For fun and games I thought it would be very important to gather the users thoughts on the subject of enlightenment. You can select more than one choice.

I believe the whole process made me appreciate being endarkened, for without it there would be no contrast, hence no light to be en'ed. Something about the duality, or even better yet, the unlimited variances that exist between light and dark that is the juice which makes life interesting, bringing forth so much material to create a life with. So I voted the last choice — "Light? What light? You are missing the point altogether."

Great list Ras, thanks for taking the time to create it.

I chased enlightenment for about a decade before becoming a devotee through the advanced practice of the TM organization, and with time I began to see that very few people within that system exuded any type of enlightened symptoms or even very many nice qualities outside the leadership lectures, telling everyone that one day it will come and that if we meditated in groups we would create world peace.

I was involved in a 3-month group peace coherence initiative on the Israeli/Lebanon border, where 3000 meditators from around the world practiced TM and the Sidhis in order to create peace in that region. It all happened months before the first peace treaty between Egypt and Israel was signed, so the TM organization took full credit for making consciousness possible for the event to take place. During that course, the Shah of Iran was deposed and the Ayatollah took over, plus the Jonestown Massacre happened too, but we won’t think too deeply about how the 3000 peace meditators may have effected those events through their refined consciousness, or how eventually the leaders of both Egypt and Israel would get assassinated. Though at the time I believed that I was having an effect on world consciousness, it did not take too much time to see that all was not well in the TM land of OZ either.

When I became a devotee, I really thought I was joining a mature community of spiritual practitioners, the ISKCON F.A.T.E. museum artists convinced me, but they were a small liberal subgroup of artist devotees who did not really reflect what was happening in the greater community of 1981, for all hell was about to be let loose in the organization in only a few more years. As a devotee, I was not really going after enlightenment anymore, but Bhakti, Love of God. What I found shortly was that there was no time for Love, just a scramble for money to support the system by selling stickers, buttons, paintings and once in a while an actual book. Infighting within the temples concerning service activities and access to the guru, territory disputes and zonal gurus on the march, it all seems like an activity blur with no time for contemplation or going deep within to see what was there … it was all so outer.

There were times of sanity and a feeling of devotion, like at the early morning mangal artiks, where the feet hit the cold marble floor in the darkness of 4 AM, while bodies assembled in front of closed curtains, then the sound of the blowing conch shell with light streaming out from the alter as the curtains finally opened. The deities seemed to be effulgent emerging from the smoky haze of burning incense which smelled so heavenly, then the singing and chanting, that was so nice and peaceful until someone from the kitchen or temple office tapped you on the shoulder.

Accosted from the possible morning bliss, you were asked to do service, cutting veggies, washing pots, running to the airport to pick up flowers or some VIP carrying a stick, then of course if you worked on creating books like I did, there were always deadlines and marathons to get those pages and art out the door and to the printer on time. There was very little time to smell the roses in ISCKON, there was little time for development of the love for God you came there for and which was preached to you from the Vyasasan … at least that was my experience in the years I was involved. Devotion to God was called service, service was work, the more menial and hard, the longer the hours the better I was taught, the more selfless you were, the less you complained and did the needful, the more you would be rewarded in the end, but the reward never came, unless seeing people get sick, stressed out and feeling stretched to their physical and mental limits was the bliss that was promised?

Now, I see every day life as enlightenment, every person is a teacher, every problem, conflict, crossroad, realization, experience is the path, it’s all here right now and how we play with the clay, mold or cast it, it’s what we make of ourselves, helping others when we can and expressing love to best of our ability ... that has become my spiritual program, be it with a guru or God or without, mine mostly without. it is endarkened and enlightened all at the same time … well at least for now, anyway

Maybe enlightenment comes when you realize there are other ways to bring about peace and tranquility than Eastern spiritual methods.

Could that even be possible?

Classic stuff, Aran. Truly beyond the T-Zones. Sorry, but I am becoming enlightened now.

I would imagine that the definition of Enlightenment would have to be changed, and I have changed it meaning in my personal life. Waiting for some state where you have no more worries, no more conflicts, where one floats on a bed of bliss 24/7 while communing with the gods and saints is just something I don't think is possible, though it would be nice, but for some reason as a human, its closest state seems to come in near death experiences or as some say and promise, after death. Being alone in a retreat, practicing methods of inner inquiry can produce altered states, so do drugs and some say unbalanced psychological states too. The East provides methods to slow down time through allowing thoughts to stop interfering with ones consciousness in differing forms of meditation and prayer, finding the pure field of being, ones true self or no self, call it the samadhi, enlightenment, supersoul, nirvana or whatever. The best that seems to come from these practices is a healthy balanced body and mind, which alone is a nice thing to have and which is why I still include some eastern practices in my life.

A good healthy life filled with love and the ability to help others, somehow naturally expressing strong values and ethics without having to follow systems or rules of religious institutions and dogma would be good. These practices seem to allow one to function well, unlocking ways to be creative and enhancing intuition and ability to think clearly. That could come without practicing anything I would imagine, though most religions started with one person telling or teaching others how to practice some form of spirituality to achieve these states, then their followers (mostly men with a desire to lead others to the promised land) let greed and lust for power take over while trying to make their new religion the best and only one offering the one truth, a kind of verification through branding and turning the faith into an institution run like a business, with impressive regional headquarters to wow the masses into coming in to take part and help create heaven on earth, well, mainly for the guys on top at least.

I am in constant personal reformation concerning anything spiritual, but after my experiences with TM and ISKCON, I am leery of spiritual groups, institutions and organized religions. I think we as humans can change our consciousness and awareness through various practices stemming from spiritual traditions, but it's a slippery path full of charlatans and deep pockets of cells that want to suck you in and join there one true cause. I can understand why certain people just quit participating in religion or some type of spiritual practice, giving up on the idea that a God or personal enlightenment is possible, but my personal experience has taught me that I am more healthy physically and mentally, more balanced, rested and creative when I practice some type of relaxation or slow the mind down technique, but just so long as it is brief, daily and not tied to following some rules filled with expectations due to someone else's realization and hand me down stories.

Some are fortunate in that they can find or are born with a meditative state of mind, where they just naturally know how to be rested and healthy, inquisitive and knowledgeable, able to function well while dealing with stress and existential questions, being giving and loving without having to practice something to achieve those things. Perhaps there is a way to learn this way of life without being religious or belonging to some formalized group, be it eastern or western. These folks, perhaps born this way, raised by good families and good school systems, or just forged that way through the toughness and fire of life, can make the world a better more adjusted place filled with a sense of justice and equality for all, with a shared ability to help one another and make the earth more clean and healthy, with no more exploitation of people or natural resources, I don’t know, maybe it’s possible? I would like to think this is possible, but our track record as humans is pretty miserable so far in achieving these things, but I think we have to keep trying and experimenting for improvement, but maybe life and human consciousness is just evolving this way, maybe we are still emerging from some historical human dark ages, where at some point in the distant future, enlightenment will be a natural state of being, something inherently in our DNA but still growing and being uncovered, so unless we do get born again, I don't think we will see this evolved state (enlightenment) globally in our life time.

I think enlightenment has something to do with consciousness. For me both are very hazy concepts, at the moment. I don't know how to vote. I find it quite striking, since I used to have much clearer ideas about these notions. Things I believed I understood turn out rather opaque upon closer examination.

"I basically learned to defeat Mayavadis and sell s--t on a stick if I have to." What? I know the sales department was not your forte`, but what about the first part? The heinous Mayavadis with them false Kapilas and all. I am sure you were not just able to recognize them, but also to pulverize them to ash.

Of course, if we speak about the modern day situation, I have also lost my capability to sell shit on a stick, the only skill I truly learned in the company. Once, when we were selling LP-records and cassettes and ran out of devotional stuff, we just bought something from a music store that had plenty of used stuff and sold them ourselves! I remember selling "Sympathy for the devil" by Rolling Stones and thinking, wow, finally some good stuff Well, pretty soon after that we had to go back to basics again.

So if I lost my selling skills, maybe it is also possible that you mix up the two Kapilas nowadays.

"I basically learned to defeat Mayavadis and sell s--t on a stick if I have to." What? I know the sales department was not your forte`, but what about the first part? The heinous Mayavadis with them false Kapilas and all. I am sure you were not just able to recognize them, but also to pulverize them to ash.

Of course, if we speak about the modern day situation, I have also lost my capability to sell shit on a stick, the only skill I truly learned in the company. Once, when we were selling LP-records and cassettes and ran out of devotional stuff, we just bought something from a music store that had plenty of used stuff and sold them ourselves! I remember selling "Sympathy for the devil" by Rolling Stones and thinking, wow, finally some good stuff Well, pretty soon after that we had to go back to basics again.

So if I lost my selling skills, maybe it is also possible that you mix up the two Kapilas nowadays.

Thanks for this comment Zanardi. I must confess that during my time in the movement I wasn't good at smashing Mayavadis. I remember reading the endless purports in the CC where the Prabhu of Pad was endlessly ranting against the evils of Mayavada: the arguments he presented made absolutely no sense, and even back then, I had the impression he was talking about something he didn't understand. Later, when I began to systematically analyze his poop roots and tried to trace every bit of them back to whatever sources he could have possibly used, I learned that Prabhupada had only tried to translate from Bengali into English his own master's anti Mayavadi rants. He quite simply didn't understand how Siddhanta Sarasvati was reasoning. It was above his head. Although it was Bengali, poor Swamilein was left in the blue.

I remember Harikesh many times telling one story in his classes: "Prabhupada, when I read the Mayavadi arguments in your purports, it all makes no sense. Am I too dull or uneducated?" "Mayavadi arguments never make sense to a devotee. You are lucky it makes no sense to you! If it made sense you would be in deep trouble."

I too remember that. It was repeated almost as often as the different variations of the moon landing hoax and other scientific bluffs. The more they were repeated, the more one started to question why they always came up. Finally I realized it was the same thing as they had with sex. A problem.

What do you guys mean when you say it made no sense? I mean, "The Mayavadis say such-and-such about God...", and you don't understand why they would say that? Sorry if I have misunderstood.

There's a vagueness in the term "enlightened" (enlightened about what?) but once upon a time it had a universal connotation. It basically meant you were open-minded, that was all that was needed. Like the end result of merely flipping a switch that would cause you to break out of well-worn hard-defined patterns of everyday life like acting as a corporate stuffed shirt, ad-man, wearing Vitalis and a tux, being a Romeo doing the tango, or perhaps driving a garbage truck every single day.

I see posters in other places say "thanks for enlightening us" in a sarcastic way a good bit, which probably means their switch needed to be shut for the time being. Another problem would seem to come from being too "juiced" on all the information and media that constantly flows and winding up with a very short attention span. The "bzzzzit" that one feels from always hearing and discovering new things can become a little addictive, and some don't take the time to absorb everything they take in fully.

So now I would say that being enlightened in the age of information simply means open-mindedness + patience. Oh, and here's a little relic from yesteryear...

In case my suspicion was right, I too had the same problem initially when reading Prabhupada's books and his rejoinders against Mayavadis. "The Mayavadis say such-and-such about God.." and I was left thinking that these Mayavadis, whoever they were, were some fringe group of idiots who seemed to make up ridiculous ideas about God as they went along. Homogenous group that they seemed, I wondered why Prabhupada spent so much time writing about their ideas and 'defeating' them, until one day I read an anti-Mayavadi comment that struck very close to my beliefs.

Then it suddenly dawned on me. Prabhupada was actually talking about Advaita and Advaitins, and his name for them was Mayavadis. No wonder I had never "got it". From that moment I started taking his arguments a little more seriously. I was a staunch Advaitin at the time, but I was developing serious disillusion with it and I found P's arguments quite useful in shooting holes in Advaitin logic. Eventually I took personalism over impersonalism. For a time, the anti-Advaitin side of GV was where my heart lay.

Oh sorry. About "Enlightenment", whenever I hear that word I think about full-blown siddhahood. Yes, I like the idea of Enlightenment being a 'movement' as it was in the 17th-19Centuries, and generally referring to a renaissance of thought or open-mindedness to new ideas and such, but for a long term 'Enlightenment' for me was a by-word for liberation and moksha. So keeping that in mind I used to think of Enlightenment as being of that highest state where further evolution isn't possible.

So as for what I think of it now, I voted 3 options: Turned On & Burned Out, There Is No Science, and Missing The Point. My rationale is quite simple, I think: If there is no truth to religion, there is no truth to enlightenment.

I'm not sure who coined the term "mayavad", but I think it means "regarding Krishna or Vishnu to have a body made of material elements". The Advaitins (or Mayavadis) see *all* the Hindu deities as material manifestations of formless, distinction-less Brahman. The best argument I can think of Vaisnava vs. Advaitin would be that if Krishna the Hindu Love God as Supreme sounds like a fantasy what about the idea that you yourself are actually controlling weather patterns and stop lights too?

From that, one could easily take *all* Eastern religion as poppycock or debate endlessly on what is redeemable from both (or either). From what I've read of Sankaracarya, though more difficult to read, he can be much more liberating and satisfying to the mind or intellect, but somewhat lacking in common sense. On the other hand you have the Vaisnava angle that seems more pragmatic (at first), but somewhat burdened by superstition (things the deity whom you've never really met might take as "offensive").

Prabhupada does say the process of trying to understand that you yourself are actually God is a way by which you can be driven insane. Alright, but consider this. It seems to be accepted among both groups that Brahman is formless and distinction-less. *Some* yogis are going to merge into it. If there are no distinctions left then what is there to keep them from thinking they are the same as God? My point would be that these types of yogis (if there still are any) should be left alone.

But if they have merged with Brahman, who is there left to think: "I am the same as God", where is the "I"? And what is there left to become insane?

Really I don't think that Sankara's approach was a way of trying to ascend to the position of the Almighty. His Gita it more laden with statements like "the wise man is deemed My very Self" or "It [Brahman] is their very Self". Yogananda used to say (in so many words), "it's not that one becomes God, but God may become you". Advaita at least seems a good bit different from Buddhism, in that there's always that ever present I, Me or It you can't get away from especially after "you" and "It" are the same thing.

Maybe a visual guide will help the reader determine whether I, Me, It, Eye, O or You are distinct or one and the same.

Just by coincidence, here's Chandan Gosvami's latest and startlingly open-minded Facebook status:

"It is so good to study Vaishnav scripture by Shankaracharya parampara Acharya. Studying by Advaitvadi gives different feeling and it gives so much help to understand their views also on Vaisnavism. Good thing is He believes "Krishnastu Bhagwan Swayam" which proves he is a pure follower of Shankaracharya."