I am enlightened. Sincere seekers: ask me anything

[BlackVoid]

1. How do you quit this game? I do not mean this life, but this whole reincarnation on Earth thing? I do not wanna see this planet again. I know reaching enlightenment is a way, but its too slow. I want to renounce the contract that binds me here NOW. 

2. What happens when someone commits suicide? Don't worry I am not planning this, I have 2 daughters, but there is contradicting information on this. 

3. Some people talk about psychedelics opening portals for demons, is that true?

Edited December 12, 2018 by BlackVoid

[FoxFoxFox]

20 minutes ago, BlackVoid said:

1. How do you quit this game? I do not mean this life, but this whole reincarnation on Earth thing? I do not wanna see this planet again. I know reaching enlightenment is a way, but its too slow. I want to renounce the contract that binds me here NOW. 

2. What happens when someone commits suicide? Don't worry I am not planning this, I have 2 daughters, but there is contradicting information on this. 

3. Some people talk about psychedelics opening portals for demons, is that true?

1. Who is this "I" who wants to do all that? Inquire into that. See if this "I" actually exists first.

2. That someone dies.

3. In the sense that if your psyche is fragile, your mind might develop ailments that impair it from its usual functioning. Also even with enlightenment (in absence of drugs) you might sometimes have the sense that you are possessed. But this is all illusions caused by the mind. 

[FoxFoxFox]

@winterknight What is your understanding of self-referential thoughts? In your own work, you refer to the absolute insight as the final analysis. That is of course not the ground for this question. But on a relative level, do you believe that any thought can be NOT self-referential? 

Second question, as someone who is teaching these stuff, how would you go about intuiting that some one else is enlightened or not?

Edited December 12, 2018 by FoxFoxFox

[Bauer1977]

23 hours ago, winterknight said:

Well, it sounds like a glimpse or glimpses of the Truth, for sure. But there is still a lot of "I am" in them, and there's still a lot of concept. The Truth is simpler than that. It is quiet and beyond concept. So keep going. What's the unchanging constant beneath these realizations?

If those states give you peace, try going there again and staying there, but while you are awake and doing other things...

After reading your response, it occurred to me that all the "I am"  entries should be changed to "I is". I went back into the void tonight with that knowledge and tried this again.... when I was in that presence in nothing ness, Here is what I observed:

- I is a presence, a non dual singularity, pure Consciousness.

- I know that God is a presence, a non dual singularity, pure Consciousness.

- Therefore I is God!

Its clear to me now how ego, free will and will power are illusions feeding a perspective of individuality. It is the illusion of free will and will power that keep the illusion of an individual ego relevant. And God lets the illusion play out like a dog chasing its tail. The part that always stumped me, was that we must have will power if we, as ego, can choose to find God. But now I see how its a part of the illusion as well. Once the illusion of will power seeks to resolve the illusion of free will and ego, all 3 appear to collapse upon themselves. But it also now makes sense that if ego doesn't choose to use its own illusion of will power to seek out its own truth, the illusion of its own existence will remain intact. So in a way, the ego actually does have a certain amount of control over its own idea of existence, as it feeds its own illusion. No wonder this has been so hard to understand. Will power does affect the individual perspective/experience until it is acknowledged as being an illusion and is surrendered to God. It can now be recognized as always having been God, but with blinders on. Now, with I as God, there clearly is no ego, no free will and no will power. I is a singularity. 

This realization still never triggered an awe inspiring spiritual experience where my energy is the universes energy, like I read about others having. But now the nature of ego and God seem so obvious. What I will hold in my mind moving forward is, I is God.

[winterknight]

4 hours ago, Emanyalpsid said:

If Brahman or One is always there, even if formless so unable to conceptualize, in the strictest sense of non-duality, this is not non-duality. As this One or Brahman, which can not be conceptualized, is there, opposed to nothing.

Truth is only in the mind.

Brahman is beyond being and non-being. No, truth goes beyond the mind.

3 hours ago, BlackVoid said:

1. How do you quit this game? I do not mean this life, but this whole reincarnation on Earth thing? I do not wanna see this planet again. I know reaching enlightenment is a way, but its too slow. I want to renounce the contract that binds me here NOW. 

2. What happens when someone commits suicide? Don't worry I am not planning this, I have 2 daughters, but there is contradicting information on this. 

3. Some people talk about psychedelics opening portals for demons, is that true?

1. You have already quit the game. So simply, completely surrender. Give up all desires, expectations, and thoughts, and just be. Do not resist anything that happens, not in the world or in your mind. Just be. And you're instantly un-bound.

2. I don't know. From the standpoint of reincarnation theory, yes, you are certainly reborn.

 3. Mental demons, perhaps.

1 hour ago, FoxFoxFox said:

@winterknight What is your understanding of self-referential thoughts? In your own work, you refer to the absolute insight as the final analysis. That is of course not the ground for this question. But on a relative level, do you believe that any thought can be NOT self-referential? 

Second question, as someone who is teaching these stuff, how would you go about intuiting that some one else is enlightened or not?

All thoughts are self-referential in some way. It is not self-referentiality that is the problem, but whether the Self is veiled or not.

And for what purpose would you want to know whether someone is enlightened or not? You can't know, because enlightenment doesn't really exist. All you can do, if one was evaluating a teacher, is to look at things like whether the person seems to have coherent words and actions, understands and is able to respond to questions, makes sense in their ideas, projects peace and patience, etc.

Edited December 12, 2018 by winterknight

[Emanyalpsid]

6 minutes ago, winterknight said:

Brahman is beyond being and non-being. No, truth goes beyond the mind.

11 hours ago, winterknight said:

 

But it is always there right?

[winterknight]

1 minute ago, Emanyalpsid said:

But it is always there right?

It cannot be said to be "always there" because that is a descriptor. It is beyond descriptors. It cannot be accurately described.

[FoxFoxFox]

@winterknight

Quote

It is not self-referentiality that is the problem, but whether the Self is veiled or not.

Ah very good phrasing. 

Quote

And for what purpose would you want to know whether someone is enlightened or not?

It is actually for teaching someone else. I guess the question in not so much as they are enlightened or not, but whether they are moving towards the right direction.

[winterknight]

7 minutes ago, FoxFoxFox said:

@winterknight

Ah very good phrasing. 

It is actually for teaching someone else. I guess the question in not so much as they are enlightened or not, but whether they are moving towards the right direction.

Is their mind getting more peaceful? Is their desire for liberation intensifying? That's the right direction, basically.

[Emanyalpsid]

10 minutes ago, winterknight said:

It cannot be said to be "always there" because that is a descriptor. It is beyond descriptors. It cannot be accurately described.

Okay let me rephrase that: is it always present?

[winterknight]

12 minutes ago, Emanyalpsid said:

Okay let me rephrase that: is it always present?

It is beyond presence and absence.

[Emanyalpsid]

12 minutes ago, winterknight said:

It is beyond presence and absence.

Is it absolute? (without form of course)

[winterknight]

1 minute ago, Emanyalpsid said:

Is it absolute? (without form of course)

Absolute is just a pointer for seekers, not an accurate description. As I've already said, it's technically beyond any such terms.

[Emanyalpsid]

3 minutes ago, winterknight said:

Absolute is just a pointer for seekers, not an accurate description. As I've already said, it's technically beyond any such terms.

But it comes close to this discription?

Edited December 12, 2018 by Emanyalpsid

[winterknight]

10 minutes ago, Emanyalpsid said:

But it comes close to this discription?

No more than a finger pointing to the moon comes close to the moon.

[Emanyalpsid]

Does Brahman change?

[winterknight]

5 minutes ago, Emanyalpsid said:

Does Brahman change?

It is beyond the categories of change and changelessness, indeed beyond words and mind.

Though it may sometimes be called changeless, that is again merely a pointer for seekers.

Are you going to keep asking me asking these sorts of questions? Why not just apply what I've said here to all those kinds of questions?

Edited December 12, 2018 by winterknight

[Emanyalpsid]

Sorry, I dont want to overload you. Thanks for asking the questions. I am just trying to understand Brahman. But it seems you cant understand it right? You have to experience it? Else, you would have been able to explain what it is. Or you can understand it but you have not understood it.

To give a bit more background to why I am asking this. I am an enlightened Buddhist, meaning someone who attained nirvana in the buddhist context, and I am just trying to establish the differences between Brahman and what I will call here 'no-thingness' (which is not nothing) following Nirvana in buddhism. You are the only one I know of on this forum who attained enlightenment, in the Advaita vedanta view. Therefore, I hope that you would be able to help shine a light on this Brahman. 

The no-thingness in buddhism can be understood and explained.

So either there is a difference between Brahman and no-thingness. Meaning, no-thingness in buddhism can be explained and Brahman not.

Or there is a difference between our understanding of these and they are the same. Meaning, you dont understand Brahman, but you do experience it.

Edited December 12, 2018 by Emanyalpsid

[winterknight]

8 minutes ago, Emanyalpsid said:

Sorry, I dont want to overload you. Thanks for asking the questions. I am just trying to understand Brahman. But it seems you cant understand it right? You have to experience it? Else, you would have been able to explain what it is. Or you can understand it but you have not understood it.

To give a bit more background to why I am asking this. I am an enlightened Buddhist, meaning someone who attained nirvana in the buddhist context, and I am just trying to establish the differences between Brahman and what I will call here 'no-thingness' (which is not nothing) following Nirvana in buddhism. You are the only one I know of on this forum who attained enlightenment, in the Advaita vedanta view. Therefore, I hope that you would be able to help shine a light on this Brahman. 

The no-thingness in buddhism can be understood and explained.

So either there is a difference between Brahman and no-thingness. Meaning, no-thingness in buddhism can be explained and Brahman not.

Or there is a difference between our understanding of these and they are the same. Meaning, you dont understand Brahman, but you do experience it.

I also wonder why it has a name? Why Brahman?

Understanding can only go so far. So far as Brahman can be understood, I understand it. But the seeker must realize that the Truth goes beyond intellectual understanding.

If the Buddhist no-thingness can be fully understood and explained, then it is merely an object. Frankly I doubt that.

Technically Brahman is beyond being experienced as well, experience being a category, and Brahman being beyond categories.

And Brahman is also not a name, merely a pointer.

These things can all be only comprehended when the veils have been cleared from the mind...

Edited December 12, 2018 by winterknight

[FoxFoxFox]

@winterknight When speaking of 'reincarnation', are the teachings referring to the illusion of 'karma' in this life or actual reincarnation in another biological form? This has never been clearly explained. I am not asking whether reincarnation into another body is a real phenomenon or not, but the intention of the texts. What is your understanding? 

Additionally, are you familiar with the Tibetan Book of the Dead?