If Muhammad was enlightened then why is Islam dogmatic?

[Aakash]

Rupert spira does not know the absolute truth, many enlightened beings do not know the absolute truth. They never take the step to end their own awareness and therefore undergo reincarnation. But this is not the issue, their karmic body does not invite the information in at the suggestion and therefore they do not know, what they do not know. 

There is no such thing as an enlightened being, this is a duality ... non enlightened being vs enlightened being. He can point you to false enlightenment where as Leo is building his base up to point to the absolute truth ?

It is very complicated. If you guru does not provide as much detail as Leo. Then you can garuntee he does not know the absolute truth. Hence the reason scriptures are good and they are absolute truth I can confirm (map wise not the terratory) 

Edited September 3, 2019 by Aakash

[Aakash]

i Can tell you that every spiritual master you know (all of them) including buddha and Maharishi and Jesus. I am them. 

And I can tell you that some of them did not even get to the absolute truth. 

You must understand paradox to understand truth. 

Therefore as dumb as it sounds. You must understand Gödel’s incompleteness theorem to become enlightened 

but I can’t tell you who, because I’m just using probability. I only studied under Leo’s teachings and used contemplation. I never used any other technique from any master to know. So I don’t know what they know ... see ? 

All techniques can get you to enlightenment as long as they draw you inwards in a sense. But the part they are missing is the knowledge itself. However, I feel like I’m most probably wrong. Every person who started a technique knew the absolute truth and all their disciples did not apart from some. That is basically how the trend goes. 

Also I definitely think there any many teachers who reincarnated again even discovering absolute truth because they didn’t want to go. 

Edited September 3, 2019 by Aakash

[Angelite]

36 minutes ago, Aakash said:

@Angelite your reality and my reality are exactly the same. Two drops in a ocean, co existing side by side via imagination. 

I do not know of your reality ? 

I do not know of any reality except my own for I am the absolute truth in my reality. And there is no other realities, this is delusion. 

Yet we have the same box with the same exact absolute truth. They are completely identical. 

To the god who can not be worded (Allah) we both exist in his universe. Until we both realise that our realities are being imagined. We do not actually exist. Our self -awareness itself is being imagined. 

Until we take a choice to leave our self-awareness behind there will be no absolute truth. I’m the relative truth, the dual truth still within the absolute truth. But the absolute truth is also dual as long as I am “me” as long as I have awareness. 

When I choose to give up my awareness. I will be Allah, you will not be distinct from me. You will not know of seperate realities , of thoughts , of dreams ... you and I are one in the same  

we must give up our form to become one with the divine. This is the cost we must pay. 

Life for death 

life for peace 

Aha, I got it. But I have no interest to merge my reality with yours. 

My guru is Allah alone. It is He who brought me to other gurus. To it's creations. 

[Leo Gura]

Stage Red & Blue spirituality is dogmatic and authoritarian.

You need to seriously take into account historical context. The notion of being non-dogmatic did not even exist 1500 years ago in Arabia.

And my guess is that Muhammad himself was not deeply enlightened. Rather he was good at channeling.

And then of course you have to distinguish between Muhammad himself and his followers. Even if Muhammad was the shit, most of the people following him were dogmatic and they corrupted his teachings.

It's not different than Christianity and all other religions.

[Aakash]

@Angelite  the merger with Allah that your talking about. Is the exact same one im taking about

we have two seperate boxes, but our boxes are identical. Therefore there’s no distinction that can be made between my box of reality and yours. 

So we will both merge with Allah  within our own boxes of reality. 

I am not asking you to merge with my box, I’m asking you to merge with Allah. I’m trying to say to you that our boxes are identical therefore for you to merge with Allah in your box. You would have the realisation the absolute truth. Which is the same for both of our boxes! Because they’re identical. 

Therefore I am a clear reflection of you because I am you and you are me and there is no distinction that can be made between our boxes 

THE HOLY MOTHER FUCKING TRINITY SOLVED 

?

 

[Angelite]

@Aakash I hate you aakash. Why are mixing the two? You are you. God is God. 

You can only speak of the Absolute in the Absolute. Relative in the relative. 

It does make a difference. 

[Aakash]

@Angelite  this is delusion. There is no difference between relative and absolute 

there is no difference between me and god. I am god. I am Allah but i must consciously die to become my true self. To become the true self of all of us 

[Truth Addict]

@Angelite

Do you not believe the Quran? Your answer is in the verse 93:8

Or you can do some research about his life.

And no, I am NOT a Muslim.

Edited September 3, 2019 by Truth Addict

[Truth Addict]

@Leo Gura

What is the relationship between being enlightened and being non-dogmatic? I don't think the two are even related at all.

To me, being non-dogmatic is just another dogma. (not kidding).

You can’t escape dogma. If you could, then you'd be separate from reality. If you could, then there would be duality.

Edited September 3, 2019 by Truth Addict

[Angelite]

16 minutes ago, Truth Addict said:

@Angelite

 

And no, I am NOT a Muslim.

Ok. But you are still Allah's creation. 

(Not a muslim means not believing in a God higher than you. And not accepting the previous prophets. Maybe you are that. Idk. It's my definition)

17 minutes ago, Truth Addict said:

@Angelite

Do you not believe the Quran? Your answer is in the verse 93:8

 

He is rich in everything else but materialistically. 

 

Allah made his wealth sufficient, but not wealthy. In this world. Though he was offered the world. 

They use their wealth in the way of God. 

 

 

[Truth Addict]

7 minutes ago, Angelite said:

He is rich in everything else but materialistically. 

Allah made his wealth sufficient, but not wealthy. In this world. Though he was offered the world. 

They use their wealth in the way of God. 

Be careful not to project your values on Mohammad. He was not a hippie nor a Sufi. He had a lot of wealth, and he wasn't ashamed of it. I don't care how he used it. He was wealthy. Period. He started poor, and died rich.

Edited September 3, 2019 by Truth Addict

[tsuki]

@Truth Addict I am resisting the temptation to start our discussion again ?

[Truth Addict]

1 minute ago, tsuki said:

@Truth Addict I am resisting the temptation to start our discussion again ?

Which one? ??

I love arguing with you. You make very good points.

[Angelite]

You know what? Don't make a joke out of your faith.

Allah says : O you who believe, fear Allah as He should be feared, and die not except in a state of Islam -(submission). [3:102]

Whatever you say, might be a prayer. 

Edited September 3, 2019 by Angelite

[tsuki]

@Truth Addict

58 minutes ago, Truth Addict said:

@Leo Gura

To me, being non-dogmatic is just another dogma. (not kidding).

You can’t escape dogma. If you could, then you'd be separate from reality. If you could, then there would be duality.

The finite mind has the capacity to mirror some of the complexity of the present moment and make predictions. I remember you saying that the present moment has no causality, while I argue that it has infinite causality.

Dogma is when the small mind takes it's own theory for the truth, what actually is. With enlightenment, the capacity of the small mind skyrockets and one is able to model reality with superhuman ability. Look at Christ for example, he made his physical life archetypal and started a religion that spans thousands of years. He literally became his preaching/teaching to do that. He got himself crucified to make his point and then he came back from the dead lol.

Enlightened people are not dogmatic, they are just, practically speaking, "right" beyond the utility of arguing.

Edited September 3, 2019 by tsuki

[remember]

47 minutes ago, Angelite said:

(Not a muslim means not believing in a God higher than you. And not accepting the previous prophets. Maybe you are that. Idk. It's my definition)

exactly it`s your definition - you are interpreting... who makes the difference you or the deity?

[Truth Addict]

58 minutes ago, tsuki said:

@Truth Addict

I remember you saying that the present moment has no causality, while I argue that it has infinite causality.

Two sides of the same coin.

58 minutes ago, tsuki said:

@Truth Addict

Dogma is when the small mind takes it's own theory for the truth, what actually is. With enlightenment, the capacity of the small mind skyrockets and one is able to model reality with superhuman ability. Look at Christ for example, he made his physical life archetypal and started a religion that spans thousands of years. He literally became his preaching/teaching to do that.

That's what I would call "open-mindedness", not enlightenment.

My definition of enlightenment is just the realisation of God. No matter where you are on the spiral.

58 minutes ago, tsuki said:

@Truth Addict

He got himself crucified to make his point and then he came back from the dead lol.

LMAO ?

58 minutes ago, tsuki said:

@Truth Addict

Enlightened people are not dogmatic, they are just, practically speaking, "right" beyond the utility of arguing.

Again, enlightenment can happen at any stage of the spiral. The occurrence of it is irrelevant to one's cognitive development. However, the interpretation of it is so much affected by the stage one's at. In a sense, the cognitive development (ego) has power over experience in that case. It's a tint that colours the experience. So, you can have Purple, Red, Blue, etc... enlightenment.

.....

Think of dogmas like locks on the mind. Any type of dogma is a limitation that you put on your thinking. It's obvious what we usually mean by dogma. But the twist here is that we think that being non-dogmatic is actually not a dogma.

Let's say there are degrees of freedom to all the ways of thinking that exist. In this case, being non-dogmatic would be the most free way of thinking, and the most effective place to be in. BUT, there's a little problem with that as well, and it's that being non-dogmatic, by definition, rejects and denies dogmas altogether. So, I see that as a bug. Because what if I need to be dogmatic in certain areas or for a certain period of time? You see the paradox? "No, I can't be dogmatic. I am free". Just a neurotic reaction. A lock inside of the 'freedom paradigm'.

What I'm advocating is the transcendence of that duality, to the point where one can jump between the two freely without having locked their minds. I think we're in agreement here, since you've referred to something similar in one of our earlier discussions.

However, that would still not be enlightenment. That would simply be tier two.

Edited September 3, 2019 by Truth Addict

[tsuki]

53 minutes ago, Truth Addict said:

That's what I would call "open-mindedness", not enlightenment.

My definition of enlightenment is just the realisation of God. No matter where you are on the spiral.

The two are correlated. In order to tap into infinite intelligence, the small mind has to be in samadhi. God realization follows.
Samadhi is synonymous with enlightenment in many traditions.

55 minutes ago, Truth Addict said:

Again, enlightenment can happen at any stage of the spiral. The occurrence of it is irrelevant to one's cognitive development. However, the interpretation of it is so much affected by the stage one's at. In a sense, the cognitive development (ego) has power over experience in that case. It's a tint that colours the experience. So, you can have Purple, Red, Blue, etc... enlightenment.

Yes, it can happen at any point in the spiral, but once it hits you, a new dimension of existence is open.
It's like you're simultaneously a small mind and the infinite mind. At least this is how I conceptualize my experience from within the small mind.

Does this answer your question about the relationship between enlightenment and dogma?

57 minutes ago, Truth Addict said:

What I'm advocating is the transcendence of that duality, to the point where one can jump between the two freely without having locked their minds. I think we're in agreement here, since you've referred to something similar in one of our earlier discussions.

I concur. This is a duality to be transcended.

57 minutes ago, Truth Addict said:

However, that would still not be enlightenment. That would simply be tier two.

I agree.

[Truth Addict]

4 minutes ago, tsuki said:

The two are correlated. In order to tap into infinite intelligence, the small mind has to be in samadhi. God realization follows.
Samadhi is synonymous with enlightenment in many traditions.

Hmmm, I think this is true, probably only after transcending tier one. Before that, I would say it's just glimpses and temporary states which can happen without much open-mindedness.

So, maybe if we're talking about permanent enlightenment, open-mindedness is essential?

[tsuki]

2 minutes ago, Truth Addict said:

So, maybe if we're talking about permanent enlightenment, open-mindedness is essential?

I would say that samadhi is a transfiguration of the mind where it loses its ability to determine itself.
Permanent enlightenment = permanent samadhi? That would seem to bridge our understanding.