reply to post by Itisnowagain
["Awakening is not an achievement, and it can not be taught, although there are many 'teachers'."]
That's the final conclusion of what I've been saying from the start. No 'absolutes' and no gurus. This does not mean, that the inverse is true,
that all methods will do, and sometimes a teacher teaching non-teaching can be a good start. But the last 'step' we'll have to take ourselves, and
it's more a 'knack' acquired through trial-and-error than anything else.
Quote: ["There are many who have awakened and speak of it,..."]
Hmmmmm, especially the speaking-about-it part, which is far more common than the actual having done it.
The next several lines in your post. Agreed, this is correct text-book information. But no offense, you don't know, what I know, so it's sensible to
mention it, even if it's standard common knowledge amongst the interested. There may also be readers unfamiliar with this.
Quote: ["This is because we have invested so much importance on our minds, we think using our brains makes us intelligent, we think logic and reason
rule. Because we place so much importance on our thoughts (we believe what they say), they lead us a merry dance of fear, anxiety, guilt and
Exactly the same can be said concerning emotions. They can, on their own, create their own dualism, and they can together with the intellect create a
intellect-emotion dualism. This overall set of dualism can be extended to include the body also. Again there are no 'absolutes' and no absolute
paths (as e.g. making emotions THE way).
Quote: [" The intelligence that is inherent in everything is also the basis of us, it is also the basis of the mind, prior to the mind."]
Where did you get that from? It's not part of any of the relatively sensible systems I'm familiar with.
Quote:["Mind can only exist within consciousness."]
Depending on system/perspective the terminology differs and express different models.
Quote: ["If we could see that the mind (with its one thought at a time)....."]
Or no thoughts at all.
Quote continued: ["....can actually be watched,"]
Who's the watcher, as you ask yourself in the coming:
Quote concerning a watcher: ["...but not a something more like not a thing."]
True. This is where it can become interesting, when we try to talk about it.
Quote: ["We are nothing."]
I believe, I recently referred to the inner-buddhistic question: Silence or 'emptiness'. There is nothing-nothing'ness, and 'something' appearing
Quote: ["That is far to frightening for the average human,"]
Very much depending on, that some christian evangelists VERY enthusiastically hammer the point home as frightening as they can (I have several
firsthand experiences of this myself).
Quote: ["You quite literally have to lose your mind to become liberated. This is why not many walk this road."]
For westerners this usually implies being slightly insane in the bargain of loosing your mind. Those used to the idea don't become so deranged.
Quote: ["The mind that thinks it is clever will not accept this, and will fight tooth and nail to survive."]
Once you have 'lost your mind', you can go back to being clever again without problems.
But where is Jesus in all this? Especially the pauline Jesus-version, who didn't teach such.