That was the first book of his I read a few years, opened my mind a LOT at the time. I really enjoyed it.
The purpose would be to live. By being alive you have fulfilled a purpose. By experiencing you give meaning to the "illusion", in turn making it real. By learning you add depth to the illusion.(which could be a positive or negative, depending on how you look at it)
Think of this as being more about what I said earlier: "...So, if all is illusion, which implies non-existence, then is the illusion real or not?..." The idea of reality being illusory, a common eastern idea, has to be understood in the right way for it to work properly as a method. How illusory is illusory? Does it mean that it's here or not here? Which part is real and which illusory? Does it being illusory mean that it's nihilism, that nothing is here at all? If there's nothing here at all then who types, who sees? MelT
What a load. I'm no Buddhist, or anything other than an observer really, but "enlightenment" doesn't seem like it can be determined by a simple 4 question test. I also thought enlightenment was kind of a rare thing. Like, an EXTREME few had attained it. Where did you get this test and how can you be so sure of the answers to tell so many people they're wrong? The purpose of life? Pretty arrogant to claim to have a firm grasp of even the concept really. ...Maybe it's because I was raised in the wild west though.
Master philosopher? No. I knew his wisdom was.... How should I say it.... Not well developed? And this was reinforced when one of my teachers laughed at him casually.
I also want to add that I'm not tryin' to hate. You are young and you youtube watts, leary, and even people like Zizek.. But you get older and wikipedia 'philosophy' and start to peer in and get a grasp of things... Then 10 years later you actually read who matters.
No I agree with you completely. I made this thread 3 years ago when I was just starting to open my mind to these eastern concepts. He helped me start to think in a different way, but I agree, I would not call him a master philosopher myself either. I've come a long way in my spiritual/philosophical understanding since this thread lol.
The problem is outlined in your first sentence. I understand completely, you are like me before I began and I understand your cynicism. You aren't a Buddhist or someone who follows an eastern tradition so you have no way of knowing what enlightenment is or what the questions mean. I can assure you as a Buddhist for most of my adult life that they will certainly help point out if some has a knowledge of basic realisation. There are deeper questions for further levels, but that just about sums them up. How do I kinow these things? Well, I'm a 'career' Buddhist, it's my life to study and teach it and other forms of meditation, and to write about it. It would be foolish of me to do these things without having spent a long time studying - and of course practising myself - before doing so. There are a lot of misconceptions in the west about what is is and means and I try to help iron out some of those ideas. Surprisingly it's not rare, though deeper versions are thin on the ground. MelT
Depends on what you mean. "Enlightenment" = obtaining the level of the awakened one. But awakened to what exactly? The meaning of life? As a buddhist since birth, only now am i starting to believe that true understanding cannot be achieved without meditation. Trying to use intellect to think about the meaning of life gets you no where. Is that true?
Depends on what you mean.>> I was asking if I was telling the truth in my previous posts about meditation and Buddhism. If a poster is unable to tell that then they wouldn't know if I was realised. "Enlightenment" = obtaining the level of the awakened one.>> There are different degrees of realisation, not all of them mean that you are 'awakened'. At the lower end you can have glimpses of Kensho that aren't really enlightenment; at the upper end you can have two or three decent Kenshos, but still not be regarded as being fully realised as you haven't reached Satori, a permanent state. But awakened to what exactly? The meaning of life? >> No, to understanding what reality is. As a buddhist since birth, only now am i starting to believe that true understanding cannot be achieved without meditation. Trying to use intellect to think about the meaning of life gets you no where. Is that true?>> Yes. As you know, the idea that there is or should be a meaning to life isn't a concern of Buddhism. But, contemplating the nature of reality - correctly - is the most powerful form of meditation, used by the final levels of meditation in traditions such as Mahamudra and Dzogchen.. Meditation in these forms is not what you would expect, and rarely includes shamatha or vipassana. MelT
[quote name='"MelT"']But awakened to what exactly? The meaning of life? >> No, to understanding what reality is. MelT[/quote] He never said he was enlightened. What made you decide the answer to your original question to him was a yes?
[quote name='"MelT"']Depends on what you mean.>> I was asking if I was telling the truth in my previous posts about meditation and Buddhism. If a poster is unable to tell that then they wouldn't know if I was realised. "Enlightenment" = obtaining the level of the awakened one.>> There are different degrees of realisation, not all of them mean that you are 'awakened'. At the lower end you can have glimpses of Kensho that aren't really enlightenment; at the upper end you can have two or three decent Kenshos, but still not be regarded as being fully realised as you haven't reached Satori, a permanent state. But awakened to what exactly? The meaning of life? >> No, to understanding what reality is. As a buddhist since birth, only now am i starting to believe that true understanding cannot be achieved without meditation. Trying to use intellect to think about the meaning of life gets you no where. Is that true?>> Yes. As you know, the idea that there is or should be a meaning to life isn't a concern of Buddhism. But, contemplating the nature of reality - correctly - is the most powerful form of meditation, used by the final levels of meditation in traditions such as Mahamudra and Dzogchen.. Meditation in these forms is not what you would expect, and rarely includes shamatha or vipassana. MelT[/quote] While I would never use one person's opinion to completely make a decision on any one concept, you have made me see that Buddhism is not much different from other religions. You lost me at "contemplating reality - correctly." Who decides what reality is correct? And the way one views it?! Assuming everyone views the same reality, who is to say that you're right? This may be a bit premature, but I'm gonna guess either you "know" you're right, or you can hear a "voice" of sorts. That, or, again like other religions, I'm just ignorant to the "higher power". Well, you know, the voice in my head says to fuck people over if it benefits me. Now should I throw my morals away to indulge this voice? No, because it's my own thought telling me what I WANT to hear. Not the devil influencing me or bad karma. This is how people work. These final forms of meditation, you know "contemplating life - correctly" how do you know they even exist? Someone told you, you read about it or it was that "voice" again, right? That is how EVERY other religion is. I'm so tired of being told how inferior I, and other people are, because we don't assume that stupid voice in our head is a god, divine deity or some other form of higher power. I feel like I'm in the fucking twilight zone! I don't think most atheists even care whether there's a god or if mother nature is "watching" us or if we rot in the ground! It's being told CONSTANTLY that you're less because you're not of this faith, you don't meditate or because you don't have a FUCKING dot on you're forehead. One last thing that's been buggin' the shit outta me. When you do good things and good things happen to you, you know, that thing called karma. Maaaaayyyybbbbeee that's because when you're a good person, other good people want to be around you. Bad things happen when you surround yourself with scum.
While I would never use one person's opinion to completely make a decision on any one concept, you have made me see that Buddhism is not much different from other religions. A lot of good questions. I'm very much in favour of people questioning things like this as there are a lot of wrong ideas about what Buddhism is and what enlightenment is. It would take a very long reply, but if I can just point out a few things that should help. Buddhism isn't a religion BTW, but that's minor : Buddhism isn't based on one concept. Hinduism came before Buddhism and it and Buddhism share the same view of what reality is and most of the ways to have an experience of it, i.e, an experience of enlightenment. That means to 'realise' what reality is at a base level and so understand your own true nature. Sufism, Zen, Jainism, Taoism, etc., all share the same understanding. This isn't my personal idea of what realisation is, but the way it's seen by every school of meditation. You lost me at "contemplating reality - correctly." Who decides what reality is correct? And the way one views it?! Assuming everyone views the same reality, who is to say that you're right? You think that somebody somewhere in one of the eastern traditions decided one day that 'ultimate nature' is this or that and that we should all strive towards having an experience of this made up state. Is that about it? No, the experience of enlightenment came about long before it was turned into something that people aim for. Experience first, ways of getting there second. There are a lot of cases where people who have never meditated before in their lives have an experience of Kensho. Meditation is an attempt to recreate that natural state, to increase the liklihood of it happening. The traditions appeared out what was learned in the state of realisation, what tens of people, not just a Buddha, have learned. No matter what tradition you follow - if any - what you will experience in Kensho (of any reasonable size) is the same from person to person. Interestingly, even if someone is a devout member of another religion, they will change their veiws after enlightenment. This may be a bit premature, but I'm gonna guess either you "know" you're right, or you can hear a "voice" of sorts. I wish. I'd like an internal voice and a wild stare How about 32 years of meditation and thirty five years study of eastern meditation traditions.I gave up working and normal life for fifteen years to meditate. I follow a form of mediation called Dzogchen, Nyingma tradition. That, or, again like other religions, I'm just ignorant to the "higher power". We don't have a higher power, a heaven, or worship anyone and nor do we have anyone telling us we are sinners. Well, you know, the voice in my head says to fuck people over if it benefits me. Now should I throw my morals away to indulge this voice? No, because it's my own thought telling me what I WANT to hear. Not the devil influencing me or bad karma. This is how people work. People think that all Buddhists and Hindus believe in a retributional karma that follows you from life to life and punishes you or rewards you. What Buddha actually said was that 'if you do bad things you will become bad, if you do good things you will become good'. These final forms of meditation, you know "contemplating life - correctly" how do you know they even exist? I practice them The schools of Mahamudra and Dzogchen have been around for nearly two thousand years. The texts of Dzogchen alone runs into thousands. It's practiced now world-wide and chances are there's probably a school near you. Someone told you, you read about it or it was that "voice" again, right? That is how EVERY other religion is. I'm so tired of being told how inferior I, and other people are, I do wish I had this voice, it sounds a lot of fun I can't remember telling you or anyone else that they're inferior to me? Could you perhaps give me a quote? I think you're mixing up eastern traditions with western religions. The east doesn't have the same penchant for telling people that they're sinners if they don't believe in this or that god. They also tell everyone of every faith, that they all have an equal chance of becoming realised and that they are all intrinsically equal in every way. Buddhism is based on that equality. No man can be above or below you, it's why it's such a dramatically popular way of life, because the poorest of men, the most evil and ignorant of all men, can experience realsation. It doesn't need a belief in the Buddha or anyone else. The Buddha gave us a set of techniques and ways of thinking to help us to become realised, he isn't the only one to have experienced it and we don't worship him for that as a god, we simply thank him. because we don't assume that stupid voice in our head is a god, divine deity or some other form of higher power. I feel like I'm in the fucking twilight zone! I don't think most atheists even care whether there's a god or if mother nature is "watching" us or if we rot in the ground! It's being told CONSTANTLY that you're less because you're not of this faith, you don't meditate or because you don't have a FUCKING dot on you're forehead. Read the above, I hope it will change your mind about what you think eastern traditions are about. No rules, no bosses, no need for dots or kneeling. No need for a saffron robe or a begging bowl - unless you want them. Some people need the discipline of joining a tradition, many don't, but simply wing it themselves and see what comes out. Buddhism has no problem at all with that, as the aim is for the enlightenment of all sentient beings, no matter how they get there. If you do it through weed and Led Zep played backwards, it counts just as much. One last thing that's been buggin' the shit outta me. When you do good things and good things happen to you, you know, that thing called karma. Maaaaayyyybbbbeee that's because when you're a good person, other good people want to be around you. Bad things happen when you surround yourself with scum. Absolutely true. That's precisely the way it works and the way that eastern Buddhists think of it. It's simple action and reaction. There is no karma as a discreet entity that confers good or bad experiences of people depending on what they've done, that's a fallacy. MelT
A question for Melt. Is it possible to experience a temporary enlightened state through the use of certain drugs? I feel as though I was in an enlightened state on one such voyage, but when I went to sleep and woke up I was back to normal. I guess a description of my state was that I felt like I didn't really know anything detail or knowledge wise, but I felt like I knew everything on a grander scale more like wisdom than actual knowledge. I realised that I was no different to any other person and that we are all really of the same essence, I was free of all fear and anxieties and was in a state of serene bliss. I also recognised the yin and yang of all things and became aware of all the dualities and balance in our universe. Is that considered enlightened?
It was an interesting experience which obviously meant a lot to you, but no. It would be unfair of me to take it apart and say why not, but for example, there is no recognition of yin and yang or recogniton of balance. It's also direct, literal knowledge rather than a sense of wisdom, so it's like any other form of understanding, once you've experienced it there is no going back, so you couldn't go to sleep and lose it. The only drug so far to induce anything like these experiences, which includes everything from MDMA to LSD, is cannabis - though as you would if you were straight, you have to be in the right state for them to occur. The usual expectations of the state are continual bliss and wisdom, but enlightenment gives people knowledge, it doesn't make them wise. Bliss too is a side-effect, not what you're actually aiming for. The problem is that whilst blisses are pleasant, they're also overwhelming and take you away from meditation. For example, you might be doing X or Y technique and enter into a bliss, which divides your attention and stops you doing X or Y, so in later forms blisses can be a barrier to realisation rather than an indication that you are realised. MelT
It's hard to talk in terms of what would someone gain afterwards without sounding negative, when quite the opposite is true. For example, you have no desires, no need for material things, standing on a mountain top is the same as standing waist deep in excrement. This is of course wonderful, but not for those around you unless they understand, which most don't. If you are a normal person with a wife and a job and one day have a major experience then everything will stop. Who you were disappears, everything you had aimed for in life you will see as unnecessary. But then, how do you earn money? Just because someone has such an experience doesn't mean that they'll be feted and welcomed with open arms, there's nowhere to go to live out your life as you'd like to, so you try to carry on and say nothing about it. Many of the most deeply realised people around today have never said more than a few words about it to family and friends because it can worry them. What's anyone's first reaction here to someone who claims to be enlightened? Exactly the same as in the Buddha's day On arising from meditation on his first day as a fully realised being he met a traveller who he told that he was beyond being taught and had learned the nature of the universe. The traveller clicked his tongue, muttered. "If that were only so..." and went on his way. Realisation has bonuses and downfalls, you have to understand it fully and be prepared for what might happen if you do reach it. MelT
Call him whatever you want but his voice is very soothing and I think he had a great way with words. Master? Maybe not. Good at what he did? Definitely.