Hi. I'm new to the web, new to lists, and generally don't know what I'm
doing. So I thought I would ask a question and see what happens. Is
realization an experience, an understanding, an obsession, a
modification to the mental hardware or what?
It's a row of Humpty Dumpty's on a wall.
Realization is the falling away of ignorance as to who you are. That
ignorance is mostly a matter of identification with and clinging to the
unreal. When the unreal is removed, what else could remain but the
That is realization.
Realization could be any of those things on your list
depending on the person and on the moment.
There is however a *Real* to recognize as your own self
beyond memory, identity, concept and process and right
I generally don't know what I'm doing too :-) Hey maybe
realization is generally not knowing what you're doing! There are a lot
of ways of approaching a definition of realization, one that occurs to
me right now; Realisation is the understanding that there is no
_________ . You can fill in the blank with many different words, for
example; self, enlightenment, continuity, mind, hope, fear.
Not a modification, only reality itself is realization.
People try to find words to talk about it and start sounding
obsessed. Understanding it involves letting go of assumptions,
being able to let go of trying to get somewhere other than
where One is. Understanding is thus often discussed as "unknowing."
Petros: movie review, The Fight Club
This is another one of those weird reality-twisting movies that does
something to say about getting to a deeper experience of life through
and danger. There are some strong mystical undertones here for anyone
pays attention. (There is a *very* esoteric plot twist towards the end
the film which is quite startling, but I won't give it away here!)
The movie is basically about an (unnamed) geeky, nine-to-five kind of
(Edward Norton) who is beginning to feel the meaninglessness of his
existence until he "accidentally" runs into a psychotic, socially
marginalized guy named Tyler (Brad Pitt.) Tyler is really some sort of
crazy-wise guru or trickster who intends to awaken people by destroying
their mundane lives. He does this quite successfully in the film
the creation of a "Fight Club" and later a "Project Mayhem."
There's one very interesting scene where Tyler and Norton's character
sitting at the kitchen table and Tyler grabs Norton's hand and pours lye
over it, causing the flesh to sear and burn. Norton's character tries
frantically to numb the pain with new-age visualization techniques while
Tyler slaps him repeatedly, holds him tighter and calls him to
the pain in the present moment instead of trying to escape from it.
you lose everything, you learn that you can do everything" is Tyler's
message to the guy.
There's another cool scene where Tyler tries to teach his reluctant
about trusting the will of the universe (surrender) by stealing a
and going the wrong way down the street towards oncoming traffic.
character tries to grab the steering wheel a few times while Tyler
on asking him -- "If you died right now, would you have any regrets?"
demanding an answer. The student finally surrenders and admits that his
has been a waste up until now. He relaxes, while Tyler floors the
accelerator and keeps his hands off the wheel while the car veers to the
side of the road, smashes into another car and goes rolling off the
embankment sending the occupants sprawling -- severely banged up but
For some reason the film also reminds me of "The Matrix" or "Jacob's
Ladder." There's a lot of what could only be called "psychological
effects," strange manipulations of the film designed to create a
reality-warping sensation. Some of these tweaks last only a single frame
you might easily mistake them for problems with the projector but they
not. The funky psychological twist near the end of the film practically
reverses the movie's whole meaning and I think it would make a second
viewing very rewarding. I'll find out!
The Pathway of Nonduality
Metaphysical Realization (continued)
Q. So there is freedom of the ego and freedom from the ego,
is there not?
A. Yes, the ego-snake, in order to be able to gratify all
sorts of insatiable desires , needs to be without
impediments or to feel free to actuate all it wishes. And
this is impossible due to the very nature of existence; but
even if we conceded to the ego any kind of freedom, it would
not be happy or fulfilled. Why? Because fulfillment is not
in the nature of the ego, as this is only a false product or
a false representation. What does not exist potentially
cannot actuate or realize itself. Although the moon may wish
to appropriate light from outside of itself, it will never
become a sun. The human physical body, though it may live
for any incredible length of time, will never become
immortal because one cannot 'become' but 'is' immortal; and
if one 'is', one does not seek immortality.
The empirical ego, because 'it is not', has to find its
fulfillment, its raison d'etre and its realization 'outside
itself'; and indeed it is obliged to, it needs to. This
means that at best it may find some kind of gratification,
but a gratification that comes from other than itself cannot
be permanent bliss-fulfillment. If one is dependent and
under the sway of the law of necessity one cannot be in
harmony, pacified, blissful and fulfilled. If the empirical
ego is searching, desiring and longing for, it means that it
'is not' and every one of its realizations is a false
realization, a false achievement.
Q. Therefore metaphysical realization is needed. What does
this concept mean?
A. We have already spoken about realization and now we shall
apply ourselves to understand the term metaphysics.
Originally the term metaphysics meant a series of texts
which, on the basis of the order given to the Work of
Aristotle, came after the texts called 'Physics'. The
subject treated by Aristotle in that Series of writings was
called Philosophia Prima.
In time the term took on the meaning of 'beyond' matters
belonging to the physical sphere, to become the 'science of
the real in itself, seen as beyond immediate tangible
>From this point of view metaphysics has a position of
superiority compared with the other fields of knowledge.
Above all the various sciences of the finite, which deal
with the partial, phenomenal and incomplete relations of
being, there is the science of Reality in itself.
Metaphysics is the science of aseity (the property of a
being which has in itself the reason and the end of its own
existence), while physics is the science of abaliety (the
property of a being which finds the reason of its existence
in other than itself).
We may also add that physics deals with the
relative-contingent, which depends on other than itself,
while metaphysics deals with what is or the Absolute and
this rests on itself, with itself and for itself.
If we understand the term metaphysics then metaphysical
realization means the achievement of the Absolute or of
Q. Can we go deeper into the concept of the Absolute?
A. According to the philosopher G. Zamboni, the term
Absolute means: "Etymologically that which is free from
relations, or which exists and is what it is, without any
need to be in relation with anything else, or what is fully
sufficient, fully independent to exist or to be what it
is.... With the concept of being or entity or reality the
idea of totality is formed: 'all that exists', 'all
Reality', 'the whole of Reality', outside of which there is
nothing. The 'whole of Reality' cannot depend on something
else outside of itself, because outside of it there is a
mere nothing; thus the totality of what exists has in itself
full sufficiency to exist and full independence. Either the
'totality of Reality' is itself the Absolute and the
Independent or else It contains them. In any case the
Absolute exists; one cannot doubt it; if anything, the
existence of the insufficient and the dependent and its
relation with the Absolute is less clear. But certainly, if
there is something that exists, the Absolute exists."
Metaphysical realization therefore aims at the actuation of
what is 'free from relations', of what has 'no need to be in
relation with anything else', because it is aseity. Let us
see what Gaudapada says in his karikas to the Mandukya
Upanisad (IV, 2 and III, 39):
"I bow to this yoga -- taught by the Scriptures -- well
known as asparsa, free from relations, beneficial, generator
of beatitude for all beings, free from oppositions and
"This yoga which is called asparsa (without contact or
relation) is difficult to understand for many yogins because
they, feeling fear where there is none, are afraid of it."
"Happiness" is the opposite of "misery" (as though they were opposite
of the same magnet) and is part of duality (maya/ignorance), the veil
obscures reality. Best to be free of both and simply *be* the
bliss of homogeneity. Worldly misery goes along with worldly happiness
is part of the same wheel that goes round and round and round and round
round... Thanks, but that merry-go-round is getting old.
<snip> Identity crumbles right in
front of your very eyes!! Implosion. The only way for someone to
is to go thru it themselves. And for that to happen I think a person has
to want the truth at any expense. Overwhelming desire for the truth, no
matter what the outcome. Put their intelligence to work.
The desire for the truth is correlated with the extent the truth
has been "hidden" or "distorted." There is no one doing this
but myself. The more I desire the truth, the more I see it is
always only me who is obscuring it. It turns out that in desiring
truth, I am desiring to be who I am,
and what is "obscuring" this is whatever extent I can
convince myself that I am "other" than who I am. All these "me's" --
so many "others" seeking Me, while convincing themselves they are not
who I am, not willing to live Truth and Truly, pretending they want Me.
My own experience is that there are different levels of
enlightenment. The further I go in self inquiry and Self
discovery the more subtle experiences become. The
definitions I had previously tend
to fade in the face of what is simple Here.
I do know this about the process of enlightenment we
are in: It destroys definitions and expectations - all of
them but not all at once.
Dan: Splitting hairs can be fun --
as the split one leads to another,
it can never be undone...
When a billion hairs are all in one
With one in all we'll all have fun!!