Ananta

Ok, so here's the deal. There is no enlightenment or unenlightenment. I would never say I'm enlightened. Once you know you are pure awareness. Pure awareness is neither enlightened or unenlighted. It is beyond both, so the question doesn't apply. But, since I do understand what you mean... Self referential thoughts reduce significantly over time. Like when you turn a fan off, it takes time for the blades of the fan to stop. It's like that, but thoughts continue. They don't come from you, they come from Isvara. Anyways, I acknowledge Moksha, not enlightenment. Moksha means free from experience (not that you don't experience, but you aren't affected like you once were), free from the Jiva/person, whilst simultaneously being associated with the apparent person. It a subtle understanding. My teacher says, you then accept the Jiva warts and all, meaning the person will not become "perfect" or a saint.

Pain=pain, suffering is feeling like your "identity" is in some way diminished.

@jimrich It's traditional Vedanta and my experience. My lingo is consistent with Vedanta, because I find it is clear and straight forward. When the "Self" has a capital "S" it's referring to -Brahman/awareness/consciousness. I don't understand this? Is this a theory or your own experience?

I agree. You don't see it though until....

@jimrich excellent post! Again, love it! So, yeah, the "association" of you, awareness, with the body/mind will continue until the death of the body. So, there is an "I-sense" that stays, because thoughts, sensations, feelings, ect don't end just because you know who/what you are, some people think that ends, that fantasy. You still play your role. No choice in that. So, although the body/mind exists, it "ultimately" not real, therefore the pains will still be painful, but the suffering ends. Also, playing your role means getting engrossed in that role, at times, but knowing always your true idenitty when needed. YES! The pointing at the ego, was to point back at/as the Self! Also, this whole game is the Self playing hide and seek with it Self.

lol, I love this! Ok, so see how this is knowledge, you will forever more know without a doubt Santa is not real. Can you ever forget that Santa isnt real? Meaning, could anyone/anything convince you that Santa is real from here on out? That's why I say enlightenment is Self knowledge (it removes ignorance), in this case, that santa was "real". But, if you weren't "sure" that Santa wasn't real and you had lingering doubts, then that knowledge wouldn't be "firm" and you may sometimes think Santa's real and other times not. This is the fire-fly state.

Are you talking about nirvikalpa samadhi? If you are, you can't stay in that "state of no mind", indefinitely. Even a fly landing on your nose could bring the mind back. In that samadhi there is no "you", therefore, if you stayed in that state you would be a complete vegetable. You need a mind to function in the apparent world. So, are your really saying here that you believe one becomes mind-less (ie. No-mind)? Or am I misunderstanding?

I will not say, yes or no, what I will say is that in youth there are typically more egoic desires to overcome, unstability of career, relationships and so on, that keep the ego nice and busy...striving. They are potential obstructions that side track the mind, but it depends on the individual. Ramana Maharshi was 17 at the time of his enlightenment, but he also lived in India, so did that matter, dunno? There's also something to be said of the amount of suffering one has had in one's life. It can be a motivator for seeking/meditation/Self inquiry, because one wants the suffering to end. So, another argument could be, has one in their youth suffered enough? Again, dunno? So, make no conclusions from what I've said... keep doing what you're doing and see what happens.

6 min, 30 secs. Blink "on" as awareness (The Self)...blink "off" back as the ego...the classic fire-fly state. This happens when Self realization, is not "firm".

Ah, we have something in common my son is 24. I try to remember where he is at, because I didn't have that at his age. People expected too much of me, which sets up a desire to be a perfectionist, which is never good and doom to fail. Which it did..lol

Yes, so no matter your personal realization or mine, for that matter. If you are going to converse with others about it. You must remember where you came from. Wink!

I think the thread is great. Self inquiry is the name of the game! Without it you dead in the water, imo.

Btw, when I have the time, I try to use analysis and/or logical reasoning when I post replies. That is the Vedantic way. If it's too many words for anyone (?), then please don't read my posts. Saying something is too many words on a forum is kinda funny.

Ignorance is hard wired, if that's not your experience, then that's fabulous! Others need teachers and teachings to lead them out of Samsara. I find Vedanta to be the crown jewel of Self knowledge. Have you had absolutely no teaching or teacher? If not, AND you have enlightenment/Moksha what issue do you have with others that find a teaching necessary?

There is only one "I". The ego is a false "I", its an object that thinks it is the subject.

"Although the experience of the inner self is invariably uplifting and intensifies the quest, it is always confusing because the knowledge gained from these experiences challenges the view of oneself as a needy, incomplete, inadequate isolated creature. Many of these experiences can accurately be described as the experience of oneness with all things, limitlessness, and transcendent bliss. During this stage, which might also be called the meditation stage, the mind, formerly riveted on happenings in the outer world, turns inward and fixes itself on the self, the light within, and at some point, usually after intense investigation, realizes the self. This realization is invariably formulated in experiential terms and is thought by many to be the end of the search, the ultimate state. But the science of self inquiry says that while this is a welcome and enjoyable state, it is not the end, because there is still a sense of separation between the experiencer and the object of experience, the self. When there is separation there is doubt, and the doubt is always that this state, like all states, will end, plunging the experiencer back into darkness. This fear is invariably fulfilled as the experience is not the direct experience of the self, which is impossible for reasons already discussed, but a reflection of the self in a still mind. No blame. However, the mind is subject to change, so the experience inevitably ends. This doubt is due to the failure of the experiencer to understand that what is experienced is just his or her own self, in which case it could never be lost, because when do you not exist? The failure to convert the experience to knowledge is usually caused by the twin beliefs that knowledge is merely intellectual and that there is such a thing as a permanent experience. Experience is permanent in samsara but discrete experiences are not. So when the experience happens, the intellect is submerged in the bliss, peace and radiance, switches off, as it does in most intense sensuous experiences, and stops inquiring. To enter the final stage, which is not a stage, inquiry must continue during the experience of the self. In ordinary perception, a thought wave arises in the mind corresponding to the nature of the perceived object. You see a tree and you know it is a tree because the self, awareness, illumines the tree thought as it arises in the intellect. Similarly, when the ego experiences the reflection of the self in a pure mind, a thought corresponding to the nature of the self, an unbroken “I” thought, arises, and this thought needs to be owned. When it is taken as one’s own, the “I” thought, backed by experience, destroys the notion in the mind that it is limited, incomplete and separate. At this point, due to inquiry, everything stops and there is a subtle shift. The ego and the Self switch places. The Self, which heretofor has mistakenly been seen as the object of inquiry, "becomes" the subject, and the ego, which had mistakenly been taken to be the subject, "becomes" the object." From "How to attain Enlightement" ~James Swartz @actualized3434 This may not answer your question, but may be helpful.

@actualized3434 gotcha, didn't mean to be rude or anything. Yes, clear your doubts. That is important. I just meant that when I read "self realization" in writings I can usually tell which way it is meant depending on how it's used. I already described in my above post what could be the differences, so will not state again here.

No, I can't. I'm not hung up on the concept. If one is enlightened, they are also Self-realized. If one has a Self realization experience and then falls back into identification with ego, as one's self, then it was an epiphany or awakening. Many have had Self realizations, then fell back into ego identification only minutes or hours later. You're making it more complicated then it is. Perhaps I added to the confusion, sorry for that.

I wrote it out the way I did, because in the Vedanta tradition, Self-realization typically comes before Self-actualization (assimilation of Self knowledge in every aspect of one's life), not at the same time. I'm suspicious of anyone stating that Self realization didn't need any "assimilation" to gain Moksha (freedom/liberation). One needs a teaching methodology and a qualified teacher, because ignorance is hard wired and the mental tendencies are strong. If you sit around and do nothing, guess what you'll get?...nothing. Traditional Vedanta is the grand daddy of Self knowledge.

So, I've got something more to say about this.... If one has realized the Self (Self-realization) AND that caused a shift in identification to the Self AND that was "abiding" (didn't come and go), then I'm cool with it being called enlightenment/Moksha. However, this would mean "Self knowledge" was obtained through the experience. If one of the 3 aspects is lacking, then it was an awakening "experience", not enlightenment.

I've been very busy at work. I'll just say that what I mean by Moksha/enlightenment not being an experience means, no discrete subject-object experience, itself, classifies it. There must be a switch in identifying oneself with/as a "thought" to identifying as your true "Self", awareness and seeing from this perspective. That may "feel" some what like an experience, but isn't the classic subject-object experience most think of. It's awareness "aware" of itself as awareness, the Self recognizing itself and this needs to be "abiding". To truly be enlightenment. So, it's a subtle understanding.

Oh, the "experiences" you hear about up to the point of Moksha (enlightenment) are awakenings (Self realizations) and epiphanies. That are helpful before/during the "assimilation" of Self knowledge, but are not Moksha/enlightenment "itself", because during these "experiences" awareness is seen as an "object" with the ego being the subject.

I can't remember my whole post as I was writing it on/off for 45 minutes. But, in a nutshell, with Moksha (enlightenment) the only experience to be had is the switch in identification. Instead of awareness being seen as an object by the ego. They switch places and ego becomes an object (I-thought) and you, awareness (The Self) become the subject and the two never get confused again.

@Prabhaker thanks, but I'm on my phone.

Omg, I just lost a post I was writing...ugh