Bruce Leroy Spiritual Q/A

For one thing, I think that it’s difficult for us to judge/assess the efforts of another human being towards any goal. Take an Olympic athlete as an example… Do we know how much actual effort it took that person to qualify? On the flip side of that, take a 5th grade student getting a ‘C’ in mathematics, did the student do his/her best? The reality is, reaching a goal is mostly a combination of ability and effort/time, the more ability you have, the less effort/time it will take to do something. Example: There are 100 kilos of wood, to a person that can carry 100 kilos at a time, it won’t take much effort/time to move that wood a couple of meters away. For someone that can only carry 20 kilos, it will take them more effort/time. The way this relates is that, the person who can carry the 100k of wood at once may have begun only carrying 5k and may have worked for years to increase to the ability to carry 100k. Someone just seeing the end result may be inclined to think that it was easy ...

If referring to advaita, then the duality that you’re referring to would be between Self (Atman) and the Whole (Brahman). The concept is that when you are able to combine the two seemingly separate parts and experience them as one, you will attain a state of nirvana(moksha). I absolutely agree to that concept because nirvana is that awareness. In my eyes, one way that religions can be categorized is between those that promote enlightenment/nirvana and those that don’t. Even within Buddhism, not all schools focus on an individual attaining enlightenment. For now let’s discuss the ones that do. If the masters of these schools have attained this state (I’m assuming they have) of enlightenment and experienced nirvana by different means from each other, then none of the means can be considered absolute. That means that none of the schools can argue the validity of another schools way of attainment. The same thing goes for me or any other individual who has had the experience without a maste...

First off, I changed this question that was originally worded, “reach” with “experience”. I did this because I feel that ‘reach’ implies a level or even a constant level, when in reality it’s more like going out of town. You go, but you come back. Since we were ‘born’ in this ‘town’, it’s safe to say that we belong here. That being the case, I’m in no way suggesting that anyone try to visit the ‘town’. In fact, my interpretation of studies would say that many people have actually gone, but none fully came back! In Joseph Campbell’s book, ‘Myths to Live By’ he interviewed people that had undergone a certain type of, paranoid schizophrenic delusion, as defined by their doctors. The one’s that were coherent described a similar experience to mine. The difference being is that when I was being bombarded with information, I was able to let it pass through, thanks to practicing meditation. Without that, it’s very easy for me to understand why those patience are institutionalized. Another adva...

I achieved enlightenment or a state of nirvana by pushing with my entire mind, spirit and soul, to 'go away', 'to escape', the words of the women looking down on me. Every adjective she used to describe who she thought I was, pierced my being. Eventually, killing my reality. She was my love; no words uttered from another meant more then hers, at that time. Then, I existed in two places, simultaneously, and had a dual awareness feeling as though “I” had lost it’s meaning. One consciousness was on the bed and governing my physical body, the other was solitary in a peaceful emptiness. Before my mind could define the lack of light as darkness and attach the instinctual fear associated with a void of sensation, an outline of a door appeared in golden light, turning the emptiness black in contrast. Even at 22 I sometimes feel afraid in the dark, but I was consciously aware of a deep, encompassing love justifying my trust and openness. I reached out for the door and as my arm ...