No, but you’re a boy, so why not a violent rubbing on the penis 
Must be a guy thing…
That reminds me of what Michio Kushi once said about people who spend a lot of time meditating is just like self masturbation :slight_smile:
That reminds me of what Michio Kushi once said about people who spend a lot of time meditating is just like self masturbation :slight_smile:
Oh good, then it’s not just me. It made my skin crawl. I could barely sit through it.
What gets me (and all the teachers seem to do it)is when the audience laugh at something that is said the teacher then feeds off it ad nauseam :astonished:
As opposed to the other kind? 
It gives me better appreciation for the foul-mouthed gurus that I read about from the good ol’ days. You know the ones, who screamed at their disciples, slapped them around a bit, made them do endless chores, and tested their resolve in every imaginable way. Not much room for ego to fester under those conditions, and the guru ran little risk of mythologization. The down side was no book tours or talk show circuits.
Thats a good look at the industry meg 
And Jillatay,you mean there is another kind?
Hi Dave,
I think your smokescreen is working very well. But don’t forget, there is only so long that you will be able to fool everyone about what is really happening to yourself and everyone around you. 
Christi
Hi all,
Some people seem to be hinting that it is not worth discussing enlightenment because everyone means something different by the word. Others, that enlightenment is something extremely rare to find, and therefore by implication, something very difficult to attain. Personally I think it is worth discussing, for if we don’t, how can we come to any common agreement about what it is, or what role it plays in our yoga.
Also, I don’t think that it is something nearly as rare as people imagine. I am beginning to suspect that if any mythologization is going on, then it could be the mythologization of the enlightened condition. If we believe that it is always something far off, extremely difficult to attain, the possession of great masters in Himalayan caves then we have separated ourselves from the condition eternally before we even have any clear idea about what it really is. Also, if we create this myth about enlightenment, that it is so rare, and so unattainable, then as soon as someone says that they are enlightened, we have immediately put them on a pedestal, the biggest pedestal you could ever erect. This could help to explain what all this weird audience behaviour is around Adya. If (because of this myth), many people think that he is something special and rare, and that he has attained something that is almost unobtainable for a human being, then it is likely to effect their behaviour (like fans when a great pop idol comes on stage). So it could just be that we are helping to create that situation by perpetuating the myth that is creating it.
I don’t think that enlightenment is something so special or difficult to see.
As I recently said to some of my students:
“Enlightenment is not complicated, it is the simplest thing in the world. It is not far away. It is right here, available in every moment. It is closer than our every breath. It has always been here and always will be. Before we come into being in each moment, freedom is there. When we stop creating ourselves in each moment, freedom is there. As long as we think that we will gain anything by moving in any direction at all, we have missed it entirely. We never gain anything. To the separate self it is That (Tat Tvam Asi), to our True nature it is This. It is immanent and eternal. Nothing ever touches it and it is always pure.”
(Rather enthusiastic audience finally disappear in a blaze of Divine light never to be seen again, much to the great relief of many members of an international yoga internet forum.) 
Christi
Hi Christi! Since we’re almost to the 6th page of this thread, I would disagree with you that anyone here is adverse to discussing enlightenment. The ones who think it not worthwhile are probably home meditating. But it’s true that a few of us find the “disappearance into a blaze of Divine light” that you referred to (with irony, I know) to be an unnecessary component to enlightenment. In fact, I find the superhero version to be rather vulgar and burlesque. This is comic book, good guy/bad guy material; not the stuff of living in the real world, or even of being enlightened in the real world. In short, it’s just more ego.
I think this discussion is great. But all hints aside (and thank you for inviting the candor), I think that those who are drawn to the Hollywood version of enlightenment (lights, cameras, canned laughter) are probably missing the point. And in case I haven’t said it enough, Adya’s a great teacher! I wish he shopped at Albertson’s instead of Whole Foods, but you can’t have everything.
Meg wrote:
I think it’s worth pointing out the ego isn’t necessarily only about grandeur, it is equally effective in the role of playing the victim.
I don’t see beating the ego down as a solution, squeeze one end of a balloon and the other end will inflate. Poke a hole in it (in it’s theories) and watch as it slowly dissipates into the silence of space.
A
Meg said:
It gives me better appreciation for the foul-mouthed gurus that I read about from the good ol’ days. You know the ones, who screamed at their disciples, slapped them around a bit, made them do endless chores, and tested their resolve in every imaginable way. Not much room for ego to fester under those conditions, and the guru ran little risk of mythologization. The down side was no book tours or talk show circuits.
Oh Meg, as an amateur gurologist myself, I have to say that unfortunately there was always plenty of room for mythologizing the guru under those circumstances. And there still is. There are still some major gurus out there who are actually little more than slap-around narcissists – sometimes with some spiritual insight, sometimes with none. And boy are they mythologized.
In fact, some of these bad boys are mythologized even more extremely than the ‘nice’ gurus.
Where there is demand, supply will follow. Some people in their ‘spirituality’ have something that is quite similar to masochism in sexuality.
Christi wrote: [quote]
Personally I think it is worth discussing, for if we don’t, how can we come to any common agreement about what it is, or what role it plays in our yoga.
[/quote]
Not that I am suggesting that any discussion in regards to enlightenment is a negative thing, but the danger in trying to define it is in creating yet another obstacle to Being It.
“Oh darn it, I haven’t fulfilled criteria a, b and c to be enlightened”, “I just haven’t achieved it yet”, thoughts like these are leading our awareness away from our true nature to just Be. We spend our time and energy thinking about the virtual reality of what enlightenment will be like instead of devoting our energy into the present moment and living life fully. Why not choose to put it all into what is happening right now? What else is there really?
All we can do is be here and now with what Is, the longer we are able to keep our minds in the present moment, the more that the light of awareness can shine through into our lives.
A
Anthem11, can you explain to me where the above philosophy comes from? I’ve heard others like Katrine mention the need to just “Be” and to realize that this just ‘is what it is’ and the need to realize “this” or “that” as all that there is, alluding that being in the “now” or “present” moment, as being the ultimate reality?
I’ve searched various spiritual teachings and can’t find anything mentioning the need to just “Be”, unless you are looking at it from a different perspective or I’m searching for the wrong term? There is nothing in Buddhism that mentions this that I can find. Are you looking at it from a perspective of the the term “present” or “renunciation” or from “attentiveness”? But the Buddha mentions this as “effort”, so I’m confused???
Thank you:
Here are some quotes mentioning the need to search, seek, or attain:
“It is hard to take up a life of renunciation, and difficult to find satisfaction in it, but it is also difficult to live in bad
households, and painful to live with people unlike oneself, when one is forever tangled in suffering and restless.
Therefore don’t always be restless, and don’t let yourself be tangled in suffering.”
- Buddha
The only way that leads to the attainment of purity, to the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, to the end of pain and grief, to the entering upon the right path, and the realization of Nirvana, is these four fundamentals of attentiveness". - Buddha
“Those who strive for freedom from (the cycles of birth) old age and death by taking refuge in Me know Brahman, the individual self, and Karma in its entirety.
Those who are not faithful in this devotional service cannot attain Me, O conqueror of enemies. Therefore they return to the path of birth and death in this material world.” - The Bhagavad Gita
“But seek first His kingdom and His righteousness, and all these things will be added to you”. - Christ
“Riches ruin the fool
But not those seeking the Beyond.
Craving for wealth,the foolish man
Ruins himself by destroying others”.
"How can you find delight and mirth,
Where there is burning without end?
In deepest darkness you are wrapped!
Why do you not seek for the light?
" - Buddha
“And how do you know but that the Creator would rid me of my brandings, and give me a new nose, and make me fit to become a disciple of yourself?”
“Ah!” replied Hsu Yu, “that cannot be known. But I will give you an outline. Ah! my Master, my Master! He trims down all created things, and does not account it justice. He causes all created things to thrive and does not account it kindness. Dating back further than the remotest antiquity, He does not account himself old. Covering heaven, supporting earth, and fashioning the various forms of things, He does not account himself skilled. It is Him you should seek.” - Tao, Chuangtse (Lin Yutang)
“O humble servant of the Lord, O True Guru, O True Primal Being: I offer my humble prayer to You, O Guru.
I am a mere insect, a worm. O True Guru, I seek Your Sanctuary. Please be merciful, and bless me with the Light of the Naam, the Name of the Lord”.
Shri Guru Granth Sahib, Sikh
“Know thou that whoso seeketh to scale the summits of the divine mysteries must needs strive to the utmost of his power and capacity for his Faith, that the pathway of guidance may be made clear unto him.” - Baha’u’llah
VIL
Hi Mike:
Here are several AYP lessons on enlightenment:
http://www.aypsite.org/35.html
http://www.aypsite.org/85.html
http://www.aypsite.org/100.html
http://www.aypsite.org/120.html
http://www.aypsite.org/274.html
The lessons attempt to map out cause and effect related to practices, so the phrase “enlightenment milestones” is used to discuss the development of experience as effect. The milestones are not intended to be targets – merely points of reference for everyone to use as confirmation. Enlightenment is not defined in words. It is defined by experience. In AYP we take the position that none of this will happen with any reliability without utilizing practices as cause.
This is in opposition to the non-dual approach, of course, which claims instant enlightenment to be both the cause and the effect. In AYP, we say that the neurobiology has to “catch up” with any sort of instant realization, and that takes both skill to manage and time. The non-dualists use skill and time too, though it may be denied. Is there any evidence to the contrary? Are lots of folks experiencing “instant enlightenment” out there?
Regarding a so-called gold standard, a condition of “Oneness,” defined with a myriad of terms in the traditions, seems to be it. But, I believe there is more, and this is where non-duality blends back into duality – non-dual duality, the paradox of Oneness.
While a person may reach a condition of “Oneness,” what we call “Unity” in AYP, this can be regarded as final enlightenment only by those sages who choose to rest on their laurels. Good for them. It is enlightenment in isolation.
No. There is much more. Enlightenment will not be complete until all of humanity (and the entire cosmos) is self-aware in Oneness. A seemingly impossible task, yes? Nevertheless, Oneness cannot truly be Oneness until all have been brought home to That. The urge for this is what drives sages forward. It is the power of divine love, and we see it in all who serve for the benefit of others.
The lonely sage who holds up his or her Oneness as separate from everyone else (contending that nothing else exists) is an incomplete being. Only in giving it all away for the benefit of others can the sage be said to be enlightened. It is only in pouring out divine love that the enlightenment process can continue, encompassing all that exists (apparently) in the field of duality.
This scenario of true enlightenment residing in sacrifice for others does not sit easily with most people, so it doesn’t get much press. Who would choose that from an unenlightened point of view? It is directly opposed to our sense of self-preservation. Or is it? For the person who has achieved Oneness, doing for others is self-preservation, and comes naturally. This is why we hold Christ, Buddha and others who gave all they had for the spiritual progress of others as the highest measure of enlightenment. They are the gold standard.
Anyone who is moved from within to aid others on the path is manifesting Oneness. Much better to manifest Oneness than not. Stillness in action!
And where does it end? It never does. Therefore, real enlightenment is an unending continuum of outpouring divine love. It is not something we can take home and lock in the closet.
The guru is in you.
Hi Vil,
It’s funny, I have to remember how much I used to not like hearing stuff like “All This is That, That is All This, This that and the other thing, blah, blah, blah”… .
I guess it isn’t always the best way to explain a perspective, but sometimes seems the only way to me. It’s funny I have seen this perspective often over my spiritual travels, but I am not much of a scholar so won’t be able to point you to any classical texts which expound this perspective though I seem to remember coming across these truths in the Bhagavad Gita.
In short, this is the way I see reality, I see my thoughts as virtual reality or better yet guesses about reality, they are all subjective to me. Our direct experience of what is happening to us right now at this moment, is the only real (truth) I can find in life. My thoughts which interpret what just happened or is going to happen can’t really know something for what it actually is, only living it can I know. Any subsequent thoughts or descriptions of it are like shadows instead of the actual experiences or objects from which they are being cast. Being in the here and now is staying with the part of me that actually Is. Going off and dwelling on ideas and thoughts about what is going on, what went on in the past, or what will happen in the future, take me away from myself.
The further I go along the spiritual path (an irony perhaps) the more real, this reality becomes for me. The more time I am very present in what is happening here and now, the more intensity the here and now seems to have for me. I stop wanting to be anywhere else other than the here and now.
I have had moments of being profoundly in the here and now of deep peace and bliss, haven’t we all had them while meditating or at other times? To me this, “right here, right now” is where we find what we are looking for. The part of us that Is, just pure Being, the part of us that watches, the formless, emptiness, the void, inner silence, inner space, they are all different words pointing to the same thing.
Some authors and people that have really helped me come to this perspective on life are: Eckhart Tolle, Byron Katie, Don Miguel Ruiz, Nisargatta (through Sailor Bob Admason), Adyashanti, Yogani (of course), Katrine, to name just a few. I guess most of all from personal experience, this is how life is presenting itself to me.
Hope this helps,
A
Thanks for explaining your point of view, Anthem11. I appreciate it:
VIL
Hi Yogani,
Just saw your post after I posted. Your words above are a great and clear description of a really important part of the enlightenment process I have never heard before. It really clears things up for probably a lot of us. I think this post would make for an excellent addition to the “Main” lesson page, what do you think?
The part I quoted above, really hits home and feels like the truth of things to me, thanks for that!
Yogani
Many thanks for enlightening me about your definition of enlightenment… 
Curious that I hadnt spotted all those references LoL… I think I have been reading the material along the lines of a cookbook - as you say at one point you prefer to focus on experiences rather than philosophy (or words to that effect).
Actually also interesting in that I found my first quibble point (never found one before )
Hear hear! I have a spiritual chum who went thru’ a phase of having “it can happen anytime” as his forum signature… to which my response was “possibly but its a darn sight more likely if you put some hard work in”!
To me the reason for this is clear - energetically folks accumulate blockages through their life (unless they have practices which on average are net clearing blockages) and the subconscious mind is full of all sorts of junk - both human nature and specific rubbish accumulated.
Indeed - the old samsara-nirvana idea (a minority view at best in Buddhism and a hand of cards that requires some skillful playing to avoid losing bigtime!).
Yeh I make this one time and time again - if anyone can show me loads of folks who come away from so ‘do nothing and everything is done for you’ seminar all sorted I will be the first to get my cheque book out
Actually thats an interesting circle-squarer as its kind of the (Tao de Ching) idea behind my Zhan Zhuang school… it just turns out you gotta stand around for a loooooong time while ‘everything is done for you’.
I like the “there must be more” approach…
Not least of which I have for a long time pondered how - with very similar meditative methods - vedantans and buddhists can reach opposing conclusions re Atman… I saw one explanation recently that technically the former are one jhana short of where one can get to. Of course its a polemical and somewhat tribal position but one should be wary of saying “hey I finally found out what my tradition says - phew now I can take it easy” … Ajahn Sumedho who I quoted earlier said a nice thing in a talk “our purpose isnt to prove Buddhism correct its to see the way things really are”.
Aha an interesting perspective - is this widespread in yogic circles? Clearly it amounts to/is very similar to the (Mahayana) Bodhisattva perspective (ie an individual who vows to postpone full, final enlightenment till he has helped all other sentient beings get there).
I think that the position is a simple one in one life… one can (as you chose to do) literally “give it away” - share all the hard work you have laboured over - for free 
. Over multiple lives it gets more tricky (and you cant avoid being dragged into having some underlying metaphysic there - so that eg Arahants upon death Parinirvana and aren’t reborn… whereas the Bodhisattva manages to ‘come back’).
However I appreciate by now that for all intents and purposes I am now in the ‘angels on the head of a pin’ territory as far as my personal experience goes!
Anyway thank you for once again “giving it all away” and sharing your (no doubt) hard-won wisdom. And thanks to Tim Berners Lee to while we are at it for inventing the internet.
The guru in me has got a bit of catching up to do on the guru in you … either that or I should try and listen harder to him
Mike
Christi said:
I am beginning to suspect that if any mythologization is going on, then it could be the mythologization of the enlightened condition. If we believe that it is always something far off, extremely difficult to attain.
Christi, I would very much agree with you – enlightenment itself is mythologized, and that is the root of the problem. By the way, I didn’t suggest that enlightenment is not worth talking about because people have different meanings for the word – rather, what I meant to suggest is that people should be aware of the problems of different meanings, and negotiate the difficulties accordingly.
Hi Yogani,
Well I think you summed it up well.
quote “No. There is much more. Enlightenment will not be complete until all of humanity (and the entire cosmos) is self-aware in Oneness. A seemingly impossible task, yes? Nevertheless, Oneness cannot truly be Oneness until all have been brought home to That. The urge for this is what drives sages forward. It is the power of divine love, and we see it in all who serve for the benefit of others.”
Yes this seems to be how I perceive how my guru is and what he is working towards.
L&L
Dave