Sign in to follow this  
cloud recluse

Enlightenment And Evolution

Recommended Posts

[split topic from John Chang Video - sean]

 

It's so simple. We can have a blast concocting elaborate rituals, learning to shoot qi balls, flying ... it could all even be part of our evolution. And Still there Is Silence the whole Way. Debating over a hierarchy of spiritual advancement is bizarre. There is no hierarchy. Evolution and progress are a function of time. What is Timeless? Nothing. Silence. And there is literally Nothing but Now. That's it. Now you are reading this. So this is That. Maybe you will be cooking later. That will be It. Completely and totally It. Maybe you will be in China with an extraordinary human being. That will be It. Up and down, moods change, your memories shift, round and round. What remains still? Can you see?

...

 

Sean

 

YES,YES,A THOUSAND TIMES YES !!! ( A bit arse-kissy on my part,bit its a most praiseworthy paragraph :lol: ).

 

Very gratifying to see a distinction between Enlightenment & Evolution!

 

Sean,would it be feasible to say that Enlightenment can facilitate any subsequent evolution by relieving our explorations of the burden of having to make our ego feel secure? We stop cramping everything that arises with our fear agenda,& get into lifes possibilities ( both 'mundane' & 'exotic') as an act of celebration,an embrace of life for its own sake.

 

Perhaps,while complex,'advanced' or even "Immortal" yogas may well unfold something miraculous,they are not in & of themselves Enlightenment? Or maybe that the less 'crampy' & rigid your ego,the easier it is to perform them?

 

We can evolve without Enlightenment,but Enlightenment frees up evolution dramatically? Or something along those lines?

 

Perhaps?

 

Regards,Cloud :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think being 'enlightened' before being 'evolved' will only lessen your chances at becoming 'evolved'... Because you would lack the desire, the motivation, the 'discipline' (of a sort,) that is necessary for grand evolution... evolution really may not have any meaning to an enlightened dude.

 

I usually think of 'enlightenment' and 'evolution' as being synonymous terms... but in this context you guys are using... 'enlightenment' sounds more like eternal contentment... which may require more mental determination, (if that's not a total paradox,) than 'evolution'....

 

you know, if I had to choose between being a powerful immortal, or being 'enlightened' (i.e. content,) I would choose immortality.

 

plato, or aristolte, maybe it was socrates.. it was one of 'em... said something along the lines of...

 

"It is better to be a genius discontent than a pig content."

 

FUCK I just wrote a long ass paragraph and somehow managed to delete it. oh well, lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think being 'enlightened' before being 'evolved' will only lessen your chances at becoming 'evolved'... Because you would lack the desire, the motivation, the 'discipline' (of a sort,) that is necessary for grand evolution... evolution really may not have any meaning to an enlightened dude..

.....

"It is better to be a genius discontent than a pig content."

 

 

I like your post here.This is good stuff,really looking at the definitions.

 

Personally,I think Evolution is the same as real living,"disciplined" evolution simply being in full contact with life,fully responding to life in whatever phase is currently presenting itself to you.Full Contact Living! This keeps our evolution bubbling along quite effectively,and to the ego it is a very demading & disciplined experience,as the ego always wants to bug out & hide in some comforting illusion.

 

And I see no reason why Evolution couldnt take us into the realm of an Immortal.We will only find out by trying.

So real,full blooded life would be the full embrace of an endless becoming,an open-ended experiment to do full justice to our potentials,& its not anything other than the life being presented to us now.

 

As to Enlightenment detracting from your evolutionary motivation,I dont think thats necessarily the case.

 

There could certainly be an awkward period of readjustment as your conventional motivations drop away.But then you would also have to deal with the exposure to awareness of all your resistances to Full Contact.Once your Enlightened,it ALL comes to the surface sooner or later,as your mechanism of avoidance has now been permanetly destabilised .It may attempt to reassert itself after Enlightenment,but its now irrevocably winding down ( this is one of the reasons why I like Adyashanti.He seems willing to address the challenges that come AFTER Enlightenment.)

 

So it would perhaps be a question of the quality of discipline you had established BEFORE Enlightenment,as to how well you will reintergrate the Evoultion-Life impulse AFTER Enlightenment.You will HAVE to intergrate it sooner or later,Enlightenment wont allow for anything else.

 

But to try & put it all in perspective,its self defeating to make Enlightenment itself a required goal (thats why I have reservations about Buddhism),as the the Passion for Enlightenment is something that emerges on its own timetable,not the ego's.

 

Meanwhile,the most rewarding trip is to get fully into Life,strive for evolutionary fun :P (Prior to Enlightenment,you will always be "striving" for something).

 

Go for Immortality,Siddhis,better social skills & a happier planet.It will keep you well occupied,And should the Passion for Enlightenment arise,you will have the skill base to reintergrate Life back into it more efficiently in the post-Enlightenment phase.

 

Regards,Cloud :)

Edited by cloud recluse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great subject, Enlightenment and Evolution! It's another angle on the ongoing Emptiness and Form conversation.

 

I think a distinction David Deida makes between what he calls Function, Flow and Glow is relevant here. Function is about getting healthy in mind, body, emotion and spirit for the sake of being relatively productive in the context you find yourself in. Flow is about polishing the dirt off of the lens of your form so that the Light of Formless can shine through. Glow is, basically, the ultimate reality of Enlightenment, that "you" is a story, all there is and ever was is pure Light.

 

These distinctions are useful on a few levels.

 

* They can be seen as stages in life, like Maslow's hierarchy of needs. First we must learn to Function - to walk, speak, read, write, hold a job, to operate in society. When we have our base, we can relax a bit and learn to Flow, to let Love and Art shine through us. Ultimately we are graced with Glow when we discover the reality of our True Nature through Awakening.

 

* They can be used to tease out the braid of various spiritual practices or approaches that are available in any moment. For example, therapy, healing, exercise tend to fall into Function. Yogic practices, inner alchemy and also true Art are Flow. And again, Glow is the timeless ever-present reality accessible through Grace alone; a happy accident that no technique can ensure. (Adyashanti tirelessly points to This.)

 

* An extension of this is to think of Function, Flow and Glow as independent lines of development. This can be useful to explain how various, sometimes strange and unexpected combinations of skillfullness can occur. For example, you can be a Yogic genius, and have Light just pouring through you into the world and be totally fucked up on a Functional level, even to the point of being a destructive personality --- this goes back to your Osho thread, and to your dilemna with deranged gurus in general. Same could apply to someone who has realized Glow. It's not a secret that Ramana Maharshi, one of the most brilliant examples of Glow in the last hundred years, was basically bathed and fed by his devotees. If he were born in America, without a support network like exists in India for dysfunctional sages, he might have become the local filthy, traumatized homeless man with the bright eyes sleeping under the bridge.

 

To tie this more directly into enlightenment and evolution, another way to look at Function, Flow and Glow is as representing the three major life orientations or spiritual thrusts:

 

Function is Pagan, unity with Earth, grounding, downward and horizontal consciousness. Flow is Transcendental, unity with Heaven, uplifting, upward and vertical consciousness. Glow is Nondual, the unity of Heaven and Earth, circular, spiralling, three dimensional consciousness, the unity of transcendental Emptiness and immanent Form, of Enlightenment and Evolution. This is where I believe the possibility of evolutionary enlightenment and incarnational nonduality exists. I have more thoughts on this but I have to rest for now. :)

 

 

Sean

 

References:

A Seminar on Sexual Yoga, with David Deida

Evolutionary Spirituality. Part 1. Incarnational Nonduality, with Andrew Cohen and Ken Wilber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The search ends with the realization that there is no such thing as enlightenment. By searching, you want to be free from the self, but whatever you are doing to free yourself from the self is the self. How can I make you understand this simple thing? There is no 'how'. If I tell you that, it will only add more momentum to that.... --U.G. Krishnamurti

 

Not that I necessarily believe UG is in any kind of "natural state" or even sane, but he is always fun to bring into a discussion like this. Google him if you don't know who he is. Don't read him for too long though or you'll start to lose your mind!

 

Anyway,

What is enlightenment in the first place? A destination? A state of mind? A state of no mind? Is it eternal bliss or just feeling real good? Can we possibly know without being there?

 

 

And evolution. What does it mean to be evolved? Does it mean you know where the salad fork goes? Does it mean we kill other things more often than they kill us? Does it man we fit our role in the worth more precisely? Does it mean we adapt to the natural environment successfully no matter the changes?

 

10 people would have 10 different answers on this definition.

I wonder if our tendency to define, categorize and conceptualize is a barrier to some sort of transcendence or "enlightenment".

 

Futility aside, here is what I imagine these things to mean:

I imagine an enlightened human being becomes a conduit between consciousness and creation itself transcending time, space, yin, yang, but at the same time able to participate in activities on the sensory plane. For what purpose? Dunno. Maybe to give the original creative force itself eyes, ears, nose, etc?

 

Evolution would be the process humans go through gradually, naturally achieving this role.

 

Thats what I'm hoping its all about. Of course I could easily be wrong. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting speculations over here...!

I am struck by the many catagorizations and differentiations that are being used to seperate the many aspects of becoming evolved or enlightened.

 

 

It seems to me that as a species we have been doing these things in tandum. As has been noted on other threads - societies in general have seen changes that allow both men & women from within our many races of people,- to operate on a par with each-other. This is not true in some societies, even those with a long history of the Habits of Civilization, but in general many prejudices have falling into the past. This strikes me as being part of both enlightenment and evolution. The races are now mixing gene pools as never before. We are bound to create more evolved people this way.

 

We are becoming enlightened as to how the universe works and this grants many of us spiritual growth as well. Our minds expand to take in the emmensity of the cosmos and we somehow relate ourselves to this expanding ever-changing mystical and glorious potentiality. Once related we are drawn into being part of it on many levels of consciousness and being. As we grow into our potentials all aspects eventually catch up with each-other and move on seperately or together as changes keep happening...

 

There seems to be a very natural process of GROWTH that is the nature of this worlds' nature and the larger cosmic order as well. Growth seems to be inevitable.

 

Individual goals are another matter. I do not believe we can will ourselves to enlightenment nor strive for it through meditation or qigong or any self-determined path. Any striving is counter-productive to enlightenment, which is in my humble understanding the loss of self into the larger world's being. A sort of giving up your self or -"that which dies" before you die- to acccept the whole of this universe as your "body"...To raise our consciousness to a level where all is one and you are just a part of it, yet still having a free will to comport yourself in this splendid swirl of being as best you can...

 

At least that's what I've gleaned so far. Evolution and enlightenment happen to us. We can make choices to allow these changes or thwart them, but change is here to stay. Entropy and gravity co-exist in an eligant dance on incredible levels of cosmic interplay. Within ourselves are forces just as emmence that we need to balance in order to move ahead WITH (what I see as) the natural trending towards enlightenment and evolution.

 

I for one believe evolution is the natural order of the universe and thus the Tao. Enlightenment is the self expanding into the great cosmic order of constant change to finally desolve into the environment each spirit lives in. With our own bodies being that which we are directly responsible for and the life around us being as much a part of that body as our original "shells" once were.

 

Thanks for the chance to think about this question!- Wayfarer

Edited by Wayfarer64

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I go for the stages of enlightenment model... There is no final destination, just paradigm shifts in our consciousnes... like the stages in life (think being a child and seeing the difference between yourself and your parents).

 

I think there are three stages to enlightenment... they seem to coordinate with the three tan tiens. The Taoist aproach is to work from the bottom up - cultivating the body, presence in the moment, centered, gracefull movement through the space of life.

 

The upper tan tien needs to stop controlling, projecting, grasping, attaching meanings and 'talking'. It needs to resolve polarities of our individual maps of reality.

 

The next step is at the heart (middle tan tien) this is achieved through interaction with others. Learning to be present and in the moment whilst relating to others - this is a very difficult process for most, it seems. It involves dropping away the fear of loving someone (anyone) completely, the dropping of the social facade (and thus revealing the parts of us we'r constantly, unconciously hiding from others) and feeling emotions fully - without editing or 'thinking about them or attaching meanings etc. By being present, in tune and in love with people, you learn to be those things with yourself...

 

The important thing to do now is to become as 'enlightened' as you're ready to be. This simply means living our life through all those three levels as best we can. The main task is to do the right thing from the right centre - move, direct, and 'function' from your belly - love, connect and feel from your heart - invent, reason, be creative from your head. In our society we give our over-worked and polluted head nearly all these tasks. Our bodies and emotions deal with our dark fears (because we tend to edit them and not let them in our head - so they settle in the heart and LTT). So we tend to behave unconciously since our bodies and emotions are acting out all the 'deleted scenes' of the head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What is enlightenment in the first place? A destination? A state of mind? A state of no mind? Is it eternal bliss or just feeling real good? Can we possibly know without being there?

And evolution. What does it mean to be evolved? Does it mean you know where the salad fork goes? Does it mean we kill other things more often than they kill us? Does it man we fit our role in the worth more precisely? Does it mean we adapt to the natural environment successfully no matter the changes?

 

 

I suppose for me Enlightenment HAS to be the Unqualified Nondual.I mean,if its going to be all its cracked up to be,it cant be a 'special state' that you get 'into'Its not an ego-cheering bliss,or any 'condition' that would be subject to passing.

It would have to be the dropping away of a fundamental error of perrception,the 'extinction' of a futile strategy that part of me has been desperately working at.We dont 'get' anything in Enlightenment,rather we 'lose' a burden,a self-defeating activity fuelled by missperception.

 

Enlightenment is freedom from a futile approach to whichever particular experience is arising at the moment,be it blissful or mundane.I stop trying to manipulate my experiences into ego-supporting forms,and consequently my perception of them clears up.

 

Its not a 'state' I can get into,but rather the result of letting go of a very silly-tragic habit.Further states will continue to arise & fall,but they will not be the source of Enlightenment.My nonconditional experience of them will be.

 

BIG difference here between the transitory state of Mystical Absorption Ecstasy ( not that theres ANYTHING wrong with that :lol::lol: ) & the existential openness of Enlightenment.

 

Of course,for this thread,now comes definitions of Evolution.Now its not Enlightenment,coz its all about transitory conditions.And in this context its not really the further evolution of the Human genome.Perhaps its really about the opportunities & responsibilities of personal 'growth' that genome evolution has thrown us into on an individual level?

 

So would it be better to frame the enquiry as Evolution (Self-Transcendance) & personal Growth (Self-Actualisation). Darebaks observation about salad forks & species competition is quite stimulating,and makes me uncertain about my habit of using the term 'Evolution' as a synonym for self-actualisation,a personal activity or yoga.

 

Regards,Cloud :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I think there are three stages to enlightenment... they seem to coordinate with the three tan tiens. The Taoist aproach is to work from the bottom up - cultivating the body, presence in the moment, centered, gracefull movement through the space of life.

 

... This simply means living our life through all those three levels as best we can. The main task is to do the right thing from the right centre - move, direct, and 'function' from your belly - love, connect and feel from your heart - invent, reason, be creative from your head...

Freeform,

I think what youve got here clearly illustrates the difference in our use of the term 'Enlightenment'.Though perhaps Im a bit hooked on being an "Orthodox Nondualist" ( does that make sense?).

 

Your description here is an excellent example of true living ,full living.Moving through those levels as best we can,being open & alive in them.Thats real life!

But this is where Im going to split some hairs :lol: Because its a you moving through a thing called life,its not necessarily IN ITSELF Enlightenment.Its Becoming,not Being.

 

Enlightenment would mean relaxing into & coming from the space "behind" all 3 Dan Tiens.Life is being able to skitter up & down the 'scale' of the dan Tiens as needed.Enlightenment has something to do with the thing that skitters.One can still be skittering up & down with a truly breathtaking grace,but still with the residual friction of the ego ,the 'drag' of the primary dualism.Enlightenment dissolves that drag,& you are now the uber-skitterer!!!

 

Thing is,you could relax into Enlightenment without much skitter-skills having been learnt beforehand,which may make it a bit tricky to re-engage your skitter-function.Or,you could get really hooked on the breadth of your skitter range,but still carry a nagging dissatisfaction coz you can only see skittering & nothing else,even thinking that skittering in itself is enlightenment.

 

Does my distinction here ring true in your experience?

 

Regards,Cloud :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I see what you're saying... (although you're very auditory - maybe I should say 'I hear what you're saying'? :) )

 

The three tan tiens are like strings on a beautiful instrument - and 'life' is playing on them skillfully and elegantly - creating a beautifull song, but what you're saying is that the deeper level is the actual 'playing' or even 'who is playing'.

 

I agree with you completely - my suggestion of living elegantly through all parts of yourself is for those of us who are on the path reaching deeper and deeper levels - eventually we'll get to the non-dual level...

 

In fact each tan tien has its own archetypal duality to resolve, as well as hundreds maybe thousands of personal dualities to resolve. The LTT has to resolve the duality between 'here' and 'there' - or basically space (I remember posting a technique that does this very quickly).... the heart has to resolve 'me' and 'other'.... and the head has to resolve 'past' and 'future'.

 

There are many more for each one that are also important - stillness and movement, inner and outer for ltt, giving and receiving for heart, aware and unaware for head etc.

 

So once all these dualities have been resolved, there will be nothing more... you could enter non-dual states at will... this is kind of how I see zen enlightenment. However I think Taoism has another, further step - wu wei. Effortless action... this is actually backtracking a bit, because you're required to get out of non-duality, back into the dual world and you navigate your life and achieve 'whatever', effortlessly and simply - this is living in true accord with nature. And it's actually like my suggestion of playing the instrument of your body (but at this level you play the instrument of the universe through your body).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I reckon that if, powers that be willing, any or all of us reach this "enlightenment" we will then know what it is or means. And not a moment sooner.

I'm sure we will all be shocked at how inaccurate and silly our concepts of enlightenment were.

If it is possible to be shocked in that state.

Yikes! A person could go bonkers thinking about the paradox inherent in the notion of "reaching" enlightenment.

Maybe thats what happened to U.G. !

Edited by darebak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cloud Recluse;

 

I have never considered a possible relationship between enlightenment

and evolution. If I look at enlightenment from the taoist viewpoint, I

envision it as reaching some sort of state of being where all questions

concerning the world outside drop away and I begin to live from the

inside, relegating the outside to smoke and mirrors. I might then say that

enlightenment is rebirth and that, as a thing among the myriad things,

I would begin the process of evolving once again.

If I look at evolution as the process of movement through time and

the accompanying changes to the things which comprise me, then I

can take the position that, at this moment in time, I am somewhere

on the path of evolution and that enlightment may be only a

transition in me which encompasses no knowing or understanding

and which is merely one of an infinite number of evolutionary changes

to which my components may be subjected.

 

michaeld

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If I look at enlightenment from the taoist viewpoint, I

envision it as reaching some sort of state of being where all questions

concerning the world outside drop away and I begin to live from the

inside, relegating the outside to smoke and mirrors. I might then say that

enlightenment is rebirth and that, as a thing among the myriad things,

I would begin the process of evolving once again.

......

 

michaeld

 

Michaeld,this may be where we have a differing perspective.

 

From my point of view,the outside world as 'smoke & mirrors' would simply be a phase of interiority.Such phases are necessary parts of Life & highly empowering,but still not Enlightenment per se.I think Daoism,as a historical circumstance in China,found itself emphasizing Interior phases in response to society,a necesary response on its part for what Lifes balance required at that time. But still too dualistic In ITSELF to be Enlightenment.

 

In the Non Dual,its ALL equally real/illusion.EVERYTHING is "Inside" yourself,ANYTHING you observe.Be it the conventional "Outside " side of Duality,the environment & society,or the "Inside" side of Duality-my somatic sensations,conceptual thoughts,subtle energies & Absorption-Bliss states.

 

Both sides are still in the glorious realm of Duality.There is still an ego-project wanting to slice one off from the other in order to create itself.Be it in the depths of material obsessions -"Outside"- or the heights of Mystic Ecstasy- "Inside"- its still the realm of Duality.The realm of Becoming,change,flow.events etc.All good & groovy stuff,"Eternity is in Love with the Productions of Time".

 

Enlightenment is to Know the Non Dual Identity,& thus drop the ego-slicing of your experience.Then you will groove even more,& perhaps there are certain Inside Yogas that remain exhaustingly Effortful until you are Enlightened,then they become effortless.And perhaps there are certain Outside lifepaths that are also immensely demanding,but then come together with no real "trying" on your part after Enlightenment.

 

The Dualistic realm of Becoming really changes ,both Inside & Outside,once its embraced from the Non-Dual.

Both Interiority & Exteriority are equally expressions of the Absolute.Prior to Enlightenment,they could be equally hijacked by the ego.

 

And now Im becoming preachy :(

 

Sorry about that Michaeld.

 

Anyhow,thats what Im on about. Do you think theres any validity in the idea that Interiority can ALSO be hijacked bt the ego-project? Its certainly my impression.

 

Regards,Cloud :)

Edited by cloud recluse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I reckon that if, powers that be willing, any or all of us reach this "enlightenment" we will then know what it is or means. And not a moment sooner.

I'm sure we will all be shocked at how inaccurate and silly our concepts of enlightenment were.

....

 

Yeah,there is that :D

 

But our "reaching" will always involve some conceptuality,so perhaps we can try & eliminate those concepts that are excessively "un-Enlightened",so that the inevitable concepts that remain wont actuallyget in the way of Enlightenment too much.Sort of "Enlightenment - freindly" concepts that push us off in the right direction,but fall away as our momentum increases ?

 

So we could look at a concept & say, "That will definetly impede Enlightenment" whereas another concept will serve a useful transitory function,with its own built-in self-destruct mechanism ,so to speak.The concept isnt "True" per se,but its not "Restrictive",or something like that.

 

I know this is all a bit vague,but I cant think of anything better right now :P

 

p.s.,have you looked at Mukunda Rao's bio of U.G.;THE OTHER SIDE OF BELIEF:INTERPRETING U.G.KRISHNAMURTI ??

Edited by cloud recluse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... the deeper level is the actual 'playing' or even 'who is playing'.

 

I agree with you completely - my suggestion of living elegantly through all parts of yourself is for those of us who are on the path reaching deeper and deeper levels - eventually we'll get to the non-dual level...

......

So once all these dualities have been resolved, there will be nothing more... you could enter non-dual states at will...

 

Freeform,heres where Im going to get really finicky again :D

 

From my understanding,admittedly VERY limited experience,and from those authorities that I have an intuitive trust for,I want to draw a distinction between Being & Becoming (Im using those terms VERY loosely & experimentally).

 

The non-dual isnt a level or state that we would ever eventually "arrive" at.Its the ever present condition of all states & stages.You could perhaps even actually exhaust the possibilties of ALL states & stages ,and still be sabotaging your perception of the Non Dual.

 

Now someone who has truly lived with the Elegance you have described so well,& has resolved many (If not all) of the dualities of Becoming,has a fairly unique opportunity.Having fulfilled all the major options,there is ,in a certain sense,"nothing left "but to turn their perception around 360 degrees & revision the entire undertaking.

 

BUT theres no guarantee,no matter to what degree the have exemplified the Elegant life,that they will have either the insight or the motivation to do this.

 

Nor is there any "Moral" reason why they should have to.

 

But should they choose/be driven to do so,to ask the 'Question Who/What Is Playing?',they will have,possibly,a far smoother reintergration of that non dual insight into becoming.Theyve prepared the bodymind for smooth flow through the elegance of their life.And so we arive at Wu Wei.

 

I suppose what Im trying to do here is prevent the necesary understanding of the Becoming of stages & states being inappropriately transferred to obscure the Always Allready presence of Being.

 

Enlightenment does NOT flow automatically as a new or deeper stage/state as a result of a linear sequence of Becoming.This could be a real trap .WE ARE coming "OUT" of the Non Dual RIGHT NOW,in every moment.Coming out of it,slicing it up so as to be less afraid of it,compulsively boxing it in.We are allready "There"!

 

But the Elegant Life WILL destabilise our pseudo certainties with the depth & intensity of its experiences.AS WELL AS prepare us to embody nondual insight better that a compulsive & narrow life.

 

THE ELEGANT LIFE UPSETS OUR CERTAINTY.Whether or not we thus gain insight into the Non Dual is another matter.

 

This is the distinction Im obseesed with,& I think it is helpful,in that we would lessen our burdening of life with the obligation to 'get' Enlightenment.We just revere life as shown by the elegance of our response to it,& AVOID making it a 'leadup' to Enlightenment.If we do that,Enlightenment will almost take care of itself.

 

Regards,Cloud :)

Edited by cloud recluse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For many years the Yi Jing keeps telling me I am already enlightened and I don't know it!?

 

So what kind of proof am I looking for? I can not accept this state of being as that which I wish to call enlightened. I want more. I search for more through meditation and long walks and celibacy and training and sharing love and reversing all the above processes and indulging my sensuality and taking drugs and reversing again and seeking teachers who I hope have mastered these changes and can impart their wisdom; and martial arts and writing books on the experiences and sonnets on the Yi Jing and trying to live a selfless life through political activities that put my very life in danger...

 

And then I take a rest. I stop seeking. I stop striving. I stop becoming and just let myself be. And just as I become a bum I find the Tao Bums! I no longer seek anything other than to enjoy my journey towards bliss as Sean has been telling me (via Joseph Campbell).

And maybe through all those stages I was enlightened and didn't know it because I was on the path of my Tao amid those activities and held a course thet offered the most potential to be the best person I can be. My life's path, which will never have a drop of perfection for me to see as such will have been nonetheless a perfect journey through the now. Becoming something new is inevitable for all life, as is our becoming dead.

 

How we go about this is the evolutionary process inherent to all life. We grow towrds the light as does almost all life - those giant worms in the deep ocean are just the white dot in the black expanse of oceanic being that lets us know there is always more to life than what we can even suspect!

Edited by Wayfarer64

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Anyhow,thats what Im on about. Do you think theres any validity in the idea that Interiority can ALSO be

hijacked bt the ego-project? Its certainly my impression."

 

 

Hi Cloud Recluse:

 

Yes, I do think that ego can be sufficiently powerful to wrest control of "Interiority?"

as well as other aspects of my psyche which are also sometimes weak, sometimes

strong. Motive , I think, plays a role in the contest between the diverse constructs

of personality as to who might be at the microphone at any given moment in time

and power is the coin of the realm as to who speaks and who doesn't.

 

Thanks for your very thoughtful response.

 

michaeld

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For many years the Yi Jing keeps telling me I am already enlightened and I don't know it!?

...

 

You lucky swine :lol: Yi Jing told me that I will have to work for everything (from the egoic point of view),& that I will never be the type of person swept away by grace!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So anyhow.

 

Evolution.Becoming.Form.

 

As far as I can figure,the human genome is pretty much set at the moment (sorry,no impending Master race stuff here :lol: ).Any kind of evolution from here on that is 'natural' ( no Cyborg stuff here either) would seem to be personal evolution,and then "social" evolution,though Im a bit wary of that concept.

 

This meanders my way back to the question of the Immortals.Could you engage in Immortal Yogas (whatever they may actually be) without being Enlightened? Could you wind up as some kind of Asura/Titan thingy ?While I imagine Enlightenment & Evolution to be 2 seperate things,does going onto certain esoteric stages of personal evoltion require Enlightenment beforehand ?

 

I have no frigging idea,but the Daoist image of the alchemical Immortal,as some kind of ideal ,has always appealed to my imagination.I mean,what are the theoretical limits to individual growth if you have a worldview where energy is more real than matter,& consciousness is more real than energy? :unsure:

 

What are the limits?

 

Regards,Cloud :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

Cloud I do like the way you think! Yes indeed there may be no limits to our evolving consciousness! And If Quantum theory proves to be correct -as I suspect it shall- then it is only our consciousness that is "real" in any meaningful way.

Thinking of you all blissfully aware in cyberspace- the tangible extension of the "quantum soup"...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

forgive my intrusion

but there is no elightenment

only the ending of ignorance

 

in the tao there is no room for striving

meditation, breathing, forms, all will help keep

the body healthy, but will never bring elightenment.

 

evolution, if thats what you want to call it,

is merely the endless creativity of a playful void.

 

peace,

paul

 

p.s. nice little story

a Zen master comes upon a student sitting in meditation, " why do you meditate?" he asks,

"to become a bhudda" the monk answers

whereupon the master picks up a rock and begins to polish it. "why are you polishing the rock?"

asks the monk. "to make a mirror" replies the master.

"but sir, no amount of polishing can turn a rock into a mirror!" the student exclaims.

" and no amount of sitting in meditation will make you a bhudda" the master states.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Father Paul,

I'm pretty new here also - but it seems that there is never any intrusion on the Bums, little decorum and plenty of gusto is the norm...enjoy!

Your insights are already meaningful and helpful. There is a palpable sense of striving here that may be ready to be discussed and understood better by us all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

evolution, if thats what you want to call it,

is merely the endless creativity of a playful void...

 

Bingo :lol: An endless creative play! And to be an endless play,it has to be relieved of the burden of making our ego feel better about itself,relived of the projections we smear it with & weigh it down with.

 

We fully unleash this creative play when our ignorance of its real satus,of its assumed 'use' to ego, ends.

 

Ignorance ends.Ego,the agenda born of Ignorance,ends.Play is fully unleashed,free of distortion.

 

One question though,why wouldnt this ending of ignorance be called "Enlightenment"? It would seem as good a term ( or as inadequate a term) as any.

 

Yes? No?

 

Regards,Cloud :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

One question though,why wouldnt this ending of ignorance be called "Enlightenment"? It would seem as good a term ( or as inadequate a term) as any.

 

Yes? No?

 

Regards,Cloud :)

 

 

if you still think of enlightenment as a thing to be attained

you can name it anything

 

but the ending of ignorance is not the beginning of enlightenment,

there is no such thing.

Edited by fatherpaul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this