Yes, thank you indeed, I broadly or strongly agree with you on nearly all those points, EmEx. I've certainly never intended to imply that experiencing OOB comes anywhere near to being some form of enlightenment. That would be an extremely ignorant thing to claim or believe.
Well, first of all let me make it clear that merging with Source isn't enlightenment at all. Not directly. What counts is how you e-merge from that mergedness consciousness, not how you potentially escape from everyday reality. Fifty years ago I believed, based on my experiences, that enlightenment was all about merging with Source. Forty-three years ago some very wise, old, very spiritually astute people told me that was only the beginning, the first step, the kindergarten class. Four years later I had thoroughly confirmed that what they had said was true, and for me that was followed by the longest journey of gradual realization you can imagine. The more you know, the more you realize how much more there is that you don't know at all. (Or is that what you meant by saying "so-called enlightenment"?) Enlightenment is all about integrating Source fully with everything one is experiencing in nonduality. The everyday things are all just as real as Source. (As can be proved by one's trying to walk blindfolded across a busy, so-called "nonexistent" freeway.) True oneness is in any case impossible without such full integration. (By the way, it's a pity I need to use the word "integration," because Ken Wilber has many notions about what "integration" is that I don't agree are accurate, even though Ken also has some great insights.)What is the difference between going OOB and merging with Source and so called enlightenment experience?
Going OOB is just very clearly and very distinctly being aware of and experiencing the psychic level of the self. You can look at post #2680 https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1157279 for a description of the levels. Going OOB has nothing to do with merging with Source. My reply to "What is the difference between going OOB and merging with Source?" is: "What is the difference between the number two and the color blue?" Except, that is, that for many it can be easier to initially contact Source from an OOB position.
They' re said to be illusory by such nondualists as Shankara and Ramana Maharishi. But not by many other nondualist philosophers, including Wittgenstein and Nagarjuna and Krishnamurti, and all the most famous Taoist and Zen Buddhist masters such as Lao Tzu, Chuang Tzu, Basho, Dogen, and so on and on. I claim that some of the latter were greater philosophers, and certainly more in touch with reality. Also, let me clarify that in Indian philosophy, a "nondualist" position has always simply meant, and continues to mean, any position that agrees that Source, or some part of reality, is nondual.how do these fit together since in non duality every form, distinction and separation is said to be illusory.
I'll continue in another post.