In Buddhism we have the Bodhisattvas, in my tradition we have the Great White Brotherhood, but in both cases we are talking about the same thing: a group of beings who work towards the enlightenment of mankind. Like most ideas concerning enlightenment, there is a lot of cheese out there on this topic, and it wasn’t long ago that I considered the idea of Bodhisattvas as an ethical curiosity peculiar to some Buddhist schools.

However, I am increasingly of the opinion that Bodhisattvas (and the Great White Brotherhood) are indeed a genuine phenomenon, and that a single fruition marks membership to the club (I don’t think it is necessary to go further than this when defining the Bodhisattva; in my opinion, anything else is a limiting model, and usually outright fantasy or speculation). Although Bodhisattvas are expressed as a group of individuals living right here and now, I would like to posit that the realisation of emptiness, being beyond both time and space, can be considered One. In this sense, it is possible to concede the existence of a body of individuals with the same aim and direction, namely working to enlighten mankind, without having to imagine that all of these people from all over the world once met up as discarnate entities/meet up on the astral plane/communicate telepathically to plot a campaign that spans millennia.

Although it’s not valid to ascribe any idea to fruition, I would at least like to propose there is something implicit in the realisation of emptiness that seeks to promote that realisation in others.

What do you think?

4  out of 4 found this valuable. Do you find this valuable? Do you?    

http://www.nanavira.org/

See: Collected Letters [L. 128]

The general mass of the Buddhists in Ceylon are not orthodox in their view of transmigration, as they believe that the same soul migrates into different bodies. But this is contrary to the teaching of Buddhu, and of this the learned priests are fully aware; but they do not attempt to correct the error, regarding the subject as too difficult to be understood by the unlearned. His doctrine is that of a series of existences, which he illustrates by the metaphors of a tree and a lamp. A tree produces fruit, from which fruit another tree is produced, and so the series continues. The last tree is not the identical tree with the first, but it is a result, so that if the first tree had not been, the last tree could not have existed. Man is the tree, his conduct is the fruit, the vivifying energy of the fruit is desire. While this continues, the series will proceed: the good or evil actions performed give the quality of the fruit, so that the existence springing from these actions will be happy or miserable as the quality of the fruit affects the tree produced from it. According to this doctrine the present body and soul of man never had a previous existence, but a previously existing being under the influence of desire performed virtuous or vicious actions, and in consequence of these upon the death of that individual a new body and soul is produced. The metaphor of the lamp is similar. One lamp is lighted from another; the two lamps are distinct, but the one could not have been lighted had not the other existed. The nature of Nirwana, or cessation of being, is obvious from this. It is not the destruction of an existent being, but the cessation of his existence. It is not an absorption into a superior being, as the Brahmans teach; it is not a retreat into a place of eternal repose, free from further transmigration; it is not a violent destruction of being, but a complete and final cessation of existence.

 out of  found this valuable. Do you find this valuable?    

Well, my cats aren't enlightened, unless enlightenment entails regularly demanding canned fish entrails.

I like Alan Wallace's work with the Shamatha Project, but I think the standard he mentions (somewhere there is something about "full time" (i.e., eight hours a day) practice of concentration necessary for "samadhi") is unrealistic. And Lamrimpa's suggestion that "almost [no one] in the world" acheives shamatha is also a ridiculously high standard. There are entire schools (like Ajaan Lee's) that focus on the development of concentration as a means to insight. And there are people who practice concentration almost every day, even in the West.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/guided.html
http://www.dharma.org/ims/retreat_detail.php?id=99
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai/lee/inmind.html

2  out of 2 found this valuable. Do you find this valuable? Do you?    

"On U.G. Krishnamurti: He's an great figure, in that he was in a very bad mood for such a very long time, and it seemed to persist well after he got curb-stomped by non-duality. If anything he's a great example of how even upon awakening, you still have to deal with everything else, including your own bad mood. Ideally, figures like U.G. Krishnamurti will lead people to begin to have a more sane--but not disempowering, inaccurate or cynical--understanding about enlightenment."

Yeah U.G. teaches in pretty a "spicy" way but he says some good stuff if it's taken the right way. I remember watching videos of his during my first dark night, and getting really really pissed off when he ranted about how enlightenment was quite impossible to reach and how spiritual seekers were "fools" or whatever. My memory is quite spotty but I think I actually resolved to step my dedication to the path up a notch if for nothing else to prove him wrong haha... So in addition to making people get a saner understanding of enlightenment he's good at annoying you and bringing out your shadow issues regarding the whole deal. On the other hand he is kind of nihilistic obviously, and it's probably difficult to get anywhere on his ramblings alone.

And it's easy to use meditation to avoid life, I thought that was the reason to really get into it in the first place? ;)

It seems as if at certain stages of the path, nihilism and negativity is useful but as one progresses one has to accept this whole "life thing" again. Except, life then has started to look totally different! It's very confusing, at least for me.

 out of  found this valuable. Do you find this valuable?    

The models that imply that this is about psychological development, getting rid of our stuff, or some such thing are very pervasive in Western dharma, so it is no surprise that many may read statements like Mr. Cooper's and interpret them through that filter. I didn't read it that way. Psychotherapy has a dismal record on the enlightenment front, just as those who spent most of their cushion time working on their stuff have a very poor chance of getting enlightened. In fact, junk being an inevitable part of life, it is much more about seeing the junk just as junk, seeing thoughts just as thoughts, emotions just as emotions, causal, arising and vanishing on their own, aware where they are, centerless, part of this great unfolding and dissolving of sensations, and perceiving that directly, in real time, as the default way of processing reality, is certainly an attainment worthy of effort, and, while it may not perform quite as we would fantasize it might, still, being all that there is, it is profound in its immediate and unarguable completeness.

I also believe that there is little point in trying to sell enlightenment or try to convince people to do it if they are not there, not already into it, not already caught in the process, as it doesn't tend to do much but cause confusion and conflict. Thus, if you don't feel called, compelled, or impelled by some inner sense that you should go in that direction, just live your life as best you can until, perhaps some time later, you begin to feel that more default clarity and fundamental perceptual truth would be helpful, and hope that, when you get there, you have the time and resources necessary to pursue that to the degree that makes the difference. Traditions, structure and technique can really help.

From the more immediate point of view, embody noticing that this is it, truth is here, and really feel what it is like right now, discarding ideals that conflict with actual experiential reality.

3  out of 5 found this valuable. Do you find this valuable? Do you?