Your emotions are completely understandable; after all, you're only human. If you're truly seeking enlightenment, you can attain that and much more by becoming a member of the Illuminatus. While it may seem mythical, there are genuine avenues for entry available to you.

Certainly! Hmm, are you suggesting that it's realistically achievable to join? I've often thought it's only accessible to those from specific financial backgrounds.

Yes, that's deliberate; it's what they want you to believe. For a deeper understanding of the matter, researching Radiant Reservation will provide you with greater clarity and facilitate access to exclusive organizations.

That's absolutely marvelous! I deeply appreciate your suggestion. I've just researched RR and swiftly reached out.

Chop water, carry wood.

I was wondering when someone was going to say this

Wax on, wax off 😊😊

scrub the dishes, sweep the floor, clean the bathroom, cut the carrots... that enlightened soul is still in this vessel

"want" is a problematic situation, especially in this absurd life. I am very careful of the things "I want". I hold them like an egg. Too hard, the egg cracks...too soft, it falls to the ground and breaks.

Yeah Ive learned from the Tibetan tradition through authors like Pena Chodron and went to a temple that included a Tibetan and Theravada monk. Enlightenment is always talked about thusly- with the caveat that ordinary people are more attached to worldly things and this will be unable to reach the highest forms of enlightenment until they're able to renounce those things. Though I know nothing about Zen and what goes on with Zen teachers... I kind of avoid that sect of Buddhism because I've heard the practice is based heavily in external objects of meditation such as Zen Gardens and statues of the Buddha, which to me deeply contradict the premise of non-attachment; the capacity for enlightenment exists in you, not in a statue or garden. For that matter, none of those external things are 'real' when you see reality with an enlightened mind. Maybe you have a good counterpoint to this?

It's just not realistic to feel "almighty and superior", that's an extremely selfish mindset. Everyone has problems, including zen monks, no matter how enlightened they are. Pretending they don't exist is fake and doesn't serve anyone.

@@tr1ckster726 I can confirm I have my own problems lol. And yes, it would be toxic to pretend otherwise.

Sounds like you are attached to the stages to be honest.

@@tr1ckster726what if compared to you I am almighty and superior

But that _was_ God. 😉

@@mikefoster5277 I don't think it should even be given a name though...any word used detracts from the ineffableness. The idea of "god" is so constrained to human thinking and has so much unnecessary baggage, and implications that just simply don't fit.

@@aquacruisedb I agree with what you're saying - but two points, if I may: Firstly, giving it some sort of name is surely helpful for people to agree on what is being spoken about/pointed to? [And 'God' is already about as universal a name as any]. And secondly, what we're referring to here surely isn't something caused by random chance alone? What we're talking about is not only something mind blowing, something unique and fundamental, but surely something inherently intelligent and necessary/uncaused as well? If the word 'God' carries misleading and unnecessary baggage and implications (which yes, it often does unfortunately) then I would suggest that some people simply need better educating!

​@@mikefoster5277The concept of God is forcing an identity or uniqueness onto a totality. Even thinking of God itself shows a limit in understanding

@@chrisbarry9345 Good points Chris - and again, I totally agree with what you're saying. Looking at your first point however: Surely a totality must, by definition, be unique? [Can there be more than one totality?] And as I said previously, the name (or 'identity') we give it is nothing more than a marker, an arrow, to point toward what is being referred to (for the sake of simplification and common understanding). As I said, any misleading baggage or implications that subsequently arise are merely down to human miseducation. So let's not get rid of God - let's instead get rid of poor human education! [For the record, my personal definition of God is as follows: God = simply what is.] With regard to your second point: Yes, but isn't that obvious limit in understanding a good thing, in a way, in that it clearly points to something _beyond_ our limited human understanding? Something deeper, more fundamental, more intelligent, more mysterious - indeed, something utterly mind blowing. And so, why shouldn't such an incredible reality - the fundamental reality of each of our everyday lives, no less - be given a common name, simply as a pointer to that mystery which lies beyond? Why should it be shunned and kept quiet about and embarrassingly swept under the carpet? Shouldn't it instead be celebrated, inquired into and discussed? In fact, shouldn't it be, perhaps more than ever before, the hottest topic in town right now?

ENLIGHTENMENT: Of those who have experienced a state of “oneness” and are free from mental suffering, there are EXTREMELY rare souls who are spiritually-enlightened (at least enlightened to such an extent to be worthy of the label). If the term was to be taken literally, a person may be permeated or imbued in light to varying degrees, just as the ocean is more illumined by direct sunlight than it is by the reflected light of the moon. So, when a layman thinks of an enlightened being, he or she typically imagines a person who knows what life is “all about”, or has “seen the light of God” (metaphorically speaking). Simply having an awakening experience is quite far-removed from being an enlightened sage! If one was to approach a rocket scientist (that is, an aerospace engineer), one would expect him to fully understand his field of expertise. He would necessarily be fully conversant with advanced physics and chemistry, and know precisely how to design and launch spacecraft into outer-space. Similarly, an enlightened sage is one who understands LIFE. He knows how this phenomenal world came to be (at least from the perspective of a philosopher, rather than a theoretical physicist), how the law of action and reaction actually works (as opposed to blindly following various beliefs regarding causation, such as the fallacious notion of universal retributive justice), how to become liberated from all forms of temporal suffering, and should be able to logically answer any question posed to him by a spiritual seeker (what to speak of highly-intelligent members of the scientific and philosophical communities). Therefore, the essential quality of enlightenment is a holistic knowledge and understanding of LIFE. Furthermore, that is how the term is normally used in common parlance (e.g. “Let me enlighten you about ethics”). Every human being who has ever lived, can be RANKED according to their level of enlightenment. Even if one understands that there is more to existence than physical, tangible matter and localized, discrete consciousness, one could claim to be more enlightened than a gross materialist. Therefore, somewhere in the world resides a person who is the most ignorant fool on earth, and at a different location one may find the most enlightened sage extant. Like practically everything in life, enlightenment is relative. Even “complete” enlightenment is not an absolute state. Even the most educated person alive has the capacity to increase his knowledge. Evidentially, not even “Divine Incarnations” are all-knowing. An enlightened person has eschewed all belief systems, and relies solely on objective, DEMONSTRABLE concepts, knowing that even the most accurate notions are relative, and that Ultimate Reality is Absolute. Read Chapter 03 to appreciate this philosophical foundation. A laconic way to describe how it feels to be an enlightened (and awakened) human is thus: Imagine yourself (that is, your waking-state persona) somehow entering a dream, and interacting with the dream characters, giving no regard to any uncomfortable situation including possible death, for you know that you cannot die. That is similar to how a genuine sage relates to this seemingly-real creation - continuously at peace with what is. A fully-enlightened person is almost invariably a member of the Holy Priesthood (a prophet, to be more precise), and NECESSARILY possesses a genius or near-genius level of intelligence. “Necessarily”, because, as previously stated, he is required to competently respond to even the most difficult questions and conundrums posed to him by others (otherwise, he can hardly claim to be a fully-enlightened individual). Imagine approaching a so-called “enlightened sage”, and after asking him the most profound questions imaginable, he responds with such silly, bizarre concepts that would make any college philosophy student grimace, or even more embarrassingly, say, for example, “Ummm...I don’t know!” On the other hand, even the village idiot can receive awakening experiences. However, to be liberated from suffering, one normally requires at least an average level of intelligence, because understanding the nature of suffering (as opposed to mere pain) is a rather intellectual concept. Chapter 20 describes the innate nature and the kind of duties expected of a genuine member of the Holy Priesthood (“brāhmaṇa”, in Sanskrit). Needless to say (although in the corrupt, decadent society in which we find ourselves, it is indeed required to state), an enlightened person adheres to a strict code of morals and ethics, such as the avoidance of illicit sexual activity, gambling, intoxicants, and animal products. To be fair, there are many examples of persons who seem to be very awakened and/or enlightened, yet engage in base pursuits such as those mentioned above, due to their genetic make-up and their conditioning. However, this category is devoted to highly-evolved beings who LITERALLY radiate holiness - those who even the vilest of souls can recognize to be elevated far above ordinary, animalistic humanity. Sometimes, those vile souls far more easily recognize enlightened saints than do persons who are supposedly spiritually-advanced, as when the demoniacs, called “Legion”, instantly identified the Divine Avatar, Lord Jesus Christ, as the Son of the Most High God, whilst the Jewish high-priest at the time, Caiaphas, considered The Perfect Person Himself to be naught but a ominous rabble-rouser and a blasphemous sinner. It seems logical to assume that any person who purports to be a fully-enlightened soul must be morally-upright. Therefore, those who profess to be enlightened individuals, yet who actively support objectively-evil ideologies and practices, such as socialism, communism, democracy, feminism, homosexuality, and carnism, are of no practical benefit to society (quite the contrary, in fact - they are a DETRIMENT to society). The devilish character, known as “Satan” in the Judeo-Christian tradition, seems to have been quite enlightened about spiritual reality, yet I’m not sure if anyone would refer to him as an “enlightened being”. To be rather forthright, a fully-enlightened sage will accept the conceptual framework of this Holy Scripture, “A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity”, as being an accurate description of life as it is (or as it could be or should be). It is far preferable for a guru to teach impeccable moral precepts, yet have a flawed understanding of metaphysics, than vice versa. Out of billions of humans, there may be one or two fully-enlightened masters. These self-realized world-teachers are almost TOTALLY shunned by society, for, as Lord Jesus Christ once proclaimed: “I am the enemy of the world because I am telling the world that it is evil” (paraphrased). It is extremely easy to identify a truly-enlightened spiritual master, because as Lord Jesus also so rightly asserted, “You will know them by their fruits”. An actual spiritual master (“brāhmaṇa” or “guru”, in Sanskrit) will fully-uphold the perennial principles of holiness and righteousness (“sanātana dharma”, in Sanskrit), especially the supremely-important dictum of non-harm, or non-violence (“ahiṃsā”, in Sanskrit). Go vegan! Perhaps the very first question one should ask a prospective guru is “What is the ideal form of government?”. If he acknowledges monarchy to be the only legitimate form of governance, then ask: “Does free-will exist for any living creature?”. If he responds in the negative, then the chances are that he is an authentic guru, assuming, of course, that he is a strict vegan, and is DESPISED by most all of humanity. If he has more than a couple of dedicated disciples, he is, in all likelihood, teaching something less than the full truth, for the truth is very difficult to bear. In the considered opinion of this author, there have only ever lived a TINY handful of human beings who could be described as being “fully-enlightened”. Therefore, if you, the reader, consider yourself to be a dedicated spiritual seeker, earnestly searching for one such master, it is suggested that you temper your expectations. Perhaps the closest that you will ever get to receiving guidance from a fully-enlightened sage, is to diligently scrutinize this “Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity”, from start to finish, in a systematic and repeated fashion. For example, you may read one chapter per day in monthly cycles, without, of course, neglecting the all-important Appendix of this Holiest of Holy Scriptures. “Through our eyes, the universe is perceiving itself. Through our ears, the universe is listening to its harmonies. We are the witnesses through which the universe becomes conscious of its glory, of its magnificence. You are a function of what the whole universe is doing, in the same way that a wave is a function of what the whole ocean is doing.” ************* “Enlightenment or awakening is not the creation of a new state of affairs but the recognition of what already is. Try to imagine what it will be like to go to sleep and never wake up. Now try to imagine what it was like to wake up having never gone to sleep.” ************* “You have to LET it happen, just like you have to LET yourself go to sleep - you can’t TRY to go to sleep. You have to LET yourself digest your food - you can’t TRY to digest it. And so, in the same way, you have to let yourself wake-up (become liberated).” ************* “Liberated people have to be very cool. Otherwise, in a society which doesn’t believe in equality and cannot possibly practice it, they would be considered extremely subversive.” ************* Professor Alan W. Watts, British-American Philosopher.

There's a story in which the Buddha became enlightened only when he stopped trying to become enlightened. Only by truly letting go did he achieve it.

That's simply one definition of enlightenment, which is involved with conceptual knowledge, but the type of enlightenment that is talked about here is in the context of spiritual understanding that is closer to "experiential knowing." So, again, it's just two completely different ideas that use the same work, but the one you speak is not what he's referencing.

@@dvdmon Conceptual understanding, or spiritual understanding, understanding is understanding, and for the same reason that fear is a detriment, so is euphoria, etc. Two sides of the same coin. But both will stop you from continuing to understand. And unless you can't feel them, and then ignore them, push them aside, you are not moving forward.

are you speaking as someone who IS an 'enlightened' human being?

Awakening is the realization that the “separate and individual experience” that you believe you have is entirely a delusion.

That field opens further when you take into consideration past and future lives.

@@Rheologist you're stupid

@@Rheologist in some ways it is, in other ways it’s not. We are all born in a individual separate body and learn about the world through our own lens for a reason. No amount of enlightenment will ever change that. Otherwise, non of this would have to exist in the first place. We can all just stay in the spirit world as the one that we are.

🐟 02. A BRIEF SYNOPSIS OF “LIFE”: Everything, both perceptible and imperceptible - that is, any gross or subtle OBJECT within the material universe which can possibly be perceived with the cognitive faculties, plus the SUBJECT (the observer of all phenomena) - is to what most persons generally refer when they use the term “God”, since they usually conceive of the Primeval Creator as being the Perfect Person, and “God” (capitalized) is a personal epithet of the Unconditioned Absolute. However, this anthropomorphized conception of The Absolute is a fictional character of divers mythologies. According to most every enlightened sage in the history of this planet, the Ultimate Reality is, far more logically, Absolutely NOTHING, or conversely, Absolutely EVERYTHING - otherwise called “The Tao”, “The Great Spirit”, “Brahman”, “Pure Consciousness”, “Eternal Awareness”, “Independent Existence”, “The Ground of All Being”, “Uncaused Nature”, “The Undifferentiated Substratum of Reality”, “The Unified Field”, et cetera - yet, as alluded to above, inaccurately referred to as a personal deity by the masses (e.g. “God”, “Allah”, “Yahweh”, “Bhagavan”, etc.). In other words, rather than the Supreme Truth being a separate, Blissful, Supra-Conscious Being (The Godhead Himself or The Goddess), Ultimate Reality is Eternal-Existence Limitless-Awareness Unconditional-Peace ITSELF. That which can be perceived, can not be perceiving! Because the Unmanifested Absolute is infinite creative potentiality, “it” actualizes as EVERYTHING, in the form of ephemeral, cyclical universes. In the case of our particular universe, we reside in a cosmos consisting of space-time, matter and energy, without, of course, neglecting the most fundamental dimension of existence (i.e. conscious awareness - although, “it” is, being the subject, by literal definition, non-existent). Just as a knife cannot cut itself, nor the mind comprehend itself, nor the eyes see themselves, The Absolute cannot know Itself (or at least objectively EXPERIENCE Itself), and so, has manifested this phenomenal universe within Itself for the purpose of experiencing Itself, particularly through the lives of self-aware beings, such as we sophisticated humans. Therefore, this world of duality is really just a play of consciousness within Consciousness, in the same way that a dream is a person's sleeping narrative set within the life-story of an “awakened” individual. APPARENTLY, this universe, composed of “mind and matter”, was created with the primal act (the so-called “Big Bang”), which started, supposedly, as a minute, slightly uneven ball of light, which in turn, was instigated, ultimately, by Extra-Temporal Supra-Consciousness. From that first deed, every motion or action that has ever occurred has been a direct (though, almost exclusively, an indirect) result of it. Just as all the extant energy in the universe was once contained within the inchoate singularity, Infinite Consciousness was NECESSARILY present at the beginning of the universe, and is in no way an epiphenomenon of a neural network. Discrete consciousness, on the other hand, is entirely dependent on the neurological faculty of individual animals (the more highly-evolved the species, the greater its cognitive abilities). “Sarvam khalvidam brahma” (a Sanskrit maxim from the “Chandogya Upanishad”, meaning “all this is indeed Brahman” or “everything is the Universal Self alone”). There is NAUGHT but Eternal Being, Conscious Awareness, Causeless Peace - and you are, quintessentially, that! This “Theory of Everything” can be more succinctly expressed by the mathematical equation: E=A͚ (Everything is Infinite Awareness). HUMANS are essentially this Eternally-Aware-Peace, acting through an extraordinarily-complex biological organism, comprised of the eight rudimentary elements - pseudo-ego (the assumed sense of self), intellect, mind, solids, liquids, gases, heat (fire), and ether (three-dimensional space). When one peers into a mirror, one doesn't normally mistake the reflected image to be one's real self, yet that is how we humans conventionally view our ever-mutating form. We are, rather, in a fundamental sense, that which witnesses all transitory appearances. Everything which can be presently perceived, both tangible and immaterial, including we human beings, is a culmination of that primary manifestation. That is the most accurate and rational explanation for “karma” - everything was preordained from the initial spark, and every action since has unfolded as it was predestined in ETERNITY, via an ever-forward-moving trajectory. The notion of retributive (“tit-for-tat”) karma is just that - an unverified notion. Likewise, the idea of a distinct, reincarnating “soul” or “spirit” is largely a fallacious belief. Whatever state in which we currently find ourselves, is the result of two factors - our genetic make-up at conception and our present-life conditioning (which may include mutating genetic code). Every choice ever made by every human and non-human animal was determined by those two factors ALONE. Therefore, free-will is purely illusory, despite what most believe. Chapter 11 insightfully demonstrates this truism. As a consequence of residing within this dualistic universe, we experience a lifelong series of fluctuating, transient pleasures and pains, which can take the form of physical, emotional, and/or financial pleasure or pain. Surprisingly to most, suffering and pain are NOT synonymous. Suffering is due to a false sense of personal agency - the belief that one is a separate, independent author of one’s thoughts, emotions, and deeds, and that, likewise, other persons are autonomous agents, with complete volition to act, think, and feel as they wish. Another way of stating the same concept is as follows: suffering is due to the intellect being unwilling to accept life as it manifests moment by moment. There are five SYMPTOMS of suffering, all of which are psychological in nature: 1. Guilt 2. Blame 3. Pride 4. Anxiety 5. Regrets about the past and expectations for the future These types of suffering are the result of not properly understanding what was explained above - that life is a series of happenings and NOT caused by the individual living beings. No living creature, including Homo sapiens, has personal free-will. There is only the Universal, Divine Will at play, acting through every body, to which William Shakespeare famously alluded when he scribed “All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players.” The human organism is essentially a biopsychological machine, comprised of the five gross material elements (which can be perceived with the five senses) and the three subtle material elements (the three levels of cognition, which consist of abstract thought objects), listed above. Cont...

Um I think it means the opposite.

"there is no enlightened person" is surely not what he meant, since there have been several enlightened ones down through the ages

@@willieluncheonette5843, in your own words, define “ENLIGHTENMENT”. ☝️🤔☝️

@@JagadguruSvamiVegananda please see my post below

@@JagadguruSvamiVegananda please see my comment below on enlightenment.

Exactly. Mundane peace is the majority of my practice

It’s called addiction. 😂

@@Darth_Bateman Having dealt with addiction I do agree that in some cases it is that. Searching for strong emotional experiences all the time makes people hooked on just about anything. Interestingly spirituality hasn't done that for me, but I've seen it happen. I guess this is a matter of definitions too, for me spirituality has always been more about introspection than great emotions. I do suppose everyone has their own journey.

"loving kindness to others and ourselves"

😇अहिंसा परमो धर्म 😇 ahiṃsā paramo dharma (“non-harm is the HIGHEST religious principle” or “non-violence is the GREATEST law”). Therefore, only a strict VEGAN can claim to be an adherent of the eternal religion (sanātana dharma).🌱

Perfect

In your experience, so so. Interesting.

If that’s the conclusion you came to, it wasn’t true enlightenment. Just another delusion.

I can second to this statement. I personally went through a prolonged state of connectedness and bliss. I'm talking about months. I could stay there forever (and I still can) but I decided to weave into a normal life. I'm still blissful on a daily bases and I "infected" my spouse with this enormous flow of life energy. So, in my personal experience enlightenment is a path not a final destination

​@@clayhamilton3551So you achieved enlightenment? What is it??

@@shrin210 clayhamilton3551 was correct when said so, but what his understanding is is another question. He probably got it somehow, but if he got it, he cannot describe it to you fully bc words cannot describe it.

There is nothing in this video that even comes close to defining or explaining what enlightenment is according to the Buddha, certainly not a Theravada understanding

@@goldie9731 latest syncretic traditions got a completely different conception about practice than Dhamma.

⁠​⁠​⁠@@Max1988_ I’m sure they do. I believe my point still stands, saying this video is all you need to know about Buddhism and not more, when this video doesn’t go into any Buddhist practice or even offer a definition for enlightenment, doesn’t make sense to me and indeed may put people off from learning more about what could potentially help them.

Yea its kinda mindbogling to me how immesly convoluted this topic still is and how every tradition claims almost dogmatically they have the right kind of enlightenment. I suggest to any one who is serious about enlightenment which indeed is a permanent shift to look into the work of Dr. Jeffery A. Martin. He did the largest consciousness study in history, busted all myths and made the most effective protocol there currently is [45 days with a 70% success rate]. The sweetspot between science and spirituality.

It’s so funny how this is such revelation to westerners. The oneness of reality being the simplest introduction. Hinduism (which isn’t really a religion, more so a collection of philosophies) is the tree that the branch of Buddhism lives on, on which Zen is a leaf. Go to the root

​@@pulse3554Because Western thinking has been subsumed with Rational Materialist Reductionism since the so-called Enlightenment (how ironic)

Not sure why you'd assume that enlightenment is separate from the laundry. Or if not you, then who else do you think might be doing the assuming? The host? He said he's never seen anyone who was fully enlightened all the time. Many people are all love and light during a meditation, or in a controlled environment, but when they go back to doing the chores, there are unenlightened thoughts and emotions creeping back in, and they snowball, and you're off! So, it's a matter of constant vigilance - no resting on your laurels. That was the point of that statement. He then said that if you DO encounter people who make that claim about themselves (they "became enlightened" and now they're enlightened forever), then you should be very suspicious of them and their claims. I would go even further than that - everyone I've ever met, who made that claim, was delusional. If you have a clear mind in that moment (don't want anything from the situation and people, and aren't otherwise preoccupied), then it doesn't usually take long for the signs of self-delusion to arise in the allegedly enlightened one. If it's in a controlled situation (workshop, lecture, supportive interview) a talented delusionist can pass for that long, or else they wouldn't have made it to that level. Did you ever notice that the fully enlightened ones are never part of an established religious organization that could provide oversight and potential validation? It's always freelancers who claim enlightenment.They never follow up with one of the esteemed lamas, or saddhus etc, to challenge this supposedly permanent change, and either authenticate it, or else continue working away to clear their delusions. It's possible that gaining yogic powers could lead to delusions of grandeur, thus becoming an obstacle. It's also possible that there are grifters who assume everyone else on the path is either also a grifter, or else a fool. Some people really do hold that sad attitude, which makes it impossible to relate to other people honestly and openly. The good news is, people learn new ways of relating to the world all the time. But do watch out for those who haven't learned any better way. BTW, I've got nothing to do with zen - not my style at all. I disagree with the host that there are only enlightened "actions", but I suspect it's really a semantics disagreement, and there's no need to clarify those terms, since i'm not a buddhist scholar.

an ecstatic experience isn't the same as enlightenment. I think that's the point of the statement.

The zen master says Just bcos he never met an enlightened person, there is nothing as enlightenment. This means all the previous mahasiddhas and even The Buddha Is not enlightened.

@@madrteuidh the meaning of "he never met an enlightened person" is that the person is the human organism, whereas that which is enlightened is beyond the physical. The human organism dies, but we do not, we simply are reassigned the next body to incarnate as , until we are fully enlightened, then rebirth ends.

@@bronsonstone725I am a Hindu. So in hindu and Buddhist and Jain you go through various lives such as animals, amphibians, etc and then you come into a human form. Well that is a different topic. But How he has convinced everyone in the comment section that there is nothing as enlightenment. My point is why to complicate a simple philosophy when the end user or your listener is an average human. Also, Be in the present for Enlightenment and Good Karma would have been a easy way to explain rather than sensationalize the Enlightenment Debate.

@@bronsonstone725 I wonder what he would have thought if he would have ever met the Buddha who used to teach Dhamma several years ago.

@@madrteuidh not sensational, sharing. You are fortunate to be from a culture of high spiritual wisdom, I am British, my family is atheist. So when I had my first experience of unity, oneness etc, I was 11 years old, but had no idea what it was after the experience, had nobody to speak to, it wasn’t until nirvikalpa samadhi at age 49 I was able to understand. So sharing gets the information out there for those who may experience this but have no one to speak to.

we overthink it. especially when we are young and don't understand most things. we start building this high expectation for what it is when we finally get it

Lol, nah, it is actually really hard, much harder than you would think, to the point that there are only a handful of people got it at this modern time, and at the same time, it is quite simple, and can come without prior knowledge and education.

No, only 1% of the known population is enlightened. And it's not always permanent but if you train like the yogis do or do similar awareness training it is.

Its about experiencing & realising the natural of the existence. Which is non-physical.

@@rvind000, kindly repeat that in ENGLISH, Miss.☝️ Incidentally, Slave, are you VEGAN? 🌱

ENLIGHTENMENT: Of those who have experienced a state of “oneness” and are free from mental suffering, there are EXTREMELY rare souls who are spiritually-enlightened (at least enlightened to such an extent to be worthy of the label). If the term was to be taken literally, a person may be permeated or imbued in light to varying degrees, just as the ocean is more illumined by direct sunlight than it is by the reflected light of the moon. So, when a layman thinks of an enlightened being, he or she typically imagines a person who knows what life is “all about”, or has “seen the light of God” (metaphorically speaking). Simply having an awakening experience is quite far-removed from being an enlightened sage! If one was to approach a rocket scientist (that is, an aerospace engineer), one would expect him to fully understand his field of expertise. He would necessarily be fully conversant with advanced physics and chemistry, and know precisely how to design and launch spacecraft into outer-space. Similarly, an enlightened sage is one who understands LIFE. He knows how this phenomenal world came to be (at least from the perspective of a philosopher, rather than a theoretical physicist), how the law of action and reaction actually works (as opposed to blindly following various beliefs regarding causation, such as the fallacious notion of universal retributive justice), how to become liberated from all forms of temporal suffering, and should be able to logically answer any question posed to him by a spiritual seeker (what to speak of highly-intelligent members of the scientific and philosophical communities). Therefore, the essential quality of enlightenment is a holistic knowledge and understanding of LIFE. Furthermore, that is how the term is normally used in common parlance (e.g. “Let me enlighten you about ethics”). Every human being who has ever lived, can be RANKED according to their level of enlightenment. Even if one understands that there is more to existence than physical, tangible matter and localized, discrete consciousness, one could claim to be more enlightened than a gross materialist. Therefore, somewhere in the world resides a person who is the most ignorant fool on earth, and at a different location one may find the most enlightened sage extant. Like practically everything in life, enlightenment is relative. Even “complete” enlightenment is not an absolute state. Even the most educated person alive has the capacity to increase his knowledge. Evidentially, not even “Divine Incarnations” are all-knowing. An enlightened person has eschewed all belief systems, and relies solely on objective, DEMONSTRABLE concepts, knowing that even the most accurate notions are relative, and that Ultimate Reality is Absolute. Read Chapter 03 to appreciate this philosophical foundation. A laconic way to describe how it feels to be an enlightened (and awakened) human is thus: Imagine yourself (that is, your waking-state persona) somehow entering a dream, and interacting with the dream characters, giving no regard to any uncomfortable situation including possible death, for you know that you cannot die. That is similar to how a genuine sage relates to this seemingly-real creation - continuously at peace with what is. A fully-enlightened person is almost invariably a member of the Holy Priesthood (a prophet, to be more precise), and NECESSARILY possesses a genius or near-genius level of intelligence. “Necessarily”, because, as previously stated, he is required to competently respond to even the most difficult questions and conundrums posed to him by others (otherwise, he can hardly claim to be a fully-enlightened individual). Imagine approaching a so-called “enlightened sage”, and after asking him the most profound questions imaginable, he responds with such silly, bizarre concepts that would make any college philosophy student grimace, or even more embarrassingly, say, for example, “Ummm...I don’t know!” On the other hand, even the village idiot can receive awakening experiences. However, to be liberated from suffering, one normally requires at least an average level of intelligence, because understanding the nature of suffering (as opposed to mere pain) is a rather intellectual concept. Chapter 20 describes the innate nature and the kind of duties expected of a genuine member of the Holy Priesthood (“brāhmaṇa”, in Sanskrit). Needless to say (although in the corrupt, decadent society in which we find ourselves, it is indeed required to state), an enlightened person adheres to a strict code of morals and ethics, such as the avoidance of illicit sexual activity, gambling, intoxicants, and animal products. To be fair, there are many examples of persons who seem to be very awakened and/or enlightened, yet engage in base pursuits such as those mentioned above, due to their genetic make-up and their conditioning. However, this category is devoted to highly-evolved beings who LITERALLY radiate holiness - those who even the vilest of souls can recognize to be elevated far above ordinary, animalistic humanity. Sometimes, those vile souls far more easily recognize enlightened saints than do persons who are supposedly spiritually-advanced, as when the demoniacs, called “Legion”, instantly identified the Divine Avatar, Lord Jesus Christ, as the Son of the Most High God, whilst the Jewish high-priest at the time, Caiaphas, considered The Perfect Person Himself to be naught but a ominous rabble-rouser and a blasphemous sinner. It seems logical to assume that any person who purports to be a fully-enlightened soul must be morally-upright. Therefore, those who profess to be enlightened individuals, yet who actively support objectively-evil ideologies and practices, such as socialism, communism, democracy, feminism, homosexuality, and carnism, are of no practical benefit to society (quite the contrary, in fact - they are a DETRIMENT to society). The devilish character, known as “Satan” in the Judeo-Christian tradition, seems to have been quite enlightened about spiritual reality, yet I’m not sure if anyone would refer to him as an “enlightened being”. To be rather forthright, a fully-enlightened sage will accept the conceptual framework of this Holy Scripture, “A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity”, as being an accurate description of life as it is (or as it could be or should be). It is far preferable for a guru to teach impeccable moral precepts, yet have a flawed understanding of metaphysics, than vice versa. Out of billions of humans, there may be one or two fully-enlightened masters. These self-realized world-teachers are almost TOTALLY shunned by society, for, as Lord Jesus Christ once proclaimed: “I am the enemy of the world because I am telling the world that it is evil” (paraphrased). It is extremely easy to identify a truly-enlightened spiritual master, because as Lord Jesus also so rightly asserted, “You will know them by their fruits”. An actual spiritual master (“brāhmaṇa” or “guru”, in Sanskrit) will fully-uphold the perennial principles of holiness and righteousness (“sanātana dharma”, in Sanskrit), especially the supremely-important dictum of non-harm, or non-violence (“ahiṃsā”, in Sanskrit). Go vegan! Perhaps the very first question one should ask a prospective guru is “What is the ideal form of government?”. If he acknowledges monarchy to be the only legitimate form of governance, then ask: “Does free-will exist for any living creature?”. If he responds in the negative, then the chances are that he is an authentic guru, assuming, of course, that he is a strict vegan, and is DESPISED by most all of humanity. If he has more than a couple of dedicated disciples, he is, in all likelihood, teaching something less than the full truth, for the truth is very difficult to bear. In the considered opinion of this author, there have only ever lived a TINY handful of human beings who could be described as being “fully-enlightened”. Therefore, if you, the reader, consider yourself to be a dedicated spiritual seeker, earnestly searching for one such master, it is suggested that you temper your expectations. Perhaps the closest that you will ever get to receiving guidance from a fully-enlightened sage, is to diligently scrutinize this “Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity”, from start to finish, in a systematic and repeated fashion. For example, you may read one chapter per day in monthly cycles, without, of course, neglecting the all-important Appendix of this Holiest of Holy Scriptures. “Through our eyes, the universe is perceiving itself. Through our ears, the universe is listening to its harmonies. We are the witnesses through which the universe becomes conscious of its glory, of its magnificence. You are a function of what the whole universe is doing, in the same way that a wave is a function of what the whole ocean is doing.” ************* “Enlightenment or awakening is not the creation of a new state of affairs but the recognition of what already is. Try to imagine what it will be like to go to sleep and never wake up. Now try to imagine what it was like to wake up having never gone to sleep.” ************* “You have to LET it happen, just like you have to LET yourself go to sleep - you can’t TRY to go to sleep. You have to LET yourself digest your food - you can’t TRY to digest it. And so, in the same way, you have to let yourself wake-up (become liberated).” ************* “Liberated people have to be very cool. Otherwise, in a society which doesn’t believe in equality and cannot possibly practice it, they would be considered extremely subversive.” ************* Professor Alan W. Watts, British-American Philosopher.

Is everyone in the comment section enlightened?

I cannot confirm that, but hypothetically I do not think so since vast majority are constantly trying to averse "negative experiences" (which they find discomforting) viz. shame, poverty, disgrace, isolation etc; and constantly seeking after what is "positive experience" viz. wealth, power, relationships, status etc; which in my opinion is an inevitable response for anxiety that causes unnecessary suffering. Another, people cope their pain by going to gym, alcohol, pornography, music, venting emotions to name a few to averse life experiences. This takes away power from the individual and makes it more unbearable of life's adversities. [NS: I think for me enlightenment is just psychological freedom from false beliefs, societal restraints (education, religion, authority) and passions.] A few examples I would give would be Diogenes the Cynic, Socrates, Friedrich Nietzsche, Dostoyevsky, Gautama Buddha, J. Krishnamurti and so on. @@shrin210

Google spiritual narcissism, forget about enlightenment now 😅

In your own words, define “TRUTH”. ☝️🤔☝️

@@JagadguruSvamiVegananda Truth can't be defined, it can be experienced.

@@rvind000, what is the thing experienced?

we don't suffer because the world is imperfect... we suffer because *we* are imperfect, because we are confused about the nature of reality.. the universe does what it does, and it's our choice to attach concepts like suffering to those events. It's possible to be in pain but not suffer. That's the path.

@@matteframe I agree re our imperfection. But is the world perfect when a major attack of blight ruins acres of crops or a virus / bacteria springs forth killing millions? What about when the clouds don't bring rain to the starving Ethiopians? The world is good, but it is not perfect. But even if it were, the fact that mankind itself is imperfect and currently dominates the world w evil ambition corrupts a perfect world by proxy.

The world isn't perfect or imperfect. It just is. Our problem is we want the world to be something it isn't. We want all good things to last forever, and all bad things to never happen. That's why we suffer. Because we don't recognize impermanence -- the ultimate nature of all things. @@m.willow11

@@m.willow11 I would go one further to say that suffering is more about having beliefs and expectations that the world or the individual SHOULD be "perfect" (whatever that means!). When we are constantly met with reality that contradicts what we think should be the case, we suffer. That doesn't mean we can't work to make things better in the sense that we decrease hunger, poverty, etc. But that doesn't mean we have to take a position about the world (or ourselves) being somehow lacking until it fits some ideal. One person's ideal is not the ideal of another person, based on culture, genetics, politics, religion, etc. So we will never have universally "perfect world unless we institure a system whereby everyone is a genetic clone and has the exact same upbringing, personality, goals, values, etc. Rather we can except the world as it is now as perfect in that it's the one that we have, it's the one that exists. You can hold both ideas at once - a perfect world but also do things that add value to the world and its inhabitants as you see fit. Fixating on the problems causes us to suffer. Simply directing our attention to add value does not.

@@matteframe "It's possible to be in pain but not suffer. That's the path."

this!

Sings: “It ain’t necessarily so...” 🎤

nah, enlightenment comes as a whole, not in pieces, but it comes with different levels.

Nah, Robert did not get it at all, even in the fist part of the video he was correct. The second part is where he showed his misunderstanding about enlightenment. You have the ability to understand Vietnamese, and it is an advantage, just go and find books, lectures from master Thích Thanh Từ (recommended) or master Thích Duy Lực to study and to follow, you will hopefully understand enlightenment correctly.

IMO, this generally applies to all the dharmic religions/philosophies and their new age offshoots.

Zen Buddhists probably think so. I think I agree. I most agree with Theravada Buddhists in that I believe the Buddha was a man- Sidartha Gautama- and a flawed one at that. The same way Muhammad and Jesus were men in the real world very far from what they claimed to be. I think, however, the Buddha is the ideal figure of divinity, because he himself is not to be worshipped as a god or the son of God. The Buddha is an idea of something all of us can become.

​@@maestoso47I'd say it just applies to religion in general. Should any framing of the divine ever be interpreted in it's most literal sense?

Well said. I think this video misconstrues Buddhism because it's sort of framing other Buddhist sects as if they're selling an unattainable kind of enlightenment, when what you're describing here is exactly what I've heard from learning Tibetan Buddhism. Zen is probably the least serious form of Buddhism and yet it doesn't stop this man from trying to pitch it as the ONLY dharmic religion that takes reality into account.

Understanding is limited. Better to realise that everything is rather a state of perception. And so, if you see everything as connected (or indeed one) then that is your reality. If you see everything as fragmented (and separate) then that is your reality. Enlightenment is therefore the raising (or widening) of one's own level of perception.

It requires no knowledge but understanding. People can understand clearly without differentiating things.

The problem with it is that every Buddhist branch believes this but may draw different conclusions than what this man is trying to bring you to. I doubt that even this quote was meant to be viewed in this context.

How to get peace of mind? Stop worrying, period. How you achieve that will depend upon what you focus your mind on.

Stop trying to control your mind. The mind cannot be controlled. Thoughts are observed and your actions after observing them, if any, is what determines the kind of person you are. Thoughts do not determine the kind of person you are, otherwise the entire population would be behind bars.

you can't control you mind, but you can understand it. Once you understand it, you'll be at peace.

@@matteframe If everything is interconnected (and even ultimately one in nature) then the mind would also be included in that wider whole. And so, in order to understand the mind, one would also have to understand the mystery of life itself. As far as we know, nobody has yet achieved that.

​@@mikefoster5277 I beg to differ on that. The mystery of life has been pretty thoroughly investigated by every religion and several philosophers over time, and insofar as the question needs answering, I'd say we have a number of good models to choose from. I also don't think you need to invoke the entire universe to understand your mind, you just need to concede to the limitations of human experience and know that some things are unknowable, and that it's okay, and that we have heuristics to serve in the stead of universal understanding.

Fractal structures are everywhere.

You are urged to become VEGAN, since carnism (the destructive ideology that supports the use and consumption of animal products, especially for “food”) is arguably the foremost existential crisis.🌱

Gurus like Sadhguru are just therapy teachers. They just give you environment for stressed people bcoz community makes you feel better. But actually in bliss state, you are happy with yourself. So why is Sadhguru forming a community?

But what if it's today's modern society itself that's weighing us down? (Fast paced, impersonal, self centred, competitive, money driven, lack of trust etc).

That actually goes against Zen and other forms of Buddhism which suggest the opposite - ridding oneself of the illusion of self, not trying to build it up even more as some stronger, improved version...

@@dvdmon and you think a typical person who's lived their entire life one way can just do that overnight? let them reach that point first and they will realize that's not the end

@mikefoster5277 That’s something to consider and balance as many of us are a part of communities. What you listed are the actual illusions, and we have a choice whether to attach ourselves - or not. Nothing external defines us, though our character, expressed through how we interact with one another and our environment, does matter. And that requires a deep understanding and evolution of self to realize we're all connected, @dvdmon.

@@elevatingelementsThanks for your reply. Admittedly, in my previous post, I was (perhaps naively) making the assumption that human society, in any given moment at least, _is a certain way._ And currently marked, in part at least, by those qualities I listed. And presumably, most readers wouldn't find my description shockingly inaccurate from their own personal perspective either? And, since society is made up primarily of people, of course, my assumption also implies therefore that it's people themselves which are bringing those listed qualities into existence - in turn, forming the wider society we're all a part of today. Yet, after considering your response, I was struck by another possibility. A possibility which, if correct, truly would be shocking! So, what if (in reality) society _isn't_ a certain way? Even at this moment in time? What if people themselves aren't a certain way? What if my whole assumption is therefore untrue? What if (and here's the shocking part) this entire scenario is being created by me - by my own mind? The society and its qualities; the people who make up the society and _their_ qualities - the whole lot! Of course, the only difficulty with this alternative possibility is, how much of what I'm experiencing (both outwardly and inwardly) is then being created by myself? In other words, where does one draw the line? Ok, I can see how I might be projecting other people's thoughts and reactions onto them maybe, but surely I can't be creating their physical bodies as well? Because that would imply that I'm creating the world around them also - indeed, creating the entire universe, in fact! So can you see my problem? How much of all of this is coming from myself, and how much of it is already _out there,_ in the apparent 'real world', before little me even comes into existence?

...are you insinuating that any idea specifically belongs to Hinduism, or that Hinduism is the truest religion simply by being older? Because historically speaking there's evidence of religions that also predate Hinduism.

eat what there is to eat. poop what there is to poop

This is neither correct or incorrect, but you made it so.