What are your tradition's safeguards against self-delusion or being deluded by others?

[dwai]

2 hours ago, Wilhelm said:

Thank you!  That sounds quite similar to the definition from Swami Sarvapriyananda's video here (which, incidentally, I may have watched based on a reccomendation you gave in another thread).  My question is - how do you differentiate between spiritual attainment and mundane charisma?  I am definitely not at the same place you are in terms of spiritual progression, but I could say I've felt uplifted and 'taken in' by people with a range of motives (even one insurance salesman!), and probably some less-than-savoury cults of personality are able to draw well-meaning people in this way.  Does this method have prerequisites?

Good question. If you are sensitive (ie have the ability to discern between different energetic qualities), you can sense what kind of energy an individual is generating.
 

A very good thing would be to be around people who have a lot of “satva”. What is satva? It is spiritual clarity. There is a serenity, and joyfulness that will make you feel that way around them. An example would be Amma or Mata Amritanandamayi. This is opposed to “Rajas”, which is a very active, kinetic kind of energy. Some people have that — one example would be sadhguru jaggi vasudev. That’s not to say that both these teachers don’t have spiritual clarity, but I prefer the satvic kind. 

 

Other than that, I look at the people around them. If a majority are acting like mindless,  fawning sycophants, I will stay away. I got away from the art of living movement because of that, and it’s predominantly why I stay away from “rockstar” teachers beyond a occasional visit (the teachers such as Amma and Sadhguru are great imho)  — it is almost impossible to get into their inner circle, as the people who control access to them will almost never let you get close enough to have a 1x1 conversation with the teachers. I like to have a close and personal relationship with my teacher — and was lucky enough to find two who have helped me over the years.

 

WRT the pre-requisites(and I’ve posted about this here earlier too) — the traditional guidelines on these are as follows — 

https://sriramanamaharishi.com/my_keywords/sadhana-chatushtaya/

 

These are “qualifications” one must develop before/during the study of Advaita Vedanta. A good gauge for a seeker, is the intensity of their thirst for liberation (or to know). The stronger the thirst, the more prepared we are. At one point, it seems like “everything else is inconsequential — I have to know, I have to find out, even if it is the last thing I ever do”...

 

As far as whether one can be deluding themselves vs objective signs in terms of Self-realization, here are some more thoughts :

• Self-realization is self-evident. There is no need for external validation. What is needed is total self-honesty and the courage to self-assess -- this goes hand in hand with the qualifications listed above. 
• What can be validated in the self-inquiry based path is the level of understanding a practitioner has. This is done in one of several ways -
  • Do the realizations/understandings (there will be many mini ones, which arise as "a-ha! that is what x, y or z means" -- zen Buddhism calls this kensho) correspond to what is outlined in the traditional texts? 
  • When discussing the understanding/mini-realizations with someone with authority (a recognized expert in the field, need not be famous), do they agree with what you (the practitioner) have to say?
• There is more-or-less complete cessation of fear (compulsive or otherwise)
• A deep sense of serenity and acceptance arises 
• There is an expansion in terms of the identity (no longer bound by "me and mine" type mentality)
  • A deep level of generosity arises 
  • Deep compassion arises 

 

Basically, when we know, we know. There is not an iota of doubt anymore about the nature of reality or Self. The earlier questions/doubts that arise during the process of inquiry are resolved. Advaita Vedanta (and in general the Wisdom paths) tend to be Self-evident and our own mundane lives will be transformed as a result thereof. There are two distinct stages in the switch from seeker to "adept" (though I balk at the word, I can't find a more appropriate one in english here, in sanskrit/indian languages we would use the word 'jñānī') --

• Brahmavid -- One who has had a direct and irreversible realization of their True Nature
• jivanamukta -- One who is liberated while embodied

 

Sometimes, there is no gap between being a brahmavid and jivanamukta. But most often, it is a process of what is called "vasanakshaya" or erosion of the habitual patterns of the mind which arise from karmic influences, specifically the activated karmic fruits which produce the present physical manifestation. Why that happens is dependent on whether the proper preparatory work has been completed or not. For someone who has already completed the preparatory work, there is virtually no gap between brahmajnana/tattvajnana and jivanamukti. -- and they are called "krtopāsaka. For most, especially in the modern world, it is the second category, that of an "akrtopāsaka", who has not yet completed all the preparatory work. Such people might experience what is called "viparita bhāvana"  (contrary tendencies), and they won't enjoy the complete fruit of embodied-realization until the point that they do. If they don't, upon the dropping of the physical body, they are liberated (videha mukti). 

 

The book that is considered to contain the highest teachings of the Advaita Vedanta tradition -- The Ashtavakra Gita states that "One who knows that they are liberated, are liberated. One who considers that they are in bondage, are in bondage". 

 

No extraordinary siddhis are necessary or required for Self-realization. I'm not just saying these things -- it is the traditional view. That being said, many of the realized masters were also great yoga/tantra siddhas, and hence had yogic siddhis (such as omniscience, ability to bi-locate,  etc etc). Yogic Siddhis and Self-realization, are un-related. One could have many Yogic siddhis, and yet not have Self-realization. One could be Self-realized, and not have any Yogic Siddhis. 

 

Edited January 5, 2021 by dwai
adding more context

[Paradoxal]

42 minutes ago, Wilhelm said:

This seems reasonable to me.  Was it your experience that these gut feelings always came through clearly?  If so, then I think you had a 'clearer' gut than me!  Many times I thought I was going with my 'gut', but it was just my brain tricking me into believing it again!  After lots of work, I might be able to partially rely on this method 

 

I had trouble trusting in my gut initially as well. Before getting into constant samadhi, it can be quite challenging to fully "get" what your gut howls about. One way that I used to train it was something I found in a book called "DIY Magic". It's a small trick, and it goes as follows: 

Carry a coin at all times in your pocket. Whenever you have a decision to make, take the coin out of your pocket and flip the coin. Decide what decisions go with heads and tails. Catch the coin, and avoid looking at where it landed. Put it back into your pocket, and divine which side it landed on. Follow through with whichever side it landed on in your divination (guess or visualization works best). 

 

This method takes the need to think out of the equation, which gets you better at understanding *how* a gut feeling feels. Eventually, you won't need a physical coin for the same results, and can visualize flipping a coin to get your answer. Afterwards, the answer will come naturally without flipping a coin.

 

The other methods I can recommend are to simply practice making decisions with your gut (without thinking about them) to eventually learn to trust your gut, or learn to enter samadhi (though, this is quite a tall order!). When your mind is silent, your gut shines through quite nicely.

 

The thing that eventually convinced me to stop making decisions with my mind was when my gut screamed at me for over a week to take an extended break off work. I was tempted to not come in, or just quit my job entirely due to this feeling. Eventually, I made a decision mentally and asked the boss for a week off. He granted me it off, but still had me work a week ahead of time. On my last day in that last week, not even an hour into the job, I was hit by a speeding driver. Insurance refused to cover and it turned into a huge deal. If I had listened to my gut, I wouldn't have even been there to be hit by said driver!

[Maddie]

45 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

I´m sure there are lots of good reasons to keep your story of meeting a fully enlightened person to yourself.  The potential for "boring" us is not one of them.  That seems very unlikely. 

 

Luke, I don't actually know where you're from but you give the best smackdowns in what I perceive to be British style. I visualize you doing a cut down in the Queens English and then saying "good day to you sir" before you turn around abruptly to walk off. ☺️

Edited January 5, 2021 by dmattwads

[freeform]

26 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

I´m sure there are lots of good reasons to keep your story of meeting a fully enlightened person to yourself.

 

Yeah - the issue for me is that I'd like to pass on just how shockingly different someone who's truly enlightened is to a normal or even an awakened person... and that's difficult without a personal story - because it just sounds ridiculous and nebulous...

 

Like I've said before - an enlightened being (hard to call them a 'person' at that stage) is effectively omniscient and omnipotent... what the hell does that even mean? How could you know that?

 

But then this is a public forum - and just as you wouldn't want to pass around a priceless manuscript to everyone at the bar to have a leaf through... it's probably not something to share online.

[liminal_luke]

3 minutes ago, freeform said:

 

But then this is a public forum - and just as you wouldn't want to pass around a priceless manuscript to everyone at the bar to have a leaf through... it's probably not something to share online.

 

Agreed, one hundred percent.  

[ilumairen]

41 minutes ago, dwai said:

A good gauge for a seeker, is the intensity of their thirst for liberation (or to know). The stronger the thirst, the more prepared we are. At one point, it seems like “everything else is inconsequential — I have to know, I have to find out, even if it is the last thing I ever do”...

Personal side tangent:

 

What if there is little to no “thirst for liberation,” but a deep curiosity (thirst “to know”)?

[ilumairen]

To the original question:

 

Paraphrased: “If you’re still here; you still have work to do.” 
 

~ Spoken by Marcy Vaughn in relation to “enlightenment experiences.”

[dwai]

24 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

Personal side tangent:

 

What if there is little to no “thirst for liberation,” but a deep curiosity (thirst “to know”)?

That’s a precursor imho. Intellectual curiosity is a good first step, but it is the driving thirst for liberation that separates the dilettantes from the serious practitioners. 

[Maddie]

This raises the question. Which figures throughout history seem the most likely to be enlightened?

 

Bill Brodhi I think says that master Nan said that Confucius was enlightened along with Lao Tzu and Gotoma. 

 I've pondered if Jesus was fully enlightened but there seem to be times that he lost his temper so that would seem to indicate he was not fully enlightened, though I think a steam winner or once returner is still capable of getting angry (though less so than the average person).

One contemporary person that I wonder if they might be enlightened is Eckhart Tolle.

 

One thing that makes me suspicious when someone claims to be enlightened says there is no test is the fact that the Buddha gave all kinds of criteria for knowing if someone is enlightened.

Edited January 5, 2021 by dmattwads

[Sketch]

14 minutes ago, dmattwads said:

This raises the question. Which figures throughout history seem the most likely to be enlightened?

 

Bill Brodhi I think says that master Nan said that Confucius was enlightened along with Lao Tzu and Gotoma. 

 I've pondered if Jesus was fully enlightened but there seem to be times that he lost his temper so that would seem to indicate he was not fully enlightened, though I think a steam winner or once returner is still capable of getting angry (though less so than the average person).

One contemporary person that I wonder if they might be enlightened is Eckhart Tolle.

 

One thing that makes me suspicious when someone claims to be enlightened says there is no test is the fact that the Buddha gave all kinds of criteria for knowing if someone is enlightened.

These are all figures used as representations of desirable states and achievements.  So...all of them.  

 

 

Edited January 5, 2021 by Sketch

[Maddie]

1 minute ago, Sketch said:

These are all figures used as representations of desirable states and achievements.  So...all of them.  

 

 

Yes but desirable states and achievements are not automatically the same thing as enlightenment. Being kind is a desirable action, but it does not mean that every person that is kind is enlightened.  

[Sketch]

There's no way to know the people

These idealized figures are based on.

 

As idealized figures, they are representations of the things they are used

To represent, with all of the super powers and prophesied things

They are depicted with.

 

The inside is a mystery 

The outside is a different mystery 

 

Telling the two things apart 

Is the mystery to solve

[Maddie]

1 minute ago, Sketch said:

There's no way to know the people

These idealized figures are based on.

 

As idealized figures, they are representations of the things they are used

To represent, with all of the super powers and prophesied things

They are depicted with.

 

The inside is a mystery 

The outside is a different mystery 

 

Telling the two things apart 

Is the mystery to solve

 

That might also be true, but none of those things are awakening and/or liberation either.

[Sketch]

Neither is a depiction

Of a guy with a halo.

 

Neither are the words written in the holy books

Edited January 5, 2021 by Sketch

[freeform]

Regarding discernment... maybe of something a little less lofty than enlightenment - but just a clear marker along the path...

 

Each stage of inner transformation always has specific signs that are quite plain and obvious... As a minor example - once one of the 8 extraordinary channels are fully opened, the practitioner is no longer affected by ambient temperature - meaning their body is comfortable at all times - and it completely stops responding by shivering, or sweating or standing one's hair on end.

 

One of my Daoist teachers explained this fact directly... suddenly it made sense to me why a teacher in a completely different tradition would have me doing seated practice in a ruined stone building that's been baking in the tropical sun all day (I failed miserably and was drenched in sweat every time, mind you ).

 

My Daoist teacher laughed and said he does a similar test - by having students train in a little aluminium hut painted black.

 

There are some weird ones... for instance I've seen one of the senior monks come up to one of the long-term lay students while they're meditating, stick his little finger up his nose - then pull it out and put it in his mouth and walk away

 

I was newish at the time and was like WTF did I just see - is this some sort of weird reverse 'wet willy' joke or something? The monks do have a weird sense of humour in Myanmar...

 

I asked the guy later - no he's just testing to see if the amrita is flowing yet...

 

These things are quite openly discussed in many classical texts... it's just we tend to think of them as metaphorical because they beggar belief.

 

Here's an example taken from Pedragio's book with various translations (called Foundations of Internal Alchemy):

 

"It is said, moreover, that when the Cinnabar Field is as firm as a stone; when one’s pace is as light as flying; and when, each time one begins to practice, the “source of the Medicine” is lively and brisk, the “celestial mechanism” is unobstructed and flourishing, and the “substance of Water” is clear and true"

 

This is literal. Anyone I've met who's advanced in alchemical training has a firm dantien in the belly... I'm certainly not advanced but even I have a firmish golf ball sized sphere.

 

There is also a lot of testing through siddhis (very controversial - but is simply the case from what I've seen) I've posted a video by Nathan Brine talking about a test that a certain (unmentionable) master used to use. Here's the link: https://youtu.be/snXtbm1VJE0

 

This is common in traditional schools.

 

Internal experience is not trusted - 'I feel as though I have a dantien' is not good enough...

 

And thank god that's the case!

 

It is so so easy to fool oneself! We're full of biases that aim to confirm our convictions - but if true progress is indeed your aim in life isn't it better to know something for a fact than leave it up to your own faulty assessment?!

 

I read recently how an AI passed a sort of 'musical Turing test'... various composers, musicians and aficionados were given a number of compositions to listen to and describe how they felt. They were all moved... some of them thought it was some of the best new compositions they've heard.

 

Another matched group were told that the composition was done by an AI - they thought it was soulless, were completely unmoved by it - it all just seemed robotic and boring to them.

 

These are people who've spent a lifetime studying, playing and listening to music - yet they're still fooled by their own biases.

 

This 'objective evidence' stuff is absolutely hated by many modern gurus... they'll use all kinds of mental and philosophical justifications to discount this stuff - simply because they don't have any of these signs! So they lower the bar of attainment to match their level of development.

 

I remember asking Michael Winn about qi emission - this is a teacher that teaches people to become immortal... yet when asked about something as simple as tangible qi emission, he - like a cat who doesn't want to be petted, squirmed and wriggled out of giving a direct answer.

 

I know it can be disappointing and disheartening - because you've had all these amazing spiritual experiences and how could this profound state be discounted by these body obsessed charlatans...

 

But of course your internal experiences aren't necessarily faulty or not real... they just haven't fully developed yet - there's more...

 

For some people seeing that 'there's more' is an amazing discovery and opportunity - even if it's a little humbling and disheartening...

 

For others it's the worst thing ever - it shatters the grand self image they've cultivated - so they'll use every mental trick in the book to somehow discount its significance.

 

For others still, they're so entrenched that it doesn't even register on their radar... They unconsciously use their ignorance as a protective mechanism and obfuscate this stuff... it's like their mind wraps an ignorance shield around the whole thing to protect themselves.

 

[edit] - I covered aversion, ignorance but I missed craving out!

 

We all know them... these are the ones chasing abilities attaching all sorts of hopes and dreams to them - craving them - trying to find any way possible to develop them (some even resort to magic tricks and computer graphics to simulate them )

 

This of course also completely misses the point entirely - but hopefully this one is a bit more clear, coz we've seen it so much on this forum...

Edited January 5, 2021 by freeform

[freeform]

7 hours ago, C T said:

For the years I've been a practicing Buddhist, I've never ever heard a master/teacher (of Buddhism) say he or she is enlightened, even those whom others acknowledge as so.

 

Oh I've seen weird dynamics with this...

 

Even the biggest charlatans will know not to call themselves enlightened... they'll just subtly cultivate this view in their students...

 

They'll for instance give more attention to the people who expound on the teacher's enlightenment while still denying anything of the sort...

 

It's a double whammy of 'not only he's enlightened but he's so humble too'...

[Maddie]

I think maybe a good question to ask is what isn't enlightenment as there seems to be a LOT of misunderstanding about this.

 

Probably the most common misconception about enlightenment in general and on this forum especially is that enlightenment means super powers and super powers mean enlightenment.

 

The Buddha was actually not enthusiastic about super powers at all, and definitely did NOT teach that powers resulted in enlightenment, were the goal of enlightenment, or were the result of enlightenment. 

[Maddie]

12 minutes ago, Sketch said:

Neither is a depiction

Of a guy with a halo.

 

Neither are the words written in the holy books

 

Agreed. the path to enlightenment is not enlightenment. 

[C T]

7 minutes ago, freeform said:

 

Oh I've seen weird dynamics with this...

 

Even the biggest charlatans will know not to call themselves enlightened... they'll just subtly cultivate this view in their students...

 

They'll for instance give more attention to the people who expound on the teacher's enlightenment while still denying anything of the sort...

 

It's a double whammy of 'not only he's enlightened but he's so humble too'...

 

Sure, when one lives long enough, one will eventually see all kinds of kooky things, I guess. 

But I wasn't conjecturing. Neither was there any implication that these guides or teachers were all beyond reproach. 

Thats the reason it was mentioned that some of their *real* activities, positive or otherwise, occur out of sight of curious onlookers. 

 

Authentic teachers (or lamas, tulkus, whatever) spend sufficient hours of their private time doing practices for others who seek their help with a variety of troubles, mostly for the oppressed, sick & dying. And they usually do this regardless of their hectic public schedules. Usually late at night. They don't seem to require much sleep. When they awake, they often resume the practices for a couple of hours before dawn, and then start the day proper. 

 

The main point is that my observation showed me genuine Buddhist masters, regardless of their level of realisation, will not openly claim enlightenment. They seem to regard it as unimportant, even improper, and would prefer to talk about football, or James Bond movies. 

[forestofemptiness]

I don't think it is possible to ever truly verify whether some one else is enlightened (whatever one means by that, the definition varies). There is a Zen saying that even the teacher appears in the mirror of the student, so any manifestation of another's enlightenment is arising in one's own mind. So at best, one can attempt to infer that some one else is enlightened, but as an inference is it always subject to doubt. 

 

 

1 hour ago, freeform said:

 

Yeah - the issue for me is that I'd like to pass on just how shockingly different someone who's truly enlightened is to a normal or even an awakened person... and that's difficult without a personal story - because it just sounds ridiculous and nebulous...

 

Like I've said before - an enlightened being (hard to call them a 'person' at that stage) is effectively omniscient and omnipotent... what the hell does that even mean? How could you know that?

 

But then this is a public forum - and just as you wouldn't want to pass around a priceless manuscript to everyone at the bar to have a leaf through... it's probably not something to share online.

 

[Maddie]

3 minutes ago, forestofemptiness said:

I don't think it is possible to ever truly verify whether some one else is enlightened

 

It is pretty easy to tell if someone is not enlightened though. 

[freeform]

9 minutes ago, C T said:

The main point is that my observation showed me genuine Buddhist masters, regardless of their level of realisation, will not openly claim enlightenment.

 

Yeah - I completely agree.

 

I just wanted to point out that it's not a point of discernment - because many smart ones (whether just deluded or purposely charlatans) will use very sophisticated ways to convey their level of attainment.

 

In the Daoist world, many teachers you can literally ask directly - and they'll tell you in no uncertain terms exactly where they are and what they're working on and what's beyond them. Daoists tend to be very practical and direct like this - especially with trusted individuals.

 

[freeform]

9 minutes ago, forestofemptiness said:

I don't think it is possible to ever truly verify whether some one else is enlightened

 

I disagree.

 

Though it's true that once someone is at a high level it can be difficult to discern

[Maddie]

1 minute ago, freeform said:

 

I disagree.

 

Though it's true that once someone is at a high level it can be difficult to discern

 

Yes the Buddha laid out ways to know if someone was awakened or not. 

[Maddie]

3 minutes ago, freeform said:

 

 

In the Daoist world, many teachers you can literally ask directly - and they'll tell you in no uncertain terms exactly where they are and what they're working on and what's beyond them. Daoists tend to be very practical and direct like this - especially with trusted individuals.

 

 

What exactly is "enlightenment" in Daoist terms?