The Mystic Quest: How Important is Enlightenment and Inner Transformation?

[Jack Daydream]

I never needed philosophy, religion, or mysticism to reach enlightenment. I got all the enlightenment i needed in the state's institutions and prisons. And while i do imagine sitting indian style and humming between deep breaths can be edifying somehow, I'm not sure I'd be able to attain the same great wisdom by doing so.

What you are saying about finding 'enlightenment' within institutions and prisons makes sense because it involves being alone within oneself and looking within. So much of conventional life involves being caught up in external dramas, which may be escapism.

The idea of 'prison' may be important as a symbol of the human condition. Being aware of a literal prison may bring so much more intense awareness for going beyond the confines of imprisonment. It also leads me to think of one of my favourite songs, 'The Whole of the Moon' by the Waterboys. It was written by Mike Scott of The Waterboys to compare the intensity of his own searching with the singer Prince, saying how Scott was 'out in the world' for years while Prince stayed in his room but saw 'The Whole of the Moon'. Of course, it was probably an idealised comparison because Prince had his difficulties...

[Belinda]

I never needed philosophy, religion, or mysticism to reach enlightenment. I got all the enlightenment i needed in the state's institutions and prisons. And while i do imagine sitting indian style and humming between deep breaths can be edifying somehow, I'm not sure I'd be able to attain the same great wisdom by doing so.

What you are saying about finding 'enlightenment' within institutions and prisons makes sense because it involves being alone within oneself and looking within. So much of conventional life involves being caught up in external dramas, which may be escapism.

The idea of 'prison' may be important as a symbol of the human condition. Being aware of a literal prison may bring so much more intense awareness for going beyond the confines of imprisonment. It also leads me to think of one of my favourite songs, 'The Whole of the Moon' by the Waterboys. It was written by Mike Scott of The Waterboys to compare the intensity of his own searching with the singer Prince, saying how Scott was 'out in the world' for years while Prince stayed in his room but saw 'The Whole of the Moon'. Of course, it was probably an idealised comparison because Prince had his difficulties...

That is a nice reply , Jack, but are we actually agreed that 'enlightenment' is a psychedelic experience that involves an alternative perception that omits time, space, and force?

[Jack Daydream]

Jack Daydream wrote:

One current trend is getting intoxicated on helium balloons, which seems like the opposite to the quest for transformation and more about a way of mind-numbing. It keeps the mystical hidden and even in most forms of religion it often remains low profile amidst ritualism and dogma.

I wonder if there are scientific words for the different states of awareness caused by substances. I have heard of uppers and downers with relation to levels of brain activity , and referring to amphetamines as "uppers". I suppose barbiturates and alcohol are "downers".

Psychedelic substances are not directly related to levels of brain activity but more to forms of brain activity. Is that correct? N
Neither psychedelics nor activity -regulators ( such as barbiturates and amphetamines) are directly related to mood as we see from instances when all these substances cause anxiety and unhappiness. Does anyone know if there is an artificial happiness substance that does not merely affect activity or perception?

Happiness is a sidetrack though ,as the conversation is about perception and how important alternative perception may be. There is no need for benefit to feel happy.
I believe perception can and does transcend time , space , and force because there is plenty of evidence from those who have taken psychedelic substances. I am however sceptical about my own wishful thinking about how dead is death. Of course I want to meet loved ones again! What, precisely is Atman? Atman is not self because self is a human construct.

There is plenty in the Bible and elsewhere about the Kingdom of God and other such mysterious sayings, however I myself find that Atman is Brahman is more intelligible than any mystical words in The Bible.

When you speak of 'uppers' and 'downers' of substances it parallels the shamanic voyages to the underworld as well as the upperworlds, or hell as well as heaven. Sometimes, the idea of transformation is seen as being about growth and ascent whereas descent may be important equally. The two may be interrelated like the life/death relationship itself. In thinking of human destructiveness, James Hillman wrote a book, 'Suicide and the Soul'. He suggested that suicidal ideas and even suicidal behaviour may express a wish for transformation, as in death and rebirth.

It is a good question how much is transformation about happiness or something else entirely? The thinking of Maslow and his framework of the hierarchy of needs is relevant. That is because is because the basic physiological needs are most important, but the higher one of self-actualization is at the top. Often, Maslow's hierarchy of needs is seen as an argument for the basic functions in life, but in his writings he spoke so much of the 'inner' aspects of 'being', especially transformation.

My own Christian thinking was challenged by the idea of Atman/Brahman making so much sense. Of course, the Hindu/Buddhist idea of Bardo and astral dimensions was also connected to ideas of reincarnation and rebirth. The idea of reincarnation would imply some literal kind of immortal soul which remains through the processes between death and a future birth. Some Buddhists see this as more a way of links between our current lives and future lifeforms as a general process of rebirth in general. There are the existence of memories of past lives which seem based on recollected facts of people who existed, and not just famous persons. Thismay be seen as evidence of actual correspondences between lives or as tapping into anscestoral memories. My understanding of the teaching of the Buddha was that he was uncertain about whether life after death existed or not.

[Jack Daydream]

I never needed philosophy, religion, or mysticism to reach enlightenment. I got all the enlightenment i needed in the state's institutions and prisons. And while i do imagine sitting indian style and humming between deep breaths can be edifying somehow, I'm not sure I'd be able to attain the same great wisdom by doing so.

What you are saying about finding 'enlightenment' within institutions and prisons makes sense because it involves being alone within oneself and looking within. So much of conventional life involves being caught up in external dramas, which may be escapism.

The idea of 'prison' may be important as a symbol of the human condition. Being aware of a literal prison may bring so much more intense awareness for going beyond the confines of imprisonment. It also leads me to think of one of my favourite songs, 'The Whole of the Moon' by the Waterboys. It was written by Mike Scott of The Waterboys to compare the intensity of his own searching with the singer Prince, saying how Scott was 'out in the world' for years while Prince stayed in his room but saw 'The Whole of the Moon'. Of course, it was probably an idealised comparison because Prince had his difficulties...

That is a nice reply , Jack, but are we actually agreed that 'enlightenment' is a psychedelic experience that involves an alternative perception that omits time, space, and force?

The trouble which I see is that people who claim to be enlightened may use the term in differing ways. I am inclined to the psychedelic ones but it is hard to say if there is any ultimate definition. Can anyone say that there 'enlightenment' is the absolute? That may get like the competing claims by individuals that their perception of what 'God' is represents the true one.

[seeds]

The idea of reincarnation would imply some literal kind of immortal soul which remains through the processes between death and a future birth.

The problem with the concept of reincarnation (of which there are several problems) is that it implies that a soul may require hundreds (if not thousands) of incarnations into corporeal form (Samsara) before one reaches a perfected state of being where reincarnation is no longer necessary (Moksha).

However, it offers not the slightest clue of what you will "be" or "do" within the context of the post-Moksha eternity that stretches out before you in a vision of endlessness that defies comprehension.

My understanding of the teaching of the Buddha was that he was uncertain about whether life after death existed or not.

Yet, the Buddha himself allegedly spoke of remembering at least 554 past lives.

The point is that either the Buddha was confused, or the accounts of what he said were confused.

I suggest that both of those options are true.
_______

[Belinda]

Seeds wrote:

The problem with the concept of reincarnation (of which there are several problems) is that it implies that a soul may require hundreds (if not thousands) of incarnations into corporeal form (Samsara) before one reaches a perfected state of being where reincarnation is no longer necessary (Moksha).

However, it offers not the slightest clue of what you will "be" or "do" within the context of the post-Moksha eternity that stretches out before you in a vision of endlessness that defies comprehension.

Maybe when post-Moksha eternity happens there is no "you" , or ego-self to experience it, because all is one whole experience.

[Jack Daydream]

The idea of reincarnation would imply some literal kind of immortal soul which remains through the processes between death and a future birth.

The problem with the concept of reincarnation (of which there are several problems) is that it implies that a soul may require hundreds (if not thousands) of incarnations into corporeal form (Samsara) before one reaches a perfected state of being where reincarnation is no longer necessary (Moksha).

However, it offers not the slightest clue of what you will "be" or "do" within the context of the post-Moksha eternity that stretches out before you in a vision of endlessness that defies comprehension.

My understanding of the teaching of the Buddha was that he was uncertain about whether life after death existed or not.

Yet, the Buddha himself allegedly spoke of remembering at least 554 past lives.

The point is that either the Buddha was confused, or the accounts of what he said were confused.

I suggest that both of those options are true.
_______

With regard to the Buddha remembering 554 past lives, it is probably at odds with him not being sure about life after death. Part of this may stem from various differing accounts of his life. He, like Jesus, didn't write books but others wrote books. This involves so much confabulation, especially when texts were written much later.

Also, it is possible that the Buddha may have thought differently at various stages in his life. In addition, he may have been unsure how to interpret his memories of past lives. Those individuals who had significant mystical experiences, or enlightenment, may have wrestled with philosophy questions too. 'Enlightenment' is not equivalent to omniscience.

[Belinda]

What you are saying about finding 'enlightenment' within institutions and prisons makes sense because it involves being alone within oneself and looking within. So much of conventional life involves being caught up in external dramas, which may be escapism.

The idea of 'prison' may be important as a symbol of the human condition. Being aware of a literal prison may bring so much more intense awareness for going beyond the confines of imprisonment. It also leads me to think of one of my favourite songs, 'The Whole of the Moon' by the Waterboys. It was written by Mike Scott of The Waterboys to compare the intensity of his own searching with the singer Prince, saying how Scott was 'out in the world' for years while Prince stayed in his room but saw 'The Whole of the Moon'. Of course, it was probably an idealised comparison because Prince had his difficulties...

That is a nice reply , Jack, but are we actually agreed that 'enlightenment' is a psychedelic experience that involves an alternative perception that omits time, space, and force?

The trouble which I see is that people who claim to be enlightened may use the term in differing ways. I am inclined to the psychedelic ones but it is hard to say if there is any ultimate definition. Can anyone say that there 'enlightenment' is the absolute? That may get like the competing claims by individuals that their perception of what 'God' is represents the true one.

'Enlightenment ' usually refers to the scientific enlightenment in Europe during the 18th century, a major reorganisation of thought . Since the 1950s -70s 'enlightenment' has increasingly referred to quasi religious alteration of conscious awareness that excludes awareness of time, space, and force.

Usage of psychedelic substances and meditation techniques have popularised psychological and quasi religious enlightenment. It is the latter meaning we are talking about. Jack's and many others' experiences of psychedelic substances and practices are so well authenticated there is ample evidence that the state of enlightened conscious awareness truly happens. I bet there have been statistical studies that show psychedelic substance usage, reported subjective effects, and even brain scans positively correlate.

Whether the enlightened state of conscious awareness is beneficial is a matter of opinion. I claim if it is entered into responsibly , whether therapeutically or for increased learning , it's probably beneficial. By "responsibly" I refer to proper dosage, purity of substances, duration of meditation, and other common -sense precautions.

Enlightened awareness sometimes happens spontaneously, and this is probably a protective mechanism. I say so because to some extent I trust in the recuperative power of the brainmind.

[Jack Daydream]

That is a nice reply , Jack, but are we actually agreed that 'enlightenment' is a psychedelic experience that involves an alternative perception that omits time, space, and force?

The trouble which I see is that people who claim to be enlightened may use the term in differing ways. I am inclined to the psychedelic ones but it is hard to say if there is any ultimate definition. Can anyone say that there 'enlightenment' is the absolute? That may get like the competing claims by individuals that their perception of what 'God' is represents the true one.

'Enlightenment ' usually refers to the scientific enlightenment in Europe during the 18th century, a major reorganisation of thought . Since the 1950s -70s 'enlightenment' has increasingly referred to quasi religious alteration of conscious awareness that excludes awareness of time, space, and force.

Usage of psychedelic substances and meditation techniques have popularised psychological and quasi religious enlightenment. It is the latter meaning we are talking about. Jack's and many others' experiences of psychedelic substances and practices are so well authenticated there is ample evidence that the state of enlightened conscious awareness truly happens. I bet there have been statistical studies that show psychedelic substance usage, reported subjective effects, and even brain scans positively correlate.

Whether the enlightened state of conscious awareness is beneficial is a matter of opinion. I claim if it is entered into responsibly , whether therapeutically or for increased learning , it's probably beneficial. By "responsibly" I refer to proper dosage, purity of substances, duration of meditation, and other common -sense precautions.

Enlightened awareness sometimes happens spontaneously, and this is probably a protective mechanism. I say so because to some extent I trust in the recuperative power of the brainmind.

I wonder to what extent the idea of enlightenment falls into the scope of psychology or philosophy. What is the overlap? Is it a matter of coping in life or the underlying questions about the nature of reality. Psychology and philosophy which were once unified have become separated. The hows of coping have been distinct from the whys about the nature of 'reality'. Spontaneity and its mechanisms may bring these splits closer together and the concept of enlightenment may be important here, as a way of thinking about states of 'awareness', which may be reduced to psychological motives or connected to the wider aspects of 'qualia' and what constitutes 'reality'.

[Walker]

I wonder to what extent the idea of enlightenment falls into the scope of psychology or philosophy. What is the overlap?

One overlap is the perpetual presence (of awareness) within reality. Its absence is studied in psychology. For example, a characteristic of a charismatic extrovert is giving full and present attention to the other person, e.g., Bill Clinton the politician. A politician without that lacks political charisma.

Its meaning is studied in philosophy (I think therefore I am), because although being exists within the perpetual present, awareness may not.

The perpetual awareness of non-duality, applied to the dualistic relationships in which we exist without delusion or distraction, is also a characteristic of enlightenment.

One of the paradoxes is that the enlightened destination of the mystic quest keeps both feet firmly planted on the ground, of reality, even though practices exist to disconnect sensory data from awareness.

[Belinda]

I wonder to what extent the idea of enlightenment falls into the scope of psychology or philosophy.

Neither . I'd say it's a matter of neuroscience.
The word 'enlightenment' sounds like a religious matter, and so it often is. But to explain what we are calling enlightenment needs neuroscience.

[Jack Daydream]

I wonder to what extent the idea of enlightenment falls into the scope of psychology or philosophy. What is the overlap?

One overlap is the perpetual presence (of awareness) within reality. Its absence is studied in psychology. For example, a characteristic of a charismatic extrovert is giving full and present attention to the other person, e.g., Bill Clinton the politician. A politician without that lacks political charisma.

Its meaning is studied in philosophy (I think therefore I am), because although being exists within the perpetual present, awareness may not.

The perpetual awareness of non-duality, applied to the dualistic relationships in which we exist without delusion or distraction, is also a characteristic of enlightenment.

One of the paradoxes is that the enlightened destination of the mystic quest keeps both feet firmly planted on the ground, of reality, even though practices exist to disconnect sensory data from awareness.

With the issue of whether the topic of mysticism and enlightenment fits into psychology or philosophy it is also worth thinking about the way psychology and philosophy were not divided that much until the early twentieth century. It was with so many developments in psychology, especially psychiatry and neuroscience, that made psychology become independent and it has overshadowed philosophy in importance in many ways.

Those who are so critical of mysticism often neglect its grounding influence. It has such a strong effect on the issues of how to live.