• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Does enlightenment have a dark side

I think that when if you reach full enlightenment you will see things that you used to block out
Click to expand...

I disagree...
when you reach "full" enlightenment there is no "you" to see anything.... you cannot acknowledge anything.... you just "are"...and you exist in the "is"

on the path to enlightenment ... yes you will see things you used to block out.... but i think pure enlightenment is seeing and being everything and nothing all at once...
 
I don't think enlightenment is necesserily a good thing, so it's hard to compare it to bad. Enlightenment is.

Its an understanding or knowing of everything, understanding principles and such. With all good comes bad, in my opinion enlightment is being able to recognise all things, both good and bad.

Its not that its good or bad, its kinda on the fence spinning in a circle really fast or something... or... ahhh... mmm
 
when seeing , hearing , feeling, knowing ect. everything in the oneness of things, one must be quite observant of the deviance of humanity , in that we are further from our true nature and into our own "natural" recreation of our paths. We are also more egocintric and further from the path of the dharma then ever before- IMO. so these are not exactly atributes one can overlook as the glass apears half empty, but it is half full as well.

considering the lack of fear tactics, high ranking seniority on the planet and an unproselatizing means of universal spreading by intution and confirmation, things look optamistic. Enlightenment, is of the now and it does not laydown the finate threat of a certian either or scinerio for tomorrow, it has little expectations and complete humility, leading to a much greater feeling of inner peace what ever the future brings.
 
We are pretty much unenlightened beings living in an unelightened world so its not surprising to have unenlightened theories. Of coarse it sounds better to label things as being enlightened but it isnt necessarily so.

But I think enlightment is more then oneness or insight, it is complete and utter freedom of all limitations so you reach your full potential mentally, psychologically, emotionally etc. Anything less then that is not enlightment, and I do not think you can do it while on drugs or whatever. Sure, drugs can give you an insight and help you grow, but they can also pull you deeper into the shit. I mean, everyone has mental structures that you may call a belief system, and just because you have reached a new insight or released an emotional block, doesnt mean you have put a dent in those structures or even realised that you can exist without them and in fact even though they prop up your ego and give you comfort they also at the same time limit you to their boundries. Anyway, there is not dark side to enlightment, at least not for the enlightened being. Though I am guesssing there is a huge different between contemplating enlightment -something which you do while in an unenlightened state so naturally flawed by that state- and being enlightened.
 
Enlightenment, I would think, would be the act of experiencing above, between, and beyond concepts such as light and dark -- the blank slate behind existence. Reactions to X would depend totally on the perciever, and once one reacts to X and falls into the delusion that her or his reaction to X is the nature of X, s/he is obviously not enlightened.

That's my take.
 
If you're enlightened, do you have self awareness? How can you, if you're supposedly egoless.

If so, then isn't the state of enlightenment the same as death?
 
http://www.mimbres.com/holp/holpath/kramer/oneness.htm

"In the East via karma/rebirth, the path progresses through levels of spirituality, taking many lifetimes until arriving at the enlightened state - also referred to as nirvana, moksha, cosmic consciousness, etc. This conception is linear and hierarchical, as are the religions that produced it. Some schools (Tibetan Buddhism) have even constructed hierarchical levels of enlightenment, so that one enlightened being is held to be more so than another. Among spiritual seekers the burning issue is how far along the path one is."


http://www.inthelight.co.nz/spirit/pg-enlight.htm
Difference between Self-Realisation and Enlightment - from Imre Vallyon's book "The Magical Mind" pages 361 - 365. According to Imre "Enlightment means that the separated, individual mind fuses with the Mind of God. The Mind of god is the Infinite Field of Light, so when your mind becomes One with It, then you are technically Enlightened. Similarly, when your ego disappears into the Greater Self, you are then Self-Realised. Self Realisation means that your ego is simply a channel for the Self. When your ego identifies with the Self, then you are Self-Realised. When your mind identifies with the Light, then you are Enlightened."

pic-selfr.jpg



Imre also has a diagram showing different levels of awakening (beyond Nirvana consciousness there is Paranirvana, then Mahaparanirvana, and then Adi). As a side note, he indicates that a teacher is only required to get the student to the level of self-realisation - beyond that the student has established sufficient connection with the Divine to allow the process to continue.

pic-ego.jpg



Awakening - this is a general term describing expansion in consciousness. Most teachers agree that it proceeds in stages or levels. A change can occur abruptly, so that one may feel that they have suddenly become "enlightened" - however, as Mariana Caplan points out in her book (cited above), there are many such experiences, each one bringer a greater level of awareness. The first level of awakening that a student experiences is not necessarily "self-realisation".

Nirvana - literally means blowing out (as of a flame). The annihilation of desire, passion and the ego. A higher state of consciousness characterised by a state of freedom and bliss. Buddhists often talk about Nirvana as the goal. Nirvana is typically considered a higher state than Self-realisation.
 
Last edited:
very, good!

one might see things as dark when they have not embraced it and accepted it, death, solatude, fear, and the means to achieve the annihilation of desire, passion and ego. This higher state in which you speak of is too intimidating to a great many minds thus it is construde as dark. But buddhism teaches you to take that fear and not channel surf arround it but to dive right in it and annihilate it through medditation and accpetance.
 
Once you reach Absolute State of Consciousness, do you return to the lower levels?
 
sexyanon said:
Once you reach Absolute State of Consciousness, do you return to the lower levels?
Click to expand...
http://www.srichinmoy.org/html/resources/library/questions_answers/nirvana_qa.htm
What is nirvana?

When one's cosmic play is done, one enters into nirvana. If one is a tired soul and wants to go permanently beyond the conflict, beyond the capacities of the cosmic forces, then nirvana is to be welcomed. Nirvana is the cessation of all earthly activities, the extinction of desires, suffering, bondage, limitation and death. In this state one goes beyond the conception of time and space. This world, earth, is the playground for the dance of the cosmic forces. But when one enters into nirvana, the cosmic forces yield to the ultimate highest Truth, and the Knower, the Known and the Knowledge or Wisdom are blended into one. At that time one becomes both the Knower and the Known.

If one does not have the experience of nirvana, he usually cannot know what illusion is. According to some spiritual teachers, the world is maya, an illusion. When one enters into nirvana, he realizes what illusion is. Nirvana is the static oneness with God. There, everything comes to an end in the static bliss. This bliss is unimaginable, unfathomable, indescribable. Beyond nirvana is the state of absolute oneness. This oneness is the dynamic oneness with God.

Nirvana is a very, very, very high state. However, it is not the highest state for the divine worker. If one wants to serve God here on earth, then he has to come back into the world again and again to serve the Supreme in humanity. If one wants to manifest the Supreme in the field of creation, then he has to work in the absolute dynamism of the Supreme, and not take rest in nirvana. This does not mean that the divine worker cannot have the experience of nirvana. The experience of nirvana is at the command of all God-realized souls. But permanent nirvana is for those who want to be satisfied with the static aspect of the supreme Brahman. If one wants to embody both the static and dynamic aspects of the Supreme, then I wish to say that one should go beyond nirvana and enter into the field of manifestation.
 
Is this God like the Christian God? With creationism and all of that stuff?

Also, what is the Absolute State of Consciousness? God himself?
 
sexyanon said:
Is this God like the Christian God? With creationism and all of that stuff?
Click to expand...
Well what I posted above seems to be the Hindu interpratation(Although I may be incorrect) which likes to explain things in terms of god(s). The Buddhist is somewhat different in that there really is no mention of a god. My understanding is Hinduism does not conflict with the old testament. Buddhism can also go along very well. Ofcourse this really depends on how literatelly you interpret either text.

Also, what is the Absolute State of Consciousness? God himself?
Click to expand...
It is believed that everything is ultimately made from nothing and nothing is everything. Nirvana is experiencing/becoming one with this nothingness/void. "The Absolute State" seems to be in the realm of everything instead of the equally opposite nothing. In this state the universal dynamic properties of all existance are evident. Such properties are applicable to "normal" existance whatever that may be and can be used in creative processes.

Certainly if God exists he/she/it is aware of these dynamic properties, and obviously he/she/it has incorporated these properties into our realm of existance(and probably all).

Ofcourse I am no Master. I really recommend doing some reading of scriptures and interpratations by Masters if you want a better understanding.
 
Last edited:
"It is believed that everything is ultimately made from nothing and nothing is everything. Nirvana is experiencing/becoming one with this nothingness/void. "The Absolute State" seems to be in the realm of everything instead of the equally opposite nothing. In this state the universal dynamic properties of all existance are evident. Such properties are applicable to "normal" existance whatever that may be and can be used in creative processes."

Makes sense to me. :)

How do yogis know of the Absolute Consciousness? One can't possibly return to human form, can they?

"Nirvana - literally means blowing out (as of a flame). The annihilation of desire..."

Doesn't one desire to reach nirvana? It seems hypocritical to me. You remove desire because you desire to reach the next step.

Damn interesting, though.
 
sexyanon said:

How do yogis know of the Absolute Consciousness? One can't possibly return to human form, can they?
Click to expand...
It is hard to say as Yoga is a truly ancient practice that is thousands of years old and whose origins are not certain. Perhaps one of the properties of the dynamic system is it shows itself to some in one way or another. Nature is the true teacher.

"Nirvana - literally means blowing out (as of a flame). The annihilation of desire..."

Doesn't one desire to reach nirvana? It seems hypocritical to me. You remove desire because you desire to reach the next step.
Click to expand...
One may desire Nirvana, but it will never directly be reached that way. There are deeper drives other than desire.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top