Greetings everyone!
I have read that enlightenment is a rearranging of the brain. That it activates parts of the brain and rids the brain of "junk" (such as ego). With my very limited understanding of neuroscience it seems possible. From what I've been told our brain often rearranges, not so dramatic as enlightenment, but on a smaller level, according to our experiences. If one were to devote themselves to a long period of intense meditation, is it possible it would result in a physical rearranging of the brain, and this rearrangement would account for enlightenment?

If this is the case, wouldn't enlightenment be as much an illusion as everyday awareness, or an awareness shaped by brain damage? When I was younger I was told stories of a man who thoroughly believed he was a glass of juice, and he was very careful whenever he moved, lest he spill himself all over the ground. I was told this was caused by an experience with drugs, they permanently rearranged his brain, and this was the result. Are we all, even those who believe they are enlightened, as illusioned as he is?

If you read texts that deal with the nature of enlightenmen there is a distinction between the body and mind (the corporeal self) and the self (the self as context) - in otherwords from the view of conditional life the brain may seem to be the self, but for the purposes of transcendence it is necessary to go beyond that definition.

If you compare that with what the current understandings are of neuroscience you can see that there is no neurological evidence that he brain is the source of the self as context (there is however evidence that the brain is the source of the self as conceived)

I think your guess is plausable, JerryCT, but I think it's a rearrangement of patterns of thought, not the physical structure of the brain itself, but the difference could be negligible.

Enlightenment is just ignoring your problems and expecting them to go away.

Most things people think are problems aren't really. Alot of them will vanish from a new point of view.

its like getting off the treadmill

Thank you all for your replies!

I found two articles this morning. I thought they'd be worth sharing in this thread.

I do not consider the first one ( https://www.onenessmovement.org/enlightenment_brain.cfm ) to be a lengthy read, but the second one ( http://www.innerworlds.50megs.com/enlightenment.htm ) will take longer, possibly too long to sit at the computer and read the entire article. If you focus on the area just before and after the diagram titled "THE BUDDHA'S ENLIGHTENMENT AS A NEURAL MAP" you'll have a decent understanding of what the entire article is expressing.

lightgigantic, you said: "In otherwords from the view of conditional life the brain may seem to be the self, but for the purposes of transcendence it is necessary to go beyond that definition." What would be a more fitting definition?

Thank you all for your replies!

I found two articles this morning. I thought they'd be worth sharing in this thread.

I do not consider the first one ( https://www.onenessmovement.org/enlightenment_brain.cfm ) to be a lengthy read, but the second one ( http://www.innerworlds.50megs.com/enlightenment.htm ) will take longer, possibly too long to sit at the computer and read the entire article. If you focus on the area just before and after the diagram titled "THE BUDDHA'S ENLIGHTENMENT AS A NEURAL MAP" you'll have a decent understanding of what the entire article is expressing.

lightgigantic, you said: "In otherwords from the view of conditional life the brain may seem to be the self, but for the purposes of transcendence it is necessary to go beyond that definition." What would be a more fitting definition?

Haven't read the articles you are referrign to you (just yet) , but at least as far as the latest findings of neurology goes, there is no evidence that the self (the self as context, in other words the sense of "I think therefore I am") is contingent on brain.

In literature that deals with the nature of enlightenment the gross and subtle body is described as instrumental (not causative) of the self - in other words it is just like a person who drives a car - in one sense it appears to be the engine that drives the car (since if the engine has a problem the car doesn't go anywhere) but it is actually the driver that does the driving - if there is no person to put the key in the ignition etc the car can sit in the garage for a million years and do nothing, even if it is in perfect running condition.

Greetings everyone!
I have read that enlightenment is a rearranging of the brain. That it activates parts of the brain and rids the brain of "junk" (such as ego). With my very limited understanding of neuroscience it seems possible. From what I've been told our brain often rearranges, not so dramatic as enlightenment, but on a smaller level, according to our experiences. If one were to devote themselves to a long period of intense meditation, is it possible it would result in a physical rearranging of the brain, and this rearrangement would account for enlightenment?

If this is the case, wouldn't enlightenment be as much an illusion as everyday awareness, or an awareness shaped by brain damage? When I was younger I was told stories of a man who thoroughly believed he was a glass of juice, and he was very careful whenever he moved, lest he spill himself all over the ground. I was told this was caused by an experience with drugs, they permanently rearranged his brain, and this was the result. Are we all, even those who believe they are enlightened, as illusioned as he is?

the mind is not the brain...the brain is part of the body...intimately connected to the mind...the brain changes as people grow up...

enlightenment is the freedom from all suffering....the freedom from all insecurities or impressions...if you have absolutely no insecurities how can there be any suffering to any degree? what sorrow, anger, fear, boredom, etc...can there be?

JerryCT

Looked at the links - I find many probelms with them - basically the main problem with these two links is that they stand as concoctions in regard to standard scriptural explanation s of the terms and processes they allude to -

for instance you would be hard pressed to establish that Sri Bhagavan is an avatar (couldn't find any scriptural refernces in the whole site, which is generally the first step in determining the nature of an avatar)

CC Madhya 20.351: Sanātana Gosvāmī said, "I am a very insignificant living entity. I am low and poorly behaved. How can I understand who is the incarnation for this Age of Kali?"

CC Madhya 20.352: Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu replied, "As in other ages an incarnation is accepted according to the directions of the śāstras, in this Age of Kali an incarnation of God should be accepted in that way.

CC Madhya 20.353: "The Vedic literatures composed by the omniscient Mahāmuni Vyāsadeva are evidence of all spiritual existence. Only through these revealed scriptures can all conditioned souls attain knowledge.

CC Madhya 20.354: "An actual incarnation of God never says 'I am God' or 'I am an incarnation of God.' The great sage Vyāsadeva, knowing all, has already recorded the characteristics of the avatāras in the śāstras.

CC Madhya 20.355: "'The Lord does not have a material body, yet He descends among human beings in His transcendental body as an incarnation. Therefore it is very difficult for us to understand who is an incarnation. Only by His extraordinary prowess and uncommon activities, which are impossible for embodied living entities, can one partially understand the incarnation of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.'

The buddha enlightenment article is based on very shaky premises for dilineating the process of enlightenemnt as a phenomena - what to speak of the allusions to chemically engineering the state of fearlessness as a means to equate with such an experience

I've made a very big mistake! What I have been referring to when I speak of "enlightenment" is what lightgigantic called in another thread "connection to the transcendental absolute", that is, the infinite, that from which all things originate and that to which all things return, fundamental reality. I'm sorry for the confusion, this is what I'm referring to, not the cessation of suffering.

I have a little more to add, but at the moment I'm rushed. Thank you for the replies!

I've made a very big mistake! What I have been referring to when I speak of "enlightenment" is what lightgigantic called in another thread "connection to the transcendental absolute", that is, the infinite, that from which all things originate and that to which all things return, fundamental reality. I'm sorry for the confusion, this is what I'm referring to, not the cessation of suffering.

I have a little more to add, but at the moment I'm rushed. Thank you for the replies!

you do realize that the two things are the same right??? Even The Buddha says so...

According to science we have JUST the gross physical body - the first of five sheath (annamaya kosha). Now, if you try to understand the process of enlightenment, the destruction of the individual ego with only the most visible 20% of the pranic body, your explanation will be incomplete. That remaining 80% is out of the realm of ordinary human knowledge of scientific facts or events.

Basically, what I'm saying is that to understand the phenomenon in terms of science, you must go to the source texts (tantras), really understand them (which might involve personal experience!), then try to put together objective scientific principles. Not squeeze them into preconceived ideas about how the brain works. Imagine trying to explain quantum computers with newtonian physics. It can't be done. Remember that neuroscience is in its infancy.

have your enlightenment today , absolutely free as

"SELF REALIZATION IS THE FIRST ENCOUNTER WITH REALITY."

you can visit these mediation technique at www.sahajayoga.org

have your enlightenment today , absolutely free as

"SELF REALIZATION IS THE FIRST ENCOUNTER WITH REALITY."

you can visit these mediation technique at www.sahajayoga.org

What are the permanent benefits of sahajayayoga?

On what grounds do they say that kali yuga has come to an end (since such a statement neither tallies with the astronomical calculations of kali yuga, since who is Kakayyar Bhujander compared to Vyasadeva, nor with the dilineation s of the qualities of kali yuga)?

Who is Shri Gnyaneshwara in regards to vedic scriptures?

What is the goal of the vedas and the means to achieve that goal?

What is the exact special quality of this yoga that enables one to achieve moksha in one lifetime? How does it tally with the last verse in the 6th chapter of Bhagavad gita?

.... etc etc

According to science we have JUST the gross physical body - the first of five sheath (annamaya kosha). Now, if you try to understand the process of enlightenment, the destruction of the individual ego with only the most visible 20% of the pranic body, your explanation will be incomplete. That remaining 80% is out of the realm of ordinary human knowledge of scientific facts or events.

Basically, what I'm saying is that to understand the phenomenon in terms of science, you must go to the source texts (tantras), really understand them (which might involve personal experience!), then try to put together objective scientific principles. Not squeeze them into preconceived ideas about how the brain works. Imagine trying to explain quantum computers with newtonian physics. It can't be done. Remember that neuroscience is in its infancy.


-agreed

Thank you all for your replies!

According to science we have JUST the gross physical body - the first of five sheath (annamaya kosha). Now, if you try to understand the process of enlightenment, the destruction of the individual ego with only the most visible 20% of the pranic body, your explanation will be incomplete. That remaining 80% is out of the realm of ordinary human knowledge of scientific facts or events.

Basically, what I'm saying is that to understand the phenomenon in terms of science, you must go to the source texts (tantras), really understand them (which might involve personal experience!), then try to put together objective scientific principles. Not squeeze them into preconceived ideas about how the brain works. Imagine trying to explain quantum computers with newtonian physics. It can't be done. Remember that neuroscience is in its infancy.

Would I be correct, then, in saying that neuroscience is "behind" the knowledge of the tantras, as opposed to the tantras being behind neuroscience?

In the second article I posted the second and third paragraph say this: " The Buddhist and the Hindu concepts, like other ideas from the middle ages, may not be a very good approximation of reality. The astronomy, anatomy & physiology, biology, meterology, and geology (just to name a few) of the ancient cultures were, without exception, all discarded as science progressed.

No matter how poorly they may describe reality, older ideas linger until a replacement appears. The cognitive science of Asia has been an effective tool for changing human consciousness, but it's replacement has only appeared recently." I have seen this attitude before concerning Western science and Eastern teachings, (I don't know what to call it, exactly.) and this is why I ask which one is "behind. This type of attitude puts one behind the other. Is it a correct attitude? Which one is behind?

My interest is fundamental reality, the transcendental absolute and my connection to it (Am I it?) and I don't know where to look. Finding so much conflict between Western science and Eastern teachings makes it all the more difficult.

My interest is fundamental reality, the transcendental absolute and my connection to it (Am I it?) and I don't know where to look. Finding so much conflict between Western science and Eastern teachings makes it all the more difficult.

if thats true then you should study Vedantic philosophy...its all about that.

in reality, all that exists is the absolute, causeless, eternal, the objective unchanging reality, bliss itself, the origin of existence, the ultimate truth. Because the material world is transient, changing, and temporary, it is false, the only thing that is "real" is brahm, reality itself.

Everything, from a thought, to a rock, to your mind, to an image, to you and I are the absolute in all respects. However due to maya (illusory energy) things appear differently. We are not merely an aspect of the absolute, but the absolute itself (aka God) pretending that we are not. When you fully realize this then there is no more suffering, just as a dreaming person upon realizing a dream is just a dream no longer suffers, instead you enjoy every moment, what fear, sorrow, anger, etc...can there be?

lightgigantic,
If we're in the kali yuga, why are people getting taller? How have yoga and buddhism (fairly dogma-free, 'religionless' religions) seen such life (or hehe.. hot air) breathed into them this past century? The math is debatable.


JerryCT,
I don't like to say that neuroscience is behind. They're incomparable. Tantra encompasses the whole body and mind and subtle energy that connects it to everything else.. One might say, unprovable hocus pocus. Neuroscience has this incredible, ever growing understanding of the nervous system. One is abstract and applied, the other is pure and scientific. Scientists do not describe science in terms of symbolic deities. But either way, these are damn exciting times, to have access to both sets of ideas.

Of course I am no yogi, have not achieved any enlightenment and am just beginning to organize the vast field of ideas from Tantra, Yoga, Buddhism et al. The journey started with real world experience (see 'the electric sneeze').

If you're one of those people who is amazed at the weirdness of simply being alive, breathing, eating, farting and fucking by all means start at but do not restrict yourself to Indian philosophy.

Here are two nice starting points:
http://www.amazon.com/Tibetan-Yogas-Dream-Sleep/dp/1559391014/sr=8-1/qid=1162496234/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-2433236-7858556?ie=UTF8&s=books
http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Tantra-Transformation-Lama-Yeshe/dp/0861711629/sr=8-1/qid=1162496221/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-2433236-7858556?ie=UTF8&s=books

Xerxes

If we're in the kali yuga, why are people getting taller?
we are less than 1.5% into kali yuga - there are scriptural statements that say it is due to get heavy after about 10 000 years from now - there are also scriptural statements that indicate we are in fact shorter and possessed of less virility (there are descriptions of the stature and qualities of persons from different yugas) - of course you could argue against this on the strength of the archeological record, which is a whole seperate issue ....

How have yoga and buddhism (fairly dogma-free, 'religionless' religions) seen such life (or hehe.. hot air) breathed into them this past century? The math is debatable.

Not sure what your point is here but yoga and buddhism are heavily defined by scripture (I assume you equate the word scripture with dogma) . It is only due to the new age nonsense of the past 30 years, financed by stressed out yuppies, that has given the view (prominent in western culture) that you are advocating.

For instance the word yoga in vedic scriptures shares the same meaning as religion (menaing to connect or bond), therefore different yogas are advocated (jnanayoga, karmayoga, astangayoga, bhaktiyoga) - and even if your only purpose is to determine the nature of astangayoga it owes its creedence to Patanjali who has given the yoga sutras - here is an example of one of his quotes from the sutras

A sober person who can tolerate the urge to speak, the mind's demands, the actions of anger and the urges of the tongue, belly and genitals is qualified to make disciples all over the world.

Does that sound like dogma to you?

lightgigantic,
If we're in the kali yuga, why are people getting taller? How have yoga and buddhism (fairly dogma-free, 'religionless' religions) seen such life (or hehe.. hot air) breathed into them this past century? The math is debatable.


true some symptoms of the Kali Yuga are not present, namely short life span (supposed to be 20 years), and people being short, when they're getting taller. Almost as if we're another Yuga, or a Sub-Yuga of the Kali Yuga.

But most of the other symptoms are present like all nations being connected, people speaking one language, sex becoming socially acceptable, no more arranged marriages, no more caste system, india becomes a desolate less powerful country, materialisim, great material science little spiritual knowledge, men's intelligence becoming diverted to atheism, power is determined by wealth only.

So it looks like we really are in the Kali Yuga, maybe a good part of the Kali Yuga, since its duration is 432,000 there are probably many sub-cycles within it no one expects all 432.000 years to be the same.

By the end of the Kali-Yuga at least 75% of the population will be atheistic, religious people will be regarded as fools.

As you can see by the end of the Kali Yuga, most likely people will all speak one language, and at least 75% of population will be atheistic...

By the end of the Kali-Yuga at least 75% of the population will be atheistic, religious people will be regarded as fools.
actually kali yuga began at about 75% atheistic (the defintions for a theistic practioner are quite specific - not to be heavily influenced by karma and jnana, what to speak of the things advocated in more direct threads of atheism)

At the end of Kali-yuga it will be closer to 99.999999999999% atheism, hence the advent of Kalki (on a side note it was entertaining to read on the site about "Sri Bhagavan" how he was balking at the prospect of being the kalki avatar - it seems like his devout worshippers, lapping up his claims that he was an incarnation of god in Kali yuga, had insisted that Sri Bhagavan was Kalki - he seemed to be a bit hesitant to accept such a title and was trying to quell the rumours, no doubt because he is familiar with Kalki's job description -lol )

actually kali yuga began at about 75% atheistic (the defintions for a theistic practioner are quite specific - not to be heavily influenced by karma and jnana, what to speak of the things advocated in more direct threads of atheism)

At the end of Kali-yuga it will be closer to 99.999999999999% atheism, hence the advent of Kalki (on a side note it was entertaining to read on the site about "Sri Bhagavan" how he was balking at the prospect of being the kalki avatar - it seems like his devout worshippers, lapping up his claims that he was an incarnation of god in Kali yuga, had insisted that Sri Bhagavan was Kalki - he seemed to be a bit hesitant to accept such a title and was trying to quell the rumours, no doubt because he is familiar with Kalki's job description -lol )

Are you sure? I remember reading a scripture where it said when it reached 80% atheistic Kalki would incarnate.......

also the SB says by the end so-called religion would become mostly atheistic:

SB 12.2.12-16: By the time the age of Kali ends, the bodies of all creatures will be greatly reduced in size, and the religious principles of followers of varṇāśrama will be ruined. The path of the Vedas will be completely forgotten in human society, and so-called religion will be mostly atheistic. The kings will mostly be thieves, the occupations of men will be stealing, lying and needless violence, and all the social classes will be reduced to the lowest level of śūdras. Cows will be like goats, spiritual hermitages will be no different from mundane houses, and family ties will extend no further than the immediate bonds of marriage. Most plants and herbs will be tiny, and all trees will appear like dwarf śamī trees. Clouds will be full of lightning, homes will be devoid of piety, and all human beings will have become like asses. At that time, the Supreme Personality of Godhead will appear on the earth. Acting with the power of pure spiritual goodness, He will rescue eternal religion.

SB 12.3.43: O King, in the age of Kali people's intelligence will be diverted by atheism, and they will almost never offer sacrifice to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is the supreme spiritual master of the universe. Although the great personalities who control the three worlds all bow down to the lotus feet of the Supreme Lord, the petty and miserable human beings of this age will not do so.

Are you sure? I remember reading a scripture where it said when it reached 80% atheistic Kalki would incarnate.......

also the SB says by the end so-called religion would become mostly atheistic:

SB 12.2.12-16: By the time the age of Kali ends, the bodies of all creatures will be greatly reduced in size, and the religious principles of followers of varṇāśrama will be ruined. The path of the Vedas will be completely forgotten in human society, and so-called religion will be mostly atheistic. The kings will mostly be thieves, the occupations of men will be stealing, lying and needless violence, and all the social classes will be reduced to the lowest level of śūdras. Cows will be like goats, spiritual hermitages will be no different from mundane houses, and family ties will extend no further than the immediate bonds of marriage. Most plants and herbs will be tiny, and all trees will appear like dwarf śamī trees. Clouds will be full of lightning, homes will be devoid of piety, and all human beings will have become like asses. At that time, the Supreme Personality of Godhead will appear on the earth. Acting with the power of pure spiritual goodness, He will rescue eternal religion.

SB 12.3.43: O King, in the age of Kali people's intelligence will be diverted by atheism, and they will almost never offer sacrifice to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is the supreme spiritual master of the universe. Although the great personalities who control the three worlds all bow down to the lotus feet of the Supreme Lord, the petty and miserable human beings of this age will not do so.

there is more

here (http://www.stephen-knapp.com/kalki_the_next_avatar_of_God.htm)
and also here (http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/kaliyuga.htm#1)

Are we all, even those who believe they are enlightened, as illusioned as he is?

Bit late to this thread still,

Thinking from an Eastern Philosophy / pranayama angle I think enlightenment happens with both physical and mental changes achieved through structured approach of meditation and associated practices.

Mental: Higher self discipline, controlled diet habits, control on sex (duration/time etc), consider Guru as God (absolute belief) as he/she is leading you the truth,

Physical: Change the way breathing is done, open up the path to Sahasradalapadma (from top end of the mouth to top of the head), control breath and learn to practice pranayama outside the body, practice truth (words, deeds etc)

+ God: Almighty need to bless an individual with higher stages of Bhakthi (devotion) which ‘mentally’ allows one to think he/she is the universe and ‘physically’ allows better synchronization between left and right brains and leads to higher states of awareness.

Good points about the diet and breath, manipulation of brain chemistry, and mental changes. I think they are all factors in realization, and each one has positive effects towards the goal, although none is absolutely necessary for it to happen.

Bit late to this thread still,

Thinking from an Eastern Philosophy / pranayama angle I think enlightenment happens with both physical and mental changes achieved through structured approach of meditation and associated practices.

Mental: Higher self discipline, controlled diet habits, control on sex (duration/time etc), consider Guru as God (absolute belief) as he/she is leading you the truth,

Physical: Change the way breathing is done, open up the path to Sahasradalapadma (from top end of the mouth to top of the head), control breath and learn to practice pranayama outside the body, practice truth (words, deeds etc)

+ God: Almighty need to bless an individual with higher stages of Bhakthi (devotion) which ‘mentally’ allows one to think he/she is the universe and ‘physically’ allows better synchronization between left and right brains and leads to higher states of awareness.



The good thing about bhagavad gita is that arjuna is a practical man and krishna gives practical advice

BG 6.33: Arjuna said: O Madhusūdana, the system of yoga which You have summarized appears impractical and unendurable to me, for the mind is restless and unsteady.

BG 6.34: For the mind is restless, turbulent, obstinate and very strong, O Kṛṣṇa, and to subdue it, I think, is more difficult than controlling the wind.

BG 6.47: And of all yogīs, the one with great faith who always abides in Me, thinks of Me within himself, and renders transcendental loving service to Me — he is the most intimately united with Me in yoga and is the highest of all. That is My opinion.

Greetings everyone!
I have read that enlightenment is a rearranging of the brain. That it activates parts of the brain and rids the brain of "junk" (such as ego). With my very limited understanding of neuroscience it seems possible. From what I've been told our brain often rearranges, not so dramatic as enlightenment, but on a smaller level, according to our experiences. If one were to devote themselves to a long period of intense meditation, is it possible it would result in a physical rearranging of the brain, and this rearrangement would account for enlightenment?

If this is the case, wouldn't enlightenment be as much an illusion as everyday awareness, or an awareness shaped by brain damage? When I was younger I was told stories of a man who thoroughly believed he was a glass of juice, and he was very careful whenever he moved, lest he spill himself all over the ground. I was told this was caused by an experience with drugs, they permanently rearranged his brain, and this was the result. Are we all, even those who believe they are enlightened, as illusioned as he is?

Enlightenment is recognition that the world is illusion. It's just self awareness, once you have it, it's in you.

Enlightenment is recognition that the world is illusion. It's just self awareness, once you have it, it's in you.

I think its more than just that, its the realization of the truth, the actual truth, the freedom from all insecurities (impressions), at last you have returned to enjoying your natural ecstasy.

Upon full realizing that there is no reason to become angry, sorrowful, fearful, etc...that all your problems are no more than feelings inside of you (impressions, insecurities), what suffering can exist? You will finally enjoy every infinitismal moment.

I think its more than just that, its the realization of the truth, the actual truth, the freedom from all insecurities (impressions), at last you have returned to enjoying your natural ecstasy.

Upon full realizing that there is no reason to become angry, sorrowful, fearful, etc...that all your problems are no more than feelings inside of you (impressions, insecurities), what suffering can exist? You will finally enjoy every infinitismal moment.


The question is what is the problem/insecurity upon which all problems/insecurities hinge?

The question is what is the problem/insecurity upon which all problems/insecurities hinge?

It probably stems from early memories of physical pain, and the physical need for food, survival instinct.

It probably stems from early memories of physical pain, and the physical need for food, survival instinct.

I was aiming more for questioning what the cause for corporeal existence is

The question is what is the problem/insecurity upon which all problems/insecurities hinge?

Desire, mostly for reality to be something other than what it is right now.

I was aiming more for questioning what the cause for corporeal existence is

We haven't yet discovered non-corporeal existence.

We haven't yet discovered non-corporeal existence.

Maybe we are not enlightened then
;)

Desire, mostly for reality to be something other than what it is right now.

Since everyone in this world suffers like this, the next question is whether this incompatability between our desires and this world is the irrevocable aspect of existence or whether it indicates an essential error of ways that has to be addressed

Enlightnment is just a heightned conciousness.

Maybe we are not enlightened then
;)

I think non-corporeal existence is something different from enlightenment.

Since everyone in this world suffers like this, the next question is whether this incompatability between our desires and this world is the irrevocable aspect of existence or whether it indicates an essential error of ways that has to be addressed
Not everyone, and it's certianly not inevitable. Yearning for a heaven in the afterlife is one cause of this kind of suffering, the idea of perfection, idealism, ect.

I was aiming more for questioning what the cause for corporeal existence is

The cause of corporeal existence? The cause is ignorance, according to The Buddha. According to Lord Krishna it is the desire to exist without God.

We haven't yet discovered non-corporeal existence.
Really? Then how do gravity, electromagnetism, time, etc...exist? They do not exist as matter, rather they are unphysical, immaterial...

Enlightnment is just a heightned conciousness.
I disagree, because consciousness is ever-changing while the happiness you attain when enlightened is eternal, and unchanging.

According to The Buddha there is an uncreate, unmade, an unborn, and because there is, there is an escape from the created, the made, the born, there is eternal bliss.

According to Hinduism Brahm is eternal and unchanging, beginningless, the absolute truth, the highest degree of bliss, the basis of happiness, the essential happiness from which all other forms of happiness are derived. Realizing Brahm you attain this happiness.

Since everyone in this world suffers like this, the next question is whether this incompatability between our desires and this world is the irrevocable aspect of existence or whether it indicates an essential error of ways that has to be addressed

What do you mean by the incompability between our desires and this world?

Really? Then how do gravity, electromagnetism, time, etc...exist? They do not exist as matter, rather they are unphysical, immaterial...
I meant non-corporeal human existence.

I meant non-corporeal human existence.

Oh, well in that case, yeah, we haven't discovered human beings existing in any way non-corporeal.

The Cyber Sapiens are coming.
http://www.kurzweilai.net/meme/frame.html?m=4

^but will these machines really have consciousness? Or will they simply be appearing to have consicousness....

What's the difference? You only "appear" to have consciousness to me.

Spidergoat

“
Since everyone in this world suffers like this, the next question is whether this incompatability between our desires and this world is the irrevocable aspect of existence or whether it indicates an essential error of ways that has to be addressed
”
Not everyone, and it's certianly not inevitable. Yearning for a heaven in the afterlife is one cause of this kind of suffering, the idea of perfection, idealism, ect.
who is an example of someone who doesn't experience a disparity (that they spend their lives trying to address) between their desires and what the world offers?

Vital one

“
Originally Posted by lightgigantic
Since everyone in this world suffers like this, the next question is whether this incompatability between our desires and this world is the irrevocable aspect of existence or whether it indicates an essential error of ways that has to be addressed
”
What do you

mean by the incompability between our desires and this world?

Even great paragons of the "if it feels good do it" philosophy like freud conceded that there is the "reality principle" - that you have to settle with a lot less desire fulfilment than desire.
Enlightenment aims at addressing this however

BG 2.70: A person who is not disturbed by the incessant flow of desires — that enter like rivers into the ocean, which is ever being filled but is always still — can alone achieve peace, and not the man who strives to satisfy such desires.

Spidergoat


who is an example of someone who doesn't experience a disparity (that they spend their lives trying to address) between their desires and what the world offers?

Buddha, and all the living Buddhas of today.

What's the difference? You only "appear" to have consciousness to me.
There's a great difference. You can make a machine that talks, walks, and acts like us...but that doesn't mean it really has real consciousness. That doesn't mean it thinks in the same way, its just a machine.

Vital one



Even great paragons of the "if it feels good do it" philosophy like freud conceded that there is the "reality principle" - that you have to settle with a lot less desire fulfilment than desire.
Enlightenment aims at addressing this however

BG 2.70: A person who is not disturbed by the incessant flow of desires — that enter like rivers into the ocean, which is ever being filled but is always still — can alone achieve peace, and not the man who strives to satisfy such desires.
I disagree, you do not have to settle for a lot less desire fulfillment than desire. You can instead fulfill all your desires, because they all stem from one desire. Remember, no suffering to even the smallest imaginable extent.

If you desire to fulfill all of your desires, you can do so:
SB 11.15.17: One who fixes his pure mind on Me in My manifestation as the impersonal Brahman obtains the greatest happiness, wherein all his desires are completely fulfilled.

This is the highest perfection....as you possess the greatest happiness...

Everyone desires enlightenment already without even knowing it. The reason people desire money is because they see it as the "end of all suffering". The reason people desire power is because they see it as the "end of all suffering". Whatever you have a true, burning desire for, you unconsciously believe it is the "end of all suffering". However in reality, it isn't the end of all suffering, so due to your ignorance you fail to realize the true path to the end of all suffering.

There's a great difference. You can make a machine that talks, walks, and acts like us...but that doesn't mean it really has real consciousness. That doesn't mean it thinks in the same way, its just a machine.
How do you know YOU aren't "just a machine"?

Buddha, and all the living Buddhas of today.
then it appears that you are advocating the option in bold from my earlier post


Since everyone in this world suffers like this, the next question is whether this incompatability between our desires and this world is the irrevocable aspect of existence or whether it indicates an essential error of ways that has to be addressed

VitalOne


If you desire to fulfill all of your desires, you can do so:
SB 11.15.17: One who fixes his pure mind on Me in My manifestation as the impersonal Brahman obtains the greatest happiness, wherein all his desires are completely fulfilled.

first you have to understand what the brahma bhuta platform is

SB 4.30.20: Always engaging in the activities of devotional service, devotees feel ever-increasingly fresh and new in all their activities. The all-knower, the Supersoul within the heart of the devotee, makes everything increasingly fresh. This is known as the Brahman position by the advocates of the Absolute Truth. In such a liberated stage [brahma-bhūta], one is never bewildered. Nor does one lament or become unnecessarily jubilant. This is due to the brahma-bhūta situation.

if your desire innvolves hankering and lamentation you are not on the platform of brahman

BG 5.25: Those who are beyond the dualities that arise from doubts, whose minds are engaged within, who are always busy working for the welfare of all living beings, and who are free from all sins achieve liberation in the Supreme.

If your desire is sinful you cannot fulfill it and claim to be on the platform of brahman

BG 6.27: The yogī whose mind is fixed on Me verily attains the highest perfection of transcendental happiness. He is beyond the mode of passion, he realizes his qualitative identity with the Supreme, and thus he is freed from all reactions to past deeds.

If you are undergoing the reactions of your previous deeds you are not on the brahman platform

BG 13.31: When a sensible man ceases to see different identities due to different material bodies and he sees how beings are expanded everywhere, he attains to the Brahman conception.

If you view yourself as your body (man/woman, sick/healthy, young/old) and express desires of that bodily designation as the ultimate in fulfilment you are not on the platform of brahman

BG 8.11: Persons who are learned in the Vedas, who utter oḿkāra and who are great sages in the renounced order enter into Brahman. Desiring such perfection, one practices celibacy. I shall now briefly explain to you this process by which one may attain salvation.

Sex desire is absent on the platform of brahman
:eek:

BG 18.54: One who is thus transcendentally situated at once realizes the Supreme Brahman and becomes fully joyful. He never laments or desires to have anything. He is equally disposed toward every living entity. In that state he attains pure devotional service unto Me.

If despite doing all this you feel miserable (ie perceive there is something lacking or that you are artificially restraining yourself from material engagement) you are not on the level of brahman

BG 14.26: One who engages in full devotional service, unfailing in all circumstances, at once transcends the modes of material nature and thus comes to the level of Brahman.

One who performs bhakti unfailingly in all circumstances is on the level of brahman

BG 18.50: O son of Kuntī, learn from Me how one who has achieved this perfection can attain to the supreme perfectional stage, Brahman, the stage of highest knowledge, by acting in the way I shall now summarize.

BG 18.51-53: Being purified by his intelligence and controlling the mind with determination, giving up the objects of sense gratification, being freed from attachment and hatred, one who lives in a secluded place, who eats little, who controls his body, mind and power of speech, who is always in trance and who is detached, free from false ego, false strength, false pride, lust, anger, and acceptance of material things, free from false proprietorship, and peaceful — such a person is certainly elevated to the position of self-realization.

The qualities of being on the platform of brahman does not at all indicate that one can do anything and everything and be situated as such



This is the highest perfection....as you possess the greatest happiness...

SB 3.15.43: When the breeze carrying the aroma of tulasī leaves from the toes of the lotus feet of the Personality of Godhead entered the nostrils of those sages, they experienced a change both in body and in mind, even though they were attached to the impersonal Brahman understanding.

Despite being on the platform of brahman the 4 kumaras were attracted to the bhagavan feature (Can you show an instance of someone attacted to the bhagavan feature of the absolute being attracted to brahman?)

SB 12.12.69: Let me offer my respectful obeisances unto my spiritual master, the son of Vyāsadeva, Śukadeva Gosvāmī. It is he who defeats all inauspicious things within this universe. Although in the beginning he was absorbed in the happiness of Brahman realization and was living in a secluded place, giving up all other types of consciousness, he became attracted by the pleasing, most melodious pastimes of Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa. He therefore mercifully spoke this supreme Purāṇa, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, which is the bright light of the Absolute Truth and which describes the activities of the Lord.

Its ironic that you quote the bhagavatm to establish that brahman is the ultimate in happiness, when it is clearly indicated that its purpose is to elaborate on an even higher value of happiness

SB 1.7.10: All different varieties of ātmārāmas [those who take pleasure in ātmā, or spirit self], especially those established on the path of self-realization, though freed from all kinds of material bondage, desire to render unalloyed devotional service unto the Personality of Godhead. This means that the Lord possesses transcendental qualities and therefore can attract everyone, including liberated souls.

clearly established (that brahman is not the ultimate in happiness, compared to bhagavan realization) in more places than one

Hari-bhakti sudhodaya (14.36)
"My dear Lord, O master of the universe, since I have directly seen You, my transcendental bliss has taken the shape of a great ocean. Thus I now regard the happiness derived from understanding impersonal Brahman to be like the water contained in a calf's hoofprint

Just in case things had to be spelt out any clearer



Everyone desires enlightenment already without even knowing it. The reason people desire money is because they see it as the "end of all suffering". The reason people desire power is because they see it as the "end of all suffering". Whatever you have a true, burning desire for, you unconsciously believe it is the "end of all suffering". However in reality, it isn't the end of all suffering, so due to your ignorance you fail to realize the true path to the end of all suffering.
desiring enlightment therefore begins with the knowledge of relationships, namely the relationship between oneself and the absolute - if one views oneself as the absolute there is no possibility of enlightenment

how do one achive enlightenment ?Only after several years(ages) of buddhas passings only scriptures/recordings about the buddha were made ..meaning these scriptures may not be absolute true

The literal truth of Buddhas scriptures are less important than the relatively simple methods he outlined for achieving enlightenment on one's own.

then it appears that you are advocating the option in bold from my earlier post


Since everyone in this world suffers like this, the next question is whether this incompatability between our desires and this world is the irrevocable aspect of existence or whether it indicates an essential error of ways that has to be addressed

Except I don't consider the lack of enlightenment to be an error of ways. I don't think Buddhism makes this sort of absolute judgement. If you are satisfied with your life as it is, then there is no problem.

^but will these machines really have consciousness? Or will they simply be appearing to have consicousness....

I think no Cyber Sapien is going to have consciousness because the most difficult aspect of human life is the ‘reason’ for being alive. Those who suicide (stop working from a Cyber Sapien perspective) they do not see a ‘reason’ for being alive and decide not to live. And if we are not able to fill in that ‘reason’ in to a Cyber Sapien then at some point of time it is going to give up (die) as well. I will not consider a Cyber Sapien, that stopped working because there are not proper reasons (commit suicide), as conscious :D

Are humans alive because without any specific training we see/find reasons for being alive every day? Hoping to hit the chick next door, drink the oldest wine, if possible fly one day…??

Except I don't consider the lack of enlightenment to be an error of ways. I don't think Buddhism makes this sort of absolute judgement. If you are satisfied with your life as it is, then there is no problem.


SB11.9.4 In this world two types of people are free from all anxiety and merged in great happiness: one who is a retarded and childish fool and one who has approached the Supreme Lord, who is beyond the three modes of material nature.

;)

I think no Cyber Sapien is going to have consciousness because the most difficult aspect of human life is the ‘reason’ for being alive. y…??

Why would it be impossible for a machine to have a reason to exist? They could provide reasons to us, like Douglas Adams' electric monk.

Why would it be impossible for a machine to have a reason to exist? They could provide reasons to us, like Douglas Adams' electric monk.
No reason at all

(If you are incapable of discerning the difference between science fiction and non-fiction titles)

The stuff of science fiction often becomes reality.

I see you fulfill the criteria that I mentioned in brackets
;)
(my mistake - I have edited the bit in brackets now)

I have no idea what you mean.

Reality is met under stronger guidelines than the whims of sci-fi pulp publishers

I still don't know what you mean.
My definition of machine is broad. I mean a computer as or more complex than the human brain, a neural net architecture, perhaps with software that can evolve. I propose that the idea you exist is a piece of information in your brain, and an identical experience can be had by such a machine.

VitalOne



first you have to understand what the brahma bhuta platform is

SB 4.30.20: Always engaging in the activities of devotional service, devotees feel ever-increasingly fresh and new in all their activities. The all-knower, the Supersoul within the heart of the devotee, makes everything increasingly fresh. This is known as the Brahman position by the advocates of the Absolute Truth. In such a liberated stage [brahma-bhūta], one is never bewildered. Nor does one lament or become unnecessarily jubilant. This is due to the brahma-bhūta situation.

if your desire innvolves hankering and lamentation you are not on the platform of brahman
The desire doesn't involve hankering and lamentation


BG 5.25: Those who are beyond the dualities that arise from doubts, whose minds are engaged within, who are always busy working for the welfare of all living beings, and who are free from all sins achieve liberation in the Supreme.

If your desire is sinful you cannot fulfill it and claim to be on the platform of brahman


Desires dont have to be sinful, in fact on the platform of brahm you cannot be sinful, even if you appear to be so, all the things you do are free from karma.


BG 6.27: The yogī whose mind is fixed on Me verily attains the highest perfection of transcendental happiness. He is beyond the mode of passion, he realizes his qualitative identity with the Supreme, and thus he is freed from all reactions to past deeds.

If you are undergoing the reactions of your previous deeds you are not on the brahman platform

BG 13.31: When a sensible man ceases to see different identities due to different material bodies and he sees how beings are expanded everywhere, he attains to the Brahman conception.
Yeah, but still even on the platform of Brahm, you will have wishes but they will be different from your material desires, they are without insecurity.


If you view yourself as your body (man/woman, sick/healthy, young/old) and express desires of that bodily designation as the ultimate in fulfilment you are not on the platform of brahman
True, but Krsna says:
BG 7.29: Intelligent persons who are endeavoring for liberation from old age and death take refuge in Me in devotional service. They are actually Brahman because they entirely know everything about transcendental activities.

People take refuge in Krishna because of their desires to end death and old age.


BG 8.11: Persons who are learned in the Vedas, who utter oḿkāra and who are great sages in the renounced order enter into Brahman. Desiring such perfection, one practices celibacy. I shall now briefly explain to you this process by which one may attain salvation.

Sex desire is absent on the platform of brahman
:eek:
This is true, however you can still have sex, but your own sex desire is absent. This is why Krsna still had sex.



BG 18.54: One who is thus transcendentally situated at once realizes the Supreme Brahman and becomes fully joyful. He never laments or desires to have anything. He is equally disposed toward every living entity. In that state he attains pure devotional service unto Me.

The word "kāńkṣati" more closely means incessant longing for something, restlessness. Even The BUddha had desires, Krishna had desires too, how can this be if they were already situated in Brahm.


If despite doing all this you feel miserable (ie perceive there is something lacking or that you are artificially restraining yourself from material engagement) you are not on the level of brahman
If all of your inner desires are fulfilled, you cannot feel miserable, because the fulfillment of desires have destroyed all your insecurities.


BG 14.26: One who engages in full devotional service, unfailing in all circumstances, at once transcends the modes of material nature and thus comes to the level of Brahman.

One who performs bhakti unfailingly in all circumstances is on the level of brahman
This is true, because whatever one focuses on, they move towards.


BG 18.50: O son of Kuntī, learn from Me how one who has achieved this perfection can attain to the supreme perfectional stage, Brahman, the stage of highest knowledge, by acting in the way I shall now summarize.

BG 18.51-53: Being purified by his intelligence and controlling the mind with determination, giving up the objects of sense gratification, being freed from attachment and hatred, one who lives in a secluded place, who eats little, who controls his body, mind and power of speech, who is always in trance and who is detached, free from false ego, false strength, false pride, lust, anger, and acceptance of material things, free from false proprietorship, and peaceful — such a person is certainly elevated to the position of self-realization.

The qualities of being on the platform of brahman does not at all indicate that one can do anything and everything and be situated as such
True, but when in Brahm you have the highest degree of happiness, having this, you have no more impressions, because your insecurities have been destroyed.


SB 3.15.43: When the breeze carrying the aroma of tulasī leaves from the toes of the lotus feet of the Personality of Godhead entered the nostrils of those sages, they experienced a change both in body and in mind, even though they were attached to the impersonal Brahman understanding.

Despite being on the platform of brahman the 4 kumaras were attracted to the bhagavan feature (Can you show an instance of someone attacted to the bhagavan feature of the absolute being attracted to brahman?)

SB 12.12.69: Let me offer my respectful obeisances unto my spiritual master, the son of Vyāsadeva, Śukadeva Gosvāmī. It is he who defeats all inauspicious things within this universe. Although in the beginning he was absorbed in the happiness of Brahman realization and was living in a secluded place, giving up all other types of consciousness, he became attracted by the pleasing, most melodious pastimes of Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa. He therefore mercifully spoke this supreme Purāṇa, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, which is the bright light of the Absolute Truth and which describes the activities of the Lord.

Its ironic that you quote the bhagavatm to establish that brahman is the ultimate in happiness, when it is clearly indicated that its purpose is to elaborate on an even higher value of happiness
This only talks of understanding, they had only the understanding that there was the impersonal brahm, no paramatma. This also shows that people can still have 'wishes' or 'desires' on the platform of Brahm, atlhough still enjoying their happiness.


SB 1.7.10: All different varieties of ātmārāmas [those who take pleasure in ātmā, or spirit self], especially those established on the path of self-realization, though freed from all kinds of material bondage, desire to render unalloyed devotional service unto the Personality of Godhead. This means that the Lord possesses transcendental qualities and therefore can attract everyone, including liberated souls.

clearly established (that brahman is not the ultimate in happiness, compared to bhagavan realization) in more places than one
This does not establish that, as it is stated in the BG and SB many times that Brahm is the absolute happiness.


Hari-bhakti sudhodaya (14.36)
"My dear Lord, O master of the universe, since I have directly seen You, my transcendental bliss has taken the shape of a great ocean. Thus I now regard the happiness derived from understanding impersonal Brahman to be like the water contained in a calf's hoofprint

Just in case things had to be spelt out any clearer
Which scripture is this from? Also the scripture says happiness derived from the understanding of the impersonal brahm, the understanding alone.

Here are the words of Krishna himself:
BG 14.27: And I am the basis of the impersonal Brahman, which is immortal, imperishable and eternal and is the constitutional position of ultimate happiness.


desiring enlightment therefore begins with the knowledge of relationships, namely the relationship between oneself and the absolute - if one views oneself as the absolute there is no possibility of enlightenment
Actually, Krishna teaches that there is no difference between oneself and the absolute. He teaches that all that really exists, in reality is the absolute, he himself, who has existed before material existence.

But they say there are infinite paths to the absolute, and they differ for each person.

Why would it be impossible for a machine to have a reason to exist?
Hopefully this machine will use a list (information store) of all possible reasons and when it exhaust the list of items it may even create few new but I doubt a machines capability to derive new meanings and aims (reasons) learned from results of actions in every day life.

Since machines do not have life (not yet) and the same reason why we call it a machine, hopefully we are safe.

They could provide reasons to us, like Douglas Adams' electric monk.
Will you be happy to accept a reason that it shares? Let me bring in a naughty example, will a machine ever suggest you that making sex with two girls are a mind blowing experience and once you hit that you will desire for Japanese twins? How about machines suggesting you eating toxic tobacco and hitting marijuana at 11 AM and standing in hot sun gives you a mood that you never knew ever existed? But what if you (human) friend tells you this?

Even if we feed these in to the machine’s list how will a machine ever make a decision to go for these and what will be the logic used? If we crack this then that’s the end of human life and beginning of a new world order !

BG 6.27: The yogī whose mind is fixed on Me verily attains the highest perfection of transcendental happiness. He is beyond the mode of passion, he realizes his qualitative identity with the Supreme, and thus he is freed from all reactions to past deeds.
I hope this stage is attained by only Lord Shiva as he is so focused about his chick that he has udhitha linga (erect penis) 24x7 and has no sins even if he cut the neck of his own son or kill father in law. I still want to oppose the “transcendental happiness” part because if we accept happiness at this stage we are also accepting the fact that that happiness was not there and clearly accept that there is a beginning to this happiness and if a happiness has beginning then it has an end and the moment that get’s over (since there is only Lord Shiva has no end and no beginning) what is left is SADNESS !! Eeeeee….not good !

As I see this, there is only one way to beat her and that is to become her son. Get inside her and be there and that’s absolutely stable.:m:

I hope this stage is attained by only Lord Shiva as he is so focused about his chick that he has udhitha linga (erect penis) 24x7 and has no sins even if he cut the neck of his own son or kill father in law. I still want to oppose the “transcendental happiness” part because if we accept happiness at this stage we are also accepting the fact that that happiness was not there and clearly accept that there is a beginning to this happiness and if a happiness has beginning then it has an end and the moment that get’s over (since there is only Lord Shiva has no end and no beginning) what is left is SADNESS !! Eeeeee….not good !

As I see this, there is only one way to beat her and that is to become her son. Get inside her and be there and that’s absolutely stable.:m:

http://s125.photobucket.com/albums/p42/lightgigantic/th_DSC01786.jpg

VitalOne



Actually, Krishna teaches that there is no difference between oneself and the absolute. He teaches that all that really exists, in reality is the absolute, he himself, who has existed before material existence.
Just to cut to the chase .....

if you accept


that maya (shadow) exists
that the absolute truth (actual object) exists
that the living entity can enter into either maya or the absolute truth
and on top of all this that the living entity is absolute


how do you propose that the living entity (as the absolute in the universe) could come under the influence of maya (shadow) - for instance do you have the experience of standing in your own shadow, or are you required to stand undderneath some object larger than yourself to stand in shadow?

In otherwords the very fact that the living entity sometimes enters into maya (illusion) indicates that they are not absolute (the absolute coming under the influence of illusion is just as absurd as a person who claims they can stand under their own shadow)

http://s125.photobucket.com/albums/p42/lightgigantic/th_DSC01786.jpg

True. I haven't cracked this, yet :)

But is enlightenment?

VitalOne



Just to cut to the chase .....

if you accept


that maya (shadow) exists
that the absolute truth (actual object) exists
that the living entity can enter into either maya or the absolute truth
and on top of all this that the living entity is absolute


how do you propose that the living entity (as the absolute in the universe) could come under the influence of maya (shadow) - for instance do you have the experience of standing in your own shadow, or are you required to stand undderneath some object larger than yourself to stand in shadow?

In otherwords the very fact that the living entity sometimes enters into maya (illusion) indicates that they are not absolute (the absolute coming under the influence of illusion is just as absurd as a person who claims they can stand under their own shadow)

According to Krishna it only appears as if it is separate from the absolute. That false appearance is maya. In a way yeah you are different, but in another way, you aren't different. Its all a matter of how you look at it.

In other words what you are trying to say is that a dream is real and exists, what I'm trying to say is that the dream has no real existence, its just appears to exist, but in reality there is no dream nor any of the events occuring in the dream.

According to Krishna it only appears as if it is separate from the absolute. That false appearance is maya. In a way yeah you are different, but in another way, you aren't different. Its all a matter of how you look at it.

In other words what you are trying to say is that a dream is real and exists, what I'm trying to say is that the dream has no real existence, its just appears to exist, but in reality there is no dream nor any of the events occuring in the dream.
So is a person who sets out to blow themselves up in a bus full of people because they are angry at another countries politicians, are they in maya or not?

So is a person who sets out to blow themselves up in a bus full of people because they are angry at another countries politicians, are they in maya or not?

maya definitely...just like having a nightmare while sleeping

SB 11.11.2: Just as a dream is merely a creation of one's intelligence but has no actual substance, similarly, material lamentation, illusion, happiness, distress and the acceptance of the material body under the influence of mayā are all creations of My illusory energy. In other words, material existence has no essential reality.

SB 11.13.34: One should see that the material world is a distinct illusion appearing in the mind, because material objects have an extremely flickering existence and are here today and gone tomorrow. They can be compared to the streaking red line created by whirling a fiery stick. The spirit soul by nature exists in the single state of pure consciousness. However, in this world he appears in many different forms and stages of existence. The modes of nature divide the soul's consciousness into normal wakefulness, dreaming and dreamless sleep. All such varieties of perception, however, are actually māyā and exist only like a dream.

maya definitely...just like having a nightmare while sleeping

SB 11.11.2: Just as a dream is merely a creation of one's intelligence but has no actual substance, similarly, material lamentation, illusion, happiness, distress and the acceptance of the material body under the influence of mayā are all creations of My illusory energy. In other words, material existence has no essential reality.

SB 11.13.34: One should see that the material world is a distinct illusion appearing in the mind, because material objects have an extremely flickering existence and are here today and gone tomorrow. They can be compared to the streaking red line created by whirling a fiery stick. The spirit soul by nature exists in the single state of pure consciousness. However, in this world he appears in many different forms and stages of existence. The modes of nature divide the soul's consciousness into normal wakefulness, dreaming and dreamless sleep. All such varieties of perception, however, are actually māyā and exist only like a dream.


Ok so if you advocate that a living entity can be immersed in shadow (maya) what is maya the shadow of?

Information.

Enlightenment is perceiving the 'Absolute Reality' as it is.

It's dealing with the reality on an impersonal level.

It requires Empathy and compassion to begin with.

Enlightenment is perceiving the 'Absolute Reality' as it is.

It's dealing with the reality on an impersonal level.

It requires Empathy and compassion to begin with.

why are we required to deal with reality impersonally?

why are we required to deal with reality impersonally?


Because the individual ego is the barrier to enlightenment.

Eastern philosophy states in essense that the ego has to dissolve and the only way to do it is to lose the individual identity.

Hi all,

I heard that consciousness stores up everything that happens to you, and what is stored up from the past lives form your 'motae' (origin) when you are born. All your past lives exist in your origin from your birth but you have just forgotten them.

About karma, this is a good question in my opinion. Karma means that what happened to you stays inside you, and it comes out through ones activities even when we don't want it to. Things that exist in oneself are the cause for oneself to exist. Only when the activities of karma are stopped completely, you can attain enlightenment.

related article: Enlightenment of Tathagata - http ://www . tathagata.co.uk

Paul

If one were to devote themselves to a long period of intense meditation, is it possible it would result in a physical rearranging of the brain, and this rearrangement would account for enlightenment?

If you define "enlightenment" as the state where you have the full understanding of the reality i.e. knowledge of the Universe and your place in it, the absolute knowledge - then it is impossible in your or anyones life time.

However, you can create a state where it is just good enough for you - then that is possible. You are just rewriting the program in your brain through meditation. There is really no mechanism to suck in the universal knowledge - besides, it won't fit in your brain.

That sucks...I know...:D

why are we required to deal with reality impersonally?

Go lightg, go.