Enlightenment is "Growing Up"

[dreamosis]

I came across a book by Alexandra David-Neel, a French female mystic, who visited Tibet and participated in their initiations in the 1930s. The book is called Initiates and Initations in Tibet and the picture it offers of Tibetan spiritual culture seems starkly honest and undressed-up.

She writes that in Tibet (or what was Tibet in the 1930s), enlightenment was thought of as "growing up."

I find this to be one of the most startling and practical definitions of enlightment that I've ever heard. But if you read the book, which shows that a lot of the spiritualism in Tibet was selfish, and that many Lamaic lines formed alliances with otherworld beings generally considered to be evil, the definition makes a lot more sense.

We live not in one world, but in a world interpenetrated by many worlds inhabited by many types of beings -- some nice and some not so nice. When we become enlightened, we begin to sense and see the great web of worlds. Enlightment is learning how to interact with all of these worlds, and beings, like a spiritual adult -- to cross the street by ourselves as it were; resolve conflicts by ourselves rather than appealing to mother or father figures, etc.

Thinking about this concept, too, has actually allowed me to see the value of both paths of dark and light. Undertaken consciously, a so-called dark path could be a very realistic attempt to cope with the realities of our world.

[CFTraveler]

That sounds very interesting, and somehow resonates with some things I've read about raising animals.
Some time ago I was doing research in wolves and other wild animals, and was shocked to learn that wolves and dogs are genetically the same- that the real difference is that domestication somehow has led to differences in psychology. The more distant an animal is from it's wild counterpart, the more domesticated it is, the less 'psychologically mature' the animal is. The scientists that did these studies on domestication also found physical characteristics that go with these traits, so it's easy to observe.
The theory was that when we domesticate an animal, be it dog or cat, what we are doing is stunting its psychological growth, keeping the animal in between the cub/teenage stage, in which the animal is dependent on their mother and/or pack- at a certain time in their life they 'grow up' and leave the pack and their attachment to the parent (at least males, females have a different way, but there is a change from puppyhood to adulthood also, as they become competitive with their mothers for the alpha female role). So when we domesticate an animal we are substituting the parent image for the dog (or cat) and keeping them in a subordinate state where they can't be the alpha animal-ever. We become their parents, and they never 'grow up'.
These scientists found that when they studied certain physical attributes ('patches/spots' in dogs) they found that it corresponded to a 'tamer/less aggressive' personality, and this patching/spots in dogs was found to happen when dogs are inbred (and by inbred I mean bred with other domestic dogs, as opposed to letting them reproduce on their own). When dogs go native, no matter what their original breed, if left to their choice, revert to those mutts we see in third world countries that are yellowish-brown and resemble small wolves, depending on the weather.
If I could remember what article I read this in (I think it was Discover magazine) I'd post more info on it.
Anyway, I see how this idea can be applied to what your author is talking about.

[dreamosis]

Wow, CF. What you wrote reminds me now of what I've been reading in the RJ Stewart books. He suggests that if we only seek pleasant, cozy experiences in our meditations and inner journeys, that our growth will be limited. We must be challenged (sometimes aggressively) in order grow. We live in the Wild, not on a farm or in a centrally-heated house.

I'd love to see that article if you find it.

[dreamosis]

make sense? or do i sound like a womanizer?

No, you don't sound like a womanizer -- but it appears that the suppression of the feminine has been weighing heavily on your mind. Your response does make me feel like I must have written a post endorsing patriarchy, which is confusing to me, because that wasn't at all my intent.

The post was inspired by the book of a female mystic. She doesn't give any indication in the book that it was exceptional for her to be initiated as a woman. Fifty pages into the book it seems to me like she was widely accepted wherever she went. It does appear that she mostly studied with men. I don't know enough about the old Tibetan culture to say whether it was patriarchal or not. In the introduction to the book she did say the polyandry -- women taking many husbands -- was a common and unshocking practice in Tibet. There are also pictures of other Tibetan women who received initiation.


now, on growing up, i must ask where is one to grow up to? where is this "up"?

You might be making only a semantical argument here. As far as I can tell from the book, Tibetan cosmology is anything but simple and vertical. They believe/believed in many worlds and many destinations. The heart of the concept seems to be in becoming a spiritual adult -- taking responsibility for your destination wherever that is.


many look down on religious intitiatory process because historically it excludes the feminine from participation. one might ask why is there this exclusion?

I don't agree with that at all, especially if you consider Western esoteric traditions. Interaction with feminine archetypes, if you're physically a man, seem to be the key to the whole shebang. As far as (physical) women being excluded from initiations, that's been true in the religious traditions -- although there are many female saints revered even in the Catholic church -- it hasn't been true in continuing land-based traditions. Nor has it been true in old traditions like Tantra.

The resistance to female energy is breaking down. Anglican churches now have female priestesses; many Episcopal churches do as well. Even Charismatic Pentecostal congregations are being led by male and female teams.

I agree that men are in need of the divine feminine; as women are in need of the sacred masculine. Both are to be found within, as well as without. A world-wide spiritual movement based totally in the feminine, and denying the masculine, would be as repressive as Abrahamic religious patriarchy.

As far as humankind being "meant" to be matriarchal...Why aren't we meant to be equal? Yes, men cannot give birth; but the number of women having babies without men is only found in mythology. :)

A part of "growing up," I would say, is becoming a complete in one's self and balanced between extremes. This spiritual growing up might be reflected in the Gnostic Jesus' saying that we only enter heaven when "the male becomes like the female and the female becomes like the male." (Gospel of Thomas).

And you saying that wisdom is inherently female reminds me of the Gnostic Christian tradition, too, in which a goddess figure (Sophia/Wisdom) plays a critical role. Although most what I would call "surface-Gnostics" look down on Sophia for being responsible for us falling into illusion. Sophia, in the Gnostic tradition, created the physical universe by consorting with herself instead of with the "Father." On the outside this seems patriarchal, but the concept of the Father in Gnoticism is beyond gender -- it's the illimitable, the innumerable, the Absolute.

My own experience of my subconscious is feminine. The embodiment of my subconscious in my dreams is always in the form of beloved woman or a goddess-like figure. Modern psychology talks about this, and apparently it's frequently the opposite for women.

[CFTraveler]

Interesting. When I receive information, it's frequently from an "Old guy" and when I hear voices in hypnagogia I hear one of each. The male voice is very male, booming and imposing.

[dreamosis]

Hmmm. What I hear in hypnogogia is rarely coherent, but a jumble of roaring sea and computer-like beeping and various indistinct voices.

I can think of one dream -- which was lucid -- in which my subconscious appeared to me as a female lover. We hung out and talked for what seemed like an hour, and she even gave me instructions for staying asleep and lucid so that we could keep seeing each other. We kissed, but didn't have sex. In the dream I thought she was a lover from a past life. I kept trying to piece it together, but she gently recommended I stop trying to analyze it. I believe all she wanted was for me to experience her energy, for me to experience union with a deeper part of myself.

[ButterflyWoman]

I think of enlightenment as expanding one's awareness (knowledge, wisdom, etc.). I'm not convinced there is a point at which you are "enlightened", just as there's no point at which you are "grown up". There are points where you can say you were less mature, less aware, or more aware, etc. etc., but I'm 44 and I'm probably not entirely "grown up" (my username is a play on the idea of that; I'm wiser now that I'm older, but that's because when I was younger I was wholly unaware, but as I get even older, I'll presumably and hopefully get wiser than I am now...).

I think the metaphor of spiritual enlightenment as "growing up" is a good one. There are things that I used to do or think or believe that I would never, ever consider harbouring now, because I'm just more aware of what they actually are, what effects they generate. It's just like the way that a little kid wants or tries to do stuff that isn't good for them, because they're just unaware of what the consequences might be...

[Timotheus]

:D

[Timotheus]

:D

[dreamosis]

kundalini serpent spoke, wound around, up and down, in me, but under my feet where it belongs.

Yeah, I think the enlightenment-as-growing-up metaphor is most definitely about living in the world, returning to one's community, coming down from the mountain.

[Sparkwielder]

It's interesting, that a gender issue came up in a thread that has "growing up" and "enlightenment" in the title! It is my personal belief, yes, my opinion, (so take it with a grain of salt!) that this is exacly where society needs to grow up!
I wish we could just put gender behind us when engaging in spiritual persuits as gender pertains to the physical body.
What sex is your soul? :| :| :| :| Yea, mouse over it! unless you want to try to make "soul babies" If anyone succeeds, I would like a full report please!

Alright, dry humor isn't the real reason for my reply, so onward!

I actually was very impressed with the original post because of two books that I have recently read, and was actually disappointed with. One was Graham Handcocks Supernatural (Sorry CFT, I know you liked it!) and the other was Inner Paths to Outer Space (I wasn't totally dissapointed with that one, there was some good stuff in there, and I especially loved the last chapter!)

The problem with a lot of Western books on spirituality is of lumping all of the different worlds into one "other world" like everything is in the same place. Both books imply that we should explore these worlds on our own.
It's like saying that Tyro is on planet Earth, but not telling me what state it's in, and then telling me to go to this town.
O.k., I wanna go, but I'd like a map please. Oh, and some instructions on how to avoid, or deal with those nasty alien greys would be essential, I think! Ok, so maybe those books are meant for an audience that is just beginning to explore these concepts, but don't tell them to go there without the map, and some kind of astral pepper spray!

What they don't tell you, is what Dreamosis said in his OP.

We live not in one world, but in a world interpenetrated by many worlds inhabited by many types of beings -- some nice and some not so nice.

It's also what what I like about Robert Bruce's writings, he does supply a map, and the Pepper spray!

The other thing I didn't like about Grahams book is that it was soooooo repetative!

Sometimes you have to navigate through hell to get to heaven. For some of us there are no bypasses, but once you learn how to get through it, it is no longer a roadblock, and what's on the other side is worth the journey! (Sounds like the biggest understatement, but I dont know how else to put it.)

[Timotheus]

:D

[CFTraveler]

I actually was very impressed with the original post because of two books that I have recently read, and was actually disappointed with. One was Graham Handcocks Supernatural (Sorry CFT, I know you liked it!) It wasn't me. I thought it was Beekeper that read it but not sure. Maybe Tempest? The one I liked was Pinchbeck's, the Return of Quetzacoatl, although I don't really agree with some of his ideas.

[dreamosis]

but don't tell them to go there without the map, and some kind of astral pepper spray!

Or, never offer somebody a new awareness without a way of dealing with it.

"Maps" and protection methods are key in exploring inner space. Of course I'm sure many of our ancestors have done it without either.

What I'm also considering now is that there are many, many ways of dealing with otherworld beings. A lot of beings -- like the parasitic types of negs -- are best avoided or warded off. But I'm beginning to sense that the subtle planes of existence are wider than I ever imagined. This is pure speculation, but I'd be willing to bet that there are complicated bureaucratic balances between realms and races. It isn't as simple as heaven versus hell, or warfare versus the time of Judgment.

[Sparkwielder]

Of course I'm sure many of our ancestors have done it without either.

According to the book I mentioned, they have been doing it for as long as humans have been graffitiing caves!It would seem like we should have it all figured out by now, but maybe as you said, it might be very complicated. It seems like a lot of different people have different understandings of how it all works.


Hmmm. What I hear in hypnogogia is rarely coherent, but a jumble of roaring sea and computer-like beeping and various indistinct voices.

I just noticed this, that exactly the way it is with me too. It's like hearing a bunch of radio stations all at the same time a lot of times for me in that state.


It wasn't me. I thought it was Beekeper that read it but not sure. Maybe Tempest? The one I liked was Pinchbeck's, the Return of Quetzacoatl, although I don't really agree with some of his ideas.
Soory about that, yes it was Beekeeper.



that you imagine that gender relates only to the anatomy of the physical body is conclusive evidence to your preturbation.

but, no worries, i imagine that your badge of "enlightenment" is quite safe sown on your starched and uniformed pre-judicial likes and dislikes of what ought to come up within a forum topic.

That really is quite an attitude you got there Timmo. I guess you have it all figured out don't you? Is God male or female? Tell me please! I always thought the answer was Both, but my knowlege pales next to that of a Guru like you. You really do like to hear yourself talk don't you?


I agree that men are in need of the divine feminine; as women are in need of the sacred masculine. Both are to be found within, as well as without. A world-wide spiritual movement based totally in the feminine, and denying the masculine, would be as repressive as Abrahamic religious patriarchy.


As much as I would like to kick some male butt because of the way I have been treated in this society, I am 100% in agreement with your statement! There should be balance, like in the yin/yang symbol.

[Tom]

I'd use this for my signature, except it doesn't allow so many characters ...


“Speaking metaphorically(!), the first thing we must do in our bid for freedom is kill our parents. We kill the Buddha (or equivalent) last on the way to truth-realization, but we kill our parents first on the way to anywhere. There are a whole lot more people who need killing before freedom is achieved, but that’s how it must begin. Until we kill our parents (metaphorically!) we remain unborn.” – Jed McKenna, Spiritual Warfare, page 227

[Sparkwielder]

No, we must wait!

She is baking chocolate friendhip bread right now!

[Tom]

You probably know what I mean. What Jed means. It just resonates well with me. I agree with the idea that enlightenment is a kind of growing up; it seems that it is normal to reach a certain age like 10 or 12 and from there only the physical body seems to get older. The influence of people can be a serious obstacle to actually growing up.

[Ouroboros]

No, we must wait!

She is baking chocolate friendhip bread right now!

Chocolate friendship bread? o.o I'm alternately scared and intrigued.

As for McKenna...I'm still not sure whether or not I want to delve into his books. Perhaps I'm letting the negative reviews I've read influence me too greatly.

[Tom]

No, we must wait!

She is baking chocolate friendhip bread right now!

Chocolate friendship bread? o.o I'm alternately scared and intrigued.

As for McKenna...I'm still not sure whether or not I want to delve into his books. Perhaps I'm letting the negative reviews I've read influence me too greatly.

So "kill" the reviewers, in order to make up your own mind afterward. Eventually you will have to "kill" Jed, too, if you do read his books and if you like them.

[Ouroboros]

As for McKenna...I'm still not sure whether or not I want to delve into his books. Perhaps I'm letting the negative reviews I've read influence me too greatly.

So "kill" the reviewers, in order to make up your own mind afterward. Eventually you will have to "kill" Jed, too, if you do read his books and if you like them.

Well, that does make sense. I'll give his first book a try once I catch up with my current backlog of reading material.

[Sparkwielder]

You probably know what I mean. What Jed means. It just resonates well with me. I agree with the idea that enlightenment is a kind of growing up; it seems that it is normal to reach a certain age like 10 or 12 and from there only the physical body seems to get older. The influence of people can be a serious obstacle to actually growing up.

I know exactly what you mean!
[Sparkwielder goes up the stairs....





goes into the kitchen....




Gets the big knife....



and hacks off the end of the bread!]
It's very good, I love it when it is hot like this.
Friendship bread is actually more like cake than bread. The Amish have this "secret" yeast culture that gets passesed around from time to time. It's kind of going around our neighborhood like the flu right now - everyone I have visited this past few weeks is serving Friendship bread. She used chocolate pudding mix in it this time.

Actually, I have never read that book, but I can see your quoted statement relating to the statement I made earlier, although now it is full of burns and bullet holes!

Getting past "male vs. female", and just focusing on the Love of the creator, and what lies beyond the veil so to speak.
I can even see another meaning as well. Sometimes parents really don't like it when kids want to explore outside the confines of family traditions, and can apply the "pressure" to keep them in line. We needed our parents to train us, and help us along for a while, but there comes a point where they just can't answer any more of our questions, and if they try to hold us back out of fear, we just to say "no, this is something I need to explore, please let go of my neck, you are choking me!"


So "kill" the reviewers, in order to make up your own mind afterward. Eventually you will have to "kill" Jed, too, if you do read his books and if you like them.

I know that what I say on here dosen't make sense to a lot of people, but I'll take that risk of looking insane once again:
I can't tell you how many times I have had to kill myself !

[Tom]

It makes perfect sense to me.

:)

:shock:

It isn't really growing up, which implies continuity and becoming. It is death, over and over, and there is no going back.

[Sparkwielder]

It isn't really growing up, which implies continuity and becoming. It is death, over and over, and there is no going back.


Is that what Jed says in his book?
That sounds more like 'Prison-ship Hell' to me! I remember in Catholic school, the teacher said "Hell is the eternal separation from God", and this quote seems to fit her definition unless I am mis-understanding the quote.

If there is no continuity and becoming, then what's the point of persuing greater knowledge that leads to nowhere? If I bought into this, I would cross my name off the cosmic waiting list for enlightenment! If Jed said that, then I can really understand why Tempest said that it's not for sissies!

[Tom]

Jed said that you don't do it because you want to; you do it because you must do it. He is very specific in saying that most spiritual seekers are wrong in thinking that they are moving forward at all, and that they are actually doing everything they can to avoid getting started. Once you do get started, the first few years are going to be really rough and you won't get anything from going through it. Jed's second book follows Julie, who is introduced in his first book, as she goes through the process using the technique Jed describes in his first book. It might be better to say that the process hapens to Julie and she says at one point that she doesn't see how anyone can do it in the middle of having a normal life, surrounded by people. She is living in a cabin and only going in to town to buy supplies as needed. When I read Jed's first book, it pissed me off and it scared me and it rocked my belief system. It was amazing and wonderful and no matter how many times I re-read the book I couldn't get those feelings back. The second book was more fun and games. After reading the first two books I expected the third book to be easy, but it wasn't. It was really good, and I'm looking forward to when it comes out on CD.

[Timotheus]

:D

[star]

I have done what I can to stop after I got started. :)
I think I'm on wierd ground.

[Alaskans]

CF illistrated something with the story of the domestication of dogs, they have the same dna as wolves. Its true that we grow by making it through and learning from hardship. I grew in some ways when I had to fight nasties day and night, but waking up at 4am every other week to fight something coming for you,all while trying to supress your fear and summon love. I mainly learned power. I didnt want to live like that. If I enjoyed the fighting, being a wolf, then it would be a different story. I said "It is hard enough, why should I have to fight as well?" ....but looking back I think I cheated myself out of many valuable lessons.



My own experience of my subconscious is feminine. The embodiment of my subconscious in my dreams is always in the form of beloved woman or a goddess-like figure. Modern psychology talks about this, and apparently it's frequently the opposite for women.
I find serenity, self love and greater ego to Truth unity when I bring up a female energy.

Unity of the two could be the main reason for our animal bodies, for men, women, and the physical world. A hopefull act to bring humans back through the sharing of energy and love between couples for those who could not be helped any other way. But for us as spiritual people we have already found ways.
I made a list of positive female and positive male traits and I found that the combination of the two lists makes the most complete beautifull and benevolent being. (I didnt list negative traits because those are simply a result of ego, whereas positive traits are a result of Truth) Of course its about the energies behind the action.

[dreamosis]

I made a list of positive female and positive male traits and I found that the combination of the two lists makes the most complete beautifull and benevolent being.

Would you feel comfortable sharing your list?

[Alaskans]

Thinking about this concept, too, has actually allowed me to see the value of both paths of dark and light. Undertaken consciously, a so-called dark path could be a very realistic attempt to cope with the realities of our world.
I had to come back and protest against this. The charactoristic of our true self is the way it is because it is the only way for the most gratifying, harmonious happy,, and fair existence. Not just for our true self, but for all beings. When acting on Truth, everything works in the favor of not just ourself, but all those involved, no matter the circumstances, nomatter if they are trying to do us harm, they will still bennifit. Truth sets all things right no matter where it is applied, all beings love it wether they know it is truth or not. (that might not be the case for the worste of them but Ive never ran into a person immune to it).

My list is not real accurate because it is a complicated thing to discern.
But these are a couple I am fairly certain of, and thier 'opposite':
Male: Female:
Strength,Resiliance-----------------Innocence
Logic---------------------------------Intuition/abstract
Unity----------------------------------Deviance(ego, life, emotion, creativity)
"Justice"------------------------------Openhearted, free loving
Non-judgement----------------------Beauty

If you combine these then you have some of the charactoristics of our high true self. Loving justice, unconditional beauty, etc. Just one of these attributes is quite an amazing treasure for someone to have.
-I couldnt think of a better word than justice for what I meant

[Ouroboros]

Thinking about this concept, too, has actually allowed me to see the value of both paths of dark and light. Undertaken consciously, a so-called dark path could be a very realistic attempt to cope with the realities of our world.
I had to come back and protest against this. The charactoristic of our true self is the way it is because it is the only way for the most gratifying, harmonious happy,, and fair existence. Not just for our true self, but for all beings. When acting on Truth, everything works in the favor of not just ourself, but all those involved, no matter the circumstances, nomatter if they are trying to do us harm, they will still bennifit. Truth sets all things right no matter where it is applied, all beings love it wether they know it is truth or not. (that might not be the case for the worste of them but Ive never ran into a person immune to it).


I dunno...I think it's entirely possible that if one sets out on something like the Left Hand Path (which by many is considered "dark" or "evil") it could lead one to the top of the same mountain as many "right hand" paths. In fact, that's sort of the direction I started out with. Granted, it's entirely dependent upon the individual and their motivations. In my opinion a true Seeker could find Truth via any path as long as the intention was there.

[Tom]

"There's a Seeker born every minute"

It turns out I only heard part of the quotation now that I've decided to look it up.

http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Firesign_Theatre/


Hello seeker! Now don't feel alone here in the New Age, because there's a seeker born every minute.

As for who they are, I have no idea, but that's okay.

[dreamosis]

My question is: how do we know there aren't a series of enlightenments awaiting us?

Perhaps there are many awakenings before we achieve the unity consciousness of which everyone speaks. Maybe the enlightenment known to humankind through religious and mystical traditions is only an adolescent type of enlightenment in the grander scheme.

What if the oneness that is spoken of in, say, Buddhist texts is no more than the oneness we're capable of experiencing in this form? It will be dramatic, altering us forever, but what if there's more work to be done after that? What if we find out we're simply in a bigger playing field than before?

[Ouroboros]

My question is: how do we know there aren't a series of enlightenments awaiting us?

Perhaps there are many awakenings before we achieve the unity consciousness of which everyone speaks. Maybe the enlightenment known to humankind through religious and mystical traditions is only an adolescent type of enlightenment in the grander scheme.

What if the oneness that is spoken of in, say, Buddhist texts is no more than the oneness we're capable of experiencing in this form? It will be dramatic, altering us forever, but what if there's more work to be done after that? What if we find out we're simply in a bigger playing field than before?

It wouldn't surprise me at all if that were the case. A series of graduated awakenings as one's awareness continues to grow.

[dreamosis]

It isn't that I disbelieve a person can achieve unity in this lifetime -- I believe it's very possible. But I also believe that our choices aren't limited to unity and the wheel of rebirth.

What I'm saying is that maybe it's possible to get off the wheel of rebirth (at least, as far as this planet or physical incarnation is concerned) and to still be less than fully enlightened.

[Tom]

What I'm saying is that maybe it's possible to get off the wheel of rebirth (at least, as far as this planet or physical incarnation is concerned) and to still be less than fully enlightened.

In Theravada Buddhism this is the Non-Returner stage, which is short of enlightenment. The person who reaches this level goes to a more refined non-physical place and gradually fades out over an extended period of time before entering into Nirvana.

[Timotheus]

:D

[dreamosis]

that is it, what more does one require, but the 'if' of it.

You're on to something here! ... I came across a quote last night that both chilled and warmed me: For every answered question, there is an answer questioned.

Growing up, becoming enlightened, may be nothing more than total comfort with the idea that because the world is ever-changing, so is truth.