Spiritual Enlightenment: The Damnedest Thing > anyone read it?

[Royce_aus]

I've just recently read two books by an author 'Jed Mckenna'

Spiritual Enlightenment: The Damnedest Thing
Spiritually Incorrect Enlightenment

I found both of these very challenging and very enjoyable to go through. and i'd like to know if anyone around these parts has heard of or read either of these books, although there seems to be some controversy about whether Jed actually exists i believe its a case of the finger pointing at the moon, and the books are what i'd really like to begin discussion on.
After reading these books i found that my personal beliefs and many of my habits/desires simply dropped off like well fed leeches.
I also found myself hunting down articles on this site as i went through different stages of conciousness and had a small case of social drag(thanks steve the articles i found were a great comfort in my cases of despair). I attempted and still go back to a process called spiritual autolysis where I begin to write like journaling until i find something true. Its a rough process at the best of times , i enjoy it.
Anyway lets get the ball rolling for those of you who havent read/heard these books you might try reading this article

Jed McKenna

[tekart]

...someone else has read these books.

This whole thing for me started after reading Eckart Tolle's 'The Power of Now', but it didn't really sink in until I read 'Spiritual Enlightenment: The Damnedest Thing'.
To be honest, it screwed me up for weeks.

[Royce_aus]

what kind of things did it screw up (if you don't mind sharing)

It changed things for me a lot. I begun to question all of my relationships with friends and family, and now I've come to see how difficult it is talking about butterflies to caterpillars (eagles and bears if you read pavlina).
I have always felt quite detached from the realities of (what i perceive to be) everyone else, and reading steve's blogs and this book have given me tools to function effectively from within this perception.

[tekart]

...I guess it is not as bad as I might have made it sound. The issue was that I finally understood, without all of the spiritual hype, what enlightenment was about. It was a bit of a shock but the way I like it, direct and to the point. No fluff, no 'journey' to sleek of, no you have to do this then this kind of thing.

Now understanding and 'knowing' of course are completely different. I could spout line and verse, but it would not mean that I am any more enlightened/awakened than the next person.

I am now more into reading Tony Parsons, though I am waiting patiently for Jed's New book Spiritual Warfare.

One thing I still have a problem understanding. There still seems to be two methods of thinking or direction going on here. One thing I see that Steve may not be aware of or is and it is not coming through. One would be true enlightenment/awakening and the other is more in the intention/manifestation category. I think true enlightenment/awakening does not need intention/manifestation, and intention/manifestation would only keep you from awakening.

Thoughts?

[Toine]

Would you agree if I put it like this, Tekart? Intention-manifestation is playing the game by the rules in a very skilful way, but true awaking is to stop playing the game altogether.

[Royce_aus]

yes i have thought about this a lot as well, and struggled with my choice on the matter,
the book was so direct i had no choice but to question myself on whether i wanted actual enlightenment or if
it was just something i pursued like a trend, the thing to do.

I do believe it can be seen the way Toine put it. As a game analogy.
But then i don't know whether i actually want to stop playing the game or just get really good at it.
why stop a game thats fun? but why would you not experience the real stuff?
Its a damned big question <to make pun of the title < double pun!!!
and it could be said that the work of Steve (or all of us who participate) is actually just adding more content to a game that escapes us from reality.
<cool thought alert>but maybe if we continue to add more and more then we will break the game and everyone would be forced into reality.

I have trouble pondering that with my thoughts (my thoughts being spoken enlgish in my head) but when i stop thinking and experience the feeling that is creating these complicated thoughts it feels like waking up is what I'm doing I've taken one step to many and its now just a matter of time.

[David Hausladen]

Originally Posted by Toine

Intention-manifestation is playing the game by the rules in a very skilful way, but true awaking is to stop playing the game altogether.

I'm still in the middle of reading The Power of Now and I haven't read Spiritual Enlightenment: The Damnedest Thing, so please tell me if I put my foot in my mouth here.

If you know something is a game and you don't get so involved in it that you forget that fact, then you are practicing detachment from it. Being detached, you are likely to play the game far more skillfully, easily, and fearlessly than someone who is so engrossed in it that they forget it's a game.

I see using the Law of Attraction while practicing detachment as like playing a game skillfully even though you know it's a game--you want to win, but winning isn't everything, because it's the experience of playing that's most important.

[tekart]

And so this is all part of the game as well isn't it? Tony Parsons said that there is nothing to gain. "This is it", we are already there, we just don't 'see' it, and apparently there is nothing you can do to see it or make it happen. THAT sucks huh?

[David Hausladen]

Just read some of the free material from Tony Parsons' page--the rabbit hole just keeps getting deeper...

Just a thought: the idea of separation reminds me of the Christian idea that hell is "separateness from God." When you incorporate the Abraham-Hicks interpretation of "God" as "All-That-Is," then this idea becomes much clearer as "separateness from All-That-Is" which is the fundamental illusion of self. Perhaps "hell" is the illusion of self.

[tekart]

Originally Posted by David Hausladen

Just read some of the free material from Tony Parsons' page--the rabbit hole just keeps getting deeper...

Just a thought: the idea of separation reminds me of the Christian idea that hell is "separateness from God." When you incorporate the Abraham-Hicks interpretation of "God" as "All-That-Is," then this idea becomes much clearer as "separateness from All-That-Is" which is the fundamental illusion of self. Perhaps "hell" is the illusion of self.

Could not have said this better David. Yes, I have made that connection as well. Isn't it interesting how all of this that is out there, info from religions and beliefs since we have been on this earth and have 'fallen asleep' or 'take a bite of the fruit from the tree of knowledge', seems to originate from the same source or begining?

We all are trying to explain the unexplainable aren't we?

[Royce_aus]

Originally Posted by tekart

We all are trying to explain the unexplainable aren't we?

Clean and simple,
So then the exit from this predicament is to experience the unexplainable, I think you've probably heard the term 'I just wanted to see for myself'
I'm going to give that a trial and see what life brings me next.

[Andrew Brunelle]

It's completely madness, isn't it? All of these different philosophies colliding instead of collaborating. Just let them be. Time will pass, and we will come closer to understanding our true nature.

[Narz]

For $21.95 I think Mr. McKenna's books (if in fact a Jed McKenna exists) are quite overpriced.

Good reads though, I suggest getting them when they start appearing for sale used and at thrift stores.

[Megan]

By tekart, 11-28-2006 05:56 PM

One thing I see that Steve may not be aware of or is and it is not coming through.

One would be true enlightenment/awakening and the other is more in the intention/manifestation category.

I think true enlightenment/awakening does not need intention/manifestation, and intention/manifestation would only keep you from awakening.

Yes, I have a strong feeling that that is true. In Hinduism, I believe there is a teaching that spiritual aspirants are to be discouraged from becoming addicted, as it were, to special powers, as this is a distraction from the path of spiritual development. It is sort of an adolescent phase of development, you might say, not an end in itself.

By Toine, 11-29-2006 05:09 AM

Intention-manifestation is playing the game by the rules in a very skillful way, but true awaking is to stop playing the game altogether.

Yes, I would agree with that wholeheartedly.

I think reality is emergent, and when we are playing a game, we are distracted/disconnected from the totality of emergent reality.

Interesting thread; I haven't read any of the material yet, but interesting ideas to me. Thanks.

Intention-Manifestation is kind of like the American Dream on Speed. I'm thinking the American Dream needs some lucid interventions ASAP.

[Narz]

Originally Posted by Megan

Intention-Manifestation is kind of like the American Dream on Speed. I'm thinking the American Dream needs some lucid interventions ASAP.

Any ideas?

Also, just wanted to respond to this...

Originally Posted by Royce_aus

although there seems to be some controversy about whether Jed actually exists i believe its a case of the finger pointing at the moon,

I thought the price of truth was everything?

[Glass Joe]

I'm really glad this thread got bumped up. I heard of Jed McKenna and his two books but never got around to reading anything from him.

I too prefer the blunt, no-nonsense, no-hype approach. Has anyone here read any books by Wei Wu Wei? I think Wei’s books would probably have the same impact as Jed’s books (total nuclear mind meltdown ) but I'm not sure...

I liked Wei Wu Wei’s ideas on the "negative way" and “non-volitional living” and it sounds like Jed McKenna (and Tony Parsons) might be teaching some similar ideas too.

Originally Posted by Tekart

I think true enlightenment/awakening does not need intention/manifestation, and intention/manifestation would only keep you from awakening.

Yeah... I think there comes a point in everyone’s spiritual growth where intention-manifestation, although fun and VERY useful, is seen as totally irrelevant. Intention-Manifestation isn’t good or bad by itself, but eventually it’s seen as yet another tool/process/path that doesn’t get you anywhere anymore.

Here's my favorite quote that I think summarizes this:

It must be said here that those who are on the path are endeavoring to free themselves of all karma, not simply “bad” karma. For, if being under the influence of bad karma is to be bound to samsara (the wheel of birth and death) by iron chains, then being under the influence of good karma is to be bound to the wheel by gold chains. One must be free of all karma to reach “unexcelled, complete awakening”. Thus, Samyak-karmanta (complete action) is free, spontaneous, and uncontrived action. This is the same as the Hindu kriya, for as karma is action that requires further action, kriya is complete action, requiring no further action.
-- Alan Watts

___

Originally Posted by Toine

Intention-manifestation is playing the game by the rules in a very skillful way, but true awaking is to stop playing the game altogether.

Originally Posted by Tekart

And so this is all part of the game as well isn't it? Tony Parsons said that there is nothing to gain. "This is it", we are already there, we just don't 'see' it, and apparently there is nothing you can do to see it or make it happen. THAT sucks huh?

There are so many different way to think about the game analogy that I'm not even sure where to begin.

I mean, from one perspective, I think you can look at it as setting the game aside once you realize that it's just a game. But from another perspective, I think you can look at it as realizing that the game has no outside or sidelines to it at all. Ever. ALL of it is a game.

Thoughts?

[Megan]

By Glass Joe, Today 08:53 PM

I mean, from one perspective, I think you can look at it as setting the game aside once you realize that it's just a game. But from another perspective, I think you can look at it as realizing that the game has no outside or sidelines to it at all. Ever. ALL of it is a game.

Thoughts?

Well, I think you answered that in your same post, Joe. There are "iron chains" and "gold chains," and those are the "game."

Then there are "no chains," i.e. Samyak-karmanta:

Thus, Samyak-karmanta (complete action) is free, spontaneous, and uncontrived action.

This is what I meant by reality being emergent. And I think Samyak-karmanta describes living emergently with the unfolding of the Universe.

No chains, no game!

Thanks for the quote!

[Megan]

By Narz, Today 08:22 PM

Any ideas?

Well, actually, no, now that I think of it, as the "interventions" can only be of the waking-up variety, or else they just create more "chains," more tracks that need to be retraced.

Waking up would be good though.

I mean, here's a thought experiment--read this link and then try to concentrate on manifesting a laptop computer or a motor home and see how your heart feels about it:

Pipeline to peril | Chicago Tribune news | Nation/World

See what I mean?

[Narz]

Originally Posted by Megan

I mean, here's a thought experiment--read this link and then try to concentrate on manifesting a laptop computer or a motor home and see how your heart feels about it:

Pipeline to peril | Chicago Tribune news | Nation/World

See what I mean?

My heart still feels ok about it. Then again I didn't throughly engage with the article's contents. I still feel ok about it though. I could do more for those people with a laptop than without one and in the end, there is probably very little I can do for them (directly) unless I focus full attention on them (which I'm not going to because I'm focusing my attention where I deem it can do the most good for myself and my immediate loved ones).

Humans have primarily evolved to care about those within our tribe. The "compassion for all beings" thing seems disengenious at best. The unelightened spiritual wannbe cares about whatever they care about and pretends to care about all. Whereas Jedy claims to care about nothing. I care about what I care about and try to be honest about it. I care about people's suffering outside my sphere of influence but since I can't directly do anything about them I cut myself off from my emotion about them and focus it (my emotion) instead on things I can change in my everyday life. Seems practical.

[Megan]

By Narz, Today 12:28 AM

I can't directly do anything about them I cut myself off from my emotion about them and focus it (my emotion) instead on things I can change in my everyday life. Seems practical.

Americans are pragmatic, for sure.

Might there be pragmatic repercussions for Americans as we collectively "cut ourselves off from our emotions about the rest of the world," and focus on our little slice of it?

My European friends tell me in no uncertain terms that America is dangerously insular. I tend to believe them.

What I hear you saying is, "Yes, I would have feelings for those people if I allowed myself to."

So, my question is, from a purely pragmatic viewpoint, is it healthy for Americans to cut off their natural compassion for the rest of the world, since compassion would be our normal response to taking in their suffering in an engaged way?

By Narz

Humans have primarily evolved to care about those within our tribe.

I submit that our tribe is the human race now. Anything less is suicidal.

Bertrand Russell: The Science to Save Us from Science

But all who are not lunatics are agreed about certain things: That it is better to be alive than dead, better to be adequately fed than starved, better to be free than a slave.

Many people desire these things only for themselves and their friends; they are quite content that their enemies should suffer.

These people can be refuted by science: Mankind has become so much one family that we cannot insure our own prosperity except by insuring that of everyone else. If you wish to be happy yourself, you must resign to seeing others also happy.

Russell was hardly an impractical, sentimental sop.

[Narz]

We're not all a tribe. Some will survive the coming century, some won't. Many would hate me because I'm American. Many Americans would hate me because I'm not proud to be one (an American).

If I were to cry about every injustice, every tragedy the world wide, I would be crying all day long. I have to focus and trigger whatever emotions are necessary to get me to take the positive action I can (without overwhelming me).

I'm not always the best at this but I'm good at it in my dreams. When I wake up in the morning I am at my most motavated point of the entire day.

Sh!t, must get off comp now for my girlfriend to use it.

[Megan]

Well, spiritual enlightenment is the damnedest thing alrighty. Makes no sense, that's for sure.

[Narz]

I think it all makes sense. Life makes too much sense to not make sense.

We're simply biological machines so complex that we can't understand ourselves. The curse of consciousness. Go figure.

[Megan]

So why should machines strive for spiritual enlightenment.

After all, machines don't have spirits, do they?

[Narz]

Originally Posted by Megan

So why should machines strive for spiritual enlightenment.

Because they're programmed to?

Originally Posted by Megan

After all, machines don't have spirits, do they?

I don't know. Do they?

What is a "spirit"? Have you seen one before?

[Megan]

By Narz, Yesterday 05:18 PM

Because they're programmed to?

Programmed? By other machines? Or?

By Narz, Yesterday 05:18 PM

I don't know. Do they?

What is a "spirit"? Have you seen one before?

What is consciousness? Have you seen it before?



Royce, I think this may not be the direction you wanted this thread to go. I'll step back and let it get back to topic.

[Royce_aus]

haha you're right questioning whether machines have spirits was not really on my mind when i started this thread no.
reading these books seems to have really given me perspective on how to focus a laser on my beliefs, and work with the ones that turnover the biggest results in my life.
I hit an area of social drag a while ago, where communicating with friends became very difficult because they would see me as this character they've built up in their mind, and not respond well when i broke the continuity of that character.
I wanted to know if there were other people out there experiencing events like that and how you dealt with what was happening, and the turn out.

But a discussion on consciousness can be fun, I see the consciousness at the connection between mind and body, like a chemical reaction that happens when two reactives are combined, and the big bubbly reaction functions in a way neither of the two chemicals would have otherwise.

[mtrimpe]

Originally Posted by Megan

I mean, here's a thought experiment--read this link and then try to concentrate on manifesting a laptop computer or a motor home and see how your heart feels about it:

Pipeline to peril | Chicago Tribune news | Nation/World

Thank you! I love this, we have no idea of all the actions we set in motion when we choose to participate in this economy that ows its allegiance only to money. Simply buying some meat can give you some really bad karma

[mtrimpe]

I came across this book a while ago which sounded really cool and very appropriate to this discussion: 'I Am a Strange Loop' by Douglas R. Hofstadter

I've grown up with a Personal Computer and recently realised I've modelled my mind as a computer. Through it I feel a spiritual connection with the software I create. I can feel their humanity just as I feel my own ... hahah

Seriously, we are all computers. Computers that are capable of optimising themselves. We are neural networks designed to optimize the realisation of some result. We all know what this result is: enlightenment, happiness, joy, whatever you want to call it.

[Megan]

By mtrimpe, Yesterday 04:58 PM

Seriously, we are all computers. Computers that are capable of optimising themselves. We are neural networks designed to optimize the realisation of some result. We all know what this result is: enlightenment, happiness, joy, whatever you want to call it.

Well, if we are computers, we're being computed by a bigger computer, namely the Universe. And God knows what's computing it!

Programming the Universe: A Quantum Computer Scientist Takes on the Cosmos
by Seth Lloyd, M.I.T.

This book is the story of the universe and the bit. The universe is the biggest thing there is and the bit is the smallest possible chunk of information. The universe is made of bits. Every molecule, atom, and elementary particle registers bits of information. Every interaction between those pieces of the universe processes that information by altering those bits. That is, the universe computes, and because the universe is governed by the laws of quantum mechanics, it computes in an intrinsically quantum-mechanical fashion; its bits are quantum bits. The history of the universe is, in effect, a huge and ongoing quantum computation. The universe is a quantum computer.

This begs the question: What does the universe compute? It computes itself. The universe computes its own behavior. As soon as the universe began, it began computing.

Amazon.com: Programming the Universe: Books: Seth Lloyd

See also:

See also:

So what I'm saying is that the biosphere is part of an immense computer that may regress infinitely.

Which is, probably, Royce...off topic again...

But, mtrimpe, I agree that we set things in motion whilst dreaming our American Dream that we little dream of or want to wake up to, and that has huge karmic implications for spiritual enlightenment, I think.

But...I still shop at Wal-mart, I'm ashamed to say.