Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Is it laughable?
lobster
Crusty Veteran
99.999% of the spiritual books and teachers out there are completely wrong. They are wrong for one simple reason, they are not enlightened, they don’t know what's going on. So in order to keep the illusion of personality, of the idea that there is something or someone, they invent stories, or theories, or ideas, wear special clothes, perform certain rituals and so on. They teach this stuff. But the truth is so simple, it is laughable.
http://www.spiritualteachers.org/norquist_article.htm
I bolded that bit . . . Oh dear . . .
The Truth hurts. What is a wannabe Buddha to do? Laugh?
You will notice this continuation of the dream state through practice is the preferred Modus Operandi. You will notice that change rather than being is part of the delusion.
Fortunately a couple of people here have had the good grace to admit they are enlightened. Most of us probably slept through that admission . . .
My life as a non Buddha will soon be over. What will you do? I won't be doing anything exceptional, just so you know . . .
The other day I noticed the Buddha Nature in someone . . . tsk tsk . . . something seems to be happening . . . :coffee:
http://www.spiritualteachers.org/norquist_article.htm
I bolded that bit . . . Oh dear . . .
The Truth hurts. What is a wannabe Buddha to do? Laugh?
You will notice this continuation of the dream state through practice is the preferred Modus Operandi. You will notice that change rather than being is part of the delusion.
Fortunately a couple of people here have had the good grace to admit they are enlightened. Most of us probably slept through that admission . . .
My life as a non Buddha will soon be over. What will you do? I won't be doing anything exceptional, just so you know . . .
The other day I noticed the Buddha Nature in someone . . . tsk tsk . . . something seems to be happening . . . :coffee:
1
Comments
I don't think people have to be awake to be teachers either; I stay sober by following a book written by a bunch of recovered alcoholics; I doubt any of them were enlightened (the co-cult-founder of A.A. definitely wasn't).
But they were still good teachers since they taught from their own experience; not theory or opinion.
Listened to a talk he gave. Seems that everyone knows all about him already. He does not fulfil our fantasy dream enlightened being? Ah well . . .
Getting people sober is wonderful. Nothing to do with enlightenment though . . .
@Florian you can recognise the enlightened? Good news.
How should he speak? You think 'no Self' means an inability to speak?
I wonder if I have to fulfil others fantasises on awakening?
Nope. I won't be.
1) That he is enlightened, and
2) That spiritual teachers and books are wrong because they are not enlightened
I didn't read the whole page but he sounds like he knows what he's saying from an advaita point of view and I do generally agree with him on his metaphysics. From my experience genuine teachers don't spend much time thinking about what they did or realized.
Maybe its just a difference of definition about what enlightenment is. Its quite probable that he has had a strong spiritual realization, its just not the type that this Buddhist recognizes as enlightenment.
His "consciousness IS the universe because there is only consciousness" message is meaningless. He seems to have had some sort of breakthrough, but perhaps needs to continue out the other side of his satori to realize consciousness is consciousness and the universe is the universe, also.
Just my opinion.
and my thoughts
".............."
The Buddha provided a huge number of prescriptions about how to respond to various obscurations and develop the factors of enlightenment. Probably no one needs all of them, but this single insight of Norquist's isn't going to release suffering on its own.
* More detailed and specific insight than the General Anatta-me that Norquist outlines here.
http://selfinquiry.org/media2010/11-Steven-Norquist-Oct-2010.mp3
You can only judge the enlightened and who is when in the 'condition'. Everything else is pseudo knowledge and 'thus have I heard'. Self evident I would have thought . . .
The point is very simple. Is enlightenment possible? Why so few enlightened Buddhists? He know his state.
Enlightenment is unmistakable. Simple, unmistakeable. He has nothing to prove. Maybe enlightenment could be mistaken for an arising? No . . . don't think so . . .
I will let you know shortly . . . sometime soon . . .
@Jeffrey Who/What's 'e'?
I have glimpses, very small glimpses. They have probably expanded by nanoseconds but it still makes me frustrated when I cannot hold them. It is like being in a dark room, and someone runs in, flips on the light and before I can start to discern shapes because I'm stunned by the light, they turn it off again. I most certainly have no clue where the lightswitch is to find it repeatedly. But I know it's there. I have no doubt there are people who can find the light switch. I am skeptical of people who claim they know where it is and that they have it turned on 24/7 and yet feel the need to explain it, describe it, and sell books about it. It seems to me that it not only is difficult to explain, but impossible to put words to. Beyond lame analogies I certainly lack the words to explain any of these moments that I've had. So I don't even try, because any word I could spew out of my thinking mind and then my mouth would not come close to doing justice to the actual moment. Nor do I think it helpful to try to explain them to someone else. When someone has one of those moments, they will know. Beyond that it does not matter. Trying to explain it to people only makes them strive to experience the same thing.
@fivebells, I must apologise, I have forgotten . . . I did ask if anyone on this forum was enlightened. A couple of people responded in the affirmative. Where you one? How do you judge your present capacity?
I don't think full enlightenment in the sense of no beings forever more is possible for mortal humans. I believe that if someone imprisoned Gautama Buddha in a dungeon, dulled his mind with torture and controlled his access to sustenance in the right way, they could induce a being in him. (I tried to test this hypothesis, but I couldn't get it past the ethics review board at my University. Pansies.)
I think the best we can hope for is freedom in the sense that germ theory and disinfectant frees us from microbial infection, with beings being the microbes, disinfectant being concentration, and insight being the germ theory. There are still germs, but they don't have nearly the impact on our lives that they did before the theory took hold. (At the same time, I know that the hostility implicit in the concentration-as disinfectant simile has a very limited place in meditation. It does have a place, though. See the sutta I linked above.)
I also think that under favorable conditions a master of concentration and insight can fashion and manifest whatever being seems appropriate to the current situation (concentration practice is the fashioning of a particular type of being, after all. It depends on a passion for attending to the object of meditation.) I am no such master, but I think such a master would not find writing an essay a colossal amount of work, because they would manifest an attitude appropriate to the task.
On the other hand, getting back to whether I am enlightened, there have been times with formless-realm beings (though I've only mastered first jhana) and times with no beings. I know what enlightenment is, the ideal the practice is heading towards, and how the practice heads there, and I am committed to heading in that direction. The longer short answer is that I just about meet the criteria for stream entry except for the doubt about full enlightenment for the rest of this life.
So, I will just say "ditto". I feel just the same.
As for my own enlightenment, be unsure for sure . . .
It's pretty obvious that he's talking nonsense. A teacher does not have to be enlightened to avoid being 'completely wrong'. All he has to do is claim no more than he knows. Unlike Mr. Norquist.
The two sentences quoted at the start are ridiculous. It is always ridiculous when people claim that everybody is wrong except themselves.
But perhaps these are not his actual words.
Well . . . so he knows what he is talking about, rather than discussing dreams of being awake, he can share gnosis, knowing, experience.
Information sharing and conveyance can be carried by a book. Learners and seeking sangha can be inspirational - making us committed seekers.
'Spiritual Teachers' in a condition of z z z . . . are usually pleasant enough napping companions . . .
Only the enlightened know of what they speak . . . or maybe that is just my dream . . .
In essence the methodology is simple
http://m.wikihow.com/Become-Enlightened
The idea that all enlightened people teach, have super powers or are somehow more than 'just awake' is . . . fantasy . . . Some teach, some have siddhi. Some appear very ordinary.
http://m.wikihow.com/Become-a-Buddha#