One of the biggest traps

A place for anything that doesn't fit into the existing forums

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby Onceler » Thu Feb 16, 2017 12:02 am

Thanks, good explanation. Not sure I buy the no death thing, although at one time it was a given. Can't see how anyone really knows.
Be present, be pleasant.
User avatar
Onceler
 
Posts: 2201
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 1:35 am
Location: My house

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby Rob X » Thu Feb 16, 2017 1:40 pm

Onceler wrote:Borris, I've read your posts with interest. Both the content of what you're saying, and my own personal reaction to it. I was quite keen on enlightenment most of my life, but now have little to no interest. I'm not sure what I thought enlightenment entailed, other than the end of suffering. What you describe doesn't even sound desirable......gaining enlightenment moments before it kills you, erasing karma, forcing oneself to obsess over food, etc. It honestly sounds more like a burden and a curse.

Oddly, I have found that I quite like the effects of karma and my humble human life. I'm quite satisfied with the way things are. I enjoy the pain and the pleasure, the laughing and crying, the drama and the stillness. The flow of life doesn't touch me, yet touches me deeply. Most of my life I wanted to escape, I wanted salvation from my life. Now I simply want my life the way it is. It gets more interesting by the day.


Great post Onceler

I have a similar take on things. But I would go further. After an initial spontaneous shift of perception seventeen years ago and the subsequent years of trying to make sense of it and assimilate it into my life, I've come to the conclusion that enlightenment (as I often hear and read about it) is a myth. Yes, there is awakening and varying degrees of liberation/peace as awakening is integrated into everyday life but the idea that the body-mind-personality can, in effect, become free of causality (karma!) and reach a state of perfection is, in my opinion a projection.

Awakening/liberation happens via the body-mind. Source has no need for liberation except as a play as the body-mind. Any so-called enlightenment would also (obviously) happen via the body-mind. But the body-mind is always subject to biology/psychology (some of it deep seated and innate), to physics, to the precarious nature of existence. Source is not touched by these things but its play as the body-mind IS.

The notion of a perfected human being is therefore a contradiction in terms. But, importantly, the whole notion misses the point. Take Nisargadatta for example. He was famously addicted to cigarettes and short tempered. But he didn't identify with the shortcomings of the organism - he understood it as the play of nature - he took none of it personally.

We could say that awakening is the realisation by the wave that it is not other than the ocean at play. But the natural limitations of the wave persist throughout its lifespan.
User avatar
Rob X
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 6:37 pm

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby borris83 » Thu Feb 16, 2017 7:06 pm

I've come to the conclusion that enlightenment (as I often hear and read about it) is a myth
..

Robx,

I used to wonder if it could be a myth. But I would never come to a conclusion that enlightenment is a myth. I just prefer to say "I don't know" and at the same time be open to what the scriptures say.Perhaps it is not a myth, how would you know..

By saying it as a myth, we are rejecting the claim of Upanishads, Brahmasutras and all authentic Buddhish and Jainist scriptures. There has been detailed documentation about how karma works and how one can dissolve the karma in various ways.

If you read more about the life of Ramana Maharishi and Ramakrishna Paramhamsa, it might clear up a lot of things for you.

but the idea that the body-mind-personality can, in effect, become free of causality (karma!) and reach a state of perfection is, in my opinion a projection
..

I wouldn't say that it is a state of perfection, it is a complete destruction. That is why Buddha put everything in a negative way. There is a term in Buddhism called "Sunyata" which can be said as the nature of enlightenment. That word simply means "emptiness"..

The mind that we are trying to use to understand enlightenment is influenced by our karmic structure right now. The way it is right now, mind can never understand what enlightenment is. It can only bring up an idea about enlightenment and then come to a conclusion that, that idea is a myth.

Also, causality is a very loose translation of Karma. It is not that after enlightenment a body/mind is not going to be bound by cause and effect anymore. That cannot be true. Because everything that we know as physical and everything that we can directly observe by mind or through five senses are bound by causality.

Karma can be rather said as a reason why there is life in a certain body. The reason why we are alive is because of Karma.After the death of a body,the particular karmic structure which was working through that body always tries to find a new body so that it can work through its dissolution. So, if I am dead right now, my body and mind will die but the karmic structure, which can be imagined as a bundle of energy waves, is not destroyed. It has its own tendency to find a suitable womb to start its action again. This cycle of births and deaths for a particular karmic structure, which is called 'Samsara', ends only in Moksha. After that the karmic structure simply dissolves and becomes no more, so that consciousness or being which was shining through that karmic structure is all that remains.

Another translation for Karma is 'action'. Karma is what produces action in a living organism. Whatever a person does, including mental action and involuntary actions, has its roots in his karmic structure. So, when the karma completely dissolves there is no question of action. That is why many people die at the time of moksha.

But there are tricks to keep the body alive after moksha. Those tricks are used just to make sure that there is a tiny bit of karmic structure left to function in this world. It can be consciously created and maintained. The only purpose of doing this is to help others towards awakening or enlightenment . This is only done by people who initially had a desire to help other people towards liberation. Those people have been called in many names: an avatar, a guru, a Bodhisattva etc.

This might not make sense to the mind and think that it is absurd. But people who wrote Upanishads and other scriptures didn't really care what the minds of people thought, because they clearly knew that the only way out of suffering and bondage is liberation or moksha.
borris83
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 5:16 am

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby Onceler » Fri Feb 17, 2017 12:20 am

Thanks for the posts, Robx and Borris83. Robx, as I wrote the post I was actually thinking the word 'myth' in my mind, but I chose not to say it. But I agree. Even if real, it is so rare that it is beside the point. What is not beside the point is the easy and simple inquiry that anyone can do to see their essential nature and get rid of fear in their lives (and the desire for salvation). I believe if more people did this it would have a huge impact on the state of the world and fear motivated behavior like greed, conflict, and other forms of neurosis and unconscious would greatly diminish.....but I have no evidence for it, only my own experience.

A simple question to ask of any guru or religion/spiritual practice is 'what are the results?' How many people experience verifiable relief from their suffering as a result from this practice. We do it for therapeutic styles in psychology, why don't we test spiritual systems with the same rigor, or why don't systems, confident in their own effect, engage in independent, reproducible testing?

Outside of this kind of systematic evaluation, spiritual systems stray into the liminal area of myth, hearsay, and (some) con jobs, preying on the pain and vulnerability as a result of suffering in their followers. I have deep respect and love for the ancient wisdom teachings, et. al, but if they are so powerful, why aren't more people transformed by them? The onus is put on the follower to change.....and if they don't they are blamed for not being ready, being too egoic, clinging, or lacking faith and belief. I think the onus should be on the system to demonstrate reproducible results In the average, messed up human.
Be present, be pleasant.
User avatar
Onceler
 
Posts: 2201
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 1:35 am
Location: My house

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby borris83 » Fri Feb 17, 2017 1:04 am

What is not beside the point is the easy and simple inquiry that anyone can do to see their essential nature and get rid of fear in their lives (and the desire for salvation). I believe if more people did this it would have a huge impact on the state of the world and fear motivated behavior like greed, conflict, and other forms of neurosis and unconscious would greatly diminish.....but I have no evidence for it, only my own experience.


Exactly Onceler.. I would say, Just practicing the "Power of now" can be very useful for human beings in reducing their suffering to a great extent. It really has the essence of the teachings in Upanishads. Even though I read about enlightenment and what happens after that, the only practice that I have done on a long term is 'listening to the voice in my head without any judegments, as a witnessing presence', which is explained in PON. It is also the core of Osho's teachings as well.

Also, the mindfulness practice in Buddhism is the same concept. Being present while letting the thoughts come and go and watching the breath, sometimes. Mindfulness has been scientifically proven to have great effects on ones well being.

Once a person has certain level of awareness, the deeper teaching can be given accordingly. The authentic spiritual teachings by a qualified Guru are usually given based on the level that the seeker is in. If something unusual is happening when I am doing a meditation, a scripture talking about what is happening can give me clarity on it and assure me that I am on the right path.

Outside of this kind of systematic evaluation, spiritual systems stray into the liminal area of myth, hearsay, and (some) con jobs, preying on the pain and vulnerability as a result of suffering in their followers

I do agree that the spirituality has been widely misused by many people, who pose themselves as teachers and cause more harm than good.

I have deep respect and love for the ancient wisdom teachings, et. al, but if they are so powerful, why aren't more people transformed by them?

That is a good question. There are lot of reasons. Most of the time, the scriptures are interpreted the wrong way.They are written thousands of years ago and the meanings for words have changed in the long run. Some translations have completely killed the real meaning as well. Many people read the scriptures just to gather information and don't see how they can be transformed by them.

If you read a teaching that comes from an authentic source and understand the real meaning, then as Eckhart says in PON, the truth inside you will respond to the truth you read or hear, and say 'that is correct!'. You can sense it. That why PON has become a best selling book and many people have seen changes.

But I can tell you very confidently that Upanishads are very authentic source. You don't have to go to a teacher to read them but you can find many of the source texts free online. Even Eckhart himself has acknowledged that years after his awakening, he came to understand what had happened to him after reading texts from Upanidhads. I will give you a link to an ebook that I found online, which is free. It is from Osho's talks on Akshya Upanishads called "Vedanta: Seven steps to Samadhi": http://www.oshorajneesh.com/download/os ... amadhi.pdf

I would love your comments on that book after reading it. It is very clear and Osho gives a very elaborate commentary. I am reading it at the moment, right now in Chapter 8.
borris83
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 5:16 am

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby maaref » Fri Feb 17, 2017 11:52 am

borris83 wrote:
Onceler wrote: The world is not going to get help simply by doing social service or charity; It might help some people but thats not the final answer. If each and every individual begins a journey towards ending his own suffering, only then the world can be saved. That is why enlightenment is stressed so much, because once a human being is realized he is also able to help other people to find their own true self and help to end their suffering as well.


I am of the opinion that not everyone would be/is capable of being enlightened. That does not mean the world is doomed (not yet at least). In fact, humankind evolved in societies and civilizations that are predominantly unawakened. However, humankind are "good" in nature. The moral and justice compass of people are more or less aligned (except of the details and paths which are effected by tradition, religion and social norms). Having said that, I believe that laws and social justice fill in the gap needed to have a functional society and enlightened people had a big role to play and continue to do so.

Enlightened people normally attract surrounding people around them. They have the power to influence and effect change. They are normally far sighted and work based on selfless agendas. Credit, money, fame means nothing to them, unless it serves a purpose. Often, they are not known as "spiritual" or "enlightned" in their societies. They almost never preach people about awareness unless asked to and reaches an intellectual conclusion that it is the situation is appropriate with a receptive audience who is capable of understanding the knowledge given. However, they often provide direct/indirect guidance which they consider suitable for the individual/group to help them realise themselves and that often starts with assisting them in removing their suffering (in whatever form it takes). This is the spirit of all great teachings, human right doctrines and religion. I once been told by a great person that an enlightened person cannot be immoral and/or unjust, because it contradicts with your own true self (since there is only one awareness) and its like someone intentionally harming himself with no reason.

The world would continue to be fine as long as people have their moral and justice compass properly working.

-------

As of the question of pain and suffering, I agree with both your view and dijmart. An enlightened person would feel pain and suffering in the same way he feels bliss and pleasure. He (awareness) is aware of such emotions arising in him. However, he is free of them as he (awareness) is above such emotions. He is indifference towards either (in the sense he is not seeking any). However, since our true nature is love, bliss, peace, such emotions automatically arise even though they are not chased. Removal of ignorance is this sense is enough. However, where a choice appears (and there is always a choice from the person's level) intelligence and common sense dictate the situation. For instance, love would always be preferred over hate for an enlightened person, because that is his nature - does not require energy to sustain. Furthermore, there is no absolute hate (because (i) it's difficult to sustain and (ii) absolute hate means awareness hates awareness!), but hate for enlightened people serves an intellectual purpose and serves as a natural signal/mechanism that there is something wrong. To hate certain actions such as murder and rape is both natural and common sense. Its against our nature of love and therefore we hate them. One can say that for an enlightened person hate is, in fact, an expression of love. For an unenlightened person, hate is effected by ignorance which makes him/her wrongly direct their hate towards a person or object for the wrong reasons, which can build up pretty quickly as you can imagine.

Suffering, pain, pleasure, bliss or any other feeling that you can think of, are merely occurring in awareness. If you realise yourself as awareness and live by this realisation, you see yourself above such feelings and are no longer dependent on them. That does not mean you are not effected by such feelings in the dream state, because the dream state is the place of cause and effect. Everything has cause and effect. But an awakened person is not entangled or dependent on such feelings, which makes his action and reactions determined by knowledge and intellect not emotions and blind conditioning.

TLDR Experience does not go away. You still experience pain and suffering (same as bliss and happiness), but it is impersonal and you don't mind it; even if you prefer one over the other based on your intellect and true nature. Just don't be attached it.
maaref
 
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2016 9:45 am

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby Onceler » Fri Feb 17, 2017 1:06 pm

I agree with most of what you say, although I believe enlightenment is not a well defined state.....I believe the natural state of a human is alertness and curiosity with an undercurrent of satisfaction, as opposed to love, bliss, and peace as you say.
Be present, be pleasant.
User avatar
Onceler
 
Posts: 2201
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 1:35 am
Location: My house

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby Rob X » Fri Feb 17, 2017 1:32 pm

borris83 wrote: Robx,

I used to wonder if it could be a myth. But I would never come to a conclusion that enlightenment is a myth. I just prefer to say "I don't know" and at the same time be open to what the scriptures say.Perhaps it is not a myth, how would you know..

By saying it as a myth, we are rejecting the claim of Upanishads, Brahmasutras and all authentic Buddhish and Jainist scriptures. There has been detailed documentation about how karma works and how one can dissolve the karma in various ways.

If you read more about the life of Ramana Maharishi and Ramakrishna Paramhamsa, it might clear up a lot of things for you.


Hi Borris

As I say, I've been around this stuff for over 17 years (before that I had a decent grounding in western philosophy.) I've put the work in and this is my conclusion. Of course I can't say that I know for sure. I can't say that I know for sure that there are no elephants on Saturn but I'm happy to conclude that there aren't.

I've read enough for several lifetimes. Probably too much. :)

borris83 wrote:
but the idea that the body-mind-personality can, in effect, become free of causality (karma!) and reach a state of perfection is, in my opinion a projection
..

I wouldn't say that it is a state of perfection, it is a complete destruction. That is why Buddha put everything in a negative way. There is a term in Buddhism called "Sunyata" which can be said as the nature of enlightenment. That word simply means "emptiness"..


I know a great deal about Buddhism. Sunyata does indeed mean emptiness. It refers to the emptiness of inherent existence. It's the nature of ALL apparent things - and yes, this includes concepts such as enlightenment.


borris83 wrote:The mind that we are trying to use to understand enlightenment is influenced by our karmic structure right now. The way it is right now, mind can never understand what enlightenment is. It can only bring up an idea about enlightenment and then come to a conclusion that, that idea is a myth.


Yes. The mind can only bring up ideas about enlightenment.

borris83 wrote:Also, causality is a very loose translation of Karma. It is not that after enlightenment a body/mind is not going to be bound by cause and effect anymore. That cannot be true. Because everything that we know as physical and everything that we can directly observe by mind or through five senses are bound by causality.

Karma can be rather said as a reason why there is life in a certain body. The reason why we are alive is because of Karma.After the death of a body,the particular karmic structure which was working through that body always tries to find a new body so that it can work through its dissolution. So, if I am dead right now, my body and mind will die but the karmic structure, which can be imagined as a bundle of energy waves, is not destroyed. It has its own tendency to find a suitable womb to start its action again. This cycle of births and deaths for a particular karmic structure, which is called 'Samsara', ends only in Moksha. After that the karmic structure simply dissolves and becomes no more, so that consciousness or being which was shining through that karmic structure is all that remains.

Another translation for Karma is 'action'. Karma is what produces action in a living organism. Whatever a person does, including mental action and involuntary actions, has its roots in his karmic structure. So, when the karma completely dissolves there is no question of action. That is why many people die at the time of moksha.

But there are tricks to keep the body alive after moksha. Those tricks are used just to make sure that there is a tiny bit of karmic structure left to function in this world. It can be consciously created and maintained. The only purpose of doing this is to help others towards awakening or enlightenment . This is only done by people who initially had a desire to help other people towards liberation. Those people have been called in many names: an avatar, a guru, a Bodhisattva etc.

This might not make sense to the mind and think that it is absurd. But people who wrote Upanishads and other scriptures didn't really care what the minds of people thought, because they clearly knew that the only way out of suffering and bondage is liberation or moksha.


Yes. Awakening (or a shift in perception) does happen. Yes, there can be a certain degree of liberation from the assimilation of this shift. It's the idea of the perfection of the mind-body-personality that I have an issue with. And this karma business. Awakening (shift of perception) and some form of liberation can be verified time and again. The karma stuff is purely metaphysical speculation.
User avatar
Rob X
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 6:37 pm

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby borris83 » Fri Feb 17, 2017 6:36 pm

Wow, Quite a lot has happened in this thread since I logged in the last time. It is interesting to see your different view points...

Rob X and Maaref,

Can you tell me a little bit about the books you have read or the teachers you have worked with? From your replies, even though a little bit of what Maaref has said differ from my viewpoints, I clearly see that you guys have been through a lot about spirituality. So, if you share a little bit about your background and the details of any awakening experiences you have had, that will be great.

Experience does not go away. You still experience pain and suffering (same as bliss and happiness), but it is impersonal and you don't mind it; even if you prefer one over the other based on your intellect and true nature. Just don't be attached it.


That description is nearly close to how I would describe the state I am in right now. Even though there is no suffering these days, there are moments of uneasiness and frustration. But the inner peace is not really disturbed by anything that is happening. About 80% of my waking time, I am quite absorbed in what I am doing in a background of great stillness and peace. But some people around me think that I have become lazy, irresponsible and childish. Thats because I dont do anything most of the time, I just go to the balcony and enjoy looking at the trees, the sky and the buildings. :lol: But I can't say there is nothing more to it yet.. I just have to wait and see what is going to happen.

I've read enough for several lifetimes. Probably too much. :)

Do you mean you past lives? Do you remember them? Can you tell more about it..
borris83
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 5:16 am

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby Rob X » Sat Feb 18, 2017 1:29 pm

Hi Borris

I don't wish to appear unfriendly or difficult but in my view I don't think it healthy to rely on spiritual authority when talking about this stuff. I think it much better to talk from experience (which may well include referencing a teacher or book at times.) The point being is that we don't need to know the details of someone's background or the books they've read in order to intuit whether or not they speak from a place of authenticity, discernment and honesty.

Having said that there are numerous references to my initial spontaneous shift in perception (awakening/satori) and to some of my subsequent influences and inspirations dotted around the forum (starting with my first ever introductory post.)

No past lives Borris. It was a bit of of joke since I find concepts such as individuated rebirth and karma highly questionable.
User avatar
Rob X
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 6:37 pm

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby Onceler » Sat Feb 18, 2017 3:08 pm

There's a point in these discussions where my eyes go crossed......my eyes just crossed.

Cheers!
Be present, be pleasant.
User avatar
Onceler
 
Posts: 2201
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 1:35 am
Location: My house

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby borris83 » Sat Feb 18, 2017 6:25 pm

I don't wish to appear unfriendly or difficult but in my view I don't think it healthy to rely on spiritual authority when talking about this stuff. I think it much better to talk from experience (which may well include referencing a teacher or book at times.) The point being is that we don't need to know the details of someone's background or the books they've read in order to intuit whether or not they speak from a place of authenticity, discernment and honesty.


Yes, I agree.. I like the Buddha's idea of following our own light. I always choose to be skeptical and take anything that is told by a spiritual authority as a hypothesis or clue and not as a belief or conclusion . My approach is very scientific and I dont rely on the scriptures alone. But I do use them to look at things from different perspectives. That is how I have fun. :D I was just curious and interested to know about the books you have read or any realized people you have met. I didn't ask you that to confirm if you speak from a place of authenticity, discernment and honesty. 8)

Even when it comes to Karma and reincarnation, I just keep those ideas in mind and not believe them blindly. The only thing that I can confidently say about Karma from my own experience is this: I do notice many times that my unconscious patterns come to the surface of consciousness time to time and melt away.When they melt away, I feel like I am becoming lighter and lighter. I feel like the clouds are disappearing and the clear sky of consciousness is becoming more and more visible. And this experience gels with the idea of dissolving the karmic structure.

There's a point in these discussions where my eyes go crossed......my eyes just crossed.

Is that an expression? What does it mean?
borris83
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 5:16 am

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby Rob X » Sun Feb 19, 2017 1:23 pm

borris83 wrote:
I don't wish to appear unfriendly or difficult but in my view I don't think it healthy to rely on spiritual authority when talking about this stuff. I think it much better to talk from experience (which may well include referencing a teacher or book at times.) The point being is that we don't need to know the details of someone's background or the books they've read in order to intuit whether or not they speak from a place of authenticity, discernment and honesty.


Yes, I agree.. I like the Buddha's idea of following our own light. I always choose to be skeptical and take anything that is told by a spiritual authority as a hypothesis or clue and not as a belief or conclusion . My approach is very scientific and I dont rely on the scriptures alone. But I do use them to look at things from different perspectives. That is how I have fun. :D I was just curious and interested to know about the books you have read or any realized people you have met. I didn't ask you that to confirm if you speak from a place of authenticity, discernment and honesty. 8)


Maybe. I'm a little cautious because I've seen conversations like these rapidly descend into lineage wars; 'my guru is more enlightened than your guru' type thing. And earlier in the thread you did post that Osho critique (rant) against Nisargadatta which was essentially just that.

Yes, paradoxically, 'be a light unto yourself' is an instruction worth following. :D
User avatar
Rob X
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 6:37 pm

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby borris83 » Sun Feb 19, 2017 3:37 pm

And earlier in the thread you did post that Osho critique (rant) against Nisargadatta which was essentially just that.


It is difficult to understand Osho. His approach was very different. Even I had difficulty in accepting Osho because of a lot of things.. But gradually, I began to trust him because of the difference he brought in my life..Also, watching him talk in a video is better than reading his talks in a book. Because, the way he put forward things may seem very egoistic and negative, but when you watch him talk you will understand that he is not at all serious. There are many things, I can go on and on about his mysterious ways of bringing a seeker to awakening or to become more conscious.

Regarding being critical about other masters, Osho himself gave an explanation by answering a question from a seeker.. Here it is:


BELOVED OSHO,

I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY ENLIGHTENED MASTERS ARE CRITICAL OF EACH OTHER. ARE
THEY NOT ALL WORKING TOWARDS THE HIGHER GOOD?

ARE THEY NOT DIFFERENT FLAVORS OF THE SAME TRUTH?

Anand Varuni, the question you have asked is almost impossible to answer for the simple reason that you are not enlightened yet. You don't know the ways of the enlightened ones. You don't know their devices, you don't know their methods; hence the misunderstanding.

An ancient story may help you.... In a great city there were two big sweet shops, and one day the owners of both the shops for some reason started fighting with each other. Naturally, they had no other way to fight so they started throwing sweets at each other. And the whole city gathered and people were enjoying the sweets that were falling on the street.

When two enlightened masters criticize each other it brings tremendous joy to those who can understand. Its taste is just unbelievable. They are not enemies, their fight is not of the ego. Their fight has a totally different context.

They fight because they know one thing: that the goal is one, but the paths are many. And each master has to defend his path, knowing perfectly well that the other paths are as valid as his. But if he starts saying that all the paths are valid, he will not have the impact, the influence on his people.

The journey is long and he needs absolute trust.

He is not a philosopher propounding a system of philosophy. His basic concern is that your commitment to the path should be total. To make it total he condemns all other paths, he criticizes all other ways. It is just out of compassion for you. He knows the people on the other path will also reach; and he knows that out of compassion the master on the other path has to criticize him, has to criticize his ways.

This is just a simple methodology to protect the disciple from influences that can take him astray.

And the mind is very, very clever in going astray. If all the paths are valid, then what is the necessity of commitment? If all the paths are valid, then what is the necessity of being total?

If all the paths are valid, then why not travel all the paths, why not go on changing, enjoying different ways, different methods, different sceneries? Each path will pass through different lands: there are paths that will go through the desert, and there are paths which will go through the mountains, and there are paths which will pass through beautiful, flowering trees.

But if you travel some time on one path and then you change the path, you will have to start again from ABC. Whatever you have learned on one path is invalid on another path, and if you go on keeping it within you it is going to create tremendous confusion. You are already in a great mess; no master wants you to be more confused!

Your mind always wants change. It does not know devotion; it loves fashions, its interest is always in some novelty. So it will go on moving from one path to another path, becoming more and more confused because each path has its own language, each path has its own unique methods, and each master is going to defend his path against all the other paths.

If you move on many paths you will collect contradictory arguments; you will become so much divided you will not know what to do. And if it becomes your habit to change paths - because the new has a certain attraction for the mind - you will move a few feet on one path, a few feet on another path, but you will never complete the journey.

One day Jalaluddin Rumi took all his students, disciples and devotees to a field. That was his way to teach them things of the beyond, through the examples of this world. He was not a theoretician, he was a very practical man. The disciples were thinking, "What could be the message, going to that faraway field... and why can't he say it here?"

But when they reached the field, they understood that they were wrong and he was right. The farmer seemed to be almost an insane man. He was digging a well in the field - and he had already dug eight incomplete wells. He would go a few feet and then he would find that there was no water.

Then he would start digging another well... and the same story was continued. He had destroyed the whole field and he had not yet found water.

The master, Jalaluddin Rumi, told his disciples, "Can you understand something? If this man had been total and had put his whole energy into only one well he would have reached to the deepest sources of water long ago. But the way he is going he will destroy the whole field and he will never be able to make a single well. With so much effort he is simply destroying his own land, and getting more and more frustrated, disappointed: what kind of a desert has he purchased? It is not a desert, but one has to go deep to find the sources of water."

He turned to his disciples and asked them, "Are you going to follow this insane farmer? Sometimes on one path, sometimes on another path, sometimes listening to one, sometimes listening to another... you will collect much knowledge, but all that knowledge is simply junk, because it is not going to give you the enlightenment that you were looking for. It is not going to lead you to the waters of eternal life."

Masters enjoy tremendously criticizing others. If the others are really enlightened, they also enjoy being criticized. They know that the purpose of both is the same: to protect the vagrant mind of the disciple, to keep him on one track, they have to deny that there is any other path anywhere that can lead you except this one.

This is not said out of an egoistic attitude; this is said out of love. This is simply a device to make you committed, devoted. The journey is long, the night is long, and if you go astray you can go on round and round for eternity without finding anything.

But in your unconscious state of mind, in your unenlightened space of being, the question seems to be relevant. You are asking, Varuni, "I don't understand why enlightened masters are critical of each other."

Don't bother why they are critical about each other; you will understand it when you become enlightened. Before that it is none of your business! If enlightened people enjoy criticizing, they must have some reason of their own, and you are not in a state to understand.

Gautam Buddha, one of the most famous enlightened persons in human history had eight contemporaries who were enlightened in the same small state of Bihar in India. Even the name ?Bihar' came about because eight enlightened masters were continuously wandering, finding their people, searching for those who could fall in tune with them. Bihar means wandering; the name has come from those eight enlightened people - and they were condemning each other like anything.

Two out of the eight have left traditions which are still alive. One was Gautam Buddha; the other was Vardhamana Mahavira. Gautam Buddha has left the great tradition of Buddhism. Mahavira has left another tradition, Jainism. Both were in the same space, but immensely critical of each other - no agreement on any single point.

It happened many times that they were in the same city. Once it happened that they were staying in the same caravanserai. Half of the serai was occupied by Gautam Buddha and his disciples and half of the serai was occupied by Mahavira and his disciples. It has been traditionally asked why they did not meet. Neither the Buddhists have the answer, nor do the Jainas. Both were enlightened; it would have been tremendously beautiful that they should have met.

But I know why they did not meet: they did not want their disciples to be confused. Gautam Buddha's approach was not that of a warrior, but that of an utterly relaxed human being. Mahavira had a totally different approach, of utter austerity, of great discipline, of arduous effort; the way of the warrior was his way. Mahavira, in comparison to Gautam Buddha, was an extremist.

Gautam Buddha insisted on the middle way: Avoid all extremes. Just be exactly in the middle and you are right. Every extreme is dangerous because it excludes the other extreme, and the truth should not exclude anything. The truth should be inclusive of all. So just be in the middle and both the extremes become like the two wings of a bird and the bird is just in the middle. You can use both the extremes to fly across the sun to the farthest star.

But Mahavira's standpoint was that unless you choose a single dimension of effort and unless you are totally devoted to it, without being worried that you are becoming extremist... Only from the extreme point can you jump into the beyond.

Now, both are right. But if a person who has never followed any path hears that both are right, he will be simply confused. Before your enlightenment you have to choose. After your enlightenment you are absolutely free to declare that all paths lead to the same place. But while you are leading people on the path you have to be consistently insistent that except this path everything else has to be completely forgotten.

You have to be one-pointed, just like an arrow moving towards the target, not bothering about other arrows moving from different angles, different aspects. If the arrow starts thinking of different angles and different aspects it is not going to reach the target. It will be lost in utter confusion.

People who have followed Mahavira have arrived and people who have followed Gautam Buddha have also arrived. If you ask me, what brings them home is totality, absolute dedication, unconditional commitment. It does not matter on which path you are, these conditions will have to be fulfilled.

In fact, the path does not matter at all. What matters are these three conditions: if you can fulfill these three conditions, even the wrong path will lead you to the right goal. And if you cannot fulfill these three conditions, the path may be absolutely right - you are not going anywhere!

And, Varuni, one thing more has to be understood: this I was saying about the enlightened ones, but there are many who are simply fake. You cannot make the distinction.

Just a few days ago I received a big letter from one of my very learned sannyasins, Swami Doctor Amrito. He has many Ph.D.s and D.Litt.s, and has written many books. He has written eight books about me. Now there is some man in Holland who talks as if he is enlightened, and many sannyasins are going to him. My international secretary, Ma Prem Hasya, seeing the situation has announced in all the newspapers that the man is fake and sannyasins should not go there.

Amrito himself was going there, so he was very much shocked because he was also thinking that the man seems to be enlightened. And I know that man cannot be enlightened even without knowing him, because I know his master. I don't know that man; I know his master. He used to live in Bombay and once I went just to have a look at him.

He was known as Beedie Baba, because he was continuously smoking Beedies. Great enlightenment! - except that, I could not see any indication of enlightenment, only a great chainsmoker.

This Dutch man became his follower. He was surrounded with a few uneducated, uncultured Indians... because he used to smoke beedies and talk about the ultimate. In India every village has one or two idiots doing the same business. This is the country of idiots and enlightened ones!

But for centuries the enlightened people have talked and the idiots have gathered all the beautiful words. It is very easy to talk about the ultimate, brahma, and quote a few statements from the scriptures. Every Indian is a spiritualist - but just on the surface. Deep down I have not seen more materialist people in the world anywhere - so much greed, so much ambition, so much repressed lust, and on the surface, a parrotlike spiritual talk.

The Indian consists not of one person, but two. The real population of India is not nine hundred million, it is double that, because each Indian is two Indians! One is the real, which is hidden in darkness, and one is the unreal, which goes on repeating beautiful phrases.

The Western seekers don't have any understanding about these parrots, so when they hear great words about which their tradition knows nothing... Their minds are conditioned by a very poor Christianity, mundane, ordinary, which does not have great philosophical flights.

But in India you can talk to anybody and you will be surprised that everybody knows about reincarnation and everybody is afraid of death. Strange! - if you know about reincarnation, why should you be afraid of death? Indians are the most cowardly people in the whole world. And when I say this I have absolute evidence for it. There is no other country in the world which has been enslaved for two thousand years continuously.

Why did India remain enslaved for two thousand years? A country which knows about reincarnation, which knows that the soul is eternal, which knows that you cannot be killed... But this knowledge is only parrot knowledge; when the time comes, this knowledge is not of any help.

Small tribes have ruled over this big, vast continent, because nobody wants to get into trouble unnecessarily. And because for centuries this country has been hearing beautiful words, tremendous revelations, everybody has become by and by saturated with them. So he is capable of rationalizing everything, even slavery.

For twenty centuries the Indian scholars, the Indian saints were even rationalizing the state of slavery - that it is a fire test of your patience, of your trust in God, of your nonviolence. And behind these beautiful words there was nothing but cowardliness. Because the Indians are afraid of being killed, that's why they don't kill others. It is dangerous. If you start killing others, you have to risk your life too. The Indians have chosen not to fight and they have made a great philosophy out of it, of "nonviolence". It is protective of their cowardly souls.

They are the most poor people in the world: half of the population is starving and any day in the coming thirteen years, five hundred million people are going to die in this country. But still they will go on rationalizing that it is fate, it is destiny, that everything is in the hands of God. Not even a leaf on a tree moves without God's orders; everything happens according to God. If he wants us to be slaves, what can we do? If he wants us to be poor, what can we do? If he wants us to have more and more children, what can we do?

The rich go on becoming richer and the poor go on producing more and more children.

Even the poorest beggar knows more about metaphysics, about great ideologies... And when the Western man comes - he may be well educated but his education is of science, his education is of logic, his education makes him a great intellectual. But in the heart he remains very naive. Then any Beedie Baba, any idiot can make a great impact on him.

This Dutch man lived for months together with Beedie Baba. He does not mention his well-known name, Beedie Baba; he mentions only his legal name, Nisargadatta Maharaj. He has written many books on Nisargadatta Maharaj; he has made Nisargadatta famous all over the world. I have looked through those books - sheer nonsense.

Now Amrito has written to me, "Osho, you have to tell Hasya to withdraw her statement, because I have seen this Dutch man and to me he looks enlightened."

Enlightened people don't look enlightened, they are enlightened! And poor Amrito, this is not for the first time... He gets caught anywhere; it has happened many times. And he is going round and round. He met another idiot's follower; that idiot was Muktananda, and he had an American follower, Baba Free John. Now he has changed his name, because now he declares himself enlightened and he has dropped any connection with Muktananda. Now he has become Da Free John.

And Amrito went there and inquired of me, "Can I write a book on Da Free John?"

I said, "Amrito, if your whole life is just to write about any idiot you come across, then don't waste your time in Holland - come to India, and you will find so many people. Go on writing."

He has written about Sri Aurobindo, he has written about J. Krishnamurti, he has written about Da Free John, he has written about me, and now he is caught up with this other Dutch fellow.

"If this is going to be just your profession, to write, if you are some kind of spiritual journalist, then it is okay. But this is not going to lead you towards enlightenment."

He became very confused. It was bound to happen, because when he read my statement about Sri Aurobindo - that he was not enlightened - Amrito was shocked. Now, what can I do about it? I know he was not enlightened and he was befooling people. He was declaring to people - and that was the only attraction, because thousands of people around the world became interested in Sri Aurobindo for a single reason.

He was telling people, "Up to now there have been enlightened people, self-realized people; they have attained to immortality. But now I have come to bring a new experience to the world and that experience is physical immortality. Spiritual immortality many have attained; I have brought the whole alchemy of making you physically immortal."

Naturally all kinds of people who are afraid of death immediately became interested - and these kinds of statements have a beauty. Naturally, you cannot contradict Sri Aurobindo while he is alive; he is the proof that he is immortal. And you cannot contradict him when he dies, because whom to contradict!

One day he died. And, one of my friends was also there in his ashram. "For three days," he told me, "it was not declared to the world that Sri Aurobindo had died." They kept it as a secret, because this would shatter all the following and the whole business.

But how long can you keep a dead body? And they were thinking and believing in the ashram of Sri Aurobindo that he had gone deep in samadhi; he would come back. But instead of coming back, his whole body started stinking. When the body started stinking, then they became worried: "It seems the fellow is gone!"

Then they declared to the world, "Sri Aurobindo has gone so deep in his samadhi that the doctors are saying he is dead."

So they have made a beautiful marble grave for him and they are still waiting - many have left but a few idiots are absolutely impossible - they still believe that one day he will knock from inside. He has gone in search for the alchemy for his disciples to become physically immortal.

Then there was a woman who was really running the ashram. She was a film actress from France, and she had become attracted to the idea of immortality. Women will be very much attracted to it, particularly film actresses whose professional life is very short, just five to seven years. Before that they are extras, after that again they are extras. Naturally they want physical immortality, and if in the middle of youth they can become physically immortal, they can remain always on the top of the list of celebrities.

This French actress became the mother of the ashram. After Sri Aurobindo died, while she was alive she managed the false and absolute lie of Aurobindo. She said, "He has gone in search of a few missing links. But I am here; I am immortal"... and by coincidence she lived almost a hundred years.

So naturally she created the idea in many that perhaps she was the chief disciple and Aurobindo had made her immortal. But one day she also popped off.

And when I told Amrito, "Don't get into all this nonsense," he said, "I had never thought about all this." But he goes on from one person to another person. Just curiosity... seems to be unquenchable curiosity.

Varuni, it is not only enlightened people criticizing other enlightened people; they have also to criticize those who are not enlightened and are pretending to be so. It is absolutely a necessity that the false should be exposed. That too is part of compassion, so you don't get caught up with the false.

And you are asking, "Are they not all working towards the higher good?"

You cannot understand anything about the people who are enlightened. They are not working at all - neither for higher good nor for anything else. They are simply delighting and sharing their love, their light, their life, everything they have, their blissfulness and their peace and their silence. And this is simply a delight, it is not a work. They are not working for some higher good; they are the highest good themselves, there is no need for them to work for any higher good. This is Christian language.

I have told you that the man who is enlightened is satyam, shivam, sunderam. He is the very truth itself; he is not working for any other truth. He is godliness himself; he is not working for any other good. And he is beauty himself; he is not trying to lead you towards some beauty. He is present.

You can drink out of his well and be absolutely contented, right now, this very moment.

A man of enlightenment is no longer interested in the future. There is no future as far as he is concerned; everything is always in the present. Existence is always in the present. His whole joy is not to lead you towards some good, but just to bring you back to yourself - because all that is beautiful, all that is good and all that is great is within you, not anywhere else.

And finally, Varuni, you are asking, "Are they not different flavors of the same truth?"

By the very nature of the situation you cannot ask the right question. And I am compelled to give you the right answer although you are asking the wrong question:

Every enlightened man has all the flavors of truth. It is not that one enlightened man has one flavor, another enlightened man has another flavor; this one has a different perfume, that one has a different perfume...

The moment you are enlightened truth blossoms in you with all the flavors together simultaneously.

Every enlightened man is complete and perfect in himself. There is nothing missing in him.

It will be good for you, rather than asking about enlightened people and worrying about what they are doing and why they are doing it... The simple way is: become enlightened and you will know!

Between enlightenment and the state of unenlightenment, it is a very long distance call. And languages are different: something is said, something else is heard - and this has been going on for centuries, misunderstanding upon misunderstanding.

The phone rang at the maternity hospital and an excited voice at the other end of the line said, "Send an ambulance quickly. My wife Maureen is about to have a baby!"

"Calm down," replied the nurse. "Tell me, is this her first baby?"

"No," said Paddy, "this is her husband speaking."

Paddy was very, very ill indeed, so Maureen sent for the doctor. After a brief examination the doctor announced that Paddy was dead.

"I am not," said Paddy from his bed.

"Be quiet," said Maureen. "Do you think you know better than the doctor?"

"My wife, Bridget," Sean confided to Paddy, "is an angel."

"You are lucky," said Paddy, "my wife Maureen is still alive."

Hymie Goldberg was having his first session with the psychoanalyst.

"Do you cheat on your wife?" asked the shrink.

"My God," said Hymie, "who else could I cheat on?"

A Californian psychiatrist was driving along in his car, when he saw a man lying on the sidewalk. He stopped his car and got out. It turned out the man had been mugged and left for dead.

"Quick," said the shrink, "tell me who did this to you; he needs help immediately!"

An Indian businessman who had made millions after a childhood of poverty was on his deathbed giving advice to his son.

"Listen, son," he said, "I owe my success to two principles - honesty and wisdom. Honesty is if you promise to deliver some goods, no matter what happens, even if it means bankruptcy, deliver!"

"I will try to remember, father," replied the boy. "And what about wisdom?"

"Wisdom is simple, my boy," continued the father. "Never make any promises."

From the place you are, don't be worried about the actions of people who are existing on a totally different plane. If you really want to understand them, reach to the same consciousness and you will understand without fail.

I have been acquainted with almost all the enlightened people who have lived on the earth. My whole life I have been searching in every nook and corner of the earth, and a few things have emerged out of my research into the enlightened being.

They are absolutely perfect in all dimensions possible, with all flavors, and it is a sheer necessity for them to criticize others knowing perfectly well that the people they are criticizing will understand their compassion. They may have moved through different paths; they have moved. It is almost like a mountain: you can move from different directions, you can choose different pathways, you will have different experiences on the way. But when you reach to the top it is the same experience, absolutely the same sweetness, the same fragrance.

But if you belong to the category of the arhatas you may remain silent, without criticizing anybody, because you don't have any followers. Therefore arhatas - there are two categories of people who have achieved enlightenment; one is called the arhata. The literal meaning of the word is one who has conquered.

The second is the bodhisattva; the literal meaning is one who has awakened. The ultimate experience is the same, whether you are an arhata or a bodhisattva. But there are differences in their actions and in their words.

Arhatas have remained silent; naturally there is no question of criticizing anybody. They have never asserted any truth, they have never tried to manifest any of their experience. They have never bothered that somebody may be there who can be helped. They never become saviors of anybody.

They have a very small boat; only one can sit in their small boat, and they go to the further shore alone. Because they don't have disciples, there is no question of any criticism. They are the silent ones.

But the bodhisattvas are people of immense compassion. The arhatas in comparison look a little hard, unconcerned about others who are struggling in darkness and death. Bodhisattvas are tremendously interested in giving you a hand and pulling you up from your ditch and putting you on the right path. And of course the right path is the path that they have followed; that is the only path they know exactly. They don't know about any other path, because they have never followed it.

And it is absolutely correct to make it completely certain to the disciple that this is the only path, so he does not go astray.

By the time the arhatas and the bodhisattvas reach to the peak, they experience the same light and the same bliss and the same ecstasy. But the arhatas still remain silent. Bodhisattvas still remain concerned about people who have been left behind on the path.

There is a beautiful story about Gautam Buddha, who was a bodhisattva: When he reached the gate of paradise, there was great celebration because never before had such a great enlightened being reached paradise. He had a beauty of his own, a grace that was incomparable, and a compassion that was infinite.

The doors were wide open, there was celebration in paradise. But the story is that Gautam Buddha refused to enter paradise, on the grounds that he had left many on the way; he would stand at the gate until the last human being had entered the gate. He would be ultimately the last.

The story says that he is still standing outside the gate, waiting for his disciples and devotees whom he has promised... He cannot go against his promise.

Gautam Buddha criticized the seers of the VEDAS, he criticized the seers of the UPANISHADS, he criticized Mahavira, he criticized everybody that he could find - Krishna, Rama, all the Hindu gods.

Continuously for forty-two years he was criticizing every old scripture, every old prophet, every old savior.

But he was not an enemy of anyone. He was criticizing all those people so that you could be unconditioned, so that you could be freed from the clinging with the past which cannot help you.

When a living enlightened being is present, he cannot allow you to remain clinging with the dead, which can only be a weight on your heart but cannot become wings for your freedom.

It needs tremendous insight and meditative understanding to have a little glimpse of the world of the enlightened person. I have criticized many: only a few of them were enlightened; most of them were simply frauds. The frauds have to be absolutely exposed to humanity.

Even those who were enlightened have become only a tradition, a convention, a dead belief. You have to be freed from their grip also, because they cannot help you, they can only hinder your path.

They can become your chains, but they cannot become your freedom.

I can become your freedom.

I am your freedom.

When I am gone I hope there may still be courageous people in the world to criticize me, so that I don't become a hindrance on anybody's path. And those who will criticize me will not be my enemies; neither am I the enemy of those whom I have criticized. The working of the enlightened masters just has to be understood.

You should remember only one word, and that is compassion - compassion for you, compassion for all those who are still not centered in their being, who are still far away from themselves, who have to be called back home.

Okay, Maneesha?

Yes, Osho.
borris83
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 5:16 am

Re: One of the biggest traps

Postby dijmart » Sun Feb 19, 2017 5:55 pm

Do to the onslaught of Osho quotes and pages within this thread I would like to add a critique of Osho by a Vedanta teacher Arlindo Nagar (who is alive and well) who spent 10 years with Osho-

WAS OSHO RAJNEESH SELF-REALIZED ? I couldn’t resist saying a few words about my first guru, Osho Rajneesh, and considering he is was so famous, I thought to begin with a new topic. You ask if he had a case of Enlightenment Sickness. Definitely not! He was terminally ill with Enlightenment Sickness, to the extent that Isvara delivered him a miserable premature death. It was as if his whole mind was taken up by it. Possibly he suffered from a large infection of inadequacy which developed the abnormal auto-immune response we call E.S.

Whether he was Self-Realized or not, nobody knows. I heard Ramji saying a few times that it takes a Jnani to know a Jnani. But what that statement really means is that it takes a Liberated person to know another.

Self-knowledge and Moksha are not the same. A liberated person is for sure self-realized, because there is no liberation without self-knowledge, meaning to say that, regardless of one’s spiritual temperament, eventually, only by knowledge the self can be realized. But a self-realized person is not necessarily liberated.

Moksha = Freedom or liberation from the tyranny of one’s bindings vasanas. A person who is established as Awareness is a discriminating person, i.e. he/she enjoys the fruit of self-knowledge which is Moksha. The fruit of self-knowledge is the result of a gradual and effortless but constant exercise of the discriminating power that allows the Jivamukta to say ‘no’ to any adharmic vasana that may still surface.

Liberation or Moksha can be observed in one’s thoughts, words, and actions. That’s how many fake swamis are able to impress the ignorant with the simple trick of withdrawing from action, and speech. What goes on in their minds, only Isvara knows! :)

A Liberated person behaves naturally and ordinarily, but in a certain way that his/her sense of freedom transpires, it can be noticed by others, specially by another self-actualized/liberated person. He/she does not crave for, or fear from anything in the world, much less if it is not in harmony with Dharma.

Self-realization or self-knowledge, on the other hand is the clear vision or direct seeing which produces the indubious knowledge; I am the Light of Consciousness, and everything is IT. Although it represents the most important turn in one’s life, it is still just the begin as far as moksha or liberation is concerned.

Nididhyasana, the constant application of self-knowledge will gradually dry up the remaining vasanas popping up in the conscious mind of the self-realized. The degree of one’s karmic vasana load, and how much purification was processed before self-realization, will determine the timing for self-knowledge to fructify as Moksha.

In the modern spiritual world we find innumerable self-realized teachers (without a teaching), being fully operated by their ignorance; adharmic vasanas seeking for expression, which manifest as compulsive likes and dislikes. Osho Rajneesh was an extreme example of such an individual.

In retrospect, my ten years’ association with him allows me to say that he was definitely, not Liberated or Self-actualized. As far as Osho being Self-realized… only Isvara knows. My devotional love for him had somehow blinded me at the time. But even before he left his body I had already developed that sense; I need another teacher.

That was when Isvara presented me with some of the books of Nisargadatta Maharaj, the teacher (without a proper teaching), with lots of experiential confusing statements who has inspired me the most until I was graced with self-realization and later on with Vedanta.

Oshos’ teachings were entry level, kindergarten, mostly based on meditations and psychological and sociological insights. His spiritual teachings were a soup made of very little knowledge diluted by much of his own experiential notions of enlightenment, i.e. ignorance. He was a rebel by nature and against everything… opposed to all traditions, including the one that could have brought true liberation into his life.

He was definitely, wiser and smarter than all of us, but was he self-realized? A book can be written on this topic, but it is not really worth it. I heard Ramji saying that Osho was the guru who has caused most damage in the modern spiritual world with his vision of ‘Zorba the Buddha’, a model which combines the attitude of wildly seeking all pleasures of life, with some therapies and a couple of hours of daily meditations. How hilarious! :lol:
Take what you like and leave the rest.
User avatar
dijmart
 
Posts: 2079
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 4:35 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest