Moksha

Do you believe others have reached enlightenment? If so, do you believe they were nihilistic and solipsistic?

Sounds very conceptual. Do you really believe Buddha and everyone else on the planet is a figment of your imagination? If so why are you even following the teachings of Buddha? You quote platitudes like "that which is empty but is ever-present" but where did those words come from and why do you believe them?

The only truth that matters is your own. That said, if your truth contradicts the collective wisdom of thousands of years from people that have achieved enlightenment like the Buddha and Jesus, it may be worth considering whether your truth is subject to growth.

Enlightenment isn't emotionless. Both Eastern and Western wisdom teach that enlightenment equates with peace and joy: “When you move amidst the world of sense, free from attachment and aversion alike, there comes the peace in which all sorrows end, and you live in the wisdom of the Self.” (Bhagavad Gita 2:64) "Let us live most happily, possessing nothing; let us feed on joy, like radiant gods." (Dhammapada 15.4) "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law." (Galatians 5:22-23) When asked to sum up his life “in twenty-five words or less”, Ghandi replied, “I can do it in three!” and quoted the Isha Upanishad: “Renounce and enjoy.”

People can experience Source, because they are Source. But as long as we're living in the horizontal dimension of form, we're still bound to it. The human brain is an amazing instrument, but it's still just flesh. We can receive creativity and intelligence from the infinite Source within us, but not in the infinite way you describe. If such a thing is possible, it would have to be outside the constraints of form. ImHO

Sadly, conservative politics has devolved into nothing more than fantasy ego trips like this commercial exemplifies. Not a single mention of a policy to improve Texas in the entire ad. As a Texan, I'm hopeful that one day sanity will return to our state. The tide is shifting, but I don't think we're there yet.

Gotcha. I'm hard pressed to think of a case where arguing spirituality positively changed someone. Real change only comes from within.

1) It's human to think divisively rather than coherently. 2) Most spiritual wisdom makes such distinctions (Bhagavad Gita, Bible, etc.). Not because the distinctions actually exist, but because humans think in this way and speaking their language can point them to the higher truth of Unity.

A great quote from the introduction in "A Course in Miracles": “Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists. Herein lies the peace of God."

Tracking spiritual progress through a level system reminds me of Scientology's "Bridge to Total Freedom". Not to discredit anyone's sincerity or progress, but it raises a red flag for me personally.

The little you does exist, but only in a transient relative sense. In 100 years, the little you will be long gone. The part of you that is Source will always be. And what is Source? Consciousness that is conscious of itself.

I see it as a practice for being conscious enough to look past the unconsciousness of others. If I understand that everyone is part of the same Source, and that egos are illusions, it's easier to get along with people that see the world differently than my own conditioned mind does. Something I came across earlier today seems relevant: “Having conquered their senses, they have climbed to the summit of human consciousness. To such people a clod of dirt, a stone, and gold are the same. They are equally disposed to family, enemies, and friends, to those who support them and those who are hostile, to the good and the evil alike. Because they are impartial, they rise to great heights.” (Bhagavad Ghita, 6:8)

There are many forms of meditation, including one form (Karma yoga) that is essentially social. Yoga literally means “integration of the spirit”. It is the practice of becoming whole at the deepest spiritual level. Some of the traditional paths: Jnana yoga (the yoga of knowledge, use will and discrimination to disidentify from the body, mind, and senses until knowing we are nothing but the Self) Bhakti yoga (the yoga of devotion, achieve the same goal by identifying completely with the Lord in love; mostly taken by the mystics of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam) Karma yoga (the yoga of selfless action, dissolve identification with body and mind by identifying with the whole of life, forgetting the finite self in the service of others) Raja yoga (the yoga of meditation, discipline the mind and senses until the mind-process is suspended in a healing stillness and we merge in the Self) Hatha yoga (“the yoga of force”, the physical postures and exercises of yoga; the Gita regards undue emphasis on this practice as outside the scope of spiritual development I recently came across this passage from the Bhagavad Gita, which references both Raja yoga (renunciation of action) and Karma yoga (selfless performance of action). Krishna recommends Karma yoga as the easier path to alignment, comparing it to climbing the mountain of self-knowledge; Raja yoga is discussed as the practice best suited after you have reached the summit. Ultimately you can arrive at the same destination through either path. Hopefully this is helpful: “Both renunciation of action and the selfless performance of action lead to the supreme goal. But the path of action is better than renunciation. Those who have attained perfect renunciation are free from any sense of duality; they are unaffected by likes and dislikes, Arjuna, and are free from the bondage of self-will. The immature think that knowledge and action are different, but the wise see them as the same. The person who is established in one path will attain the rewards of both.” (5:2-4)

Beautifully said.

It's like merging with an infinite stream of Consciousness. I still have a transparent sense of my human identity, but it's like everything is flowing through me and around me and in me, and that the deeper I is this. It feels like swimming in an infinite ocean of intelligence, creativity, and being. So many similes, but I don't know how else to describe it. Just let go of thinking, focus your awareness on the Now, and experience it for yourself.

Truth is riddled with paradox. The human mind likes to discriminate between this and that, but maybe we have free will and we don't have free will in the same moment. The question of free will (or any other question really) is ultimately meaningless given that Source is nonconceptual. It seems to me that the conditioned mind is inherently imprisoned. As long as we are identified with our conditioning, we cannot have free will. Everything we do, think, feel, or say is the result of our biological and behavioral programming. What about the guru that has surrendered the conditioned mind and is one with Source? Even then, is it not Source working through the guru, rather than the guru himself doing the doing?

Do we have free will? In the Bhagavad Gita, it says: "Those who know this truth, whose consciousness is unified, think always, "I am not the doer." While seeing or hearing, touching or smelling; eating, moving about, or sleeping; breathing or speaking, letting go or holding on, even opening or closing the eyes, they understand that these are only the movements of the senses among sense objects." (5:8-9) Even when we disidentify with form and realize our unity with Being: "The distinctions of caste, guna, and karma have come from me. I am their cause, but I myself am changeless and beyond all action." (4:12) If Source created all things, wouldn't Source be responsible for all things? To me, it seems we only have free will in the sense that we ultimately are Source. And yet I remember that when I first awoke, it was preceded by a conscious willingness to surrender. Maybe it was simply the Source that is me reaching for reunion with the Source that pervades the Universe and every being in it? I think of suffering as life's way of shaking us from slumber. But does anyone "choose" to wake up or is it something that happens to us?

The only "choices" that feel completely independent are those that arise out of Source. If I am Source, in a sense they are a choice. But "I" is an illusion, since Source is unified. So I can't say that I have free will at all. But what about the double-split experiment? It almost seems like the individual photon makes a "choice" on which slit to travel through.

I agree 100%. I wouldn't say thought is a need really, just another form to play with

I agree, there's a conscious evolution within the world of form. But ultimately isn't that illusion too? Time doesn't exist in the transcendent dimension, so conscious evolution doesn't exist. Einstein showed that time is relative, rather than absolute. "Reality" depends on the perspective of the observer. It is subsumed by, yet still part of. ultimate reality.

Is the dream not part of the dreamer? They are united, and neither would be possible without the other.

@Someone here I get what you're saying. And you're right, nonduality means everything is One including all questions and all answers. Yet the gurus continue to teach, and aspirants continue to learn. All of that is part of the One too.

What you describe sounds like what I experience when connecting with Source. It's impossible to describe with words but I would say it feels like coming home, being bathed in peace and joy, having heightened awareness, being in a timeless state, feeling connected with ultimate reality and with every other being on the planet, being filled with light, having freedom from thoughts and concepts, and tapping into an infinite source of creativity, wisdom, and love all rolled into one. I've never tried drugs, but I do think drugs can help us to descend below thought, which in turn makes it easier to tap into our internal Self which is the transcendent dimension of ultimate reality. This may be why drugs play a role in many spiritual ceremonies.

This makes sense to me. My real question is what role, if any, we have in our own enlightenment? Before I woke up, I remember consciously deciding to surrender. Maybe it was just a dissolving of "little self"-will, and I was nothing more than the observer.

It's the enlightened state I'm asking about. Once enlightened, there's no reason to apologize for prior egoic acts. Or is there? Even if we weren't responsible in the egoic state, maybe we could help others heal by apologizing for our unconscious acts.