Is Enlightenment a choice?

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by wolfgang

It's interesting that some will hear "there's no free will" as being powerless and unable to act on desires and a cause to be depressed as if nothing matters or that this means you are a victim to the universe and just have a certain life that you will have and that's that so "why bother?".

Yes, it's not pleasant to establish one's identity as a separate, vulnerable person, and try to grasp the idea of no choice. We want to talk about oneness and everything being God because that brings God a little closer and makes us feel more safe as separate individuals, but we don't want God to get so close that he threatens our independence, our separateness. It's a difficult paradigm shift to release one's separate identity and "Be still and know that you are God", because separation and independent choice collapse completely in this absolute unification.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Harmonium

I am actually surprised you would say something like this based on what I've read from you.

it doesn't seem to make much sense to me. if freewill is somehow an illusion it's a damn convincing one.

I mean, given the fact that you could, right now, go down to your local bank, hold it up, take the money, kill the witnesses, etc. this could all easily alter your future/destiny, or perhaps a more plausible example might be: anywhere you make a decision that "forks" your "path" so to speak could alter your future in drastic ways.

Not to mention if you only had one destiny/future, you would arrive there no matter what you do. How does this make sense? It makes sense to me that people have different degrees of freewill, but to have no control over the future? I am interested to know how you came to this conclusion.

It IS damn convincing because you are God creating the expression of your beliefs. The physical expression must be seamless and foolproof, which is why it is advised by all of our greatest teachers to turn the attention away from that physical expression and turn within toward the source of that creation, which cannot be hidden because the source IS that attention.

If you rob a bank then it is your destiny to make such a choice. The fact that you have done so says nothing about your ability to freely choose. Choices happen. You have no choice about that.

What is it that doesn't make sense about destiny? If you are not the author of your choices, destiny makes perfect sense. The notion of free will and control arises from the belief in separateness. From within that belief it makes sense and is logical, but separateness is just an idea. Life is a singular unfolding. It remains whole and fully integrated because God remains whole. Likewise, you are that wholeness. You are not the separate person you have come to believe you are. That person is one of your own countless expressions.

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by Placebo23

What do you mean with this ? Difficult to understand. Please elaborate on that.

It's a common reaction that comes up when people hear "you have no free will".

It becomes a reason to be depressed because some will feel there's no purpose if they have no control.

That having no free will means no control and therefore no influence on the circumstances of life, and jump to the conclusion that life will suck.

This leads to feeling powerless with thinking "no free will" means being at the mercy of whatever the universe does "to you".

[raykilleen]

Originally Posted by wolfgang

It's a common reaction that comes up when people hear "you have no free will".

It becomes a reason to be depressed because some will feel there's no purpose if they have no control.

That having no free will means no control and therefore no influence on the circumstances of life, and jump to the conclusion that life will suck.

This leads to feeling powerless with thinking "no free will" means being at the mercy of whatever the universe does "to you".

Yet on a deeper level it’s quite liberating and damn exciting not knowing what will be happening next, yikes!

[Placebo23]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

It IS damn convincing because you are God creating the expression of your beliefs. The physical expression must be seamless and foolproof, which is why it is advised by all of our greatest teachers to turn the attention away from that physical expression and turn within toward the source of that creation, which cannot be hidden because the source IS that attention.

If you rob a bank then it is your destiny to make such a choice. The fact that you have done so says nothing about your ability to freely choose. Choices happen. You have no choice about that.

What is it that doesn't make sense about destiny? If you are not the author of your choices, destiny makes perfect sense. The notion of free will and control arises from the belief in separateness. From within that belief it makes sense and is logical, but separateness is just an idea. Life is a singular unfolding. It remains whole and fully integrated because God remains whole. Likewise, you are that wholeness. You are not the separate person you have come to believe you are. That person is one of your own countless expressions.

Ok, the belief in being a seperate entity is nearly the same as the belief in having free will. So is it true that everything plays itself out in front of me ? Even the realization that I'm not the person unfolds itself in awareness. So there can and will be no choice of me to start this unfolding... is it then by chance, that the process starts ?

and for wolfgang:
Thank you, and you are right about it. I know it from my own experience that one get really depressed about it. In the past I was unable to read any nondualistic texts which states, that there is no free will.

[raykilleen]

I only need one, give me one confirmation in separation and of course accepting the belief of non-dualistic philosophy is depressing, I have yet to find any belief that does not head towards suffering and those damn mirrors reflecting mirrors need to be seen for what they are, illusions.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Placebo23

Ok, the belief in being a seperate entity is nearly the same as the belief in having free will. So is it true that everything plays itself out in front of me ? Even the realization that I'm not the person unfolds itself in awareness. So there can and will be no choice of me to start this unfolding... is it then by chance, that the process starts ?

Well, not by chance. Since Intelligence is functioning, creating, perceiving continuously in all creatures, nothing can happen by chance. Nothing is random.

One's attention will go wherever the interest goes, which is matter of conditioning. Maybe it can be said that most serious spiritual seekers have pretty much lost interest in the things that entertain most folks (power, fame, fortune, drama, etc) and naturally turn their attention to what's next. Most will be satisfied by whatever they find along the way and never actually discover their true nature. Some will see that the spiritual search is no more fruitful or satisfying than the search for those other things, and a sense of futility will settle in. This is very auspicious as it is in this emptiness that the Truth may be recognized.

[raykilleen]

Originally Posted by Placebo23

... is it then by chance, that the process starts ?

Nothing is by chance it will happen when it’s suppose to happen, whatever that means, although I still do ponder the ability of self inquiry?

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by raykilleen

although I still do ponder the ability of self inquiry?

Wadayamean?

[raykilleen]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

Wadayamean?

Damn if I still don’t want to claim some ownership for the insightful hard work that went into self inquiry.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by raykilleen

Damn if I still don’t want to claim some ownership for the insightful hard work that went into self inquiry.

Oh, okay. Well, good job, then. Hehe.

[Irisha]

Originally Posted by Harmonium

Well it makes sense to me that of course you can't choose your desires and preferences, etc. you cannot escape your own perspective, but is that really such a huge limit to freewill as to say it doesn't exist? Not to me. You still have lots of options available to you, you have potential you can reach or not reach, bad choices to make or not make, good choices to make or not make, etc.

Why do you think it's you who is making choices? It's a scientifically proven fact that before you decide to make a movement , and make a step, the impulse to do that has already existed in your mind, though you were not aware of it, because it'a a too short time between the impulse and your decision (choice). This time interval is too short to notice it (about 0.000000015 sec). The brain is just a receiving device.
What I have written right now was also made according to this scenario, of course.

[Irisha]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

You are God..

You mean in potential. Which can never be realized.

[raykilleen]

Originally Posted by Irisha

You mean in potential. Which can never be realized.

Perhaps not realized intellectually but directly experienced, otherwise there would be no verification.

[Irisha]

Originally Posted by raykilleen

Perhaps not realized intellectually but directly experienced, otherwise there would be no verification.

How do you know that what you have experienced is the verification that you are God?

[raykilleen]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

Wadayamean?

{And now for the rest of the story}

Choice A (similar to above): Would you like coffee or tea? I think I’ll have tea.

Choice B: Here it comes…out of nowhere…wait for it; I’m going to study and practice the yogic sciences in an effort to allow calm space for deeper self inquiry.

Unfortunately I can’t remember where I read the following and it’s borrowed knowledge from a second hand quote of someone suggesting Ramana Maharishi once said, something like; “all is determined except the ability of self inquiry of one’s true inner nature”, although I’ve never personally read this from any Ramana writing.

The pondering began; am I missing something, is there any kind of difference between Choice A & B and what are the flaws of thinking difference.

[ChristsLight]

Originally Posted by Placebo23

Is it because the person is itself non existing ?

Exactly.

[ChristsLight]

Originally Posted by Harmonium

it doesn't seem to make much sense to me. if freewill is somehow an illusion it's a damn convincing one.

Isn't separation a convincing illusion?

All of the arguments you have in your post rely on the illusion of separation. Can you give me one way, without relying on the illusion of separation, that free will can exist?

[Apopohis Reject]

Placebo23 :Is it because the person is itself non existing?

Originally Posted by ChristsLight

Exactly.

Of course the person exists. It is an OBVIOUS, and a delusion to suggest otherwise.

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by Apopohis Reject

Of course the person exists. It is an OBVIOUS, and a delusion to suggest otherwise.

Originally Posted by ChristsLight

Isn't separation a convincing illusion?

Indeed.

[Apopohis Reject]

Originally Posted by ChristsLight

Isn't separation a convincing illusion?

All of the arguments you have in your post rely on the illusion of separation. Can you give me one way, without relying on the illusion of separation, that free will can exist?

Separation being an illusion is a misunderstanding of reality. Our conceptualisation of separation is due in full to our SUBJECTIVE perspective of our (personal) reality.

On the other hand, we also have an OBJECTIVE perception of the universe; the actual, unchangeable reality at any moment, which includes 'me' - the existent person. Through this far more authentic objective perspective, separation doesn't exist.

So we veer to the subjective perspective rather than the objective, and subsequently recognise only fragmentation/separation. Therefore this separation argument is merely a misreading of our two perspectives of reality.

[ChristsLight]

Originally Posted by Apopohis Reject

Separation being an illusion is a misunderstanding of reality. Our conceptualisation of separation is due in full to our SUBJECTIVE perspective of our (personal) reality.

On the other hand, we also have an OBJECTIVE perception of the universe; the actual, unchangeable reality at any moment, which includes 'me' - the existent person. Through this far more authentic objective perspective, separation doesn't exist.

So we veer to the subjective perspective rather than the objective, and subsequently recognise only fragmentation/separation. Therefore this separation argument is merely a misreading of our two perspectives of reality.

If there is no separation, then how is there a "me" that is a person?

[MaryAnneMc]

I believe that enlightenment comes when you are ready, or when spiritual helpers who are watching over you believe you are ready. For years I have tried to understand my ability to be intuitive, and to manifest, and to have information about topics I don't really know about consciously. Only recently have I really been able to consciously and effectively maneuver the world of information that exists spiritually.

I tend to know when something really bad is brewing, though I always associate the anxiety I feel prior to an event with something that is going to happen to me, I personalize it. This is where I need to grow and mature in my gifts I think. Does anyone have experience with this? Is there anyone here who can help me understand the difference between things to come that affect me directly or globally or within a degree or two of separation?

Thanks for any help or info or support on this topic. xo

MaryAnne

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by Apopohis Reject

On the other hand, we also have an OBJECTIVE perception of the universe; the actual, unchangeable reality at any moment, which includes 'me' - the existent person.

This is where you lose me, AR.

I can understand your "objective perception" (which I must assume is for lack of a better phrase, since it appears to me to be oxymoronic) including the essence of reality (including the essence of 'me', I suppose), but I cannot see an 'exitent person' perceiving anything (including himself/herself) but subjectively.

Originally Posted by ChristsLight

If there is no separation, then how is there a "me" that is a person?

And then there's that.

[raykilleen]

Originally Posted by Irisha

How do you know that what you have experienced is the verification that you are God?

God, Divine, Absolute, Brahma; do you have a definition in mind?

[Apopohis Reject]

Originally Posted by ChristsLight

If there is no separation, then how is there a "me" that is a person?

I do not have any idea what your question is asking, but that appears to me to be about a misunderstanding of your definition of (at least) the term 'separation'. hmmmmmmmmmm

But now - I'll be darned if I'm going to (again) ask you to define anything, so I guess - let misunderstanding and the aggravation it supports reign supreme!

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by Apopohis Reject

On the other hand, we also have an OBJECTIVE perception of the universe; the actual, unchangeable reality at any moment, which includes 'me' - the existent person. Through this far more authentic objective perspective, separation doesn't exist.

Originally Posted by ChristsLight

If there is no separation, then how is there a "me" that is a person?

Originally Posted by Apopohis Reject

I do not have any idea what your question is asking, but that appears to me to be about a misunderstanding of your definition of (at least) the term 'separation'. hmmmmmmmmm

I think I see what CL is asking (since I have the question myself)--

"Me", as opposed to "you" or "he" or "she" or "it", implies separation, yet you state (bolded above) that separation doesn't exist. This appears to be a contradiction (but, most of us know how deceiving appearances can be ).

[Irisha]

Originally Posted by raykilleen

God, Divine, Absolute, Brahma; do you have a definition in mind?

My question was:
How do you know that what you have experienced is the verification that you are God?

You answer:
"God, Divine, Absolute, Brahna; do you have a definition in mind?"


I don't understand your answer.



You said that God can be directly experienced, otherwise there would be no verification. How can the experience of God be verification at the same time? How do you know that what you experience as God is really God?
And even more than that. That YOU are God?

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Irisha

You mean in potential. Which can never be realized.

In actuality.

[Irisha]

In actuality with potentiality which can never be actually realized?