Enlightenment, from what I've heard (and I've heard a lot of different stories), is basically as the sanskrit word nirvana means: an extinguished light. (something like that anyway). The light being the ego, which is the central psychological concern of our lives, or perhaps, the only psychological concern. So that ends. As Krishnaji said: 'one must truly die to know what love is'. So the ego presumably disappears. A new centre is born, if you can call it that: a centre-less centre. Past and future disappear. All that remains is the brilliant present. The whole notion of survival goes out the window. Yes, you carry on with your daily routine as one Zen master once told me 'eating, drinking and crapping'. But it's like sitting in a cinema watching a film, there's no longer any sense of self invested in anything because oddly, the self has actually disappeared.
Teaching is a different phenomenon. Teaching is an activity motivated by anticipation. If not purely materialistic (which some, sadly are), people become teachers to make a difference, to impart knowledge to others, to influence them, to help them develop. All of these are self-fulfilling time-bound activities. Now if the enlightened person has no self, and time no longer is a reality...then why would he or she even consider teaching? The most common justification is compassion. Supposedly they are now filled with compassion and simply must help others. However, isn't compassion actually just a deep acceptance of the world as it is. If so, how could there be any kind of dissatisfaction, any kind of desire to change it? Francis Lucille says 'I teach in the same way the birds sing...for no reason. I teach just to teach' (or something like that). OK. This sounds more plausible. Teaching becomes like a game. Francis is just doing it 'for a laugh', as someone else would perhaps play darts or play a guitar. No competition, no pressure, no pressing objectives or goals. Just a bit of light relief.
Why is it then that there are SOOOOO many 'enlightened' teachers? It seems that anyone who becomes 'enlightened' suddenly because a teacher. Why not become an 'enlightened' musician? Or an 'enlightened' miner? Or an 'enlightened' water-carrier (as the old Zen expression goes).
The fact that EVERYONE seems to become a teacher to me implies a survival of ego. The ego is reproducing itself in the role of 'guru'. For the truly enlightened, there are no gurus. The world is perfect as it is. There are no lost souls to be shepherded. The nondual, akarmic reality is perfect, unchangeable - because that is reality.
No?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSorry, bad spelling mistake in first comment. How about an "enlightened" mum? Teachers aren't enlightened. They'd be the first to tell you this. They'll tell you over and over until you're sick of hearing it! I guess there's room for it all - because it exists. The nondual, akarmic reality is perfect, including any judgements that may arise about gurus.
ReplyDeleteThat's not true though. Semantics aside, the simple fact is that they have purportedly had 'an experience' and that's why they now sit on podiums preaching. I can understand a few people doing it but it just seems that most people who have these experiences end up doing it. Which makes me think that what has happened isn't that their ego has died, simply that their ego has changed, absorbed some new information and now has a new world view. You're clearly a 'teacher' judging by the number of posts on your blog, your videos online. Soon you'll be holding satsangs for 15 dollars. :P
ReplyDeleteI'm definitely not a teacher, there's nothing to teach. Ego still arises, mostly in the form of survival mechanisms - good thing too. The last thing in the world I want to do is hold satsangs! To what purpose? The money I get sponging off my husband and writing fiction is enough. And is ego dying the goal? That may seem to happen, or not. There is no goal. There is no one to have a goal. You seem to have a very specific idea of what enlightenment acts like. What is that? Enlightenment is this. It acts like this. Whatever that seems to be.
ReplyDeleteEnlightenment, surely, is coming to an understanding of the true nature of the self. Can that be acquired by mere semantics alone like 'there is no goal'? I really don't know.
ReplyDeleteWho, exactly, is it that "acquires"? Who understands?
ReplyDeletePerhaps there's truth in the old sayings in Buddhism that there can only be one buddha at a time, usually in time of 'great need,' whatever that means. I'm sure you've heard something like that. Then, it would make sense, because everyone who writes about this stuff, yourself, I, and others, almost speak or write from perspective that is indirectly influenced from this truth. We're like ricochets or pale reflections of it. Because, of course, if we had direct access to it, then we would be a buddha.
ReplyDeleteI've also heard something in Buddhism like if one person were to attain enlightenment, then we all would. The world would disappear, because the Godhead would know itself completely once again. So, we're all caught in this web of illusion trying to find our way back to the source, only to find that when we get there, we'll cast ourselves back into the illusion, but isn't that what has always been happening?