enlightenment revisited

"This is some of what Chris is going through right now."

Ha!

I should really keep my mouth shut here but....

Boredom has faded. I am focused now, not then. Angst about the past and the future has faded. I'm not really enlightened but that much I can report. I can also sort of support David's comment about what used to be "subjective impressions" having more substance than I previously thought. I seem to have developed an ability to intuit people's intent as they talk to me, sometimes before they even say anything. And as I have said elsewhere, I feel much more connected to the world than ever before, and the use of the word "connected" is not very accurate. It's more like being a part of the world. The same as. We are a huge identity.

But! Be careful to take what I say with a grain of salt compared to the others who have spoken up here. They are much. much further down the path.

Part1

What would you say is a difference of "emotionally enlightened" and "spiritually enlightened" people?

When I read your explanations and expressions of how you have changed, I can't help but to think that what you are saying is simply that you can more easily let go of your feelings than you used to. I mean, it is pretty big achievement indeed that will have enourmous impact on your life. But is it important to label that as an "enlightenment" or something like that?

I don't want this to sound as I'm grading your experiences - or saying I'd be myself somehow different. Actually when starting my studies of "who am I?" first by duscussions and sharing amongst other people and later by more meditative practises, what I instantly noticed was that my stress level went don't a lot. My self-esteem improved, guilt feelings were removed, castigations diminished etc.

Part 2

However, I don't see that as an implication of some big "enlightenment" experience or such like. I simply see that is the result of me maturing emotionally. I know better who I am and won't take things so seriously - I don't take myself so seriously anymore. What was more important for me after some experiences I had, was the change in the level of understanding I had. I kind of got a totally new viewpoint on the world. The old texts of the sages made me laugh as they pointed to something I now understood! (Actually I'm not sure if I would have understood those earlier, as I wasn't interested in things like that before..)

Part 3

But I don't see any reason to label that change with some concept, because it can just mean that "a critical mass" had been reached where the changes in my knowledge, perception and personality were bigger than usually and as such more visible for myself too. I see that kind of development happening in my 2-year-old son every other day but I don't give him "enlightenment certificates" every time a breakthrough happens.

So, this development is very natural and I doubt if there are actually any reason to talk about satori's and things like that. Actually it can easile happen that the development can turn other way around and after few years you have just "lost it". Especially if the development was largely because of some effort you had made and which you then stopped. Probably it was something you didn't even know you were doing, or some big change in your life that changed you too. Or perhaps your teacher was right and IT WAS the meditation practice your teacher told you to do - I don't know..

What's your view on these?

Hello, Kundun.

My view is this -- I can put the changes brought on by my practice in the context of my 53 years of life experience. I sort of know what emotional maturity is, and how it differs from practice related changes. Could I be fooling myself? Yeah, maybe. But I don't think so.

YMMV

" I see that kind of development happening in my 2-year-old son every other day but I don't give him "enlightenment certificates" every time a breakthrough happens.

"

I'd say that it is a bit more encompassing than gaining emotional maturity. Relating this to your son, to look at this in terms of Piaget's ideas, it's as if it's a new stage of development after formal operations that Piaget never observed. A new form of cognition opens up that subsumes and integrates the stages and cognitions of formal operations, concrete operations, pre-operational, and sensorimotor (stage). This new cognition is transpersonal.

Regarding Piaget's idea of the developmental process, Wikipedia says "This process is not wholly gradual, however. Once a new level of organization, knowledge and insight proves to be effective, it will quickly be generalized to other areas. As a result, transitions between stages tend to be rapid and radical, and the bulk of the time spent in a new stage consists of refining this new cognitive level. When the knowledge that has been gained at one stage of study and experience leads rapidly and radically to a new higher stage of insight, a gestalt is said to have occurred."
D

"What would you say is a difference of "emotionally enlightened" and "spiritually enlightened" people?"

Hi Kundun,

If there were such a thing as "emotional enlightenment", I'd say that it's quite different from spiritual enlightenment. Though, I don't think "emotional enlightenment" is an accurate term to describe the development of mastery of one's emotions.

Spiritual enlightenment is, first and foremost, Truth realization. It has just as much to do with emotions as it it does passing gas. That is to say, to wake up the Truth is to wake up to the Truth of Everything.

In this thread we have sort of been exploring the question, "What, if anything, has changed since you woke up to the Truth?" Many have found that Truth realization (spiritual enlightenment) does tend to precede a re-framing of one's perception of their waking life, and that this may lead to some changes in emotions or a resolution of deep questions that had yet been unresolved.

Notice that I said, "may lead to," not, "will lead to," or even, "must lead to." As such changes don't necessarily occur. And if emotional changes do arises as a result of one's awakening, that's not to say that it will manifest in the same way as it did for another enlightened person.

Kenneth cited Jed McKenna earlier in saying that there is a big difference between becoming an Adult and getting enlightened. Though, in theory, the latter may work as a catalyst for the development of the former.

Thoughts?

Jackson

I'm liking the description of it being a higher cognition that subsumes and integrates both rational thought, emotions, and primary processes in the psychodynamic sense.
Adyashanti in "The End of Your World" talks about intellectual, emotional, and visceral enlightenment - and I think it's a book worth reading, and might offer some insights.

Just to be completely clear though, Kundun, what we are talking about is a radical transformation of identity, and a radical transformation of the experience of consciousness and reality - in an ongoing and permanent basis (at least in terms of the physioenergetic development being completed model, as opposed to Rigpa). It is clearly, from the perspective of the ordinary consciousness we experienced before, a radically altered state of consciousness which is not only preferable in terms of quality of experience and has distinct advantages both pragmatically and otherwise, but also seems to have no drawbacks. To call it an altered state of consciousness is somewhat misleading, because that tends to imply a steady state, whereas this is an extremely flexible, adaptive mode of consciousness which provides the qualities needed for the moment, including access to high concentration states, and is itself the answer to many psychological and existential problems. The structure of consciousness itself is altered. Some things, like the "complex emotions" that Kenneth mentions, are seen as the absurdities they are.

That doesn't mean that anyone who experiences it is infallible, or superhuman, or otherwise incapable of error, moral or otherwise. It also doesn't mean that one necessarily applies this capacity for insight in needed areas. It does mean that one is fully online. I tend to agree with Warner that attachment to some "enlightenment experience," even the one which caused this, is not as important as applying the capacity in the present.
D

Actually there were two separated things I was trying to address.
1) What (if any) are the differences between "emotional" and "spiritual" enlightenment?
This emotional enlightenment was a new concept for me that I just noticed couple of days ago from Kenneth's post. It felt intuitively right as I have witnessed people to suddenly have a big growth in the areas of emotional maturity as they begin to explore themselves in some peer groups like AA etc.

2) Is there really such thing called "enlightenment" or is it just a very normal growth experience that happens regardless of any so called "spiritual practice"?
I mean I have also witnessed people to suddenly expand in their knowledge and quality of personality. Usually this has to do with some big (stressful?) change in life like having a child or divorce etc. This is very visible in young childres as they are growing very fast. That Piaget's theory describes very well what I mean.

With adults this of course happens more rarely, but still I've seen it happening with people that have nothing to do with spiritual practices. The thing is that it usually doesn't last very long though. Perhaps the function or the spiritual practice is to cultivate and maintain such growth experiences instead of causing them?

Part 2

In any case. I haven't yet experienced or witnessed anything that needs to be referred with some mystical concept like "enlightenment". When I read your posts, the witnesses you give seem to be very important and meaningful changes in the way you see the world and yourselves. So significant that it changes your way of thinking and acting too. But I still see no need for lifting that shift in the mind on the shelves and labelling it with "enlightenment" tag. It seems to be quite ordinary thing that happens to lot of people and it will most probably be gone if you don't cultivate it with your efforts - and that isn't a guarantee either. Perhaps this is what has happened to masters like Osho, Trungpa etc?

It might be a little dangerous to see that as something permanent which you receive and that's it. I believe that nothing is permanent in this world of ours. I also understand that if you try to sell an experience like that in religious context you have to label it with words like "permanent" and "eternal" because that' what we are looking for. Not just experiences that last for 6 months or couple of years max. For me, this explains why the teachings always talk about "permanent things in an impermanent world".

I hope I'm wrong, but I fear I'm not.

I have a fear, too. It's that people with no experience of awakening, and who are honest about that, will weigh in and offer up the idea that there is no such thing as awakening, And that they will further dismiss the testimony of those who have very clear, stable and long term awakening experience, like some of those who weighed in here over the past few days.

This same thing happened recently on the Open Enlightenment blog. I get why it happens, I suppose, but it is a real fear because it potentially diminishes a truly marvelous, transformative thing that is our birthright as human beings into... ****.

Pardon my directness, Kundun, and everyone. Sometimes, though, what needs to be said needs to be said. I'll be the ******* today. I must be cycling through Dark Night.

HI Chris,

This thread is an attempt to communicate enlightenment and/or what it entails to the not yet enlightened. There will be, and should be, skeptics among the yet to be enlightened. I think healthy skepticism will contribute positively to this discussion.

I'm personally glad that Kunddun is participating.

Amr

"

2) Is there really such thing called "enlightenment" or is it just a very normal growth experience that happens regardless of any so called "spiritual practice"?
I mean I have also witnessed people to suddenly expand in their knowledge and quality of personality... This is very visible in young childres as they are growing very fast. That Piaget's theory describes very well what I mean.

"

Kundun,
It seems ironic now, but I would have been completely in your camp about a year ago before it was pointed out to me in a very specific way that I had stable changes in the structure of my consciousness that correspond pretty closely to the classic experience. I also don't like the word "enlightenment" and greatly prefer "Bodhi" or even my own neologism "Intuitive Transpersonal Awareness." "Enlightenment" has a lot of baggage - not all bad baggage, but definitely some baggage.

One problem, as I see it, is that if you haven't really experienced this metamorphosis, there's no real frame of reference, and every description of it will fail. It's sort of like trying to describe sight to the blind. To insert ourselves in the metaphor, the responses you give above seem analogous to a situation in which I had tried to describe vision to you, and you came back with "well, maybe you guys have just developed really accurate proprioceptive mapping." I would suggest that it's important to avoid any semblance of trivializing the outcome. It is a big deal.

It may well be that this is an optional neurodevelopmental process - if so then it requires certain environmental stimuli. I have suggested as much in the "enlightenment as a social construct" thread. I think spiritual practices simulate environmental stimuli that otherwise might have been present in tribal living. Continued.

Continued from post 61
The point is, if you want to consider it a developmental process, then it's more accurate to place it on a level with other major developmental milestones, like learning to walk, or acquiring language. Seriously.
I might point out that child development takes place both gradually and precipitously. One thing that seems clear though is that relatively few people experience the kinds of changes we are talking about, even with a practice.

"1) What (if any) are the differences between "emotional" and "spiritual" enlightenment?"

Again, I think Adyashanti's book might be helpful, but I'll say that for me, whatever happened had profound effects both emotionally (empathy on steroids, etc.), intellectually (my conceptual map of reality was completely shredded), and on the gut or instinctively (gut level existential grasping dissolved). I'd like to emphasize that these were *side-effects*. The developmental process was not primarily concerned with these areas, but with consciousness itself. For me, the emotional opening was the most impressive, because I was so shut down, but it clearly had effects on all of these levels. I think what happens with so called "emotional enlightenment" vs "enlightenment of the mind" is that some people are relatively more emotionally attuned, some less bound by concepts, some with less instinctive grasping and developed instinctual awareness - these people don't see much change in those areas, but may be greatly impressed by the changes in others. What happens is that all the circuits and potentialities, even if previously only vestigial, "come online." I think that there's only one kind of "enlightenment" ultimately. Also - when I say the changes were permanent - I mean that in an ordinary or relative sense - they've been stable for years now. It seems to be a permanent change.

I'm happy there are skeptics, Amr. I just felt upon reading some of what was posted by Kundun that much of what had been said in answer to his/her previous posts was being ignored. No huge deal. I assume, too, that Kundun will weigh back in and tell me I'm full of it, which is probably true.

Also please note: I am not asking Kundun not to participate. I WANT Kundun to participate and I want to be able to discuss the issues he/she raises. I'm also being honest about my own fear, which I think has very real standing based on what I see in some of the posts here. There is no evidence in this realm but personal experience, and since we can't share that other than through words it's incumbent upon us to trust the words others say. So if the awakened are first, willing to confess to that fact and second, wiling to talk about it and describe it to us, well, then I think we need to think long and hard about why we're practicing if we really and truly remain of the belief that there is no awakening. I wanted to express that, although in my rush I may have done so too bluntly for this message board. I apologize for that.

I can't tell if Kundun is saying that "enlightenment" really isn't possible or whatever enlightenment people here have isn't really that big a deal.
Kundun, let me know, okay?
I certainly think that the enlightenment of all the "models" is a myth. Definitely.
But if enlightenment means knowledge of one's "true nature," and nothing more, then i'm a believer.

"
Also please note: I am not asking Kundun not to participate. I WANT Kundun to participate and I want to be able to discuss the issues he/she raises. I'm also being honest about my own fear, which I think has very real standing based on what I see in some of the posts here. There is no evidence in this realm but personal experience, and since we can't share that other than through words it's incumbent upon us to trust the words others say. So if the awakened are first, willing to confess to that fact and second, wiling to talk about it and describe it to us, well, then I think we need to think long and hard about why we're practicing if we really and truly remain of the belief that there is no awakening. I wanted to express that, although in my rush I may have done so too bluntly for this message board. I apologize for that.

"

Not that I'm a moderator here or anything, but my vote is that Kundun (or anyone else), in the spirit of open discussion, gets to question the validity of our experiences or conclusions. The points that Kundun raises are fair, and we are all fallible human beings here. I think the proper course is to consider such points carefully, and if we happen to disagree based on our own experience, to say so and why as clearly as possible. Kundun (and anyone else) have to draw their own conclusions in any case.

I also don't like drawing a line between those who are "awakened" and those who are not, and all that hierarchy crap we've discussed in other places.

It may be a little off-putting to consider the idea that I am completely full of sh--, but it's healthy for me to consider the possibility every once in a while, and it's good for all of us. So thank you, Kundun.
David

I think as mature adults, we can discuss absolutely anything related to the Dharma broadly conceived of as the path, ground and fruit; including other traditions thereof.

If an idea, argument or experience can or cannot stand up on its own merits, then under the scrutiny of public discussion, this will likely come to light, and we all grow and are better for it.

If we can do this as ladies and gentlemen, than all the better.

In kind regards,

Adam.

Yes. I deserved that. I'm not communcating well today and, in fact, not doing well at all the past 24 hours or so. I'm sorry. I'm sorry to kundun and anyone else who was offput, insulted or just plain peeved at what I said.

All good Dharma brother Chris,

I think we've all been through so many ups and downs, periods of poor communication, and just plain foot-in-mouth syndrome brought on by the fast paced evolutionary forces initiated by meditation - to err is to be human, and to grow, usually involves a lot of error, pain and self-discovery, as the old makes way for the transient, and very temporary new - change and insight tends to be like that, doesn't it? And since your practice is coming along so well, you're kinda asking for a whole lot of change and growth - may it be gentle on you and all us who aspire to realization.

You may have heard of the Chinese curse: "may all your karma come to fruition now" or something along those lines; meditation and insight is kinda like that, and we often bite off more than we can chew, and figuratively, acquire a great deal of tummy pains. ;-P Gluttons for punishment, we are!

In kind regards,

Adam.

I will only say that poor Kundun became that which the universe today employed to teach this fool self-restraint and humility. So it's MY turn to thank you, kundun.

A seldom-discussed aspect of 'compassion on steroids' is that all the input is dialled up to 11, and we are definitely NOT used to that. Consequently, there are lots of wobbles from the newfound equanimity. It is never more obvious that 'meditation ISN'T: getting used to IS' than after a big breakthrough. Part of the tour has seemed to me to involve seeing the innocent intentions behind even my own (and others'-- but that's almost easier) dumbest, most dysfunctional behavior. It's kind of disarming to feel myself veering toward, say, a habitual defensiveness, even when I know it's going to cause me and others trouble. The 'getting used to' part has come to mean that the old habits become as malleable as a lucid dream's contents. And that I no longer feel that it makes sense 'do unto myself' as I would not 'do unto others'. Funny thing is, the less of a hard time I give myself, the more relaxed, responsive, and present I am to others. If it's not 'compassion', it'll do in the meantime.

(I hope I'm not intruding into this space-- I missed your posts on the other forum lately, and discovered your good news here. Congratulations!)

Kate Gowen

Welcome, Kate. I was hoping you'd find your way over here.

Chris, I don't see that you did anything bad. You're allowed to be cranky now and then.

Kundun, your skepticism has given these boards a welcome injection of fresh.

Everybody who has spoken up here, thanks for a wicked cool discussion.

Amr, nice topic; thanks for creating the thread.

Our laptop is broken and in the shop, so The Poor Man and I have to share one computer, and she has lots of papers to write for grad school. That's why I've been so scarce lately. I hope to be back with you all soon.

Affectionately,

Kenneth

PART 1

I'm on a different timezone than the most of you so my participation to this discussion is slow.

First of all, I have got used to people being sensitive about the questioning of certain kinds of things. I didn't feel insulted about what you said Chris, and actually I felt good that you were able to express honestly how you felt. I think that this discussion has proved that you have a very healthy sangha here in this forum.

I think that I will now have to explain why I'm practicing this sceptisism towards the "enlightenment" and why I'm not really so sceptic about the thing that is referred with that word.

I have had spiritual kind of experiences since I was a child. Of course back then I didn't consider those to be spiritual experiences but just ordinary stuff. I'm not talking about paranormal things like out-of-body experiences (although some were pretty close to that I guess). I'm talking about sort of "presence in the moment" that happened spontaneously every now and then. It felt kind of like you were suddenly "standing on nothing" but with very aware mind. There was a little bit of panic or losing oneself somewhere at the background, but mostly genuine joy and wonder. I don't think I ever lost those kind of moments although there were times I was depressed and lost with my life in my late teen years and early adulthood.