Recognizing an awakened I say it is simply impossible. I don’t see partial awakening as a possibility. Maybe moments, but that is still not partial awakening. Can we then say it is also partial sleeping? Sort of a daydreaming? There is no linearity here. There is no certain finality. Instead there is a paradox to be solved.

I don’t get it how or why it leads to frustration, indifference, hostility. Please explain.

Oh yes, many people say they want to wake up. But when it comes to making an effort – and a superhumanly great effort is required here – they step back. Or maybe ask for that “faster, easier, more effective or why not – cheaper way”. Just consider how ‘The Secret’ turned into a big BS. (Or it was from the start) I hear of attracting even enlightenment trough this “method”. OMG

Whether those people deserve guidance or not is their wish. But from the awakened perspective it is still irrelevant what they wish for. As long as they are in the sleeping state, they don’t have a true will. Their aspiration towards a higher good is very much pure from the ethical perspective. It is good, it is the right thing to do. Dreaming of the sun.

“while asleep, how can you recognize the awakened”.”

How can a blind man recognize color? In the only possible way…

…once he can see…

You can’t recognize an “awakened”, unless you have a common point-of-reference, with them.

If you are partially awake yourself, then you will recognize them. And if you are fully asleep then you will either not care about the issue – or if you do care, then you will have to take it all on faith.

It’s very much of a case of ‘being on the outside and looking in’. Perhaps it leads to a degree of frustration or sometimes even indifference and hostility, I really don’t know. But it is always possible to recognize the people that want to wake up and haven’t done so yet, because they express a certain degree of effort which leads them towards (intellectual) confusion. So in those cases I entirely agree that such people should be given all the guidance possible. And personally I believe they are very deserving of being given that guidance.

As for the higher-faculties emerging. From my own personal experience I can say to you without any form of doubt that these higher-senses only emerge during the moments the ego disappears, or starts breaking down. The ego effectively suppresses these abilities. They don’t emerge because of the Ego, they emerge when the Ego is removed even if only momentarily. At least that is how it has happened for me – so I can talk about that from experience, rather than as an abstract intellectual concept.

However I think I would be very arrogant to say that is how it works for everyone else, after all – who am I to say how these things function for everyone?! Especially without more experience. Part of the process of all forms of development is the realization that at some point we have to leave intellectual concepts at the door. Certain things simply have to be experienced in order to be understood. Now watch how the Ego will fight against that notion – because it likes to believe it can understand everything in the form of concepts! That is how the Ego grabs you, and it won’t let go until you see it for what it is. It simply doesn’t like hearing this sort of thing and generates all sorts of arguments and notions.

Also, the Ego causes problems with these higher-senses – because it tries to ‘interpret’ them in the BS superficial level. They simply won’t work through the Ego. At least that is my experience of them.

That said – I do agree that when you can use them at will – it would be a true sign of an ‘awakened’ mind.

I don’t quite get what you mean with ‘my interpretation of the Tao.’

The Tao isn’t an intellectual concept. It can’t be understood on an intellectual level. That is all a part of the illusion, and the Tao says that itself many times over. Unless I mis-understand what you are saying?

I wrote a bit about Awareness Development a while ago. Or another way of saying that – I wrote about one way to start the process that will eventually lead to spiritual development.

http://www.thethoughts.co.uk/thoughts/awareness-development/

I don’t know if you read that before. But a large part of our development (all forms of development) is finding a balance between authority and personal experience.

Here’s a question for you that is a bit out of the box. On my Spiritual Development, I have found that my ‘higher faculties’ have developed. These ‘higher-senses’ are things like increased intuition, and symbolical understanding of my life etc. I have also experienced premonitions. These things I can validate from my own personal-experience, I am my own authority on these matters because no-one else possibly can be.

As kulcsi says; how can another person provide me with any form of authority on those things? I can discuss the experiences with another person, but that person is not inside my head. That person did not experience what I experienced – therefore that person cannot be an authority. Let’s be clear. If we are talking about spiritual development – which leads to higher awareness, then we are not talking about something that is observable from a third-person perspective. How would you explain ‘green’ to a blind-man?

At best all another person can do with regards to inner development and higher-senses, is to be an impartial observer and share their opinion with me. But even if their words helped me, the fact remains that their opinion would be little more than mere opinion.

For example if I have a dream. I can tell you about it. You could perhaps give me your own ‘interpretation’ on that dream. But the only authority on my dreams is me. Simply because there is no way another person can experience the dream I had. They can give me their opinion, but that opinion can in no way be authoritative. How do you ‘share’ a dream with another person? How would you explain sound to a deaf man?

You speak of oriental ways of approach. Then you will have heard this; “The Tao that can be shown, is not the true Tao”.

“The Tao that can be spoken is not the true Tao.”

In our conversation we could say; “The Tao that is an authority, is not the true Tao.”

I didn’t understand those words until I let go off my intellectual view on the subject. Spiritual development really isn’t an intellectual matter at all…

I agree on getting support in the presence of a guru. Going further, I would say that if that is the only time/place to get closer to a higher state, then it is a sort of a vampirism. If this is the case, some gurus might beat you up But on the more serious side, this Witness concept is not very clear to me the way you use it. The Witness seems to me like a silent entity, thus without judgments, impartial. How it becomes an authority then?

The only “authority” on this question is the inner Witness, and noone else. The presence of a realized guru helps You to be in a higher state of mind which is a firm support on personal/spiritual development. But without judgment one can not make distinction between this authentic support, and the fake, egocentric thoughts. And judgment it cannot be “injected” with a third party person… Every personal and spiritual path is ultimatelly an auto-didactism.

And yep, I accept what you are saying. There are many forms of reference to help us along the way. And yes I agree that finding ’someone who is already there’ is ideal.

Yet, most of us don’t have that option. So the other questions you raise – don’t even need to be asked for those of us that don’t have a guru.

Whilst we are on the subject – how would / do you go about your own development (self, personal and spiritual)? I appreciate it is somewhat of a “private” question, so don’t feel you have to answer.

With respect I will give an answer to that question I asked. For self-development I tend to go on my personal-experience, and judge by what “feels right” or “feels wrong”. I can then tell if those methods work based on the feedback I get from my environment and the people around me. And whether I become a better person or a worse person (we all know deep down what sort of person we are). I also read the odd book, and research on the Internet. Mostly though it is a lot of observation and attempts at intuition.

Of course I spend a lot of time talking about the results of my trials and errors with a few friends. Comparing notes – so-to-speak. I can tell that so far this has worked for me, because today I am a much more well-rounded and ‘full’ person than I was a few years ago. And all that change has come from personal effort to become conscious and aware of myself. In short, I know it works – because it has worked.

As for Spiritual Development. That one is a bit tougher. I think we need to find whatever definition or idea of ’spirituality’ resonates with us the closest, and then follow a path along those lines. I have based a lot of my spiritual development on the ideas of people like Rudolf Steiner, Robert Anton Wilson, and even the occasional bit of Stuart Wilde.

You gotta find what works for you as an individual. And what works for you, might not work for another person. That is one of the most important keys to auto-didacticism; realizing that we are all different and therefore require a different path. How do I know the development of my Spiritual being is successful? The proof is in the pudding. I know it works because it has worked. But there is a long, long, long way to go yet. And everyday I realize I know less…

Sure, it can be a form a measurement. Which is communicated maybe as simple as an OK.

Regarding getting there on their own. I do not exclude the extraordinary. Someone might get there on their own. Although I consider this as rare as a white crow. Yes, that someone else needed for the role of the point of reference can be another person, or even a group of people. Also, I do not exclude some cathartic form of knowledge, even a book of that kind. But the most certain possibility lies within the other person(s) who are already there. There is also a theory propagated by Gurdjieff saying that even a group of committed people can try this together, even if they are not “awake”, playing the role of alarm clocks for each other. Still, the most certain way seems to be the help of someone already there. But is that someone willing at all to help you? It would be ethical you might think. But why would he help you? Why you? He got there where he has a true (free?) will. Does he have any guarantees that he will be able to really help you? Does he have the time for helping you? So many questions from here …

Earlier today, after getting the OMG experience seeing on the news the Bush vs. Dalai Lama, I stumbled upon a great video where the Dalai Lama gave a lecture on the Four Noble Truths. At a relaxed moment, he came up with the story of some of his Westerner fans asking him questions like: “Do you have a special method for us to get there faster? Easier? A more efficient one?” He said that there was only one more question missing from here: “A cheaper one?” LOL. And he concluded that this kind of questions are the sign of failure. I liked a lot the emphasis on the constant and intense effort needed.

We certainly need ‘help’. What I am saying is that we are more than capable of creating our own path. However we may need help to find our way along that path…

You were talking about “getting feed-back” on development – both spiritual development and personal development. What is feed-back if not a form of measurement?

Attila, let me ask you something. Why do you feel that someone cannot ‘get there’ on their own?

And if we need someone or something else. What do you feel it is? An authority in the form of a guru, or teacher? Or something more insubstantial; for example our surrounding circumstances and situations, or a book or knowledge etc?

This often seems to be a hanging point between our conversations. So it would really help to hear your views on this.

I know that you prefer the concept of awakening. Do you think that all by ourselves we are able to get there? I seriously doubt it.

Language is easy to get feedback on. You just write on the Internet, or talk to someone that speaks the language. Learning to play music is the same…so are many other things.

Personal Development is similar, depending on what you mean by ‘Personal Development’.

Spiritual Development though. I don’t see how that can be measured by someone else. Unless of course they have a camera inside your head. Spirituality isn’t really empirical. And on top of that, everyone means something different by the term. So how would one ‘measure’ another persons spiritual development?

Reducing it to its bare bones, yes, this is what I am saying. You can learn a language for ex. without many problems from audio/video materials. But you’ll need someone to have the confirmation that you did good. Now think of something similar in terms of personal or – God Forbid – spiritual development.
Also, my point is that nowadays autodidacticism is so praised that felling over the horse is near.

So just to clarify. You are saying that autodidacticism is not entirely effective without having the feedback of a third-party?

(PS: I understand and appreciate your effort in understanding my English. It is not easy to touch these subjects even in a native language, please keep being patient with me on this )

“Authenticity should be seen here as the proof of a working method.”

You were referring to an authority of some sort. In fact you are saying; “The proof is in the pudding”. i.e. if it tastes fine then it must be fine.

Being authentic as a person sounds good. Authentic according to who?

Being authentic means being genuine. Being your true self without all the superficial ego-based BS. Obviously we are talking about the same things.

I personally feel capable of going as far as I find the feed-back to be approving.

I am not sure what you mean by that. I am still not sure I am understanding what you mean by “feed-back”. Could you define that a bit clearer?

Oh, and this isn’t anything to do with being categorical. For some reason I have trouble understanding what you mean by certain words – so I am asking for clarification. Though now I am wondering if you were joking at the fact I am separating your comments point-by-point! This isn’t something I normally do. But I think from past experience it will help me avoid getting into a messy dialog here…

It is your turn now to give an answer.

Until I feel I can’t go any further. Or end up a wreck at the bottom of some cliff…

Nobody is required to provide a proof. That is the deal. As I said, authenticity doesn’t seem like a requirement. This is why I think that autodidacticism remains the sole choice on that field.

Being authentic as a person sounds good. Authentic according to who? I am not denying the possibility of being authentic, it is just dependent on some authority and believing in that authority.

I personally feel capable of going as far as I find the feed-back to be approving. It is your turn now to give an answer.