On Spirituality

IMO no one is omniscient. Whatever the spiritual masters taught were their own experiences. You can see overlap in their ideas. There are multiple ways to practice spirituality. Hence it is not fair to say one is right and other is wrong.

Buddha's goal was end of suffering. He answered the question:What should be done to achieve end of suffering? He probably did not go much further once he realized dependent origination and uncreate. He did not feel the need to understand uncreate since he had uncovered the answers to his question.

I have always felt disconnected with Hindu mythology. I think I understand some of it now. I think the saints went a step ahead to understand the nature of uncreate. Why so much confusion? How to explain uncreate to someone who only understands creation? It cannot be done. Thus sprung various mythological figures and all sorts of human stories were attributed to them. Just to somehow explain uncreate to someone who only understands creation.

UG Krishnamurthy talks about the natural state. I like the concept. He used to say that his mind was engaged only when needed. Like the clutch of a vehicle. I think a similar sentiment is echoed by Raman Maharshi. IMO it is called sahaja nirvikalpa samadhi. IMO Buddha said that when conditioning is removed through elimination of samkaras, it results in natural state. I think he said natural state = unconditioned state.

Raman Maharshi emphasized self enquiry. He says that samadhi suppresses conditioning or desires.

Both Raman Maharshi and Buddha emphasized experiential wisdom. Elon musk is onto something. It is very much possible that we are living in a simulation. If the simulation theory is right, mythology might also hold.

Jiddu krishnamurthy says that you cannot prepare for enlightenment.  He says that enlightenment is not a gradual process. UG says that a hangman is as likely to get enlightenment as any other person. 

Lets agree that there is something which is beyond the grasp of ordinary humans. Can you realise it intellectually? UG narrates an interesting incident. He mentions that he was chasing a particular state (enlightenment). But when he realised he had no way of knowing if he was in that particular state or not, a calamity (thats what he liked to call it; his descriptions make it sound like it also included kundalini awakening) happened which threw him into the natural state. Does it mean that he realized it intellectually? It does seem so. But according to him it was not enlightenment. It was the natural state he liked to talk about so much. The forces behind it will remain a mystery.

The more I write about UG, the more I find his ideas intriguing. I think I will re-read some of his works.

A lot of emphasis is given on thought free mind. From  Buddha's pov does it mean that a thought free mind does not create samkaras?

Now the essence: I think we have the following players in play here.

I think forced meditation and yoga are not essential to spirituality. They do help but there are other ways also. I dont think kundalini yoga is for me. I could not find satisfactory answers highlighting its role in awakening or enlightenment.

Again please note that I am not touting anything. Just mentioning what I think can be mentioned.

Spirituality is the art of living. IMO, the litmus test of spirituality should be improvement in ones quality of life (by quality of life I mean state of mind. There are various parameters but IMO, state of mind is the primary indicator; I lean a bit towards equanimity of the mind.) in this current earthly life. If the promised improvement is in some other life etc. , I think it is not true spirituality. True spirituality will benefit in other lives as well (if it exists).

Religion can be considered a package not very unlike a tourist package. It is for the layman. If you want to understand true spirituality, you have to be an explorer.
IMO Buddha's enlightenment was a bit different from other spiritual masters. How so? Imagine the universe is the output of a program. What other spiritual masters call enlightenment is their experiencing the output of the program at a different level whereas Buddha experienced the program itself. IMO even Buddha didn't understand the whole program. He understood some functions of the program. My conclusions are based on the discourses of the spiritual masters.

To experience the output only enlightenment, I don't think meditation is necessary. A good analogy is gaining an extra sense, kind of spiritual sense which enables one to experience the output. This can happen any moment if one practices just being. The output only enlightenment also leads to physical and mental transformation. It leads to natural state. IMO UG, Eckhart Tolle, Eric Putkonen etc explain the natural state quite well. 

I would like to make a distinction between awakening and enlightenment. IMO, output only enlightenment is awakening. Awakening means awakening to our true nature. Technically, enlightenment is understanding something. Buddha's experience was enlightenment as he was able to understand the program. 

IMO quantum physics is one of the functions of the program. Uncreate is achieved by quantum physics.