Enlightenment
Meditationtime Forum Post
Date: Posted 3 years before Jan 31, 2017
Terri Ana 3 years ago
What are the symptoms of enlightenment? Does every enlightened person become a master?
MiBeloved 3 years ago
Every enlightened person does not become a master in terms of teaching others and becoming known as an authority. Some enlightened persons are not required of their own desire to be publicly recognized and they may not be required by their superiors to teach either.
In this experience, we find that sometimes a person gets a Master degree and does not get an employment where he or she can use it. No one may know that the person got this degree and the person might work in some menial employment which gives no hint of the person's qualification.
Some persons however are publicly recognized for their qualifications and are required by society to teach or be in a leadership role.
Alfredo 3 years ago
Also, this word "enlightenment" has been used so much in the field of spiritual experience that it is difficult to know what it really means because...what is the person enlightened about?
Several realizations have been identified in the field of spiritual experience and yoga. It is possible that a person be enlightened on one but not on the other. He/she could be enlightened in more than one, even several. Sometimes it seems that the word itself in interchangeable with "realization".
Take for example the realization or enlightening of the "cosmic consciousness". There is an interesting book written by a certain Dr. Bucke in 1903 that tries to define this condition. This book is iconic and well-known. In it, a list of prominent spiritual personalities (including Jesus, Buddha, Jacob Boehme, Meister Echkart and similar others) are analyzed by comparison, age, and other parameters. The author, who was a close friend and admirer of the poet Walt Whitman places him as the cuspid of this type of realization. In that book, he masterfully described Whitman's character as follows:
"He never spoke deprecatingly of any nationality or class of men, or time in the world’s history, or feudalism, or against any trade or occupations – not even against animals, insects, plants or inanimate things, nor any of the laws of nature, or any of the results of those laws, such as illness, deformity or death. He never complained or grumbled either of the weather, pain, illness, or anything else. He never in conversation, in any company, or under any circumstance, used language that could be thought indelicate. In facts, I have never known of him uttering a word or a sentiment which may not be published without any prejudice to his fame. He never swore; he could not very well, since as far as I know he never spoke in anger, and apparently never was angry. He never exhibited fear, and I do not believe he ever felt it. His conversation, mainly toned low, was always agreeable and usually instructive. He never made compliments, very seldom apologized, used the common forms of civility, such as “if you please” or “thank you” quite sparingly, usually made a smile or a nod answer for them. He never gossiped. He seldom talked about private people, even to say something good of them, except to answer a question or remark, and then he always gave what he said a turn favorable to the person spoken of.”
Pretty impressive...right? Anyone could say that such a character must exhibit the marks of enlightenment, and I do not doubt that Walt Whitman was one of the few.
But in studying Sri Aurobindo's life, one discovers that the attainment of the cosmic consciousness is one of several landmarks that he passed. There was also the Vedantic realization of the Brahman, in its static aspect like Shankara with the "neti, neti" (not this, not this) approach, as well as the dynamic realization of the same Brahman, now with the "iti, iti" approach (this, that). Then also the Upanishadic realization of the One in all.
Terri Ana 3 years ago
Is it possible that a truly enlightened person does not know that he is enlightened?
Alfredo 3 years ago
If we follow the example of Walt Whitman described above, and accept he was somehow enlightened, then his case does not show that he was aware of it in anyway.
But if we take the examples of Ramana Maharshi and Sri Aurobindo from India, the answer is definitely yes in both cases. The former, although in a veiled form, accepting that he was a Jivanmukta (liberated while alive), the latter, also in a veiled way, that he was an Avatar, besides entertaining and expanding upon this concept like no other master in recent memory.
One more example...was Srila Yogeshwarananda aware of his enlightenment? Definitely yes.
chris_hall1951 3 years ago
Namaste Alfredo Yogiji!
Thank's for the interesting information on Walt Whitman,
but do you have any knowledge relative to his views on celibacy, abortion, women's right's, gay right's etc, etc, etc
or his ideas on the Yoga-sutras, and the Vedanta-sutras?
=========================
Namaste to you Terri Ana!
Thank's for posting your very nice question's.
I think Alfredo Yogi, has done a great job in trying to answer them.
Obeisances to him and Yogi Madhvacharya now and forevermore!
Jettins 3 years ago
Alfredo wrote: Sometimes it seems that the word itself in interchangeable with "realization".
Jettins' Comment: I'm not going to forget that.
chavez 3 years ago
Most everyone has read books and heard stories about “enlightenment.” This is the ultimate spiritual trophy. The ultimate symbol of achievement. It is the ultimate desire of the spiritualist that journeys into the realm of spiritual awareness.
The stories of monks meditating in the Himalayas for twenty years letting out a thunderous laughter to imply that “spiritual” seeking must be an arduous and painful journey. That seems to match what we’ve read about the Hindu yogis that starve themselves and chant endlessly, hoping to one day figure all of this out. And because the seeking of enlightenment was such a difficult path for those special few, enlightenment must be a flowery, holy and permanently blissful state of happiness and permanent high.
Is this is a huge and heaping pile of bullshit. Maybe, I do not know, since my enlightenment experiences have been with psychedelic drugs, cocaine, heroin, ecstasy and the like. So, can an enlightened person such as the Dali Lama tell me I’m wrong if he’s ever experienced what I’ve experienced- I certainly believe not!
One must recognize that any experience that pops up is just another transient experience-- just another event that comes and goes. It is rather obvious that what comes and goes. Any experience, no matter how ‘grand’, ‘profound’ or ‘spiritual’ is just another experience that will inevitably pass.
As this ‘mystical’ experience passes, one must recognize the psychological suffering that arises, since any enlightened spiritual experience one experiences, one must always return to the ephemerality of one’s own finite existence here on earth. When expressing the experience of enlightenment or heightened spirituality the use of the word “I” is always in being. What if this fundamental assumption, “I” is completely false, a fiction. What if a ‘person’ is NOT always here? To whom does this thought of “I” appear to?
If I am not the thought “I” then clearly, the opposite of “I” must also be false. The boundaries of conceptualizations then fall apart because both are false. Where can you find limitations? Where are there beginnings and endings? Isn’t it only in concepts? Concepts are merely fleeting labels with no substance. No one walks around and questions their existence, or says “I am not.” This is why the Buddhists call what you are: “non-conceptual awareness.” My point is basically more of the western realization of “The Peter Principle”, where an individual has reached his own level of incompetency. He, she might consider themselves on a high level of the spiritual plane, but down in the lower echelon of the 3-dimensional world, they still haven’t been able to resolve their own petty problems and inconsistencies, such as the lack of not been able to resolve conflicts with their mates, friends or family members. An example of such is Albert Einstein able to communicate the theory of relativity but does not have the competency to wash a sink of dirty dishes. Competence on the higher level, but no competence on the lower. I find that a great spiritual person needs to resolve the simplicity of earthly situations first, in order to consider him or herself rightly “enlightened”.
Alfredo 3 years ago
Hello Chris!
I would define Walt Whitman as a liberal soul.
He was a bachelor all his life and of a refined type of sexuality, very private. Apparently, his sexual interests ranged the whole spectrum, with biographers and others who have studied his life believing, in both cases of women and men, to had been platonic, and others, more recently, to had been actively sexual.
He was totally against war and violence and during the civil war volunteered as a nurse in a New York hospital to tend to injured Union casualties. Apparently, he had not a single vestige of racism, prejudice of any kind, or hate of any type, to women or others.
As for Yoga Sutras, I do not know for sure, but these were not well-known in the USA at his time. However, it is important to notice that his contemporaries, the American so-called "Transcendentalists"; mainly Channing, Emerson, and Thoreau, got their name from their interest in Vedic literature, specifically the Bhagavad Gita, the Upanishads and the Vedas at large.
