It got me thinking about the terminology that is used in spiritual circles and the misunderstandings that come with these and other terms.For example words like ‘enlightenment, self realisation, being’ etc are banded around by teachers, masters and therapists alike. But when you explore what these terms mean, the answers seem varied and often contradictory. Each teacher seems to use them differently, and some commentators are critical of anyone who uses these terms, especially if they are westerners.
There are others who I might disagree with, but they appear to me to have come to some real understanding or another. Some claim ‘ enlightenment’ whilst others might not claim it so directly, but are claiming they have something to teach.
There is a plethora of non duality teachers, some of whom have never been students of Osho or any other eastern teacher. What I notice is that they nevertheless, are using language and ideas that are based on eastern teachings. It seems there isn’t any way around this. The subject is largely based on eastern ideas.
My feeling is that the unique and rare nature of enlightenment is a prejudice from the east. Osho himself offered contradictory ideas about it. Sometimes he implied only he and a few others could claim any real understanding of the subject. At others, we mere students might one day reach the state.
That he was as unique and rare is pretty much self evident. That he was unusual, & special also seems self evident.
But does that mean the state of consciousness is rare or unique ? Can you be enlightened in the West? But also be of the West, married, a mother or father ? Can you be working in a normal job? Why for some, is that such a challenging idea?
Can we differentiate between those who may be enlightened and those who don’t necessarily teach the subject.? Osho himself occasionally spoke of uneducated people who ‘ lived the truth’, but didn’t necessarily teach others.
In the West I sense a far greater number of people who demonstrate a real understanding about the whole subject. It’s as if what seemed like a rare phenomena is now much less rare than Osho envisaged. It’s my experience that this a greatly humbling and empowering, and means we can move forward and explore the subject from a much wider perspective than we could previously.
That many westerners, from varied perspectives are attempting to discover their own understanding of these eastern terms and are questioning some of the ideas behind them must be a good thing, even if we are also sometimes confused and challenged by it.