Enlightenment

[Dado]

Hello

I decided to open this thread because i didn't find one thats strictly about enlightenment.

I had spiritual awakening before few years and since then on I have been reading, reasearching and practising everyday with aim to become liberated one day.

This thread could serve everyone who is genuinely interested in enlightenment by sharing their stories, ideas about what liberation is and a way how to achieve it.

For me, theravada buddhism and advaita vedanata(hinduism) are the most closest ones when it comes to enlightenment, epescially buddhism.

 

[Pin]

I've read a lot about the concept but I don't know if it's possible to eliminate all desire.

Spoiler

Also, isn't desire what affirms life, pushes us to act, to achieve? Why would you want to remove your ego rather than embrace it?

 

[Dado]

Even after enlightenment, person would still have desires(to eat, walk, sleep, etc) but he would not have cravings which are compulsive desires that lead to stress(negative emotions) and suffering.

Yes, desires push us to act, to achieve. Without desire, enlightenment can not be achieved. Walking the path is not denial of life, but rather seeing the futility in temporary pleasures that we want to experience.

Also, path is not about removal of ego, but recognition that Ego is just an illusion...

 

[Pin]

Even after enlightenment, person would still have desires(to eat, walk, sleep, etc) but he would not have cravings which are compulsive desires that lead to stress(negative emotions) and suffering.

Yes, desires push us to act, to achieve. Without desire, enlightenment can not be achieved. Walking the path is not denial of life, but rather seeing the futility in temporary pleasures that we want to experience.

Also, path is not about removal of ego, but recognition that Ego is just an illusion...

If you don't mind, I'd like to hear your thoughts on these quotes by Nietzsche as well as this 4 minute film.



"To those human beings who are of any concern to me I wish suffering, desolation, sickness, ill-treatment, indignities - I wish that they should not remain unfamiliar with profound self-contempt, the torture of self-mistrust, the wretchedness of the vanquished: I have no pity for them, because I wish them the only thing that can prove today whether one is worth anything or not - that one endures."
(The Will to Power, p 481)

"You want, if possible - and there is no more insane "if possible" - to abolish suffering. And we? It really seems that we would rather have it higher and worse than ever. Well-being as you understand it - that is no goal, that seems to us an end, a state that soon makes man ridiculous and contemptible - that makes his destruction desirable. The discipline of suffering, of great suffering - do you not know that only this discipline has created all enhancements of man so far?"
(Beyond Good and Evil, p 225 )

"I do not point to the evil and pain of existence with the finger of reproach, but rather entertain the hope that life may one day become more evil and more full of suffering than it has ever been."

 

[Wyote]

I am also a libtard

 

[Dado]

Everything sentient in universe seeks happines and wants to avoid pain, thats instinctual to every being. Because human possess intellect, he is capable to make sense of his suffering and use that suffering to achieve higher states of consciousness. A lot of sages on east see human life something as very special because human can experience very high peeks of bliss but also low sides of suffering. That enables person to recognise his true nature which is pure love, but we cant feel it because our hearts are covered with negative emotions. Everyone who did drugs, can experience this because what they do, they suppress negative emotions in subconscious mind and our true nature is revealed which is peace and love.

Problem arises in case with Nietzsche because he reprogrammed his mind to enjoy pain. He developed attachment towards pain and suffering. That happened because he wasnt able to totally confront and resolve deeper existentials fears, so through intellectualisation, theories he learned how to cope with it. Enlightenment is opposite, aim is to resolve every attachment and aversion, to stop clining onto everything and see reality as it is.

Thats one of the reasons why i dont read stuff written by wester philosophers. Its filled with confusion and with not that much practical use.

Enlightened person would experience physical pain but not psychological one.

 

[Pin]

I am also a libtard

Spoiler

I think there's something to be said for certain buddhist concepts having a liberal appeal.

 

[Pin]

Everything sentient in universe seeks happines and wants to avoid pain, thats instinctual to every being. Because human possess intellect, he is capable to make sense of his suffering and use that suffering to achieve higher states of consciousness. A lot of sages on east see human life something as very special because human can experience very high peeks of bliss but also low sides of suffering. That enables person to recognise his true nature which is pure love, but we cant feel it because our hearts are covered with negative emotions. Everyone who did drugs, can experience this because what they do, they suppress negative emotions in subconscious mind and our true nature is revealed which is peace and love.

Problem arises in case with Nietzsche because he reprogrammed his mind to enjoy pain. He developed attachment towards pain and suffering. That happened because he wasnt able to totally confront and resolve deeper existentials fears, so through intellectualisation, theories he learned how to cope with it. Enlightenment is opposite, aim is to resolve every attachment and aversion, to stop clining onto everything and see reality as it is.

Thats one of the reasons why i dont read stuff written by wester philosophers. Its filled with confusion and with not that much practical use.

Enlightened person would experience physical pain but not psychological one.

You know what, I think you're correct. Let me tell you why.

Western philosophers have this tendency to write these long-ass tomes and not get to the point. Like, fuck. On the other hand...

• The Book of Five Rings- Short
• The Art of War- Short
• The Tao Te Ching- Short
• The Bhagavad Gita- Short

It's like... I'm a working class guy, give me a break. As a reader, concise treatises like the Federalist Papers (unrelated, I know) are a relief.

 

[Dado]

You know what, I think you're correct. Let me tell you why.

Western philosophers have this tendency to write these long-ass tomes and not get to the point. Like, fuck. On the other hand...

• The Book of Five Rings- Short
• The Art of War- Short
• The Tao Te Ching- Short
• The Bhagavad Gita- Short

It's like... I'm a working class guy, give me a break. As a reader, concise treatises like Federalist Papers (unrelated, I know) are a relief.

Exactly!

 

[Pin]

Exactly!

The first philosophies of which I got a solid understanding were Chinese. I'll tell you, I learned a lot of brilliant stuff.

Spoiler

Go on, ask me about the Warring States period, even the Spring and Autumn period. Come on!

 

[Dado]

In my marxist days, after some time i started to read about east when i got fed up with western philosophies, i started with china, read about Confucius but then later as I stopped being politically involved, switched to Taoism which is just beautiful, very natural.

I don't know much about Warring States period, but i would be glad to hear about it from you

 

[Ren]

Western philosophers have this tendency to write these long-ass tomes and not get to the point.

I can give you a good list of Western philosophers who get to the point

 

[Pin]

I can give you a good list of Western philosophers who get to the point

I dare you, list their short works too.

 

[Dado]

I can give you a good list of Western philosophers who get to the point

Feel free to share

 

[Ren]

I dare you, list their short works too.

Feel free to share

Sure thing! Here's a snippet of works of Western philosophy that are straight to the point:

Spinoza, Ethics
Descartes, all works — I recommend in particular the Meditations and the Discourse on Method)
Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling
Nietzsche, Ecce Homo, Beyond Good and Evil, Genealogy of Morals
Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations
Deleuze's works on Kant, Spinoza, and Nietzsche (less so his own 'original' works)
Foucault, Discipline and Punish
Schopenhauer, all works (though World as Will and Representation is very long)
Russell, 'Mysticism and Logic and Other Essays'
Rorty, Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature

 

[Dado]

Sure thing! Here's a snippet of works of Western philosophy that are straight to the point:

Spinoza, Ethics
Descartes, all works — I recommend in particular the Meditations and the Discourse on Method)
Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling
Nietzsche, Ecce Homo, Beyond Good and Evil, Genealogy of Morals
Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations
Deleuze's works on Kant, Spinoza, and Nietzsche (less so his own 'original' works)
Foucault, Discipline and Punish
Schopenhauer, all works (though World as Will and Representation is very long)
Russell, 'Mysticism and Logic and Other Essays'
Rorty, Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature

I like Spinoza, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche and Schopenhauer and their contribution to western philosophy. They also played huge factor in my life and awakening but non of them still got really to the "point", they didn't realize Ultimate. Their minds were still bound to this Relative reality when they died. They were still dependent on ideas and concepts, they didn't reach "zero" like Buddha and other Arahants did, in experiential sense, not intellectual. Just because of that for me westerners don't matter that much, maybe they do for the mundane aspects of life but supermundane? nope

 

[Ren]

I like Spinoza, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche and Schopenhauer and their contribution to western philosophy. They also played huge factor in my life and awakening but non of them still got really to the "point", they didn't realize Ultimate. Their minds were still bound to this Relative reality when they died. They were still dependent on ideas and concepts, they didn't reach "zero" like Buddha and other Arahants did, in experiential sense, not intellectual. Just because of that for me westerners don't matter that much, maybe they do for the mundane aspects of life but supermundane? nope

I don't believe in the supermundane, but I respect your perspective Also, this thread is encouraging me to read more about the Eastern philosophies, which I've meant to do for a long time.

 

[Dado]

I don't believe in the supermundane, but I respect your perspective Also, this thread is encouraging me to read more about the Eastern philosophies, which I've meant to do for a long time.

That's what got interested me in enlightenment when I started reading about eastern philosophies, possibility to realize supermundane, "that" which is beyond existence it self, beyond experience and yet, human can realize it, because we are it, but we are not aware of it so we think that we are this body/mind, we suffer and feel limited but deep down we are limitless.

I am glad that you are open to think about this. It changes life when you grasp some of eastern concepts and combine that with meditation practice. My thinking mind is almost 80% quiet throughout day, actions become spontaneous, sense of doership is seen as illusion and it feels like everything is happening on its own. Social anxiety, fears and anger dropped at very low levels, no more depression, body always feel light like feather.

 

[John K]

If you don't mind, I'd like to hear your thoughts on these quotes by Nietzsche as well as this 4 minute film.



"To those human beings who are of any concern to me I wish suffering, desolation, sickness, ill-treatment, indignities - I wish that they should not remain unfamiliar with profound self-contempt, the torture of self-mistrust, the wretchedness of the vanquished: I have no pity for them, because I wish them the only thing that can prove today whether one is worth anything or not - that one endures."
(The Will to Power, p 481)

"You want, if possible - and there is no more insane "if possible" - to abolish suffering. And we? It really seems that we would rather have it higher and worse than ever. Well-being as you understand it - that is no goal, that seems to us an end, a state that soon makes man ridiculous and contemptible - that makes his destruction desirable. The discipline of suffering, of great suffering - do you not know that only this discipline has created all enhancements of man so far?"
(Beyond Good and Evil, p 225 )

"I do not point to the evil and pain of existence with the finger of reproach, but rather entertain the hope that life may one day become more evil and more full of suffering than it has ever been."

I'm no great expert in Nietzsche, but it's clear to me that his subtlety can so easily be misunderstood, particularly as he goes out of his way to express his ideas in a sensationalist way that seems designed to provoke dissent lol.

I fundamentally disagree with the conflation of pain and suffering. Pain is a feature of life in our material world, but suffering is not a necessary consequence of it. For most of us, suffering will follow closely on the experience of pain, but any of us who follow @Skarekrow's Merkabah thread will know how far he has travelled in order to try and separate suffering from the pain he experiences. I think that Nietzsche is probably quite right - we cannot develop ourselves without pain. The monk who submits to Zen training will probably experience a whole host of physical discomfort and mental pain on the road to enlightenment because that is the price that is paid in order to set our ego aside for this to happen. Similarly, an athelete competing in a marathon race cannot even take part, let alone win, without the pain of training - and study at school or uni is also accompanied by the pain of personal development. Suffering is illusive because it's a poor-me reflection and it isn't mandatory lol. But knowing this and doing something about it is something else again.

 

[Dado]

I like this quote : "Suffering is the sandpaper of our incarnation. It does its work of shaping us."

Nietzsche was one of my first favorite philosophers from whom I learned how to accept pain and use suffering to progress. To not avoid it and see it as a part of life. But problem with Nietzsche is that he made identity out of his suffering, he made it personal, which reveals it self in his prideful talks about how suffering is good thing and wanting to provoke another people with his ideas, that was his agenda. That also shows that he wasn't able to fully surrender him self to abyss, but rather he choose to hold onto his ideas because it made him feel alive in a some sense. That was his major obstacle to confront inner emptiness and transcend the Ego, identity or sense of self...