|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
snake
United Kingdom
275 Posts |
 Posted - Mar 20 2007 : 7:29:22 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by meg
quote:
Originally posted by Jim and His Karma
I've got to say, something in me deeply recoils when watching those videotapes, whenever he says something the least bit cute, the audience erupts in greasy giggles and applause. It reminds me of Bob Hope getting laughs without being the least bit funny just 'cuz he's Bob Hope.
Oh good, then it's not just me. It made my skin crawl. I could barely sit through it.
What gets me (and all the teachers seem to do it)is when the audience laugh at something that is said the teacher then feeds off it ad nauseam |
 |
|
|
jillatay
USA
206 Posts |
Posted - Mar 20 2007 : 8:12:22 PM
|
quote:
just like self masturbation 
As opposed to the other kind?  |
|
|
|
Manipura
USA
870 Posts |
Posted - Mar 21 2007 : 12:01:41 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by snake
What gets me (and all the teachers seem to do it)is when the audience laugh at something that is said the teacher then feeds off it ad nauseam
It gives me better appreciation for the foul-mouthed gurus that I read about from the good ol' days. You know the ones, who screamed at their disciples, slapped them around a bit, made them do endless chores, and tested their resolve in every imaginable way. Not much room for ego to fester under those conditions, and the guru ran little risk of mythologization. The down side was no book tours or talk show circuits. |
|
|
|
snake
United Kingdom
275 Posts |
Posted - Mar 21 2007 : 04:10:19 AM
|
| Thats a good look at the industry meg :) |
|
|
|
snake
United Kingdom
275 Posts |
Posted - Mar 21 2007 : 04:11:03 AM
|
| And Jillatay,you mean there is another kind?:) |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4379 Posts |
Posted - Mar 21 2007 : 07:35:11 AM
|
Hi Dave,
quote:
Yes. If you really want to inhibit your mythical status, you have to get cleverer and subtler still. My own system for reducing my mythical status works very well, but unfortunately I cannot share it because I am afraid that if I do, people will know it and see my spiritual attainment through the smokescreen of relative-ordinariness that I put up, and start mythologizing me.
My smokescreen technique does work very well though. Before I started using it, people used to get these extremely warm and loving feelings whenever I appeared in person or print; dogs would stop fighting in the street when I passed; people would burst out crying without knowing why; and all would see all manner of lights and angels and wonders.
I think your smokescreen is working very well. But don't forget, there is only so long that you will be able to fool everyone about what is really happening to yourself and everyone around you.
Christi |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4379 Posts |
Posted - Mar 21 2007 : 07:39:51 AM
|
Hi all,
Some people seem to be hinting that it is not worth discussing enlightenment because everyone means something different by the word. Others, that enlightenment is something extremely rare to find, and therefore by implication, something very difficult to attain. Personally I think it is worth discussing, for if we don’t, how can we come to any common agreement about what it is, or what role it plays in our yoga.
Also, I don’t think that it is something nearly as rare as people imagine. I am beginning to suspect that if any mythologization is going on, then it could be the mythologization of the enlightened condition. If we believe that it is always something far off, extremely difficult to attain, the possession of great masters in Himalayan caves then we have separated ourselves from the condition eternally before we even have any clear idea about what it really is. Also, if we create this myth about enlightenment, that it is so rare, and so unattainable, then as soon as someone says that they are enlightened, we have immediately put them on a pedestal, the biggest pedestal you could ever erect. This could help to explain what all this weird audience behaviour is around Adya. If (because of this myth), many people think that he is something special and rare, and that he has attained something that is almost unobtainable for a human being, then it is likely to effect their behaviour (like fans when a great pop idol comes on stage). So it could just be that we are helping to create that situation by perpetuating the myth that is creating it.
I don’t think that enlightenment is something so special or difficult to see.
As I recently said to some of my students:
“Enlightenment is not complicated, it is the simplest thing in the world. It is not far away. It is right here, available in every moment. It is closer than our every breath. It has always been here and always will be. Before we come into being in each moment, freedom is there. When we stop creating ourselves in each moment, freedom is there. As long as we think that we will gain anything by moving in any direction at all, we have missed it entirely. We never gain anything. To the separate self it is That (Tat Tvam Asi), to our True nature it is This. It is immanent and eternal. Nothing ever touches it and it is always pure.”
(Rather enthusiastic audience finally disappear in a blaze of Divine light never to be seen again, much to the great relief of many members of an international yoga internet forum.)
Christi
|
Edited by - Christi on Mar 21 2007 07:45:51 AM |
|
|
|
Manipura
USA
870 Posts |
Posted - Mar 21 2007 : 08:50:18 AM
|
Hi Christi! :) Since we're almost to the 6th page of this thread, I would disagree with you that anyone here is adverse to discussing enlightenment. The ones who think it not worthwhile are probably home meditating. But it's true that a few of us find the "disappearance into a blaze of Divine light" that you referred to (with irony, I know) to be an unnecessary component to enlightenment. In fact, I find the superhero version to be rather vulgar and burlesque. This is comic book, good guy/bad guy material; not the stuff of living in the real world, or even of being enlightened in the real world. In short, it's just more ego.
I think this discussion is great. But all hints aside (and thank you for inviting the candor), I think that those who are drawn to the Hollywood version of enlightenment (lights, cameras, canned laughter) are probably missing the point. And in case I haven't said it enough, Adya's a great teacher! I wish he shopped at Albertson's instead of Whole Foods, but you can't have everything. |
|
|
|
Anthem
1608 Posts |
Posted - Mar 21 2007 : 09:24:19 AM
|
Meg wrote:
quote:
It gives me better appreciation for the foul-mouthed gurus that I read about from the good ol' days. You know the ones, who screamed at their disciples, slapped them around a bit, made them do endless chores, and tested their resolve in every imaginable way. Not much room for ego to fester under those conditions, and the guru ran little risk of mythologization. The down side was no book tours or talk show circuits.
I think it's worth pointing out the ego isn't necessarily only about grandeur, it is equally effective in the role of playing the victim.
I don't see beating the ego down as a solution, squeeze one end of a balloon and the other end will inflate. Poke a hole in it (in it's theories) and watch as it slowly dissipates into the silence of space.
A
|
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Mar 21 2007 : 09:41:13 AM
|
Meg said:
It gives me better appreciation for the foul-mouthed gurus that I read about from the good ol' days. You know the ones, who screamed at their disciples, slapped them around a bit, made them do endless chores, and tested their resolve in every imaginable way. Not much room for ego to fester under those conditions, and the guru ran little risk of mythologization. The down side was no book tours or talk show circuits.
Oh Meg, as an amateur gurologist myself, I have to say that unfortunately there was always plenty of room for mythologizing the guru under those circumstances. And there still is. There are still some major gurus out there who are actually little more than slap-around narcissists -- sometimes with some spiritual insight, sometimes with none. And boy are they mythologized.
In fact, some of these bad boys are mythologized even more extremely than the 'nice' gurus.
Where there is demand, supply will follow. Some people in their 'spirituality' have something that is quite similar to masochism in sexuality.
|
|
|
|
Anthem
1608 Posts |
Posted - Mar 21 2007 : 09:41:14 AM
|
Christi wrote: quote:
Personally I think it is worth discussing, for if we don’t, how can we come to any common agreement about what it is, or what role it plays in our yoga.
Not that I am suggesting that any discussion in regards to enlightenment is a negative thing, but the danger in trying to define it is in creating yet another obstacle to Being It.
"Oh darn it, I haven't fulfilled criteria a, b and c to be enlightened", "I just haven't *achieved* it yet", thoughts like these are leading our awareness away from our true nature to just Be. We spend our time and energy thinking about the virtual reality of what enlightenment will be like instead of devoting our energy into the present moment and living life fully. Why not choose to put it all into what is happening right now? What else is there really?
All we can do is be here and now with what Is, the longer we are able to keep our minds in the present moment, the more that the light of awareness can shine through into our lives.
A
|
|
|
|
VIL
USA
586 Posts |
Posted - Mar 21 2007 : 10:56:52 AM
|
quote:
Anthem11: "Oh darn it, I haven't fulfilled criteria a, b and c to be enlightened", "I just haven't *achieved* it yet", thoughts like these are leading our awareness away from our true nature to just Be. We spend our time and energy thinking about the virtual reality of what enlightenment will be like instead of devoting our energy into the present moment and living life fully. Why not choose to put it all into what is happening right now? What else is there really?
Anthem11, can you explain to me where the above philosophy comes from? I've heard others like Katrine mention the need to just "Be" and to realize that this just 'is what it is' and the need to realize "this" or "that" as all that there is, alluding that being in the "now" or "present" moment, as being the ultimate reality?
I've searched various spiritual teachings and can't find anything mentioning the need to just "Be", unless you are looking at it from a different perspective or I'm searching for the wrong term? There is nothing in Buddhism that mentions this that I can find. Are you looking at it from a perspective of the the term "present" or "renunciation" or from "attentiveness"? But the Buddha mentions this as "effort", so I'm confused???
Thank you:
Here are some quotes mentioning the need to search, seek, or attain:
"It is hard to take up a life of renunciation, and difficult to find satisfaction in it, but it is also difficult to live in bad
households, and painful to live with people unlike oneself, when one is forever tangled in suffering and restless.
Therefore don't always be restless, and don't let yourself be tangled in suffering."
- Buddha
The only way that leads to the attainment of purity, to the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, to the end of pain and grief, to the entering upon the right path, and the realization of Nirvana, is these four fundamentals of attentiveness".
- Buddha
"Those who strive for freedom from (the cycles of birth) old age and death by taking refuge in Me know Brahman, the individual self, and Karma in its entirety.
Those who are not faithful in this devotional service cannot attain Me, O conqueror of enemies. Therefore they return to the path of birth and death in this material world."
- The Bhagavad Gita
"But seek first His kingdom and His righteousness, and all these things will be added to you".
- Christ
"Riches ruin the fool
But not those seeking the Beyond.
Craving for wealth,the foolish man
Ruins himself by destroying others".
"How can you find delight and mirth,
Where there is burning without end?
In deepest darkness you are wrapped!
Why do you not seek for the light?
"
- Buddha
"And how do you know but that the Creator would rid me of my brandings, and give me a new nose, and make me fit to become a disciple of yourself?"
"Ah!" replied Hsu Yu, "that cannot be known. But I will give you an outline. Ah! my Master, my Master! He trims down all created things, and does not account it justice. He causes all created things to thrive and does not account it kindness. Dating back further than the remotest antiquity, He does not account himself old. Covering heaven, supporting earth, and fashioning the various forms of things, He does not account himself skilled. It is Him you should seek."
- Tao, Chuangtse (Lin Yutang)
"O humble servant of the Lord, O True Guru, O True Primal Being: I offer my humble prayer to You, O Guru.
I am a mere insect, a worm. O True Guru, I seek Your Sanctuary. Please be merciful, and bless me with the Light of the Naam, the Name of the Lord".
Shri Guru Granth Sahib, Sikh
"Know thou that whoso seeketh to scale the summits of the divine mysteries must needs strive to the utmost of his power and capacity for his Faith, that the pathway of guidance may be made clear unto him."
- Baha'u'llah
VIL
|
Edited by - VIL on Mar 21 2007 11:46:57 AM |
|
|
|
yogani
USA
5195 Posts |
Posted - Mar 21 2007 : 11:50:30 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mike
...As to the absolute 100.00% gold standard then my feeling is that with Vedanta (rather like Taoism) - there are plenty of schools and competing explanations but concensus never was historically reached and certainly wont be at this rate ...
...on the other hand I guess in AYP then (unless I have yet to come across it) its up to Yogani to (at some point) define what the Gold Standard is (ie perfection of result of application of AYP techniques)?? Or maybe as such a finely focused practical set of tools such as AYP will ultimately just kind of imply an asymptotic approach to 'the speed of light'...?
More questions than answers.
yrs curiously
Hi Mike:
Here are several AYP lessons on enlightenment:
http://www.aypsite.org/35.html
http://www.aypsite.org/85.html
http://www.aypsite.org/100.html
http://www.aypsite.org/120.html
http://www.aypsite.org/274.html
The lessons attempt to map out cause and effect related to practices, so the phrase "enlightenment milestones" is used to discuss the development of experience as effect. The milestones are not intended to be targets -- merely points of reference for everyone to use as confirmation. Enlightenment is not defined in words. It is defined by experience. In AYP we take the position that none of this will happen with any reliability without utilizing practices as cause.
This is in opposition to the non-dual approach, of course, which claims instant enlightenment to be both the cause and the effect. In AYP, we say that the neurobiology has to "catch up" with any sort of instant realization, and that takes both skill to manage and time. The non-dualists use skill and time too, though it may be denied. Is there any evidence to the contrary? Are lots of folks experiencing "instant enlightenment" out there?
Regarding a so-called gold standard, a condition of "Oneness," defined with a myriad of terms in the traditions, seems to be it. But, I believe there is more, and this is where non-duality blends back into duality -- non-dual duality, the paradox of Oneness.
While a person may reach a condition of "Oneness," what we call "Unity" in AYP, this can be regarded as final enlightenment only by those sages who choose to rest on their laurels. Good for them. It is enlightenment in isolation.
No. There is much more. Enlightenment will not be complete until all of humanity (and the entire cosmos) is self-aware in Oneness. A seemingly impossible task, yes? Nevertheless, Oneness cannot truly be Oneness until all have been brought home to That. The urge for this is what drives sages forward. It is the power of divine love, and we see it in all who serve for the benefit of others.
The lonely sage who holds up his or her Oneness as separate from everyone else (contending that nothing else exists) is an incomplete being. Only in giving it all away for the benefit of others can the sage be said to be enlightened. It is only in pouring out divine love that the enlightenment process can continue, encompassing all that exists (apparently) in the field of duality.
This scenario of true enlightenment residing in sacrifice for others does not sit easily with most people, so it doesn't get much press. Who would choose that from an unenlightened point of view? It is directly opposed to our sense of self-preservation. Or is it? For the person who has achieved Oneness, doing for others is self-preservation, and comes naturally. This is why we hold Christ, Buddha and others who gave all they had for the spiritual progress of others as the highest measure of enlightenment. They are the gold standard.
Anyone who is moved from within to aid others on the path is manifesting Oneness. Much better to manifest Oneness than not. Stillness in action!
And where does it end? It never does. Therefore, real enlightenment is an unending continuum of outpouring divine love. It is not something we can take home and lock in the closet.
The guru is in you.
|
|
|
|
Anthem
1608 Posts |
Posted - Mar 21 2007 : 12:23:49 PM
|
quote:
Anthem11, can you explain to me where the above philosophy comes from? I've heard others like Katrine mention the need to just "Be" and to realize that this just 'is what it is' and the need to realize "this" or "that" as all that there is in the "now" or "present" moment is the ultimate reality?
Hi Vil,
It's funny, I have to remember how much I used to not like hearing stuff like "All This is That, That is All This, This that and the other thing, blah, blah, blah"....
I guess it isn't always the best way to explain a perspective, but sometimes seems the only way to me. It's funny I have seen this perspective often over my spiritual travels, but I am not much of a scholar so won't be able to point you to any classical texts which expound this perspective though I seem to remember coming across these truths in the Bhagavad Gita.
In short, this is the way I see reality, I see my thoughts as virtual reality or better yet guesses about reality, they are all subjective to me. Our direct experience of what is happening to us right now at this moment, is the only real (truth) I can find in life. My thoughts which interpret what just happened or is going to happen can't really know something for what it actually is, only living it can I know. Any subsequent thoughts or descriptions of it are like shadows instead of the actual experiences or objects from which they are being cast. Being in the here and now is staying with the part of me that actually Is. Going off and dwelling on ideas and thoughts about what is going on, what went on in the past, or what will happen in the future, take me away from myself.
The further I go along the spiritual path (an irony perhaps) the more real, this reality becomes for me. The more time I am very present in what is happening here and now, the more intensity the here and now seems to have for me. I stop wanting to be anywhere else other than the here and now.
I have had moments of being profoundly in the here and now of deep peace and bliss, haven't we all had them while meditating or at other times? To me this, "right here, right now" is where we find what we are looking for. The part of us that Is, just pure Being, the part of us that watches, the formless, emptiness, the void, inner silence, inner space, they are all different words pointing to the same thing.
quote:
I've searched various spiritual teachings and can't find anything mentioning the need to just "Be", unless you are looking at it from a different perspective or I'm searching for the wrong term? There is nothing in Buddhism that mentions this that I can find. Are you looking at it from a perspective of the term "present" or from "attentiveness"? But the Buddha mentions this as "effort", so I'm confused???
Some authors and people that have really helped me come to this perspective on life are: Eckhart Tolle, Byron Katie, Don Miguel Ruiz, Nisargatta (through Sailor Bob Admason), Adyashanti, Yogani (of course), Katrine, to name just a few. I guess most of all from personal experience, this is how life is presenting itself to me.
Hope this helps,
A
|
|
|
|
VIL
USA
586 Posts |
Posted - Mar 21 2007 : 12:31:09 PM
|
Thanks for explaining your point of view, Anthem11. I appreciate it:
VIL
|
Edited by - VIL on Mar 21 2007 12:48:15 PM |
|
|
|
Anthem
1608 Posts |
Posted - Mar 21 2007 : 1:15:18 PM
|
quote:
No. There is much more. Enlightenment will not be complete until all of humanity (and the entire cosmos) is self-aware in Oneness. A seemingly impossible task, yes? Nevertheless, Oneness cannot truly be Oneness until all have been brought home to That. The urge for this is what drives sages forward. It is the power of divine love, and we see it in all who serve for the benefit of others.
Hi Yogani,
Just saw your post after I posted. Your words above are a great and clear description of a really important part of the enlightenment process I have never heard before. It really clears things up for probably a lot of us. I think this post would make for an excellent addition to the "Main" lesson page, what do you think?
The part I quoted above, really hits home and feels like the truth of things to me, thanks for that!
|
|
|
|
Mike
United Kingdom
77 Posts |
Posted - Mar 21 2007 : 3:16:24 PM
|
Yogani
Many thanks for enlightening me about your definition of enlightenment...  Curious that I hadnt spotted all those references LoL... I think I have been reading the material along the lines of a cookbook - as you say at one point you prefer to focus on experiences rather than philosophy (or words to that effect).
Actually also interesting in that I found my first quibble point (never found one before )
quote:
Yogani in Lesson 35
What is enlightenment?
A state of balanced union between our two natures: pure bliss
consciousness, and our sensory involvement on this physical earth.
That is the definition of yoga, and the destination of all religion.
In my little examination of the subject religions seem to have their goals all over the place :-P ... there is a strong mental tendency of many religious folks to map all other religions onto theirs ('really they all actually agree with us below the surface') ... but in practice this can only be achieved by some not insignificant circle squaring (eg to name a few non-rebirth religions (notably Christianity) vs rebirths, Atman vs Anatta etc).
But anyway quibbling is beside the point here... as for me the interesting thing about yoga as presented in AYP is the union of the 'mind' and 'energy' processes... As one who has done quite a bit of Taoist Qigong over the years and rather less of meditation its always been two sets of teachers who dont speak the others language and are focused on their direction. So it really is fascinating to have them united here 
The second point I was raising was are there criteria for deciding whether a given person is enlightened ... I have never really seen anywhere either objective SATS tests or subjective touchy-feely stuff ... so all over the net there are these "is X really enlightened?" conversations with no way of deciding.
quote:
Originally posted by yogani
In AYP we take the position that none of this will happen with any reliability without utilizing practices as cause.
Hear hear! I have a spiritual chum who went thru' a phase of having "it can happen anytime" as his forum signature... to which my response was "possibly but its a darn sight more likely if you put some hard work in"!
To me the reason for this is clear - energetically folks accumulate blockages through their life (unless they have practices which on average are net clearing blockages) and the subconscious mind is full of all sorts of junk - both human nature and specific rubbish accumulated.
quote:
This is in opposition to the non-dual approach, of course, which claims instant enlightenment to be both the cause and the effect.
Indeed - the old samsara-nirvana idea (a minority view at best in Buddhism and a hand of cards that requires some skillful playing to avoid losing bigtime!).
quote:
Is there any evidence to the contrary? Are lots of folks experiencing "instant enlightenment" out there?
Yeh I make this one time and time again - if anyone can show me loads of folks who come away from so 'do nothing and everything is done for you' seminar all sorted I will be the first to get my cheque book out
Actually thats an interesting circle-squarer as its kind of the (Tao de Ching) idea behind my Zhan Zhuang school... it just turns out you gotta stand around for a loooooong time while 'everything is done for you'.
quote:
Regarding a so-called gold standard, a condition of "Oneness," defined with a myriad of terms in the traditions, seems to be it. But, I believe there is more, and this is where non-duality blends back into duality -- non-dual duality, the paradox of Oneness.
I like the "there must be more" approach...
Not least of which I have for a long time pondered how - with very similar meditative methods - vedantans and buddhists can reach opposing conclusions re Atman... I saw one explanation recently that technically the former are one jhana short of where one can get to. Of course its a polemical and somewhat tribal position but one should be wary of saying "hey I finally found out what my tradition says - phew now I can take it easy"  ... Ajahn Sumedho who I quoted earlier said a nice thing in a talk "our purpose isnt to prove Buddhism correct its to see the way things really are".
quote:
While a person may reach a condition of "Oneness," what we call "Unity" in AYP, this can be regarded as final enlightenment only by those sages who choose to rest on their laurels. Good for them. It is enlightenment in isolation.
No. There is much more. Enlightenment will not be complete until all of humanity (and the entire cosmos) is self-aware in Oneness. A seemingly impossible task, yes? Nevertheless, Oneness cannot truly be Oneness until all have been brought home to That. The urge for this is what drives sages forward. It is the power of divine love, and we see it in all who serve for the benefit of others.
The lonely sage who holds up his or her Oneness as separate from everyone else (contending that nothing else exists) is an incomplete being. Only in giving it all away for the benefit of others can the sage be said to be enlightened. It is only in pouring out divine love that the enlightenment process can continue, encompassing all that exists (apparently) in the field of duality.
This scenario of true enlightenment residing in sacrifice for others does not sit easily with most people, so it doesn't get much press. Who would choose that from an unenlightened point of view? It is directly opposed to our sense of self-preservation. Or is it? For the person who has achieved Oneness, doing for others is self-preservation, and comes naturally. This is why we hold Christ, Buddha and others who gave all they had for the spiritual progress of others as the highest measure of enlightenment. They are the gold standard.
Aha an interesting perspective - is this widespread in yogic circles? Clearly it amounts to/is very similar to the (Mahayana) Bodhisattva perspective (ie an individual who vows to postpone full, final enlightenment till he has helped all other sentient beings get there).
I think that the position is a simple one in one life... one can (as you chose to do) literally "give it away" - share all the hard work you have laboured over - for free . Over multiple lives it gets more tricky (and you cant avoid being dragged into having some underlying metaphysic there - so that eg Arahants upon death Parinirvana and aren't reborn... whereas the Bodhisattva manages to 'come back').
However I appreciate by now that for all intents and purposes I am now in the 'angels on the head of a pin' territory as far as my personal experience goes!
Anyway thank you for once again "giving it all away" and sharing your (no doubt) hard-won wisdom. And thanks to Tim Berners Lee to while we are at it for inventing the internet.
The guru in me has got a bit of catching up to do on the guru in you ... either that or I should try and listen harder to him
Mike |
Edited by - Mike on Mar 21 2007 3:32:01 PM |
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Mar 21 2007 : 5:02:53 PM
|
Christi said:
I am beginning to suspect that if any mythologization is going on, then it could be the mythologization of the enlightened condition. If we believe that it is always something far off, extremely difficult to attain.
Christi, I would very much agree with you -- enlightenment itself is mythologized, and that is the root of the problem. By the way, I didn't suggest that enlightenment is not worth talking about because people have different meanings for the word -- rather, what I meant to suggest is that people should be aware of the problems of different meanings, and negotiate the difficulties accordingly.
|
|
|
|
riptiz
United Kingdom
741 Posts |
Posted - Mar 21 2007 : 7:53:51 PM
|
Hi Yogani,
Well I think you summed it up well.
quote "No. There is much more. Enlightenment will not be complete until all of humanity (and the entire cosmos) is self-aware in Oneness. A seemingly impossible task, yes? Nevertheless, Oneness cannot truly be Oneness until all have been brought home to That. The urge for this is what drives sages forward. It is the power of divine love, and we see it in all who serve for the benefit of others."
Yes this seems to be how I perceive how my guru is and what he is working towards.
L&L
Dave |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Mar 23 2007 : 11:49:58 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by david_obsidian
Meg, I understand what you and Jim are saying. Adyashanti has become something of a celebrity. That is what it is, whether it's good or bad or his fault or not or anyone's fault or not.
One disadvantage of it is that some of the students will get caught up in the 'celebrity' energy of the whole thing. The whole spiritual celebrity thing can eventually run on its own steam -- ** come on everybody, it's the Adya Show!!! ** Students should just keep in mind that, to whatever extent they are glomming off the Spiritual Celebrity, in that, they are not looking at Reality, and not necessarily getting any real feel for enlightenment, or Presence. Rather, they are basking in presence of a celebrity-hero.
Thanks for making this point, David - it's an important one.
Adya, to his credit (imo), has at least tried (in the past) to avoid this dynamic (by pointing out the tendency, to everyone) - but he eventually concluded, per what he publicly said, "It's gonna happen - and each of us needs to simply maintain our awareness, so that we don't delude ourselves and others into thinking that the teacher is someone special."
Similar comments from Adya, in the same general "vein":
"It's all costumes and roles - I'm the 'teacher-guy', and everyone focuses on me, as the 'enlightened one'; but it's not about me. It's not about you, either. That's the whole point. One means one. Everything said here is to help you awaken to the reality of your true nature. Period."
(Referring - next statement - to a satsang led together with his wife, Annie / Mukti)
"We only sit up front so you can us; we only sit up front so you can see us."
(As in: not because we're the enlightened "models" for you to revere / copy / follow.)
And said even more directly, in the same satsang (during a weekend gathering, focused on Love and Relationships - and their place in an awakened / enlightened life) ...
"Don't hold us, or our lives, or our marriage, up as models of anything. If you do, you're missing the entire point. The only thing that matters is the level of consciousness you bring to the relationships in your life. Period."
(Indicating a satsang attendee, who was engaged in dialog with Adya, by motioning his own hand from himself, to the other guy, back-and-forth.)
"You - me - same. Same. Not different. One. Same."
(Usually said when someone - as in this cases - indicates that they're feeling this, too - or beginning to.)
Some of us (several of whom I know personally, and including myself) who have been involved with Adyashanti's teachings for some time, shudder a bit at the "Adyashanti Show" thing - and respond accordingly (by attending satsangs less often, and/or not engaging in Adya-consumerism, and buying a copy of everything he's ever breathed on, etc. )
I used to buy every tape of Adya's, after each satsang, etc. etc. -- like the unconcious light-fiend (as opposed to "dope fiend") that I was, at the time. It's a phase that many of us pass through, and ultimately can be a helpful one (by enabling us to see the contrast in what "real awakening" can look like, as opposed to "sheep-like, pretend awakening" (and nothing against buying anyone's tapes or books - especially AYP tapes or books ... -- and seriously: as within anything else, it's about the inner essence of what prompts the action, rather than the external form of that action.)
Recently, I was more in the mode of attending Adya's satsangs simply to be in his presence (not really caring what was said; the verbal content of the teaching mattered little, or not at all).
And please know - I understand that this could "raise red flags", or start the "deluded follower" klaxons ... klaxoning ... ... at high volume -- which is the key reason I'm honestly sharing it: in my own experience, this dynamic ("subtle shaktipat", just by sitting with Adyashanti) was experienced as being both conscious and useful. However, as always: comments and alternate views are welcome (as are supporting views, additional thoughts, etc. -- that's why we call this a Forum, yes? ).
So, it was simply my experience that, having become much more sensitive to subtle energies in recent times, I became aware that there is a very real energy emanating from any fully awakened teacher - and to a lesser, but similar extent - from any teacher or person (presumably, though I have only experienced it from / with teacher or guru-types) who has attained a certain level of awakening.
As Adyashanti has very helpfully pointed out, at essence, this (shaktipat-like dynamic - whether overt or subtle) does *not* involve an actual transfer of energy from the teacher/guru, to the student/event attendee. It's as if the teacher plucks a guitar-string, on a guitar sitting in his own lap -- which then creates resonance (vibration) in the corresponding guitar string / note ... on the guitar, sitting in the lap of the other person.
As In: One value of the guru, is that he/she can help us to experience, and become more aware of the real guru that is in (each of) us.
And so, in that sense - it all became much less about the "Adyashanti Show" for me, a while back.
Another personal "sign", which I'm experiencing as positive, is that having been absent from the Bay Area for about a month-ish, now - there's zero sense of wanting or needing an "Adyashanti fix" - it was fine when I lived in the same area as most of Adyashanti's satsangs, and it's fine, now.
Getting all FGB (Full-Goose Bozo ) over the form of one's guru, can be a powerful practice of guru kripa (though is very much a double-edged sword, and often experienced less-than-consciously, and less-than-helpfully, in terms of the sadhaka's presumed goal of Realization).
However, A. I've never really felt drawn to that practice, other than feeling a sense of heart-centered reverence an appreciation for all spiritual teachers and divine beings, historical or symbolic/archetypal (i.e. Shiva, Krishna, Jesus, etc.) <-- and please note: "symbolic/archetypal" doesn't mean not real (necessarily) - it simply means "possibly experienced at levels of consciousness more subtle than the physical / historical", and B. Adyashanti is not my guru in any sense, though as Adya said recently, to another sangha member who expressed an ongoing sense of connection with Adyashanti, when he'd moved away, "The bridge is always there."
It's not a "bow to the teacher, because they have the consciousness" thing, it's "gratitude to the teacher, because they're willing to share / express the consciousness -- igniting realization of its inherent existence within" thing - which I see as being predicated upon a relatively significant degree of love, real love (not emotional dysfunction or ego-worship, masquerading as love) - on the part of the given teacher and student (or guru and devotee - whatever terms apply).
Ultimately, and I simply "submit this for your consideration" - I don't know that it makes sense to even try to judge or evaluate any dynamics related to perception of "the Adyashanti show" (or the "{Pick Your Teacher} Show") -- only because (personal opinion here, completely) - I would see the chances of tripping up and landing flat on our ... ego, and/or simply being wrong, about what others may be experiencing (including the teacher) - as being as great, or greater - than the chances of being "right" in any ways that would have actual value for us, and/or our sadhana.
Peace & Namaste,
Kirtanman
REPEAT OF KIRTANMAN QUOTING ADYASHANTI DISCLAIMER THINGY
And once again, everyone - please note - the quotes I give are very close paraphrases, but not necessarily verbatim quotes - because most statements I'm almost-quoting ) are from my own memory of Adya's audio tapes I heard some while back, and/or live events with Adyashanti, which I attended personally. The one pertinent facet of my almost-quoting, that I am completely confident in, is: per my long term familiarity with Adya and his teachings, I don't think there's any danger of my mis-conveying the general style, tone, idea or essence behind a paraphrased statement of Adya's, which is part of one of my posts.
Though I could be completely deluded about that. And/or anything else.
And so, please note: my only reason for paraphrase-quoting Adyashanti in this thread (or elsewhere in the AYP Forum), is because that I have personally found that Adyashanti's statements can be useful pointers, in connection with whatever context they are made -- to pointing us in the direction, at least, which will help us to see life / Reality as it is.
|
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Mar 23 2007 : 12:11:47 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by meg
Hey Christi - I'll be sure not to tell anyone that you're a great guru. Kirtanman - since you asked, yes, your posts seem to generate an automatic defense mechanism whenever potential criticism for Adyashanti pops up. Not egregiously so, and I wouldn't even mention it but for the fact that you seemed to genuinely want to know. And again, I don't think anyone here has criticized Adya, not yet anyways. But his students have been criticized here for their sometimes reckless devotion to someone who is, after all, partially human.
So when I hear someone say, "If you're having a hard time with Adyashanti's teachings, it's because your ego is in the way", it's not unlike hearing someone say, "If you're not receiving the blessings of our Christ-based ministry, there must be some sin that's preventing you from receiving." Ego is the new buzzword for sin.
(and I'm not suggesting that you've said the above. I did hear it, though, at an Adya group that I attended). (and it wasn't subtle!)
It's as old as the hills to go on the defensive when one's tribe or tribe leader is perceived to be attacked. In fact, it's often the attack that makes the tribe stronger, as the bond overrides the individual differences in the group. I've defended Yogani and AYP to critics who argue that it's irresponsible to be using a potentially volatile energy (shakti) without hands-on instruction. It's a valid point, and it would be foolish of me to deny the wisdom in it. But the experienced benefits far outweigh the perceived dangers, as the testimonies of so many at AYP would imply. To defend one's tribe or leader without considering the possible truth of the criticism leads to cultish activity and blind faith in one's leader, as well as giving the leader too much unchecked power over the tribe.
Thanks, Meg --- great comments, all - thanks!
And yes, I do want to know what I "sound like" - primarily so that I can be clear in my communication.
My goal truly isn't to "defend" Adyashanti (and the feeling-tone within me doesn't feel like that, nor do my mental processes go through the familiar defense-dance that they often do, in other situations which trigger my ego, in those kinds of ways).
My goal is actually to respond to a given post, either by agreeing and commenting (where applicable), or disagreeing and commenting (where applicable).
In the areas / at the times when I disagree, I'm attempting to simply say that, based on my experience with Adyashanti, and what I know him to have expressed - "these are the reasons" why I respectfully disagree.
With regard to Yogani's comments "check back in ten years", and my response, which resulted in the "cultic thinking" post from David - my comments were not made in the sense of "Accept Adya, and be saved!" - but rather in the sense that, respecting "checking back in ten years", regarding anything or anyone -- that our ego-minds will likely have changed more OR simply affect our perception more, at the time of ""said reconsideration" - to a greater degree - than whatever is going on with the object of our consideration, at that time.
Example: If I check back in ten years, and have become a fundamentalist, born-again Christian ("unlikely at best", I hope to God ... ) -- my perception of Adyashanti, at that time (unless he has also become a born-again Christian) - will likely be VERY different than if (for instance) Enlightenment has occurred in this body-mind, during that intervening period of time -- regardless of anything actually going on with Adyashanti, at that time.
I was basically agreeing with Yogani's point that not much, specifically the authenticity / long-term value of any spiritual teacher or system, can be legitimately evaluated via the lens of a small portion of time --- and that "history will show" if there is real value, there.
Then, I was attempting to add the point that this is even more true, when the significant vacillations experienced by most ego-minds, over a given time period -- as far as any conclusions reached by a given person, about anyone or anything.
Stated nearly as simply as possible, I hope ....
The subject always changes more than the object.
The most important point of all, vis a vis Realization, Awakening, etc. - however - is that what we currently experience and/or see as being the subject (our own ego-mind, the ahamkara, the I-maker) - is actually just another object.
The only actual subject, is.
Peace & Namaste,
Kirtanman
PS - Please note that there are no typographical or grammatical errors or omissions in the final sentence of the post above. |
|
|
|
Mike
United Kingdom
77 Posts |
Posted - Mar 23 2007 : 12:23:37 PM
|
Kirtanman
As well as admiring your ability to type your coherent streams of consciousness at what I can only assume must be 100wpm (unless you have conquered the need for sleep ) I admire your honesty about clearly reporting this situation... As long as you think for yourself I can't see any dangers for you.
For me well as I said I have watched some of his video clips which were cool and bought the book which I havent yet ploughed into.
Being honest myself altho' his stuff sounds good - and its a useful pointer to some high level of achievement if there is some special energy phenomena - there is always a kind of slight jarring note. On the other hand this may be by British reticence/Buddhist-modesty cultural conditioning reacting to some west coast dude ... for all I know he is incredibly shy and retiring by local standards
There seem three things in common with Tolle:
quote:
Originally posted by Kirtanman
Adya, to his credit (imo), has at least tried (in the past) to avoid this dynamic (by pointing out the tendency, to everyone) - but he eventually concluded, per what he publicly said, "It's gonna happen[i]
Well it certainly is if you say you are enlightened and publicise yourself on that basis!
Similar comments from Adya, in the same general "vein":[/b]
quote:
Referring - next statement - to a satsang led together with his wife, Annie / Mukti)
As with Tolle - he finds a partner and next thing you know she is doing most of the teachings and retreats and he is singing her praises 
quote:
in Adya-consumerism, and buying a copy of everything he's ever breathed on, etc. )
Again acuse me of asceticism if you will but cf Tolle... over years the online shop gets bigger and bigger....
quote:
I used to buy every tape of Adya's, after each satsang, etc. etc. -- like the unconcious light-fiend (as opposed to "dope fiend")
My personal experience with teachers is that in terms of their message (as opposed to practical tools to use) this phase wears off... after a while you start knowing their verbal answers... kind of you get to know [i]that particular finger pointing at the moon and its time to find a different finger pointing from a slightly different angle...
[Of course with tools/techniques its a different thing as these things are arts that one never perfects].
Anyway Kirtanman - I dont see you being anyones fool. Associating with the wise (and does it matter if they are 90% wise, 95% wise, 99% wise or 100% wise when the rest of us struggle to get to 50%) has gotta be a cool thing to do... better than the average american who I read recently watches something like 5hrs a day tv on average
Peace
Mike |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Mar 23 2007 : 12:32:31 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jim and His Karma
quote:
Originally posted by meg
But his students have been criticized here for their sometimes reckless devotion to someone who is, after all, partially human.
I've got to say, something in me deeply recoils when watching those videotapes, whenever he says something the least bit cute, the audience erupts in greasy giggles and applause. It reminds me of Bob Hope getting laughs without being the least bit funny just 'cuz he's Bob Hope.
Exploring why this turns me off so much (more with Adya than with Bob Hope), I think it's two things:
1. I worry Adya is in danger of being churned by this dynamic into runny butter. I'm not saying it's ego, but....I get the feeling he likes it.
2. I worry that the more fawning students are never going to get anywhere. If the entire spiritual path is just a skillful means for realizing something that can't be taught or shown, so it's all just tools and pointers, then I think one of the most efficacious tools and pointers in any tradition is the Zen Buddhist injunction "If you see the Buddha walking down the street, kill him." (actually, that's a mis-translation. A scholar once assured me that it is actually "$hit on his head). The Buddha doesn't hold the key to enlightenment. The Buddha doesn't "give" you enlightenment. You must become like the Buddha, not worship him as an untouchable paragon.
There's something about a teacher earnestly insisting that he is not necessary while he's being absolutely adulated ("yes! That's SO insightful! Yes, yes, you're not necessary! Please...go on!") that just seems "off" to me. I'm not judging anybody, it's just my visceral reaction.
Hello Jim & All (<- Including Your Karma ),
Pertinent and valid points; I've simply never perceived the audience's laughter, and Adya's reactions, in the way you described (which doesn't mean anything, other than the obvious: you and I have different reactions to similar Adya-centric stimuli).
As far as Adya having some human-level reactions to the audiences enjoyment and/or adulation -- that could be; I dunno. IMO, that doesn't necessarily means that he's less enlightened than some people perceive him to be, unless his reactions come from ego-attachment, which is not part of the enlightened condition ... and imo, and ime (in my experience) - that's a very tough thing to evaluate from outside ("of Adyashanti", in this case).
Also, I think longer-term exposure to almost anyone and anything, helps with perception like this (example: people who have only been exposed to me, a little, will often form opinions that people who know me better, may refute, i.e. "He's really not like that; he's almost tolerable, once you get to know him ..." ) --- and I think most of us have experienced something like this.
Actually (KIRTANCANDOR MOMENT) - I just got this - and Thanks to all who have helped (the related lightbulb fizzle and pop ) - just as some of the audience laughter, and/or "insipid" video content bugs some of you ..... the entire dynamic of teacher-watching bugs my ego, big-time.
Rather than "does this teacher have consciousness and/or information, which can be helpful to my consciousness and/or practice?" - the key question seems to be, "Where is this teacher less than he seems to be? What are his failings?"
Not only do *I* viscerally react to my perception of this (I feel kinda like, "Damn - leave the poor guy alone; he's a nice guy, and a good teacher - and as far as I know, he's never hurt anyone, nor does he have an unethical or unkind bone in his body!"
And PLEASE Note - I'm NOT saying those things outright or directly, I'm saying them as an illustration of what "teacher-watching" feels like to my sense-of-self, viscerally.
Which may well explain some / all of *my* reactions, in this thread.
COOL.
And in conjunction with the comments above -- this truly isn't Adya-specific ... I've felt this way regarding criticism of nearly every spiritual teacher I know (because they're all criticized a surpringly equivalent amount of the time, and to a surprisingly equivalent degree, in my experience.)
Part of this reaction is based on my own psycho-emotional conditioning, relating to criticism.
And part of my reaction is based on my own experience, that focusing on the value which may be gleaned by association with certain teachers / teachings, outweighs focusing on what may be their failings.
Example: I know there's a lot of "dirt" regarding the late Swami Muktananda - but that's all I know (about anything other than his actual writings / teachings). Ditto Yogananda. Ditto a LOT of other teachers. I just take in the teachings, find that the things which resonate naturally "stick", and other stuff doesn't.
If we (our energy / consciousness), in my experience - we can take in helpful teachings.
Other than that, every teacher is just a mirror for our egos.
Jim, you said (in another / later post in this thread), that you hope I'm still "speaking" to you (why wouldn't I be? -- as in: I don't exactly "offend" easily. )
Though however - per my candor in this post - I'll say the same to you, and everyone (meaning: my goal is never to be offensive -- but simply to "call 'em as I see 'em", in ways I hope are helpful to us all.
Peace & Namaste,
Kirtanman |
|
|
|
Jim and His Karma
2111 Posts |
Posted - Mar 23 2007 : 1:03:45 PM
|
| Kirtanman, all makes total sense to me. On both sides you're describing, it's humans endlessly scratching around. It's what we do. It's a waste of energy in the spiritual realm, but a useful neurosis if you're trying to buy a stereo or choose an orthopedist. ;) |
|
|
|
Jim and His Karma
2111 Posts |
Posted - Mar 23 2007 : 2:48:40 PM
|
| ...not that the spiritual realm is a separate realm, of course. Argh...words.... |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
American Guru Tradition, Non-Guru - Adyashanti
