The nature of enlightenment

In light of all the individuals on this forum that have been claiming enlightenment lately, I'd like to start a thread about the exact nature of enlightenment with the intention to dispel misconceptions and establish greater understanding.

I will first preface this by saying that for the purposes of this post I will speak in definitive, authoritative terms as a matter of convenience. I am not claiming to be an absolute authority on this matter (yet ) but I do believe that I have insights that may help to provide a sense of perspective on a subject that is notorious for its ambiguity and abstractness.

First of all, enlightenment is a fixed state that's characterized by many things, but I will begin by naming a few of its principal traits: transcendence of separative identity and direct realization of the interconnectedness of all life. Detachment from the mental internal dialogue and capacity to transcend all thought at will. Transcendence of the subject/object paradigm that characterizes ego identification (transcendence of duality). A psyche purged of all reactive emotions, positive and negative (e.g. emotions based on attachments to external conditions: anger, frustration, infatuation, lust, jealousy, escapist bliss, etc. etc.) A consciousness that manifests from a state of infinite love and awareness.

If an individual does not exhibit at least these above characteristics, then they have not attained enlightenment.

This having been established, there exists a continuum of consciousness that one must ascend prior to the attainment of enlightenment. Attempting to pinpoint the exact qualities of this continuum is futile, because it has as many manifestations as there are vessels (individuals) to act as conduits for these states of consciousness (a potentially limitless amount). Personality "alpha" may behave in a completely different way than personality "delta" though they may both be experiencing a similar vibratory rate (this is just a hypothetical example intended to illustrate the point.)

Enlightenment is about total integration of one's physical existence with one's spiritual existence. Many spiritual seekers have succumbed to the temptation to interpret a fleeting glimpse of their true nature as the pinnacle of consciousness. It is this state of being that produces the false gurus and spiritual charlatans that have abounded throughout the 20th century. Some examples of these people: Frederick Lenz (Swami Rama), Osho (Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh), and Prem Rawat (Maharaji). These individuals have all exploited their positions of spiritual authority for the purposes of personal gain in one way or another. It is also the aforementioned state that produces the fragmentation of consciousness that allows some individuals to unjustifiably claim enlightenment (some of these individuals have been somewhat outspoken on these forums as of late).

On the other end of the spectrum there exists what one might call "spiritual teachers" (as opposed to gurus), people who wouldn't necessarily claim enlightenment but by definition teach diluted versions of spiritual principles. These people can only uplift the consciousness of others up until a certain point, but are incapable of acting as a catalyst for the ultimate realization, simply because they themselves remain unrealized. Some examples of these people: Wayne Dyer, Deepak Chopra, and Ram Dass. As long as it has been established, either by the teacher him/herself or the spiritual aspirant, that the teachings have been diluted by the remnants of ego-identification, these people can be beneficial -- but again, only up to a point.

The upliftment of consciousness is paradoxically both a prerequisite for enlightenment and an illusion that's dispelled by its attainment.

To understand the nature of enlightenment in a broader sense, one must understand the distinction between enlightened consciousness (as has already been described) and the vessel that acts as a conduit for this consciousness. Again, this is a subject best approached through generalizations as opposed to intense scutinization of particular cases, because otherwise the issue becomes unreasonably complex. The vessel must be moulded and tempered in order to accomodate enlightened consciousness. The upliftment of consciousness encompasses all aspects of our beings, including the physical level. The state of ego-identification is equivalent to the state of association with the vessel without awareness of the consciousness that sustains it. Because there are a vast multitude of vessels, enlightened consciousness can manifest in an equally vast number of ways. The path towards enlightenment that the spiritual aspirant in question resonates with is determined by the nature of her/his vessel. Some gravitate towards devotional paths (e.g. authentic Christianity or Islam, Bhakti yoga), some towards energetic (e.g. the chakra system or the new age modalities), and still others towards paths that emphasize practical applications of spiritual principles through disciplinary practices (e.g. Zen Buddhism, certain yogic branches).

If there remains any doubt that one's degree of realization fails to encompass the qualities of enlightened consciousness mentioned above, then one must reassess their relationship to their internal experiences. Self-deception, grandiosity, and spiritually induced megalomania do not help to facilitate the upliftment of consciousness, and must be transcended prior to the legitimate realization of one's true nature.

Any questions or comments regarding any of the above, or for that matter anything pertaining to the nature of enlightenment in general, are both welcome and encouraged.

Travis

 

Not that the aforementioned principles are not rational, but who are we to define enlightenment?

 

This is a common mentality within spiritually-oriented communities, and it certainly isn't without merit given the experiential and enigmatic nature of enlightenment and its pursuit. However, we as ego-bound beings have not been relegated to a proverbial dark room without means of orientation. We have our intuition and perceptual faculties, and not only are we allowed to use them, we're encouraged to.

Like I alluded to in my preface, the knowledge that I'm attempting to convey isn't intended to be interpreted concretely or definitively. Incorporate it into your conceptual framework if it strikes you as being relevant or approach it with a receptive mentality in order to allow your intuition to guide you. Just know that the utilization of one's discerning faculties, when liberated from presumption and dogmatism of course, is a completely legitimate aspect of spiritual growth.

Travis

 

From my own observation, enlightenment is not like an on/off switch. There are degrees of enlightenment. It is an ever expanding awareness that is never static.

Every day is a different day. And every day I am different because of it.

When life sparkles, like it used to when you were a child, it's because you are once again alive with awareness.

The world is brand new. And it reveals itself in intricate detail. In a way most people cannot see yet.

How well you can tell other people of this talent and not get yourself killed is another matter. If you grew up in a blind school, and woke up one day to see the world brand new, how are you going to tell your classmates? They will call you an SOB and a liar. Not because you are one, but because they can't see what you see.

So enlightenment also travels with a companion called compassion. You see others struggle and you feel the need to help them along.



x

 

can the ego fake it's own death?

thus leading you to believe you have transcended it when in fact it's still there?

 

This whole "gradations of enlightenment" belief is one of the beliefs about the nature of enlightenment that I feel is a misconception.

One must make a distinction between enlightenment and higher consciousness. My personal sense is that enlightenment is exactly like an on/off switch. From my perspective, what you are referring to Xexon is the continuum of consciousness that one experiences as their ego-identification is dissipated and their awareness begins to expand in order to accomodate the realization of their true nature, which is a process that manifests through an experience of gradation. This is why I feel it is critical to specify certain manifestations of enlightened consciousness. Can one be partially transcendent of separative identity? Can one truly realize infinity for a finite period? These are contradictions in terms.

Ultimately, though it may be unpalatable to our post-modern, relativistic sensibilities, you're either enlightened or you're not.

Travis

 

Yes, in my experience this is exactly what happens to guru figures who succumb to their manipulative and/or megalomaniacal tendencies and exploit their followers for the purposes of gratifying their ego or physical senses, or for monetary gain. They have deceived themselves, and for a short period they have the capacity to deceive others as well. The outcome of such a scenario is nearly always tragic for both the guru and the followers.

The only remedy for this condition is a commitment to humility and impeccability while walking the path, thus minimizing the possibility for this type of mental self-deception.

Travis

 

I think I may be too silly to ever be enlightenend.

 

What makes you say that?

Remember, "the meek shall inherit the earth".

Travis

 

haha I dunno. I tend to laugh at things that others' take so seriously. Like enlightenment. Yeah I believe it's possible and Im all for transcendance, but people's attitudes toward it are particularly intense. That's just not how I float through life.

I would like to start walking down this path though. I have no clue where to begin though.

 

I'd say an ability to take intense and mystical phenomena lightly is a strength, not a weakness. It's exactly the type of mentality that allows one to maintain a sense of sobriety and perspective in the midst of phenomena that could otherwise act as egoic entrapments (the ego has a way of taking itself quite seriously ).

I find your openness and unassuming qualities admirable -- they make you a good candidate for the pursuit of an authentic spiritual path as far as I'm concerned.

As far as how to begin however -- that may be beyond my capacity to influence. I can only tell you how I began: by reading books, many books from all different spiritual backgrounds. This provided me with inspiration and the conceptual framework necessary to navigate during the path's initial phases.

Travis

 

are there some specific books that you would recommend?

 

Geez, don't get me started.

Ok, here are some essentials:

Autobiography of a Yogi by Paramahansa Yogananda
The Power of Now by Eckhart Tolle
The Three Pillars of Zen by Roshi Philip Kapleau
Wheels of Life: A User's Guide to the Chakra System by Anodea Judith
Astrology: A Cosmic Science by Isabel M. Hickey
A Course in Miracles by The Foundation for Inner Peace
Talks with Ramana Maharshi by Robert Powell
No Time for Karma by Paxton Robey (free e-book)
Journey to Ixtlan by Carlos Casteneda (or any of the Don Juan Matus series)
The Four Agreements by Don Miguel Ruiz
Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind by Shunryu Suzuki
The Prophet by Khalil Gibran
Siddhartha by Herman Hesse
What The Buddha Taught by Walpola Rahula

And of course:

The Bhagavad-Gita
The Tao te Ching
The Bible
The Qu'ran
The Suttas and the Dhammapada

Travis

 

lol ok.

that could take a little while lol.

thanks for the list though!

 

Yeah, sorry, that was a lot of recommendations all at once wasn't it.

If I had to pick three to begin with:

Autobiography of a Yogi
The Power of Now
A Course in Miracles

Travis

 

Hands down the best book I've ever read. Have you by chance checked out his version of the Gita or his book on Christ Consciousness?
Namaste

 

Joshua, enlightenment may or may not be many things with many difficult obstacles to overcome. As long as you realize God and Her work to be equal, I feel that it doesnt matter at all what you become. Im one of the silliest mother fuckers out there, and could care less about religion and self denial no matter what the outcome. What works for you is what works, period.
Namaste

 

This explains my situation the best.

I think I do very well working behind the scenes.

I don't know why, but I have a feeling you made this thread in response to me Travis. Is this true?

 

God and Her work?

When did you find out?

 

You amongst others, yes.

Travis