Can the path to enligtenment change ppl bad?

USA
525 Posts

Posted - Apr 20 2006 : 11:08:34 AM

We are seeing so many corrupt gurus these days. (Lets not take anybody's name.) But most of these people I am sure have started out like many of us sincere seekers. Having the typical traits of a spiritual seeker like selflessness, honesty, less interest in material things etc.. all those yama and niyamas.

The path of purification to enlightenment should infact enhance these qualities rather than decrease them. What causes them to go the other way? Is it an effect of premature kundalini awakening? Or something else?

Infact from what I believe without those yamas and niyamas it is hard to acheive so much of spiritual progress that these guys have acheived. Or is it true that moral qualities are not a pre-requisite for enlightenment. So many paradoxes in the spiritual world.

2111 Posts

Posted - Apr 20 2006 : 11:52:19 AM

Early practice releases small attachments. Advanced practice releases larger ones. Very advanced practice releases nearly all the normal worldly attachments.

But if you start being recognized for your very advanced status, and revered or even worshipped for it, that presents supernormal attachment potential. There's a difference, in other words, between getting beyond craning your neck and panting when a hot chick smiles at you at the shopping mall and getting beyond dozens of thousands of women chanting your name and placing body and soul under your stewardship. There's a diff between giving up your $200,000 trust fund and turning down 500 Rolls Royces. Etc etc.

Yes, it's all just manifestations of the same thing, and we realize that,, spiritually. But if even a tiny kernal of ego remains, it will find these heady temptations rich fertilizer. And if one retains a self image (this path is about extinguishing that), and that self image is "egoless saint" (as it must be, because that's the sort of image that attracts followers - it's a key marketing device), your ego can grow to grotesque dimension even without your awareness. Read "Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism" by Trungpa for more on how ego can subvert one's entire sadhana - i.e. how you can be taken on a seemingly spiritual trip entire within the realm of ego.

Even sincere seekers presented with extraordinary worldly temptation can find they're not up to it. And I'm very firmly convinced that the really advanced people recognize the trap, and go running in the other direction from proclaimed guruhood (for this and other reasons). Those who become gurus tend to be a little less serious (and certainly a little less insightful, for failing to recognize the trap) and retain a little more ego to begin with, which makes it all that much more precarious.

And bear in mind that people eat bugs on tv or blow themselves up to grab glory. Gotta watch the glory thing. I've seen humble-seeming teachers who manage to more or less avoid the guru trap but are more attached to the potential for glory than you'd ever believe possible.

Edited by - Jim and His Karma on Apr 20 2006 1:05:40 PM

USA
2602 Posts

Posted - Apr 20 2006 : 12:22:11 PM

Hello Near,

[ I didn't see Jim's reply ]
there are many, many things coming into play in that picture, and many angles can be taken on answering your question.

On one angle, I think that the expectations within whole guru system are part of the problem. The mythologization. And our understanding of "enlightenment". I think that the view of the "enlightened" that comes to us from India may be somewhat inflated and magicalized.

It's magical and emotional, not objective.

I've experienced something recently where someone essentially took a turn to see everything I was doing as wicked. If I showed her kindness, it was wicked kindness. If I tried to help her, I was being condescending, or had ulterior motive. She had decided that I was bad, and nothing I could do would change that. I was mythologized, but in a negative way --- I was a demon, and that was that.

Gurus are often at the other end of people's tendencey to mythologize. People see them as Angels rather than Demons. They are Angelized (to coin a word). The people who do this do not realize that they are getting into territory that is potentially as problematic as Demonization; if the guru does not abuse the situation, things may work out OK; if the guru does, problems follow.

Some gurus are good, well-behaved people and people's mythologization of them does not lead to problemmatic situations and abuse. Other gurus start to turn sour; the mythologization may appeal to a problemmatic, narcissistic part of their personality, and all hell breaks loose in either a fast, or a slow way. One major guru-led organization has become a slow-motion train-wreck in the last ten years.

So that's part of it: people's tendency to mythologize may be part of the problem.

Near said:
The path of purification to enlightenment should infact enhance these qualities rather than decrease them.

Unfortunately there is no saying how 'deep' purification will go in any particular person's life. So some deeper personality tendencies may go uncleansed.

Is it an effect of premature kundalini awakening? Or something else?

Yes, I don't think it is all "premature kundalini awakening" but if we broaden it to "imbalanced awakening" I think you are on the mark. I believe "enlightenment", uncompleted or imbalanced, can make people worse in some ways. As a simplification of the issues, two major things the path to wholeness should do is decrease your Fear, but increase your Love. Unfortunately, some people, going through spiritual transformation, seem to grow in fearlessness, but not enough in lovingness and morality. We have another major guru (dead now) and I think this happened to him and this was the reason for his fall.

Another question is whether enlightenment itself can tend to produce inflated states. My feeling is that it might. We had many, many, supposedly enlightened people --- not 'nasties' by any means, as far as I know quite well-behaved gurus --- in the last century telling us that they were, in one way or another, the greatest in centuries. See the problem in logic?

And these were the ones who said it. How many others, even among the well-behaved ones, felt it, but kept their mouths shut about it?

-David

Edited by - david_obsidian on Apr 20 2006 12:41:54 PM

Manipura

USA
870 Posts

Posted - Apr 20 2006 : 12:33:33 PM

Great answer, Jim.

Near, I see inflation in all areas, certainly not just guru-dom. For an obvious example, look at the Oscars. There they are, in all their sparkling glory, giving and receiving talent awards, each actor more beautiul than the next. Such a farce. The best films are being produced anywhere but LA, and the most profound performances are from actors whom you've never heard of. Same with artists, musicians, and gurus. To have mass appeal one must appeal to the masses (!), and the masses' tastes are easy to predict. Thus the trap - it's just too easy to sell out and give the fans what they want, and spirituality is no exception.

Edited by - Manipura on Apr 20 2006 12:53:47 PM

USA
2602 Posts

Posted - Apr 20 2006 : 12:41:32 PM

Hi Meg,

yes, that's another angle -- what we get is what the Market demands.

The market, in some ways, demands inflation. So many of the gurus to which there will be a big market response, will be inflated.

-D

2111 Posts

Posted - Apr 20 2006 : 1:13:01 PM

True, meg and david. it's all marketing.

I'd make a terrible guru. I come off as anything but yogic in person; I could never attract diddleysquat in terms of followers. And when I look at most gurus, with their carefully cultivated I'm-so-spiritual manner, I can't help rolling my eyes. They're just "acting the part". You can see them setting the trap for themselves. Yoga's about removing self-image, not swapping in a new one (much less swapping in a new one better suited to worldly gain e.g. increasing one's following). Look, maybe it's for real . It may be that I'm just not spiritually advanced enough, and that in a few years or decades or lifetimes I'll just naturally take on that photo-ready holy demeanor. I could be missing the whole thing. But I doubt it.

Last year, someone started a thread about how to recognize the enlightened. Here was my reply:

Here's a way: "Whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it." Serious countenanced holy men with grim faces, those with a studiedly loving aura who wield their bright wise eyes like torches, anyone projecting a polished image of any sort, or who show any self consciousness whatsoever (even a trace)...all these people are still living in the realm of mind and ego. Those who remove mind and ego are utterly (but playfully) immersed in every action, and don't give a damn about appearances. Like a small child.

If you meet a holy man who you couldn't imagine coming right up to and playing slap hands with, s/he is still anchored in mind/samsara/ego. Sounds silly, but I think that can actually be used as a litmus test.

You mentioned Amma, and there's a lot to dislike about her organizationm and I'm not saying she's necessarily the saint they say she is (nor am I saying she's not). But the one time I saw her (I skipped the hug, fwiw), she was absolutely like a small child, and I'm completely convinced it wasn't for show. So there's something there.

Of course, child-like and childish are completely different things! :)

Edited by - Jim and His Karma on Apr 20 2006 1:13:49 PM

USA
525 Posts

Posted - Apr 20 2006 : 2:06:06 PM

good posts there everyone.

if we leave the case of unfinished/incomplete enlightenment (which is the case for most popular gurus these days), i am just wondering even if truly enlightened folks are also susceptible to imperfections. As Yogani says in one of his lessons about enlightenment "enlightenment means being in light and it is always our choice to choose to walk in the light or take the wrong path". The journey to enlightenment is a process in which i encounter all kinds of temptations, much much bigger than worldly ones and I am blessed with enlightenment only when i overcome all these worldly attachments. It's hard to believe that a truly enlightened person will get tempted to worldly things be it popularity/money/sexual desires. As jim points out the unfinished ones are susceptible. If a truly enlightened person can still be tempted and go back to his previous self then that means enlightenment is not a permanent state which cannot be true.

When I am truly enlightened and am always in light, what prompts me to choose the wrong way?

May be this is true of people who meditate in caves and then come out into the world. But according to AYP or other modern methods englightenment is learning how to live in the world. To be in the worldly temptations but still be uninfluenced.

weaver

832 Posts

Posted - Apr 20 2006 : 2:27:41 PM

Yes, I agree, this is a very interesting topic. I especially like Jim's criterion of being completely child-like and not at all caring about the appearance, to tell when the lesser ego is just about gone. I could however imagine that an enlightened being may not always be in a playful mode outwardly, but could act as a teacher as well and being stern when called for, but not with the aim of pleasing the masses or caring about their image.

Responding to Near's comments about temptations, I believe that even a truly enlightened being, while still remaining in the physical plane, will have to make some effort to maintain the enlightened state, which is the same as saying that there is always the possibility by choice to develop a lesser ego again, and that's where temptation comes in. Both Jesus and Buddha were tempted until the last moments they were here.

USA
525 Posts

Posted - Apr 20 2006 : 2:29:04 PM

i have always felt spirituality and morality are on different dimensions. There are many moral ppl (ex. mother theresa) who am sure wouldnt be tempted even in the most severe temptations (be it money/popularity/anything else). Then there are popular gurus who are much more advanced than mother spiritually(are they?) but made mistakes in trying to build institutions.

Even if we keep an extreme example like mother teresa aside, i can see lot of good ppl around me who i can say wouldnt get tempted in such circumstances where these incompletely enlightened gurus got tempted. Atleast there are ppl who dont care abt money at all and it is in their nature. Probably natures dont change much when we advance spiritually. Or else as a species we are still not there and we are yet to see a truly enlightened person (may be one of jim or david or myself

)

riptiz

United Kingdom
741 Posts

Posted - Apr 20 2006 : 2:39:14 PM

Hi Near,
Unfortunately if one promotes their teachings to help the masses then someone will always claim (rightly or wrongly, and I'm not judging)that they are doing it to inflate their ego.It's catch 22, you don't promote your teachings and few get benefit of the teachings, you promote you are condemned.
Then we have the gurus who claim they are enlightened, which we can all claim to have partial enlightenment can't we on the path.One session of meditation will take us nearer.But how near is the point.One group claim to give instant enlightenment to thousands which we all know is not possible.It depends on your perception of enlightenment.Some will believe a certain level is 'there' and another will believe 'no, I still have further to go to get there'.
From what I have seen and experienced I believe there are many gurus out there who believe they are enlightened but are only partially there.
The reason that some meditate in caves is so there are no distractions from your practices.Dhyanyogi Madhusudandas ji says in one of his books, if you go to a cave to meditate but are still distracted by the family you leave behind , then you may as well stay at home and practice.Makes sense to me.
Within KMY and I am sure other schools the emphasis is on the path to God, right thinking and NOT material things or siddhis which are seen as distractions to the path.By trying to think,speak and act correct to others we can change our mindset and sin doesn't get a look in.Unfortunately it seems the temptation derived from the ego sometimes wins in the end with some.Sad but true.
L&L
Dave

'the mind can see further than the eyes'

weaver

832 Posts

Posted - Apr 20 2006 : 3:20:27 PM

quote:
Originally posted by nearoanoke

i have always felt spirituality and morality are on different dimensions.

I share your opinion here Near, if we limit the concept of spirituality to "spiritual abilities", but if we include the removal of the lesser ego also, then morality I think would follow from that. And I also think that "spiritual abilities" can only be developed to a limited extent as long as parts of the lesser ego are maintained. So, the gurus who still like to display themselves don't have all the powers that they could get if they would let their egos go completely.

Yogani has made the statement in Lesson 150 that "If there is inner silence, there will also be moral responsibility and conduct...". This is an interesting statement that I haven't fully grasped but hopefully will someday. That would mean when the inner silence is complete, which it must be in full enlightenment, then morality must be complete also.

2111 Posts

Posted - Apr 20 2006 : 4:16:04 PM

quote:
Originally posted by nearoanoke
As jim points out the unfinished ones are susceptible. If a truly enlightened person can still be tempted and go back to his previous self then that means enlightenment is not a permanent state which cannot be true.

Er, I said that? :)

I don't know if anyone is ever "finished". So I don't know if anyone is ever unsusceptible.

The notion of "finished" or "truly" enlightened is what gets people in these jams to begin with. We're all human...we're born that way and remain that way, and that means lingering temptation and imperfection (one can, however, be human while being surprisingly steeped in and of the divine).

I'd strongly suggest abandoining any notion of Perfected People or other models of spiritual superstars. The whole notion, I believe, stems from the Indian tradition of revering one's teacher to extreme.

Edited by - Jim and His Karma on Apr 20 2006 5:03:51 PM

http://www.energygrid.com/spirit/ap...urutest.html

USA
525 Posts

Posted - Apr 21 2006 : 3:53:28 PM

USA
525 Posts

Posted - Apr 21 2006 : 4:11:54 PM

quote:
The whole notion, I believe, stems from the Indian tradition of revering one's teacher to extreme.

The notion stems more from the acceptance of facts without proof, than in revering one's teacher to extreme. If you approach spirituality with an open mind, I dont think such pitfalls occur. And most ppl who come to meditation do have this open-minded approach, the courage to question, the ability to impartially analyze themseleves and their guru. The reverence to the extreme happens mainly with the kind of ppl who want quick results, by relying on the guru or temple/church heads to see god than on themselves.

USA
2602 Posts

Posted - Apr 21 2006 : 4:26:22 PM

near said:
The reverence to the extreme happens mainly with the kind of ppl who want quick results, by relying on the guru or temple/church heads to see god than on themselves.

Actually, I'm not so sure. I am inclined to agree with Jim that the tendancy to over-revere, or as I put it earlier, have an inflated view of the the teacher, is something of an endemic problem in the Indian tradition. I don't think it tends to get confined to immature or less dedicated or committed seekers.

I think it's a cultural problem of over-expectation.

yogani

USA
5197 Posts

Posted - Apr 21 2006 : 4:36:44 PM

quote:
http://www.energygrid.com/spirit/ap...urutest.html

Thanks Near, there are a few really good ideas in there.

Let's see, "His Holiness The La Dee Da Yogani"

Only kidding! Dying laughing here. Sorry...

Btw, I think you all have done a wonderful job with this topic. Not kidding on that.

The guru is in you.

Yoda

USA
284 Posts

Posted - Apr 21 2006 : 5:56:03 PM

Every breed has it's own thing going on. Accountants and computer people are introverts, politicians like power, engineers are good with numbers, girls just want to have fun, etc.

Gurus are entertainers for people with existential questions, so they are pretty flamboyant and charismatic.

The real problem with gurus comes when you have a very good hearted, 100% authentic 'enlightened' teacher on your hands. Then you are *really* up the crick, as you find them so inspiring that you soak up their philosophy and practices only to live with a growing sense of frustration that the guy or gal's system doesn't work for you.

At least, that's been my problem.

Shanti

USA
4854 Posts

Posted - Apr 21 2006 : 6:26:49 PM

Near, that was a great website. Still laughing.. Thanks.

Edited by - Shanti on Apr 21 2006 7:39:21 PM

sean

USA
20 Posts

Posted - Apr 22 2006 : 02:49:14 AM

I don't think traditional meditation practices alone full address the shadow ... actually I believe a contemplative practice can be used (unconsciously) to give certain shadow elements a new way to hang out and fester. This is why I feel good methods of self-inquiry are essential to the path. Yogani wrote about some here: http://www.aypsite.org/forum/topic....TOPIC_ID=968 and others (including myself) added a few ... Staying connected in a healthy family/community/sangha where you can receive straight feedback is also grounding and important.

Sean

http://www.thetaobums.com/forum

Wolfgang

Germany
470 Posts

Posted - Apr 22 2006 : 1:40:47 PM

Concerning gurus, saviours, messiahs and what else you have,
I can testify from my own experience: I have been a member of
a sect for many years and I still have contact to many
members of this group (I won't mention names yet).
The greatest problem I found is that I experienced God and
found great truth in the teachings of this group and
because of this truth it was difficult to decide if I
still want to follow the guru.
I think many members in that group realize that something
is not correct, but because they found God to a deep extent,
they somwehow feel that they owe it to the guru
who taught them about God. Then they tend to overlook
wrong things or find excuses for the wrong things
or even try to justify the wrong things (it was God's will)

Still in search of truth
yours
Wolfgang

USA
2602 Posts

Posted - Apr 22 2006 : 5:48:55 PM

Yogani said:
Let's see, "His Holiness The La Dee Da Yogani"

I'm personally all for it, but I think that 'La Dee Da' sounds so much like 'Adi Da' that you may be up in court on trademark imitation issues.

A great website Near. I went through the warning signs, and there was only one guru I know who scored a hit on every single warning sign listed, except for the funky technology one. I'm not going to say who it was, though I have mentioned him....

Edited by - david_obsidian on Apr 22 2006 5:51:26 PM

weaver

832 Posts

Posted - Apr 22 2006 : 9:51:16 PM

Talking about gurus, this guru rating site was brought up a while ago, where Yogani is written about also: http://www.globalserve.net/~sarlo/Ratings.htm

Yoda

USA
284 Posts

Posted - Apr 23 2006 : 10:12:39 AM

Sean,

Thanks for pointing out that thread. Yogani even threw in some sungazing tips! I finally 'get it' what role 'inquiry' has. I had assumed it was something that gurus who didn't have to bother with a path cooked up to confuse the rest of us. I didn't realize that they were being helpful.

I disagree with Wilber though. I think he should grow his hair out. Meditation is quite up to the task, too. It sets into motion everything else needed, when needed, as needed.

Re: bad people. S. Suzuki Roshi says that one of the preconditions of enlightenment is to view all others as perfect and enlightened and not as bad or in need of help.

2111 Posts

Posted - Apr 23 2006 : 12:26:40 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Yoda
S. Suzuki Roshi says that one of the preconditions of enlightenment is to view all others as perfect and enlightened and not as bad or in need of help.

Language is tricky. "Need of help" is somewhat ambiguous. Everything's exquisitely perfect as-is. But one maintains great empathy for the pain of others, and desire to help (though at a different level and from a different impulse).

Hey, this path is fraught with paradox. It's all perfect, nothing needs changing......but the people who don't realize that will remain in despearate misery until they do. Their misery and ignorance are also perfect, but one is compelled to try to compassionately help them see the big picture. Not to remove the pain, but to remove the delusion that causes the pain. Even though the delusion itself is perfect and beautiful (nothing is outside the perfection).

To phrase it a different way...the perfection is ever-shifting and manifesting. This is an enormous artwork in which we're all collaborators (we do the shifting and manifesting). Those who come to realize this don't drop their paintbrushes. They continue to act (though without delusions about what's going on), and the color they choose to add to the painting (a clumsy metaphor, sorry) is the color of compassion. None of it has "meaning" and none of it is for a desired result. It's all just pure beauty - always has been, always will be.

Edited by - Jim and His Karma on Apr 23 2006 1:20:32 PM

Sparkle

Ireland
1457 Posts

Posted - Apr 23 2006 : 1:58:17 PM

Yes, everything is perfect right now. This is an essential ingredient in:
Loving everybody right now
Forgiving everybody right now
Accepting everybody right now.

As Jim says, the perfection is always shifting and changing.

The change is perfect, the evolution is perfect, the growing is perfect, the learning from mistakes is perfect, the mistakes themselves are perfect, even gurus are perfect, these words are perfect, the mind that perceives these words is perfect.

In stillness love envelopes us all

Louis