The Game of 'Awakening' Demands Your Strict Obediance to Protocol!

We all love our games and most of our games we play to win and, therefore, we're always looking to identify winners and losers. This is often how we determine our progress, by evaluating how close we have come to what others have defined as winning. This is easy in the external world since the prizes are very recognizable. Even in the 'god games' there are winners and losers. This is determined by status, such as saint, guru, master, teacher, 1st level novitiate, instructor level 1, sage level 2, pope, cardinal, bishop, priest, apostle, 1st level lineage, etc, etc, etc.

However, it is much harder to identify those who do not play to win, but play simply... to continue playing.

They're not seeking rewards and need not conform to any preordained, set path since all paths provide rewards based on attaining expected 'outcomes' (as taught by winners). Examine every religion and spiritual path and you will see that most are founded on specialized concepts of heaven, enlightenment, revelation, satori, non-dualism, awakening, nirvana, rapture, etc, etc. These are all outcomes that we expect to achieve (as taught through the master teachers of the 'path') to become winners in the game of 'awakening.'

If these specialized concepts did not exist, the religions would crumble of their own oppressive weight, since all are based on some degree of sacrifice and/or struggle (to transcend or transform). Why would we struggle or sacrifice (i.e. pray or meditate for years) if there were no reward expected?

But isn't "enlightenment" everyone's birthright?

Of course! And the 'revelation,' or revealing, is your long sought out reward. Therefore, if you do this or that, meditate this way or that, for this long or, as Thaddeus Golas states (in "The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment"), by "believing that enlightenment demands effort, discipline, strict diet, non-smoking, and other evidences of virtue" You too, can be a winner! YEAH!

It's nice to want everybody to win. Unfortunately, in the "god game" there is room for only so many winners (so many gurus, masters, etc). However, to truly want "everybody" to win would be to change the rules of the game in which winning is simply the continuation of play, because if everybody wins, then there really are no winners. This is because in our world, winners are identified only in contrast to losers.

Yet, if you do not play by the rules, but still love to play, it's not hard work whatsoever. However, as the email responses, to my repudiation of the need to meditate, attest to, you will often be vehemently attacked for not playing by the 'sacred' rules of the game as determined by the path you chose to follow. For many, the rules are paramount and to mess with the rules is a 'sin' of the highest order.

"THE LAZY MAN"S GUIDE TO ENLIGHTENMENT"

The ideas of Thaddeus Golas are quite profound in their average simplicity. I read his little book, "The Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment" years ago and have returned to it often. This is because I consider myself the premier "lazy man" when it comes to austere practices and paths.

"Laziness keeps me from believing that enlightenment demands effort, discipline, strict diet, non-smoking, and other evidences of virtue." - Golas

Notice how, in one fell swoop, his main theme seems to completely trash centuries of austere spiritual and religious practices.

"These are the rules of the game as I see them."

Once again we have the concept of a spiritual "game." This can be a very freeing perspective for some and has been used by other authors as well (James Carse). However, most seem to need ever more complex austerity. We are drawn to the complexity and skills of the austere "technique."

"All I can do is ask that you play the idea game, see where it leads, and check it out against what you know."

Thinking is a game and the supple mind, not bound to ideological schemes, is free to twist and bend ideas in ways most would find sacrilegious and disrespectful to the ordained 'path' of the masters. But notice the contradiction here. He wants you to "check it out" for yourself and this requires resolve, fortitude and a strong will. How many of us have that? How many of us have the strength to find our own way? Most just follow the way mapped by others. Ironically, that choice is the epitome of laziness.

Therefore, what he presents is not"lazy" at all. Our laziness is our complete acceptance and surrender to the texts and teachings of the past. We refuse to think for ourselves and simply accept what the "masters" teach, i.e. Buddha, Jesus, or the neo-masters like Cohen, Adi Da, Wilber, etc, etc. etc. For most, there can be no question.

"Perhaps these conclusions will be meaningful to you only if you follow your own process of checking and proving."

He comes up with some interesting concepts. Yet, he doesn't want your acceptance, only for you to do your own "checking and proving." Find your own meaning and stop blindly accepting what the Buddha said or what Moses commanded or what Mohammad proclaimed or even what your brain chemistry requires (note that Golas's secondary intention in writing his book was to assist in "acid trips").

This whole book is sweetly sacrilegious and non-ideological.

I recommend it to all.

Peace Angels,
mikeS