Namaste Bruce,

I read all of the FAQ pages (even though only one is indexed on the site?) and could not find much in the way of insight into the ultimate nature of reality that Buddha talked about.

You talk about going higher and higher until you were aware of the original consciousness, and then you had trouble getting beyond that.

I have had 8 personal experiences of some realm of the afterlife in which I was everywhere in the universe and at all times at once. I knew everything and nothing at once. There was infinite love and truth. I was everything at once and also my self at the same time. Every question I asked was met by the answer "you are asking the wrong question." There were divine beings--I asked them if they were God. They kind of chuckled but didn't answer. Silence was the most respected speech in this realm. I could conjure up any scene I wanted, which is like what you mention, although the scenes were kind of super-imposed onto the 360 degree view of everything everywhere as mentioned before.

Everything was true and not true at the same time. Except peace and love and unity, which were the ultimate truth.

All of these experiences happened during my period of being an atheist. I had no exposure to buddhism at the time, but now as a result I have looked more into it.

Anyway, now I'm learning about what Buddha taught, and I wonder what your thoughts on it are. It does seem to match what I've experienced, but then again it's hard to say, because any being that is fully realized/enlightened, would no longer exist in a way that would facilitate communication.

There are many enlightened beings alive on Earth today. They all seem to have one thing in common, which is "no self." I.e., they say that "they" died when they became enlightened, and that no sense of self ever returned. That the "self" and free will are just an illusion created by the clinging to existence and ignorance which Buddha talked about.

You and other astral travelers seem to describe existence as a kind of evolutionary schooling experience. Clearly, it is that way as long as the self exists. But, my question is, what is the point of the learning? Is it as Buddha said, to simply finally learn to  stop clinging to existence, and release the illusion of the self?

I wonder if there is any concern about this teaching whatsoever in the afterlife. You don't seem to emphasize it at all if it does exist (although you do mention that we are here to develop perfect love, which hints at no-self).

Mr. Nobody, what would be a right question to ask out there in the universe?

If I were there I would ask:
How has my soul been created?
Will I remain my independancy in eternity?
What is the origin of evil?
What is the origin of human love?
How do I have to go from here?
Will you kiss me???

Two more questions, so you will never have to be embarrased for not being able to say something.


What is the origin of conscious?

Why did Christ allow Himself to be crucified?

Hi Mr. Nobody,

This site includes discussions and experiences from people of different backgrounds.  However, here it is commonly populated by human beings still stuck in ego-based thinking (myself included sometimes). 

When one explores consciousness, one explores with a mind full of expectations and interpretation.  If you are asking why more people on this site don't encounter buddhas, bodhisatvas, etc. when astrally exploring, I would say that it they may, but it really has to do with your education and expectation.  When people describe "incredible beings of light, expressing PUL (pure unconditional love) - they are often describing what may be described as a highly enlightened being.  They may not be aware of the eight-fold path of buddhism or the terms that buddhists know.

I see an inherent unity between spiritaul juadeo-christian thought and buddhism.  All great teachers speak of love, charity, compassion, and the need to follow the golden rule.  It just depends upon your interpretation of what you see when you travel or explore.

The need to erase the "self" in order to be a truly enlightened being is perhaps the single most controversial and difficult area of thought and or discussion.  I have pondered on this long and hard, and I think that it is a misunderstanding of spiritual teaching to think of it as a complete dissolution of a mind into the void. 

My own take on the matter is that as we evolve, if we follow a path of love, we stop acting out of self interest alone (that is a sad lonely path), and start thinking about and acting out of love for others.  This is done by many in the most basic way when they have children or relatives who need help.  The person begins to put their child's needs above their own, and stops pursuing personal pleasure in an ego-based way. 

But if all they do is switch their love to their children, they still haven't quite evolved in their thinking to lose self-centered base perspective.  Instead, they swap their personal ego for that of their children.  It is a step up, but it perpetuates a dualist "us vs. them" attitude.

When Jesus preached to the masses, he told a wealthy man, that in order to follow him, he must be prepared to give up his wealth.  He also told potential followers that they would have to put his path (of love) above all others - even their own family.  They might have to leave their husbands, wives, etc.

I believe what was meant by this was that if you follow the path of love, you give up on ego-based thinking, which includes clinging to people we love.  I don't really think he meant that the person must abandon their loved ones, just evolve in love.

The big misunderstanding (in my opinion) is that the point of learning is to give up on our self so completely that we do not exist and are no longer individual units of perceptive awareness.  I see no reason why we can not act out of love for others, yet maintain our perceptive awareness and interact with others.  I see no reason why a "fully enlightened being" could not continue to exist, and interact with others in a meaningful way.  If I can think, act and create right now, shouldn't I be able to do the same things if I no longer acted out of self interest and ego?

Matthew

Hello Mr. Nobody:

It sounds like you had a wonderful experience. Thank you for sharing.

I can't say that I like the name you've chosen because that no one business has been highly misunderstood. The goal isn't to find that eventually there will be just one being all by his lonesome for all of eternity. The goal is to find that at one point there was one being all by himself (some people call this being God), and this being made it so eventually many beings get to share a state of love and oneness with each other for all of eternity.

In a way love would be meaningless if there was only one being because it would quickly get boring to share love only with one's self. I'm so happy that all of you are here so I can share love with you.

Sure people sometimes have false viewpoints of themselves. This doesn't mean that there aren't beings who are able to accumulate meaningful knowledge in many unique ways.

If you are interested, here are four things I wrote that relate to this subject.

One key point is to not allow the supposed enlightened claims of others to limit what you are able to discover for yourself.

http://nondualityisdualistic.com/articles-2012/nondual-teachings-my-likes-and-dislikes-11712/

http://nondualityisdualistic.com/articles-2/jeff-foster-advaita-vedanta-and-nonduality-122311/

http://nondualityisdualistic.com/joining-the-oneness/introduction/

http://nondualityisdualistic.com/joining-the-oneness/chapter-1/

I am not Bruce....and yet, I am Bruce... :)

You were everything and nothing.

There is no such thing as everything and nothing, but only love, the basis of our being, which is all being.

When we are in love, nothing -- else -- matters.

Maybe I have no sense, but there are my two cents...


Mr. Nobody wrote on Jun 30^th, 2012 at 10:27pm:

Namaste Bruce, I read all of the FAQ pages (even though only one is indexed on the site?) and could not find much in the way of insight into the ultimate nature of reality that Buddha talked about. You talk about going higher and higher until you were aware of the original consciousness, and then you had trouble getting beyond that. I have had 8 personal experiences of some realm of the afterlife in which I was everywhere in the universe and at all times at once. I knew everything and nothing at once. There was infinite love and truth. I was everything at once and also my self at the same time.

I agree Isee. :) How can we be nothing when we are love? If one or more conscious beings are aware of that love, then they exist even if they can't find something such as a physical body to identify with.