Enlightenment Genetics

[Blessed2]

So I saw this mentioned in another thread and figured it would be a good subject to contemplate, and a good way to perhaps question some assumptions and beliefs about the nature of enlightenment, and materialist paradigm.

 

It's this idea that enlightenment has something to do with genetics. That you might have good genetics that make enlightenment easy for you, or bad genetics which makes it almost (or completely) impossible.

 

Is it really so? Is enlightenment connected to genetics? Let's discuss!

 

[Daniel]

Looking at my immediate family, either this is a highly questionable notion or I'm completely screwed.😳 Hoping to buggery it's the former.

[Mandy]

Genetics are the supposed already created "programing" for a body, and enlightenment is the recognition that one is not the body, nor separate, nor ever a finished creation.

 

[Aware Wolf]

2 hours ago, Blessed2 said:

So I saw this mentioned in another thread and figured it would be a good subject to contemplate, and a good way to perhaps question some assumptions and beliefs about the nature of enlightenment, and materialist paradigm.

 

It's this idea that enlightenment has something to do with genetics. That you might have good genetics that make enlightenment easy for you, or bad genetics which makes it almost (or completely) impossible.

 

Is it really so? Is enlightenment connected to genetics? Let's discuss!

 

 

Sure personality characteristics can play a part. But since we can't do anything about genetics , its kinda irrelevant. I was pissed at Star Wars when they did the whole midichlorian bullshit. Instead of a farm kid Luke finding his hero,'s journey, we gotta have the royal family genetic connections. 

 

What we can do is to what we can do. Volition is huge. Even if someone at a retreat is a genetic super meditator and sees auras and colors and shit -- but can't get up in the morning to sit, bitches at the cooks, and is afraid of dogs -- I'll take my run of the mill practice. 

 

My experience is that super meditators often crash or burn. 

 

The other take away is from a book I read recently by Henry Shukman, One Blade of Grass. If you are gifted and have an early awakening -- it can be problematic. As Henry puts it, when the seed germinates, there should be ground of loam waiting for it. But how often does that happen? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[solereproduction]

3 hours ago, Blessed2 said:

So I saw this mentioned in another thread and figured it would be a good subject to contemplate, and a good way to perhaps question some assumptions and beliefs about the nature of enlightenment, and materialist paradigm.

 

It's this idea that enlightenment has something to do with genetics. That you might have good genetics that make enlightenment easy for you, or bad genetics which makes it almost (or completely) impossible.

 

Is it really so? Is enlightenment connected to genetics? Let's discuss!

 

No, no.

 

When I discuss life as it actually evolves naturally, i get warnings for being off topic serving someone else's realities that defy genetics is the source for ancestors remaining eternally separated adapting to the moment here time is stationary and no reproduction is ever same total sum form shaped since conceived to replace its previous 4 generation gaps present before one's conception came to pass.

 

I explain the algorithm but people honoring relative time logistics won't believe it is possible as it is constantly taking place with themselves part off the whole process.

 

Free will doesn't give freedom from anything but reasonable doubt governing outcomes tomorrow when living never exceeded the moment here.

 

Then when one is free from reasonable doubt, they are eliminated from intellectual realities.  Catch 22. No win scenario.  Eternal hell manifested into the evolving experience taking place here.

Edited March 31, 2023 by solereproduction
adding information to clarify more than just a single talking point.

[Blessed2]

2 hours ago, Daniel said:

Looking at my immediate family, either this is a highly questionable notion or I'm completely screwed.😳 Hoping to buggery it's the former.

 

No need to worry. 😂

[Blessed2]

Genetics, the body and personality are the movie.

 

Enlightenment is the screen.

 

How could anything in the movie affect the screen?

 

There isn't even a movie, only the screen appearing as, movie.

 

The only reality is non-duality!

 

[Blessed2]

1 hour ago, Aware Wolf said:

Sure personality characteristics can play a part.

 

How can the movie play a part for the screen being the screen?

 

Does the screen become the screen, in the movie?

 

1 hour ago, Aware Wolf said:

My experience is that

 

That's the movie. 🤔

 

[Joseph Maynor]

I can honestly say that interfacing with so called spiritual people has helped me and hurt me in equal measure.  There are covert narcissists in spirituality who are reduced to that as a means to justify feeling superior to others.  Those people can be very toxic.  I think it’s very important to understand your and others’ motive for doing spirituality, especially those who always need to be right and a teacher no matter what.  There’s nothing more annoying than someone talking at you and over you who really isn’t.  That’s about them needing to feel one up and one over you.  See if the person has any humility — that’s a great test.  I mean humility about their role as a teacher or coach.  If it’s all about them needing to feel superior, that’s their trip and they’re gonna run that so that true collaborative relating is next to impossible with them.  They’re feeding a social insecurity inside of themselves — and the way they feed it is to feel spiritually important in relation to others.  Another test — see if the person expresses empathy towards others.  Do they come off as arrogant, cold, and aloof?  Are they sort of hiding themselves from relating like a human?  That’s kind of a red flag they may be in spirituality to aggrandize a weak self-esteem that’s also narcissistic.  I know I’m blowing the whistle on this, but you guys and gals know this is true at least in part.  You don’t need any kind of credentials or proof to declare yourself spiritually superior or supreme — it’s an easy way to get narcissistic supply if that’s the underlying motive.

Edited March 31, 2023 by Joseph Maynor

[Blessed2]

33 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

I can honestly say that interfacing with so called spiritual people has helped me and hurt me in equal measure.  There are covert narcissists in spirituality who are reduced to that as a means to justify feeling superior to others.  Those people can be very toxic.  I think it’s very important to understand your and others’ motive for doing spirituality, especially those who always need to be right and a teacher no matter what.  There’s nothing more annoying than someone talking at you and over you who really isn’t.  That’s about them needing to feel one up and one over you.  See if the person has any humility — that’s a great test.  I mean humility about their role as a teacher or coach.  If it’s all about them needing to feel superior, that’s their trip and they’re gonna run that so that true collaborative relating is next to impossible with them.  They’re feeding a social insecurity inside of themselves — and the way they feed it is to feel spiritually important in relation to others.  Another test — see if the person expresses empathy towards others.  Do they come off as arrogant, cold, and aloof?  Are they sort of hiding themselves from relating like a human?  That’s kind of a red flag they may be in spirituality to aggrandize a weak self-esteem that’s also narcissistic.  I know I’m blowing the whistle on this, but you guys and gals know this is true at least in part.  You don’t need any kind of credentials or proof to declare yourself spiritually superior or supreme — it’s an easy way to get narcissistic supply if that’s the underlying motive.

 

Let's stay on the subject. This thread isn't about people or teachers per se, the subject was "enlightenment genetics". Does genetic play a role in regard to enlightenment?

[Aware Wolf]

39 minutes ago, Blessed2 said:

 

How can the movie play a part for the screen being the screen?

 

Does the screen become the screen, in the movie?

 

 

That's the movie. 🤔

 

 

How do you know this? How can one recognize this? 

 

What language are you typing in? 

 

You're ignoring duality. If you nonduality doesnt include duality, it's incomplete. Although there is the absolute, as you point out, we attain awakening through the relative (Nagarjuna). 

 

See Advaita Vedanta too. There's a list of requirements for the student to be able to learn and recognize the truth. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Mandy]

@Aware Wolf There's nothing holding up the structure of a thought, no prior knowledge, no requirements, just the thought occurring now. The structure of a sentence depends on the subject, but there is no subject, there is no structure. 

 

How does it feel on a gut level as the thought is considered now that there are requirements for the truth? 

 

 

[Joseph Maynor]

1 hour ago, Blessed2 said:

 

Let's stay on the subject. This thread isn't about people or teachers per se, the subject was "enlightenment genetics". Does genetic play a role in regard to enlightenment?

 

I think what I said directly addresses the subject-- maybe too directly.  I'm giving the larger picture.  It's spiritual ego.  Spiritual enlightenment is equally available to everyone.  Obviously.  Look at this ridiculous question for what it is -- do I need a certain genetics to become enlightened!  What are we back in the 1800's?  @Robed Mystic If you think you're consciousness and your body is a dream isn't genetics a kind of allusion to materialism which you're creating?

If you don't believe that spiritual enlightenment is equally available to everyone, you have no business teaching the subject to others imo.  That's a hard but useful test.  That tells me a person is coming at it from an impure perspective.  And I've been doing this for a long time and have interacted with many people in the spiritual community, so this comes from a lot of my own experience.  If you have ears to hear this, good for you.  Keep this.  You have everything you need for spiritual enlightenment right now.

Edited March 31, 2023 by Joseph Maynor

[Blessed2]

11 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

I think what I said directly addresses the subject-- maybe too directly.  I'm giving the larger picture.  It's spiritual ego. 

 

This thread is about the belief (enlightenment genetics). Not the assumed believer of belief. (Spiritual people, narcissists, those toxic people etc.)

 

[Joseph Maynor]

6 minutes ago, Blessed2 said:

 

This thread is about the belief (enlightenment genetics). Not the assumed believer of belief. (Spiritual people, narcissists, those toxic people etc.)

 

You're a believer.  I'm a believer.  Are you dictating who can or can't respond to your thread and in what manner?  I don't think that's within your control let alone within your right.   Have I violated any guidelines?  I'm stating what I believe and feel is a good response to this thread.  Are you rejecting my point of view personally or do you have a good reason to do so?  If it's personal bias I would say that's your problem, if you have a good reason otherwise, than that might be my problem.

Edited March 31, 2023 by Joseph Maynor

[Blessed2]

3 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

You're a believer.  I'm a believer.

 

This is a belief. 😄

 

4 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

Are you dictating who can or can't respond to your thread and in what manner?

 

Just trying to keep the thread on the subject it's intended it for.

[Phil]

@Blessed2 Yep.

 

The enlightenment & genetics theory is ‘deep’ personal bias and arises via the belief in understanding being dual or a duality. ‘It’ isn’t. The ‘first act’ is “forgetting’ by being, and therein much misunderstanding is experienced. When misunderstanding is dispelled, there is no experience of an “understanding” of what is, there is just ‘the direct experience’ of, what is. Of being. In the denial or overlooking or employment of self-deception / self deception in this regard, there seems to be a separate self which has levels of understanding. Meanwhile the very word points perfectly already. Under standing. Genetics is essentially a rationalization or justification of the belief as an upholding of the ‘separate self’. 

 

@Joseph Maynor

This ‘believer’ stuff is dogmatic & projection. It seems like an overlooking of the entirety of the videos offered, the group calls, what’s shared in this thread, and the point & content of the forum. 

 

[Joseph Maynor]

5 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

 

@Joseph Maynor

This ‘believer’ stuff is dogmatic & projection. It seems like an overlooking of the entirety of the videos offered, the group calls, what’s shared in this thread, and the point & content of the forum. 

 

Yeah Phil, I disagree with you.  You're a lot like Leo Gura dude.  I've always thought you and Leo were similar -- you're a similar kind of person.  If you ban me for saying this I will note that.  I'm done being gaslit by spiritual narcissists.  I'll set the record straight if provoked.

Edited March 31, 2023 by Joseph Maynor

[Phil]

1 minute ago, Joseph Maynor said:

Yeah Phil, I disagree with you.  You're a lot like Leo Gura dude.  I've always thought you and Leo were similar -- you're a similar kind of person.  If you ban me for saying this I will note that.

Note whatever you like (obviously). 

Warnings and bannings are only for comments and with respect to the guidelines. 

The ‘rub’, and illumination of partaking in this forum is that there is quite literally no one here being disagreed with. 

There appears to be the belief or assumption that there is. 

The suggestion here is to inspect that, which more or less requires ‘taking pause’, or experiencing the projection without projecting. 

‘Owning it’, or ‘sitting with it’ would be another way to put it. 

 

I’m not a lot like Leo Gura. We are not similar. I am Leo Gura. 

[Aware Wolf]

I posted similar but it got lost 

 

Heres another analogy similar to the movie and screen:

 

"An analogy given here is a series of buckets with different shapes and colours containing clear or muddy water of varying degrees. The same sun is reflected in each of them. The reflected sun together with the colour and contour of the bucket and the tardiness or clarity of water constitute an individual ego sense or jiva. It associates itself with the bucket contour or the water quality and thinks itself to be the bucket or the water. But all the while it is the sun outside that gets reflected. When the reflection knows itself to be the reflection of the sun outside, the association between reflection and the real sun breaks as there is no longer any reflection. The same sun of consciousness is reflected in millions of buckets of individual souls or jiva."

 

There is the sun. Or screen. True Self. Brahman. God. The Absolute. Etc. 

 

The Unborn, the undying, the unfabricated...the Unconditioned. 

 

True, the Absolute has no personality, gender, genetic characteristics. Let's not get stuck here. 

 

Our problem is that we identify as the bucket. Not as Brahman! 

 

So how can we realise our True Self? 

 

There's different paths here. One path recommended by the Bhagavad Gita is Bhakti. 

 

But I'll take Advaita Vedanta as the bucket is their example. AV says we realise our True Self by removing our ignorance through education. 

 

Now to the theme of the thread. As human beings, who suffer, we have relative strengths and weaknesses. Some may help in learning, understanding, and grokking the Truth here. All sentient beings have Buddha Nature. Human beings have a better chance of realising it than a cockroach. 

 

As Nagarjuna says, we obtain the Absolute Truth through the relative truth.