The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Andrew introduced us to this book, which I found online here:

The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment - Thaddeus Golas

Foreword

I am a lazy man. Laziness keeps me from believing that enlightenment demands effort, discipline, strict diet, non-smoking, and other evidences of virtue. That's about the worst heresy I could propose, but I have to be honest before I can be reverent. I am doing the work of writing this book to save myself the trouble of talking about it.

There is an odd chance that this is what someone needs to read in order to feel better about himself. If you are a kind person and want to know what to expect when enlightenment strikes and why it comes to you, with or without psychedelic help, this is for you.

These are the rules of the game as I see them. I realize that many of us are opening up very fast these days, and one of the most common delusions we face is the belief that our sense of revelation is unique. The feeling of knowing the truth is not enough. My intention is not to pretend final truth, but to suggest certain simple attitudes that will work for anybody and stay with you in the most extreme freak-out or space-out, even when your mind is completely blown. These attitudes are so simple that I'm surrounding them with a picture of the universe to show why they work even when you don't believe they will.

The universe is so vast and complex that if we needed books like this to become enlightened, we'd never make it. But on the other hand the universe is so simple in design that there's no reason for anyone to be puzzled or unhappy. It's easy to control your existence, no matter how complicated it looks. I've abandoned the idea of writing this a number of times, on the ground that people didn't know it because they didn't want to. But in the end there is no more reason for not writing it than there is for writing it.

I am writing what I will want to read someday when I am stuck in a weird place. Several times on bummers I've thought: What could I say to someone in this state of mind that would mean anything? That's the kind of testing this information has had. There isn't a line in this book that is there just because it sounds beautiful. The information is practical and reliable. It has taken me and others safely through some extreme states of mind, and can be reduced to a few phrases that are simple enough to recall in any crisis.

The first chapter begins with a briefly stated idea about how the universe is made, and the rest of the book discusses our lives from that viewpoint. It is a far-reaching idea, extending into every field of knowledge, and since it took me many years to get it straight, I cannot expect that anyone else should casually accept it. All I can do is ask that you play the idea game, see where it leads, and check it out against what you know. What has to be true for the universe to look to us as it does? Is there a credible bridge between matter and spirit? Like many people, I wrestled with such concerns for years, and this book contains some of the conclusions. Perhaps these conclusions will be meaningful to you only if you follow your own process of checking and proving. If so, the first chapter contains all you will need to keep you busy for a long time. On the other hand, if all you want is a handy trip guide, you'll find that, too.

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Enlightenment is, I believe a very personal endeavor. One can become enlightened daily in small ways, every now and then one gets an “AHA” moment and once in a while a revelation. This short write up seems to preview a book about conclusions derived from someone's personal experience. That's actually what most literature is about, living vicariously and growing from insights gained from other's experience.

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment - Ch 1

Yes, exactly, Mr - personal experience.

Continuing on:

CHAPTER ONE

Who Are We?

We are equal beings and the universe is our relations with each other. The universe is made of one kind of entity: each one is alive, each determines the course of his own existence.

That is really all you need to know to understand this book or write your own. Everything I say has its roots in that first paragraph, and it is possible to resolve any question by going back to it and thinking it through for yourself.

The universe is made of one kind of whatever-it-is, which cannot be defined. For our purpose, it isn't necessary to try to define it. All we need to do is assume that there is only one kind of whatever-it-is, and see if it leads to a reasonable explanation for the world as we know it.

The basic function of each being is expanding and contracting. Expanded beings are permeative; contracted beings are dense and impermeative. Therefore each of us, alone or in combination, may appear as space, energy, or mass, depending on the ratio of expansion to contraction chosen, and what kind of vibrations each of us expresses by alternating expansion and contraction. Each being controls his own vibrations.

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment - Ch 1

I don't agree.  It puts us on par with the Creator.  I agree we are creators to some degree; but, I believe, and sense, that our existence serves a purpose beyond what his philosophy, as described in these few paragraphs, considers.  There may be more to his belief system than what is written in what is posted above.  But, if it is summed up in that one paragraph as he says it is, then, I find it lacking.  It just isn't as easy as stated.  I do agree with one thing, that it is unnecessary to find a way to define it all or any of it to be truthful.  Just wish I could get myself to stop trying and to just Be.

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment - Ch 1

Hi Opening,

Thanks for commenting, I was beginning to worry that no one would nibble at the conversation starter…

Did you have a chance to read any more than the excerpt I posted? I'd love to hear if you have the same reservations (or maybe you'd have more!)…

 I do agree with one thing, that it is unnecessary to find a way to define it all or any of it to be truthful.  Just wish I could get myself to stop trying and to just Be.

Oh yes, I can so empathise with that.

Love,

Nicole

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment - Ch 1

No, I didn't have a chance to get back to it.  But, I will.  I do find great Truth in his saying it is all so simple and yet complex.  What I believe is that we all have to find a way to kind of “relax” with it.  But, doing this amidst a life of stress, dissappointment, and dreams and wishes, and hopes and fears, etc.  is quite a feat.  It is perhaps what it is all about, relaxing with it and living our lives at the same time.  I don't believe that life's stresses can be handled or even met with medication and no matter how many “oms” one says, the ___it in life is still going to stink.  Meditation is not going to take you through it.  It is like swallowing an anti-depressant.  I am not putting down either mind you, I am just saying no great wisdom is going to come AND be pulled into our everyday living from these things.  Somehow, you have to stand in the middle of the stink and pull your divine connection into it.  What happens then, I don't know because I am not to the point where I can do this, where I keep my cool to the point that I call the Father (my belief system) into my situation while the situation is slapping me upside the head.  I can go home at night and cry and pray, but pulling him in with confidence is something I have to build the muscle for I guess.  Maybe meditation will keep you clear headed enough so that you don't go blank in the head remember to call Him in. 

I will go back and read more and report.  I had his book before and meant to check it out and got too busy and forgot.  So, thanks for the reminder.  Even if I don't agree with what he says, it gives me the opportunity to examine my own beliefs known and unknown to me.

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Hi Nicole

I'm so pleased you are using this simple yet profound piece of literature to encourage dialogue.

What impresses me about his work is that is so laid back, different, and he doesn't profess to being anything special.

Very easy to relate to.

An eccentric Aussie

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Golas's ideas are quite profound and I read that little book years ago and have returned to it often.

Laziness keeps me from believing that enlightenment demands effort, discipline, strict diet, non-smoking, and other evidences of virtue.

Notice how, in one fell swoop, his main theme seems to completely trash centuries of austere spiritual and religious practices.

These are the rules of the game as I see them

Once again we have the realization of a “game.” This can be a very freeing perspective for some and has been used by other authors as well

All I can do is ask that you play the idea game, see where it leads, and check it out against what you know.

But notice the contradiction here. He wants you to “check it out” for yourself and this requires resolve, fortitude and a strong will. How many of us have that? Most just follow the path mapped by others and this is the epitomy of laziness.
Therefore, what he presents is not lazy at all. Our laziness is our complete acceptance and surrender to the texts and teachings of the past. We are lazy in that we refuse to think for ourselves and simply accept what the masters teach, i.e. Buddha, Jesus, or the neo-masters like Cohen, Adi da, Wilber, etc, etc.

Perhaps these conclusions will be meaningful to you only if you follow your own process of checking and proving.

He comes up with some ideas, but doesn't want your acceptance but for you to do your own “checking and proving.” Make your own meaning and stop blindly accepting what the Buddha said or what Moses commanded or what Mohammed taught or even what your brain chemistry requires (note that his secondary intention was to assist in acid trips).

This whole book is sweetly sacrilegious and non-ideological. I recommend it to all.

Peace Angels,
mikeS

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Opening, I look forward to hearing your thoughts when you've had time to look through.

Andrew, thanks again for introducing me to this work.

Mike, I should have known it was already very familiar to you.

Love,

Nicole

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Nicole,

I am going to go through this slowly as I have found that if I try to zip through something, it only serves to boogle my mind.  Anyway, I read a bit more and wanted to see what is thought about one particular line as it is what gets me everytime in living in the world.  Which, of course, what actually nails everyone. 

“The more we withdraw from loving other beings, the more of a “physical” world we will contend with, the more mass-obsessed we become. On the other hand, the more we open up to our brothers and sisters, the less solid the world becomes.” 

Here is my thing with this statement.  I have found that often, the more I open up, the more at risk I place myself as I then, because I am who I am, have this expectation that wonderful things will follow from my giving myself over in this way.  I had these women tell me that I had a problem with a co-worker because I was not looking at her with loving thoughts as soon as I saw her.  The thing is, I was.  I always do with anyone.  But, this woman had made a decision on her own for whatever reasons she held that she found to be valid, not to have loving thoughts about me.  My attempts to change this with loving thoughts was a manner of trying to control her and left me with disastrous results.  She knew I held loving thoughts from the manner in which I communicated with her and others and saw me as an easy mark.  This put me in a position of being hurt and started a tailspin that took me from my place of seeing myself as enlightened.  Yes, this woman did not do this, I did this to myself.  But, time and time again I have seen that it is in my character to place importance on others to the point that I seek acceptance.  Change this and I change my result?  How does one change the fundamental things that are of one's character?  It is fundamental to who I am as a human being.  So, this is where this line put me and how I found it to be a bit simplistic.  I will read on to see if he addresses this.  I hear myself saying that this is something that has to be risen above.  Well, I do one day, forget about it, and then bam it slaps me in the face again.  Maybe I am a bit slow.

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

It sounds like you really want to connect with those around you and it's not happening like you want. I would be careful about making assumptions about “fundamental parts of your character.” What if they weren't? What if those were the exact parts that were keeping you from God?

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Joshua,

You could have a point.  It is just it is the part of me that wants to reach out to others and to accept them as they are and live and work in a cooperative way with them.  This is what I can't alter.  This is what others have told me is the problem.  That people see me as someone they can walk on.  I have even had other woman attempt to give me lessons on how to walk in a room and make people think I am a, well, you know the word.  Act in a way that says “back off” and “don't mess with me”.  Now, is it possible that my inability to shut down this part of me that shows my own venerability is what would be keeping me from God?  I don't know.  It is hard to believe that this could be true.  I think that the thing is I should have become a nun or something.  The corporate world does not suit my personality.  I have a background in law.  Running around being able to see the good in just about everyone (with a few exceptions), is not conducive to success in some environments.  I want to believe that this is not true.  Maybe it is just me in those environments.

Belinda,

I agree with you.  What you are talking about is touched on in the Gospel of Mary.  I forget the name of the author of the version that goes into a discussion of this; but, in it Jesus is explaining to Mary that she can see him (after his resurrection) through a part of her, I forget the name of the term.  He explains it is within everyone.  It is just some people make a determination not to take their awareness to the level that would put this part of themselves into action.  I think that if you accept that you are enlightened, then you will feel your own enlightenment, have access to it.  I am struggling with how to live there and in the world without causing a bunch of disharmony in myself no matter what I find, especially when so many people see the work environment as a competitive, as opposed to cooperative, environment.  Some folks see all of life in this manner, even spirituality (my soul is better than your's thinking).  I am an empath and I pick up on this type of thing. 

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Hi Opening,

Something that used to not make any sense to me when I started my search for meaning and Truth was people telling me I was trying too hard.

I don't think you are trying too hard but I think you are focusing your energy and awareness in the wrong direction.

At some point you will have to become 'selfish'.  In order to be effective in helping those around you Spiritually you have to deal with your own needs first.

You display an enormous amount of courage and determination. Law? I can't think of a more difficult area to exercise Divine Grace in but you're doing it. The idea is to be in the world but not of it.  You seem to have that bit worked out.

Now you need to take your focus off those around you and focus on yourself.  Everyone has a 'well' within them from which they can 'drink' the Divine presence.  In fact that is the only source we have, and we are continually drinking from it to sustain ourselves.  One aspect of enlightenment is awakening to the fact that you have been drinking from that well all along, another is realising there is nothing that you need that you don't already have.

What you are looking for you are looking with. It is the most natural thing in the world. 

Be patient with yourself, it is there just waiting for you to recognise it.

In love and peace

Andrew

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

I came back to this thread when notified that it had recently received new activity. 

Joshua,

I re-read your question to me regarding my statement regarding fundamental characteristics.  I think you could be right.  The thing is, the characteristics I was refering to was this sense of compassion I have for other people.  I have maybe been learning that I can retain that without letting other people walk all over me. 

Andrew,

I very much want to read that book “Dance of a Fallen Monk.”  Amazon lists two versions.  I am going to have to get this immediately.  

Ricosoma,

I have also been thinking about your many posts regarding the space between thoughts and I think I finally get it.  I want to ask you if it is possible to actually enter this space with your mind?  I have these memories of when I was a child and finding this “place” where I would “enter” and there would be this golden light and I could be there while still being at school on the playground or in class.  My teachers would spot me “going away” and would become quite concerned.  But, when I “came from” this place, I would feel smarter and powerful and see them not as teachers but as women with concerned looks on their faces as if I was somehow transformed and I was then, in that moment of “return”, older than them.  Does this make sense?

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Opening, I am fascinated by your childhood experiences of going away. I wonder now, where do we go when we step out of the usual stream in our mind? There seem to be many ways to do it (Alan has described some amazing ones, and others have too) so are we in the same “place”?

Light and joy,

Nicole

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Nicole,

I started “going away” when I was a kid.  I used to love to listen to music.  Once, when around five, I put my ear to the speakers of one of those old huge radios from the forties.  I closed my eyes, listening to the music, and entered a zone where I felt warm and safe.  Due to other experiences, I learned that I could go to this place as long as I closed my eyes and sought it.  So, I would go off to myself when I was feeling low and go to this place.  Sometimes, when really , really low,  I would hear the words “Go there, go there” in my head.  I knew what was meant by “there”.  It involved concentrating but not concentrating and slowing my breath.  I really didn't think about how to get there, I just would sit down and would focus but not focus.  It was like reaching out and opening a door.  You don't concentrate to open the door, you just have the intention to reach out and do it and you do it. 

What I try to do now is stay there, as I believe we can, at all times.  This isn't something I was taught to do, it was just “given” to me as a child.   I remembered trying to explain it at times to my father.  He thought I just had a wild imagination. 

Now, I admit, I had a particularly trying childhood in some ways.  Some psychologists would say I was trying to escape and just invented this place to cope.  When I became a teenager and read about meditation and started reading Kahlil Gibran, and recognizing what he said as something that was really true and right, I mean really recognizing it as if I had heard it all before, I started thinking that there was more than just “escaping” a difficult situation involved in what I experienced.   Reading Riscosoma's posts over time made me think back to these experiences and think that it was quite possible that what he describes is what I was doing.  When I say I try to live there all the times, I just  now made the connection to doing this then and what I do now.

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Opening, I am completely with you, this is more than just escaping (and I am so sorry to hear about your trying childhood). Thank God you had a way out!

Love,

Nicole

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Mike there are times that you approach the border of reasonableness.

I'm impressed that you take such an agreeable approach to Mr. Golas's literary masterpiece.

But you do love to play those games.  It's the gaming concept I'm not comfortable with.  Game to me means someone has to lose in order for someone else to win. 

I've got an aunty that will go to any lengths to win at scrabble.  Cheat?  I think she invented the idea, put me off scrabble and just about every other game for life.

Enlightenment isn't about winners and losers, it is everybodies birthright, just waiting to be revealed, to everybody.

Perhaps Mr. Golas would have been better to call it the Casual Mans Guide to Enlightenment, but somehow it doesn't have the same ring to it.

It is certainly not hard work…

- an eccentric village idiot

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Mike there are times that you approach the border of reasonableness.

Yes, but the very moment I rely exclusively on reason will be the time I promptly remove myself from the game, since I will then resign myself to uselessness.

But you do love to play those games.  It's the gaming concept I'm not comfortable with.  Game to me means someone has to lose in order for someone else to win. 

Actually, we all love our games and most of our games we do play to win. Therefore, we look to identify winners and losers. This is often how we determine our progress, by evaluating how close we have come to what others have defined as winning. This is easy in the external world since the prizes are very recognizable. Even in the god games there are winners and losers. This is determined by status, such as saint, guru, master, teacher, 1st level novitiate, instructor level 1, sage level 2, pope, cardinal, bishop, priest, apostle, 1st level linneage, etc, etc, etc.

However, much harder to identify are those who do not play to win, but simply play…to continue playing They are not seeking rewards and therefore, need not conform to any set path since all paths provide rewards based on attaaining expected  'outcomes' or rewards. Examine every religion and spirtual path and you will see most are founded on specialized concepts of heaven, enlightenment, revelation, nondualism, nirvana, etc, etc. These are all outcomes that we expect to achieve (as taught through the path) and therefore, become winners in the god game. If these specialized concepts did not exist, the religions would crumble of their own oppressive weight, since all are based on some degree of sacrifice and/or struggle (to transcend or transform). Why would we struggle or sacrifice (i.e. pray or meditate for years) if there were no reward expected?

Enlightenment isn't about winners and losers, it is everybodies birthright, just waiting to be revealed, to everybody.

Of course! And the 'revelation,' or revealing, is your long sought out reward. Therefore, if you do this or that, meditate this way or that for this long, or as Thaddeus Golas states, “believing that enlightenment demands effort, discipline, strict diet, non-smoking, and other evidences of virtue” You too, can be a winner!  YEAH!

It's nice of you to want everybody to win. Unfortunately, in the god game there is room for only so many winners (so many gurus, masters, etc). However, to truly want “everybody” to win would mean to change the rules of the game in which winning is simply the continuation of play, because if everybody wins, then there really are no winners since, in our world, winners are identified only in contrast to losers.

Yet, if you do not play by the rules, but stil love to play, it is as you state, “not hard work” whatsoever. However, as the responses to my repudiation of the need to meditate attest to, you will often be vehemently attacked for not playing by the 'sacred' rules of the game as determined by the path you chose to follow.

Your Move, Aussie

mikeS

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Interesting

Laziness keeps me from believing that enlightenment demands effort, discipline, strict diet, non-smoking, and other evidences of virtue

This is so true though.. here we are all trying to be enlightened lol and it's the trying that is stopping us :P

I found this on youtube, it's Ken Wilber talking about helping others and talking about tending your own house http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=3E8CAWawn2g
One part he says is:
“…To assume that you're not enlightened is the ultimate insult to spirit, you presume the non-existance of spirit moment to moment  and under the presumption that spirit doesn't exist you seek it.… so it's the same with political activism you fundamentally have to realise that things are just fine radically the way they are and yet things are truly truly a nightmare.. and balancing both of those, it sounds crazy, but its a very very important sort of thing to keep in mind…”

I found that quite interesting and it hit home with me as someone “seeking spirit” :-)

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

hi belinda :D

yes, that's a fun paradox; when one realizes one is one with one, one simultaneously realizes there is a lot of work to be done :D

adopting a larger, 'higher' perspective is easy with the right mix of  experiences and personality.  in the right environment, one may find they can be lazy and acheive this state of mind, but is this all there is to enlightenment? it seems to me that many people define it so.  what do you all think?

integral enlightenment seems to run contrary to apathy though.  understanding our multifaceted natures in order that one may have the awareness to facilitate transcendence and inclusion, takes a lot of time.  whether our personalities have us labelling that effort 'work' or 'play', 'lazy' would not seem to be part of that equation.

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Hi Joshua,

“when one realizes one is one with one, one simultaneously realizes there is a lot of work to be done”

Isn't that a contradiction?

If we are already one, in other words we've realised that a duality consciousness is an illusion, hasn't the work already been done?

My understanding is that once we realise there is no separation, the only 'work' is discarding the concepts from the mind, of duality.

In love and peace

an eccentric Aussie

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

hi there…
Hi Joshua,

“when one realizes one is one with one, one simultaneously realizes there is a lot of work to be done”

I entirely agree.
For me there is no contradiction.  For duality is as much a fact of embodied existance as nonduality is.  Both together.  And, as embodied beings in time and space, all interdependant and inter-related …  interbeing - so to speak … then our actions, decisions, etc DO matter.  All of our thoughts, all of our decisions affects the larger collective Being of Collective Humanity… and of course all of the other relationships we have with other beings…
the trick of course, is to discern, in our compassionate action, what is egoic … and what is not.  Because compassionate action can be relative, according to what we believe to be true - or compassionate action can simply arise out of our own deepening experience of “transcendance and inclusion” as Joshua has says…. and the recognition that we are all one - is not just an intellectual recognition - it is an actual experience… that one recognizes - a perceptual shift… not just an idea.  and once the first experience (of naked awareness) is recognized then INDEED the work has just begun - to recognize that shift more and more …  and eventually, to abide mostly in that state… for that is when the natural state of compassion simply arises in the moment, serving the moment, and the relationships that appear in that moment… embodied, dualisticly in time and space, here and now.

arpita

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Hi Andrew,

yes, a contradiction of terms, a play on words if you will, which is why i began by pointing out that it's a fun 'paradox' as Wilber puts it at the beginning of Belinda's link. 

arpita (hi :D) has provided an excellent treatment of the idea…better, i'm sure, than i could muster…but, i'm happy to share my thoughts for whatever they are worth :D

'If we are already one, in other words we've realised that a duality consciousness is an illusion, hasn't the work already been done?

My understanding is that once we realise there is no separation, the only 'work' is discarding the concepts from the mind, of duality.'

yes, that's when the work (or play) begins :D  when we realize we are one with all, we can recognize that we are not behaving so.  that larger perspective allows for the realization that we have not always been acting in our own best interests; that we have previously been unaware of the harm we were doing ourselves.  all is perfect with the Kosmos, and the Kosmos has a loooong way to go :D

at least that's my take on what Wilber was getting at from Belinda's link.  

equating 'life' - or what we call 'reality' - with illusion is, i think, an effective tool for engaging perspectives beyond the ego-self, but i'm not convinced that this - or any particular state of mind alone - could be the end-all-be-all to enlightenment (i'm hoping there is no end, or as some say, 'it's not a destination…' ;D), but, who am i to say :D 

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Hi Joshua

I understood you exactly when you said “when one realizes one is one with one, one simultaneously realizes there is a lot of work to be done :D” And I think Apita did a great job at explaining it.

Hi Andrew

In response to your question to Joshua

“If we are already one, in other words we've realised that a duality consciousness is an illusion, hasn't the work already been done?”

I would say, we are all one whether we realise it or not, and it's when we realise it that the work starts to disidentify from the ego and to try and always feel the oneness.

And Joshua, I think you can reach “enlightenement” but at the same time it doesn't just suddenly stop and there you are enlightened, the depth of awareness is never ending :D

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Joshua, Belinda, and Arpita,

I hope I got those names right.  I agree 100% with everything that you stated.  To me, the real work isn't just to carry ourselves to this place inside, it is to bring it forth in our living.  I hope, I pray, that as we all, or as many as answer the call to this stirring, move towards greater awareness of our real selves, we bring about a shift in thinking and are able to bring a new outlook, a new way of living and being into society.  The world is so large and its problems so many, it seems it would take a very, very, very long time, then this wouldn't be a very  long time in terms of eternity.    

Of course, we are getting help from the source of it All, otherwise, this discussion would not be going on.  Can you imagine having it in a public forum like this even ten years ago?  Can you imagine having a number of people interested in it, that understand what may sound like a load of crap to many, yet to them it rings true, it all sounds familiar?  Ideas that bear no substance in the tangible, but “feel” right when put in front of you?  Yep, something is up alright.

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

To me, the real work isn't just to carry ourselves to this place inside, it is to bring it forth in our living.

But what if “living” is an inside job?

Sensation gives an 'experience' of an outside or external world but the experience of living is internally realized. Maybe we project the context of 'externality' upon the senses. What if there is no outside, but just an external reference manufactured by a separate individualized ego that projects guilt upon constructed 'others' in order to maintain its own innocense.

In that case, suffering is not a product of the world, but a product of mind and there are no 'others' external to mind. Therefore, all suffering is a result of the mind that thinks it and could be completely abolished by that same mind, if it did not believe in an external world outside mind, based on the faulty association of the senses creating an experience of an external world.

When you really get down to brass tacks, we have no conclusive proof that our experience of an external world is anything but a self-manufactured experience or is real in anyway whatsoever, except in the mind.

But I'm just saying…

Peace Angels,
mikeS

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Mike,

Well, I guess that is when you get to that bus that will flatten you if you stand in front of it because you think the external is manufactured in your mind.  This is what I mean in terms of the purpose of all of our reflections.  What is the purpose, what is our intent?  Are we just on here to entertain ourselves? 

Also, not all sensations are of the external world.  Having a heart attack, getting an appendage amputated (is it that I only think it is gone or is it that it never was really there?), giving birth to a child, catching a cold, getting shot, or stabbed, on and on and on.   However, our minds want to play “what if” games, there is a shared experience on Earth amongst living creatures.  If what we are doing is examining the true reality of that experience, we have to deal with what our minds and sensations do present to us as living creatures on Earth, the shared set of circumstances that do make up our sense of reality. 

When I was a kid, it occurred to me that the color red may be red to me because that is what someone labeled it one-day and how I saw it in my mind.  Yet, that person may see “red” as what I see as “yellow”.  There is no way to know what I see is what that person sees and vice versa.  But, the one thing we agree on is that there is color.  We can go on from there to something we both can “see” or not go on.  If either one of us wants to convince the other that red is yellow or yellow is red.   Living is what it is about.  Living and growing and expanding, or not.  It all depends on how you see it and what you determine is your purpose.  You cannot share with someone who refuses to share with you. 

If it isn't about the interaction between all of us that are the collective, the One, then what is it about?  The individual makes a determination as to how far into awareness they are willing to go.  But, however far they go, they still have to eat, work, do things to feed the human body to survive.  They must do that in a world that, at least the collective has agreed in their conscious minds, is peopled with other beings.  How do you, where do you, take all of your awareness, and put it to use in the world of your physical sensations?  Does it matter? Is it important?  Or is the awareness of ALL the only thing that you strive for and in that, if you keep stretching, keep reaching, it doesn't matter what happens in the world of your physical senses?  Or, does the fact that most religions, most spiritual beliefs, tell us that how we treat and love each other is just as important as how we love and treat ourselves, does this weigh in enough to make us want to learn to take this awareness and apply it to the physical world and how we move in it?

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

What do you want to give?  I guess that is what I am aiming at.  We make this determination whether we realize it or not over and over.  That is what the story of Christ on the cross, whether you see it as a true story, fact, or see it as a myth ,a legend,  is about.  He gave his life to show us who we are.  He suffered in the physical, to demonstrate the spiritual to us.  Obviously, mankind as a collective, no matter what the religion, sees immeasurable value in this story.  Sees this as an ultimate sacrifice for Truth.  You don't have to believe Christ, (which I do) was the Son of God, to understand the LOVE of Man, the collective, inherent in the story. 

“Wake up oh dreamer”

 BAM–I am tortured, ridiculed, hated, killed. 

BAM–I am dead. 

Oh, wait a minute, nope, I haven't gone anywhere.  Look, you can even touch me.  

In fact, while in a little while, you may no longer touch me in the physical, truly I never will leave you.

Close your eyes and I will be there; call me, and I will come;  and,  to make sure you are okay between the times you call on me or my Father, I have left you with a really good friend of mine within you so that you will always have a constant line of communication with me or my Father,  if you so choose to use it. 

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Well, heck, if “jesus” is nothing but a conceptualization of your mind, then he did not suffer on the cross, YOU did.

The jesus story has been found in numerous ancient civilizations long before the christians adopted it. Most likely each civilization tailored the archetype to conform to its own culture.

The sacrifice the cross symbolizes is played out day after day even in the modern world. It seems we have learned nothing from the archetype but that it is a myth of unattainable proportions for mortal weak and feeble mankind. No wonder we chose to worship the personae, rather than live the message.

sad…

Peace Angels,
mikeS

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Well, I guess that is when you get to that bus that will flatten you if you stand in front of it because you think the external is manufactured in your mind.

Of course, when the bus flattens me, you and all those who believe in death might assume I'm dead. However, if I do not subscribe to the conventional ideology of death (or an 'ending'), then I might continue, but only as a different “I” or possibly no “I” at all. I am prepared for “surprise” as long as I do not conceptualize death. OTOH, religions prepare you for death!

be careful in adhering to the body's senses as the chief mode of accumulating all your knowledge and remember that sense impressions must be categorized by the mind (but I'm sure you're aware of all that).

All sensation IS of an external world or, more specifically, the defining of experience as external. All the sensations you describe are external to mind since they refer to body. The body is external to mind so ”Having a heart attack, getting an appendage amputated (is it that I only think it is gone or is it that it never was really there?), giving birth to a child, catching a cold, getting shot, or stabbed, on and on and on” are all externally referenced as outside mind. You may feel pain in mind, but cause is externally referenced.

All knowledge ever accumulated has been in direct accordance with sense impressions, even abstractions such as truth, beauty, etc, are formulated in relation to forms external to mind. We demand form and substance, but form and substance only exists to sensaory perception. The mind has no need for it, unless the mind conceptualizes a 'self' requiring a 'body' and a 'world' to support its existence.

A radical perspective would conceptualize all external references as internal and essentially, when you get down to it, this is where LOA must eventually take you (once you gte beyond that silly “The Secret”). Of course, you can attract from the universe if universe is nothing but consciousness/mind, then all objects of consciousness are nothing but mindstuff with no substance or form but that which you give it. Quantum theory will never get to that resolution because consciousness has no form or substance and neither do the objects of consciousness. Science must have form and substance to quantify and label as “reality.”

It would seem that fear is the chief obstacle to creating and limits what can be created. The fear that if all the objects of consciousness are simply “mindstuff” with absolutely no form or substance, then that would mean YOU have no form or substance either.

I would imagine the purpose is to recognize that you have no purpose that a formless, substanceless Beingness could conceptualize as long as it believes it has form and substance.

Radical freedom is to be free of purpose completely. YEAH!

Peace Angels,
mikeS

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Mike,

I don't agree with your bottom line, to be free is to be without purpose.  For me, to be free is to live that purpose in the physical and in the spiritual without limits, where the nature, the Truth of the nature, of the limits are of my own production or given to me by God.  

 Nor, do I see Jesus as a concept. In my post, I clearly stated that, for some, the story of his death on the cross is a myth.  My point was that it , even if you see it as a myth, it is a myth that evidently has been deemed to serve the betterment of man.  So, it strikes at something at the core of man.  Also, it isn't about religion, it is about the nature of Being.  The other main point of my last post, wasn't that when the bus hits you, you experience death, it was that Jesus showed that that there is no death.   The senses are not where it ends or begins.  But, certainly the nature of what will be perceived will change.  But, the physical reality is still a form of reality.  You will be flattened, or, more likely smooshed,  in the physical form, but not necessarily in your Being.  If you want to cut your existence off  from the physical, then stand in front of the bus.  That was the whole point. The physical is one reality, the internal is another, and the spiritual is another.  You can't define the nature of being by merely attempting to eradicate the reality of one of its forms, or to deny its importance to the whole.  What is, is.  To get to Knowing, all must be part of the equation.

If there is no purpose, and we create all in our perceptions, then why choose to be?  Just go evaporate yourself then.  Why play the game?  If it is a game, and the way it is presented in your last post, it appears as if that is how you view it or are asking others to consider it being viewed.  Is there no purpose in purpose?  In others words, would a God that created (if you accept God as a reality) the ALL just do it as an exercise in checking out the limits of the mind of God?  Are we all just checking out the limits of our own minds?  All of the suffering (external and internal) is for no reason, or only that which we choose to give recognition to even exists?  Or, if we, and what we conceptualize is all there is, why the heck did we conceptualize ourselves into our mother's womb and come into the world at all?  Or, are our parents, our relatives, all people, just concepts in our minds, products of our senses? 

At some point, all of this becomes nonsense speak.  I maintain that  there is no point to it if there is no purpose or divine reality and that is what the search is in Reality is about, even if we can't know or understand or conceputalize the Whole, we choose to participate, or not, in it in some manner.

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Opening,

I really don't have a bottom line.

I recognize that it is frightening, and demanding of resistance, for a separate ego/self to consider that there is no purpose. However, I only introduce the idea for consideration.

We have been stuffed with the 'sacred' until we are ready to burst and I suppose that when we do finally burst we will be ready to recognize that all our seeking of purpose has been for naught.

My point was that it , even if you see it as a myth, it is a myth that evidently has been deemed to serve the betterment of man. 

That certainly seems to be the purpose of the savior myth. Yet, in 2000 yrs of idolizing the myth as 'true' have we seen any tangible results, individually or collectively? Seems a bit of a time waster.

The other main point of my last post, wasn't that when the bus hits you, you experience death, it was that Jesus showed that that there is no death.  

Not exactly. It is likely he 'died' on the cross. Yet, his resurrection symbolized rebirth not that “there is no death.” This might seem insignificant, however, “no death” and rebirth are conceptually different. Therefore, you will die, but you probably won't 'end.' So getting smooshed by the bus is ok by me.

If there is no purpose, and we create all in our perceptions, then why choose to be? 

Most likely you have no choice in Being or not Being. However, existence is intricately tied to 'self.' The 'self' is existing as something and that seems to be cause of the suffering, (or at least that's what the buddhist's claim). To exist presupposes 'as something' wereas Being does not require defining as anything since it is NOT anything, although all the religious and spiritual guru's insist on defining it.

However, possibly it is our need for “purpose” that causes the suffering of a consciousness bound to a specific direction or course and the consciousness that asserts a “purpose” must always seek it.

We become imprisoned in our senseless seeking and to seek something asserts that we have some idea of what it is, for if you had no idea, why seek at all. Thus, we sift through consciousness adding and subtracting what we determine is in line with some “purpose” we seek. To me, this is nonsense.

To assert a 'divine reality' is to assert that you are separate from it and caught in the circularity of seeking, since what you seek posits that it is not yet found. Maybe when the seeking for purpose is terminated, purpose will be found and the ego/self will dissolve right before your spiritual eyes!

but I'm just saying…

Peace Angels : )
mikeS

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

To assert a 'divine reality' is to assert that you are separate from it and caught in the circularity of seeking, since what you seek posits that it is not yet found.

Nope, I never said this.  I never said we are separate from divine reality.  In fact, I know that we are of a divine nature and are one with God.  Our separation is  an illusion.  By “no death” I meant, that he did not cease to be.  He died in the physical, or really, if you follow traditional Christianity, his body did not die.  I dont' know which it was.  I am not sure if it matters to my growth that I decide which it was.  I just accept that He was.  There is no seeking when you know that you are part of it.  The only “seeking” involved, is a desire to improve the quality of my connection.  If you don't know about this through experience, you can't possibly know what I am talking about. 
You are not taking what I say at face value and are, instead,  reading what you regard to be traditional Christian thought into my words.  How do you know we have not seen any tangible results as a result of the story of Christ?  You forget, as you have said, it is only real if you conceive it.  If you don't , then you wont.   This is using your own logic. 

If it all begins and ends with our thoughts, how is it that we have no choice in being? We just flashed into being after a series of cells split up in our mother's womb?   Is it all a matter of biology and we are animals without soul or spirit, just our minds? 

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

How do you know we have not seen any tangible results as a result of the story of Christ?  You forget, as you have said, it is only real if you conceive it.  If you don't , then you wont.   This is using your own logic.

Actually, I was relying on the proof of sense impressions since you seem to rely on that as proof with your bus analogy. If there are tangible results that can be seen with physical eyes, what are they? I am open to the possibility that I may be missing something that you see.

If it all begins and ends with our thoughts, how is it that we have no choice in being? We just flashed into being after a series of cells split up in our mother's womb?   Is it all a matter of biology and we are animals without soul or spirit, just our minds? 

Being asserts “I AM.” Existence, which the 'self' relies on, asserts I AM THAT. Self denies being in its desire to be something and thus we have a world of 6 billion separate 'somethings' all asserting one above another, all competing for supremacy.
Cells, womb, mother, animals, spirit, soul, biology, even mind, are all objects, or concepts, of consciousness. Obviously, if Jesus proved you cannot die, why would you think you were born?

Peace Angel,
mikeS

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

The bus analogy was related to physical reality.  That God could move the bus, would not be taken into the senses as God moving the bus, just in the fact that the bus was moved.  He once drove my car for ten miles after I feel asleep.  Did I see him driving the car, no.  But the car stayed on the highway for around ten miles (I know about when I feel asleep) and when I woke up, I was about a mile from my exit.  The car was driving down the middle of the highway.  My friend woke me up asking me who was driving the car.  This wasn't the experience that made me congnizant of His Being, it is just one of the experiences I was talking about before.  Also, being a Christian does not mean that you look upon yourself as “special” that is merely the value you think Christians or people that regard themselves as religious place upon it.  A true Christian does not regard himself or herself as any more special than anyone else.  It is about Love, not attaching values on human beings.  Maybe you missed that lesson.  Frankly, most of what you say displays a distinct prejudice against people that believe in a higher being. 

Most of what you say, begins nowhere and ends nowhere.  It just doesn't make sense, except it clearly displays that you believe yourself to be “superior” in some way in that you came up with this, I conceptualize all that I am so I am free stuff.  Nope, you are imprisoned in your own mind, or that which you think is your mind.  But, then, I just imagined that you exist.  So, I can dissolve you and as I perceived of my existence prior to taking you into my imagination, I can dissolve you without dissolving myself.  No offense intended, just following your form of thinking.

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

How do you know we have not seen any tangible results as a result of the story of Christ?

Still waiting for those tangible results.

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

I asked you how you knew they weren't any tangible results.  I didn't say I could provide you with a list of tangible results or that I wanted to provide you with a list.  It is one of those things that if you don't know, no one could convince you of it.  Oops, what am I doing, I just dissolved you.  Wait, that was in another group.  I guess I have to dissolve you in this one as well. 

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

    

         : )

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

hi opening and Mike, very intense discussion! interesting too…

love,

nicole

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Hi Mike,

Back in my days of Pentecostal Christendom I saw many unexplained happenings - healings, exorcisms, one person raised from the dead, all through nothing more that a prayer and laying on of hands “in the name of Jesus Christ is Lord or Jesus Christ of Nazareth”.

People called them miracles.  Because I'm fairly big I was often asked to be a 'catcher', so I was close enough to see and know that much of what I saw was the real thing.  But you'd have to take my word for it.

I'm wondering what tangible evidence you would consider proof?

“For him who believes no proof is necessary, for him that does not believe no proof is possible.”

an eccentric Aussie

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Certainly we have isolated anecdotal evidence of what faith can do. We have individual reports of what seems to defy logic and reality.

But man's inhumanity to man goes on unabated and so, although indoctrinated a christian, I have little hope for that, or any other religious dogma, to make even the slightest dent to the world's suffering.

Essentially the end of suffering through love was the Christ message which goes on unheeded, century after century. war and genocide, greed and corruption proceed unencumbered.

Therefore, under the circumstances, the message is no longer valid since it utterly fails to heal. Except, of course, for those individuals who provide reports based on personal experience.

I do NOT doubt their experience, only hope for a more collective experience. I believe such a collective experience is possible, but not under archaic, dogmatic, religious ideologies that have a proven track record of, not only failing to heal the masses, but provoking increased suffering to the masses throughout history.

Actually, no proof is necessary, simply because none is available.

Sorry, it was a trick question.

Thanks anyway…
mikeS

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

I don't think it was a trick question Mike.

I believe the difference, as with most religions is whether you adhere to the scriptures attributed to that belief system, as revealed to that system of belief supernaturally, or whether you allow yourself to be controlled by an ecclesiastical leadership that tell you what you should believe.

In love and peace

an eccentric Aussie

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

It can come to the question of do you have to have a believer present for it to happen?  Do you have to ask to receive?  In my story, I did not ask to be kept safe; and, at the time I was by no means a “good Christian”.  I believed.  I  talked to God and Jesus, and had experienced God before.  But, I was not the model “Christian” in the way I lived. My behaviors have changed as I have gained understanding and a clearer view, more remembering.

It was that I was loved and saved, and my friend as well,  for some reason yet known to me.  So, I maintain that this force for miracles, as I see it God, is just there, available at all times.  It has nothing to do with religion as God is not about religion.  Religion is man's concept of God.  It could be accurate.  It is likely that it is not.  So, God, or Jesus, or a belief there in cannot be blamed for the lack of healing within the heart of man or where religion(s) may fall short.  That is about the choices that a man makes in his life about who he is and that for which he hungers. 

I agree with Arpita, it is a very completed thing that is not bound by religion or people or individualized beliefs.  It is just there.  It just is and is far too complicated to be understood by me as well.

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Also, nothing in the Bible or that was stated by Christ ever promised that his message would heal all suffering, just that understanding could be gained and love in the mayhem could be found ,and peace with it, given. And, we are urged to love and give to each other in the midst of it all.   In fact, the New Testament says that there will be no peace and that man will almost destroy man and that Christ will return before that happens.  Take as much from this as you want.  What it means will play itself out in time. 

In my last post, I meant to say that it is a very “complicated” thing.

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

It is only as complicated as you allow yourself to be convinced it is.

What is it that you find complicated?

Jesus said “Truly I say to you, Whoever does not recieve the kingdom of God like a little child shall not enter it.” Mark 10:15 (Lamsa Translation)

In love and peace

an eccentric Aussie

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

The best way to explain would be that when one gets a glimpse of the “other side”, what is seen is marvelous beyond words, golden colors, pinks, and greens, that this world has nothing like, the sense of peace and love, the wisdom and knowledge and vision of all that you are, not can be, ARE, then it closes and there you are in your place in the phsyical, remembering how simple it seemed compared to the heaviness of this plane.  How can that much serenity be your's and at the same time, the heaviness of this world be your's as well?   I am not talking about an individual thing, a heaviness that comes from my circumstances.  I am talking about a comparative thing.

Looking into the eyes of so many, even those with smiles on their faces that profess to happiness, you know that the heaviness is with them as well.  It is the sense of separation that causes this.  We are one with both, the heaviness and the Supreme.  Please don't think I am talking about duality here.  I am talking about walking in the world while tied to the spiritual.  This is our “assignment”.  Bring the one into the other in your awareness at all times–Remember. 

Then, there are the creatures of light and the creatures of darkness.  This is where you get into duality.  Are there ghosts, demons?  If you allow your life to be filled with them, then there probably are on both sides.   It is simple in that in remembering, we can get there and remembering seems to be such a simple thing. It is, and then it isn't.  If it was as simple as blinking your eyes, we would all be there.  To our natures it is in direct opposition to all that we have learned in this plane, which seeks to complicate it.  The way it works is what is complicated to our natures, to our way of understanding.  The most important thing is that we just Be.  Get past the distractions and just Be.  If it were easy to fully do this, we all would be walking on water, if we choose to do so.  Getting up and going to work in the morning, making it through traffic, putting together a presentation, arguing before a panel of judges in a courtroom, this is far easier than dismissing everything that you see before your eyes in the physical world and acknowledging a tie, melding into that tie, being lifted up into that tie, when the world of senses has told you no such thing exists.  Dismiss all you know of this plane and move oneself into another that is not seen, is not always felt, and when it is felt, it is felt within you, stirred by something that can't be described with our words.  No one can direct you on how to get there.  You must rely on a mixture of your heart, your mind, your innermost and strongest self, a self that you seldom see.  That you may find is there, but no one has told you about it.  If they did, you  may think that  they are nuts.  It isn't really relying so much as allowing, opening, accepting. 

It isn't like there is some pie in the sky cloud hopping place.  It is vast as it is eternity.  Understanding the nature of eternity, all that is, all that has been, all that will be, well that is complicated for the human mind.  An organized, purposeful, never ending vastness.  Our place within it is important.  Yet, we are a very small part of it at the same time.  No one, nothing is neglected, we can turn our eyes and ears away from it.  Yet, it is still there with us, not just in us, but of us, at all times.  Now, to some this sounds incredibly off the wall. 

In the following, please keep in mind that the two worlds are not separate and only appear to be so.  For instance, nothing is really solid.  It only appears to be solid as the atoms or molecules are jammed in tighter in some things than they are in others.

I have been lucky, because I never looked for it.  It came to me when I was a kid.  I allowed myself to be distracted by this world.  It returned, or appeared to return.  It never went anywhere.  It was always there and is always here.  My senses of it are stronger at some moments.  At others, I can only see what is in this world.  This world is easier to communicate with, yet harder at the same time. The other one knows my heart.  The physical world tries to guess at my heart, define my heart, and me.  It pushes me to do the same.  Ignoring this push, is, or seems to be,  very hard.  Sustaining the ability to ignore it, is, or appears, to be hard.  There is work, there is food to be cooked, tables to be dusted, children to raise and to watch over (especially boys), dishes to be washed, husbands that never can find anything on their own, on and on and on.  There are co-workers and bosses, and bills to be paid, and checking accounts to keep balanced, and rent or mortgages, car notes, car accidents.  Yet, all while we do these things, it is there with us.  I don't intend to describe the physical as a burden, all these things within it that distract are a blessing as well.  A distraction nonetheless. 

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

hmm…
just to muddy the pot a little more

this is not something i know for sure, but it seems to me that there are “spheres” of experience … for example the Pentecostal experience Andrew mentions…  where some energy is accessed, some connection is made and the miraculous happens…
Other spheres of experience - cultural - for example Lakota Sundance… or a Sufi healer/teacher  or John of God in Brazil who appears to channel disembodied beings to heal…  There are examples all over the world.
And it is the miraculous that appears to confirm whatever view the miracle is clothed in… for example - the Pentecostal's faith is confirmed in his/her experience…  the Sweat Lodge participant's faith confirmed in his/her experience… the Sufi's faith confirmed in his/her experience…  the new-age chaneller/healer's faith confirmed in his/her experience…

there seems to be a confusion between the surface ideas (the religious/cultural/personal ideas) and some other deeper process that does not care about what is worn.

also - i tend to believe that other beings (who do not have human bodies) tend to have relationships with various spheres of experience … (like the entities that John of God channels, or specific spirits etc that manifest during a sweat lodge)…

a complicated situation….
how it all works together… i don't have a clue…

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

I don't think you are muddying the waters at all Christine.

I speak from my own experience.  The reason I am not as involved with the Christian movement as I once was is the “exclusive” aspect, that condemns anyone who has not fulfilled the conditions laid out in the rules (dogma) of the organisation to a Christless eternity, or Hell.

There was a fascinating book called 'Dance of a Fallen Monk', by George Fowler, that gives an excellent description of why there are so many faiths in the world, all equally legitimate.

I speak from the Christian mystic perspective because that is the one I'm most familiar with, but I can talk with someone of any faith and agree with that person, so long as they are not exclusive in there dogma.

I've studied scripture from various religions, to a limited degree and have found that through talking to adherents of those religions that are also seeking the mystical connection, that we have far more in common that at  variance.

In love and peace

-an eccentric Aussie

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

That book by George Fowler looks very interesting, Andrew. I found a review here

It is very true about the mystical streams of faith, how much they overlap than diverge.

Love,

Nicole

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Pushking said: Sacred laziness the mother of a genius. Truth is usually simple. The problem is it's hard to find :)

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

One of the most difficult aspects to accept is the fact that to realise Truth IS our natural state and therefore it should be the simplest thing to grasp.

I think we've been programmed to think that there has to be a lot effort involved to 'earn the right' to be enlightened, when nothing could be further from the truth.

an eccentric Aussie

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Alex, thanks for joining our discussion and sharing your blog :)

Andrew, yes, it should be the simplest thing in the world. Why does it often seem so complicated?

Love,

Nicole

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Thinking makes it so

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Ask yourself, who, what why am I? You are a mystery. The world about you is a mystery.  The most difficult thing for any human seems to be to admit being wrong- to confess error of belief and conviction-to unlearn false knowledge as well as to learn true knowledge. Real enlightenment is two fold 1) Reading of the word and believeing without a doubt. 2) through the holy spirit. We must understand that we are of human spirit [ matter] and god is of the holy spirit.  When god calls us if we are willing he will infuse us with his very own spiritual holy, righteous and perfect character.  This is what will bring us to love for one an all.

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

ricosoma, it's true, thinking does make it so. Thank you.

I will, thanks for sharing in our discussion.

Love,

Nicole

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Hi 'I will'

Welcome to Gaia.

When you say you are a mystery do you feel you will always be a mystery or do you think it might be the first step of realising that you really don't know yourself and puts you on the path of self discovery?

The essence of 'The Lazy Mans Guide to Enlightenment' is that you already have the light of love and understanding within you waiting to be released, a type of imprisoned splendour.

The love of God abides in and on all, in Him we live and move and have our being.

It is so simple you need help to misunderstand it.

in love and peace

an eccentric Aussie

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

just saw this discussion and it made me smile ear to ear! I read the book years ago and LOVED it! In working with troubled teens I often refer to 'I hate myself' exercise - I remember it took me a week to be abel to actually do it myself! 

Re: The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment

Patty, always great to have you drop in. I could see how this would be a super approach for troubled teens.

Peace,

Nicole