--- In [email protected], "Alex Stanley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "sandiego108" <sandiego108@> > wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "yifuxero" <yifuxero@> > > wrote: > > > > > > ---(below - in my view). No. By all means, attain the Self, the > > non- > > > dual "state" described by the Neo-Advaitins; but don't regard that > > as > > > the ultimate goal, or even being close to Enlightenment, unless > > one has > > > made the progression through the Kundalini signs. The Neo- > > Advaitins > > > haven't done this. > > <snip> > > Experientially, in other words, in terms of inner freedom > > experienced in real life, (in other words, outside your head) there > > is little difference between living a non-dual state and > > accomplishing the signs that you speak of. Once the mind is free of > > encumbrances, there is little that the freedom of the body can add > > to the experience. > > > > This insistence of yours on attaining signs is just a way to keep > > the dissolution of your identity at bay. In other words, you remain > > bound to subtle elements of your ego, by insisting to yourself that > > true enlightenment has nothing to do with living a non-dual reality. > > I can see how the desire to attain signs, i.e., the desire to be a > special person with a special mind/body, could keep awakening at bay. > But, haven't there been great awakened masters who did attain such > signs and teach that they are essential to awakening? If so, were they > wrong?
Beats me-- I am just making the point that of course there is always further to go, but once the state of inner freedom is reached, there is a choice about further direction; the goal for all practical purposes has been reached, and the momentum carries on smoothly and inexorably from then on. Who knows what the circumstances were for the Masters teaching about attaining Sidhis as the complete package of enlightenment? I'll say that I suspect it wasn't part of a householder tradition-- who has the time, or really the inclination, given the sped up timeframe of today's worldly life? Personally I had a lot of special experiences; remote viewing of my master, opening of the crown chakra, blah blah blah, before I ever attained enlightenment, so who knows what the special significance of such experiences are? As for this discussion about neo advaitins, it sounds like something Vaj mentioned in a prior post, denigrating TM (what a surprise), that folks with no real realization do, as a mental exercise. Its essentially mood-making, and gives authentic realization a bad name. > > Personally, in all my seeking, I was never a seeker of enlightenment. > I was only ever a seeker of a fix for the broken I/me story. <snip> I think most if not all seekers feel that way-- Enlightenment is too nebulous a concept seen from the outside, with tenuous benefits. Rather it is the things each of us is trying to fix or satisfy within ourselves that drives us to seek that goal, whatever we call it.
