--- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Granted the world's great religions like Christianity, Buddhism, > Judaism, Hinduism, Taoism and Islam all preach being 'good' and > doing 'good'. Because most if not all of the spiritual teachers > in the world have had exposure to religion, they too profess > being 'good' as a condition for enlightenment. > > But why is this then taken as a truth? In some religions, like > Christianity and Buddhism, being 'good' and doing 'good' are > seen as major cornerstones to achieving salvation. There are > asome on this forum who have said it is more enlightened if > someone does 'good', than if they meditate, so this idea is > widespread. > > What is the reason for this? Is it because we just thoughtlessly > associate being 'good' with being enlightened? Or is there a > direct, provable and causal link between being 'good' and > attaining enlightenment? > > I don't think there is any connection between the two, at all.
Jim, I've been staying out of this because 1) I really don't have that much interest in theoretical discussions about enlightenment, and 2) I don't have much to contribute to the question you pose. About the only thing I think I DO have to contribute is a reminder of one of Maharishi's teachings that I still believe is accurate -- knowledge is different in different states of consciousness. I would extend that to "...in different states of *attention*," which includes any and all of the "10,000 states of mind" within, say, the waking state. So when a teacher teaches something, it's always in a *context*. He or she is teaching at a particular moment in time ( even though time doesn't exist :-) and in a particular context and to a particular group of seekers ( none of whom exist, either :-). And so at any given moment in time, and in any given context, and for any given group of students, the teacher may be *emphasizing* a particular teaching, AS SEEN FROM A PARTICULAR STATE OF ATTENTION. Thus, in one moment, and context, and with a certain group of students who can benefit from that teaching, the teacher may *emphasize* the value of "doing good works" or of acting "rightly." The next day the same teacher could teach the EXACT OPPOSITE, and be correct in doing so, because it's a different moment, a different context, and a different group of students. And even if the group of students is the same, hopefully their state of attention is not the same as it was yesterday. If it is, they didn't learn much, did they? :-) For me the bottom line is that I don't know what "causes" or even facillitates enlightenment, and doubt that I ever will. I DO tend to believe, based on my own exper- ience and the experience of many others, that performing actions that one can feel are somehow "wrong* is just a GREAT way to lower one's state of attention, and quickly. But whether that lowering of their state of attention has any effect on when or whether they'll realize their enlightenment, I don't know. I now leave you to get back to the other threads in this discussion. Carry on...
