Is Enlightenment for everyone?

[egoless]

I was contemplating that... There are different personalities of people. Some are extremely extroverted and some introverted. TBH Enlightenment seems to be best suited for INTPs because we have  strongest introverted thinking, intuition and very prone to abstract thinking. On the other hand ENTJs for example are natural born extraverts. They are always out there. Seeking to solve practical problems, etc... I think in general introverts are more prone to find this path and have more chances to be Enlightened. Extraverts mostly are happy enough by social relationships, communication, practical lives. While introverts always feel lack of those.  

[Shin]

That's actually interesting, cause you kinda need A LOT of time alone to introspect.

Also, It doesn't seem like a lot of spiritual master are extrovert, of course some research about their past is required there, 

But look at them, all fucking chill AS FUCK, Leo looks like the badboy in Karate Kid in comparaison, and he is introvert.

The only guy that seem extrovert is Rali.

Now an another thing that kinda make sense, why would an extrovert would be a spiritual master in the first place ?

Wouldn't he want to do something more stimulating than giving speeches and workshop ?

 

[Leo Gura]

Watch your generalizations.

Enlightenment should actually be easier for extroverts because enlightenment is extroversion. Introversion is being stuck in your own mind.

[egoless]

20 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Watch your generalizations.

Enlightenment should actually be easier for extroverts because enlightenment is extroversion. Introversion is being stuck in your own mind.

But extraverts have so many benefits in this world nowadays. Shouldn’t we introverts at least have that?  

I don’t agree with you. Extraverts more likely won’t do nearly as much inner work as heavy introverts...

[Shin]

1 minute ago, egoless said:

But extraverts have so many benefits in this world nowadays. Shouldn’t we introverts at least have that?  

1 minute ago, egoless said:

 

That's a desire 

[egoless]

@Shin so what? Desire is not bad. I don’t demonize ego. It is part of the experience. 

I’ll go eat juicy big mac right now. Because that’s the point no?  

Edited March 6, 2018 by egoless

[Monkey-man]

That's not the case imho. It's not the introversion per se, but rather the need for Truth, which is a natural need in terms of evolution/growth of the soul, requires turning inward and introversion arises as a natural consequence of that. However, you might argue that you start seeking Truth only in 20s, 30s, 40s, while you were introvert from childhood. Its because you actually were ready to seek truth from childhood, or even did it but unconsciously.

Enlightenment is for everyone who is ready in terms of karma, i.e. people whose 'soul' or higher-self or karmic stream is grown-up enough. Some people are still busy playing with social dramas/chasing career/status/basic survival etc etc. And they are happy from that, and there's no problem here if they are truly happy doing this, it means they are growing. And Only if you see that there's no more joy/meaningfulness in all of that, you are ready for truth-seeking. Its both for people who were born extrovert and introvert. Extraverts can still seek truth but they still turn inward and become more of introverts during that.

And also, i think, enlightenment is easiest for truly happy people. They can agree to lose ego and let go very easily, however, happy people don't tend to seek truth until idle life ends, and sooner or later it will. its usually unhappy people who seek truth and god. why? because their soul is ready for it, thats why they suffer, because they can't have growth from ordinary things and from being in crowd anymore, they outgrew it in terms of karma but still engage in it and don't understand why they are unhappy while everyone else around is happy from doing same things. Suffering is a sing that you need to outgrow what ya doing. Now that seems to be an introversion because evolution in crowds (extraversion) is no longer helpful for you. Once you are enlightened you can have growth and happiness from being around people again, this is 'the return to the marketplace'.

imho

[Prabhaker]

2 hours ago, egoless said:

Some are extremely extroverted and some introverted.

As the extrovert person moves on, he becomes one with the whole universe. As he advances, he reaches to a point beyond which nothing is left outside, he becomes identified with the outer world. The day this happens, nothing remains within or without. But by becoming one with the world outside, he finds himself and he finds the truth. Then he declares: ‘I am Brahman’. He becomes one with the entire universe. When he says: ‘I am the Whole’, he is indeed one with the Whole. Then he feels the moon and the stars are moving inside him. The introvert person while going deep within comes to a point where nothing is left to be seen, he becomes a void. Then he is able to say: ‘I am not’. Such as the flame of a lamp blows out and disappears -- everything disappears.

The extrovert is ultimately able to grasp the whole. The introvert is ultimately able to grasp the shunya, the void. And both, the void and the purna, the whole, mean the same thing. But the extrovert reaches by moving along the outer journey; the introvert reaches by moving along the inner journey.  At the end, the extrovert completely eliminates the inner world, nothing is left inside, only the outer world remains. The introvert goes on becoming oblivious of the outer world to such a point that nothing remains outside.

And the interesting thing is that both the inner and the outer prevail together. Of the two only one cannot remain. Hence, when one disappears the other disappears too. If only the outer were to exist and nothing remains inwardly, the outer too will be no more. Because how would you otherwise identify the outer?  In order for the outer to exist, the inner is necessary. It is only because there is the inner does the outer exist. If only the inner were to be left and nothing were to remain in the outer at all, how would you be able to call it the inner?  It exists only in comparison to something of the outer, it is inner relative to the outer.

For example, the pocket of your jacket -- its one part makes the inner side in which you put your hand, and the other is the visible part seen outside. Can you ever imagine a situation where only the inside of the pocket would remain without its outer part?

Or, take your home, for example, Can you ever think that only the inner section of the house should remain and not what is outside of it? If only the interior part were to exist but not the outer part, the inner too will cease to be. If only what is outside were to remain and nothing inside, that which is outside the house would also cease to exist. The inner and the outer are two sides of the same coin.

Hence, there are two ways to go about. Either drop the outer or drop the inner. With the falling of one, the other will also fall on its own accord. And then, that which would remain, which was present in the outer as well as in the inner -- in fact, it was always present even beyond the inner and the outer too. If our journey has been outward, then, that which would remain to exist we will call it the Brahman; if we have followed the inward journey, we will call it shunya, void, nirvana.

Those who have seen god as Whole, they have traveled through the outer journey. Those who have seen god as a Void, they have followed the inner journey. It is not that while following the spiritual discipline of yoga, or the outer path, some day you will have to start with the Sankhya -- there is no need for it. Yoga itself will help you to reach.

Let us look at it yet another way so that it becomes easier to understand. Let us assume a man is standing at the number ten and if he were to proceed from ten to number eleven and then twelve and so on, he would eventually reach to the infinite. A point will come where all numbers would vanish. If he were to come down from number ten to nine, eight, and thus move back, after reaching number one he would arrive at zero where all numbers are bound to disappear too. No matter from which end you begin your journey, the numbers will disappear. When this happens then it does not matter from where you started your search. That which will remain beyond the numbers will be the same. This can be understood in terms of Positive and Negative as well.

Some people like positive words; these are the same people who are extrovert. Some people like negative words; these are the people who are introvert -- such as, the Buddha. Buddha is very fond of negative terms. Even if God were to appear before him, He would appear in terms of “nothingness”, in terms of void. Hence the word Buddha chose for his 
moksha, for his liberation is -- nirvana. And nirvana means: blowing of the lamp. Such as a lamp blows out, similarly, the individual blows out. What remains after that, is nirvana.

Someone asks Buddha, “ What will happen to you after nirvana?” And Buddha says: “What happens when the lamp blows out? It becomes one with the Void”. So Buddha’s emphasis is on the negative. It is an introvert’s emphasis. Whenever an introvert will speak he will use negative terms. He will say: “neti, neti”, neither this, nor that. One wants to reach a point where nothing is left. But when nothing is left, everything is found. Then there is language of the positive: this, and this, and this too. When everything comes together, then what exists that too is all that IS.

These are the only two ways. You can choose whichever kind of a journey you like. These two kinds appear very contradictory. They are contradictory as far as types are concerned, but as far as achievement is concerned there is no contradiction. One arrives through shunya, the void, as much as one arrives through the Whole. Some arrives by saying: neither this, nor that. Others arrive by seeing god in all -- they think and feel by realizing god in everything. The basic idea is one wants to reach at a point where duality exists no more.

Duality can dissolve into nothingness in two ways; it can become non-existent if either one accepts everything, or one denies everything. It can happen if either all bondages are dropped, or all bondages are identified with the atman, the spirit. Either there is no bondage any more; or, the bondage itself becomes everything, the atman -- it becomes the universal, then too it ceases to be bondage.

Neither the yogi needs to go into Sankhya, nor does the seeker of Sankhya need to go into Yoga. And yet, the point where both reach is the same. One does not have to make any changes. Both bring you to the same place.

Each individual has to look within to see what one’s interests are, what is his or her true identity, whether one’s leaning is toward the positive or the negative; toward the Whole or the Nothingness. It can also be seen this way: if a person is of emotional type, if he is filled with emotions, the language of Wholeness will be acceptable to him. And if the person is of a very intellectual type, the language and expression of denial, of the Negetive will be acceptable to him. Logic negates, it follows the process of elimination. It goes on saying: this is meaningless, that is meaningless, that too is meaningless -- it keeps discarding until nothing is left to throw away. When nothing is left to throw out, the logic too drops on its own accord.

BHAGAVADGEETA III - Karmayoga

Translated by Swami Satya Vedant

Discourses given by Osho at Cross Maidan, Bombay
28th December, 1970 - 7th January 1971

[Samuel Garcia]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Enlightenment should actually be easier for extroverts because enlightenment is extroversion. 

What do you mean by enlightenment is ''extroversion''? Are there more expressive actions with enlightenment with your body and by talking?

[DocHoliday]

@Samuel Garcia

Extroverts stereotypically think less and act more. One could go as far as to say that they're naturally more in a flow-like state from which they don't premeditate or plan everything they say or do. They are more spontaneous and immediately in touch with the ongoing process of life. Of course balance is once again the key-concept, which is why it may be hard for extroverts to become still and internally grounded. What introverts sometimes have too much of, the extrovert needs to develop and vice versa. It's the middle way, always. It's Yin and Yang, with everything. The two extremes in perfect harmony. 

Edited March 6, 2018 by DocHoliday

[Ether]

@DocHoliday Too much generalizations and stereotypes

[DocHoliday]

@Ether Well yeah, that's why they're called stereotypes. Then what would be your explanation for why extroverts seem to have it easier?

[LiakosN]

4 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Watch your generalizations.

Enlightenment should actually be easier for extroverts because enlightenment is extroversion. Introversion is being stuck in your own mind.

Isn't enlightenment the merging of extroversion and introversion >?

[Joseph Maynor]

Enlightenment is like a religion for Philosophers.  That’s tongue in cheek haha.  However — Enlightenment does require the kind of probing and questioning that a lot of personalities would be averse to.  That might explain the INTP connection.  INTPs naturally do the work.  Enlightenment is more up their alley.  But that doesn’t mean that Enlightenment wouldn’t be good for other personalities.  They are just less inclined to naturally question everything under the Sun like INTPs do.

Edited March 6, 2018 by Joseph Maynor

[mohdanas]

5 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Watch your generalizations.

Enlightenment should actually be easier for extroverts because enlightenment is extroversion. Introversion is being stuck in your own mind.

True introvert are stuck in their mind but at the same hand, it is due to the fact they are more emotional. They feel more such as empathy and their own feeling.

Shouldn't this make them stronger to feel their chakras, energy, nature? 

 

[egoless]

@mohdanas definitely. Generally Introverts are just better suited for this work. That’s it. 

[Shin]

40 minutes ago, egoless said:

@mohdanas definitely. Generally Introverts are just better suited for this work. That’s it. 

Maybe, but why try to make that a fact ?

Who cares ? lol

It's true that all people I know that are highly conscious are introvert in some degree, and almost all teachers seems to be this way too, but I don't know, that still doesn't mean anything, there is no study of this for now anyway.

Edited March 6, 2018 by Shin

[SBB4746]

Well enlightenment does require a lot of inner work and inner reflection usually which is natural for introverts. Extroverted personalities who experience a kundalini or spiritual awakening usually become much more introverted to.

[Leo Gura]

8 hours ago, Samuel Garcia said:

What do you mean by enlightenment is ''extroversion''? Are there more expressive actions with enlightenment with your body and by talking?

The essence of extroversion isn't being social, but having a system of perception where you exist "out there" in the world more than you do inside your skull.

And enlightenment is basically the eradication of the mind (the internal mental space), such that all that remains is the "outside world". The outside world becomes your new mind and body. Actions are no longer run through a gauntlet of internal analysis like they do for introverts.

Don't confuse this with becoming social. It's a change in perceptual attitude.

Imagine living in a way where "mind" ceased to exist for you. Where you didn't think any thought which was not publicly known to all people around you.

Maybe you've noticed, psychedelics make you more extroverted.

[D-tron]

Here is a video by Shinzen Young where he talks about the topic. He used to feel uncomfortable around people but that changed once he became enlightened.