Anyone got the big E from AYP?

[krcqimpro1]

Hi Tibetan ice,

 I have not read Paulsen's book, but I have been formally initiated into Kriya a year ago. My understanding has been that "stillness" and "inner silence"(during which, I am certain,the senses are shut down) are the same. I may be wrong. According to Yogani, the important pre-requisites for "enlightenment are "inner silence" and "rising conductivity".And what I understand from YSS(SRF)here is that Kriya results in rising conductivity and Hong Sau produces "stillness". Since both methods are expected to result in Enlightenment, I conclude that they are parallel. One of course, may be faster or slower than the other.
Again, like with AYP, YSS starts off with Hong sau for a whole year before giving you Kriya, just like Yogani suggests we build up inner silence before starting with SBP.While Yogani does not recommend Sambhavi with DM, he says if it occurs automatically as a result of habit formation from the SBP practice, it is OK.
In the YSS Kriya too we are asked to trace the imagined hollow tube within the spinal cord between the root and third eye,with a hissing noise while out-breathing(Ujjayi), and breathing in through the "opened-up throat"(with Kechari) just like in SBP. YSS has not taught us any "pulsing" at root or 3rd eye, or bringing up or down any "divine light" from crown to chakras.
If SRF teaches what Paulsen has written in his book, then there is obviously some difference between SRF and YSS here in India.

And lastly, the Thokar and Jyoti Mudra also seem to be similar to Chin-pump and YMK, with the effect during Jyota Mudra and YMK being identical(seeing the golden ring, etc).

My understanding is from experiencing both methods myself and not from just reading a book. Of course, I must confess that while I started just over two years ago, I am no-where near "enlightenment", but am confident I will get there one day !

Krish

[Kirtanman]

quote:Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice

quote:
My next comment, aimed specifically at anyone who proclaims themselves to be fully awake, is a quote from B. Alan Wallace's "Mind in the Balance" :

 The final nirvana of an arhat entails a nondual realization of the nonconceptual, primordial stillness of the absolute space of phenomenon. But it seems that such a being has not fully realized the perfect luminosity of omniscient, primordial consciousness or the creative potential of the energy of primordial consciousness. One who achieves the perfect spiritual awakening of a buddha, fully realizes all three aspects of the Great Perfection.

Something to think about and something to strive for...


TI

Hi TI,

Good post; very helpful comparison on AYP techniques vs. Kriya techniques; thanks.

Per the quote above - I just read Embracing Mind by B. Alan Wallace; I highly recommend anything by him.

And I agree with that quote, by the way.

Different traditions have different terms, and what B. Alan Wallace calls an Arhat is one who has realized the clarity, as he says, of absolute space of phenomenon, which still occurs within the space of consciousness.

In Shaivism, this would be someone who has realized the fullness of Shakti, but not of Shiva.

"Perfect luminosity of omniscient, primordial consciousness or the creative potential of the energy of primordial consciousness" refers to the union of Shivashakti - limitless subjectivity and limitless objectivity, living unbound as the wholeness now.

As far as "proclaiming" - yes, many, including myself have made the point that if there's one "claiming" or "proclaiming" enlightenment, especially with any sort of indication of a "separate me" who is enlightened, such statements are inherently untrue.

Yogani has also said in the most recent lesson, posted today, that statements about enlightenment are inherently distracting.

Some of us here well know the truth of this.



And so, there's no proclaiming here; that's certainly never been the intent, as you and I have discussed at length in other threads.

My mention of enlightenment, or liberation, the knowing of true nature, is, and has been for one purpose alone:

To attest that it's possible for all of us; it's real, it's available.

That's all.

There's truly "no one here" to be concerned about levels or labels or attainment; that's all relative, and potentially-orienting (and hopefully not disorienting! )

What I say along those lines is simply a counter-point to those who say "well, everything always keeps changing, and so nothing can ever be called 'enlightenment'."

At the levels of form, this is of course true; in our true nature, it is not true - because our true nature is changeless (beyond the "absolute space of phenomenon" mentioned above); change requires the changeless; what we actually are is the changeless --- ever-changing in experience. That's what experience is, and what it's for.

I didn't get the impression that anyone else was proclaiming anything, either, in this thread.

A direct questions was asked: "Anyone got the big E from AYP?"

This question has been answered in ways that seem very straightforward across the board, I would say.

Pretending there is no good answer to that question, or that no one can actually say whether they have the "Big E" or not, is simply the flip-side of one who runs around proclaiming "I'm enlightened and you're not."

The only unenlightenment is in the conceptual experience of the conceptual experiencer.

Enlightenment is simply actuality.

Enlightenment isn't an attainment; it's just an opening past all the conceptual obstructions to experiencing the actual as it actually is -- the very obstructions that effective practices help to remove from the memory of the body-mind concept, including the body-mind concept, itself (we may pragmatically "have" a body-mind, but are not that body-mind, alone).

And so, as Jed McKenna says:

"Enlightenment doesn't mean I have something you don't; it means you believe something I don't."

I don't proclaim that "I" have anything that anyone else doesn't. I do proclaim that our true nature is called "true nature" for a reason: it's what we each and all actually ever are, now.

I used to not recognize my true nature, and now I do.

That's all I mean when I say "I'm enlightened" or "I'm liberated"; it's all anyone who has ever accurately made those statements has meant, including people such as Ramana Maharshi (who said "there is only the Self") and Nisargadatta Maharaj (who said "I am the Supreme, the source; the ultimate.")

None of us who say these things are saying that we're anything that anyone else is not. We're simply saying that we know what we are, by being what we are, and that everyone else can, too.

No sense of anyone else's experience matters, or can be accurate, prior to knowing ourselves; that's why knowing ourselves by being what we are, which has nothing to do with any ideas, teachings or concepts, which can only be somewhat-vague indicators, is so solely important.

My statements regarding enlightenment have nothing to do with "where I think I am" (short answer: I don't; actually - there's no I to do so, and no thinking about it).

My statements regarding enlightenment have to do with letting people know that of all the vast amounts of spiritual traditions and teachings out there, that some of us have spent a few years with AYP, and have experienced the complete results available via any spiritual practices - the knowing of our true nature, by being our true nature.

We're not "our true nature" any more than anyone else reading these words --- we just know it.

And anyone reading can know it, too.

Because we all are equally This - the Wholeness.

Wholeheartedly,

Kirtanman

[11jono11]

How does this all relate to the different stages of enlightenment eg Nirvikalpa Samadhi etc (what are they all again)?

Blessings

xxxxxxx

[Kirtanman]

Hi Jono,

Nirvikalpa samadhi, and other forms of samadhi, are experiences which can help facilitate enlightenment, which is being our true nature (as opposed to unenlightenment, which is identifying with a falsely limited idea of ourselves).

I don't think the AYP Lessons ever reference nirvikalpa samadhi specifically; it's just one term among many, from one set of traditions.

Enlightenment isn't an experience; it's being who we actually are, after focus on everything that's not who we actually are has been released.



Which is exactly what AYP, and other effective spiritual systems, helps us to do.

I hope this helps.

Wholeheartedly,

Kirtanman

[Christi]

Hi Jono,

 

quote:How does this all relate to the different stages of enlightenment eg Nirvikalpa Samadhi etc (what are they all again)?

Blessings

xxxxxxx

Yogani has often stressed that enlightenment is an un-ending journey. Self-realization, which is what is being discussed here, is one of the stages on that journey, a milestone if you like. Some people get stuck at this stage- they bump into the milestone- whilst others continue on the journey. Nirvikalpa samadhi is samadhi without fluctuations (vikalpas). The higher stages of nirvikalpa samadhi can only be realized when there is no holding on to anything, including the idea of being self-realized (enlightened). This is why Yogani often says that proclamations of enlightenment are usually just a distraction for both the listener and the person making the proclamation.

See here:

http://www.aypsite.com/plus/426.html

There is a great deal of divine unfoldment after self-realization. The journey never ends.

Christi

[Kirtanman]

quote:Originally posted by Christi



See here:

http://www.aypsite.com/plus/426.html



Christi

Thanks for this, Christi.

The points you emphasized in your post, and the points I've emphasized in my posts in this thread, are both well-covered by Yogani in that lesson.

Wholeheartedly,

Kirtanman

[Christi]

quote:Originally posted by Kirtanman

quote:Originally posted by Christi



See here:

http://www.aypsite.com/plus/426.html



Christi

Thanks for this, Christi.

The points you emphasized in your post, and the points I've emphasized in my posts in this thread, are both well-covered by Yogani in that lesson.

Wholeheartedly,

Kirtanman

Hi Kirtanman,

You're welcome.