Guest guest Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 Myth #1: You must kill the ego in order to achieve enlightenment. Myth #2: You must not seek enlightenment - because seeking perpetuates the sense of separation. Myth #3: We are all already enlightened, so just get on with your life. Response to Myth #1: If you kill the ego, you have no self to enjoy the Realized Self in the material world. The ego must be silenced and sent to a corner for a time out, but enlightenment brings the ego instant relief of not having to be " on " 24/7 and presents the startled ego with a new playmate - a new Captain of The Ship (of consciousness) - who dispels the ego's fear and doubt...and as they say in advertising - much, much more. But the ego lives on as a tenured resident of this temporal life. And some would say, plots mutiny once again, after a while. Meditation can be a good crimestopper. But that's another story. Response to Myth #2: The is trickier. It is a matter of timing. All 'teachers' who parrot the " You must not seek " admonishment eventually, if they go on long enough, replace the word seek with a synonym of some sort (like: inquire, for instance). And their personal stories ALWAYS have some reference to seeking (a rose by any other name). It is true that absolute surrender opens the door, but... seeking ALWAYS precedes the point of surrender. We don't need anything else to perpetuate the feeling of separation - we were already socially coerced into it before any thought of seeking occurred to us. And we don't come to feel the intuitive stirring at some point in our lives, and immediately flop down in complete and absolute surrender. It is only after a time of seeking, listening, reading, questioning, sitting in meditation, sitting in satsang, pleading for deliverance from despair and such (and for some, this goes on for a very long time - and for others, no time is long enough in their present lifetime) that the seeking gives way to utter surrender - and with grace, enlightenment. Effort precedes grace. Response to Myth #3: Much like Myth #2, all professed 'teachers' who parrot the " We're already all enlightened " line eventually, if they are authentically (or poetically) enlightened, and go on long enough, relate personal stories that ALWAYS have some reference to their awakening/realization/shift in perspective, ... at a specific point in time. Otherwise, they wouldn't have anything to say - negation or propagation - about enlightenment. To parrot this, " We're already all enlightened, " pat phrase is to discourage the sincere seeker (who must one day surrender utterly if they ever hope to experience enlightenment). My 3-Myths worth. Jeff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2010 Report Share Posted February 24, 2010 Dear Jeff, I like your posting very much, and it torpodoes most of the Neo Advaita myths very effectively. However with No. 1, I cannot find any reference in Bhagavan's teaching which allows the ego to continue even in an attenuated state. His main thrust seems to me to be that the ego has to go. After Realisation the material world can be still enjoyed from the 'no mind' state. Love, Alan --- On Tue, 23/2/10, Papajeff <jeff wrote: Papajeff <jeff Enlightenment Myths Date: Tuesday, 23 February, 2010, 22:03 Myth #1: You must killthe ego in order to achieveenlightenment.Myth #2: You must notseek enlightenment - becauseseeking perpetuates the senseof separation.Myth #3: We are all alreadyenlightened, so just get onwith your life.Response to Myth #1: Ifyou kill the ego, you haveno self to enjoy the RealizedSelf in the material world.The ego must be silenced andsent to a corner for a timeout, but enlightenment bringsthe ego instant relief of nothaving to be "on" 24/7 and presents the startled ego witha new playmate - a new Captain of The Ship (of consciousness) - who dispels the ego's fearand doubt...and as they sayin advertising - much, much more.But the ego lives on as atenured resident of thistemporal life. And some wouldsay, plots mutiny once again,after a while. Meditation can be a good crimestopper. Butthat's another story.Response to Myth #2: The istrickier. It is a matter oftiming. All 'teachers' whoparrot the "You must not seek"admonishment eventually, if theygo on long enough, replacethe word seek with a synonymof some sort (like: inquire,for instance). And their personalstories ALWAYS have some referenceto seeking (a rose by any othername). It is true that absolutesurrender opens the door, but...seeking ALWAYS precedes thepoint of surrender. We don'tneed anything else to perpetuatethe feeling of separation - wewere already socially coercedinto it before any thought ofseeking occurred to us. And we don't come to feel the intuitive stirring at some point in ourlives, and immediately flop down in complete and absolute surrender. It is only after a time of seeking,listening, reading, questioning,sitting in meditation, sittingin satsang, pleading for deliverance from despair and such(and for some, this goes on for a very long time - and forothers, no time is long enoughin their present lifetime) thatthe seeking gives way to uttersurrender - and with grace,enlightenment. Effort precedes grace.Response to Myth #3: Much likeMyth #2, all professed 'teachers' who parrot the "We're alreadyall enlightened" line eventually, if they are authentically (or poetically) enlightened, and go on long enough, relate personal stories that ALWAYS have some reference to theirawakening/realizati on/shiftin perspective, ...at a specific point in time.Otherwise, they wouldn't haveanything to say - negation orpropagation - about enlightenment.To parrot this,"We'realready all enlightened, " patphrase is to discourage thesincere seeker (who must oneday surrender utterly if theyever hope to experienceenlightenment) . My 3-Myths worth.Jeff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2010 Report Share Posted February 24, 2010 Thanks, Alan. It is my feeling that Bhagavan leaves room for the ego's potential for return in his statement that, " the aspirant meditates to attain and the awakened meditate to maintain. " Yes, Myth #1 is the most difficult to state clearly, because the identity of 'ego' is often used as a sense of separated or individual self that 'dies' or has to go in favor of the new realization of our true identity in no mind. I am as comfortable with viewing the enjoyment of the material world as from 'no mind', but left the door open for ego's return (and therefore not it's 'death') as mentioned above. Do we not realize with awakening that what we considered our primary identity (ego or I) is now seen, in truth, as a secondary mode of being; that is, secondary to the now realized primary mode of " I-I " while still maintaining the material world consciousness, (and in this context, ego in the servant role)? This is where many who consider themselves jnani yogis or neo-advaitans, who may have experienced the unitive leap in consciousness without full awakening, sound silly and hide behind semantic shields - by lumping our entire flesh and blood existence in their narrow view of maya or " illusion " . As mentioned in the earlier post, my complaint is that this can be a discouragement to the seeker. Jeff , Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs wrote: > > Dear Jeff, >  > I like your posting very much, and it torpodoes most of the Neo Advaita myths very effectively. >  > However with No. 1, I cannot find any reference in Bhagavan's teaching which allows the ego to continue even in an attenuated state. His main thrust seems to me to be that the ego has to go. After Realisation the material world can be still enjoyed from the 'no mind' state. >  > Love, >  > Alan >  >  > --- On Tue, 23/2/10, Papajeff <jeff wrote: > > > Papajeff <jeff > Enlightenment Myths > > Tuesday, 23 February, 2010, 22:03 > > >  > > > > Myth #1: You must kill > the ego in order to achieve > enlightenment. > > Myth #2: You must not > seek enlightenment - because > seeking perpetuates the sense > of separation. > > Myth #3: We are all already > enlightened, so just get on > with your life. > > Response to Myth #1: If > you kill the ego, you have > no self to enjoy the Realized > Self in the material world. > The ego must be silenced and > sent to a corner for a time > out, but enlightenment brings > the ego instant relief of not > having to be " on " 24/7 and > presents the startled ego with > a new playmate - a new Captain > of The Ship (of consciousness) - > who dispels the ego's fear > and doubt...and as they say > in advertising - much, much more. > > But the ego lives on as a > tenured resident of this > temporal life. And some would > say, plots mutiny once again, > after a while. Meditation can > be a good crimestopper. But > that's another story. > > Response to Myth #2: The is > trickier. It is a matter of > timing. All 'teachers' who > parrot the " You must not seek " > admonishment eventually, if they > go on long enough, replace > the word seek with a synonym > of some sort (like: inquire, > for instance). And their personal > stories ALWAYS have some reference > to seeking (a rose by any other > name). It is true that absolute > surrender opens the door, but... > > seeking ALWAYS precedes the > point of surrender. We don't > need anything else to perpetuate > the feeling of separation - we > were already socially coerced > into it before any thought of > seeking occurred to us. And > we don't come to feel the intuitive > stirring at some point in our > lives, and immediately flop down > in complete and absolute surrender. > > It is only after a time of seeking, > listening, reading, questioning, > sitting in meditation, sitting > in satsang, pleading for > deliverance from despair and such > (and for some, this goes on for > a very long time - and for > others, no time is long enough > in their present lifetime) that > the seeking gives way to utter > surrender - and with grace, > enlightenment. > > Effort precedes grace. > > Response to Myth #3: Much like > Myth #2, all professed 'teachers' > who parrot the " We're already > all enlightened " line eventually, > if they are authentically (or > poetically) enlightened, and > go on long enough, relate > personal stories that ALWAYS > have some reference to their > awakening/realizati on/shift > in perspective, ... > > at a specific point in time. > Otherwise, they wouldn't have > anything to say - negation or > propagation - about enlightenment. > > To parrot this, " We're > already all enlightened, " pat > phrase is to discourage the > sincere seeker (who must one > day surrender utterly if they > ever hope to experience > enlightenment) . > > My 3-Myths worth. > > Jeff > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2010 Report Share Posted February 24, 2010 Dear Jeff, My difficulty with this is that according to his teaching the ego veils the apperception of the Real Self- and also causes Consciousness to be reflected, so it is stepped down, and not experienced as the Pure Absolute Consciousness Sat-Chit-Ananda. He illustrates this in a diagram in collected works, the chapter. on Self Enquiry. In Padamalai he makes numerous statements that the ego must go, sometimes using the word 'destroyed'. When the ego goes, then the Self is Realised in its fullness, until then it is occluded or clouded over. Love, Alan--- On Wed, 24/2/10, Papajeff <jeff wrote: Papajeff <jeffRe: Enlightenment Myths Date: Wednesday, 24 February, 2010, 11:17 Thanks, Alan. It is my feeling that Bhagavan leaves room for the ego's potential for return in his statement that, "the aspirant meditates to attain and the awakened meditate to maintain."Yes, Myth #1 is the most difficult to state clearly, because the identity of 'ego' is often used as a sense of separated or individual self that 'dies' or has to go in favor of the new realization of our true identity in no mind.I am as comfortable with viewing the enjoyment of the material world as from 'no mind', but left the door open for ego's return (and thereforenot it's 'death') as mentioned above. Do we not realize with awakening that what we considered our primary identity (ego or I) is now seen,in truth, as a secondary mode of being; that is, secondary to the now realized primary mode of "I-I" while still maintaining the material world consciousness, (and in this context, ego in the servant role)? This is where many who considerthemselves jnani yogis or neo-advaitans,who may have experienced the unitiveleap in consciousness without fullawakening, sound silly and hidebehind semantic shields - by lumping our entire flesh and blood existence in their narrow view of maya or "illusion".As mentioned in the earlier post,my complaint is that this can bea discouragement to the seeker.Jeff, Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs@ ...> wrote:>> Dear Jeff,>  > I like your posting very much, and it torpodoes most of the Neo Advaita myths very effectively. >  > However with No. 1, I cannot find any reference in Bhagavan's teaching which allows the ego to continue even in an attenuated state. His main thrust seems to me to be that the ego has to go. After Realisation the material world can be still enjoyed from the 'no mind' state.>  > Love,>  > Alan>  >  > --- On Tue, 23/2/10, Papajeff <jeff wrote:> > > Papajeff <jeff> Enlightenment Myths> > Tuesday, 23 February, 2010, 22:03> > >  > > > > Myth #1: You must kill> the ego in order to achieve> enlightenment.> > Myth #2: You must not> seek enlightenment - because> seeking perpetuates the sense> of separation.> > Myth #3: We are all already> enlightened, so just get on> with your life.> > Response to Myth #1: If> you kill the ego, you have> no self to enjoy the Realized> Self in the material world.> The ego must be silenced and> sent to a corner for a time> out, but enlightenment brings> the ego instant relief of not> having to be "on" 24/7 and > presents the startled ego with> a new playmate - a new Captain > of The Ship (of consciousness) - > who dispels the ego's fear> and doubt...and as they say> in advertising - much, much more.> > But the ego lives on as a> tenured resident of this> temporal life. And some would> say, plots mutiny once again,> after a while. Meditation can > be a good crimestopper. But> that's another story.> > Response to Myth #2: The is> trickier. It is a matter of> timing. All 'teachers' who> parrot the "You must not seek"> admonishment eventually, if they> go on long enough, replace> the word seek with a synonym> of some sort (like: inquire,> for instance). And their personal> stories ALWAYS have some reference> to seeking (a rose by any other> name). It is true that absolute> surrender opens the door, but...> > seeking ALWAYS precedes the> point of surrender. We don't> need anything else to perpetuate> the feeling of separation - we> were already socially coerced> into it before any thought of> seeking occurred to us. And > we don't come to feel the intuitive > stirring at some point in our> lives, and immediately flop down > in complete and absolute surrender. > > It is only after a time of seeking,> listening, reading, questioning,> sitting in meditation, sitting> in satsang, pleading for > deliverance from despair and such> (and for some, this goes on for > a very long time - and for> others, no time is long enough> in their present lifetime) that> the seeking gives way to utter> surrender - and with grace,> enlightenment. > > Effort precedes grace.> > Response to Myth #3: Much like> Myth #2, all professed 'teachers' > who parrot the "We're already> all enlightened" line eventually, > if they are authentically (or > poetically) enlightened, and > go on long enough, relate > personal stories that ALWAYS > have some reference to their> awakening/realizati on/shift> in perspective, ...> > at a specific point in time.> Otherwise, they wouldn't have> anything to say - negation or> propagation - about enlightenment.> > To parrot this,"We're> already all enlightened, " pat> phrase is to discourage the> sincere seeker (who must one> day surrender utterly if they> ever hope to experience> enlightenment) . > > My 3-Myths worth.> > Jeff> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2010 Report Share Posted February 24, 2010 On 24/02/2010 07:56, Alan Jacobs wrote:  Dear Jeff,  I like your posting very much, and it torpodoes most of the Neo Advaita myths very effectively.  However with No. 1, I cannot find any reference in Bhagavan's teaching which allows the ego to continue even in an attenuated state. His main thrust seems to me to be that the ego has to go. After Realisation the material world can be still enjoyed from the 'no mind' state.  Love,  Alan oh yes, thank you jeff. alan, friends, this might clarify somewhat the 'ego' issue... I am, Self identity Is a donkey. Mind, name, form, feelings Emotions, cravings, hopes and fears All included… merely an ass. We all are donkeys, whether considered most intelligent And revered as such Or regarded as the dumbest of the dumb… No different from plain asses – Likewise subject to birth, growth, decay and death. But the remember, friend, Lucky seeker after truth, That the master, the all pervading Nameless and impersonal self Is boundless and beyond time. Peerless ghost rider Directing and guiding all donkeys, The herd owner and sustainer Is the same resplendent one and only, Birth-less and deathless reality. There is no other god. So Wake up from dreams of selfhood, oh fortunate! Friend of bright prospects, Enjoy the frolics Of the dead donkey – While there is time. yosy the dead ass ps. any opinions, comments etc most welcome and appreciated   --- On Tue, 23/2/10, Papajeff <jeff (AT) mindgoal (DOT) com> wrote: Papajeff <jeff (AT) mindgoal (DOT) com> Enlightenment Myths Tuesday, 23 February, 2010, 22:03  Myth #1: You must kill the ego in order to achieve enlightenment. Myth #2: You must not seek enlightenment - because seeking perpetuates the sense of separation. Myth #3: We are all already enlightened, so just get on with your life. Response to Myth #1: If you kill the ego, you have no self to enjoy the Realized Self in the material world. The ego must be silenced and sent to a corner for a time out, but enlightenment brings the ego instant relief of not having to be "on" 24/7 and presents the startled ego with a new playmate - a new Captain of The Ship (of consciousness) - who dispels the ego's fear and doubt...and as they say in advertising - much, much more. But the ego lives on as a tenured resident of this temporal life. And some would say, plots mutiny once again, after a while. Meditation can be a good crimestopper. But that's another story. Response to Myth #2: The is trickier. It is a matter of timing. All 'teachers' who parrot the "You must not seek" admonishment eventually, if they go on long enough, replace the word seek with a synonym of some sort (like: inquire, for instance). And their personal stories ALWAYS have some reference to seeking (a rose by any other name). It is true that absolute surrender opens the door, but... seeking ALWAYS precedes the point of surrender. We don't need anything else to perpetuate the feeling of separation - we were already socially coerced into it before any thought of seeking occurred to us. And we don't come to feel the intuitive stirring at some point in our lives, and immediately flop down in complete and absolute surrender. It is only after a time of seeking, listening, reading, questioning, sitting in meditation, sitting in satsang, pleading for deliverance from despair and such (and for some, this goes on for a very long time - and for others, no time is long enough in their present lifetime) that the seeking gives way to utter surrender - and with grace, enlightenment. Effort precedes grace. Response to Myth #3: Much like Myth #2, all professed 'teachers' who parrot the "We're already all enlightened" line eventually, if they are authentically (or poetically) enlightened, and go on long enough, relate personal stories that ALWAYS have some reference to their awakening/realizati on/shift in perspective, ... at a specific point in time. Otherwise, they wouldn't have anything to say - negation or propagation - about enlightenment. To parrot this,"We're already all enlightened, " pat phrase is to discourage the sincere seeker (who must one day surrender utterly if they ever hope to experience enlightenment) . My 3-Myths worth. Jeff _ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2010 Report Share Posted February 24, 2010 Thank you, Alan. Just as a short preface to my reply: As was the case with Ramana, my reports are based on my direct experience, not in an attempt to be in absolute (semantic or otherwise) accord with another's teachings (or another's interpretation of the teachings). The limits of language must give way to the actual experience - which is never at the mercy of argument. My affinity to, and love for the teachings of, Bhagavan is a result of learning that he set out to experience 'death' - as did I. My mantra prior to awakening was 'let me die'. When I read the story of young Ramana, several (many) years ago, I looked into his teachings and they resonated with my experience. When I looked more closely at the teachings of Jesus, also after the fact, they too resonated powerfully - as have the teachings of many awakened teachers over the years. But I still rely on my own direct experience from which to offer my comparative views. And so, on to the reply: It is our identification with ego or self that must be destroyed. My inquiry lead to the destruction/ annihilation this false identification (ego). At the point of the startling and sudden rush of wisdom that the heart whispered - the experience of SatChitAnanda - the ego as my identity was obliterated. And then... the world was no longer illusory. My default state is no mind, blissful, fearless, unassailable. Do I enjoy it from no mind? No question. But I am still aware of the earlier I (ego) identity and suspect (with good reason) that the ego lurks. Bhagavan is reported to have admonished, " Don't slip away " . J'ai Satchitananda, Jeff , Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs wrote: > > Dear Jeff, >  > My difficulty with this is that according to his teaching the ego veils the apperception of the Real Self- and also causes Consciousness to be reflected, so it is stepped down, and not experienced as the Pure Absolute Consciousness Sat-Chit-Ananda. He illustrates this in a diagram in collected works, the chapter. on Self Enquiry. In Padamalai he makes numerous statements that the ego must go, sometimes using the word 'destroyed'. When the ego goes, then the Self is Realised in its fullness, until then it is occluded or clouded over. >  > Love, >  > Alan > > --- On Wed, 24/2/10, Papajeff <jeff wrote: > > > Papajeff <jeff > Re: Enlightenment Myths > > Wednesday, 24 February, 2010, 11:17 > > >  > > > > Thanks, Alan. > > It is my feeling that Bhagavan leaves > room for the ego's potential for return > in his statement that, " the aspirant > meditates to attain and the awakened > meditate to maintain. " > > Yes, Myth #1 is the most difficult > to state clearly, because the identity > of 'ego' is often used as a sense > of separated or individual self > that 'dies' or has to go in favor > of the new realization of our > true identity in no mind. > > I am as comfortable with viewing > the enjoyment of the material world > as from 'no mind', but left the door > open for ego's return (and therefore > not it's 'death') as mentioned above. > > Do we not realize with awakening > that what we considered our primary > identity (ego or I) is now seen, > in truth, as a secondary mode of > being; that is, secondary to > the now realized primary mode > of " I-I " while still maintaining > the material world consciousness, > (and in this context, ego in the > servant role)? > > This is where many who consider > themselves jnani yogis or neo-advaitans, > who may have experienced the unitive > leap in consciousness without full > awakening, sound silly and hide > behind semantic shields - by lumping > our entire flesh and blood existence > in their narrow view of maya or " illusion " . > > As mentioned in the earlier post, > my complaint is that this can be > a discouragement to the seeker. > > Jeff > > , Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs@ ...> wrote: > > > > Dear Jeff, > >  > > I like your posting very much, and it torpodoes most of the Neo Advaita myths very effectively. > >  > > However with No. 1, I cannot find any reference in Bhagavan's teaching which allows the ego to continue even in an attenuated state. His main thrust seems to me to be that the ego has to go. After Realisation the material world can be still enjoyed from the 'no mind' state. > >  > > Love, > >  > > Alan > >  > >  > > --- On Tue, 23/2/10, Papajeff <jeff@> wrote: > > > > > > Papajeff <jeff@> > > Enlightenment Myths > > > > Tuesday, 23 February, 2010, 22:03 > > > > > >  > > > > > > > > Myth #1: You must kill > > the ego in order to achieve > > enlightenment. > > > > Myth #2: You must not > > seek enlightenment - because > > seeking perpetuates the sense > > of separation. > > > > Myth #3: We are all already > > enlightened, so just get on > > with your life. > > > > Response to Myth #1: If > > you kill the ego, you have > > no self to enjoy the Realized > > Self in the material world. > > The ego must be silenced and > > sent to a corner for a time > > out, but enlightenment brings > > the ego instant relief of not > > having to be " on " 24/7 and > > presents the startled ego with > > a new playmate - a new Captain > > of The Ship (of consciousness) - > > who dispels the ego's fear > > and doubt...and as they say > > in advertising - much, much more. > > > > But the ego lives on as a > > tenured resident of this > > temporal life. And some would > > say, plots mutiny once again, > > after a while. Meditation can > > be a good crimestopper. But > > that's another story. > > > > Response to Myth #2: The is > > trickier. It is a matter of > > timing. All 'teachers' who > > parrot the " You must not seek " > > admonishment eventually, if they > > go on long enough, replace > > the word seek with a synonym > > of some sort (like: inquire, > > for instance). And their personal > > stories ALWAYS have some reference > > to seeking (a rose by any other > > name). It is true that absolute > > surrender opens the door, but... > > > > seeking ALWAYS precedes the > > point of surrender. We don't > > need anything else to perpetuate > > the feeling of separation - we > > were already socially coerced > > into it before any thought of > > seeking occurred to us. And > > we don't come to feel the intuitive > > stirring at some point in our > > lives, and immediately flop down > > in complete and absolute surrender. > > > > It is only after a time of seeking, > > listening, reading, questioning, > > sitting in meditation, sitting > > in satsang, pleading for > > deliverance from despair and such > > (and for some, this goes on for > > a very long time - and for > > others, no time is long enough > > in their present lifetime) that > > the seeking gives way to utter > > surrender - and with grace, > > enlightenment. > > > > Effort precedes grace. > > > > Response to Myth #3: Much like > > Myth #2, all professed 'teachers' > > who parrot the " We're already > > all enlightened " line eventually, > > if they are authentically (or > > poetically) enlightened, and > > go on long enough, relate > > personal stories that ALWAYS > > have some reference to their > > awakening/realizati on/shift > > in perspective, ... > > > > at a specific point in time. > > Otherwise, they wouldn't have > > anything to say - negation or > > propagation - about enlightenment. > > > > To parrot this, " We're > > already all enlightened, " pat > > phrase is to discourage the > > sincere seeker (who must one > > day surrender utterly if they > > ever hope to experience > > enlightenment) . > > > > My 3-Myths worth. > > > > Jeff > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2010 Report Share Posted February 24, 2010 Thanks, yosy. Frolicing without fear is my favorite way of being...an ass. , Yosy <yosyflug wrote: > > On 24/02/2010 07:56, Alan Jacobs wrote: > > > > Dear Jeff, > > I like your posting very much, and it torpodoes most of the Neo > > Advaita myths very effectively. > > However with No. 1, I cannot find any reference in Bhagavan's teaching > > which allows the ego to continue even in an attenuated state. His main > > thrust seems to me to be that the ego has to go. After Realisation the > > material world can be still enjoyed from the 'no mind' state. > > Love, > > Alan > > > > oh yes, thank you jeff. > alan, friends, this might clarify somewhat the 'ego' issue... > > > I am, > Self identity > Is a donkey. > Mind, name, form, feelings > Emotions, cravings, hopes and fears > All included… merely an ass. > We all are donkeys, whether considered most intelligent > And revered as such > Or regarded as the dumbest of the dumb… > No different from plain asses †" > Likewise subject to birth, growth, decay and death. > But the remember, friend, > Lucky seeker after truth, > That the master, the all pervading > Nameless and impersonal self > Is boundless and beyond time. > Peerless ghost rider > Directing and guiding all donkeys, > The herd owner and sustainer > Is the same resplendent one and only, > Birth-less and deathless reality. > There is no other god. So > Wake up from dreams of selfhood, oh fortunate! > Friend of bright prospects, > Enjoy the frolics > Of the dead donkey †" > While there is time. > > > yosy the dead ass > > ps. any opinions, comments etc most welcome and appreciated > > > > --- On *Tue, 23/2/10, Papajeff /<jeff/* wrote: > > > > > > Papajeff <jeff > > Enlightenment Myths > > > > Tuesday, 23 February, 2010, 22:03 > > > > Myth #1: You must kill > > the ego in order to achieve > > enlightenment. > > > > Myth #2: You must not > > seek enlightenment - because > > seeking perpetuates the sense > > of separation. > > > > Myth #3: We are all already > > enlightened, so just get on > > with your life. > > > > Response to Myth #1: If > > you kill the ego, you have > > no self to enjoy the Realized > > Self in the material world. > > The ego must be silenced and > > sent to a corner for a time > > out, but enlightenment brings > > the ego instant relief of not > > having to be " on " 24/7 and > > presents the startled ego with > > a new playmate - a new Captain > > of The Ship (of consciousness) - > > who dispels the ego's fear > > and doubt...and as they say > > in advertising - much, much more. > > > > But the ego lives on as a > > tenured resident of this > > temporal life. And some would > > say, plots mutiny once again, > > after a while. Meditation can > > be a good crimestopper. But > > that's another story. > > > > Response to Myth #2: The is > > trickier. It is a matter of > > timing. All 'teachers' who > > parrot the " You must not seek " > > admonishment eventually, if they > > go on long enough, replace > > the word seek with a synonym > > of some sort (like: inquire, > > for instance). And their personal > > stories ALWAYS have some reference > > to seeking (a rose by any other > > name). It is true that absolute > > surrender opens the door, but... > > > > seeking ALWAYS precedes the > > point of surrender. We don't > > need anything else to perpetuate > > the feeling of separation - we > > were already socially coerced > > into it before any thought of > > seeking occurred to us. And > > we don't come to feel the intuitive > > stirring at some point in our > > lives, and immediately flop down > > in complete and absolute surrender. > > > > It is only after a time of seeking, > > listening, reading, questioning, > > sitting in meditation, sitting > > in satsang, pleading for > > deliverance from despair and such > > (and for some, this goes on for > > a very long time - and for > > others, no time is long enough > > in their present lifetime) that > > the seeking gives way to utter > > surrender - and with grace, > > enlightenment. > > > > Effort precedes grace. > > > > Response to Myth #3: Much like > > Myth #2, all professed 'teachers' > > who parrot the " We're already > > all enlightened " line eventually, > > if they are authentically (or > > poetically) enlightened, and > > go on long enough, relate > > personal stories that ALWAYS > > have some reference to their > > awakening/realizati on/shift > > in perspective, ... > > > > at a specific point in time. > > Otherwise, they wouldn't have > > anything to say - negation or > > propagation - about enlightenment. > > > > To parrot this, " We're > > already all enlightened, " pat > > phrase is to discourage the > > sincere seeker (who must one > > day surrender utterly if they > > ever hope to experience > > enlightenment) . > > > > My 3-Myths worth. > > > > Jeff > > > > _ > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2010 Report Share Posted February 24, 2010 Dear Jeff, I quite understand. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion based on their understanding and experience.. I was merely quoting how I understand it from the standpoint of my understanding of Bhagavan's Teaching, and my own experience. I assure you that you will coninue to enjoy the material world from the 'no mind state'. All Jnanis do. Love, Alan --- On Wed, 24/2/10, Papajeff <jeff wrote: Papajeff <jeffRe: Enlightenment Myths Date: Wednesday, 24 February, 2010, 12:58 Thank you, Alan.Just as a short prefaceto my reply:As was the case withRamana, my reports are based on my direct experience, not in an attempt to be in absolute (semantic or otherwise) accord with another's teachings (or another's interpretation of the teachings).The limits of language must give way to theactual experience - whichis never at the mercyof argument.My affinity to, and love for the teachings of, Bhagavan is a result of learning that he set out to experience 'death' - as did I. My mantra prior to awakening was 'let me die'. When I read the story of young Ramana, several (many) years ago, I looked into his teachings and they resonated with my experience.When I looked more closely at the teachings of Jesus, also after the fact, they too resonated powerfully -as have the teachings of many awakened teachers over the years. But I stillrely on my own direct experience from which to offer my comparativeviews.And so, on to the reply:It is our identification with ego or self that must be destroyed. My inquiry lead to the destruction/annihilation this false identification (ego).At the point of the startling and sudden rush of wisdom that the heart whispered - the experience of SatChitAnanda - the ego as my identity was obliterated. And then...the world was no longer illusory. My default stateis no mind, blissful, fearless,unassailable. Do I enjoy itfrom no mind? No question.But I am still aware ofthe earlier I (ego) identityand suspect (with good reason) that the ego lurks. Bhagavan is reported to haveadmonished, "Don't slip away".J'ai Satchitananda,Jeff, Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs@ ...> wrote:>> Dear Jeff,>  > My difficulty with this is that according to his teaching the ego veils the apperception of the Real Self- and also causes Consciousness to be reflected, so it is stepped down, and not experienced as the Pure Absolute Consciousness Sat-Chit-Ananda. He illustrates this in a diagram in collected works, the chapter. on Self Enquiry. In Padamalai he makes numerous statements that the ego must go, sometimes using the word 'destroyed'. When the ego goes, then the Self is Realised in its fullness, until then it is occluded or clouded over.>  > Love,>  > Alan> > --- On Wed, 24/2/10, Papajeff <jeff wrote:> > > Papajeff <jeff> Re: Enlightenment Myths> > Wednesday, 24 February, 2010, 11:17> > >  > > > > Thanks, Alan. > > It is my feeling that Bhagavan leaves > room for the ego's potential for return > in his statement that, "the aspirant > meditates to attain and the awakened > meditate to maintain."> > Yes, Myth #1 is the most difficult > to state clearly, because the identity > of 'ego' is often used as a sense > of separated or individual self > that 'dies' or has to go in favor > of the new realization of our > true identity in no mind.> > I am as comfortable with viewing > the enjoyment of the material world > as from 'no mind', but left the door > open for ego's return (and therefore> not it's 'death') as mentioned above. > > Do we not realize with awakening > that what we considered our primary > identity (ego or I) is now seen,> in truth, as a secondary mode of > being; that is, secondary to > the now realized primary mode > of "I-I" while still maintaining > the material world consciousness, > (and in this context, ego in the > servant role)? > > This is where many who consider> themselves jnani yogis or neo-advaitans,> who may have experienced the unitive> leap in consciousness without full> awakening, sound silly and hide> behind semantic shields - by lumping > our entire flesh and blood existence > in their narrow view of maya or "illusion".> > As mentioned in the earlier post,> my complaint is that this can be> a discouragement to the seeker.> > Jeff> > , Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs@ ...> wrote:> >> > Dear Jeff,> >  > > I like your posting very much, and it torpodoes most of the Neo Advaita myths very effectively. > >  > > However with No. 1, I cannot find any reference in Bhagavan's teaching which allows the ego to continue even in an attenuated state. His main thrust seems to me to be that the ego has to go. After Realisation the material world can be still enjoyed from the 'no mind' state.> >  > > Love,> >  > > Alan> >  > >  > > --- On Tue, 23/2/10, Papajeff <jeff@> wrote:> > > > > > Papajeff <jeff@>> > Enlightenment Myths> > > > Tuesday, 23 February, 2010, 22:03> > > > > >  > > > > > > > > Myth #1: You must kill> > the ego in order to achieve> > enlightenment.> > > > Myth #2: You must not> > seek enlightenment - because> > seeking perpetuates the sense> > of separation.> > > > Myth #3: We are all already> > enlightened, so just get on> > with your life.> > > > Response to Myth #1: If> > you kill the ego, you have> > no self to enjoy the Realized> > Self in the material world.> > The ego must be silenced and> > sent to a corner for a time> > out, but enlightenment brings> > the ego instant relief of not> > having to be "on" 24/7 and > > presents the startled ego with> > a new playmate - a new Captain > > of The Ship (of consciousness) - > > who dispels the ego's fear> > and doubt...and as they say> > in advertising - much, much more.> > > > But the ego lives on as a> > tenured resident of this> > temporal life. And some would> > say, plots mutiny once again,> > after a while. Meditation can > > be a good crimestopper. But> > that's another story.> > > > Response to Myth #2: The is> > trickier. It is a matter of> > timing. All 'teachers' who> > parrot the "You must not seek"> > admonishment eventually, if they> > go on long enough, replace> > the word seek with a synonym> > of some sort (like: inquire,> > for instance). And their personal> > stories ALWAYS have some reference> > to seeking (a rose by any other> > name). It is true that absolute> > surrender opens the door, but...> > > > seeking ALWAYS precedes the> > point of surrender. We don't> > need anything else to perpetuate> > the feeling of separation - we> > were already socially coerced> > into it before any thought of> > seeking occurred to us. And > > we don't come to feel the intuitive > > stirring at some point in our> > lives, and immediately flop down > > in complete and absolute surrender. > > > > It is only after a time of seeking,> > listening, reading, questioning,> > sitting in meditation, sitting> > in satsang, pleading for > > deliverance from despair and such> > (and for some, this goes on for > > a very long time - and for> > others, no time is long enough> > in their present lifetime) that> > the seeking gives way to utter> > surrender - and with grace,> > enlightenment. > > > > Effort precedes grace.> > > > Response to Myth #3: Much like> > Myth #2, all professed 'teachers' > > who parrot the "We're already> > all enlightened" line eventually, > > if they are authentically (or > > poetically) enlightened, and > > go on long enough, relate > > personal stories that ALWAYS > > have some reference to their> > awakening/realizati on/shift> > in perspective, ...> > > > at a specific point in time.> > Otherwise, they wouldn't have> > anything to say - negation or> > propagation - about enlightenment.> > > > To parrot this,"We're> > already all enlightened, " pat> > phrase is to discourage the> > sincere seeker (who must one> > day surrender utterly if they> > ever hope to experience> > enlightenment) . > > > > My 3-Myths worth.> > > > Jeff> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2010 Report Share Posted February 24, 2010 On 24/02/2010 15:02, Papajeff wrote: Thanks, yosy. Frolicing without fear is my favorite way of being...an ass. hehehe is there any other? @}->,->'-- yosy ps. another donkey trick.... Abandoning intent Right intent Is no intent. When all is perfect, whole, Just as it should be - Only gratitude Remains. What intent can arise? Can any purpose spring up And be In the absence Of 'Me'? , Yosy <yosyflug wrote: > > On 24/02/2010 07:56, Alan Jacobs wrote: > > > > Dear Jeff, > > I like your posting very much, and it torpodoes most of the Neo > > Advaita myths very effectively. > > However with No. 1, I cannot find any reference in Bhagavan's teaching > > which allows the ego to continue even in an attenuated state. His main > > thrust seems to me to be that the ego has to go. After Realisation the > > material world can be still enjoyed from the 'no mind' state. > > Love, > > Alan > > > > oh yes, thank you jeff. > alan, friends, this might clarify somewhat the 'ego' issue... > > > I am, > Self identity > Is a donkey. > Mind, name, form, feelings > Emotions, cravings, hopes and fears > All included… merely an ass. > We all are donkeys, whether considered most intelligent > And revered as such > Or regarded as the dumbest of the dumb… > No different from plain asses â€" > Likewise subject to birth, growth, decay and death. > But the remember, friend, > Lucky seeker after truth, > That the master, the all pervading > Nameless and impersonal self > Is boundless and beyond time. > Peerless ghost rider > Directing and guiding all donkeys, > The herd owner and sustainer > Is the same resplendent one and only, > Birth-less and deathless reality. > There is no other god. So > Wake up from dreams of selfhood, oh fortunate! > Friend of bright prospects, > Enjoy the frolics > Of the dead donkey â€" > While there is time. > > > yosy the dead ass > > ps. any opinions, comments etc most welcome and appreciated > > > > --- On *Tue, 23/2/10, Papajeff /<jeff/* wrote: > > > > > > Papajeff <jeff > > Enlightenment Myths > > > > Tuesday, 23 February, 2010, 22:03 > > > > Myth #1: You must kill > > the ego in order to achieve > > enlightenment. > > > > Myth #2: You must not > > seek enlightenment - because > > seeking perpetuates the sense > > of separation. > > > > Myth #3: We are all already > > enlightened, so just get on > > with your life. > > > > Response to Myth #1: If > > you kill the ego, you have > > no self to enjoy the Realized > > Self in the material world. > > The ego must be silenced and > > sent to a corner for a time > > out, but enlightenment brings > > the ego instant relief of not > > having to be "on" 24/7 and > > presents the startled ego with > > a new playmate - a new Captain > > of The Ship (of consciousness) - > > who dispels the ego's fear > > and doubt...and as they say > > in advertising - much, much more. > > > > But the ego lives on as a > > tenured resident of this > > temporal life. And some would > > say, plots mutiny once again, > > after a while. Meditation can > > be a good crimestopper. But > > that's another story. > > > > Response to Myth #2: The is > > trickier. It is a matter of > > timing. All 'teachers' who > > parrot the "You must not seek" > > admonishment eventually, if they > > go on long enough, replace > > the word seek with a synonym > > of some sort (like: inquire, > > for instance). And their personal > > stories ALWAYS have some reference > > to seeking (a rose by any other > > name). It is true that absolute > > surrender opens the door, but... > > > > seeking ALWAYS precedes the > > point of surrender. We don't > > need anything else to perpetuate > > the feeling of separation - we > > were already socially coerced > > into it before any thought of > > seeking occurred to us. And > > we don't come to feel the intuitive > > stirring at some point in our > > lives, and immediately flop down > > in complete and absolute surrender. > > > > It is only after a time of seeking, > > listening, reading, questioning, > > sitting in meditation, sitting > > in satsang, pleading for > > deliverance from despair and such > > (and for some, this goes on for > > a very long time - and for > > others, no time is long enough > > in their present lifetime) that > > the seeking gives way to utter > > surrender - and with grace, > > enlightenment. > > > > Effort precedes grace. > > > > Response to Myth #3: Much like > > Myth #2, all professed 'teachers' > > who parrot the "We're already > > all enlightened" line eventually, > > if they are authentically (or > > poetically) enlightened, and > > go on long enough, relate > > personal stories that ALWAYS > > have some reference to their > > awakening/realizati on/shift > > in perspective, ... > > > > at a specific point in time. > > Otherwise, they wouldn't have > > anything to say - negation or > > propagation - about enlightenment. > > > > To parrot this,"We're > > already all enlightened, " pat > > phrase is to discourage the > > sincere seeker (who must one > > day surrender utterly if they > > ever hope to experience > > enlightenment) . > > > > My 3-Myths worth. > > > > Jeff > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2010 Report Share Posted February 24, 2010 All egos " have to go " .... in the sense that the sense of separation which creates this world IS NOTHING ELSE BUT THE EGO. Only love will return us to the sense of non-separation, our Kundalini awakening to the Oneness that is ever present and always as near as our breath. Love. ~A , Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs wrote: > > Dear Jeff, >  > I like your posting very much, and it torpodoes most of the Neo Advaita myths very effectively. >  > However with No. 1, I cannot find any reference in Bhagavan's teaching which allows the ego to continue even in an attenuated state. His main thrust seems to me to be that the ego has to go. After Realisation the material world can be still enjoyed from the 'no mind' state. >  > Love, >  > Alan >  >  > --- On Tue, 23/2/10, Papajeff <jeff wrote: > > > Papajeff <jeff > Enlightenment Myths > > Tuesday, 23 February, 2010, 22:03 > > >  > > > > Myth #1: You must kill > the ego in order to achieve > enlightenment. > > Myth #2: You must not > seek enlightenment - because > seeking perpetuates the sense > of separation. > > Myth #3: We are all already > enlightened, so just get on > with your life. > > Response to Myth #1: If > you kill the ego, you have > no self to enjoy the Realized > Self in the material world. > The ego must be silenced and > sent to a corner for a time > out, but enlightenment brings > the ego instant relief of not > having to be " on " 24/7 and > presents the startled ego with > a new playmate - a new Captain > of The Ship (of consciousness) - > who dispels the ego's fear > and doubt...and as they say > in advertising - much, much more. > > But the ego lives on as a > tenured resident of this > temporal life. And some would > say, plots mutiny once again, > after a while. Meditation can > be a good crimestopper. But > that's another story. > > Response to Myth #2: The is > trickier. It is a matter of > timing. All 'teachers' who > parrot the " You must not seek " > admonishment eventually, if they > go on long enough, replace > the word seek with a synonym > of some sort (like: inquire, > for instance). And their personal > stories ALWAYS have some reference > to seeking (a rose by any other > name). It is true that absolute > surrender opens the door, but... > > seeking ALWAYS precedes the > point of surrender. We don't > need anything else to perpetuate > the feeling of separation - we > were already socially coerced > into it before any thought of > seeking occurred to us. And > we don't come to feel the intuitive > stirring at some point in our > lives, and immediately flop down > in complete and absolute surrender. > > It is only after a time of seeking, > listening, reading, questioning, > sitting in meditation, sitting > in satsang, pleading for > deliverance from despair and such > (and for some, this goes on for > a very long time - and for > others, no time is long enough > in their present lifetime) that > the seeking gives way to utter > surrender - and with grace, > enlightenment. > > Effort precedes grace. > > Response to Myth #3: Much like > Myth #2, all professed 'teachers' > who parrot the " We're already > all enlightened " line eventually, > if they are authentically (or > poetically) enlightened, and > go on long enough, relate > personal stories that ALWAYS > have some reference to their > awakening/realizati on/shift > in perspective, ... > > at a specific point in time. > Otherwise, they wouldn't have > anything to say - negation or > propagation - about enlightenment. > > To parrot this, " We're > already all enlightened, " pat > phrase is to discourage the > sincere seeker (who must one > day surrender utterly if they > ever hope to experience > enlightenment) . > > My 3-Myths worth. > > Jeff > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2010 Report Share Posted February 24, 2010 On 2/23/2010 5:03 PM, Papajeff wrote: Myth #1: You must kill the ego in order to achieve enlightenment. The ego as meant in in texts on advaita regards the sense of "I" and is the root of all afflictions: whatever happens, does so to "me". Hence the effort, once this is recognized, is not to hinder the dissolution of the sense of "I" (without which there isn't a sense of "you" either). Myth #2: You must not seek enlightenment - because seeking perpetuates the sense of separation. It is impossible to seek something that is unknown, nor can be defined in such a way that it could be recognized. Apart from that, whatever is found is is bound to be lost. Hence stories exist like that of a seeker after a gem while carrying it on the head already, unknowingly. Myth #3: We are all already enlightened, so just get on with your life. Incorrect formulation: life gets on with "you" no matter "your" approval or disapproval. Hence the fundamental issue that without a sense of "I / me" a situation arises that cannot be known as long as that sense exists. Response to Myth #1: If you kill the ego, you have no self to enjoy the Realized Self in the material world. The ego must be silenced and sent to a corner for a time out, but enlightenment brings the ego instant relief of not having to be "on" 24/7 and presents the startled ego with a new playmate - a new Captain of The Ship (of consciousness) - who dispels the ego's fear and doubt...and as they say in advertising - much, much more. In the West, in psychology, there's a different definition of "ego" - it's more than the sense of "I / me". Hence C.G. Jung failed to understand how it is possible to live without "ego" - because of a difference in definition. But the ego lives on as a tenured resident of this temporal life. And some would say, plots mutiny once again, after a while. Meditation can be a good crimestopper. But that's another story. Response to Myth #2: The is trickier. It is a matter of timing. All 'teachers' who parrot the "You must not seek" admonishment eventually, if they go on long enough, replace the word seek with a synonym of some sort (like: inquire, for instance). And their personal stories ALWAYS have some reference to seeking (a rose by any other name). It is true that absolute surrender opens the door, but... There's at least one advantage in seeking: when unsuccessful, it's easier to give that up to so "something else" can take over. seeking ALWAYS precedes the point of surrender. We don't need anything else to perpetuate the feeling of separation - we were already socially coerced into it before any thought of seeking occurred to us. And we don't come to feel the intuitive stirring at some point in our lives, and immediately flop down in complete and absolute surrender. Recognizing the futility of seeking for pleasure (with the unavoidable pain / attachment) is quite enough to initiate a very different lifestyle. It is only after a time of seeking, listening, reading, questioning, sitting in meditation, sitting in satsang, pleading for deliverance from despair and such (and for some, this goes on for a very long time - and for others, no time is long enough in their present lifetime) that the seeking gives way to utter surrender - and with grace, enlightenment. Effort precedes grace. Grace is when effort is given up so "something else" takes over instead. Response to Myth #3: Much like Myth #2, all professed 'teachers' who parrot the "We're already all enlightened" line eventually, if they are authentically (or poetically) enlightened, and go on long enough, relate personal stories that ALWAYS have some reference to their awakening/realization/shift in perspective, ... at a specific point in time. Otherwise, they wouldn't have anything to say - negation or propagation - about enlightenment. At best, the so called "enlightenment" is but the start of the dissolution of the sense of "I". To parrot this,"We're already all enlightened," pat phrase is to discourage the sincere seeker (who must one day surrender utterly if they ever hope to experience enlightenment). My 3-Myths worth. Jeff A phrase like "there is only Brahman" is valid also before it is recognized as such, just like ripe mangoes are sweet before one actually tastes the first one. In that sense an expression like "you are enlightened already" has to be interpreted. It is nevertheless useless, if just because an aspirant doesn't have the faintest idea of what "enlightened" actually means. Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2010 Report Share Posted February 24, 2010 Thanks, Jan. Nice follow up(s). , ecirada <ecirada wrote: > > On 2/23/2010 5:03 PM, Papajeff wrote: > > Myth #1: You must kill > > the ego in order to achieve > > enlightenment. > > > The ego as meant in in texts on advaita > regards the sense of " I " and is the root > of all afflictions: whatever happens, does > so to " me " . Hence the effort, once this > is recognized, is not to hinder the > dissolution of the sense of " I " (without > which there isn't a sense of " you " either). > > Myth #2: You must not > > seek enlightenment - because > > seeking perpetuates the sense > > of separation. > > > It is impossible to seek something that is unknown, > nor can be defined in such a way that it could be > recognized. Apart from that, whatever is found is > is bound to be lost. Hence stories exist like that > of a seeker after a gem while carrying it on the > head already, unknowingly. > > Myth #3: We are all already > > enlightened, so just get on > > with your life. > > > Incorrect formulation: life gets on with " you " no matter > " your " approval or disapproval. Hence the fundamental > issue that without a sense of " I / me " a situation arises > that cannot be known as long as that sense exists. > > Response to Myth #1: If > > you kill the ego, you have > > no self to enjoy the Realized > > Self in the material world. > > The ego must be silenced and > > sent to a corner for a time > > out, but enlightenment brings > > the ego instant relief of not > > having to be " on " 24/7 and > > presents the startled ego with > > a new playmate - a new Captain > > of The Ship (of consciousness) - > > who dispels the ego's fear > > and doubt...and as they say > > in advertising - much, much more. > > > In the West, in psychology, there's a > different definition of " ego " - it's more than > the sense of " I / me " . Hence C.G. Jung > failed to understand how it is possible to > live without " ego " - because of a difference > in definition. > > But the ego lives on as a > > tenured resident of this > > temporal life. And some would > > say, plots mutiny once again, > > after a while. Meditation can > > be a good crimestopper. But > > that's another story. > > > > Response to Myth #2: The is > > trickier. It is a matter of > > timing. All 'teachers' who > > parrot the " You must not seek " > > admonishment eventually, if they > > go on long enough, replace > > the word seek with a synonym > > of some sort (like: inquire, > > for instance). And their personal > > stories ALWAYS have some reference > > to seeking (a rose by any other > > name). It is true that absolute > > surrender opens the door, but... > > > There's at least one advantage in seeking: > when unsuccessful, it's easier to give that > up to so " something else " can take over. > > seeking ALWAYS precedes the > > point of surrender. We don't > > need anything else to perpetuate > > the feeling of separation - we > > were already socially coerced > > into it before any thought of > > seeking occurred to us. And > > we don't come to feel the intuitive > > stirring at some point in our > > lives, and immediately flop down > > in complete and absolute surrender. > > > Recognizing the futility of seeking for pleasure > (with the unavoidable pain / attachment) is > quite enough to initiate a very different lifestyle. > > It is only after a time of seeking, > > listening, reading, questioning, > > sitting in meditation, sitting > > in satsang, pleading for > > deliverance from despair and such > > (and for some, this goes on for > > a very long time - and for > > others, no time is long enough > > in their present lifetime) that > > the seeking gives way to utter > > surrender - and with grace, > > enlightenment. > > > > Effort precedes grace. > > > Grace is when effort is given up so > " something else " takes over instead. > > Response to Myth #3: Much like > > Myth #2, all professed 'teachers' > > who parrot the " We're already > > all enlightened " line eventually, > > if they are authentically (or > > poetically) enlightened, and > > go on long enough, relate > > personal stories that ALWAYS > > have some reference to their > > awakening/realization/shift > > in perspective, ... > > > > at a specific point in time. > > Otherwise, they wouldn't have > > anything to say - negation or > > propagation - about enlightenment. > > > At best, the so called " enlightenment " is but > the start of the dissolution of the sense of " I " . > > > > > To parrot this, " We're > > already all enlightened, " pat > > phrase is to discourage the > > sincere seeker (who must one > > day surrender utterly if they > > ever hope to experience > > enlightenment). > > > > My 3-Myths worth. > > > > Jeff > > > > > A phrase like " there is only Brahman " is valid also before > it is recognized as such, just like ripe mangoes are sweet > before one actually tastes the first one. In that sense an > expression like " you are enlightened already " has to be > interpreted. It is nevertheless useless, if just because an > aspirant doesn't have the faintest idea of what " enlightened " > actually means. > > Jan > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2010 Report Share Posted February 24, 2010 On 24/02/2010 17:36, ecirada wrote: On 2/23/2010 5:03 PM, Papajeff wrote: Myth #1: You must kill the ego in order to achieve enlightenment. The ego as meant in in texts on advaita regards the sense of "I" and is the root of all afflictions: whatever happens, does so to "me". Hence the effort, once this is recognized, is not to hinder the dissolution of the sense of "I" (without which there isn't a sense of "you" either). Myth #2: You must not seek enlightenment - because seeking perpetuates the sense of separation. It is impossible to seek something that is unknown, nor can be defined in such a way that it could be recognized. Apart from that, whatever is found is is bound to be lost. Hence stories exist like that of a seeker after a gem while carrying it on the head already, unknowingly. Myth #3: We are all already enlightened, so just get on with your life. Incorrect formulation: life gets on with "you" no matter "your" approval or disapproval. Hence the fundamental issue that without a sense of "I / me" a situation arises that cannot be known as long as that sense exists. Response to Myth #1: If you kill the ego, you have no self to enjoy the Realized Self in the material world. The ego must be silenced and sent to a corner for a time out, but enlightenment brings the ego instant relief of not having to be "on" 24/7 and presents the startled ego with a new playmate - a new Captain of The Ship (of consciousness) - who dispels the ego's fear and doubt...and as they say in advertising - much, much more. In the West, in psychology, there's a different definition of "ego" - it's more than the sense of "I / me". Hence C.G. Jung failed to understand how it is possible to live without "ego" - because of a difference in definition. But the ego lives on as a tenured resident of this temporal life. And some would say, plots mutiny once again, after a while. Meditation can be a good crimestopper. But that's another story. Response to Myth #2: The is trickier. It is a matter of timing. All 'teachers' who parrot the "You must not seek" admonishment eventually, if they go on long enough, replace the word seek with a synonym of some sort (like: inquire, for instance). And their personal stories ALWAYS have some reference to seeking (a rose by any other name). It is true that absolute surrender opens the door, but... There's at least one advantage in seeking: when unsuccessful, it's easier to give that up to so "something else" can take over. seeking ALWAYS precedes the point of surrender. We don't need anything else to perpetuate the feeling of separation - we were already socially coerced into it before any thought of seeking occurred to us. And we don't come to feel the intuitive stirring at some point in our lives, and immediately flop down in complete and absolute surrender. Recognizing the futility of seeking for pleasure (with the unavoidable pain / attachment) is quite enough to initiate a very different lifestyle. It is only after a time of seeking, listening, reading, questioning, sitting in meditation, sitting in satsang, pleading for deliverance from despair and such (and for some, this goes on for a very long time - and for others, no time is long enough in their present lifetime) that the seeking gives way to utter surrender - and with grace, enlightenment. Effort precedes grace. Grace is when effort is given up so "something else" takes over instead. Response to Myth #3: Much like Myth #2, all professed 'teachers' who parrot the "We're already all enlightened" line eventually, if they are authentically (or poetically) enlightened, and go on long enough, relate personal stories that ALWAYS have some reference to their awakening/realization/shift in perspective, ... at a specific point in time. Otherwise, they wouldn't have anything to say - negation or propagation - about enlightenment. At best, the so called "enlightenment" is but the start of the dissolution of the sense of "I". To parrot this,"We're already all enlightened," pat phrase is to discourage the sincere seeker (who must one day surrender utterly if they ever hope to experience enlightenment). My 3-Myths worth. Jeff A phrase like "there is only Brahman" is valid also before it is recognized as such, just like ripe mangoes are sweet before one actually tastes the first one. In that sense an expression like "you are enlightened already" has to be interpreted. It is nevertheless useless, if just because an aspirant doesn't have the faintest idea of what "enlightened" actually means. Jan jan my dear friend, it is a pleasure, as always, to concur your brilliant comment. jeff's myths notwithstanding lol... thanks! yosy ps. how's panama? regards to our winged friends!. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2010 Report Share Posted February 24, 2010 There's only one enlightenmen myth perpetuated unto infinity; three guesses as to who it is*. Hugs of love, U2. ~A (*Knock Knock. Guess who?) , " Papajeff " <jeff wrote: > > Thanks, Jan. Nice follow up(s). > > , ecirada <ecirada@> wrote: > > > > On 2/23/2010 5:03 PM, Papajeff wrote: > > > Myth #1: You must kill > > > the ego in order to achieve > > > enlightenment. > > > > > The ego as meant in in texts on advaita > > regards the sense of " I " and is the root > > of all afflictions: whatever happens, does > > so to " me " . Hence the effort, once this > > is recognized, is not to hinder the > > dissolution of the sense of " I " (without > > which there isn't a sense of " you " either). > > > Myth #2: You must not > > > seek enlightenment - because > > > seeking perpetuates the sense > > > of separation. > > > > > It is impossible to seek something that is unknown, > > nor can be defined in such a way that it could be > > recognized. Apart from that, whatever is found is > > is bound to be lost. Hence stories exist like that > > of a seeker after a gem while carrying it on the > > head already, unknowingly. > > > Myth #3: We are all already > > > enlightened, so just get on > > > with your life. > > > > > Incorrect formulation: life gets on with " you " no matter > > " your " approval or disapproval. Hence the fundamental > > issue that without a sense of " I / me " a situation arises > > that cannot be known as long as that sense exists. > > > Response to Myth #1: If > > > you kill the ego, you have > > > no self to enjoy the Realized > > > Self in the material world. > > > The ego must be silenced and > > > sent to a corner for a time > > > out, but enlightenment brings > > > the ego instant relief of not > > > having to be " on " 24/7 and > > > presents the startled ego with > > > a new playmate - a new Captain > > > of The Ship (of consciousness) - > > > who dispels the ego's fear > > > and doubt...and as they say > > > in advertising - much, much more. > > > > > In the West, in psychology, there's a > > different definition of " ego " - it's more than > > the sense of " I / me " . Hence C.G. Jung > > failed to understand how it is possible to > > live without " ego " - because of a difference > > in definition. > > > But the ego lives on as a > > > tenured resident of this > > > temporal life. And some would > > > say, plots mutiny once again, > > > after a while. Meditation can > > > be a good crimestopper. But > > > that's another story. > > > > > > Response to Myth #2: The is > > > trickier. It is a matter of > > > timing. All 'teachers' who > > > parrot the " You must not seek " > > > admonishment eventually, if they > > > go on long enough, replace > > > the word seek with a synonym > > > of some sort (like: inquire, > > > for instance). And their personal > > > stories ALWAYS have some reference > > > to seeking (a rose by any other > > > name). It is true that absolute > > > surrender opens the door, but... > > > > > There's at least one advantage in seeking: > > when unsuccessful, it's easier to give that > > up to so " something else " can take over. > > > seeking ALWAYS precedes the > > > point of surrender. We don't > > > need anything else to perpetuate > > > the feeling of separation - we > > > were already socially coerced > > > into it before any thought of > > > seeking occurred to us. And > > > we don't come to feel the intuitive > > > stirring at some point in our > > > lives, and immediately flop down > > > in complete and absolute surrender. > > > > > Recognizing the futility of seeking for pleasure > > (with the unavoidable pain / attachment) is > > quite enough to initiate a very different lifestyle. > > > It is only after a time of seeking, > > > listening, reading, questioning, > > > sitting in meditation, sitting > > > in satsang, pleading for > > > deliverance from despair and such > > > (and for some, this goes on for > > > a very long time - and for > > > others, no time is long enough > > > in their present lifetime) that > > > the seeking gives way to utter > > > surrender - and with grace, > > > enlightenment. > > > > > > Effort precedes grace. > > > > > Grace is when effort is given up so > > " something else " takes over instead. > > > Response to Myth #3: Much like > > > Myth #2, all professed 'teachers' > > > who parrot the " We're already > > > all enlightened " line eventually, > > > if they are authentically (or > > > poetically) enlightened, and > > > go on long enough, relate > > > personal stories that ALWAYS > > > have some reference to their > > > awakening/realization/shift > > > in perspective, ... > > > > > > at a specific point in time. > > > Otherwise, they wouldn't have > > > anything to say - negation or > > > propagation - about enlightenment. > > > > > At best, the so called " enlightenment " is but > > the start of the dissolution of the sense of " I " . > > > > > > > > To parrot this, " We're > > > already all enlightened, " pat > > > phrase is to discourage the > > > sincere seeker (who must one > > > day surrender utterly if they > > > ever hope to experience > > > enlightenment). > > > > > > My 3-Myths worth. > > > > > > Jeff > > > > > > > > A phrase like " there is only Brahman " is valid also before > > it is recognized as such, just like ripe mangoes are sweet > > before one actually tastes the first one. In that sense an > > expression like " you are enlightened already " has to be > > interpreted. It is nevertheless useless, if just because an > > aspirant doesn't have the faintest idea of what " enlightened " > > actually means. > > > > Jan > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2010 Report Share Posted February 24, 2010 Thanks for starting the discussion Jeff. When even a scholar like C.G. Jung couldn't look beyond the psychological definition of "ego", it's a good subject. On 2/24/2010 11:17 AM, Papajeff wrote: Thanks, Jan. Nice follow up(s). , ecirada <ecirada wrote: On 2/23/2010 5:03 PM, Papajeff wrote: Myth #1: You must kill the ego in order to achieve enlightenment. The ego as meant in in texts on advaita regards the sense of "I" and is the root of all afflictions: whatever happens, does so to "me". Hence the effort, once this is recognized, is not to hinder the dissolution of the sense of "I" (without which there isn't a sense of "you" either). Myth #2: You must not seek enlightenment - because seeking perpetuates the sense of separation. It is impossible to seek something that is unknown, nor can be defined in such a way that it could be recognized. Apart from that, whatever is found is is bound to be lost. Hence stories exist like that of a seeker after a gem while carrying it on the head already, unknowingly. Myth #3: We are all already enlightened, so just get on with your life. Incorrect formulation: life gets on with "you" no matter "your" approval or disapproval. Hence the fundamental issue that without a sense of "I / me" a situation arises that cannot be known as long as that sense exists. Response to Myth #1: If you kill the ego, you have no self to enjoy the Realized Self in the material world. The ego must be silenced and sent to a corner for a time out, but enlightenment brings the ego instant relief of not having to be "on" 24/7 and presents the startled ego with a new playmate - a new Captain of The Ship (of consciousness) - who dispels the ego's fear and doubt...and as they say in advertising - much, much more. In the West, in psychology, there's a different definition of "ego" - it's more than the sense of "I / me". Hence C.G. Jung failed to understand how it is possible to live without "ego" - because of a difference in definition. But the ego lives on as a tenured resident of this temporal life. And some would say, plots mutiny once again, after a while. Meditation can be a good crimestopper. But that's another story. Response to Myth #2: The is trickier. It is a matter of timing. All 'teachers' who parrot the "You must not seek" admonishment eventually, if they go on long enough, replace the word seek with a synonym of some sort (like: inquire, for instance). And their personal stories ALWAYS have some reference to seeking (a rose by any other name). It is true that absolute surrender opens the door, but... There's at least one advantage in seeking: when unsuccessful, it's easier to give that up to so "something else" can take over. seeking ALWAYS precedes the point of surrender. We don't need anything else to perpetuate the feeling of separation - we were already socially coerced into it before any thought of seeking occurred to us. And we don't come to feel the intuitive stirring at some point in our lives, and immediately flop down in complete and absolute surrender. Recognizing the futility of seeking for pleasure (with the unavoidable pain / attachment) is quite enough to initiate a very different lifestyle. It is only after a time of seeking, listening, reading, questioning, sitting in meditation, sitting in satsang, pleading for deliverance from despair and such (and for some, this goes on for a very long time - and for others, no time is long enough in their present lifetime) that the seeking gives way to utter surrender - and with grace, enlightenment. Effort precedes grace. Grace is when effort is given up so "something else" takes over instead. Response to Myth #3: Much like Myth #2, all professed 'teachers' who parrot the "We're already all enlightened" line eventually, if they are authentically (or poetically) enlightened, and go on long enough, relate personal stories that ALWAYS have some reference to their awakening/realization/shift in perspective, ... at a specific point in time. Otherwise, they wouldn't have anything to say - negation or propagation - about enlightenment. At best, the so called "enlightenment" is but the start of the dissolution of the sense of "I". To parrot this,"We're already all enlightened," pat phrase is to discourage the sincere seeker (who must one day surrender utterly if they ever hope to experience enlightenment). My 3-Myths worth. Jeff A phrase like "there is only Brahman" is valid also before it is recognized as such, just like ripe mangoes are sweet before one actually tastes the first one. In that sense an expression like "you are enlightened already" has to be interpreted. It is nevertheless useless, if just because an aspirant doesn't have the faintest idea of what "enlightened" actually means. Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2010 Report Share Posted February 24, 2010 On 2/24/2010 11:54 AM, Yosy wrote: On 24/02/2010 17:36, ecirada wrote: On 2/23/2010 5:03 PM, Papajeff wrote: Myth #1: You must kill the ego in order to achieve enlightenment. The ego as meant in in texts on advaita regards the sense of "I" and is the root of all afflictions: whatever happens, does so to "me". Hence the effort, once this is recognized, is not to hinder the dissolution of the sense of "I" (without which there isn't a sense of "you" either). Myth #2: You must not seek enlightenment - because seeking perpetuates the sense of separation. It is impossible to seek something that is unknown, nor can be defined in such a way that it could be recognized. Apart from that, whatever is found is is bound to be lost. Hence stories exist like that of a seeker after a gem while carrying it on the head already, unknowingly. Myth #3: We are all already enlightened, so just get on with your life. Incorrect formulation: life gets on with "you" no matter "your" approval or disapproval. Hence the fundamental issue that without a sense of "I / me" a situation arises that cannot be known as long as that sense exists. Response to Myth #1: If you kill the ego, you have no self to enjoy the Realized Self in the material world. The ego must be silenced and sent to a corner for a time out, but enlightenment brings the ego instant relief of not having to be "on" 24/7 and presents the startled ego with a new playmate - a new Captain of The Ship (of consciousness) - who dispels the ego's fear and doubt...and as they say in advertising - much, much more. In the West, in psychology, there's a different definition of "ego" - it's more than the sense of "I / me". Hence C.G. Jung failed to understand how it is possible to live without "ego" - because of a difference in definition. But the ego lives on as a tenured resident of this temporal life. And some would say, plots mutiny once again, after a while. Meditation can be a good crimestopper. But that's another story. Response to Myth #2: The is trickier. It is a matter of timing. All 'teachers' who parrot the "You must not seek" admonishment eventually, if they go on long enough, replace the word seek with a synonym of some sort (like: inquire, for instance). And their personal stories ALWAYS have some reference to seeking (a rose by any other name). It is true that absolute surrender opens the door, but... There's at least one advantage in seeking: when unsuccessful, it's easier to give that up to so "something else" can take over. seeking ALWAYS precedes the point of surrender. We don't need anything else to perpetuate the feeling of separation - we were already socially coerced into it before any thought of seeking occurred to us. And we don't come to feel the intuitive stirring at some point in our lives, and immediately flop down in complete and absolute surrender. Recognizing the futility of seeking for pleasure (with the unavoidable pain / attachment) is quite enough to initiate a very different lifestyle. It is only after a time of seeking, listening, reading, questioning, sitting in meditation, sitting in satsang, pleading for deliverance from despair and such (and for some, this goes on for a very long time - and for others, no time is long enough in their present lifetime) that the seeking gives way to utter surrender - and with grace, enlightenment. Effort precedes grace. Grace is when effort is given up so "something else" takes over instead. Response to Myth #3: Much like Myth #2, all professed 'teachers' who parrot the "We're already all enlightened" line eventually, if they are authentically (or poetically) enlightened, and go on long enough, relate personal stories that ALWAYS have some reference to their awakening/realization/shift in perspective, ... at a specific point in time. Otherwise, they wouldn't have anything to say - negation or propagation - about enlightenment. At best, the so called "enlightenment" is but the start of the dissolution of the sense of "I". To parrot this,"We're already all enlightened," pat phrase is to discourage the sincere seeker (who must one day surrender utterly if they ever hope to experience enlightenment). My 3-Myths worth. Jeff A phrase like "there is only Brahman" is valid also before it is recognized as such, just like ripe mangoes are sweet before one actually tastes the first one. In that sense an expression like "you are enlightened already" has to be interpreted. It is nevertheless useless, if just because an aspirant doesn't have the faintest idea of what "enlightened" actually means. Jan jan my dear friend, it is a pleasure, as always, to concur your brilliant comment. jeff's myths notwithstanding lol... You're welcome Yosy - physically as well although here, "winter" is nearing (rainy season). thanks! yosy ps. how's panama? regards to our winged friends!. Slowly the birds in the garden are loosing their fear IOW don't fly away when they see me nearing. The daily concert is cool too and a live reminder of the 2 birds in a tree from one of the Upanishads. Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2010 Report Share Posted February 24, 2010 On 24/02/2010 21:45, ecirada wrote: On 2/24/2010 11:54 AM, Yosy wrote: On 24/02/2010 17:36, ecirada wrote: On 2/23/2010 5:03 PM, Papajeff wrote: Myth #1: You must kill the ego in order to achieve enlightenment. The ego as meant in in texts on advaita regards the sense of "I" and is the root of all afflictions: whatever happens, does so to "me". Hence the effort, once this is recognized, is not to hinder the dissolution of the sense of "I" (without which there isn't a sense of "you" either). Myth #2: You must not seek enlightenment - because seeking perpetuates the sense of separation. It is impossible to seek something that is unknown, nor can be defined in such a way that it could be recognized. Apart from that, whatever is found is is bound to be lost. Hence stories exist like that of a seeker after a gem while carrying it on the head already, unknowingly. Myth #3: We are all already enlightened, so just get on with your life. Incorrect formulation: life gets on with "you" no matter "your" approval or disapproval. Hence the fundamental issue that without a sense of "I / me" a situation arises that cannot be known as long as that sense exists. Response to Myth #1: If you kill the ego, you have no self to enjoy the Realized Self in the material world. The ego must be silenced and sent to a corner for a time out, but enlightenment brings the ego instant relief of not having to be "on" 24/7 and presents the startled ego with a new playmate - a new Captain of The Ship (of consciousness) - who dispels the ego's fear and doubt...and as they say in advertising - much, much more. In the West, in psychology, there's a different definition of "ego" - it's more than the sense of "I / me". Hence C.G. Jung failed to understand how it is possible to live without "ego" - because of a difference in definition. But the ego lives on as a tenured resident of this temporal life. And some would say, plots mutiny once again, after a while. Meditation can be a good crimestopper. But that's another story. Response to Myth #2: The is trickier. It is a matter of timing. All 'teachers' who parrot the "You must not seek" admonishment eventually, if they go on long enough, replace the word seek with a synonym of some sort (like: inquire, for instance). And their personal stories ALWAYS have some reference to seeking (a rose by any other name). It is true that absolute surrender opens the door, but... There's at least one advantage in seeking: when unsuccessful, it's easier to give that up to so "something else" can take over. seeking ALWAYS precedes the point of surrender. We don't need anything else to perpetuate the feeling of separation - we were already socially coerced into it before any thought of seeking occurred to us. And we don't come to feel the intuitive stirring at some point in our lives, and immediately flop down in complete and absolute surrender. Recognizing the futility of seeking for pleasure (with the unavoidable pain / attachment) is quite enough to initiate a very different lifestyle. It is only after a time of seeking, listening, reading, questioning, sitting in meditation, sitting in satsang, pleading for deliverance from despair and such (and for some, this goes on for a very long time - and for others, no time is long enough in their present lifetime) that the seeking gives way to utter surrender - and with grace, enlightenment. Effort precedes grace. Grace is when effort is given up so "something else" takes over instead. Response to Myth #3: Much like Myth #2, all professed 'teachers' who parrot the "We're already all enlightened" line eventually, if they are authentically (or poetically) enlightened, and go on long enough, relate personal stories that ALWAYS have some reference to their awakening/realization/shift in perspective, ... at a specific point in time. Otherwise, they wouldn't have anything to say - negation or propagation - about enlightenment. At best, the so called "enlightenment" is but the start of the dissolution of the sense of "I". To parrot this,"We're already all enlightened," pat phrase is to discourage the sincere seeker (who must one day surrender utterly if they ever hope to experience enlightenment). My 3-Myths worth. Jeff A phrase like "there is only Brahman" is valid also before it is recognized as such, just like ripe mangoes are sweet before one actually tastes the first one. In that sense an expression like "you are enlightened already" has to be interpreted. It is nevertheless useless, if just because an aspirant doesn't have the faintest idea of what "enlightened" actually means. Jan jan my dear friend, it is a pleasure, as always, to concur your brilliant comment. jeff's myths notwithstanding lol... You're welcome Yosy - physically as well although here, "winter" is nearing (rainy season). thanks! yosy ps. how's panama? regards to our winged friends!. Slowly the birds in the garden are loosing their fear IOW don't fly away when they see me nearing. The daily concert is cool too and a live reminder of the 2 birds in a tree from one of the Upanishads. Jan BOOM! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2010 Report Share Posted February 24, 2010 Killing or crushing, actually reading the text below, by whom and where is the ego crushed, and how is it dissolved? It must be so that every individual presentaion on this matter ranges from a deeper knowledge to ignorance or a struggeling to understand. Good or bad, it is often presented as the way to go for others. Here is a response from shallow waters : ) Encouragement comes not from building, but removing the habit. (catch 22). Rather than reading or caring about what is said by others. As long as there are glimpses and we have a development (along the last line below). Then when it comes to a safe first hand knowledge there is a lot more sense in a constant focus and for most of us, long time observing the differences in associaton and identification, or why we get caught off guard. Alan (the other other) From Maharshis Gospel / Conscious Immortality - Conversations with Ramana. Actually this book covers the matter in detail and so well that there can be no question about it. " A jnani crushes the ego at its source. It rises up again and again, for him too as for the ignorant, impelled by nature, ie,parabdha. Both in the ignorant and in the jnani , ego sprouts, but with this difference: the former's ego is quite ignorant of it's source, and is not aware of it's deep sleep in the dream and waking states. On the other hand, when the jnani's ego rises, he enjoys his transcendental experience with his ego, keeping his focus always on it's source. His ego is not dangerous- it is only the ash-skeleton of a burnt rope: although it possesses a form it is ineffective. By constantly keeping our focus on our source, our ego is dissolved. " , Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs wrote: > > Dear Jeff, >  > I like your posting very much, and it torpodoes most of the Neo Advaita myths very effectively. >  > However with No. 1, I cannot find any reference in Bhagavan's teaching which allows the ego to continue even in an attenuated state. His main thrust seems to me to be that the ego has to go. After Realisation the material world can be still enjoyed from the 'no mind' state. >  > Love, >  > Alan >  >  > --- On Tue, 23/2/10, Papajeff <jeff wrote: > > > Papajeff <jeff > Enlightenment Myths > > Tuesday, 23 February, 2010, 22:03 > > >  > > > > Myth #1: You must kill > the ego in order to achieve > enlightenment. > > Myth #2: You must not > seek enlightenment - because > seeking perpetuates the sense > of separation. > > Myth #3: We are all already > enlightened, so just get on > with your life. > > Response to Myth #1: If > you kill the ego, you have > no self to enjoy the Realized > Self in the material world. > The ego must be silenced and > sent to a corner for a time > out, but enlightenment brings > the ego instant relief of not > having to be " on " 24/7 and > presents the startled ego with > a new playmate - a new Captain > of The Ship (of consciousness) - > who dispels the ego's fear > and doubt...and as they say > in advertising - much, much more. > > But the ego lives on as a > tenured resident of this > temporal life. And some would > say, plots mutiny once again, > after a while. Meditation can > be a good crimestopper. But > that's another story. > > Response to Myth #2: The is > trickier. It is a matter of > timing. All 'teachers' who > parrot the " You must not seek " > admonishment eventually, if they > go on long enough, replace > the word seek with a synonym > of some sort (like: inquire, > for instance). And their personal > stories ALWAYS have some reference > to seeking (a rose by any other > name). It is true that absolute > surrender opens the door, but... > > seeking ALWAYS precedes the > point of surrender. We don't > need anything else to perpetuate > the feeling of separation - we > were already socially coerced > into it before any thought of > seeking occurred to us. And > we don't come to feel the intuitive > stirring at some point in our > lives, and immediately flop down > in complete and absolute surrender. > > It is only after a time of seeking, > listening, reading, questioning, > sitting in meditation, sitting > in satsang, pleading for > deliverance from despair and such > (and for some, this goes on for > a very long time - and for > others, no time is long enough > in their present lifetime) that > the seeking gives way to utter > surrender - and with grace, > enlightenment. > > Effort precedes grace. > > Response to Myth #3: Much like > Myth #2, all professed 'teachers' > who parrot the " We're already > all enlightened " line eventually, > if they are authentically (or > poetically) enlightened, and > go on long enough, relate > personal stories that ALWAYS > have some reference to their > awakening/realizati on/shift > in perspective, ... > > at a specific point in time. > Otherwise, they wouldn't have > anything to say - negation or > propagation - about enlightenment. > > To parrot this, " We're > already all enlightened, " pat > phrase is to discourage the > sincere seeker (who must one > day surrender utterly if they > ever hope to experience > enlightenment) . > > My 3-Myths worth. > > Jeff > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2010 Report Share Posted February 24, 2010 On 25/02/2010 00:07, erilarend wrote: Killing or crushing, actually reading the text below, by whom and where is the ego crushed, and how is it dissolved? It must be so that every individual presentaion on this matter ranges from a deeper knowledge to ignorance or a struggeling to understand. Good or bad, it is often presented as the way to go for others. Here is a response from shallow waters : ) Encouragement comes not from building, but removing the habit. (catch 22). Rather than reading or caring about what is said by others. As long as there are glimpses and we have a development (along the last line below). Then when it comes to a safe first hand knowledge there is a lot more sense in a constant focus and for most of us, long time observing the differences in associaton and identification, or why we get caught off guard. Alan (the other other) >From Maharshis Gospel / Conscious Immortality - Conversations with Ramana. Actually this book covers the matter in detail and so well that there can be no question about it. " A jnani crushes the ego at its source. It rises up again and again, for him too as for the ignorant, impelled by nature, ie,parabdha. Both in the ignorant and in the jnani , ego sprouts, but with this difference: the former's ego is quite ignorant of it's source, and is not aware of it's deep sleep in the dream and waking states. On the other hand, when the jnani's ego rises, he enjoys his transcendental experience with his ego, keeping his focus always on it's source. His ego is not dangerous- it is only the ash-skeleton of a burnt rope: although it possesses a form it is ineffective. By constantly keeping our focus on our source, our ego is dissolved." hehehe this reminds me.... burnt-out mind the lit wick keeps on burning, but when the sun rises the scorching light of the candle flame is seen no more. an incinerated rope slowly burnt to ashes appears to be whole - but it has no strength to bind nor hold anything at all. BOOM! aum namah sivaya! yosy (the same one) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 25, 2010 Report Share Posted February 25, 2010 Dea Yosy, Thank you, this is a helpful posting throwing additional light on the question. Love, Alan (there are no others?)--- On Wed, 24/2/10, Yosy <yosyflug wrote: Yosy <yosyflugRe: Enlightenment Myths Date: Wednesday, 24 February, 2010, 22:19 On 25/02/2010 00:07, erilarend wrote: Killing or crushing, actually reading the text below, by whom and where is the ego crushed, and how is it dissolved?It must be so that every individual presentaion on this matter ranges from a deeper knowledge to ignorance or a struggeling to understand. Good or bad, it is often presented as the way to go for others.Here is a response from shallow waters : )Encouragement comes not from building, but removing the habit. (catch 22).Rather than reading or caring about what is said by others.As long as there are glimpses and we have a development (along the last line below). Then when it comes to a safe first hand knowledge there is a lot more sense in a constant focus and for most of us, long time observing the differences in associaton and identification, or why we get caught off guard.Alan (the other other)>From Maharshis Gospel / Conscious Immortality - Conversations with Ramana. Actually this book covers the matter in detail and so well that there can be no question about it. " A jnani crushes the ego at its source. It rises up again and again, for him too as for the ignorant, impelled by nature, ie,parabdha.Both in the ignorant and in the jnani , ego sprouts, but with thisdifference: the former's ego is quite ignorant of it's source, and is not aware of it's deep sleep in the dream and waking states. On the other hand, when the jnani's ego rises, he enjoys his transcendental experience with his ego, keeping his focus always on it's source. His ego is not dangerous- it is only the ash-skeleton of a burnt rope: although it possesses a form it is ineffective. By constantly keeping our focus on our source, our ego is dissolved."hehehe this reminds me....burnt-out mind the lit wickkeeps onburning,butwhen the sun risesthe scorching light of the candle flameis seenno more. an incinerated ropeslowly burnt to ashes appears to be whole -but it has no strength to bind nor holdanythingat all.BOOM! aum namah sivaya!yosy (the same one) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 25, 2010 Report Share Posted February 25, 2010 Dear Alan 1, A helpful posting-thanks-throws some new light on this vexatious question which contains some ambiguity. The general thrust of the Teaching seems to be Let go of E go. Love, Alan 2 , " erilarend " <alan wrote: > > Killing or crushing, actually reading the text below, by whom and where is the ego crushed, and how is it dissolved? > > It must be so that every individual presentaion on this matter ranges from a deeper knowledge to ignorance or a struggeling to understand. > Good or bad, it is often presented as the way to go for others. > > Here is a response from shallow waters : ) > Encouragement comes not from building, but removing the habit. (catch 22). > Rather than reading or caring about what is said by others. > As long as there are glimpses and we have a development (along the last line below). > Then when it comes to a safe first hand knowledge there is a lot more sense in a constant focus and for most of us, long time observing the differences in associaton and identification, or why we get caught off guard. > > Alan (the other other) > > From Maharshis Gospel / Conscious Immortality - Conversations with Ramana. Actually this book covers the matter in detail and so well that there can be no question about it. > > " A jnani crushes the ego at its source. It rises up again and again, for him too as for the ignorant, impelled by nature, ie,parabdha. > Both in the ignorant and in the jnani , ego sprouts, but with this > difference: the former's ego is quite ignorant of it's source, and is not aware of it's deep sleep in the dream and waking states. On the other hand, when the jnani's ego rises, he enjoys his transcendental experience with his ego, keeping his focus always on it's source. His ego is not dangerous- it is only the ash-skeleton of a burnt rope: although it possesses a form it is ineffective. By constantly keeping our focus on our source, our ego is dissolved. " > > , Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs@> wrote: > > > > Dear Jeff, > >  > > I like your posting very much, and it torpodoes most of the Neo Advaita myths very effectively. > >  > > However with No. 1, I cannot find any reference in Bhagavan's teaching which allows the ego to continue even in an attenuated state. His main thrust seems to me to be that the ego has to go. After Realisation the material world can be still enjoyed from the 'no mind' state. > >  > > Love, > >  > > Alan > >  > >  > > --- On Tue, 23/2/10, Papajeff <jeff@> wrote: > > > > > > Papajeff <jeff@> > > Enlightenment Myths > > > > Tuesday, 23 February, 2010, 22:03 > > > > > >  > > > > > > > > Myth #1: You must kill > > the ego in order to achieve > > enlightenment. > > > > Myth #2: You must not > > seek enlightenment - because > > seeking perpetuates the sense > > of separation. > > > > Myth #3: We are all already > > enlightened, so just get on > > with your life. > > > > Response to Myth #1: If > > you kill the ego, you have > > no self to enjoy the Realized > > Self in the material world. > > The ego must be silenced and > > sent to a corner for a time > > out, but enlightenment brings > > the ego instant relief of not > > having to be " on " 24/7 and > > presents the startled ego with > > a new playmate - a new Captain > > of The Ship (of consciousness) - > > who dispels the ego's fear > > and doubt...and as they say > > in advertising - much, much more. > > > > But the ego lives on as a > > tenured resident of this > > temporal life. And some would > > say, plots mutiny once again, > > after a while. Meditation can > > be a good crimestopper. But > > that's another story. > > > > Response to Myth #2: The is > > trickier. It is a matter of > > timing. All 'teachers' who > > parrot the " You must not seek " > > admonishment eventually, if they > > go on long enough, replace > > the word seek with a synonym > > of some sort (like: inquire, > > for instance). And their personal > > stories ALWAYS have some reference > > to seeking (a rose by any other > > name). It is true that absolute > > surrender opens the door, but... > > > > seeking ALWAYS precedes the > > point of surrender. We don't > > need anything else to perpetuate > > the feeling of separation - we > > were already socially coerced > > into it before any thought of > > seeking occurred to us. And > > we don't come to feel the intuitive > > stirring at some point in our > > lives, and immediately flop down > > in complete and absolute surrender. > > > > It is only after a time of seeking, > > listening, reading, questioning, > > sitting in meditation, sitting > > in satsang, pleading for > > deliverance from despair and such > > (and for some, this goes on for > > a very long time - and for > > others, no time is long enough > > in their present lifetime) that > > the seeking gives way to utter > > surrender - and with grace, > > enlightenment. > > > > Effort precedes grace. > > > > Response to Myth #3: Much like > > Myth #2, all professed 'teachers' > > who parrot the " We're already > > all enlightened " line eventually, > > if they are authentically (or > > poetically) enlightened, and > > go on long enough, relate > > personal stories that ALWAYS > > have some reference to their > > awakening/realizati on/shift > > in perspective, ... > > > > at a specific point in time. > > Otherwise, they wouldn't have > > anything to say - negation or > > propagation - about enlightenment. > > > > To parrot this, " We're > > already all enlightened, " pat > > phrase is to discourage the > > sincere seeker (who must one > > day surrender utterly if they > > ever hope to experience > > enlightenment) . > > > > My 3-Myths worth. > > > > Jeff > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 25, 2010 Report Share Posted February 25, 2010 On 25/02/2010 08:44, tigersjaws wrote: Dear Alan 1, A helpful posting-thanks-throws some new light on this vexatious question which contains some ambiguity. The general thrust of the Teaching seems to be Let go of E go. Love, Alan 2 yes indeed, dear friend alan (whichever lol). generally, speaking of "enlightenment" reminds me... Enlightenment Means Not describing Nor discussing What enlightenment Is. It is so simple It’s a shame to admit Even the lowest of the base Know it. Yet the most profound intellect Can but glimpse A mere reflection Of its depths. No amount of words Can describe the taste Of honey. Eat! The enlightened ask not They are The answer. BOOM! yosy the fool , "erilarend" <alan wrote: > > Killing or crushing, actually reading the text below, by whom and where is the ego crushed, and how is it dissolved? > > It must be so that every individual presentaion on this matter ranges from a deeper knowledge to ignorance or a struggeling to understand. > Good or bad, it is often presented as the way to go for others. > > Here is a response from shallow waters : ) > Encouragement comes not from building, but removing the habit. (catch 22). > Rather than reading or caring about what is said by others. > As long as there are glimpses and we have a development (along the last line below). > Then when it comes to a safe first hand knowledge there is a lot more sense in a constant focus and for most of us, long time observing the differences in associaton and identification, or why we get caught off guard. > > Alan (the other other) > > From Maharshis Gospel / Conscious Immortality - Conversations with Ramana. Actually this book covers the matter in detail and so well that there can be no question about it. > > " A jnani crushes the ego at its source. It rises up again and again, for him too as for the ignorant, impelled by nature, ie,parabdha. > Both in the ignorant and in the jnani , ego sprouts, but with this > difference: the former's ego is quite ignorant of it's source, and is not aware of it's deep sleep in the dream and waking states. On the other hand, when the jnani's ego rises, he enjoys his transcendental experience with his ego, keeping his focus always on it's source. His ego is not dangerous- it is only the ash-skeleton of a burnt rope: although it possesses a form it is ineffective. By constantly keeping our focus on our source, our ego is dissolved." <courtesy snip> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.