Stephen/To El

[Guest guest]

Dear Stephen,

 

Nisargadatta, " Stephen " <user@p...> wrote:

> > By investigating and discovering the same 'non-state' that

> > Nisargadatta was " in. " It's a very scientific process, and

> > certainly, remaining still as Beingness has never been known to

> > cause 'mental illness'.

>

> Naturally, I completely agree. But how can we ever prove or

> demonstrate that Enlightenment (either as a permanent state or

> momentary Illumination) isn't, itself, an actual 'side-effect' or

> meditation?

 

Is there some reason why this " should be " proven or demonstrated? Is

it *that* impossible for the unknowable to simply remain so?

 

Take a flower. Pick it, dissect it and, using the microscope, see if

you can discover its beauty.

 

> I'm quite happy by saying I believe that Enlightenment isn't just

> biological because I have faith that it isn't.

 

On the contrary, the more doubt, the better ;-).

 

> Aside from that, the things I've seen and done in my life have

> quite clearly satisfied me, personally, that there is much more to

> life than the material.

 

You seem easily satisfied :-). But if that's good enough, " there is

more to life than the material, " who am I to say anything?

 

> Truer words were never spoken but, being practicle, the fact is

> that people do the exact opposite of this. The have all their

> previous beliefs that they carry around like luggage.

 

When they're ready and willing to dump the luggage, when it becomes

enough of a burden, it can and does happen. Or rather, the

luggage " falls off the cart " :-).

 

> Even more poignant is the fact that the only way to start from

> knowing absolutely nothing and proceeding to investigate is to be

> Enlightened in the first instance.

 

" If you seek for freedom, you cannot find it. Absolute freedom itself

is necessary before you can acquire absolute freedom. That is our

practice. "

-- Shunryu Suzuki-roshi, from " Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind "

 

> > Science says only " God hasn't been discovered... it's unknown if

> > there is God or 'mystical experience'. " It will remain unknown,

> > because the observer is never taken into account, only the

> > observed. It's a very one-sided approach.

>

> Not any more. Quantum physics has totally changed that.

 

It's made a beginning, anyway.

 

> We can, now, be quite confident in our belief in, and statements

> about, Enlightenment. The observer is quite essential to the

> observed.

 

Unfortunately, confidence in beliefs are quite incompatible with

what's usually called " Enlightenment. " But it may be helpful for

those 'beginning on the path'.

 

> > To stop asking all these question is to " Realize. " Not to answer

> > these questions, or keep going in circles asking them. The mind

> > just won't give up in wanting to 'participate' in " Realization. "

> > It doesn't get to participate and that makes the mind unhappy.

>

> I'm not sure about this.

 

Can you remain with that unsureness, rather than trying to 'fix' it?

 

> > If science and 'spirituality' ever meet, it will likely be in the

> > area of quantum physics. A tentative shaking of hands has already

> > begun.

>

> I'd say we're well on the way now.

 

You probably know more than I do, I've only been keeping up on a very

limited basis with the latest developments in Quantum Physics.

 

Namaste,

 

Omkara / Tim