rigorousintuition.ca

http://www.iraresoul.com/mimicry.html

DISSOCIATION MIMICS ENLIGHTENMENT

Dissociation (being split-off from one’s deepest truth) mimics enlightenment – but it isn’t enlightenment. People who are dissociated live in great peace. But this is only because they have blocked their negative feelings. The enlightened person resolves his negatives feelings, and thus his peace is not false.

People who are dissociated do not suffer. But this is only because they have abandoned their healing process and numbed their pain. Enlightenment grows from the fertilized soil of suffering.

People who are dissociated call themselves enlightened. But this is only because they have they have no conception of what enlightenment is. Enlightenment is the polar opposite of dissociation.

People who are dissociated are not easily emotionally ruffled. But this is only because there lies a thick wall buffering their hidden, vulnerable self from the sharp and often honest edges of the world. The enlightened are much less protected, but have such a deep core of self-love that they can defend themselves gently.

People who are dissociated feel they have mastered forgiveness. But this is only because they completely deny the harm done to them – and the damage remaining. The enlightened forgive spontaneously and without effort because they have fully embraced their damaged parts and grieved every honest ounce of their misery.

People who are dissociated are extremely self-confident. But this is only because their self-deceptive armor is impenetrable to self-reflection. The self-confidence of enlightenment is fed by the universal spring of life.

People who are dissociated gravitate naturally toward leadership roles. But this is only because they are experts at leading themselves away from their heart’s true course. The enlightened person leads right to the heart of the matter.

People who are dissociated have gone through hell to get to where they’re at. But they fail to realize that they’re still stuck right in hell. Enlightenment is the freedom of emotional integration.

People who are dissociated feel they have found their true self. But this is only because they equate their true self with no self at all – or at best a false self or ego based on a distorted sense of consciousness. Enlightenment is the true self linked with the conscious mind.

People who are dissociated consider themselves paragons of spirituality. But this is only because their spirits are so buried behind walls of denial that they have no conception of what spirit is. Enlightenment is the passionate spirit of the child held by the consciousness of the adult.

People who are dissociated are quite motivated, sophisticated, and convincing. But this is only because they perennially risk returning to suffering if they do not convince everyone of their lie. Enlightenment brings a motivation to spread the truth that is everyone’s birthright.

People who are dissociated act decisively. But this is only because they cannot see or question their unconscious motivation. The enlightened person is also decisive, but only because he has no unconscious, because in his healing process it, like a now-useless appendage, has dissolved.

Dissociation is contrary to enlightenment.

Behind dissociation lies unresolved trauma, and only once trauma is resolved can the light of consciousness enter the core of our being.

http://www.iraresoul.com/fundamentals.html

THE FUNDAMENTALS OF MY PERSPECTIVE ON ENLIGHTENMENT AND HEALING FROM UNRESOLVED TRAUMA.

What is enlightenment?

Enlightenment is the conscious awareness of truth. Everyone who has any consciousness is enlightened to a degree, but where people are blocked from having resolved their own traumas of childhood – or adulthood – they will be blocked from their awareness of full reality. Full enlightenment is a consequence of full resolution of one’s traumas.

Are children born enlightened?

Children are not born enlightened. Children are born connected to their spirits, which is the precursor to enlightenment – and a necessity for enlightenment to happen. But children are born unconscious. To become enlightened they have to be both connected to their true selves and conscious. And to be fully enlightened they have to be both fully connected to their true selves…and fully conscious. This requires a huge amount of time – and energy.

How hard is it to become fully enlightened?

I think it’s the most difficult thing anyone can strive for. What I’ve seen is that not very many people are willing or able to expend the necessary time or energy. Most people seeking full connection with full truth quickly compromise for lesser comforts. By denying the depths of their emotional unresolution – and building a wall over their brewing torture within – they can often delude themselves into believing that they are resolved people. If they are able to do this and at the same time maintain a conscious connection with the remaining parts of themselves, they can easily pawn themselves off as fully enlightened people. The reality is that they are only partially enlightened people. The rest of them remains dissociated. And behind their dissociation remains unresolved trauma.

It is also worth noting how extremely difficult it is to strive for enlightenment in the midst of a society that is so dead set against heading in this direction. It is hard to grow without allies - and a deeply nurturing environment. Hard...but not impossible.

Has anyone ever achieved full enlightenment?

Not that I know of – myself included. But some people certainly come closer than others. Otherwise we wouldn’t receive powerful guidance from the words of others, handed down over the millennia.

Is full enlightenment achievable?

Yes. My heart tells me that it is so. It is our basic purpose here on earth. Its path offers the deepest nourishment and satisfaction. Its path is the way. But my feeling that full enlightenment is achievable is based on factors other than my heart simply telling me it is so. I used to be much less enlightened. Now I am much more enlightened. I have watched this path unfold over many days, weeks, months, and years, and I have learned the basic patterns of healing and growth. I can now comfortably extrapolate from my experience and see that there is no reason to think that if I continue on the path I am on that I can someday resolve all my trauma and know my deepest self fully – be fully enlightened.

Are there ways to speed up one’s path toward enlightenment?

Yes, but maybe no. Every action has an equal an opposite reaction. Quit drinking and you might just feel more pain, which in turn might kick up more of your denial. Become celibate, but then you might repress your sex drive. Refuse to be in a relationship, but your loneliness might cause you to dissociate. Life has its own timetable. Honor your inner voice, follow its guidance, explore as it bades you, and you will honor life’s path.

Is death inevitable?

Yes. That’s why you need to work hard now.

Is forgiveness healthy?

Yes, but only as a consequence of having healed one’s inner traumas. Forgiving someone prior to healing the damage he has caused you is premature, and thus not real. This is dangerous, because it allows the poison of unresolved traumas to remain in your system. Premature forgiveness might bring you – and him – comfort, but it won’t bring you enlightenment. True forgiveness is the consequence of the process, nothing more.

Is there a healthy way to become a parent?

Yes. There are two ways. The first is by becoming enlightened first. If you don’t become enlightened you will always be spoon-feeding your child some degree of toxic nourishment. This is an abuse of his spirit – and the foundation of all child abuse. The second is by parenting the wounded child within yourself – the one your parents abused. This is called the path to enlightenment.

What is God?

God - if you feel comfortable using such a loaded word - is the best part of us. The enlightened person knows that "God" resides fully within him, as well as within all people and all creatures. People who are separated from their true selves, however, cannot see "God" within themselves. They project God outward onto external objects and ideas. Whole religions are based are this, which is why troubled people are drawn to them. Everyone needs God, even if they call him by a different name. (I actually rarely use the word God.) That is why life is not complete without enlightenment.

Can people become fully enlightened in relationships?

No. People become fully enlightened on their own. Enlightenment is found by looking within, not looking without. Enlightenment is found in solitude, not in company. Others can guide the way, but only enlightened others. And the fully enlightened never engage in intimate relationships with the unenlightened. To do so would be self-destructive.

People can grow in the context of a relationship, but only so far. Ultimately they must face the truth of themselves on their own, with no crutches, projections, or fantasies. And relationships for all the but the fully enlightened involve these.

Can therapy help a person become enlightened?

Yes, if you have a very enlightened therapist. But if you don’t you could end up in big trouble, because disturbed therapists, especially if they’ve mastered the art of deception – and self-deception – can wreak havoc on your journey toward truth. Therapists have a lot of power, and this can go toward healing or harming.

Do you believe our world will change for the better – or are we doomed as a species?

I don’t know, but I believe humanity as a whole operates much like the individual: people, myself included, don’t change unless they are forced to at some level. The lucky ones of us change because we’re called to grow from within. I suspect our larger world will not change much until the pressure comes from the outside. Hopefully it won’t be too late by then.

Do you hate parents?

No, not the parents themselves – just their unconscious behavior and the damages they commit on their innocent children.

Isn’t your whole website reductionistic – like everything you say just comes back to parental trauma?

In my experience life’s basic conflicts are ultimately rooted in the traumas we suffer in childhood. These traumas play out on individual levels, cultural levels, and on the global levels of war, economics, and exploitation of the earth. For people who deny the significance of their own emotional traumas, a denial which is presently the standard of our world, my website certainly can look very foolish and naïve – and even axe-grinding – but the more I learn and the more I grow and the more I study humanity, the more I realize that if I have made any major errors here on this website it is because I have likely understated my case…

Curious:

What would I say if I had just five minutes to give comprehensive instructions for awakening?

You are unenlightened to the extent that you are embedded in your experience. You think that your experience is you. You must dis-embed. Do that by taking each aspect of experience as object (looking at it and recognizing it) in a systematic way. Then, surrender entirely.

It sounds like a recipe for disassociation. And for some on the KFD forum it may well be. But if you put quotes around the second 'you' in the first line of the quote, it could be a recipe for integration. Subtle stuff.

(I mean you can spend time concerned about an idea of yourself embedded in a personal narrative reflecting immediate experiences you might prefer were different rather than experiencing stuff directly...without an agenda, so to speak. Such 'embedding' limits the range of perspective to the confines of the narrative, and in a way that precludes self awareness, whilst this formula makes such narrativization impossible. I’m suspicious however, that the embedding preemptively turns the formula into a dissociative practice…)

Who the feck would wish for enlightenment in this day and age?

I dunno, I try my best to be nice and stupid then someone throws this shit in my face.

Get me a life please.

American Dream wrote:http://www.iraresoul.com/mimicry.html

DISSOCIATION MIMICS ENLIGHTENMENT


People who are dissociated...
People who are dissociated...
People who are dissociated...
People who are dissociated...
People who are dissociated...
People who are dissociated ...
People who are dissociated ...
People who are dissociated ...
People who are dissociated ...
People who are dissociated...
People who are dissociated....

Repetition is the most basic form of mind control.

annie aronborg wrote:

"Repetition is the most basic form of thought control."

Yes! And Boredom is a close second.

Repetition + Boredom = School.

Dissociation Mimics Enlightenment?

It sure does. It sure does.



a comforting delusion....

background

annie aronburg wrote:

American Dream wrote:http://www.iraresoul.com/mimicry.html


Repetition is the most basic form of mind control.

oh Annie, laughing my ass off. It certainly is. People who are enlightened tend not to speak of 'people' at all...each case is unique.

Can't be enlightened. Too much Comic Sans.

Thanks annie and alwyn

Given my bad attitude toward ‘enlightenment’, (as well as to words and intellect), this may become a somewhat stumbling attempt at engagement.

Quote:
You are unenlightened to the extent that you are embedded in your experience. You think that your experience is you. You must dis-embed. Do that by taking each aspect of experience as object (looking at it and recognizing it) in a systematic way. Then, surrender entirely.

tasmic wrote...

It sounds like a recipe for disassociation. And for some on the KFD forum it may well be. But if you put quotes around the second 'you' in the first line of the quote, it could be a recipe for integration. Subtle stuff.

(I mean you can spend time concerned about an idea of yourself embedded in a personal narrative reflecting immediate experiences you might prefer were different rather than experiencing stuff directly...without an agenda, so to speak. Such 'embedding' limits the range of perspective to the confines of the narrative, and in a way that precludes self awareness, whilst this formula makes such narrativization impossible. I’m suspicious however, that the embedding preemptively turns the formula into a dissociative practice…)

I sort of get it up to the part where you say; ‘whilst this formula makes such narrativization impossible’.
Feel free to expand on this and the last sentence also, if you might be so inclined.

From the link that tasmic posted…

Name them and be free of them. These mind states are not "you;" we know that because if there is a "you" it is the one who is looking, not what is being looked at.

While turning these states into objects may help one become more conscious of their impacts, I still don’t see them as being free of the subject.

From the OP

Enlightenment is the conscious awareness of truth.

Is this a truth that has dispensed with the space between the signifier and the signified? OK then put words to this ‘truth’ and you are right back at square one.

I have never much cared for the enlightenment model as it seems the element of narcissism, rather than the seeking of truth, is often the dominant driver.

One can wish this fellow well for his efforts at overcoming his childhood traumas, but it seems like his striving for enlightenment is asking for a bit much.

My attention got derailed at this sentence in the first article:

People who are dissociated do not suffer.

I'm probably the most highly dissociated person I know and I do suffer and do not consider myself to be enlightened. The folks I've known who did consider themselves to be enlightened were well-camoflaged New Ager narcissists, so I've become allergic to the term. Still would like to achieve the real thing some day, but meanwhile I avoid self-proclaimed enlightened individuals like the plague.

But--interesting discussion, so carry on.

LilyPat

This reminds me of a new-agey former employer of mine. She was fond of doing tarot readings for people and at one point, while reading for me (or a friend, memory is a fragile thing at my age) she mentioned that her deck was missing several cards. She assured me this was OK, that it simply meant that the universe had decided that she had completed those lessons and no longer needed to contemplate them. I thought that funny, that she would, in literally 'not playing with a full deck' think that certain universal archetypes/personality traits/human needs would no longer apply to her.

... if you have a very enlightened therapist. But if you don’t you could end up in big trouble, because disturbed therapists, especially if they’ve mastered the art of deception – and self-deception – can wreak havoc on your journey toward truth. Therapists have a lot of power, and this can go toward healing or harming.

To this I would add wanna-be gurus...

Enlightenment, in and of itself is not narcissitic, however people who pursue it loudly and publicly tend to be. If I understand aright, enlightenment is total integration of the personality, the ability to act consciously and in a balanced manner, somewhat the antithesis of narcissism. Of course we don't see much of that in action and I suspect that with further dissociations arising in the near future due to socio-economic pressures (combined with some really strong astrological aspects, for those who are into such things) we are likely to see even less. There is likely to be little enlightened self-interest in foxholes, if you get my drift...

And yes, it doesn't help that we are embedded in a culture that deploys all sorts of soporifics, both high and low-tech, to keep us dreaming dreams of the dreamer and of the dreamer awakening. If we don't know where all the cards are in the first place, how can we ever have a 'full-deck' experience?

The term, "enlightenment," irks me — and perhaps for no other reason than those who apply it to themselves almost inevitably aren't.

If someone were actually "enlightened" s/he might well lack all self-consciousness of being so, since s/he's found the "self" itself to be illusory.

LilyPatToo wrote:My attention got derailed at this sentence in the first article:

People who are dissociated do not suffer.

I did as well, and though the point has been made, it is the opposite, to be dissociated is to suffer. To be split from one's central being-nature, to exist day to day as if through a set of conjured proxies is to suffer in a most fundamental way.

Simulist wrote:The term, "enlightenment," irks me — and perhaps for no other reason than those who apply it to themselves almost inevitably aren't.

If someone were actually "enlightened" s/he might well lack all self-consciousness of being so, since s/he's found the "self" itself to be illusory.

Exactly. One who is truly 'enlightened' is probably going not going to be conscious of the fact, it simply is.

I think one should strive to be intergrated and balanced as a personality, but once one starts pursuing 'enlightenment' that battle has probably already been lost

Project Willow wrote:

LilyPatToo wrote:My attention got derailed at this sentence in the first article:

People who are dissociated do not suffer.

I did as well, and though the point has been made, it is the opposite, to be dissociated is to suffer. To be split from one's central being-nature, to exist day to day as if through a set of conjured proxies is to suffer in a most fundamental way.

.

That is one of the points made I have a hard time with too. Perhaps one is not necessarily conscious of where the suffering comes from, but dissociation does cause suffering.

Maybe there are different scales and levels within dissociation. Others here have experienced far more trauma and dissociation than my former employer who was so smug in how she's 'gotten over' her family and 'found herself' and acted as 'enlightened' as anyone as she unconsciously acted out her family psychosis on a grand scale.