Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Who's realised ? - was: Intellectual dishonesty

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Hi Tony & everybody !

 

The question that comes up is, when can we begin to speak of personal

realisation, are we actually entitled to talk about ourselves in the same

terms as recognized realised beings like Ramana, the Buddha, Nanak,

Ramakrishna etc. ?

 

The view you, Tony seem to advocate is that there's something inherently

blasphemous or at least hypocritical in using vocabulary that's normally

associated with illustrious and luminous beings like the ones above, when

describing one's own spiritual affairs.

 

Another approach is to believe and rejoice in one's own experience, even if

this is at first only based on intellectual deduction - which is actually

Jnana-yoga. And as such is a very valid but difficult path, because it's

main focus is in the intellect which also houses the ego. I think it

requires enormous powers of discrimination to avoid the numerous traps that

go with a path that doesn't really take into account purification of

subconscious patterns and energy or the disciplining of the mind/body.

 

Nevertheless, why shouldn't insights and realisations gained be valid, -

even if it's easy to delude oneself, I'd still say that it's possible to

talk of realisation although there might be a certain half-bakedness to it -

it's not the complete works, that's all.

 

Then there's the totally unorthodox pattern of experience that seems to

happen more and more often, in which people have profound spiritual

experiences and insights without any sadhana or effort or work on the

character at all - take the many accounts of spiritually overwhelming

near-death-experiences as an example. (It's probably the Age of Aquarius -

I'm not joking !:) )

 

Anyway, my own experience initially was of this maverick type, I mean I was

eighteen or something and went into total kundalini-induced samadhi and union

after smoking pot with some other longhaired guitar-playing friends...

 

No sadhana, a pretty immature outlook on life and a whole bunch of defects of

character and no real spiritual ideals whatsoever.

 

The question is, how do you see yourself after such an experience ?

At the time, I had no idea about what had happened to me, so I just filed it

away as something cool and very weird that happened to me. It was only much

later, after being confronted with all the massive problems

kundalini-awakenings like this can bring, and after having done some sadhana

just to save my skin, that I began to reflect on this whole business and

tried to somehow find the adequate definition for my state of being.

 

Was I a yogi ? In a certain sense, yes, definitely, I practiced several forms

of yoga, the shakti was well awake and I'd had the ultimate experience of

going beyond myself into infinity. On the other hand I felt terrible most of

the time, acted strange and seemed more like a basket-case on so many

occasions - so what was the bottom line ?

 

When I went to India and met sadhus and yogis, many of whom had followings

and seemed like the very essence of realised beings, I could sense that they

hadn't had the experience of cosmic union and shakti was just a concept and

not something that kept them on their toes for 25 hours a day. Still many

radiated strength and knowledge and seemed to be in tune with the universe in

a way that I unfortunately couldn't claim at all.

 

Another aspect of the kundalini-process is that, as time goes by and the

energy keeps on hammering away, the former personality begins to recede. The

shakti seems to take over and the witnessing state becomes more firmly

established. This is followed by many automatic spiritual insights and in my

case there have also been numerous profound experiences of realisation,

truth, bliss etc.

 

The problem is that it's not really the "I" or the personality that

experiences this, or indeed has earned this by doing sadhana or can claim any

type of responsibility for it or brag about it. In reality it seems as if

it's the immutable and sometimes truly merciless will of this energy to

achieve these higher states - and it does so by slowly killing and

annihilating the normal "I"!

 

So, who's realised ? It's like a case of split personality, in which a

previously dormant, but in it's essence radiantly pure and forceful aspect of

the self, squeezes out the old personality or ego-structure, which

unfortunately puts up a huge struggle for survival.

 

Now, if this ego-structure claims to be realised, there's an immediate

contradiction, since in essence, it's this very ego-structure, that opposes

the evolution into the greater Self. On the other hand, the action of the

shakti being in itself pure, consciousness experiences itself as free and

enlightened and "realised" and can rightly claim to be so (since it's the

truth). But here again there's still the contradiction of having to live

with unresolved karmas and the limitations and inadequacies of the squirming

ego. Not to mention being restricted by afflictions of the physical body and

all the other problems one might have just by living on this green little

planet.

 

What I'm saying is, that in spite of very real realisations, which seem to hav

e more to do with God's will (or maybe rather that of the Goddess) and very

little with the person and the ego, there can still be contradiction and

plain old stupidity and total egoism and extreme depression - and perhaps

even more so than in a normal and balanced person. Even after experiences of

absolute surrender, seeing & feeling everything as God , melting into the

surroundings and being immortal and having a spiritually jolly good time in

general...

 

Maybe that makes it unrealised again...

 

Sound like a case for the shrink ? You bet :)) -All this can easily make a

grown man cry - in despair at the pain and confusion of growing and having to

shed one's skin but sometimes also out of the pure ecstasy of being ! :)

 

 

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

In a message dated 3/16/00 5:02:19 PM Mountain Standard Time,

MHortling writes:

 

<< Nevertheless, why shouldn't insights and realisations gained be valid >>

 

During one of my kundalini raptures, I had the vision that every teeny

increase in consciousness in creation was equally valuable and cause for

celebration -- this means a rock increasing in rock-ness, an ant having an

ant's epiphany or a human being realizing the fear behind its act of

unkindness. Indeed, it seemed in some way that these modest gains provided

the fuel for the universe, since it's all the movement of God-stuff anyway.

So, yes, hooray for all of us and hooray for Ramakrishna and the lizard on my

deck, too. Holly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

MHortling wrote:

> MHortling

>

> Hi Tony & everybody !

>

> The question that comes up is, when can we begin to speak of personal

> realisation, are we actually entitled to talk about ourselves in the same

> terms as recognized realised beings like Ramana, the Buddha, Nanak,

> Ramakrishna etc. ?

>

> The view you, Tony seem to advocate is that there's something inherently

> blasphemous or at least hypocritical in using vocabulary that's normally

> associated with illustrious and luminous beings like the ones above, when

> describing one's own spiritual affairs.

>

> Another approach is to believe and rejoice in one's own experience, even if

> this is at first only based on intellectual deduction - which is actually

> Jnana-yoga. And as such is a very valid but difficult path, because it's

> main focus is in the intellect which also houses the ego. I think it

> requires enormous powers of discrimination to avoid the numerous traps that

> go with a path that doesn't really take into account purification of

> subconscious patterns and energy or the disciplining of the mind/body.

>

> Nevertheless, why shouldn't insights and realisations gained be valid, -

> even if it's easy to delude oneself, I'd still say that it's possible to

> talk of realisation although there might be a certain half-bakedness to it -

> it's not the complete works, that's all.

>

> Then there's the totally unorthodox pattern of experience that seems to

> happen more and more often, in which people have profound spiritual

> experiences and insights without any sadhana or effort or work on the

> character at all - take the many accounts of spiritually overwhelming

> near-death-experiences as an example. (It's probably the Age of Aquarius -

> I'm not joking !:) )

>

> Anyway, my own experience initially was of this maverick type, I mean I was

> eighteen or something and went into total kundalini-induced samadhi and union

> after smoking pot with some other longhaired guitar-playing friends...

>

> No sadhana, a pretty immature outlook on life and a whole bunch of defects of

> character and no real spiritual ideals whatsoever.

>

> The question is, how do you see yourself after such an experience ?

> At the time, I had no idea about what had happened to me, so I just filed it

> away as something cool and very weird that happened to me. It was only much

> later, after being confronted with all the massive problems

> kundalini-awakenings like this can bring, and after having done some sadhana

> just to save my skin, that I began to reflect on this whole business and

> tried to somehow find the adequate definition for my state of being.

>

> Was I a yogi ? In a certain sense, yes, definitely, I practiced several forms

> of yoga, the shakti was well awake and I'd had the ultimate experience of

> going beyond myself into infinity. On the other hand I felt terrible most of

> the time, acted strange and seemed more like a basket-case on so many

> occasions - so what was the bottom line ?

>

> When I went to India and met sadhus and yogis, many of whom had followings

> and seemed like the very essence of realised beings, I could sense that they

> hadn't had the experience of cosmic union and shakti was just a concept and

> not something that kept them on their toes for 25 hours a day. Still many

> radiated strength and knowledge and seemed to be in tune with the universe in

> a way that I unfortunately couldn't claim at all.

>

> Another aspect of the kundalini-process is that, as time goes by and the

> energy keeps on hammering away, the former personality begins to recede. The

> shakti seems to take over and the witnessing state becomes more firmly

> established. This is followed by many automatic spiritual insights and in my

> case there have also been numerous profound experiences of realisation,

> truth, bliss etc.

>

> The problem is that it's not really the "I" or the personality that

> experiences this, or indeed has earned this by doing sadhana or can claim any

> type of responsibility for it or brag about it. In reality it seems as if

> it's the immutable and sometimes truly merciless will of this energy to

> achieve these higher states - and it does so by slowly killing and

> annihilating the normal "I"!

>

> So, who's realised ? It's like a case of split personality, in which a

> previously dormant, but in it's essence radiantly pure and forceful aspect of

> the self, squeezes out the old personality or ego-structure, which

> unfortunately puts up a huge struggle for survival.

>

> Now, if this ego-structure claims to be realised, there's an immediate

> contradiction, since in essence, it's this very ego-structure, that opposes

> the evolution into the greater Self. On the other hand, the action of the

> shakti being in itself pure, consciousness experiences itself as free and

> enlightened and "realised" and can rightly claim to be so (since it's the

> truth). But here again there's still the contradiction of having to live

> with unresolved karmas and the limitations and inadequacies of the squirming

> ego. Not to mention being restricted by afflictions of the physical body and

> all the other problems one might have just by living on this green little

> planet.

>

> What I'm saying is, that in spite of very real realisations, which seem to hav

> e more to do with God's will (or maybe rather that of the Goddess) and very

> little with the person and the ego, there can still be contradiction and

> plain old stupidity and total egoism and extreme depression - and perhaps

> even more so than in a normal and balanced person. Even after experiences of

> absolute surrender, seeing & feeling everything as God , melting into the

> surroundings and being immortal and having a spiritually jolly good time in

> general...

>

> Maybe that makes it unrealised again...

>

> Sound like a case for the shrink ? You bet :)) -All this can easily make a

> grown man cry - in despair at the pain and confusion of growing and having to

> shed one's skin but sometimes also out of the pure ecstasy of being ! :)

>

> Michael

>

 

Thanks Michael for some incredible sharing!

 

Love

Harsha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

-----

>MHortling

>

>Hi Tony & everybody !

>

>The question that comes up is, when can we begin to speak of personal

>realisation, are we actually entitled to talk about ourselves in the same

>terms as recognized realised beings like Ramana, the Buddha, Nanak,

>Ramakrishna etc. ?

>

snip of beautiful post....

>

>

>Michael

>

>

Welcome to the club! Be sure many of us can identify with your story. Similar

experiences have been shared here with kundalini process, so you have a lot of

company. I quite honestly do not care all that much if someone is realised or

not, the friends on these lists are my real teachers. You know there is a

tradition of honoring the guru, knowing of faults and imperfections, just as

much as one would honor the Buddha. This is because the teacher is the one

actually taking his time to bring you the teachings and sharing truth. So I bow

to you. I am inspired as much if not more from your sincere and honest

experiences as from reading any written truth. The Grace is alive and at work.

Thanks for showing us this.

 

Much love,

Gloria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Thank you! This is so beautiful!

 

Peace - and Love Abiding - Michael

 

, MHortling@a... wrote:

> Hi Tony & everybody !

>

> The question that comes up is, when can we begin to speak of

personal

> realisation, are we actually entitled to talk about ourselves in

the same

> terms as recognized realised beings like Ramana, the Buddha, Nanak,

> Ramakrishna etc. ?

>

> The view you, Tony seem to advocate is that there's something

inherently

> blasphemous or at least hypocritical in using vocabulary that's

normally

> associated with illustrious and luminous beings like the ones

above, when

> describing one's own spiritual affairs.

>

> Another approach is to believe and rejoice in one's own experience,

even if

> this is at first only based on intellectual deduction - which is

actually

> Jnana-yoga. And as such is a very valid but difficult path,

because it's

> main focus is in the intellect which also houses the ego. I think

it

> requires enormous powers of discrimination to avoid the numerous

traps that

> go with a path that doesn't really take into account purification

of

> subconscious patterns and energy or the disciplining of the

mind/body.

>

> Nevertheless, why shouldn't insights and realisations gained be

valid, -

> even if it's easy to delude oneself, I'd still say that it's

possible to

> talk of realisation although there might be a certain

half-bakedness to it -

> it's not the complete works, that's all.

>

> Then there's the totally unorthodox pattern of experience that

seems to

> happen more and more often, in which people have profound spiritual

> experiences and insights without any sadhana or effort or work on

the

> character at all - take the many accounts of spiritually

overwhelming

> near-death-experiences as an example. (It's probably the Age of

Aquarius -

> I'm not joking !:) )

>

> Anyway, my own experience initially was of this maverick type, I

mean I was

> eighteen or something and went into total kundalini-induced samadhi

and union

> after smoking pot with some other longhaired guitar-playing

friends...

>

> No sadhana, a pretty immature outlook on life and a whole bunch of

defects of

> character and no real spiritual ideals whatsoever.

>

> The question is, how do you see yourself after such an experience ?

> At the time, I had no idea about what had happened to me, so I just

filed it

> away as something cool and very weird that happened to me. It was

only much

> later, after being confronted with all the massive problems

> kundalini-awakenings like this can bring, and after having done

some sadhana

> just to save my skin, that I began to reflect on this whole

business and

> tried to somehow find the adequate definition for my state of

being.

>

> Was I a yogi ? In a certain sense, yes, definitely, I practiced

several forms

> of yoga, the shakti was well awake and I'd had the ultimate

experience of

> going beyond myself into infinity. On the other hand I felt

terrible most of

> the time, acted strange and seemed more like a basket-case on so

many

> occasions - so what was the bottom line ?

>

> When I went to India and met sadhus and yogis, many of whom had

followings

> and seemed like the very essence of realised beings, I could sense

that they

> hadn't had the experience of cosmic union and shakti was just a

concept and

> not something that kept them on their toes for 25 hours a day.

Still many

> radiated strength and knowledge and seemed to be in tune with the

universe in

> a way that I unfortunately couldn't claim at all.

>

> Another aspect of the kundalini-process is that, as time goes by

and the

> energy keeps on hammering away, the former personality begins to

recede. The

> shakti seems to take over and the witnessing state becomes more

firmly

> established. This is followed by many automatic spiritual insights

and in my

> case there have also been numerous profound experiences of

realisation,

> truth, bliss etc.

>

> The problem is that it's not really the "I" or the personality

that

> experiences this, or indeed has earned this by doing sadhana or can

claim any

> type of responsibility for it or brag about it. In reality it seems

as if

> it's the immutable and sometimes truly merciless will of this

energy to

> achieve these higher states - and it does so by slowly killing and

> annihilating the normal "I"!

>

> So, who's realised ? It's like a case of split personality, in

which a

> previously dormant, but in it's essence radiantly pure and forceful

aspect of

> the self, squeezes out the old personality or ego-structure, which

> unfortunately puts up a huge struggle for survival.

>

> Now, if this ego-structure claims to be realised, there's an

immediate

> contradiction, since in essence, it's this very ego-structure, that

opposes

> the evolution into the greater Self. On the other hand, the action

of the

> shakti being in itself pure, consciousness experiences itself as

free and

> enlightened and "realised" and can rightly claim to be so (since

it's the

> truth). But here again there's still the contradiction of having

to live

> with unresolved karmas and the limitations and inadequacies of the

squirming

> ego. Not to mention being restricted by afflictions of the

physical body and

> all the other problems one might have just by living on this green

little

> planet.

>

> What I'm saying is, that in spite of very real realisations, which

seem to hav

> e more to do with God's will (or maybe rather that of the Goddess)

and very

> little with the person and the ego, there can still be

contradiction and

> plain old stupidity and total egoism and extreme depression - and

perhaps

> even more so than in a normal and balanced person. Even after

experiences of

> absolute surrender, seeing & feeling everything as God , melting

into the

> surroundings and being immortal and having a spiritually jolly good

time in

> general...

>

> Maybe that makes it unrealised again...

>

> Sound like a case for the shrink ? You bet :)) -All this can easily

make a

> grown man cry - in despair at the pain and confusion of growing and

having to

> shed one's skin but sometimes also out of the pure ecstasy of being

! :)

>

>

> Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...