- Joined
- Dec 2, 2013
- Messages
- 2,592
I have been asked several times about enlightenment and my views on it. Here is a quick and dirty version of everything I've learned about Enlightenment (this will provide a good break from some article writing/my book. I've been wanting to write this for a while and need to get it out there. The desire to do this keeps bugging me, constantly).
Now before I say anything else, let me be clear about two things
1. I am not enlightened
2. There's no such thing as a "complete guide" to enlightenment
Not really selling myself very well, am I? Well, by the end of this post, I will show you how one of these two statements is a lie and why it's completely irrelevant if you buy into anything I say or not.
Prefatory Warning:
I will probably confuse you in this post. I will say things that might seem absurd and go against everything you believe. If so, I probably did my job. I will also go on side-tangents that might not seem to make sense or have a place, but they do and I'm over-explaining for a reason. Oh and if I seem angry during any of this, I assure you, it's just excitement (I smiled the entire time I wrote this). This shit gets me harder than a girl with fat ass in a mini skirt.
You have been warned.
For those who want to get into a massive debate with me, I'll be frank - I'm not interested. I haven't had a productive debate in pretty much ever.
A discussion, however, I am HIGHLY interested in and for those that are genuinely curious and want to know more, please feel free to ask anything you would like!! You are the ones I'm focused on.
To illustrate this, let me share a story from the Pali canon (something I will reference often in this post, since it is my academic background - this is from the Ayacana Sutta):
When the Buddha was newly awakened, he was chilling underneath a tree. He'd just finished his 6 year journey (read: countless aeons) in search of Truth. He'd gone through all sorts of trouble to get there - he'd left his princely life, given up family, spent years cutting himself, sitting in his own shit and vomit, ripping out his own hair, meditating for days on end, starving his body, and all other austerities in an effort to escape his ignorance. Now, while he realized that most, if not all of this, was unnecessary self-torture, he did realize that finding Nirvana is very, very hard. And so, he said to himself
In short, just like the journey get pussy, most guys aren't going to put in the work to find Truth. They're too lazy and, contrary to all of their bitching about suffering, they enjoy their lot in life.
So what did he decide to do? Just fucking chill and not teach anyone, because they wouldn't listen anyways.
When Brahma Sahampati, the highest of the Brahma gods, read the Buddha's mind and saw that he didn't want to teach anyone the Dhamma (way), he got hella sad and begged the Buddha to teach the world, because there did exist some who would listen.
And so the Buddha searched with his mind and found that there were some beings with little dust in their eyes. Acknowledging that these people might understand what he has to say, he decided to teach and responded to Braham Sahampati thus
In other words, "whoever has ears to hear, let them hear" (Mark 4:9).
Alright, here we go.
What Is Enlightenment?
This is, actually, an impossible question to answer, for reasons that will be explained. In addition, it is much easier to explain Enlightenment via negation (i.e., what it is NOT). Then once we've established what Enlightenment is NOT, it becomes much easier to see what it IS.
But, let's start with a simple definition of what Enlightenment is just as a bench-mark.
Enlightenment = Truth Realization
You know the Truth (and the capitalized "T" is important here).
Now what is Truth? Well here's a property of Truth (and if you get this, you pretty much get everything).
The Truth must be True all the time and everywhere. This means the Truth is True no matter who believes it (or doesn't believe it), it is true in Dakota and in Tokyo, and it was true before the Big Bang, is true after the Big Crunch, and it doesn't matter how many licks it takes to get to the center of a pussy.
True is True is True is True.
A girl is a girl is a girl is a girl.
Alright, got that? Okay, cool. So anything that DOESN'T fit that can't possibly be true right? Well, unless you don't buy into the definition that the True is always True, but if you deny that, you're really stupid and buy into Relativism and I have no answer for you, because you have a tautology on your hands. No matter what I say, your retort can always be "well the truth is just relative!"
And if that's the case, then if I say "the truth isn't relative," then I'm equally right, aren't I? The Liar's Paradox ("this sentence is false") and Russell's paradox come upon the same problem.
So moving forward, if you accept that the Truth must be True always, forever, and everywhere, we'll have a much easier time with this.
But that doesn't tell you a lot does it? The Truth is True. It's reflexive (which is exactly the point). However, let's figure out what it's not first and then we'll be left with what MUST be.
What Is Enlightenment NOT?
Here's a quick list.
Enlightenment is NOT a Logical Assertion (i.e., why mathematicians and logicians are just jerking off)
- Argument from Authority (cuz an Enlightened guy said so): sutta 1 of the Dīgha Nikāya (Brahmajāla Sutta). The Buddha lists sixty wrong views about Nirvana. Four of these mistaken views are listed as being held by logicians (takki; btw, this language that I'll refer to with anything from the Pali Canon, or Theravada Buddhist scriptures, is called Pali). He criticizes them as thinking they can "hammer out [truth] with reasoning." What he says logicians are ACTUALLY doing, instead of finding truth, is that they are just obsessed with the pleasure that comes from a conceptual problem, its solution, and all of the fun that comes with arguing with yourself, other logicians, and thinking you're smarter than everyone because you know how to make a fucking syllogism.
- Cuz you Kant: In his Critique of Pure Reason, Kant demonstrates in a really absurd amount of detail why Pure Logic (deductive reasoning) cannot give Unconditional Truth (i.e., Truth that is always True, everywhere and always).
- Godel's Incompleteness Theorems: an axiomatic system (like Zermelo-Fraeknel set theory, the mainstream accepted foundation of all mathematics) cannot be both consistent and complete.
Completeness = all true statements expressible by the language are provable (and this theorem actually "solves" the Liar's paradox by demonstrating that it's neither true nor false, but unprovable, which is exactly the point).
Consistency = "For any formal effectively generated system T including basic arithmetical truths and also certain truths about formal provability, if T includes a statement of its own consistency then T is inconsistent."
In other words, it's like trusting a dude because he says "trust me," but you know that no one is really trustworthy until someone else can confirm it (or you confirm it yourself), but if you can't believe someone says they're trustworthy, then they really aren't trustworthy, are they? Ad infinitum. You go in circles.
Or here's another way (this is called a syllogism):
I am a Man (this is a premise)
Men are Mortal (another premise)
Therefore, I am Mortal (the conclusion)
Where did you get the "I," the "am," the "a," and the "man" from? You got them from somewhere, but you definitely didn't get them from logic. You either got them from experience or they just came to your mind. Logic can't answer where you got these from.
And here is the kicker: if formal mathematics or basic deductive logic cannot be demonstrated as completely true, all the time, everywhere, and always, then it isn't True (with a capital T). And if deductive logic, which actually ENTAILS its own truth, is not True, then you can be damn sure that Inductive Logic is about to suck a big fat fucking dick, too.
Enlightenment is NOT an Intuitive Leap (i.e., why Stephen Hawking will never find the Theory of Everything)
My example earlier just a moment ago of the "I am a Man" thing pointed out the weakness of premises - you gotta get them from somewhere, right? I'd have to be crazy to tell you that you're not allowed to use a simple observation, like that you're a human, to start off a logical syllogism. But here's the problem.
Inductive reasoning does not have the strength of deductive reasoning. You can't connect the dots like you can with
I am X -> X are Y...I am Y!
That's called entailment. Well, as we showed with pure logic, deduction, it's ultimately not True (by our definition of Truth always being True everywhere and always). So if inductive reasoning doesn't even have that which made deductive reasoning pretty damn strong, then inductive reasoning is HELLA in trouble. For this reason especially
- The Problem of Induction: This dude name David Hume saw that we connect events (like the sun rising) with causes (another day!) and these observations (every day the sun rises) leads us to an inference (the sun will rise tomorrow). The problem with this is, you're never 100% sure. I mean, the sun will continue to burn tomorrow, right? That'd be STUPID for me not to think that. Well, the sun will keep burning...until it doesn't. Just like you THINK you'll be alive tomorrow...until you're not
Modern science got really smart with its ability to counteract this uncertainty. It learned how to isolate variables and do experiments until just a few causes could be explained as the efficient cause (the thing that makes X -> Y). But here's the problem with that -
1. Lurking variables; you will never have a true vacuum, a situation where only the variables you know of or want to be in play will be the only ones in play. There will always be the possibility that there is something ELSE causing the events (like dark matter or intergalactic dildos).
2. Uncertainty; you can make mistakes in measurements. Maybe the time it took for that neutrino was really .000000000000001 seconds faster than you recorded it. So we established uncertainty (Physics uses the Sigma system), to account for those possible mistakes. Unfortunately, 99.99999999999999% correct or 0.0000000000000001% wrong is still WRONG and NOT COMPLETELY CORRECT. Are we assholes if we're this hardcore about Truth? Well yeah, that's the point.
Observations of cause and effect, are, ultimately wrong.
We want to be 100%, super duper uber pooper certain that the Truth is the Truth, because it has to be the Truth all the time, everywhere, NO MATTER WUT.
What Else Is TRUTH Not?
Alright, so science and logic will never bring us unerring certainty. We're kinda fucked aren't we?
Just to make this seem even more dire, let me go over a few other possibilities for what truth isn't
- Truth is NOT a sensory experience; you cannot see it, taste it, feel it, hear it, smell it (or think it; the Indians view thought as just another sense)
- It is not a state of mind, like being high, happy, sad, bored, curious, ecstatic, anxious, etc
It's NONE of these things, because, remember the Truth has to be True always, forever, and everywhere.
In other words, it has to be Unconditioned. This means it cannot have a beginning, because forever doesn't have a beginning. It also can't have an end; it is Deathless.
So if it's not a thought, an experience, a feeling, a mood, a state of mind, a logical assertion, or anything that we would consider ANYTHING, then what is it...NOTHING?
Clickity click boom.
Nothing.
It's nothing.
Game over, go home, GG.
But not really.
The only reason it is Nothing, is because to us the only thing that can be Unconditioned is Nothingness, or at least intuitively seems like Nothingness, because every THING that we think of as existing doesn't have this quality. Everything that we know of, all states of mind, all thoughts, all feelings, and even our life, is impermanent. ALL is, according to our definition of Truth always being True, simply not true.
It's all rubbish, bullshit, makyo, vikulpa.
But, somehow, there have been people in history (and now) who say "I got it, bro."
And by our greatest arguments and our grandest hopes, there MUST be Truth. I mean, even if we think reality is a LIE or an ILLUSION, the fact that it IS a lie or IS an illusion is still an AFFIRMATIVE STATEMENT OF EXISTENCE.
This is why nihilism is silly goose business (kind of). The Universe IS. Reality IS. Because Realty can't NOT be. Even if we're brains in vats being fed this universe through bits of data like in the Matrix, there still must be that world which is feeding this Untrue world. At some point, there must be a IT that is real, even if you keep going infinitely outwards. Even if the chain of being does't have a beginning, the fact that there IS a chain means that the CHAIN itself is the Truth, since that "chain" exists forever and always everywhere.
If you're still with me, then this is what we have -
The Truth is beyond logic, words, or even experience. It just IS. And somehow, there have been those who have "seen" it. But how come they can't just SHOW me THAT which they "saw"?
For the exact fucking reason that the Truth IS True everywhere, always, and everywhere.
Since everything that we know of as a sensible or conceivable THING (thoughts, feelings, or sensory data) is impermanent or localized on a certain spot (at your house or in my head), it is therefore NOT the truth.
So if you expect to scratch and smell the truth, you've already missed the point. You haven't listened to a word that's been said.
You cannot HAVE it, because there is no "IT."
And herein lies the answer to the whole problem. Are you ready? Cuz if you understand this, your brain might explode.
If, as we established, the Truth is always, everywhere, and forever, what does the mean EVERYTHING IS, ALWAYS, and FOREVER?????????????????????????????
The Truth.
That keyboard, that girl across the street, the roof above your head, those thoughts in your mind, THAT is the Truth, because the Truth is EVERYTHING and ALWAYS.
It is complete and consistent and cannot be contradictory to itself and no argument or phenomenal event can harm it, because it doesn't have any of the properties that make things like logic, mathematics, inductive reasoning, or sensory experience fallible
This means YOU are It.
No, not this "you" that you think you are - these thoughts, experiences, and feelings or SENSE of "I" that you know you have but can't quite explain how you have it - I mean THAT which underlies all of it.
Those appearances - the girls' skirt, her skin, her smile, her eyes - those are just the mask of THAT which IS, because as I've said way too many times but cannot say enough, ALL THAT IS MUST BE ALL THAT IS.
X is X.
This is the truest thing that can ever be said, so long as you realize that X is just a token (a term from philosophy of mathematics). It's what that token, the "X" that you SEE, is pointing towards that is important. That is called its TYPE in philosophy of mathematics. Except, whether you write
X
1
GIBBLKEJKLWTD
It doesn't matter, all of those tokens represent the same TYPE - Truth. They are all bullshit in that they are not in and of themselves the truth, but just markers, pointers, signposts. Since they are in and of themselves impermanent (this forum will eventually be destroyed or erased, whether by choice or because the servers are blown up in a nuclear holocaust), they are not the TRUTH, but THAT which holds them up and THAT which they signify or represent IS the TRUTH.
Therefore, the Truth is the Truth, always and forever, and you are THAT which is TRUE. You are TRUTH.
What's that mean? That means that when this body dies, when your head slams into your steering wheel or when your brain fires its last neuron after your heart stops beating, THAT which you truly are will REMAIN and only your body/mind will transition (the atoms remain and are just moved to another geographical location...instead of the brain atoms that were in your head, they're now on the floor, if you were just decapitated).
Death isn't real, because that which you ARE, which is EVERYTHING, always has been and always will be. You are immortal, so long as you realize that when I say "you" I don't mean you, I mean YOU.
GET IT?
Enlightenment Then Is...
Perfect knowledge.
It is KNOWN by identity. You ARE IT.
Knowledge and Existence are ONE.
This is why Enlightened beings cannot be persuaded or argued with - they KNOW, not by any conditional method (thought, feeling, experience, etc), but by direct knowledge.
With the same certainty that you think you exist, they KNOW they exist.
It is self-consistent and complete.
Wait...how do I get it?
Good question.
How do you "get" something that is already there? Well, since it's not something you can "get," because anything that is "gettable" is by definition NOT Truth (you can't put Truth in your pocket, hide it in a vault, or write an IOU for it), are you fucked?
Nope, just remove the mask.
And what is that mask?
Everything that is a THING.
Thought, feelings, sensory data, emotions? They are the enemy. They are that which stands in the way of you seeing THAT which is.
Well how the FUCK do you do that?
Throw away everything.
If you truly, truly are convinced that what I'm saying is true, then you can find the Truth by just throwing away everything. And in return, you get EVERYTHING, because EVERYTHING that IS is exactly what is left when you get rid of everything that ISN'T.
What isn't?
Your hopes, your dreams, your lusts, your fears, your anxieties, your notions of truth, of friendship, of morality, of love....
Everything that you consider "you."
There Is No You
We have established many times over that all experiences, all thoughts, and all feelings, or anything that exists within the conceptual, perceptual, or emotive fabric that we call existence is actually NOT REAL (by our definition of Truth).
Therefore, if I ask you
"Who are you?"
You will very soon realize that you are NOT any of those, because anything that IS, IS NOT that which you think you are.
Your skin? That's a sensory object. Not the truth, just a skin-mask of the Truth.
Your fat? That's a sensory object. Not the truth, just a fart-mask of the Truth.
Your anxieties? That's a feeling. Not the Truth, just an anxiety-mask of the Truth.
Your desires? That's an affection. Not the Truth, just a desire-mask of the Truth.
Your knowledge of 2+2 = 4? That's a concept. Not the Truth, just a conceptuality-of-2+2=4-mask of the Truth.
Your conceptual conclusion that the Truth is always the Truth everywhere and forever? Not the Truth, just a really fluffy and paradoxical mask of the Truth.
All of it is not YOU. What YOU are is what EVERYTHING IS. That means there is no YOU or ME - there is only THAT.
Self does not exist. Only Not-Self exists (and in Sanskrit, the word for "not-self" is Anatman. Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahah).
True Self is No-Self.
So here is the next paradox that will fuck your brain -
If you are already the Truth, and that which you think you are is NOT the Truth, how do you Realize THAT which you already are?
You can shout at the top of your lungs that you want to wake up to THAT which you are, but that's just a shout, a sensory object, and a desire, an affection.
Ready for it?
Self cannot get rid of Self. It's like trying to think away thinking. By thinking "I want to stop thinking," you are perpetuating the problem.
Don't think about pink elephants!!!!!!
You have the key, but you can't remember which pocket you put it in, and the Self that you are currently inhabiting (this body and mind) is making sure you don't find that fucking key, because as soon as you do, you're outta here (in theory).
So Self does everything it can to keep you locked up.
This includes materialism (believing that the world is just matter), rationalism (thinking that thinking is the chief solution to all problems), atheism (believing that there is no ultimate), agnosticism (believing that whether or not there is an ultimate, you can't know it), and religion (that a system of beliefs and rituals will bring you closer to the Ultimate).
All of it, is bullshit. The atheist, agnostic, and devout Christian are all equally skullfucking retarded, because they are attached to their dogmas of Untruth.
The atheist thinks that because there is no evidence for God that there is no God and instead adheres to logic, because he's smart like that (when in fact, the belief that something doesn't exist because there is no evidence for it is actually TERRIBLE logic and anyone who takes an elementary class in logic and learns about a logical fallacy like the appeal to ignorance should immediately realize how stupid he is for thinking such a thing).
The devout Christian thinks he's right because his parents said so, he read this book that has some crazy cool shit in it that says he will have eternal life if he accepts Christ as his savior, etc. Well, problem is, he's not focusing on THAT which the religion is pointing to and he's just making a non-sensical leap. He focuses on morality, on ritual, on belief, and on custom to secure his eternal life, when instead, as I've demonstrated, he should be focusing on THAT which the signposts of words like "God" are pointing to). He is attached to words, beliefs, and concepts...in other words NOT god, and in other words, idolatry
And the agnostic...well he think he's special because he's taken the middle road and doesn't know the answer! However, unless he's actively doing something to remedy that ignorance, then he is an agnostic not in the sense of "I don't know," but in the sense of "I CAN'T know," both of which are possible translations of "a" (not) "gnostic" (gnosis is Greek for knowledge). It's like a man sitting in his room, wondering if he can go out, meet girls, and get pussy. You don't know until you try and sitting in your room saying "I don't know!" isn't very admirable (and before you quote Socrates to me, "I know nothing," just stop; knowing NOTHING (hint hint hint hint) is a universe away from not knowing the answer or admitting that one cannot know the answer).
You Still Haven't Answered My Question - How Do I Get Enlightenment?
Remove ignorance and Enlightenment is the only thing that will be left.
Except for food, shelter, and water, abandon everything you have, dismiss any thought, feeling, and experience as Untruth, and in time, you will see THAT which IS.
Unfortunately, "you" (this body and mind) has no control over WHEN and HOW that happens, because YOU are not "you" (this body and mind), and "you" (this body and mind) is a conditioned phenomena.
In other words, "you" (this body and mind) has no free will.
How so?
Because absolute freedom implies a lack of conditioning.
There are two forks in the road; chooses one.
This is free will yes?
No.
Free will would mean not having any forks or any roads, or anyone to "choose" a direction. Why?
Because the fact that there is a fork in the road, means you are being FORCED into a decision. You are given two options (or three; do nothing). In all three choices, you were still hoisted that choice by the conditions existing in the first place.
Put another way, you didn't choose your face, your parents, or your place of birth, did you?
All of history, in its infinity, has led up to this very moment and made "you" who "you" are. You had no choice in any of it, because all that "you" consider as "you" never was your choice.
Please, try and prove me wrong. Don't go to sleep for 10 years. Think about one thing for 24 hours straight. Stay hard for 7 days straight.
Let me know how that goes
Like I said, true free will ABSOLUTE freedom. In order to have absolute freedom, you must be able to do ALL, ANYTIME, ANYWHERE (you should be connecting two very big dots right now...)
And since "you" have no freedom, "you" (this body and mind) does not CHOOSE Enlightenment, because "you" cannot desire the destruction of "you" (I will show later on how suicide is a noble thought, but ultimately futile).
Truth Realization, then, must come from outside the Self.
In other words, it must be an act of Grace.
"AH," you say, "but I am THAT which is ALWAYS, therefore I am ULTIMATELY FREE and CAN GRANT "ME" (this body and mind) THAT knowledge whenever the TRUE ME wishes."
And you would be correct in saying that. 100%.
So do it
Can't?
Ah, well then this must all be a farce, a big hoax.
And you would be correct in saying that. 100%.
Why?
Remember, all intention, all desire, all thought, all hope, all EVERY thing that is a THING is NOT THAT. Only THAT is THAT, and THAT is EVERYTHING.
Alright, even I'm annoying myself now, but here's what I'm trying to tell you -
It will happen when it happens and you have absolutely no say in it.
"Okay, fine!" you say. "I'm gonna go back to sitting alone in my room playing video games and not doing anything, since I don't have any free will! Fuck you, Hector!"
I only have one response to that -
Is that True?
There was a funny comic posted on the door of one of my philosophy professors. It showed a guy reading a "choose your own adventure" book and the page he was reading said something like this -
"If you don't have any free will, turn to page 35. If you have free will, turn to page 35."
Get it?
Alright, sooo what now?
If you do nothing, everything will go on as it always has been, because everything will be as it always was.
If you do anything, everything will go on as it always has been, because everything will be as it always was.
No matter what you do, EVERYTHING IS AS IT IS.
Boom. There you go.
Do what you want.
And even if you can't choose what you want or ACTUALLY choose to DO what you want, but you still WANT to get Enlightenment, what should you do?
Well, when you wanna learn how to get pussy, who do you go to?
People who get pussy
Who Has Been Enlightened?
Well other than the very true statement that everyone is already Enlightened, they just don't realize it yet, here's a list of people that, in my research, seemed to have found THAT which is True
Moses
Siddartha Gotama (the Buddha - along with his attendant Ananda, after the Buddha's death, his main two followers, Moggallana and Sariputta, along with anyone in the Pali canon who is identified as an "arhat" or "arahant.")
Jesus
St. Paul (the guy who wrote half the new testament)
Angelus Silesius
Meister Eckhart
Giardano Bruno
Franklin Merrell Wolff (see this book)
Adi Shankara (see this bookor any others by him)
Lao Tzu (founder of Daoism)
Herman Melville (Didn't think you'd see this one, huh!? Go read Moby Dick for Melville's journey Enlightenment and Bartleby the Scrivener for what it's like to be Enlightened)
Walt Whitman (see Leaves of Grass)
Eckhart Tolle
U.G. Krishnamurti
Mohammad (an Enlightened pedophile, lol)
Plato (another Enlightened pedophile, lulz)
Nagarjuna
Nisagadatta
Socrates (here's the kicker: I know nothing is his claim to Enlightenment; remember that THAT which is TRUE is NOTHING, when compared to what we think of as everything?)
Plotinus
Dogen
Bodhidarma
Ramana Maharshi
Baal Shem Tov
Rumi
St. John of the Cross
Bernadette Roberts
Heraclitus
Parmenides
Woah, there's Buddhists, Advaita Vedantist, Christian mystics, Ancient Greek philosophers, and even modern literary figures in this list.
Yep, that's the point.
And there are dozens upon dozens more that I haven't done personal research on, but have certainly attained Enlightenment. And there are probably MANY more who attained it, but didn't tell anyone, because nobody wants to hear the Truth, since it means losing everything that you are and have
I'm quite tired after writing all of this, but the next time I take a break from writing articles and my book on college game, I'll show you what the benefits of Enlightenment are (i.e., WHY get enlightened), and how there is no fundamental distinction between the teachings of Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, or any secular path towards Truth. They are different in name and form, but not in essence.
Until then.
Love ya,
Hector
p.s. this is all speculation since I have not had Truth Realization, so everything I've said is double-not true
p.p.s Oh and none of this should have any bearing on how I teach you to fuck bitches; I by no means advocate celibacy as a path to enlightenment and will explain in the next post why celibacy is irrelevant to enlightenment
Now before I say anything else, let me be clear about two things
1. I am not enlightened
2. There's no such thing as a "complete guide" to enlightenment
Not really selling myself very well, am I? Well, by the end of this post, I will show you how one of these two statements is a lie and why it's completely irrelevant if you buy into anything I say or not.
Prefatory Warning:
I will probably confuse you in this post. I will say things that might seem absurd and go against everything you believe. If so, I probably did my job. I will also go on side-tangents that might not seem to make sense or have a place, but they do and I'm over-explaining for a reason. Oh and if I seem angry during any of this, I assure you, it's just excitement (I smiled the entire time I wrote this). This shit gets me harder than a girl with fat ass in a mini skirt.
You have been warned.
For those who want to get into a massive debate with me, I'll be frank - I'm not interested. I haven't had a productive debate in pretty much ever.
A discussion, however, I am HIGHLY interested in and for those that are genuinely curious and want to know more, please feel free to ask anything you would like!! You are the ones I'm focused on.
To illustrate this, let me share a story from the Pali canon (something I will reference often in this post, since it is my academic background - this is from the Ayacana Sutta):
When the Buddha was newly awakened, he was chilling underneath a tree. He'd just finished his 6 year journey (read: countless aeons) in search of Truth. He'd gone through all sorts of trouble to get there - he'd left his princely life, given up family, spent years cutting himself, sitting in his own shit and vomit, ripping out his own hair, meditating for days on end, starving his body, and all other austerities in an effort to escape his ignorance. Now, while he realized that most, if not all of this, was unnecessary self-torture, he did realize that finding Nirvana is very, very hard. And so, he said to himself
In short, just like the journey get pussy, most guys aren't going to put in the work to find Truth. They're too lazy and, contrary to all of their bitching about suffering, they enjoy their lot in life.
So what did he decide to do? Just fucking chill and not teach anyone, because they wouldn't listen anyways.
When Brahma Sahampati, the highest of the Brahma gods, read the Buddha's mind and saw that he didn't want to teach anyone the Dhamma (way), he got hella sad and begged the Buddha to teach the world, because there did exist some who would listen.
And so the Buddha searched with his mind and found that there were some beings with little dust in their eyes. Acknowledging that these people might understand what he has to say, he decided to teach and responded to Braham Sahampati thus
In other words, "whoever has ears to hear, let them hear" (Mark 4:9).
Alright, here we go.
What Is Enlightenment?
This is, actually, an impossible question to answer, for reasons that will be explained. In addition, it is much easier to explain Enlightenment via negation (i.e., what it is NOT). Then once we've established what Enlightenment is NOT, it becomes much easier to see what it IS.
But, let's start with a simple definition of what Enlightenment is just as a bench-mark.
Enlightenment = Truth Realization
You know the Truth (and the capitalized "T" is important here).
Now what is Truth? Well here's a property of Truth (and if you get this, you pretty much get everything).
The Truth must be True all the time and everywhere. This means the Truth is True no matter who believes it (or doesn't believe it), it is true in Dakota and in Tokyo, and it was true before the Big Bang, is true after the Big Crunch, and it doesn't matter how many licks it takes to get to the center of a pussy.
True is True is True is True.
A girl is a girl is a girl is a girl.
Alright, got that? Okay, cool. So anything that DOESN'T fit that can't possibly be true right? Well, unless you don't buy into the definition that the True is always True, but if you deny that, you're really stupid and buy into Relativism and I have no answer for you, because you have a tautology on your hands. No matter what I say, your retort can always be "well the truth is just relative!"
And if that's the case, then if I say "the truth isn't relative," then I'm equally right, aren't I? The Liar's Paradox ("this sentence is false") and Russell's paradox come upon the same problem.
So moving forward, if you accept that the Truth must be True always, forever, and everywhere, we'll have a much easier time with this.
But that doesn't tell you a lot does it? The Truth is True. It's reflexive (which is exactly the point). However, let's figure out what it's not first and then we'll be left with what MUST be.
What Is Enlightenment NOT?
Here's a quick list.
Enlightenment is NOT a Logical Assertion (i.e., why mathematicians and logicians are just jerking off)
- Argument from Authority (cuz an Enlightened guy said so): sutta 1 of the Dīgha Nikāya (Brahmajāla Sutta). The Buddha lists sixty wrong views about Nirvana. Four of these mistaken views are listed as being held by logicians (takki; btw, this language that I'll refer to with anything from the Pali Canon, or Theravada Buddhist scriptures, is called Pali). He criticizes them as thinking they can "hammer out [truth] with reasoning." What he says logicians are ACTUALLY doing, instead of finding truth, is that they are just obsessed with the pleasure that comes from a conceptual problem, its solution, and all of the fun that comes with arguing with yourself, other logicians, and thinking you're smarter than everyone because you know how to make a fucking syllogism.
- Cuz you Kant: In his Critique of Pure Reason, Kant demonstrates in a really absurd amount of detail why Pure Logic (deductive reasoning) cannot give Unconditional Truth (i.e., Truth that is always True, everywhere and always).
- Godel's Incompleteness Theorems: an axiomatic system (like Zermelo-Fraeknel set theory, the mainstream accepted foundation of all mathematics) cannot be both consistent and complete.
Completeness = all true statements expressible by the language are provable (and this theorem actually "solves" the Liar's paradox by demonstrating that it's neither true nor false, but unprovable, which is exactly the point).
Consistency = "For any formal effectively generated system T including basic arithmetical truths and also certain truths about formal provability, if T includes a statement of its own consistency then T is inconsistent."
In other words, it's like trusting a dude because he says "trust me," but you know that no one is really trustworthy until someone else can confirm it (or you confirm it yourself), but if you can't believe someone says they're trustworthy, then they really aren't trustworthy, are they? Ad infinitum. You go in circles.
Or here's another way (this is called a syllogism):
I am a Man (this is a premise)
Men are Mortal (another premise)
Therefore, I am Mortal (the conclusion)
Where did you get the "I," the "am," the "a," and the "man" from? You got them from somewhere, but you definitely didn't get them from logic. You either got them from experience or they just came to your mind. Logic can't answer where you got these from.
And here is the kicker: if formal mathematics or basic deductive logic cannot be demonstrated as completely true, all the time, everywhere, and always, then it isn't True (with a capital T). And if deductive logic, which actually ENTAILS its own truth, is not True, then you can be damn sure that Inductive Logic is about to suck a big fat fucking dick, too.
Enlightenment is NOT an Intuitive Leap (i.e., why Stephen Hawking will never find the Theory of Everything)
My example earlier just a moment ago of the "I am a Man" thing pointed out the weakness of premises - you gotta get them from somewhere, right? I'd have to be crazy to tell you that you're not allowed to use a simple observation, like that you're a human, to start off a logical syllogism. But here's the problem.
Inductive reasoning does not have the strength of deductive reasoning. You can't connect the dots like you can with
I am X -> X are Y...I am Y!
That's called entailment. Well, as we showed with pure logic, deduction, it's ultimately not True (by our definition of Truth always being True everywhere and always). So if inductive reasoning doesn't even have that which made deductive reasoning pretty damn strong, then inductive reasoning is HELLA in trouble. For this reason especially
- The Problem of Induction: This dude name David Hume saw that we connect events (like the sun rising) with causes (another day!) and these observations (every day the sun rises) leads us to an inference (the sun will rise tomorrow). The problem with this is, you're never 100% sure. I mean, the sun will continue to burn tomorrow, right? That'd be STUPID for me not to think that. Well, the sun will keep burning...until it doesn't. Just like you THINK you'll be alive tomorrow...until you're not
Modern science got really smart with its ability to counteract this uncertainty. It learned how to isolate variables and do experiments until just a few causes could be explained as the efficient cause (the thing that makes X -> Y). But here's the problem with that -
1. Lurking variables; you will never have a true vacuum, a situation where only the variables you know of or want to be in play will be the only ones in play. There will always be the possibility that there is something ELSE causing the events (like dark matter or intergalactic dildos).
2. Uncertainty; you can make mistakes in measurements. Maybe the time it took for that neutrino was really .000000000000001 seconds faster than you recorded it. So we established uncertainty (Physics uses the Sigma system), to account for those possible mistakes. Unfortunately, 99.99999999999999% correct or 0.0000000000000001% wrong is still WRONG and NOT COMPLETELY CORRECT. Are we assholes if we're this hardcore about Truth? Well yeah, that's the point.
Observations of cause and effect, are, ultimately wrong.
We want to be 100%, super duper uber pooper certain that the Truth is the Truth, because it has to be the Truth all the time, everywhere, NO MATTER WUT.
What Else Is TRUTH Not?
Alright, so science and logic will never bring us unerring certainty. We're kinda fucked aren't we?
Just to make this seem even more dire, let me go over a few other possibilities for what truth isn't
- Truth is NOT a sensory experience; you cannot see it, taste it, feel it, hear it, smell it (or think it; the Indians view thought as just another sense)
- It is not a state of mind, like being high, happy, sad, bored, curious, ecstatic, anxious, etc
It's NONE of these things, because, remember the Truth has to be True always, forever, and everywhere.
In other words, it has to be Unconditioned. This means it cannot have a beginning, because forever doesn't have a beginning. It also can't have an end; it is Deathless.
So if it's not a thought, an experience, a feeling, a mood, a state of mind, a logical assertion, or anything that we would consider ANYTHING, then what is it...NOTHING?
Clickity click boom.
Nothing.
It's nothing.
Game over, go home, GG.
But not really.
The only reason it is Nothing, is because to us the only thing that can be Unconditioned is Nothingness, or at least intuitively seems like Nothingness, because every THING that we think of as existing doesn't have this quality. Everything that we know of, all states of mind, all thoughts, all feelings, and even our life, is impermanent. ALL is, according to our definition of Truth always being True, simply not true.
It's all rubbish, bullshit, makyo, vikulpa.
But, somehow, there have been people in history (and now) who say "I got it, bro."
And by our greatest arguments and our grandest hopes, there MUST be Truth. I mean, even if we think reality is a LIE or an ILLUSION, the fact that it IS a lie or IS an illusion is still an AFFIRMATIVE STATEMENT OF EXISTENCE.
This is why nihilism is silly goose business (kind of). The Universe IS. Reality IS. Because Realty can't NOT be. Even if we're brains in vats being fed this universe through bits of data like in the Matrix, there still must be that world which is feeding this Untrue world. At some point, there must be a IT that is real, even if you keep going infinitely outwards. Even if the chain of being does't have a beginning, the fact that there IS a chain means that the CHAIN itself is the Truth, since that "chain" exists forever and always everywhere.
If you're still with me, then this is what we have -
The Truth is beyond logic, words, or even experience. It just IS. And somehow, there have been those who have "seen" it. But how come they can't just SHOW me THAT which they "saw"?
For the exact fucking reason that the Truth IS True everywhere, always, and everywhere.
Since everything that we know of as a sensible or conceivable THING (thoughts, feelings, or sensory data) is impermanent or localized on a certain spot (at your house or in my head), it is therefore NOT the truth.
So if you expect to scratch and smell the truth, you've already missed the point. You haven't listened to a word that's been said.
You cannot HAVE it, because there is no "IT."
And herein lies the answer to the whole problem. Are you ready? Cuz if you understand this, your brain might explode.
If, as we established, the Truth is always, everywhere, and forever, what does the mean EVERYTHING IS, ALWAYS, and FOREVER?????????????????????????????
The Truth.
That keyboard, that girl across the street, the roof above your head, those thoughts in your mind, THAT is the Truth, because the Truth is EVERYTHING and ALWAYS.
It is complete and consistent and cannot be contradictory to itself and no argument or phenomenal event can harm it, because it doesn't have any of the properties that make things like logic, mathematics, inductive reasoning, or sensory experience fallible
This means YOU are It.
No, not this "you" that you think you are - these thoughts, experiences, and feelings or SENSE of "I" that you know you have but can't quite explain how you have it - I mean THAT which underlies all of it.
Those appearances - the girls' skirt, her skin, her smile, her eyes - those are just the mask of THAT which IS, because as I've said way too many times but cannot say enough, ALL THAT IS MUST BE ALL THAT IS.
X is X.
This is the truest thing that can ever be said, so long as you realize that X is just a token (a term from philosophy of mathematics). It's what that token, the "X" that you SEE, is pointing towards that is important. That is called its TYPE in philosophy of mathematics. Except, whether you write
X
1
GIBBLKEJKLWTD
It doesn't matter, all of those tokens represent the same TYPE - Truth. They are all bullshit in that they are not in and of themselves the truth, but just markers, pointers, signposts. Since they are in and of themselves impermanent (this forum will eventually be destroyed or erased, whether by choice or because the servers are blown up in a nuclear holocaust), they are not the TRUTH, but THAT which holds them up and THAT which they signify or represent IS the TRUTH.
Therefore, the Truth is the Truth, always and forever, and you are THAT which is TRUE. You are TRUTH.
What's that mean? That means that when this body dies, when your head slams into your steering wheel or when your brain fires its last neuron after your heart stops beating, THAT which you truly are will REMAIN and only your body/mind will transition (the atoms remain and are just moved to another geographical location...instead of the brain atoms that were in your head, they're now on the floor, if you were just decapitated).
Death isn't real, because that which you ARE, which is EVERYTHING, always has been and always will be. You are immortal, so long as you realize that when I say "you" I don't mean you, I mean YOU.
GET IT?
Enlightenment Then Is...
Perfect knowledge.
It is KNOWN by identity. You ARE IT.
Knowledge and Existence are ONE.
This is why Enlightened beings cannot be persuaded or argued with - they KNOW, not by any conditional method (thought, feeling, experience, etc), but by direct knowledge.
With the same certainty that you think you exist, they KNOW they exist.
It is self-consistent and complete.
Wait...how do I get it?
Good question.
How do you "get" something that is already there? Well, since it's not something you can "get," because anything that is "gettable" is by definition NOT Truth (you can't put Truth in your pocket, hide it in a vault, or write an IOU for it), are you fucked?
Nope, just remove the mask.
And what is that mask?
Everything that is a THING.
Thought, feelings, sensory data, emotions? They are the enemy. They are that which stands in the way of you seeing THAT which is.
Well how the FUCK do you do that?
Throw away everything.
If you truly, truly are convinced that what I'm saying is true, then you can find the Truth by just throwing away everything. And in return, you get EVERYTHING, because EVERYTHING that IS is exactly what is left when you get rid of everything that ISN'T.
What isn't?
Your hopes, your dreams, your lusts, your fears, your anxieties, your notions of truth, of friendship, of morality, of love....
Everything that you consider "you."
There Is No You
We have established many times over that all experiences, all thoughts, and all feelings, or anything that exists within the conceptual, perceptual, or emotive fabric that we call existence is actually NOT REAL (by our definition of Truth).
Therefore, if I ask you
"Who are you?"
You will very soon realize that you are NOT any of those, because anything that IS, IS NOT that which you think you are.
Your skin? That's a sensory object. Not the truth, just a skin-mask of the Truth.
Your fat? That's a sensory object. Not the truth, just a fart-mask of the Truth.
Your anxieties? That's a feeling. Not the Truth, just an anxiety-mask of the Truth.
Your desires? That's an affection. Not the Truth, just a desire-mask of the Truth.
Your knowledge of 2+2 = 4? That's a concept. Not the Truth, just a conceptuality-of-2+2=4-mask of the Truth.
Your conceptual conclusion that the Truth is always the Truth everywhere and forever? Not the Truth, just a really fluffy and paradoxical mask of the Truth.
All of it is not YOU. What YOU are is what EVERYTHING IS. That means there is no YOU or ME - there is only THAT.
Self does not exist. Only Not-Self exists (and in Sanskrit, the word for "not-self" is Anatman. Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahah).
True Self is No-Self.
So here is the next paradox that will fuck your brain -
If you are already the Truth, and that which you think you are is NOT the Truth, how do you Realize THAT which you already are?
You can shout at the top of your lungs that you want to wake up to THAT which you are, but that's just a shout, a sensory object, and a desire, an affection.
Ready for it?
Self cannot get rid of Self. It's like trying to think away thinking. By thinking "I want to stop thinking," you are perpetuating the problem.
Don't think about pink elephants!!!!!!
You have the key, but you can't remember which pocket you put it in, and the Self that you are currently inhabiting (this body and mind) is making sure you don't find that fucking key, because as soon as you do, you're outta here (in theory).
So Self does everything it can to keep you locked up.
This includes materialism (believing that the world is just matter), rationalism (thinking that thinking is the chief solution to all problems), atheism (believing that there is no ultimate), agnosticism (believing that whether or not there is an ultimate, you can't know it), and religion (that a system of beliefs and rituals will bring you closer to the Ultimate).
All of it, is bullshit. The atheist, agnostic, and devout Christian are all equally skullfucking retarded, because they are attached to their dogmas of Untruth.
The atheist thinks that because there is no evidence for God that there is no God and instead adheres to logic, because he's smart like that (when in fact, the belief that something doesn't exist because there is no evidence for it is actually TERRIBLE logic and anyone who takes an elementary class in logic and learns about a logical fallacy like the appeal to ignorance should immediately realize how stupid he is for thinking such a thing).
The devout Christian thinks he's right because his parents said so, he read this book that has some crazy cool shit in it that says he will have eternal life if he accepts Christ as his savior, etc. Well, problem is, he's not focusing on THAT which the religion is pointing to and he's just making a non-sensical leap. He focuses on morality, on ritual, on belief, and on custom to secure his eternal life, when instead, as I've demonstrated, he should be focusing on THAT which the signposts of words like "God" are pointing to). He is attached to words, beliefs, and concepts...in other words NOT god, and in other words, idolatry
And the agnostic...well he think he's special because he's taken the middle road and doesn't know the answer! However, unless he's actively doing something to remedy that ignorance, then he is an agnostic not in the sense of "I don't know," but in the sense of "I CAN'T know," both of which are possible translations of "a" (not) "gnostic" (gnosis is Greek for knowledge). It's like a man sitting in his room, wondering if he can go out, meet girls, and get pussy. You don't know until you try and sitting in your room saying "I don't know!" isn't very admirable (and before you quote Socrates to me, "I know nothing," just stop; knowing NOTHING (hint hint hint hint) is a universe away from not knowing the answer or admitting that one cannot know the answer).
You Still Haven't Answered My Question - How Do I Get Enlightenment?
Remove ignorance and Enlightenment is the only thing that will be left.
Except for food, shelter, and water, abandon everything you have, dismiss any thought, feeling, and experience as Untruth, and in time, you will see THAT which IS.
Unfortunately, "you" (this body and mind) has no control over WHEN and HOW that happens, because YOU are not "you" (this body and mind), and "you" (this body and mind) is a conditioned phenomena.
In other words, "you" (this body and mind) has no free will.
How so?
Because absolute freedom implies a lack of conditioning.
There are two forks in the road; chooses one.
This is free will yes?
No.
Free will would mean not having any forks or any roads, or anyone to "choose" a direction. Why?
Because the fact that there is a fork in the road, means you are being FORCED into a decision. You are given two options (or three; do nothing). In all three choices, you were still hoisted that choice by the conditions existing in the first place.
Put another way, you didn't choose your face, your parents, or your place of birth, did you?
All of history, in its infinity, has led up to this very moment and made "you" who "you" are. You had no choice in any of it, because all that "you" consider as "you" never was your choice.
Please, try and prove me wrong. Don't go to sleep for 10 years. Think about one thing for 24 hours straight. Stay hard for 7 days straight.
Let me know how that goes
Like I said, true free will ABSOLUTE freedom. In order to have absolute freedom, you must be able to do ALL, ANYTIME, ANYWHERE (you should be connecting two very big dots right now...)
And since "you" have no freedom, "you" (this body and mind) does not CHOOSE Enlightenment, because "you" cannot desire the destruction of "you" (I will show later on how suicide is a noble thought, but ultimately futile).
Truth Realization, then, must come from outside the Self.
In other words, it must be an act of Grace.
"AH," you say, "but I am THAT which is ALWAYS, therefore I am ULTIMATELY FREE and CAN GRANT "ME" (this body and mind) THAT knowledge whenever the TRUE ME wishes."
And you would be correct in saying that. 100%.
So do it
Can't?
Ah, well then this must all be a farce, a big hoax.
And you would be correct in saying that. 100%.
Why?
Remember, all intention, all desire, all thought, all hope, all EVERY thing that is a THING is NOT THAT. Only THAT is THAT, and THAT is EVERYTHING.
Alright, even I'm annoying myself now, but here's what I'm trying to tell you -
It will happen when it happens and you have absolutely no say in it.
"Okay, fine!" you say. "I'm gonna go back to sitting alone in my room playing video games and not doing anything, since I don't have any free will! Fuck you, Hector!"
I only have one response to that -
Is that True?
There was a funny comic posted on the door of one of my philosophy professors. It showed a guy reading a "choose your own adventure" book and the page he was reading said something like this -
"If you don't have any free will, turn to page 35. If you have free will, turn to page 35."
Get it?
Alright, sooo what now?
If you do nothing, everything will go on as it always has been, because everything will be as it always was.
If you do anything, everything will go on as it always has been, because everything will be as it always was.
No matter what you do, EVERYTHING IS AS IT IS.
Boom. There you go.
Do what you want.
And even if you can't choose what you want or ACTUALLY choose to DO what you want, but you still WANT to get Enlightenment, what should you do?
Well, when you wanna learn how to get pussy, who do you go to?
People who get pussy
Who Has Been Enlightened?
Well other than the very true statement that everyone is already Enlightened, they just don't realize it yet, here's a list of people that, in my research, seemed to have found THAT which is True
Moses
Siddartha Gotama (the Buddha - along with his attendant Ananda, after the Buddha's death, his main two followers, Moggallana and Sariputta, along with anyone in the Pali canon who is identified as an "arhat" or "arahant.")
Jesus
St. Paul (the guy who wrote half the new testament)
Angelus Silesius
Meister Eckhart
Giardano Bruno
Franklin Merrell Wolff (see this book)
Adi Shankara (see this bookor any others by him)
Lao Tzu (founder of Daoism)
Herman Melville (Didn't think you'd see this one, huh!? Go read Moby Dick for Melville's journey Enlightenment and Bartleby the Scrivener for what it's like to be Enlightened)
Walt Whitman (see Leaves of Grass)
Eckhart Tolle
U.G. Krishnamurti
Mohammad (an Enlightened pedophile, lol)
Plato (another Enlightened pedophile, lulz)
Nagarjuna
Nisagadatta
Socrates (here's the kicker: I know nothing is his claim to Enlightenment; remember that THAT which is TRUE is NOTHING, when compared to what we think of as everything?)
Plotinus
Dogen
Bodhidarma
Ramana Maharshi
Baal Shem Tov
Rumi
St. John of the Cross
Bernadette Roberts
Heraclitus
Parmenides
Woah, there's Buddhists, Advaita Vedantist, Christian mystics, Ancient Greek philosophers, and even modern literary figures in this list.
Yep, that's the point.
And there are dozens upon dozens more that I haven't done personal research on, but have certainly attained Enlightenment. And there are probably MANY more who attained it, but didn't tell anyone, because nobody wants to hear the Truth, since it means losing everything that you are and have
I'm quite tired after writing all of this, but the next time I take a break from writing articles and my book on college game, I'll show you what the benefits of Enlightenment are (i.e., WHY get enlightened), and how there is no fundamental distinction between the teachings of Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, or any secular path towards Truth. They are different in name and form, but not in essence.
Until then.
Love ya,
Hector
p.s. this is all speculation since I have not had Truth Realization, so everything I've said is double-not true
p.p.s Oh and none of this should have any bearing on how I teach you to fuck bitches; I by no means advocate celibacy as a path to enlightenment and will explain in the next post why celibacy is irrelevant to enlightenment
