If Reality Is Neutral..

[Guest username]

Become directly conscious of what suffering and all the things you label as bad actually are. You should notice that reality isn't biased against them. It is all-inclusive.

[Ananta]

14 hours ago, Shanmugam said:

But since you are certain about it and seem to know everything that happens after moksha

Actually, you said first-

"They don't really feel those emotions like others do... It only appears such for the people who are watching them.. All the liberated person feels is ups and downs in energy, and a little bit of subtle sensations... In other words, their emotions are not really like the emotions of people who are unconscious."

You seem rather "certain" in this paragraph you wrote. Yes, you then say, you were talking about yourself, but then in another post say, "I don't know what happens after Moksha". However, you used language in the excerpt above regarding a liberated person and said you were talking about your own experience.

See your contradictions??

 

14 hours ago, Shanmugam said:

I am not starting another debate with you.. I am only going to ask you questions..

Lol... what is this an interview? 

14 hours ago, Shanmugam said:

In the further discussions about this topic with you, I am going to maintain that I don't know)

 

Oh, that's convenient... Ok, make that my answer too, interview done...lol!

 

[SOUL]

Reality is all of it, positive, negative, neutral and none of those.

[Shanmugam]

@Anna1 When I said I don't know, that is the absolute truth... All I can do is inference or say something based on what a teacher has said...How the hell do you think I will know for sure? 

When I said I don't know, I said that because I don't have any mystical vision to peak into their consciousness.

If you say you are certain, than how do you know? Please answer that question..

The whole point of my post was not to let your ego to rejoice in finding faults with me.. It was to ask you that question so that you can answer...I was really curious what you were going to say.

Of course, your statements also sound certain, but they are either based on what you have heard or just inference, wouldn't you agree?. (or if you had a mystical access to an enlightened person mind, please let me know) ..So, you also actually don't know for sure...

When I said I don't know, thats what I meant.. 

[Shanmugam]

@Anna1 Anyway, My only problem here is in trying to convey what I have in my mind in words...  But let me try... The reason why you see many contradictions in my replies is because of certain issues we have in determining if one is really enlightened or not...Each of my reply presents various perspectives... And everyone has the same problem.

Let us say you get enlightened... And you are absolutely sure that this is it.. And if someone asks you if an enlightened person feels pain and pleasure, your response will be solely based on whether you experience pain and pleasure or not? right?

Also, how would you conclude that you were enlightened in the first place? Based on any one definition out of thousands of definition that exists, right?

Somebody says that a thoughtless mind is an indication for enlightenment; another one says that just the disappearance of the sense of separate identity as an indication etc...

I sounded certain in my first reply, based on one widely accepted definition for enlightenment; 'disappearance of the sense of separate identity'.. And it is true that I replied based on my own state of mind and how I perceive emotions...(there is no other way to answer).. And according to this definition, I am enlightened already. 

Since you objected to that, I explained to you that I actually said that based on my own experience (and as I said, that is the only way to answer)...

My third reply was actually based on a curiosity, to see if you will ever say 'I don't know'...Since there are various definitions for enlightenment and enlightenment is just a word, I said I know nothing about enlightenment, with little sarcasm... That is just to show you that I am really not pretending to be all knowing about what enlightenment is, considering all the other definitions that exist for the word. Because, after all, whatever I say can be based only on my experience alone... Testimony of others and inference are not as reliable as what one can witness in his own consciousness. Do you get my point?

It is only because of this problem, I am writing in my blog about bridging science and spirituality.  I have already collected information about some studies and put it in an article. Also, a Vedanta teacher himself has published a paper on this here: http://www.nondualitymagazine.org/nondualitymagazine.4/nonduality_magazine.4.jivanmuktarevised_27_apr_2011.htm

 

Edited July 26, 2017 by Shanmugam

[Ananta]

@Shanmugam

So, you want to know if I'm enlightened?

I think everyone is enlightened, because all are "the Self" (awareness). 

The only reason people don't recognize this is due to ignorance of their true nature, rajas/tamas (gunas) and mental tendencies/vasanas. Which is all the "illusion" of separation.

Once, you know/apprehend your true Self (here 6 yrs ago) and that Self knowledge is firm (here-this year), the knowledge is always available (mostly) and you know you aren't the doer (this is interesting,  because there's a sense of doership, but when looked at closer..no doer).

Its like switching between the person channel and awareness channel (my teacher said something similiar). You don't always have the thought "I'm awareness" constantly running, but when called upon the knowledge is readily available. 

You play your role and do your duties (person channel), but when wanting completeness, perfection, ect. you tune into the "awareness" channel. Knowing how to navigate and switch channels is part of "assimilation" of Self knowledge.

So, yes,  Anna has emotions. They come and they go. Good example, tonight when I got home from work my husband told me my son who already has 2 car loans (and lives at home) bought a $30,000 truck yesterday . I yelled, "What!!!!" and I was pissed! It lasted 10 minutes, but now, it's gone. 

In conclusion, it doesn't matter what stage of Moksha I/Anna am at...I "got" the great cosmic joke. Essentially, none of this matters, except to remove one's suffering. There is no soul emancipation with any of this... how could there be? You are awareness and awareness is associated with the world, as well as being "all" the actors. If one actor dies, you'll be associated with another and so it continues....

Hopefully, your demand for an answer has been satisfied. 

[Shanmugam]

1 minute ago, Anna1 said:

@Shanmugam

So, you want to know if I'm enlightened?

I think everyone is enlightened, because all are "the Self" (awareness). 

The only reason people don't recognize this is due to ignorance of their true nature, rajas/tamas (gunas) and mental tendencies/vasanas. Which is all the "illusion" of separation.

Once, you know/apprehend your true Self (here 6 yrs ago) and that Self knowledge is firm (here-this year), the knowledge is always available (mostly) and you know you aren't the doer (this is interesting,  because there's a sense of doership, but when looked at closer..no doer).

Its like switching between the person channel and awareness channel (my teacher said something similiar). You don't always have the thought "I'm awareness" constantly running, but when called upon the knowledge is readily available. 

You play your role and do your duties (person channel), but when wanting completeness, perfection, ect. you tune into the "awareness" channel. Knowing how to navigate and switch channels is part of "assimilation" of Self knowledge.

So, yes,  Anna has emotions. They come and they go. Good example, tonight when I got home from work my husband told me my son who already has 2 car loans (and lives at home) bought a $30,000 truck yesterday . I yelled, "What!!!!" and I was pissed! It lasted 10 minutes, but now, it's gone. 

In conclusion, it doesn't matter what stage of Moksha I/Anna am at...I "got" the great cosmic joke. Essentially, none of this matters, except to remove one's suffering. There is no soul emancipation with any of this... how could there be? You are awareness and awareness is associated with the world, as well as being "all" the actors. If one actor dies, you'll be associated with another and so it continues....

Hopefully, your demand for an answer has been satisfied. 

Oh my God!!! You never got what I was trying to say... I  didn't want to know if you are enlightened.. I asked  to imagine a situation, as an example... 

Anyway, I am speechless... I stared at my monitor for 2 minutes to find the right words and I give up... Probably, I am not explaining it clearly..

[Ananta]

14 minutes ago, Shanmugam said:

Oh my God!!! You never got what I was trying to say... I  didn't want to know if you are enlightened.. I asked  to imagine a situation, as an example... 

Anyway, I am speechless... I stared at my monitor for 2 minutes to find the right words and I give up... Probably, I am not explaining it clearly..

You wanted to know where I was coming from with what I say...and I told you. 

When did you say to imagine a situation?

Edited July 27, 2017 by Anna1

[Ananta]

On 7/25/2017 at 8:13 PM, Shanmugam said:

No problem... But let me ask you onething... Unless you yourself are enlightened, how would you know how enlightened ones perceive emotions in a particular way?

This  ^^^  right here. Now, you have my answer.

 

You referenced how could I know for 100% certain.... when did I say 100% certain? When?

Please post the quote where I say for 100% certain, if you think such quote exists, of course it doesnt. You've made a huge deal over 3 sentences I wrote in a post. 

 

 

Edited July 27, 2017 by Anna1

[Nahm]

when you become enlightened, you leave the reality of "who is and isn't enlightened"  You see everyone is you and that all that seperates is illusion.  The fabric of the illusion of reality is Love. It is you who chose the veil, you who removes it, and once removed, there is no you, there's only Love. 

[Shanmugam]

12 hours ago, Anna1 said:

This  ^^^  right here. Now, you have my answer.

 

You referenced how could I know for 100% certain.... when did I say 100% certain? When?

Please post the quote where I say for 100% certain, if you think such quote exists, of course it doesnt. You've made a huge deal over 3 sentences I wrote in a post. 

 

 

yes.. thats because you said I was contradicting and you didn't understand why.. I just gave an explanation in detail.. 

when I sounded certain, I was as certain as you...

When I said I don't know, I was saying I am not 100% certain.

I didn't make a big deal out of it... I just gave a long explanation, thats it...I don't mind giving a long explanation, that doesn't mean I think there is a problem..

Let me give you another example...

1) Someone tells you that there is  fire behind a mountain.. This is verbal testimony. You still don't know if there is fire behind the mountain because the person might by lying or deluded

2) You see smoke behind the mountain... Now you can infer that there is fire, because there is smoke.. But you still really don't know if there is fire behind it, because the smoke may be due to a cement factory behind the mountain.

3) You actually go behind the mountain and see that there is a fire. Now, you know there is fire because you have seen it with your own eyes...

When you/I are not 100% certain, that means you/I actually don't know yet... that is the absolute truth..

You started it by finding a fault in my post.. And you are still trying to find faults... Stop finding faults in others posts, thats just ego. I see that trend in most of your posts... (the ego is saying 'I know, these people don't know yet')..Once you stop finding faults, it will save a lot of time for you..

 

 

Edited July 27, 2017 by Shanmugam

[Shanmugam]

16 hours ago, Shanmugam said:

@Anna1 Anyway, My only problem here is in trying to convey what I have in my mind in words...  But let me try... The reason why you see many contradictions in my replies is because of certain issues we have in determining if one is really enlightened or not...Each of my reply presents various perspectives... And everyone has the same problem.

Let us say you get enlightened... And you are absolutely sure that this is it..

@Anna1 Look at the sentence in my previous reply, which is bold. English is not my native language. But to my knowledge,  when someone says 'Let us say', it implies imagining a situation, am I wrong? 

[Ananta]

On 7/25/2017 at 7:54 PM, Shanmugam said:

On 7/25/2017 at 7:07 PM, Anna1 said:

Because we feel off balance, however all these emotions are part of the human existence. Accepting them and not resisting allows them to move on much quicker. 

That's ego talking. Meaning, ego wants to not feel these things and so will chase objects to feel happy.

How many so called enlightened people do you know ..well? You can't count those under a microscope during a Satsang. Emotions come and go, they're not a problem unless the ego grabs a hold of them.

Nisargadatta is a prime example, many people have accounted that he was quick to anger, even yell at people, but would turn around a few minutes later and be laughing with them.

They don't really feel those emotions like others do... It only appears such for the people who are watching them.. All the liberated person feels is ups and downs in energy, and a little bit of subtle sensations... In other words, their emotions are not really like the emotions of people who are unconscious. Emotions of people who are unconscious are very solid, opaque and they get powered by thoughts and emotions back and forth for a while.. Emotions of liberated ones are like tiny bits of distant clouds which disappear without any effort. I would feel hesitant to even call them as emotions..

@Shanmugam You were "correcting" what I said (is this fault finding to you?...hmmm)... This was your first response to me in this thread. So, when you say-

"You started it by finding a fault in my post.. "

That's actually not true. You started it.

My subsequent response to you in this thread, was in regards to your post above. Where I simply said "pleasure and pain persist after Moksha" and you have become completely bent out of shape over it. 

Even though your very next post was-

" I didn't say pain and pleasure doesn't persist... Read my post again"

?

Edited July 27, 2017 by Anna1

[Shin]

[Shanmugam]

26 minutes ago, Anna1 said:

@Shanmugam You were correcting what I said (is this fault finding to you?...hmmm)... this was your first response to me in this thread. So, when you say-

"You started it by finding a fault in my post.. "

That's actually not true.

My subsequent response to you in this thread, was in regards to your post above. Where I simply said "pleasure and pain persist after Moksha".

'My subsequent response to you in this thread, was in regards to your post above. Where I simply said "pleasure and pain persist after Moksha".'

Here you sounded certain, my subsequent replies were about questioning the nature of this certainty...And you admitted it in one of the posts that you are not 100% certain.. Thats what I wanted to hear... 

I was talking about the 'ego's intention of finding faults... that's all.... My response was not to find faults with yours.. just compare your response and my response in the text quoted by you in your previous post.. The posts of you and me are not contradicting with each other. They are complimentary. You said 'emotions come and ago', I talked about the nature of those emotions which come and go... Where did I find fault in what you said?

It was to clearly point out the distinction between the quality of a  normal person's emotions vs the quality of emotions felt by some one who has lost the sense of a separate identity... And also, I never said sensations of pain and pleasure do not persist in such a person. After seeing your response on that, I clarified with annotations.

But does it mean that pain and pleasure persist after moksha? As long as we accept that the definition of moksha is just losing the sense of duality, the sense of a separate identity, I would say that it is not necessary for the pain and pleasure to disappear after moksha...It didn't disappear in me after losing the sense of duality...

But it is really possible to get rid of pain and pleasure completely? Some people claim that they actually got rid of it and they claim that getting rid of pain and pleasure completely is what moksha is... Now, when dealing with this, we need to forget about the word 'moksha', because arguing what 'moksha' is, is only a linguistic argument.. It depends on what a person means by the word 'moksha'..

Instead, the question that needs to be asked is 'it is really possible to get rid of pain and pleasure completely?'.. And this is a question which you and I cannot answer with certainty, unless it actually happens to you and me... So, here it is best to live with uncertainty and say 'we don't know about that'... It may be true or may not be true... That was the whole point of my subsequent posts... Is it clear?

 

[cetus]

@Shanmugam @Anna1 Non-duality wars will not be tolerated on this forum.

[The White Belt]

Who will drop the egoic desire to win the debate first? I don't even know what you guys are arguing about...