--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
> "tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis"
> <tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlist@> wrote:
> >
> > Truth Comes at a Cost
> > by Adyashanti
> > If I was to translate the enlightened state down into
> > human terms, I'd have to describe it as contentment.
> > Being nobody, going nowhere, needing no reason to exist.
>
> Excellent. Just this morning I was reading FFL,
> gazing at all the understandable (they've been
> told for decades how important they are, after
> all) but lamentable self-importance there ("Only
> we can save the world by bouncing on our bums")
> and remembering one of my favorite quotes by
> a spiritual teacher:
>
> I am not important.
> Today I am here and tomorrow I will be gone.
> This is my freedom.
> I am not important.
>
> > To the ego, that probably sounds a little boring and of
> > course to an ego it is. But then again, there's really
> > nothing for the ego in enlightenment. In enlightenment,
> > the egoic false self is rendered an irrelevant illusion,
> > a mask, a character that nothingness wears while pretending
> > to be human.
> >
> > Not only is there nothing in enlightenment for the ego,
> > the ego is really nothing but a defense against enlightenment.
> > I'm not saying that ego is bad or evil because it's not. I'm
> > saying that ego is a social and personal construct and
> > therefore an illusion. But there's nothing wrong with an
> > illusion. A painting is an illusion; a movie is an illusion;
> > a good novel is an illusion. The problem isn't with illusion;
> > the problem is with the emotional attachments and addictions
> > of ego.
>
> I like this guy. He's got a clue. I have very little
> tolerance these days for those who go on and on about
> how only the "highest" state of consciousness or the
> "highest" reality is real. They're all equally real,
> and equally illusory, even the supposed "highest."
> Those who can't be happy in the "low," ego-bound states
> of consciousness are fooling themselves if they think
> they're going to be any happier in the "high," non-
> ego-bound states of consciousness. Their lack of
> happiness is something they bring to their current
> state of consciousness, not an attribute *of* that
> state of consciousness.
>
> As before, so after. Before enlightenment, sport wood
> and carry condoms. After enlightenment, sport wood
> and carry condoms. If you're bitching about life before
> your realization, you're probably going to bitch about
> life after your realization, too.
>
So much for "If I was to translate the enlightened state down into human
terms, I'd have
to describe it as contentment..."
