jjer94

Your happiness right now is circumstantial. You refuse to be happy unless you're enlightened, unless you have a girlfriend, unless you have your dream career, etc. The happiness that the gurus are talking about is the subtle happiness of being, the I AM. It's right there in your experience, silent but full, right beyond the mind's stories, pervading every sense perception. The most difficult part about being happy is that it's too simple! "Being happy is a matter of being happy." - Peter Ralston "Well I’m telling you...you do have a terminal illness. It’s called Birth. You don’t have more then a few years left, no one does, so be happy now with out reason or you never will be at all.” - Socrates, Way of the Peaceful Warrior "A fool is 'happy' when his cravings are satisfied. A warrior is happy without reason. That's what makes happiness the ultimate discipline--above all else I have taught you." - Socrates, Way of the Peaceful Warrior

There is no "I" or ego to benefit from this. You'll have to give that up. The result is that you will have freed up a lot of space to do whatever the heck you feel moved to do. No more rules on how things should be, no more resistance to what is (or a lot less), just pure authenticity. It's important to come to the conclusion that no belief is true on your own instead of believing me, because otherwise that's just another belief. What you may not realize yet is that you live your life unconsciously to your own secret rulebook, your own sets of should's. And even if you've read up on enlightenment and no-self and ego, that rulebook will still be intact. It is your job to dismantle your own rulebook. That is essentially the pathless path to enlightenment: deconstruction of your beliefs, your should's, your resistances, your fear.

This is a fantastic point you made, because I can flip it around. When you talk about objective proof for something from scientists, are you talking from experience or is it just what you have been told and you believe it? When you talk about existing as a separate self, are you talking from experience or is it just what you have been told by society and you believe it? How can you trust anything I say, anything ANYONE says, if you can't actually confirm that they are speaking from their own experience? Sure, I can say that I'm speaking from my own experience, but you're not the one inhabiting this body or this perspective. How can you know? And this is what I mean by no belief is true. All scientific theories and interpretations are just that: theories and interpretations. There can never be any sort of objective certainty with any of them. They are only maps that allow us to manipulate reality as we see fit, and most of the time they work. That's how I'm able to communicate with you here online. But just because we know how to manipulate reality doesn't mean we know anything about the substance of reality, what it's made of. Science gets into a lot of trouble this way because they completely leave out the subjective first person, which is the aperture through which they make their so-called objective claims. Let's say you're in a dream, and you're a computer technician. You're telling me how the computer works by opening up the back and showing me all of its components: motherboard, CPU, etc... You tell me that electrons flow through each of these components sending electrical signals, which allow the computer to run. While on a conceptual level, this all makes sense, on the level of reality, it doesn't. What are those electrons actually? They are consciousness. The whole computer is consciousness, but you're taking it to be a solid entity external to you. Without your observing of the computer in the dream, it would cease to exist. Sure, this particular dream may be orderly enough to say that there are certain laws that describe how things work. But they're never set in stone, because it's a freaking dream. They are only descriptions, not explanations. What if the life you're living right now is exactly like this analogy? If you're into writing, I suggest trying out Spiritual Autolysis. I wrote a guide a while back that you can check out here:

Instead of asking whether anything can be objectively proven, you may first want to ask whether there is such thing as objective proof. What makes a proof objective, and where does it come from? This may help: when we talk about enlightenment, we're talking about Absolute Truth. We're talking about something that transcends time, space, and this universe. We're talking about what you are before you were born, what you are right now, and what you are after this body dissolves. How can something that is totally Infinite be encapsulated into a finite, logical objective proof? Evolution is just a theory. Theories are never 100% certain. Forget about evolution if you're pursuing enlightenment. You're also presupposing that consciousness exists within a universe full of atoms and molecules and space. But what if it were the other way around? What if the universe existed within consciousness? As crazy as that sounds, that may just be the case...you don't even need to believe it or have scientific proof for it either. Just look in your direct experience. But that link should help you dispel your ideas about an external universe. To me, it sounds like you're trying to pour yourself a cup a tea when there's already plenty of tea in there. Meditation and mindfulness are great and all, but you have yet to empty your cup. Enlightenment is not something you gain, it just reveals itself when you've removed all of your ideas about how you and reality work. It doesn't come about through progress in a practice; it comes about through seeing through your own illusions. Empty your cup of beliefs is my suggestion. Contemplate anything you think is true, and see if you can figure out why it's false. A newsflash for you: all so-called knowledge is actually belief, and no belief is true. Don't take my word for it; confirm it for yourself. Cheers!

@Kelley White Shoot! Didn't get a notification when you replied. Thanks for the thoughtful reply. The thing is, when you say, "I am giving up ______", you're still regarding it as important. If you didn't regard it as important, it would be a non-issue; the problem would just resolve itself. But by renouncing yourself, you're trying to brute force your way out of your neuroses, and what often happens is that the problem comes back in full force. Take an overweight person for example. They have the neurotic need to eat junk food all the time. Do you actually think that cutting donuts out of their diet will cure them completely? No, of course not. They would merely be changing their external circumstances, when the problem is internal. They give importance to donuts. Maybe it's because they taste good. Maybe it's because they remind the person of their childhood. Maybe it's to mask another deeper neurosis. Oftentimes what happens when an overweight person tries to eat healthy for a while is that they accidentally start eating junk again and gain twice as much weight. If you haven't seen Leo's new video on fake growth vs. real growth, I suggest you do; it ties exactly into what I'm talking about. So now let's move to you as the example. You're trying to cut your time on Facebook and all these other distractions. But by cutting them out, you're resisting your natural tendencies, and while you may see progress now, it'll only make things worse in the long run. That's just my opinion. A couple years ago I quit video games cold turkey after being an addict for more than a decade, and it was a year later that I picked up the habit again. These neuroses will always come back to bite you in the ass...unless you look inside yourself face them directly. Why are these distractions so important to you? What are you getting out of them? Once you understand that the importance you give to these things are illusory, and you consciously see through it every day, eventually the neuroses will cease on their own. That's what I did with the video games, and my addiction is gone. Let's use another analogy. When a magician does a magic trick for you, you're captivated. You want to see it again and again. It seems like literal magic because you don't know how he does it. But then you decide to sneak up on stage, look under the tablecloth...and there's a trapdoor. Now you know how the magic trick works. Will you still be captivated when he does the trick again? Not likely, because you know how it works. Once you understand how the magic trick works, you won't be so drawn to it. Your addiction to distractions are like magic tricks. All you need to do is look under the tablecloth, see what's going on under the surface, and look for that trapdoor. Then you will no longer be so drawn to them. Are you running away from something by partaking in distractions? Do you secretly believe that you need them to be happy? Are you afraid that you will be worthless if you don't partake in them? All hypothetical questions, gateways to exploring your inner realm. I'm warning you though, looking inward can be painful work. You never know what you'll uncover... All the best, Kelley!

Yes, I think that is his main point...but some foolish ones like me decided that meant to just stop your thinking.... Yeah, I get it now, just didn't get it back then. But the way you say 'not to let your mind take over'...It always takes over in your current paradigm. Observe your thinking, as Eckhart says, is a great technique for the journey. But in my opinion, Eckhart's methods of trying to be present is like giving candy to a prisoner. I mean, if the prisoner likes candy, that's cool. But he/she then depends on a constant source of candy to function, to distract themselves from the fact that they are in prison. Why not just break out of prison first, and then you can buy all the candy you want if you still have the desire? Here's another analogy. Trying to be present is like trying to build a new house with the same rickety foundation. Why not just destroy the foundation first and rebuild? What's the prison and what's the foundation? Ego.

I prefer to use the word Infinity. Does Infinity have boundaries? Can you point to it and say "Ah! There it is!" You can't, because to try to label it would make it finite and therefore not Infinity. There is no such thing as 'beyond' Infinity because 'beyond' implies that Infinity has boundaries, which it does not. Infinity is so vast that vastness is not even possible. As you can probably tell by how paradoxical this sounds, the mind cannot comprehend Infinity. That is why in order to become conscious of Infinity, you need to go beyond mind, beyond rationality. Knowledge/belief creates illusory boundaries. Remove those boundaries and Infinity remains....except it's always been there "Truth hath no confines." --Captain Ahab, Moby Dick

It's been all there is your whole life. But your beliefs of others and your experience somehow being 'limited' are in the way of you realizing this.

You assume there are "other persons." You may want to re-examine that assumption in your direct experience. No, you won't be able to experience. Experience is unique to your particular mind and body. The Truth (nothingness, as you and Leo call it) is not unique. It's the substratum behind experience that's always been there for eternity. It's just not any particular quality. I have an analogy that may help. You experience the world through a space suit that comes with various attributes: height, weight, looks, intelligence, personality... Sorry to say, but one day, that space suit will cease to function, and it will break down. What remains? Just plain old space. You currently identify with your space suit instead of the space, what you've been for eternity. While it may seem like you lose something when the space suit breaks down, you never lost anything. You were always the space pervading the space suit. Enlightenment work is the process of dis-identifying with the space suit and remembering that you're space. Again, re-examine your assumption of there being "others". What if your experience was all the experience there ever was?

You sound like an analytical person just by the way you write, and by the fact that you're reading Ralston. Spiritual Autolysis would probably work really well for you. If you decide to take it up and need help with the general direction, here's a post that'll help you get started:

I don't know if you've gotten to the part in Ralston's book where he talks about bottom-line contemplations? This is exactly what he suggests. Jed also suggests this by using Spiritual Autolysis. I've found both techniques to be helpful.

What I found is that there is both. There may be some events where you contemplate and have a huge awakening and it completely revolutionizes your perspective... but then your good ol' self-agenda comes back, usually in full force. Sure, you may be able to "flip" between self-mode and observer-mode, but it doesn't mean much if it isn't abiding. That's why seeing through your own illusions (or 'destroying the self' as Jed says in his books, a bit dramatic) is really the only way to make efficient 'progress' (really a regression) on this journey. Another phrase Jed uses for enlightenment is untruth-unrealization, and I've recently found that to be very fitting. This also explains why all those meditators stagnate. They may have had some non-abiding enlightenment experiences, but their whole self structure is still intact. It's like trying to chop the regenerating heads off of a hydra when instead you should be plunging your sword into its heart: your heart.

Just as a heads-up to others: This is not to be confused with excitement. What often happens is that ego looks for happiness in excitement and then equates excitement with happiness. However excitement is just a fleeting emotional state. It won't last forever. The happiness Leo is talking about is more a kind of contentment/gratitude/sense of completeness regardless of external circumstances. You can still have highs and lows, excitements and depressions, but this sort of happiness is always there no matter what. By the way: you don't need to be enlightened to experience this sort of authentic happiness, although enlightenment will make it abiding. "You can be happy in your anxiety. Isn’t that crazy? You can be happy in your depression. But you can’t have the wrong notion of happiness. Did you think happiness was excitement or thrills? That’s what causes the depression. Didn’t anyone tell you that? You’re thrilled, all right, but you’re just preparing the way for your next depression. You’re thrilled but you pick up the anxiety behind that: How can I make it last? That’s not happiness, that’s addiction." --Tony de Mello

Jed's books will do that to ya. They scared the bajeezus out of me after I read the entire trilogy. Keep in mind that this is one perspective of the path to enlightenment. It's not the only way. Sure, you'll deal with some pain and suffering on the journey, but it doesn't have to be so dramatic where you become a raving lunatic holed up in a cabin with a golden retriever to prevent you from killing yourself... Although that may well be a possibility. In his books, Jed is pretty narrow-minded, but you may not see that because of how convincing and eloquent his writing is. He shuns meditation and consciousness work and basically says the only way to enlightenment is to become like Captain Ahab....And yet, countless others claimed to have become enlightened through meditation and consciousness work. Enlightenment is a pathless path. You don't have to do anything in particular. There are certain techniques that may help accelerate the process such as contemplation and Spiritual Autolysis, but those aren't the only ways. In fact, Jed McKenna today has mellowed out, saying that trying to destroy illusion as suggested in his books is futile, and instead you ought to learn to see through your illusions. Yes, enlightenment work is essentially 'killing' who you think you are bit by bit. But you don't have to nuke your whole life in one whole sweep to get to the end. Who you think you are is illusion. Your beliefs about what reality is are illusion. How do you destroy something that appears to exist but doesn't actually? By seeing through it; by seeing that it doesn't exist. You don't necessarily have to slit your wrists and cut ties with everyone to do that; seems a bit unnecessary, don't you think?

Now that I think about it, yes I am.

Yep. When I had my awakening to the I AM, I couldn't stop laughing. I laughed to the point of crying, and then I just flat out cried of joy. It's so silly. There was no 'me' this whole time! What a joke! It depends on what you mean by awareness. I'm guessing you're equating awareness with Truth, that which is eternal. The I AM is ephemeral, which you can prove to yourself by simply going to sleep. The Truth of you is always there no matter what. The I AM is a stepping stone, a gateway, to Truth. "When the state of [I AM] is totally swallowed, whatever remains is that eternal 'I'." --Nisargadatta Maharaj

Others, as in, other people, other bodies. What are they really? Listen to any sounds. Where are they coming from? Where are they going? In order to really get what I'm saying, you may need to re-examine your ideas of an external world. Currently, you believe that your consciousness is a subset of the universe, a little ant among vast space and matter. What if it were the other way around? What if the universe was a subset of your consciousness? Contemplate that. Use this as a resource. Make that small little adjustment, and seeing through ego to find the "I AM" will be automatic.

There is no "Mom" for you to kill. Surely there's an animated body that is labelled as "Mom," but "Mom" herself doesn't exist. Just as I can say that there are fingers typing these words right now, but nobody's typing them. All there is in "my" experience are sense perceptions and sentience. Any "I" entity comes from thought, but that's just a sense perception, so in reality there is no "I" entity. There's only a puppet without a puppeteer. I won't even bother saying that you can confirm that in your direct experience...

What/where are you among these sense perceptions? What is the backdrop of all of these sense perceptions? What permeates them? Is there also an external world full of space and matter, or are there only sense perceptions? What are "others"?

@TruthSeeker I'm not sure you understand the definition of illusion. An illusion is something that appears to exist, but actually doesn't. There is no "reality of an illusion." Self and free will are illusions, meaning they don't actually exist in reality. Like Santa Clause. They don't exist, no matter how much they appear to exist. You can confirm this in your direct experience.

If there is only will, then every action done by will would be totally random, since there's no entity that can choose one thing over another. Doesn't sound like the free will you're talking about...

1. There exists no ego to create the illusion of free will. An illusion is something that appears to be there but doesn't actually exist. The ego and free will are both illusions. 2. I'm not sure what you mean here. Belief can be powerful sometimes. You can consider the illusion of free will to be one world-wide placebo effect!

@TruthSeeker What were you before you were born? Did you make yourself? Just curious...

I think what you may have found is the "I AM," which is one layer beyond ego. It's that sentient, empty aliveness, right? It's an intrinsic part of sense perceptions, which is everything, really. Pretty amazing when you first see it. ...But that's not enlightenment. Jed McKenna calls that stage Human Adulthood, or waking up in the dream. "Even the sense ‘I am’ is not continuous, though it is a useful pointer; it shows where to seek, but not what to seek. Just have a good look at it. Once you are convinced that you cannot say truthfully about your self anything except ‘I am’, and that nothing that can be pointed at, can be your self, the need for the ‘I am’ is over — you are no longer intent on verbalizing what you are." --Nisargadatta Maharaj

@jip He sure as heck makes it seem like it. But in truth, there is no such thing as value. In my opinion, I agree with Leo that enlightenment is the one thing most worth pursuing in this life. "But that's just, like, your opinion, man." You want an example of someone that will give you a different perspective on values and enlightenment? This guy. Not as much uncomfortable as it is eerie. Imagine going to a Halloween costume party where everyone believes they are their costume. But just like anything else, you get used to it. It probably even becomes fun after a while.