I think I just experienced enlightenment

TheJourney

It finally makes sense. There are no holes. It has to be true.(of course there could be details i'm missing, as this is new, but the general idea) The funny thing about it is, as I will say, even though most of you are closer to finding the truth, most of you will probably reject this.

Basically all that exists is chaos. It's life. It's all that exists. Chaos is made up of different subjective truths. Perhaps there are infinite subjective truths. Anyways, people start thinking about the truth. Some more than others. You may think you don't know the truth. That is basically the truth, but you don't understand that yet. The seekers are desperate for the truth. Because they believe there is a truth, they are farther from the truth, but they are on their way unlike those who don't care. As you grow spiritually, you continue to think that you have found the truth. The more convinced you are that you have found the truth, the farther you are from the truth. Even if you're closer to finally finding the ultimate truth than those who are unknowingly "closer" than you are. We're all looking for enlightenment. What is enlightenment? Understanding that there is no truth. The buddha said his teachings were a raft to get across the river. Once you cross, there is no need for the raft. Truly buddha was the greatest spiritual teacher that I can think of, but he didn't teach the truth. He tried to get us to the truth, which, as I said, is that there is no truth.

I'm so happy. Or content. Or whatever. Now I just have to understand that I can't just tell people and expect them to understand. Some of you may say i'm stuck in my truth. Whatever.

compassionate_warrior

What brought you to this realization, TJ?

TheJourney

A lot of thinking as well as reading other people's ideas.

ravkes

It'll pass.

TheJourney

There's nothing to pass. There's no truth to grasp to. I'm finally free.

Cristina

It'll pass.

Hahah yeah probably, and then you will suffer for it. Happens to me all the time.

There's this story in Ajahn Brahm's book, about the day he got enlightened. They had something extra delicious for the meal that day, and he was like, "oh perfect, to celebrate my enlightenment!" And then the senior monk ahead of him in line took lots of the good food, and proceeded to mix it all in together with the gross food, saying, "it's all the same anyway." And Ajahn Brahm got really mad. And then he realized he wasn't enlightened after all. And he was so disappointed it ruined his whole day.

"I can fight back against the confusion,
but I'll never make up my mind."

ravkes

Who is this 'I' that is free?

Is there something there that is happy and content? Or is there just the experience of happiness and freedom?

ravkes

It'll pass.

Hahah yeah probably, and then you will suffer for it. Happens to me all the time.

There's this story in Ajahn Brahm's book, about the day he got enlightened. They had something extra delicious for the meal that day, and he was like, "oh perfect, to celebrate my enlightenment!" And then the senior monk ahead of him in line took lots of the good food, and proceeded to mix it all in together with the gross food, saying, "it's all the same anyway." And Ajahn Brahm got really mad. And then he realized he wasn't enlightened after all. And he was so disappointed it ruined his whole day.

"I can fight back against the confusion,
but I'll never make up my mind."

Haha yup! We always seem to be holding onto something or other.

ShiftPlusOne

For once, I agree with you, TheJourney. Thanks for sharing.

TheJourney

True. But there is a point where you understand that there is nothing to hold on to. It seems that the people who are evolved enough to be into a religion such as buddhism has vastly wrong ideas about enlightenment and certain other things. Idk how many, but it seems to me most buddhists cling to buddhism. They are delusioned in buddhism. They're probably quite evolved to understand buddhism, but yet they are far from the truth because they're still convinced that there is a truth.

thickpaper

>>>>"TheJourney">>>>It finally makes sense. There are no holes. It has to be true.(of course there could be details i'm missing, as this is new, but the general idea) The funny thing about it is, as I will say, even though most of you are closer to finding the truth, most of you will probably reject this.

If Lord Gotama time travelled to today and posted about enlightenment on this forum he would be met with rejection and ridicule, I figure this is so.

I don't know if you are enlightened or not, how could any of us? But my thoughts on your thoughts:

>>>>Basically all that exists is chaos.

Do you mean chaos or randomness? Chaos has a pretty specific mathematical meaning

>>>It's all that exists. Chaos is made up of different subjective truths. Perhaps there are infinite subjective truths.

There is an objective reality in dharma, surely?


>>>We're all looking for enlightenment.

Do I have to look for it? can't I just strive for it? I can see where it is, out there in the distance where there is clarity and nonattachment, but i dont know how far away I am from it.

>>>What is enlightenment? Understanding that there is no truth.

so when you are enlightened there are no noble truths?

>>>>The buddha said his teachings were a raft to get across the river. Once you cross, there is no need for the raft.

OK, but doesn't the raft metaphor refers to the teaching itself, not the noble truths and the marks of existence or all they condition through interdependent causation?

>>>>Truly buddha was the greatest spiritual teacher that I can think of, but he didn't teach the truth. He tried to get us to the truth, which, as I said, is that there is no truth.

I don't get this but of your revelation:/



>>>I'm so happy.

Great!


>>>Or content.

Umm... good?


>>>Or whatever.

Ummm... meh?:p


>>>Now I just have to understand that I can't just tell people and expect them to understand.

I think you can, but you will need to explain yourself better than you have so far.

>>>Some of you may say i'm stuck in my truth. Whatever.


You shouldn't care at all about what others think about your path, be your own light.


namaste and, stay enlightened;)

ravkes

True. But there is a point where you understand that there is nothing to hold on to. It seems that the people who are evolved enough to be into a religion such as buddhism has vastly wrong ideas about enlightenment and certain other things. Idk how many, but it seems to me most buddhists cling to buddhism. They are delusioned in buddhism. They're probably quite evolved to understand buddhism, but yet they are far from the truth because they're still convinced that there is a truth.

I'm just trying to understand who understands what?

Logically, I agree there is no absolute verifiable truth. Therefore, seeking for the truth doesn't make any sense and is not aligned with reality. Then perhaps there's nothing to be done because in reality there is no solid seeker (sense of self)..

I find this to be understood by many intellectually, however manifesting this truth (anatta) is somewhat of a challenge for most.

caz

I think it would do well to institute a rule to prevent people from claiming enlightenment on a forum...;)

TheJourney

[quote]Do you mean chaos or randomness? Chaos has a pretty specific mathematical meaning [/quote]

Opposite of orderly

[quote]There is an objective reality in dharma, surely[/quote]

Dharma is difficult to explain. I don't know how to explain this if you don't understand. There is truth, to a degree, but ultimately there is no such thing, other than the truth of non-truth. But yes dharma is true. Idk. I think it's impossible to explain.

[quote]so when you are enlightened there are no noble truths? [/quote]

They are true but. They're just the nature of non-truth. As I said, I don't think it's explainable. You just have to understand. You're probably close. But who knows what close really means when there's an eternity.

thickpaper

>>>Opposite of orderly

So random or stocastic.

>>>Dharma is difficult to explain.

I don't think so. Dharma is the interconnected set of truths that arise from the three marks of existance and condition all things, including experience, via interdependent causation. If you can understand the last part, it's not difficult to explain.

The hard part is the practice;)


>>>I don't know how to explain this if you don't understand.

I understand.

>>There is truth, to a degree, but ultimately there is no such thing, other than the truth of non-truth.

I am far from a scriptural literalist, but I do believe that everything in dharma is in the scriptures (Its the stuff in the scriptures that I cant see is dharma that's problematic). In other words, if you say "Dharma holds this" then it should be in the scriptures. So where in the scriptures do you find support for the above position?

>>>But yes dharma is true. Idk. I think it's impossible to explain.

Then maybe you don't see it as clearly as you think?


>>>They are true but. They're just the nature of non-truth.

Be wary of sophistry, from your words and those of others.


>>>>As I said, I don't think it's explainable. You just have to understand.


But this strikes me as you just hiding the answers behind the curtain (OZ). A common tactic of zealots and economists and charlatans and I dare say some Budddhist's too.

The Buddha makes it pretty clear in a number of places that he employs no hidden methods, nothing is up his sleeve, all is at it is presented. yet you seem to say the opposite?

>>>You're probably close.

I think I am far from your enlightenment:/

>>>But who knows what close really means when there's an eternity.

There is no eternity to me, there is no rebirth for me, this is my only life. All is impermanent.


namaste

compassionate_warrior

Thickpaper, I gotta tell you, you're a riot! You made my day. Keep on keepin' on. :clap:

>>>>"TheJourney">>>>>>>I'm so happy.

Great!


>>>Or content.

Umm... good?


>>>Or whatever.

Ummm... meh?:p


>>>Now I just have to understand that I can't just tell people and expect them to understand.

I think you can, but you will need to explain yourself better than you have so far.

>>>Some of you may say i'm stuck in my truth. Whatever.


You shouldn't care at all about what others think about your path, be your own light.


namaste and, stay enlightened;)

TheJourney

thickpaper, did the buddha tell you what enlightenment was like? It's one of the big themes of buddhism that it's indescribable. Enlightenment can only be experienced, not talked about.

If you don't believe me, that's great. It doesn't matter anyways. There's no truth to cling to. You can believe whatever you want, and that's great. I'm only here to help, if you don't like what I have to say then don't listen to me and that's ok.

SherabDorje

...if you don't like what I have to say then don't listen to me and that's ok.

This is a discussion forum. You can expect people to disagree with you. That's what forums like this are for. If you come to the forum claiming to have just experienced enlightenment, you can expect some skepticism.

TheJourney

I know. That's what i'm saying. There's no need to accept what i'm saying. Just enjoy your life and do what you think is for the best.

jinzang

Too much thinking.

Khandro Rinpoche told the story of a Western student who went to his Tibetan teacher and said, "I understand now! It's all empty!" The teacher jumped up, grabbed him, and hung him out the window by his legs.

He asked, "Is everything empty now?"

"Not so empty! Not so empty!," replied the student.

Until you can pass the hanging out a ten story window test, you still have work to do.

TheJourney

So, in your opinion, the only way you can say you understand reality is if you don't care whether you're experiencing happiness or pain? Interesting. Thanks for sharing

genkaku

If Lord Gotama time travelled to today and posted about enlightenment on this forum he would be met with rejection and ridicule, I figure this is so.
__________________________________________________

And thank goodness for it!

SherabDorje

So, in your opinion, the only way you can say you understand reality is if you don't care whether you're experiencing happiness or pain? Interesting. Thanks for sharing

That would be one way of looking at it.

TheJourney

So, in your opinion, the only way you can say you understand reality is if you don't care whether you're experiencing happiness or pain? Interesting. Thanks for sharing

That would be one way of looking at it.

It's an interesting theory. Personally it seems too mythological for me. "I understand reality so good. Go ahead and stab me I don't care, since I understand that ultimately there is no difference between happiness and suffering." If that is what happens when you understand reality, I have no desire to understand it.

compassionate_warrior

Until you can pass the hanging out a ten story window test, you still have work to do.

This is something I've always had trouble understanding about emptiness. Supposedly phenomena are empty, or devoid of inherent existence. And yet, when a car is rushing towards us as we cross the street, we jump to get out of the way. If the car were devoid of inherent existence, why would we need to get out of the way?

TheJourney

Until you can pass the hanging out a ten story window test, you still have work to do.

This is something I've always had trouble understanding about emptiness. Supposedly phenomena are empty, or devoid of inherent existence. And yet, when a car is rushing towards us as we cross the street, we jump to get out of the way. If the car were devoid of inherent existence, why would we need to get out of the way?

It's not about "needing" to. Even though you may understand emptiness, you're still experiencing life. Of course if you're living you want happiness and not pain. You could say ultimately it doesn't matter, but simply on the basis of enjoying life we do what we think allows us to do that. Why live if you don't enjoy it?

SherabDorje

If that is what happens when you understand reality, I have no desire to understand it.

That's sort of my point. And you're using the word "understand", which is a cognitive function, as opposed to "grasp" or "experience", which is a more whole-person function.

I think we go back to "thinking too much". It may be productive thinking, it may be elegant and helpful in the long run, but it's still just thinking. "Infinite subjective truths"? "There's no truth to grasp to. I'm free."?

It's still just thinking.

TheJourney

The words don't matter. I'm simply trying to express myself. Words are empty. This is the best way I can think of to communicate the message. I'm not gonna bend over backwords to word things in a way that is more technically accurate. Try to understtand the truth behind what i'm saying, rather than focusing on what i'm saying. Or don't believe me at all. Whatever is best for you.

ravkes

Until you can pass the hanging out a ten story window test, you still have work to do.

This is something I've always had trouble understanding about emptiness. Supposedly phenomena are empty, or devoid of inherent existence. And yet, when a car is rushing towards us as we cross the street, we jump to get out of the way. If the car were devoid of inherent existence, why would we need to get out of the way?

Enlightenment, in my opinion, is simply seeing things as they are. Logically speaking, when approaching reality objectively from a scientific point of view all things are empty of a solid sense of self because they are here due to dependent origination. So your body is here because it's composed of many different elements. Therefore when experiencing pain for example, one can see that the reality of the situation is that it's just a sensation that we call pain. The physical pain is neither good nor bad because there isn't a solid sense of self experiencing it -- the reality is that it's a changing phenomena. But that doesn't mean that we're going to run into the middle of the road and get run over to prove to others that we aren't suffering from the pain. Even though things are empty of self they still exist as they are; the car is still there, the person is still there, the reaction that happens when car hits body is still there. In fact, we take better care of our bodies and watch our actions because we understand that this is a rare opportunity to help others now that the dust has cleared from our own eyes.

SherabDorje

The words don't matter. I'm simply trying to express myself.

You might do well to remember that you're not just expressing yourself to the computer screen, and that the words you write are actually communications to other people. If you're simply trying to express yourself with words that don't matter, would you like us to ignore you from here on out?

Seriously. There are actually other people reading your thought-experiments. Or thought-meanderings. Or whatever.

TheJourney

Sure, ignore me. As i've said multiple times, i'm not here to convince anyone of anything. If you think i'm not making sense than think I don't make sense. That's ok

compassionate_warrior

Thanks, TJ and ravkes, but the point was along the lines of--the car doesn't exist except in our perception. If it doesn't inherently exist, we should be able to cross the road and the reality would be that there is, in fact, no car. Except in our minds. If a tree falls in the forest and there's no sentient being around to hear it, does it make a noise? No, it only generates sound waves. A living ear is required to translate the waves into a noise. Light waves can change from particles to waves depending on if there's an observer or not. Reality changes when an observer is present. Does the car exist, or doesn't it?

TheJourney

Thanks, TJ and ravkes, but the point was along the lines of--the car doesn't exist except in our perception. If it doesn't inherently exist, we should be able to cross the road and the reality would be that there is, in fact, no car. Except in our minds. If a tree falls in the forest and there's no sentient being around to hear it, does it make a noise? No, it only generates sound waves. A living ear is required to translate the waves into a noise. Light waves can change from particles to waves depending on if there's an observer or not. Reality changes when an observer is present. Does the car exist, or doesn't it?

You want to conceptualize it. That's our nature, we desire to conceptualize. Just stop. "Real" and "unreal" are silly concepts.

ravkes

The words don't matter. I'm simply trying to express myself. Words are empty. This is the best way I can think of to communicate the message. I'm not gonna bend over backwords to word things in a way that is more technically accurate. Try to understtand the truth behind what i'm saying, rather than focusing on what i'm saying. Or don't believe me at all. Whatever is best for you.

"Words have the power to both destroy and heal. When words are both true and kind, they can change our world."

- Buddha

If words are empty why do you watch what you say around your boss if you're at work, or around your professor if you're at school?

PietroPumokin

i enjoy learning from your insights and i am glad you've had this experience journey, my only comment is that how can you or me be sure we dont have other rivers to raft, and even the truth of truthlessness is not always true, and it seems a journey is never over until one ceases journeying, and can would one want to?
:werr:

ravkes

Thanks, TJ and ravkes, but the point was along the lines of--the car doesn't exist except in our perception. If it doesn't inherently exist, we should be able to cross the road and the reality would be that there is, in fact, no car. Except in our minds. If a tree falls in the forest and there's no sentient being around to hear it, does it make a noise? No, it only generates sound waves. A living ear is required to translate the waves into a noise. Light waves can change from particles to waves depending on if there's an observer or not. Reality changes when an observer is present. Does the car exist, or doesn't it?

I'm pretty sure you'll die if you get run over by a car if it's going at a certain velocity. This is Buddhism. We're concerned with suffering here, not theoretical physics. If it exists or not in an absolute sense I have no idea. Bottom line is, all the spiritual teachers and physicists can claim it to be unreal but they'll still wait until the light turns red before they cross the street.

Cloud

@TheJourney: If you've fully abandoned self view, thinking there is anything that is you or yours, and embraced the emptiness; then chances are good.

compassionate_warrior

You want to conceptualize it. That's our nature, we desire to conceptualize. Just stop. "Real" and "unreal" are silly concepts.

But to the guy hanging out the 10-story window, the situation is very real, not at all a silly concept. Not to mention to the person crossing the street in front of a speeding bus. The teacher in the first situation seemed to be aiming at teaching the student...what, exactly? That our perceived reality is what we should deal with, not Buddhist theory? I'm still struggling with this.

compassionate_warrior

I'm pretty sure you'll die if you get run over by a car if it's going at a certain velocity. This is Buddhism. We're concerned with suffering here, not theoretical physics. If it exists or not in an absolute sense I have no idea. Bottom line is, all the spiritual teachers and physicists can claim it to be unreal but they'll still wait until the light turns red before they cross the street.

Thanks, ravkes. This is the contradiction I don't get; if the Buddhist teachers are saying it's unreal, why do they wait for the light to turn before they cross the street?

ravkes

You want to conceptualize it. That's our nature, we desire to conceptualize. Just stop. "Real" and "unreal" are silly concepts.

But to the guy hanging out the 10-story window, the situation is very real, not at all a silly concept. Not to mention to the person crossing the street in front of a speeding bus. The teacher in the first situation seemed to be aiming at teaching the student...what, exactly? That our perceived reality is what we should deal with, not Buddhist theory? I'm still struggling with this.

Buddhism isn't a theory, it's a practice. If you feel confused, please take 10-15 minutes to sit down quietly and meditate.

ravkes

I'm pretty sure you'll die if you get run over by a car if it's going at a certain velocity. This is Buddhism. We're concerned with suffering here, not theoretical physics. If it exists or not in an absolute sense I have no idea. Bottom line is, all the spiritual teachers and physicists can claim it to be unreal but they'll still wait until the light turns red before they cross the street.

Thanks, ravkes. This is the contradiction I don't get; if the Buddhist teachers are saying it's unreal, why do they wait for the light to turn before they cross the street?

No problem. Science is definitely useful, but there are reasons why it's called 'theoretical' physics.

compassionate_warrior

What about "theoretical BUddhism", saying the onrushing car isn't real? (Buddhism and physics have a few things in common, I've noticed.) Are we supposed to dismiss the teaching that objects have no inherent existence? How do we integrate that with day-to-day reality?

Cloud

That's not a useful teaching or theory then, is it? It's not about there not being anything, but clearly seeing what is there for what it is; Anicca-Dukkha-Anatta. Not empty of existence, but of permanent/self existence. "Anicca" and "Anatta" are together "emptiness", and "Dukkha" is what results when this isn't known clearly to the mind.

ravkes

Well said Cloud!

compassionate_warrior

Thanks, guys. I may start a thread on this topic for more clarification. (What's the difference between "existence" and "permanent/self-existence"? The fact that the car becomes very real as soon as there's an observer (or driver) to perceive it?)

SherabDorje

The car is still composed of constituent parts. Conventionally it's very real. Conventionally we react appropriately. But ultimately it's not real, and neither is our "self".

Cristina

I think people will look back on this thread in a week and have a good chuckle.

compassionate_warrior, it sounds like you have good questions. Pema Chodron says in one of her talks, which I think may be a quote from her teacher Chogyam Trungpa, "Suffering is stronger than our petty opinions." You may be asking whether or not these things are real, but the fact is, if you get hit by a car you will have been hit by a car. And you'll feel it. And you'll wish you'd stayed on the curb. Real enough for you?

compassionate_warrior

Right. So why are they telling us the car isn't real?

Cloud

What I'd like to know is who teaches that things aren't "real" in a literal sense. Do you have a source for that? Wait we're getting off topic here. Isn't this thread about TJ's enlightenment?

SherabDorje

The car is relatively real, that is, conventionally real, and we do get out of the way if we don't want to die. But it has no inherent existence. We live in conventional, that is, relative, reality on a day-to-day basis. But ultimately it's not real.

TheJourney

Right. So why are they telling us the car isn't real?

It's the raft. It's trying to get you beyond conceptualization. And they're not exactly telling you it isn't real. It just. Our reality is simply an expression. To take it as "real" is to misunderstand reality, because thanks to our understanding of reality we think that if it's real it must be orderly, when in fact reality is a (perhaps) infinite amount of seemingly orderly realities making up the ultimate which is chaos.