Are You Enlightened? An Honest Self Exam

[Valwyndir]

After spending some time on this forum, I've found it quite comical to see arguments over the "correct" perspective of reality.

It's especially comical when these arguments are coming from people who claim to be abiding in non-dual awareness.

Usually this happens after a person sees beyond the materialist paradigm. 

Said person then gets attached to the idealist paradigm, yet fails to see their attachment to this new paradigm is the same attachment they had for the old one.

Non-dual awareness is not a paradigm that you can attach yourself to. 

Non-dual awareness does not refer to any kind of content within a paradigm. Non-dual awareness is the Context of all paradigms.

There is no "correct" perspective of reality. A "correct" perspective would be considered a ground. Reality is groundless. 

There is no absolute that stands alone. The absolute can only be known through the relative. 

The absolute is the relative.

There is nothing that can stand alone. All is empty. There is nothing fundamental with inherent self nature. 

Even consciousness is not some foundational substrate that can stand alone. 

Consciousness dependently arises with objects within consciousness.

With that being said: Here's a self exam designed to free you from any paradigm you're clinging to.

 

1. Do you ever seek to invalidate someone else's perspective?

2. Do you see certain perspectives as more "correct" than other perspectives.

3. Do you believe gaining another perspective means letting go of an old one?

4. Do you believe that to abide in non-dual awareness you must erase all dualities in your mind?

5. Do you believe that from the absolute perspective, reality is infinite?

6. Do you believe that from the absolute perspective, you are God?

 

This is going to piss some people off, but if you answered only "Yes" to any of these questions, you're still abiding on a ground.

Enlightenment is not the disposing of old perspectives and the collection of new ones.

Enlightenment is the ultimate Perspective of perspectives. It's a meta perspective.  

It's the effortless fluidity between perspectives. 

No perspective is "correct." For a perspective to be "correct" would imply other perspectives are "wrong."

You'll find that all perspectives dependently arise with each other. 

Not a single minutia of reality could exist without everything else. This is the essence of what non-duality points to.

Enlightenment is seeing past the fabrication of perspective itself. 

Enlightenment is to see the dependence of everything on everything else. 

It would be unwise to say any perspective is "wrong" when your "right" perspective couldn't exist without that "wrong" perspective.

That "wrong" perspective is actually part of your "right" perspective. 

To say a perspective is "wrong" is to say your "right" perspective is "wrong."

 

For example, idealism couldn't exist without materialism just as up could not exist without down. 

Someone who claims materialism to be "wrong" and idealism to be "right" is like someone who claims up to be "wrong" and down to be "right."

BUT, here's where is gets messy...

The perspective that materialism is "wrong" and idealism is "right" is still a valid perspective. 

Issues arise when people cling to only that perspective. 

Also be aware that this is only an "issue" on the relative level. All issues are perfection from the absolute perspective. 

Just be aware that clinging to any one perspective will limit you in becoming more conscious. 

 

Two perspectives I commonly see people cling to here is the perspective that reality is infinite and the perspective that you are God.

These are valid perspectives, but realize that being dogmatic about these perspectives will limit you.

Understand that from certain perspectives reality is finite and you are simply a human. 

So many people get caught up in being God that they forget to enjoy their humanness. 

You are both human and God. You are not one more than you are the other.

Abiding on the ground of God is like playing a video game and always having awareness on the screen.

It takes away from the immersion of the video game. 

 

The bottom line is that reality is non-dual. 

But many people don't truly understand nonduality. 

Most people just turn nonduality into another ground.

They create a duality by seeing the world as non-dual and opposed to dual.

Non-duality cannot exist without dualities. 

The dualities you seek to invalidate are the essence of the non-dual paradigm you seek to validate. 

The key here is nonattachment. 

Become aware enough to realize when you become attached to any one perspective, even if that perspective seemingly comes from a higher level of consciousness.

 

Also, recognize that I just gave you an awesome new perspective, but don't get attached to it haha. 

Edited February 7, 2021 by Valwyndir

[zeroISinfinity]

Do you just want to justify your own behaivor, self bias and worldview with this? 

Thank you, come again. 

Edited February 7, 2021 by zeroISinfinity

[Thought Art]

@Valwyndir

Fun to read, But, wasn't completely accurate or new.

"Also, recognize that I just gave you an awesome new perspective, but don't get attached to it haha."

ditto

Edited February 7, 2021 by Thought Art

[Valwyndir]

15 minutes ago, zeroISinfinity said:

Do you just want to justify your own behaivor, self bias and worldview with this? 

Thank you, come again. 

@zeroISinfinity

You should read the post. It's actually about the dissolution of all personal worldviews. 

You're an intelligent guy. A less arbitrary critique of this post would be warmly welcomed. 

[zeroISinfinity]

There are no objects. 

There are no people. All you. 

Consciousness=Pure Love=God 

You are singular Infinite Love. 

[Forestluv]

Some nice insights in there. Yet keep in mind that the terms “is” and “are” are used to construct dualisms - which can be deconstructed and reconstructed. Everytime you used the term “is” in the OP, we can deconstruct it down to being either true and false as well as neither true or false. And ultimately, deconstruct to Nothing.

To create a distinct thing, there must be a not-that-thing for contrast. A thing is relative to not-that-things.  At a higher level relativistic fluency, the mind holds handles of things loosely and is more fluid as it flows from various degrees and mixtures of grounded and groundless. 

[Valwyndir]

6 minutes ago, Forestluv said:

Some nice insights in there. Yet keep in mind that the terms “is” and “are” are used to construct dualisms - which can be deconstructed and reconstructed. Everytime you used the term “is” in the OP, we can deconstruct it down to being either true and false as well as neither true or false. And ultimately, deconstruct to Nothing.

Haha I love it. The limitations of language are frustrating yet beautiful. 

[Forestluv]

2 minutes ago, Valwyndir said:

Haha I love it. The limitations of language are frustrating yet beautiful. 

♥️ ? 

[Lolz]

Until you can't make sense anymore of anything, you still aren't enlightened and have more work to do. And the more reality makes sense to you, the more deluded you are. The ultimate test for enlightenment is how much you think you know. The more you realize you don't know shit, the more advanced you are. And that's not the same thing as ignorance. Ignorance is the state of babies and animals. Enlightenment is the state of highly conscious beings. And it only gets deeper and deeper with time, or at least that's my experience. Enlightenment, paradoxically, gets deeper with learning. The more you learn about reality, the less you actually know.

Basically, what you're saying here is that SD tier two equals enlightenment. But the way I see it is that you can glimpse SD tier two from tier one at any time. So that gives you glimpses into enlightenment. And once you have glimpsed it, it cannot be undone. And even if you fully embody tier two, you will still be short of enlightenment. SD has very little to do with enlightenment. It's just the beginning.

[Osaid]

57 minutes ago, Valwyndir said:

You are both human and God. You are not one more than you are the other.

This is why I believe you can answer both "yes" and "no" to question 6. 

Same goes for question 5. Reality is infinite but it also includes finitudes, and certain infinities are made of these finitudes. For example, numbers can go on forever but a number itself is a finite superficial duality created by our minds. In a sense, the finitudes are part of infinity and so they really aren't finitudes, they are only finite when we superficially separate them from reality, which is what I believe you were alluding to in question 4.

TLDR: both questions 5 and 6 depend on a duality between "God" and "human" and "infinite" and "finite", which is why I believe you can answer both "yes" and "no" to them. I think this is basically what @Forestluv is talking about in their post.

Other than that, great questions to contemplate

 

Edited February 7, 2021 by Osaid

[Valwyndir]

9 minutes ago, zeroISinfinity said:

There are no objects. 

There are no people. All you. 

Consciousness=Pure Love=God 

You are singular Infinite Love. 

I love that perspective. But to go a little deeper...

The word "people" simply points to specific, distinct appearances in consciousness.

To say there are no people, you would have to show me an alternative where there are people. 

Just as to say an apple doesn't exist inside this room, an apple must exist outside this room. 

Of course, there is none such alternative where there are people in a realer sense than our reality. 

So there are people, but of course the nature of these "people" can be profoundly recontextualized for someone trapped in the materialist paradigm. 

[Thought Art]

@Valwyndir

8 minutes ago, Valwyndir said:

Haha I love it. The limitations of language are frustrating yet beautiful. 

Ahaha, I enjoy your posts!

You are really diving in.

 

[Valwyndir]

2 minutes ago, Osaid said:

This is why I believe you can answer both "yes" and "no" to question 6. 

Same goes for question 5. Reality is infinite but it also includes finitudes, and certain infinities are made of these finitudes. For example, numbers can go on forever but a number itself is a finite superficial duality created by our minds. In a sense, the finitudes are part of infinity and so they really aren't finitudes, they are only finite when we superficially separate them from reality, which is what I believe you were alluding to in question 4.

TLDR: both questions 5 and 6 depend on a duality between "God" and "human" and "infinite" and "finite", which is why I believe you can answer both "yes" and "no" to them

Other than that, great questions to contemplate

 

Ah, great point. I just edited in "only."  

To clarify: if you answered only yes to any of the questions, you're still abiding on a ground. 

[Valwyndir]

8 minutes ago, Lolz said:

Until you can't make sense anymore of anything, you still aren't enlightened and have more work to do. And the more reality makes sense to you, the more deluded you are. The ultimate test for enlightenment is how much you think you know. The more you realize you don't know shit, the more advanced you are. And that's not the same thing as ignorance. Ignorance is the state of babies and animals. Enlightenment is the state of highly conscious beings. And it only gets deeper and deeper with time, or at least that's my experience. Enlightenment, paradoxically, gets deeper with learning. The more you learn about reality, the less you actually know.

This perspective is interesting because by claiming that "the ultimate test for enlightenment is how much you think you know," you're claiming to know the ultimate test for enlightenment.

To claim to know the ultimate test for enlightenment is to claim to know more than I claim to know.

I simply offered a mediocre test at best haha.   

And because you claim to know more than I claim to know, I'm more enlightened than you based on your own perspective ?

Paradoxically, I believe your perspective is valid, but I don't believe I'm more enlightened than you. 

[Forestluv]

Another way to look at it. Consider four characters in a sleep dream. How would you rank them in terms of “enlightenment”?

Character A in the dream think he knows a lot.

Character B in the dream is aware of how little he knows.

Character C: The person dreaming realizes they are in a lucid dream and is aware he is playing a dream character that thinks he knows a lot.

Character D: The person dreaming realizes they are in a lucid dream and is aware he is playing a dream character that is aware of how little he knows.

[zeroISinfinity]

28 minutes ago, Valwyndir said:

I love that perspective. But to go a little deeper...

That's the truth. You are God and to really be it I am sorry to say but you will literally have to embidy it all. It already is the case. 

Quote

The word "people" simply points to specific, distinct appearances in consciousness.

Which you created and nobody else. 

Quote

To say there are no people, you would have to show me an alternative where there are people. 

No I don't have to since you are not separated from anything since you are Consciousness and there for you are "them". 

 

Quote

Just as to say an apple doesn't exist inside this room, an apple must exist outside this room. 

I don't get it. 

Quote

Of course, there is none such alternative where there are people in a realer sense than our reality. 

Consciousness =Reality there is really no separation you can look at it as unified field or lets say Reality is wholistic. For anything to exist since Reality is Infinite it must exist through contrasts and differences. You making comparissons for example will result in certain worldview. For example you indentifying only with body you will notice all differences around you and their seeming  change so you will live by that, which is complete delusion. So in that view there are other people etc. But it's all false. 

Quote

So there are people, but of course the nature of these "people" can be profoundly recontextualized for someone trapped in the materialist paradigm. 

I am so sorry to say but monopoly is masturbation. Time for you to face it God. 

Edited February 7, 2021 by zeroISinfinity

[sleep]

Lol would'nt leo fail this exam, I mean from what I can see in his forum posts he seems to proclaim that his perspective is the correct one as opposed to others in some threads

[Arcangelo]

@Valwyndir

I had a S.A.E. in June, 2019.

But I am not enlightened. For me there is a difference.

For some people there is no difference, if you are awake you are enlightened they say.

 

 

Arc

 

 

[Tim R]

1 hour ago, Valwyndir said:

There is no "correct" perspective of reality. A "correct" perspective would be considered a ground. Reality is groundless. 

So what about your perspective of "reality is groundless" then?

Isn't that itself what you in your own words "would consider a ground"?

1 hour ago, Valwyndir said:

Non-duality cannot exist without dualities. 

Not true non-duality. The essence of non-duality is that it has no opposite. 

[Arcangelo]

@Valwyndir I don't think you are enlightened.