me", not actually the "I" and "me" that we so often confuse ourselves with as has been discussed throughout this thread. You are not "John Smith", that is simply a make believe story that we witness.
Fully agreed; somewhat ironically (given the ebb and flow of this thread ) ... this is the primary point Wayne Wirs makes on his blog.
We are not who we think we are; we are not our story.
There is no "we" or "me" other than conceptually.
Empty open awareness alone is the subject of all experience.
quote:
Originally posted by Anthem11
The second part of the equation is that "enlightened" or "enlightenment" doesn't exist, it is a word, or a temporal idea, an attempt to define the undefinable. It is like putting water in a jar and calling it the ocean, the description can never do it justice.
Again ... agreed.
Words get in the way so easily ........ as this thread showcases in such major ways.
And words are the realm of conceptual mind ... but are one of the only tools available to help conceptual mind to potentially look past itself.
As Ramana Maharshi once said, it's akin to removing a thorn with a thorn.
There's no such thing as enlightenment; there's either the experiencing of the wholeness (aka emptiness) of awareness as the "experiencer-experiencing-experience-now" .......... or the confusion of conceptual conditioning mistaking objectivity for the sum total of actuality.
We tend to call the former conditioning enlightenment ... and the latter unenlightenment ...... though neither term fits well; terms are road signs.
Trying to help those understand that trying to make a road sign that is pointing the way to New York City *into* New York City itself is not going to get them any closer to New York City ..... is an exercise in circling, as we're experiencing in this thread.
quote:
Originally posted by Anthem11
What point along a continuum are we defining as enlightenment? For another example, a line spreading to infinity in either direction, what part of it is "the line"? It is all arbitrary. Holding on to ideas of "attainment" is a sure way to slow the flow. The statement "my elightenment" is just another experience along the way, but already a sign of inherent identification at some level with the story of "enlightenment".
Yes, true.
And it may sound like I'm talking in circles here; not my intention, of course.
Again, somewhat ironically, my purpose in "chiming in" here had one purpose: to help those who may be "stuck" in trying to understand enlightenment (which is impossible) to simply feel more motivation to experience it ... and not to block themselves from the experienc(ing) by trying to understand it.
As far as "point along the continuum" .... there is a fundamental shift from "thinking I'm me" to an empty, open awareness living this moment.
There's no "point" where a line can be drawn (despite the fact that so many make it sound this way) .... because it's more of a "morphing" from the incorrect idea of self to ......... no idea of self.
In my (this? ) case ... it was literally noticed after the fact .... "Wow; this is different than ... something .... Hm ... something happened, it seems ... heyyy .... 'no me' .... nice; and on it goes ....".
And based on some of the back-and-forth-tracking that's gone on in this thread ... I'm not sure how much good has been done.
Ultimately, it seems, discussing enlightenment really isn't pertinent, because it's too easy for conceptual mind to try to figure out that which is completely beyond figuring out.
Helping people to stay centered in the actions that get awareness knowing itself in reality beyond suffering and attachment to memory and imagination ....... whatever it's called ... seems like what loving does, now.
Wholeheartedly,
Kirtanman
|
Edited by - Kirtanman on Nov 22 2009 11:07:54 PM |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Nov 22 2009 : 11:06:21 PM
|
Hi TI,
It seems like you may still be very interested in acquiring, comparing and understanding informational knowledge.
Believe me, I know how entertaining this can be.
However, it truly has nothing to do with enlightenment (or whatever wholeness is best called).
Limited mind can't understand this; it's so sure that discrimination and understanding are important; a lifetime of conditioning has it feeling this way.
"Nirvikalpa samadhi" .... is the "primal unity free from thought constructs" ......... that's what those words mean.
As with all words .... definitions, interpretations and conceptions vary.
A lot.
By re-programming, I didn't mean "reprogramming with something" ... but rather unprogramming .... more like deleting or erasing code than replacing it.
My point was: awareness dissolves concepts, and this new living from and as awareness is reflected in the body-mind.
That's why, even after hearing of the end of the me, and the mind, we don't even remotely understand it, initially ... and we try to ..... and it makes no difference; has no effect, ever.
Practices and inquiry help to dissolve conceptual error, and wholeness is revealed.
That's it.
That's why, as Yogani says, that in AYP, we favor experience over words.
Trying to understand enlightenment conceptually is like trying to understand swimming using rocks ......... not much fun at all.
Keep practicing, keep noticing your own experiencing/awareness, and keep knowing that no book or forum thread has anything to do with enlightenment .... other than to motivate you to know for yourself.
I agree in general with SwamiG's statements about "oneness in duality" (not being true realization/enlightenment).
Dissolving past duality .... into the emptiness of actual union ..... open, original awareness ... is the "enlightenment" I've been inviting everyone to experience.
Living unbound is simply an accurate term for experience, now, when there's no longer the incorrect concept of being bound.
It doesn't have to be called anything.
But it is real.
It's all that's real.
Have you ever felt the sweetness of touching someone you love, tenderly?
When the concept of separate self dissolves, every moment feels like being the caressing hand ... and the caressed skin ... and most beautifully of all ... the two becoming one ... and the one dissolving into the wholeness of the experiencing ..... no separate will; no concepts .... just loving .... just wholeness .... just home.
It's not that every moment "seems like this", now.
Every moment is this, now.
I invite you all to know this, in living experiencing, every moment now.
_/\_
|
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4514 Posts |
Posted - Nov 23 2009 : 03:17:50 AM
|
Hi Kirtanman,
quote:
Hi Christi,
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Christi
"... people think, "When I spiritually awaken, when I have union with God, I will enter into a state of constant ecstasy". This is, of course, a deep misunderstanding of what awakening is." [Adyashanti]
It's difficult for me to work out what he means by that line if, for him, enlightenment is a state of constant ecstasy.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Christi
What I was saying is that the state of consciousness that Adyashanti seems to be pointing people to, and the state of consciousness that Yogani seems to be pointing people to seem to be different.
Yogani's statement that full enlightenment is something that cannot occur except as a result of a long drawn out union between ecstasy and bliss, resulting in Christ consciousness (his words), just doesn't sound like what Adyashanti is talking about, which doesn't seem to require any prerequisites at all on an experiential level. If it does, Adya is keeping very quiet about them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah ... I think I can help (I think I understand the apparent discrepancy, now ... and I don't think there is one).
One of Adya's more well-known quotes is:
"Enlightenment is not an experience."
... and I think the line you quoted above is simply a re-statement of that.
So are you saying that what Adyashanti really means, is that although a permanent state of ectstasy is one of the qualities of enlightenment, and is a pre-requisite for enlightenment, and one of the factors that brings enlightenment about, it is not in itself what enlightenment is. And he would point to the shift of identity from egoic consciousness to undifferentiated awareness and from there to unity, or oneness as being what enlightenment is about?
I have to confess, I would find that a little hard to believe, based on some of the things that Adyashanti has said. I remember he talked once about how the mind has the idea that an enlightened person doesn't feel crappy in the mornings, and that he had to let go of that idea, which was of course just an idea that "thinking mind" had about what enlightenment was or was not. To be honest, feeling crappy in the mornings doesn't sound much like a permanent state of ecstasy.
I'm just pointing this out so you can see why I believe that Adyashanti and Yogani are guiding people towards different stages of enlightenment. As I said above, I am not trying to put anyone down in any way and I have the utmost respect for everyone we are discussing here. I am just trying to make some kind of sense out of what Adyashanti means when he talks about enlightenment, awakening and oneness and where it falls in the overall process of enlightenmnet.
In the main lessons, Yogani doesn’t say that at some stage in the process of awakening you experience ecstasy 24 hours a day, seven days a week, except in the mornings when you feel crappy. So we must be talking about two different things.
If Adyashanti is talking about the witness stage becoming a 24 hour/ 7 days a week experience, then yes, it would be possible to feel crappy in the mornings, and yet still be present as the witness. So the identity would be residing as pure awareness and would be aware of the sensation of the body/mind feeling crappy. I would say that in some of the higher stages of the enlightenment process this would no longer be possible, because of the way in which the body becomes purified, and that Yogani is pointing to these higher stages, as well as the witness stage and unity consciosness stages that Adyashanti seems to be pointing to.
On the subject of the transition from oneness (unity consciousness) to Christ consciousness, I found this written by Tau malachi on the four stages of the evolution of the soul, which I thought you may find interesting:
quote:
Rauch
Rauch is our spirit or intelligence... there are two distinct manifestations of Rauch. They are called the upper Rauch and the lower Rauch. The lower Rauch is the normal human intelligence which is oriented to the... external world...
The upper Rauch is oriented to the Neshamah and to the divine. As a result, it is an awareness of the ocean of spirituality, which surrounds us- awareness of the play of spiritual or cosmic forces, the metaphysical dimensions of reality, and God's holy Shekinah (presence and power) within and behind everything that transpires.
At this level we begin to get a sense of God's will for our soul- the mission of our soul. We are also able to receive the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, to receive communication from the divine powers, and to experience higher states of consciousness well beyond the ordinary level.
Reaching the level of upper Rauch more and more, we find ourselves guided by the spirit and moved by the spirit. At the highest levels, we can experience unification with the Holy Spirit... which is a prophetic state of consciousness in which a person feels him or herself completely elevated and transformed.
When the level of upper Rauch is present in a person, they are rightly called a spiritual or holy person, for more than a godly soul, he or she is a Spirit-filled soul.
Neshamah
At the level of Neshamah, one experiences the radiant holy breath of God. Neshamah is the vessel that holds the spiritual power that God wants to give us... Nefesh forms a material body, but the Neshamah forms a body of light or heavenly image. This is an angelic image... the image of one's Christ self or future self. It is this divine image resembling a human being that prophets behold in the peak of their divine visions.
The enlightenment experience begins at the level of Rauch, but enlightenment and liberation proper correspond to the level of Neshamah... It is at this level that a true Messianic consciousness dawns and the Christ-self is realized. While many initiates attain the level of Rauch, relatively few attain the level of Neshamah.
Hayyah
The Hayyah is the most subtle life-force or living essence- so heavenly that it has little connection with the body and dwells mostly in other realms. It is the radiant holy breath of God that is experienced at the level of Neshamah. Yet at the level of hayyah, the holy breath is completely within God and one who experiences this presence and power experiences a conscious unification with God.
Most individuals will only gain the awareness of Hayyah in altered states. In these rare moments of peak experience, it is as though one is light in an ocean of light- the world of supernal light being experienced within and all around oneself. Quite literally one sees and experiences everything as this light-force....
While many initiates may experience something of Hayyah in peak mystical experience, the actual attainment of Hayyah is very rare. The power of the Hayyah is the power to resurrect the dead. Very few masters have walked the earth with this divine power...
Yechidah
There is an even higher level of the soul of light than Hayyah. It is called Yechidah- the holy or divine spark. It is a grade of unification beyond Hayyah of which nothing can really be said. One who attains this level is the light of all the worlds and is the way, truth and life. This is the essence of the spiritual sun- the Christos- Christ...
If Hayyah represents enlightenment proper and Yechidach is something beyond that holy attainment, then something subtle and profound is being said of enlightenment. What appears to us as a supreme or ultimate attainment is, in truth, but the beginning of a whole new level of evolution to which there is no end in sight." [Tau malachi, Gnosis of the Cosmic Christ]
I believe that the practices in AYP are designed to take someone through these four stages of transformation leading from Rauch, through Neshamah and Hayyah, to Yechidah... the unfolding of Christ consciousness and the bringing down of the divine light into the light of this world.
Personally I find Tau Malachi in particular, and Gnostic Christianity in general, helpful for not falling into the illusion of thinking that I have arrived anywhere, even when living from/as undifferentiated awareness. I also find Tau Malachi's writings useful for keeping the process of enlightenment as a never-ending continuum in perspective, which is something that Yogani also continually points to.
Christi
|
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Nov 23 2009 : 7:53:31 PM
|
Hi Christi,
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
So are you saying that what Adyashanti really means, is that although a permanent state of ectstasy is one of the qualities of enlightenment, and is a pre-requisite for enlightenment, and one of the factors that brings enlightenment about, it is not in itself what enlightenment is.
Not at all.
When Yogani writes of enlightenment involving ecstasy, he's trying to give a general sense of how wonderful enlightenment is ... using one of the few terms that might serve to give limited mind any sense of what enlightenment might be like, in any way.
However, he wasn't referring to an unending state of ecstasy; enlightenment truly isn't about states .... and enlightenment isn't "ecstasy" in and of itself.
If ecstasy is even the correct term for the experiencing, it's a very subtle, whole experiencing of ecstasy ... the term "blended" or "integrated" feels kind of right.
The ecstasy that's an inherent part of the awareness-self-experiencing .... in-as what we're loosely calling enlightenment ... the living from the true nature of original awareness that's revealed when the dream of conceptual conditioning being real, or being the self, dissolves ... is very subtle, very peaceful ... and infinitely real, now.
Yet, it's probably not a word I would use at all ... though I get why Yogani did ... and it's certainly not inaccurate; I would be likely to describe the general sense maybe as bliss ... as in "ananda" ... sat-chid-ananda .... actuality-awareness-bliss ..... aka ecstasy.
No experience, quality or state is the same in enlightenment as it is when experienced as an object, by a sense-of-self ... because subject-object duality is no longer confused with actuality.
There's certainly the experiencing of "being a person, going about one's day" ... but there's not the confusion of thinking I *am* a person, any longer.
And so, there's not the "having" of ecstasy, nor the comparison with non-ecstasy, that there was in the "ideaverse" ... the dream of subject-object duality .... but there's a completion, a pleasantness ... a wholeness ... that even the most staggering ecstasy experienced in the ideaverse can't even begin to touch ..... because the ideaverse isn't real; experiences-as-objects aren't real.
Enlightenment (living from-as original awareness) experiences a full range of states and a full range of emotions; these things are part of the human experiencing .... there's simply no longer the constriction of attention around distorted, artificially limited thinking about those states and emotions which were a symptom of living a thinking-based dream, rather than living as awareness-illuminated presence, now.
Adyashanti focuses primarily on what enlightenment is like, and what it's about.
Yogani focuses primarily on the sets of activities that can get us to the living experience of enlightenment.
Both Yogani and Adyashanti are teaching these things from-as enlightenment.
Enlightenment itself continues to expand and unfold, but it is much less about specific levels than mind can think.
I agree that Tau Malachi does a very nice job of articulating what can be articulated about some of this (and I appreciate your inclusion of his teaching on this; I'll comment on that in a separate post) .... and he has repeatedly made the point that any experiences (further unfolding, new levels) at the level of supernal (thought-free) awareness, aka enlightenment ... really can't be communicated or understood, outside of living those experiences for oneself.
That's why it truly isn't pertinent to talk much about enlightenment, other than very generally ........ anyone not experiencing it can't understand it, and even if they could ... it still wouldn't be accurate, because it would be a conception or image of enlightenment ...... and conception and imagination is exactly what enlightenment is not.
"The tao which can be spoken of is not the tao" is not just a poetic or mysterious statement ... it's literally and actually true.
If something can be spoken of, it's part of the realm of words and images ... duality.
And so, just because Adyashanti doesn't emphasize the term or state of ecstasy doesn't mean that he's at a different "level" than Yogani; there really aren't different "levels" in enlightenment, as the mind can understand that term.
True nature is completion.
The union of the divine romance that Yogani speaks of kind of smooths everything out .... terms like ecstasy, bliss and peace don't even matter, in the actual experiencing of enlightenment/one awareness .... and the experiencing of them is wonderful, beyond imagination .... yet they are not at all as mind imagines them to be.
I can't say for sure that Adya has ever used the phrase "crappy day" ... that may have been my mis-remembering (though he may have; my point is: in enlightenment there aren't really "crappy days" ... that's a figure of speech).
There can be anger, for a moment ... there can be a series of events that limited mind would have resisted or disliked (for instance, the day I was physically very sick, which I described in rather graphic detail in a recent post to TI ).
However, anger is a reaction of the body-mind; awareness doesn't have anything to do with it, other than it experiences the anger ... but without the constriction of limited mind, emotions like anger pass very quickly.
Being very sick can be what happens; there's no sense of disliking, or wishing it was different; actual is actual .... resisting or disliking artificially creates a sense of suffering .... which shows how unreal those ego reactions truly are).
I hope this helps clarify why I have a sense that Adya and Yogani are not teaching from or about different "levels" in any way.
And please note: the rest of this post is directed to anyone / all reading, not primarily to Christi, only.
They're both teaching from and of enlightenment (as is Tau Malachi, by the way) and how to experience enlightenment ..... for enlightenment can only be experienced; it can't be understood ........ because enlightenment is living free from the subject-object-perception ideaverse in which understanding resides.
And to answer-in-advance the question-objection which often arises: yes, I do have a sense that Yogani, Adya and Tau Malachi are enlightened ... solely as intuition, yet intuition which is still comfortably here even though evaluation (and the former evaluator) are thankfully absent.
As much as some consider it "yogically-incorrect" (or even "yogically-inaccurate") to say .... this (the genuine enlightenment appearing as the three teachers named above) feels pertinent to mention .... because there's a lot of confused teaching out there ....... and they are three of the clear and authentically enlightened ones, and three of a small handful of teachers who helped (figure of speech-->) me .... know I'm home, too.
And in my experience, nothing that any of the three of them has ever said or written can steer you wrong ... and long as you look at where their words are pointing, in terms of what they can mean in your experiencing, and the experiencing their words can facilitate.
And there's a lot (in the teachings of all three of them ... Yogani, Adyashanti & Tau Malachi) that can not only potentially steer you "right" ... but can also steer you home.
And, like it always is when you get home ....... you'll recognize it when you get here.
I hope this is truly helpful .... wholeheartedly.
Peace, All.
Kirtanman
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
Wayne Wirs: Newly-Minted Enlightened Guy
Topic Locked
