Ramana Maharshi, Socrates, Walt Whitman, R. M. Bucke, U.G. Krishnamurti,Diogenes

[Alexander]

(Please note: we have strayed far from J. Krishnamurti & Eckhart Tolle, so I split the topic and started a new one)

I'm almost finished reading his book "The Power of Now", and I haven't read the others. So far he hasn't demonstrated being free of addictions/sins/fetters. He hasn't shown he has attained the superior fruit (maha-phala) of attainment, and he hasn't described the 8 stages of the religious experience. If I find anything suggestive of his attainments, I'll post something. But thanks, Jhananda, for pointing out all the criteria for determining a person's level of attainment; I've learnt something. 

I think Tolle is worth reading for his interesting insights on being mindful in the present moment through ending the thought process, and just simply observing and accepting whatever experience one is having. It helps one to practice the 7th factor of the Eightfold Path, Right Mindfulness.

We have had some interesting convos on people, trying to assess what level they've attained. We had this convo on Sri Ramana Maharshi most recently:

http://fruitofthecontemplativelife.org/forum/index.php?topic=540.0

Jhananda didn't really think that the Maharshi was fully enlightened; then I brought up some evidence of the religious experience, and the two spiritual crises he navigated, i.e. putting forth the proof that the Maharshi was the real deal.

In general you can get a grasp on people's levels one you establish yourself somewhat. The highest people are of course Christ/Krishna/Buddha, but there are a long list of people throughout history who (while they were not "divinized"), certainly separated themselves from the rest of humanity and partook in that Reality which we are all so interested in. Socrates and Walt Whitman are great examples.

You could check out R. M. Bucke's book Cosmic Consciousness, which is basically an explication of how some people throughout history are "in on" a Cosmic Sense (his language). He gives a long list (with defenses) of different people since the Buddha's time, and how each is in on a Cosmic "something."

You may also have heard of U.G. Krishnamurti: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.G._Krishnamurti who, (although he hardly can explain himself), is a jnani who personally impresses me more than Jiddu does.

[Michel]

aglorincz:

In general you can get a grasp on people's levels one you establish yourself somewhat. The highest people are of course Christ/Krishna/Buddha, but there are a long list of people throughout history who (while they were not "divinized"), certainly separated themselves from the rest of humanity and partook in that Reality which we are all so interested in. Socrates and Walt Whitman are great examples.

Thank-you for pointing out some of the contemplatives/mystics, other than Christ, Krishna and the Buddha, that you think are worth considering, and for the links, aglorincz; I'll take a close look at these people:

Sri Ramana Maharshi
Socrates
Walt Whitman
(R. M. Bucke's book Cosmic Consciousness)
U.G. Krishnamurti

Socrates couldn't keep his mouth shut; he had to speak the truth no matter what the cost. Could he have attained the 2rd Jhana, the stilling of the mind, that is if indeed he had a meditation practice, where the throat chakra opens up?

What levels of attainment do you think these people achieved, and how did you arrive at these conclusions?

Jhananda, what do you think about Socrates, Walt Whitman, and U.G. Krishnamurti levels of attainment?

Note: Sri Ramana Maharshi, on the above list, was already discussed at length in a separate posting. See here: http://fruitofthecontemplativelife.org/forum/index.php?topic=540.0

[Alexander]

aglorincz:

Socrates couldn't keep his mouth shut; he had to speak the truth no matter what the cost. Could he have attained the 2rd Jhana, the stilling of the mind, that is if indeed he had a meditation practice, where the throat chakra opens up?

What levels of attainment do you think these people achieved, and how did you arrive at these conclusions?

It's hard to say with 100% sureness what level a person is on, but when I read Xenophon's and Plato's accounts on Socrates I see the following facts:

(1) Socrates clearly had -certain knowledge- about the "other" world, about the falsity of this one, and at least in part of the means of extricating ourselves from this one;

In addition, Socrates had a phenomenal (2) certitude in all of his actions; and (3) he lacks any reasonable fear of death.

I would add in addition to these, Socrates seems (4) happy. Happy, meaning... rupa-jhanas. The first and second.

Now, a streamwinner could have that first characteristic I brought up: the special kind of knowledge. But in order for someone to treat death so lightly, or to have such an immense faith, Socrates must either be a (1) once-returner or (in my opinion this is what he is) a (2) nonreturner.

I conclude this because Socrates is not an arahant. He is not on the level of a Jesus Christ, or a Buddha, but otherwise his nearly complete enlightenment is there.

Let's also look at his predicted fate after death:

Socrates: I am going by a dream that I had in the night, only a little while ago. It looks as though you were right not to wake me up.

Crito: Why, what was the dream about?

Socrates: I thought I saw a gloriously beautiful woman dressed in white robes, who came up to me and addressed me in these words: Socrates, "To the pleasant land of Phthia on the third say thou shalt come."

Crito: Your dream makes no sense, Socrates.

Socrates: To my mind, Crito, it is perfectly clear. (Plato's Crito, 44a-b)

We can relate this to the Buddha's teaching on what a Nonreturner's fate is after death.

Plato in general seems to hide Socrates' otherworldly qualities. Plato himself (that is, what level he was on) is hard to say. But Plato was almost certainly a noble person himself.

Moving on, Walt Whitman of course is another character. If I had time I would analyze his poems, and the story of his life. But the Sparknotes of why I think he was a once-returner or nonreturner:

- In his early life he was a pedantic, disingenuous prude, who repressed his feelings constantly and fancied himself a part of the literati.
- From what I understand at some point he had a breakdown, came to a phenomenal and immense self-hatred of himself (his goodness/honesty prevailed!), and through a major re-making of himself (a 'dark night'), he came to be the character of Walt Whitman we all know and love.

In his poems:
- There is an immense certitude;
- An understanding of fate, or his purpose/end in life (as a poet);
- A feeling of union: with the world/his readers;
- & a Happiness that almost certainly communicates he is in the rupa-jhanas (jhanas 1 & 2).

Again, like Socrates, Whitman is not on the level of a Jesus Christ, or a Buddha, or a Krishna, but he is certainly a partaker/enjoyer of that better, more happy Reality than this one. He was likely a once-returner or nonreturner.

[Alexander]

So from the above, I would lean on Socrates and Walt Whitman having attained both the first and second jhanas. U.G., who I forgot to bring up, I would conclude is a once-returner. If you read his biography, he talks about a "calamity" (what must be a spiritual crisis) he went through. From his descriptions of his "natural state" which he attained, it sounds like this is him trying to explain how he more or less ended up living in the first jhana consistently. It does not look like he achieved the second jhana, but the reorganization of his personality in a profound way seems to be there. Like I said, I appreciate U.G. because he is a bona fide "jnani" - someone who followed the path of -discriminative knowledge- as his path to attainment.

U.G. sometimes says he's enlightened, sometimes not (or that enlightenment is complete nonsense). I would attribute this to his not entirely understanding what he's attained - that he's actually only gone halfway, but not the whole way.

Keep in mind I am basing my analyses off of this model (which I believe Jhananda doesn't agree with me on: so you can come to your own conclusions):

Streamwinner - right view
Once-returner - 1st Jhana
Nonreturner - 2nd Jhana
Arahant - 3rd Jhana+

[Michel]

Thank-you for your interesting comments on these remarkable people, aglorinz.  I was just thinking about all this, and wondering if I should spend my precious time reading up on these guys. I'm interested in moving as fast as possible along the path towards enlightenment since I'm rapidly getting old and have little time left. So I'm going to be very selective on how I spend my reading time; I have to be practical. So, it comes down to this: do any of these guys have a methodology leading to the attainment of enlightenment. I know that Eckhart Tolle has a methodology for developing present moment awareness of the "NOW" in his book, "Practicing the Power of Now." I think he's brilliant, straightforward and articulates his views very well for everyone to understand. J. Krishnamurti in his talks and dialogues emphasized the need to  develop self- knowledge, and understand the true nature of reality - and in his view that was IT, but he had no complete methodology like Siddhartha Gautama's teachings. I haven't read the others in any depth, but did they have a methodology? Do you think it is vitally important to read up on them?

[Alexander]

Thank-you for your interesting comments on these remarkable people, aglorinz.  I was just thinking about all this, and wondering if I should spend my precious time reading up on these guys. I'm interested in moving as fast as possible along the path towards enlightenment since I'm rapidly getting old and have little time left. So I'm going to be very selective on how I spend my reading time; I have to be practical. So, it comes down to this: do any of these guys have a methodology leading to the attainment of enlightenment. I know that Eckhart Tolle has a methodology for developing present moment awareness of the "NOW" in his book "Practicing the Power of Now." I think he's brilliant, straightforward and articulates his views very well for everyone to understand. J. Krishnamurti in his talks and dialogues emphasized the need to  develop self- knowledge, and understand the true nature of reality - and in his view that was IT, but he had no complete methodology like Siddhartha Gautama's teachings. I haven't read the others in any depth, but did they have a methodology? Do you think it is vitally important to read up on them?

I'm not really sure. I think that whatever phantom Hand brought you to this forum, will continue to guide you. :) Whatever you feel you should be studying, or doing, do that. That will be the best use of your time.

[Jhanananda]

What levels of attainment do you think these people achieved, and how did you arrive at these conclusions?

Jhananda, what do you think about Socrates...

It's hard to say with 100% sureness what level a person is on, but when I read Xenophon's and Plato's accounts on Socrates I see the following facts:

(1) Socrates clearly had -certain knowledge- about the "other" world, about the falsity of this one, and at least in part of the means of extricating ourselves from this one;

In addition, Socrates had a phenomenal (2) certitude in all of his actions; and (3) he lacks any reasonable fear of death.

I would add in addition to these, Socrates seems (4) happy. Happy, meaning... rupa-jhanas. The first and second.

Now, a streamwinner could have that first characteristic I brought up: the special kind of knowledge. But in order for someone to treat death so lightly, or to have such an immense faith, Socrates must either be a (1) once-returner or (in my opinion this is what he is) a (2) nonreturner.

I conclude this because Socrates is not an arahant. He is not on the level of a Jesus Christ, or a Buddha, but otherwise his nearly complete enlightenment is there.

Let's also look at his predicted fate after death:

Socrates: I am going by a dream that I had in the night, only a little while ago. It looks as though you were right not to wake me up.

Crito: Why, what was the dream about?

Socrates: I thought I saw a gloriously beautiful woman dressed in white robes, who came up to me and addressed me in these words: Socrates, "To the pleasant land of Phthia on the third say thou shalt come."

Crito: Your dream makes no sense, Socrates.

Socrates: To my mind, Crito, it is perfectly clear. (Plato's Crito, 44a-b)

Thank-you Michel and aglorincz, for posting your most interesting views on various mystics, philosophers, and poets.  If you recall there are 8 stages of the religious experience, therefore there are 8 stages of mystics, which means world history could abound with mystics.

After having read the complete dialogs of Plato, I happen to be a fan of Socrates, because there Socrates is not just a philosopher.  We frequently see examples of him going into trances, for instance the Symposium shows that on his way to it, he walked up onto a neighbor's porch and went into an extended trance, before entering the home he had been invited to.  I read those "trances" as he was a contemplative, and he was so skilled in it, that he could just stand quietly aside from the path of man, and enter one.

Then in the Symposium we read several justifications for pedophilia, as examples of what true love it.  When it comes time for Socrates to describe what love is, he speaks of his spiritual teacher who taught him about love, which was not physical love but an abstract experience, which suggested to me bliss.

Another aspect that is a characteristic of an enlightened being is their use of logic and critical thinking.  In Plato's writing about Socrates, Socrates comes off as the best critical thinker of his day.

So, if we add up all of what aglorincz and I have found as evidence for Socrates being enlightened, and consider that the Greek period in which Socrates lived was not supportive of an enlightened being, and his willingness to be martyred, which I believe is more salient an aspect of the truly enlightened than just about any other factor, I then place Socrates among the Buddhas and Messiahs of the world.

Thank-you for your interesting comments on these remarkable people, aglorinz.  I was just thinking about all this, and wondering if I should spend my precious time reading up on these guys. I'm interested in moving as fast as possible along the path towards enlightenment since I'm rapidly getting old and have little time left. So I'm going to be very selective on how I spend my reading time; I have to be practical. So, it comes down to this: do any of these guys have a methodology leading to the attainment of enlightenment. I know that Eckhart Tolle has a methodology for developing present moment awareness of the "NOW" in his book "Practicing the Power of Now." I think he's brilliant, straightforward and articulates his views very well for everyone to understand. J. Krishnamurti in his talks and dialogues emphasized the need to  develop self- knowledge, and understand the true nature of reality - and in his view that was IT, but he had no complete methodology like Siddhartha Gautama's teachings. I haven't read the others in any depth, but did they have a methodology? Do you think it is vitally important to read up on them?

You are very practical Michel.  Those who want to be enlightened in this lifetime have no time to waste.  On the other hand most literature suffers from profound translation errors.  Most of the people with the big spiritual reputations bought it.  So, we just need to use a lot of critical thinking, to find a path that leads to enlightenment, then diligently follow that path.  Along the way, we may find we have some time to investigate other mystics, sometimes in that investigation we find a gem.  Socrates was that for me.

[mapeli]

Thank you all for this discussion. I wish to add that the fruit of Insight might also be a helpful tool in dicrimenating between frauds, delusionals and mystics. With youtube this is easier as more of a man comes through faster than through books.
I find myself miserable and depressed after having watched any of the Krishnamurtis, and their teachings have been useless for me. Both of them just seem to stink of bitterness. As for UG - there is a video of his "parting message" where he says that all is useless and he will rot like a garden slug or something. Not the death of an attained one, imo.

On the other hand, watching the discourses of Jhanananda makes me inspired and I want to meditate.

Sometimes Insight-data are subconcious projections, but sometimes it clearly is not.

[Michel]

Jhananda:

You are very practical Michel.  Those who want to be enlightened in this lifetime have no time to waste.  On the other hand most literature suffers from profound translation errors.  Most of the people with the big spiritual reputations bought it.  So, we just need to use a lot of critical thinking, to find a path that leads to enlightenment, then diligently follow that path.  Along the way, we may find we have some time to investigate other mystics, sometimes in that investigation we find a gem.  Socrates was that for me.

Thank-you for your comments, Jhananda. I remember reading the Apology, Plato's account of Socrates' trial, and I must say I enjoyed it immensely. I never really went much deeper into ancient Greek philosophy, and ethics, for I had formed the impression that all Western ideas and philosophies were at their roots deeply flawed, and these ideas got us into all kinds of trouble in our long and bloody history. Perhaps this was a mistake on my part, for there are many good things about Socrates', and others' view of the world. But I'm open to broadening my education if it is a help to my practice.

Which translations of Plato on Socrates do you recommend, and what are the works that should be read?

Do you think Socrates practiced meditation?

Jhananda:

So, if we add up all of what aglorincz and I have found as evidence for Socrates being enlightened, and consider that the Greek period in which Socrates lived was not supportive of an enlightened being, and his willingness to be martyred, which I believe is more salient an aspect of the truly enlightened than just about any other factor, I then place Socrates among the Buddhas and Messiahs of the world.

This is very interesting. I've never heard anyone describe Socrates as fully enlightened.

mapeli:

Thank you all for this discussion. I wish to add that the fruit of Insight might also be a helpful tool in dicrimenating between frauds, delusionals and mystics. With youtube this is easier as more of a man comes through faster than through books.
I find myself miserable and depressed after having watched any of the Krishnamurtis, and their teachings have been useless for me. Both of them just seem to stink of bitterness. As for UG - there is a video of his "parting message" where he says that all is useless and he will rot like a garden slug or something. Not the death of an attained one, imo.

On the other hand, watching the discourses of Jhanananda makes me inspired and I want to meditate.

Like you, when I need inspiration, I watch some of Jhananda's videos. Also, I find interacting with him on this forum motivating, and I feel like I'm getting a first class education.

aglorincz:

I think that whatever phantom Hand brought you to this forum, will continue to guide you.  Whatever you feel you should be studying, or doing, do that. That will be the best use of your time.

It was the draw of Jhananda's spirit, his views that brought me here.

[Jhanananda]

Thank you all for this discussion. I wish to add that the fruit of Insight might also be a helpful tool in dicrimenating between frauds, delusionals and mystics.

Oh, I completely agree.  If it was not for insight born of the religious experience (jhana/samadhi) I surely would not have made any progress at all.

Thank-you for your comments, Jhananda. I remember reading the Apology, Plato's account of Socrates' trial, and I must say I enjoyed it immensely. I never really went much deeper into ancient Greek philosophy, and ethics, for I had formed the impression that all Western ideas and philosophies were at their roots deeply flawed, and these ideas got us into all kinds of trouble in our long and bloody history. Perhaps this was a mistake on my part, for there are many good things about Socrates', and others' view of the world. But I'm open to broadening my education if it is a help to my practice.

Yes, this would be a mistake.  One has to study the mystics, philosophers, and prophets of the world with a hefty dose of critical thinking and insight, because most of the Greek philosophers, as well as prophets of any religion, are frauds; however, not all of them.  My favorite Greek philosophers are Socrates and Diogenes.  I would recommend reading any and all works by or about either philosopher, although it is not to say that there are not other Greek philosophers worthy of study.  They are just the two that inspired me the most.

Which translations of Plato on Socrates do you recommend, and what are the works that should be read?

I do not really know.  A few decades ago I picked up an academic version of the Complete Dialogs of Plato.  It is now stored in a box here.

One always has to be able to "read between the lines," using insight as a guide, because most translators are not even contemplatives, let alone mystics.

Do you think Socrates practiced meditation?

I think I already said, that he surely had, because all genuine mystics start out being contemplatives.

This is very interesting. I've never heard anyone describe Socrates as fully enlightened.

Well, so what else is new?  People lionize the frauds, while ignoring the genuine enlightened all of the time.

[Michel]

Just bought a pile of books about Socrates and Diogenes.

I skimmed through a bit of Diogenes. If you heard the sound of loud, roaring laughter in the background today, it was me.

What a character. I love the anecdote of him wandering about in a crowded marketplace, in broad daylight, caring a lantern - looking for an honest man.

Caught regularly masturbating in public, he would say, ‘If only rubbing the stomach could alleviate hunger pains as easily.’

When seeing a boy taking a drink from his cupped hands, Diogenes addressed his mug thus: ‘Why was I lugging you around with me all this time?’

Asked what kind of wine he preferred, he replied, 'Other people's.'

If Diogenes were alive today, I'm sure he would be incarcerated in a psychiatric institution, and heavily medicated; but his views of his fellow contemporaries  seem more than sane to me.

[Jhanananda]

I am glad, Michel, that you enjoyed reading about Diogenes.  Some of the stories you provided caused me to laugh loudly as well. You came up with a few I had not heard of.  However, I think most of the stories about Diogenes are apocryphal.

The story about the cup I had heard of about a sea shell that he used to wear around his neck for eating and drinking, until he saw girl drink from a spring with her cupped hand.  He was said to have thrown away the sea shell.  One more useless possession.

Another of my favorite Diogenes stories is when Alexander the Great came to power he sent for Diogenes to come to court.  Diogenes would not come, so a courtier was sent to fetch him.  Still Diogenes would not come.  So, Alexander came to him. 

Diogenes lived in a fishing village where he caught fish to eat.  Alexander came there to him.  They spent the day in conversation.

At the end of the day Alexander said, "I am very impressed with you Diogenes.  I will give anything you want to half my kingdom.  Just tell me what you want.

It was winter and late in the day, and Alexander was standing between Diogenes and the sun.

So, Diogenes said, "Yes, there is something you can do for me.  Would you mind standing aside so that I can have some sun?"

[Michel]

What a wit!

However, I think most of the stories about Diogenes are apocryphal.

That is unfortunate. I read that he authored many books and they have all been lost.

Apparently he begged for a living and slept in a large ceramic jar in the marketplace. If he were alive toady, he might live in an old van, or in a sewer pipe near a soup kitchen.

[Jhanananda]

What a wit!

That is unfortunate. I read that he authored many books and they have all been lost.

I have heard this is true for many of the Greek philosophers.  The early Greco-Roman church was in the habit of burning any books that were not directly marketing their version of Christianity; whereas, many of the Greek philosophers were preserved in libraries in Persia, Syria and Egypt.  Many of those libraries were subsequently burned when Islam emerged; however, Muslim kalifs later worked to preserve, and copy books, which is how the world acquired the few Greek philosophers we have today.

Apparently he begged for a living and slept in a large ceramic jar in the marketplace. If he were alive toady, he might live in an old van, or in a sewer pipe near a soup kitchen.

Yes, I would expect, or as you wrote up thread, he might be heavily medicated.

I recalled another of my favorite Diogenes stories.  When he got too old to support himself living in a jar, and throwing a net out in the morning for a fish, he went to the slave market and offered himself up for sale.

The slave trader said, "Old man, who is going to pay anything for you?"

Diogenes said, "Sell me to a master who needs a master."

Among the buyers that day was a man who knew and respected Diogenes' reputation.  He bought Diogenes to mentor his son.

[Michel]

Jhananda:

The early Greco-Roman church was in the habit of burning any books that were not directly marketing their version of Christianity; whereas, many of the Greek philosophers were preserved in libraries in Persia, Syria and Egypt.  Many of those libraries were subsequently burned when Islam emerged; however, Muslim kalifs later worked to preserve, and copy books, which is how the world acquired the few Greek philosophers we have today.

Did the Muslim kalifs preserve the original Greek writings, and do these writings still exist today?

I read a bit more on Diogenes today...

This is supposedly Diogenes view on marriage and children:

"It is best not to marry or raise children. Our race is weak; marriage and children only burden humankind with additional cares. People who choose to marry and raise children for support later regret it when they realize that both entail more trouble, trouble that might have been avoided in the first place. A person indifferent to material things declines to marry or produce children because he knows that he has enough resources on his own for a life of moderation. ‘But life will become devoid of people. Who,’ you ask, ‘will take our place?’ Well, I wish that everyone would turn to philosophy and the world be purged of stupidity. As it is, though, it may be that only people of our persuasion will die out while the rest of the world, unconverted, will go on breeding. But if the human race were to die out, would that be any more lamentable than if wasps or flies became extinct? Such scruples only show the failure of people to see things for what they really are."

He was apparently a charming dinner guest:

"At a dinner certain guests tossed bones his way as they might to a dog. He repaid them by pissing on them the way a dog might do."

Here is another example of his charm:

"He was once invited to a stately home where spitting was considered bad form. It happened, however, that he had to clear his throat of phlegm. So he discharged it into his host’s face, with the excuse that no meaner place was available."

On pleasure:

"You can even derive pleasure from despising pleasure once you have got used to it. Then pleasure becomes as distasteful an experience as being deprived of pleasure is for people who have not acquired self-discipline."

And finally, on begging:

 "He once begged money from a statue. Asked what he thought he was doing, he answered, ‘Getting used to being refused.’ When he begged – a practice he began owing to his poverty – he used to say, ‘If you’ve given to others then give to me too; if you haven’t, now’s a good time to start.’ "


All quotations of, and about Diogenes from: Lucian; Diogenes Of Sinope; Julian (2012-12-06). The Cynic Philosophers: from Diogenes to Julian (Penguin Classics), Penguin Books Ltd. Kindle Edition.

To me, Diogenes' character suggests a man who was a free spirit, of true authenticity, who had absolutely no fear whatsoever of expressing himself. His attitude must of been - "damn the consequences, I shall speak the truth." This is unusual; it is rare. I remember when I was manic, on occasion, I too could be uninhibited in expressing my views; a feeling of invincibility was at the root of this type of behaviour. But I was delusional; Diogenes was not.