This apperception was non-conceivable—beyond self, thought, space, time and all existences. It remained for me the Ultimate and Absolute Reality at the time. Upon reflection it seemed to me that the Hindu term sat-chit-ananda meaning: existence, consciousness, bliss indicating the highest reality in that tradition, would better conform to my experience, if translated as a double negative: not-not existent, not-not conscious, bliss.
So, these various terms within the context of the Traditions most aptly fit my experience. Then I had a second experience with a main part in common with the experience above. This occurred some 10 years later while sitting close to my Indian Guru, Swami Muktananda, under whom I practiced for 13 years.
In his proximity, over one week, I disappeared in this absolute sense about five times but without the attendant bliss. It happened most distinctly but within a second—a moment of cosmic relief in the annihilation of a self.
As soon as a self returned to recognize its absence, the experience could no longer exist. The third experience occurred around in Elmira, upstate New York. One day while doing a spiritual exercise, suddenly the width of my visual perception began to increase. I got up and walked out into a foyer and stood there for about 30 minutes watching two men chatting. One of the men was sitting on the ground with his back against the wall, the other was standing.
They were talking in earnest. As I looked at them, the whole scene appeared as an illusion. They were no more real than puppets in a puppet show. It was a fascinating perception; a full-blown experience, yet with no change in the appearance of objects. Life and what I was witnessing seemed an illusion—ordinary perception giving a false impression of reality.
Every trace of the weight and sting of life had vanished. Even as I watched I knew I was enjoying the classic Vedantic realization that all life is an illusion—a dream—a mere seeming.
It is what one branch of the spiritual Indian tradition promulgated as a key truth and a mark of Enlightenment. Here I was in the middle of it experientially. Seeing from this perspective, nothing really mattered as I had assumed it did. This perception shut down after about 30 minutes. Despite having these marvelous experiences, I was intrigued by them having zero impact on my life at all. It was a bit on the thrilling side, but it did not add one jot to the quality, texture or function of my conventional life or spiritual activities, which was also true with the following.
All of this proved to be a serious eye-opener. It was years later, that on this point I had a clue to the basis of the whole Far Eastern tradition of spirituality and how it contrasted to the Christian one. In a purposive sense, Buddhism and Hinduism were about escape and transcendence, leaving an unreal world—life-negative; Christianity rather, was about engagement and fulfillment through Christ—life-positive.
On further reflection: to Buddhist doctrine, life is suffering; to the Hindus, an illusion or at best a play of consciousness. Squarely faced, both these viewpoints do not affirm the value of the created world as plainly experienced by all people.
It seemed to me that both viewpoints are a dodge and a highly sophisticated one at that. A whole metaphysical, philosophical system is built around this dodge, including a way of life, sets of values, and for those in earnest, a system of spiritual disciplines and techniques.
Reflections upon my perceptions above and those of others, understandably lead to conclusions, but ones that I believe are flawed. The experiencer assumes that such experiences, because of their loveliness or superiority, is true reality, or at least a truer reality, and therefore something to be pursued.
Yes, in my case a filter was pulled off and a new dimension of reality opened up. Perhaps in the history of mankind there are those to whom it has fallen for half a lifetime. But ultimately these experiences are unsustainable. They quickly pass. Does not their impermanence bring into question their true value or significance?
Is it not possible that these Eastern spiritual objectives are unsustainable pathways of spirituality, and understandable miss-takes on the true purpose of life when contrasted to the teachings of Jesus and His apostles? Perhaps Far Eastern systems of spirituality do not conform to the real reality for which, by design, we were created to enjoy. This is what I was beginning to suspect. It can be correctly affirmed that these generic mystic states or classical forms of Far Eastern Classical Enlightenment are real and valid states of consciousness, but are states rarely attained.
If experienced, they are rarely, if ever, sustainable. Mystic states can precipitate spontaneously or can be induced by rigors of spiritual or mental disciplines, just as athletic rigors can induce muscular enhancement and control leading to amazing athletic prowess. The latter point supports the idea that it all begins and ends with chemical changes in the brain.
Further, I know from experience that mystical phenomena arise from stirring the Kundalini energy, as some of them have been in my own case. This spiritual power is spoken about by the Hindus who believe that Kundalini has its roots in the physical body, a force that can induce experiences beyond bodily boundaries as well. However, I believe that Kundalini too dies with the body. And whatever post-death state a Vedantin, Shaivite, yogi or Buddhist finds him or herself in, is not related in any way to earthly spiritual disciplines, manipulations or psycho-physical phenomena, coming from whatever source.
I am suggesting that none of this leads to genuine Salvation or an eternal liberation. But as such they are only sub-realities and part of nature, being on the top of a natural vertical continuum. Being of nature, all these experiences lie within the potential of a human being to experience through multiple means, unlike Salvation, which is above or beyond all forms of nature to apprehend.
On the other hand, the potential for Salvation in contrast to Enlightenment, takes us beyond the loop, to another dimension beyond space and time, called heaven This Christian concept is elaborated on later in the text, in the way it radically distinguishes itself from Buddhist and Hindu concepts of heaven.
The Gospel teaching of Salvation and the power of its accomplishment does not lie within bounds of the creature or natural man or woman to accomplish, but originates from without.
Salvation rests in the hands of the Creator alone existing beyond nature, space and time, being His prerogative alone to confer. The gate to this reality is the person of Jesus Christ alone. He will come in and go out, and find pasture. John By no self-effort can a man bridge the gap between the natural and the place of God Himself.
This is the place of Him who is the Creator of all these things. That place of eternity being beyond our notions of space and time is named heaven, by Jesus Christ. Here, perfect relationship in intimate union with God is given as a free gift to those placing full faith or trust in the person of Jesus Christ alone.
Here I have stressed the importance of understanding the difference between Divine Reality and the natural potentials of mystic states—Nirvana, Nirvakalpa or Sahaja Samadhi, fana and so on, these differences implying the notions of Salvation and Enlightenment not being synonymous. Judging from my own experience and contrasting biblical statements and those of Far Eastern scriptures, it becomes clear to me that the ultimate condition of Salvation is quite distinct from the ephemeral experiences of being Enlightened, being one with pure consciousness, Paramashiva or Brahman, or experiencing nirvana, moksha or satori.
These states are forms of natural phenomena. Being part of nature they all eventually perish along with the body or bodies of natural man and finally along with nature herself. The states die. Perhaps that image can be directly apprehended. Only that. God , though not maintained as true by Dvaitins like Ramanuja and Madhva.
We may unite to a marriage partner as one in sexual intimacy, but obviously in the strictest sense of that concept we remain separate. I believe it is a flawed idea. All worldviews have consequences. In the case of the Monist worldviews consequences ensue—Mary Poppins movies, the holocaust, good and evil, sin and righteousness, a plastic bucket, a pin and a Ferrari are all One—God manifest. According to this rationale, ultimately, nothing can be impugned because it is all God.
And much of the culture of India and their gurus reflect this. However, delving into this case is beyond the scope of this essay.
All created worlds and states lie beneath the Heaven of which Christ spoke, including all conditions that the oriental spiritualists reach for. The one who seeks Enlightenment and the one who asks for Salvation are looking to the tops of different peaks. In my opinion, Jesus Christ is the Everest of all hopes and endeavors.
This grace assures an arrival at the summit of all possibilities—different aspirations, different states, one of natural man, the other of God alone. And, to my own thinking, this reality cannot accommodate some Shaivite or Dvaitin ideas that one can scramble by self-effort to within 10 feet of the summit but only by grace can one cross the last 10 feet. Last I heard, he was writing a book called, The Nine-Fifteen to Nirvana, a title referring to the eventful hour the bus departed.
Take the case of another, Ramana Maharishi, the famous South Indian saint who died in He woke up from this condition in altered state of consciousness. As time went on, wanting to know what happened to him, he searched the scriptures and found something resembling his condition.
He then began teaching a volitional doctrine seeking to induce volitionally in others what happened to him spontaneously. A similar case exists with contemporary American spiritual teacher, Byron Katie.
I knew her personally. My understanding of the nature of the Soul, is that the soul is active by nature, and thus it doesn't stay in nirvana nor in the Brahman state nor when merged in the Brahmajyoti effulgence. The name "Mukunda" is the name of the Lord that means, "one who awards liberation". The name itself means 'the One who liberates' A Shivite eventually finds this out too. Bhaktajan II , Jul 7, CobblersApprentice , Jul 7, Cino , Jul 7, That's possible, since he received a state funeral.
The Thai military have this weird macho admiration for the forest monks, and Ajahn Chah was a famous figure in Thai society. Edited to add: In Thailand, it's not uncommon to have a time span of a year between the death of a person and the cremation ceremony. The equivalent of graveyards has areas to store bodies for this period. Last edited: Jul 7, Joined: Sep 25, Messages: 11, Likes Received: 2, Thomas , Jul 8, Bhaktajan II likes this.
For me, it's more and more about love. Where love is, there God is Cino likes this. Everything is same, they are seen varied depending upon our senses. This creates the illusion. Actually everything is made from the same thing. Like you said, when we look the things or its source then we will find that everything is made from the same thing. This is the oneness. But to realize this thing, we need to reach the state of enlightenment.
It seems that the concept of salvation and enlightenment is totally opposing. Thought the meaning of both is to reach the similar thing. Thanks for your intelligent response Enlightenment without the knowledge of God is not enlightenment at all. Enlightenment with out God is folly.
The fool says in his heart there is no God, and with his intelligence he proves he knows nothing. Salvation begins with enlightenment, with out enlightenment how can one know he is in need of Salvation?
Therefore true enlightenment is salvation, and salvation is the breaking of the earthly chains that keep us in the dark and on the same spiritual road to nowhere. Hello freethinkingagent!!! I disagree with your statement "Enlightenment without god is foolish. At that time, there was no proper knowledge about anything.
And he clarified most of the happenings of this world. He said not to take the support of God. In fact, the belief in God is one of the ditches that prevents you from reaching the enlightenment. The same is with Osho.
He also say the same thing. If you look at the concept of enlightenment in both of Buddhism and Osho, you will find that the Enlightenment means the same thing. Not like salvation in Christianity and Muslim is different.
At least the people who reached the enlightenment don't see the God in the concept given by the religions. They give the different meaning. They talk about oneness made everything from the same thing like you mentioned. Show more comments. In essence Salvation is an Eternal Absence of suffering.
Can it be that they are two sides of the same coin? Freedom from suffering and the eternal absence of suffering are very relative to each other. Can salvation come from enlightenment? I am not speaking in a religious sense of the word salvation and forgiveness.
For me forgiveness is only important to self. One can not find enlightenment with out forgiveness of self, because if i am constantly thinking about things I have done that have caused me pain or caused pain to others, I can never find enlightenment. Religion tries to give man forgiveness by saying God forgives them, but this alone can not get rid of guilt and remorse.
So for me to have "salvation", I must forgive myself as a flawed being that does not know who I am, and then realize i may be something more than I am.
0コメント