Enlightenment Redux

[Gonzo]

Enlightenment Redux

The notion of enlightenment has once again come up. I think this is because once again I have come full circle, passing through spiritual and philosophical notions and returning to essential Zen.

When I first encountered Zen over 30 years ago, I took notes, and did the same from Castaneda's works later, as well as from "Illusions". Those notes I've maintained in the front part of my notebook which comprised my hand written journal prior to having a PC available for daily writing. The notes are now yellowed with age and all have had three hole reinforcements applied, some stained with by coffee or beer.

In the thread on "change" I posted one of those Zen excerpts from long ago, which now seems finally to have really come home to roost. The essential comment was, "...in reality there is no such thing as awakening. In the end, the notion of awakening turns around and deludes people."

The comment has to do with the notion of enlightenment. The interesting thing about essential Zen is that it openly states several things that are confounding. First, it denies there is any such thing as Zen. Second, it states flatly that meditation will not make a Buddha of anyone. Then it says there is no such thing as awakening. What it does not say is why people become enamored of any of these things, why especially the notion of enlightenment grabs hold of them and won't let go.

What I find further of interest is that even though several threads have explored the notion of enlightenment, and even though it has been a frequent topic on chat, no one yet has adequately defined it, nor have those who claim to have experienced it been able to describe it. Jed McKenna states flately he has achieved it, yet nowhere in his books does he say really what enlightenment is.

There is, of course, the usual excuse that true enlightenment is a state of being that is beyond words, and further, that if you have experienced it, you know it and as well, recognize those few others who also have achieved it.

What has become curious to me is twofold, the first being my own notion, the second being a notion Kim has brought up several times and to my knowledge has never been dealt with nor discussed.

My notion: why does anyone seek enlightenment? In its most basic guise, enlightenment represents a "better" way of being. If that is true, that implies a judgement has been made that the known, or current way of being is not good enough and requires fixing, or upgrading, or making better. It seems to me this is the essential reason for the existence of psycho-therapy...that is, a person has come to the conclusion there is something wrong with themselves and repairs are required. In effect, the teachings of Don Juan could be looked at as sort of advanced psycho-therapy. Truly, the business of recapitulation is exactly that. In my opinion, learning about the programs of society, consensus reality, etc, is really a matter of maturity, and is not related to becoming an enlightened being. The same is true in re learning about the energy body and how to manipulate it, and in re other "advanced" achievements, such as "seeing", "heightened awareness", et al. Enlightenment, perhaps, is the culmination of all those things.

Kim's notion, or question: does achieving enlightenment have any impact on a potential afterlife? If so, what? If not, why bother?

[Affinity]

I've shared this quote with you before... seems fitting to include it in this thread.

"The what is is what you are, not what you would like to be; it is not the ideal because the ideal is factious, but it is actually what you are doing, thinking, and feeling from moment to moment. What is is the actual, and to understand the actual requires awareness, a very alert, swift mind." - J. Krishnamurti

[Gonzo]

I've shared this quote with you before... seems fitting to include it in this thread.

"The what is is what you are, not what you would like to be; it is not the ideal because the ideal is factious, but it is actually what you are doing, thinking, and feeling from moment to moment. What is is the actual, and to understand the actual requires awareness, a very alert, swift mind." - J. Krishnamurti

True. You have. And I agree, with the exception of the last line, that saying what is required is a very alert, swift mind.

[Affinity]

I've shared this quote with you before... seems fitting to include it in this thread.

"The what is is what you are, not what you would like to be; it is not the ideal because the ideal is factious, but it is actually what you are doing, thinking, and feeling from moment to moment. What is is the actual, and to understand the actual requires awareness, a very alert, swift mind." - J. Krishnamurti

True. You have. And I agree, with the exception of the last line, that saying what is required is a very alert, swift mind.

"to understand the actual requires awareness, a very alert, swift mind."

What are you talking about you disagree with the last part? Just look how long it's taken you to "understand the actual". Real alert, real swift there Gonzo.

[Gonzo]

I've shared this quote with you before... seems fitting to include it in this thread.

"The what is is what you are, not what you would like to be; it is not the ideal because the ideal is factious, but it is actually what you are doing, thinking, and feeling from moment to moment. What is is the actual, and to understand the actual requires awareness, a very alert, swift mind." - J. Krishnamurti

True. You have. And I agree, with the exception of the last line, that saying what is required is a very alert, swift mind.

"to understand the actual requires awareness, a very alert, swift mind."

What are you talking about you disagree with the last part? Just look how long it's taken you to "understand the actual". Real alert, real swift there Gonzo.

heh - I guess that's just proof of what I said.

[Affinity]

What I meant was that it's taken you a long time to finally become alert and swift. So congratulations!

[Gonzo]

Let's see if I can clarify...heh. Here's the essence of JK's statement:

"The what is is what you are, not what you would like to be; it is not the ideal because the ideal is factious, but it is actually what you are doing, thinking, and feeling from moment to moment.

What I said was, that it didn't take a swift mind to realize this, since I finally realized it, taking some time to do so. Therefore, proof of what I said, that I disagree with his last sentence about being alert and swift.

[Affinity]

Let's see if I can clarify...heh. Here's the essence of JK's statement:

"The what is is what you are, not what you would like to be; it is not the ideal because the ideal is factious, but it is actually what you are doing, thinking, and feeling from moment to moment.

What I said was, that it didn't take a swift mind to realize this, since I finally realized it, taking some time to do so. Therefore, proof of what I said, that I disagree with his last sentence about being alert and swift.

My point is that you finally had to become alert and swift to "get it". Without achieving that level of swiftness you would still not get it no matter how long you pondered it. Your mind is finally alert and swift, after all... just look how clever you're being.

[Affinity]

What is enlightenment?

Coming to understand, coming to realize that you are not the body. you are the light within, not the lamp, but the flame. you are neither body nor mind. Mind belongs to the body, mind is not beyond body, it is part of the body. Minds is also atomic, as body is atomic.

You are neither body nor the mind - then you come to know who you are. And to know who you are is enlightenment.....

Enlightened means you have realized who you are.

[Gonzo]

What is enlightenment?

Coming to understand, coming to realize that you are not the body. you are the light within, not the lamp, but the flame. you are neither body nor mind. Mind belongs to the body, mind is not beyond body, it is part of the body. Minds is also atomic, as body is atomic.

You are neither body nor the mind - then you come to know who you are. And to know who you are is enlightenment.....

Enlightened means you have realized who you are.

Coupla things. First, there is the implication within McKenna's works that the enlightened state is much more than coming to know who you are. The same implication is within Japanese Zen literature, the requirement to experience satori and so on.

My effort here has been to say, as I believe essential Zen says, there is no such thing as enlightenment, that those who have come to believe there is, and further have opted to seek it, are not only on a snipe hunt, they are so because they were convinced they could become better or more than they are.

[Affinity]

the Buddha said, "Those who are unawakened grasp their thoughts and feelings, their body, their perceptions and consciousness, and take them as solid, separate from the rest. Those who are awakened have the same thoughts and feelings, perceptions, body, and consciousness, but they are not grasped, not held, not taken as oneself."

[Gonzo]

the Buddha said, "Those who are unawakened grasp their thoughts and feelings, their body, their perceptions and consciousness, and take them as solid, separate from the rest. Those who are awakened have the same thoughts and feelings, perceptions, body, and consciousness, but they are not grasped, not held, not taken as oneself."

He also said, "We are what we think" and that has many implications. And regardless what he said, I still reference the quote from Zen I posted earlier that stated that there is no such thing as awakening, that the notion turns around and deludes people. It's therefore conceivable the Buddha himself was deluded.

There's another option as well, and I believe a similar thing exists within essential Christianity, and that is that these concepts are provided for the children, rather like the Ten Commandments.

[Gonzo]

Maybe this gets closer, from chat yesterday

Gonzo[2:47:51 PM]: I think we seek enlightenment because in our guts we know being in human form is not our real natural state of being
Gonzo[2:48:27 PM]: enlightenment is a state of being that is exalted, free, powerful, aware, awake, open, vulnerable, able
Gonzo[2:48:30 PM]: fearless
Gonzo[2:48:51 PM]: which is our natural state, but we cannot be like that in human form, yet we ache for it
Gonzo[2:49:15 PM]: as to life after death....fuck yeah
Gonzo[2:49:28 PM]: if not, you won't have awareness to know not
Gonzo[2:50:06 PM]: Richard Bach in "Illusions" nailed it, when he said we are the otters of the universe

[Red Heart]

Welcome!
Love the line about cosmic schmucks...

[Zamurito]

~

So toss 'enlightenment' out the window and seek evolution.

"Uh, let's see, is enlightenment a natural evolutionary step?"

"Oh, that's a good one. The answer is no. If anything, enlightenment is evolution derailed. I mean, I take the question to mean evolution of a reincarnating individual or an evolving species, but the answer is the same either way. Evolution is about change and enlightenment is about truth, which is unchanging. Evolution takes place in a larger context than day-to-day existence, but it's still encased within a dualistic context. In other words, evolution, growth, development, change, whatever, are all parts of the dramatic event of dualistic being. Enlightenment isn't."

"But wait," injects Mark, "is enlightenment the end of the evolutionary line?"

"It's an amusing question. Will I myself experience growth beyond truth-realization in this life? No. Will I reincarnate back into an ignorant state, which is to say, will unseen forces put me back to sleep? No. The question assumes the existence of a differentiated true self, like a separate entity, and uh, that wouldn't be an accurate assumption. Differentiated and true are mutually exclusive."

"Then who are we talking to?"

"You mean Jed McKenna? I have no idea. A character in a dream."

"You're enlightened and you don't know who you are?"

"Can't know, doesn't matter, don't care. You're talking about reconciling the dream state with reality, like it all has to add up.

Everyone seems to get hooked on that, but you can't do it. Truth and non-truth are irreconcilable. Truth is, non-truth isn't. The false is purely an apparition; it exists only in the eye of the beholder. True and false aren't opposites; they're not like the black and white of the yin-yang symbol. There is no true self and the false self is irrelevant. We can't insist on a truth that makes sense in light of what we know because we don't know anything. Again, differentiated and true are mutually exclusive, not two halves of the whole."