This is from Osho....and I enjoyed reading it this morning, so I wanted to share it with you. It reminds me that there is always another layer of the false self which can be removed to make the Way clear.

love, blink :)


A Cup of Tea
Bodhidharma's eyelids and the origins of tea

Awareness comes through sensitivity. You have to be more sensitive whatsoever you do, so that even a trivial thing like tea... Can you find anything more trivial than tea? Can you find anything more ordinary than tea? No, you cannot--and Zen monks and masters have raised this most ordinary thing into the most extraordinary. They have bridged "this" and "that"... as if tea and God have become one.

Unless tea becomes divine you will not be divine, because the least has to be raised to the most, the ordinary has to be raised to the extraordinary, the earth has to be made heaven. They have to be bridged, no gap should be left.

Tea was discovered by Bodhidharma, the founder of Zen. The story is beautiful. He was meditating for nine years, facing a wall. Nine years, just facing the wall, continuously, and sometimes it was natural that he might start falling asleep.

He fought and fought with his sleep--remember, the metaphysical sleep, the unconsciousness. He wanted to remain conscious even while asleep. He wanted to make a continuity of consciousness--the light should go on burning day and night, for twenty-four hours. That's what dhyana is, what meditation is--awareness.

One night he felt that it was impossible to keep awake; he was falling asleep. He cut his eyelids off and threw them! Now there was no way for him to close his eyes.

The story is beautiful. To get to the inner eyes, these outer eyes will have to be thrown. That much price has to be paid. And what happened? After a few days he found that those eyelids that he had thrown on the ground had started growing into a small sprout. That sprout became tea.

That's why when you drink tea, something of Bodhidharma enters you and you cannot fall asleep. Bodhidharma was meditating on the mountain called T'a, that's why it is called tea. It comes from that mountain where Bodhidharma meditated for nine years.

This is a parable. When the Zen Master says, "Have a cup of tea," he's saying, "Taste a little of Bodhidharma. Don't bother about these questions, whether God exists or not, who created the world, where is heaven and where is hell and what is the theory of karma and rebirth."

When the Zen Master says, "Forget all about it. Have a cup of tea," he's saying, "Better become more aware, don't go into all this nonsense. This is not going to help you at all."

Rather i would further add, lose self in service, and then eventually you will completely and fully know the truths of these.   Not many within the Earth have done this Blink and far too many Eastern teachers have been placed on pedestals of complete enlightenment wherein perhaps they shouldn't have been.   This is something i believe Recoverer knows all too well from deep personal experience.  

 I would say it is far better and constructive to be in active loving service to others, than to passively meditate and try to foster 'no mind' whatever that is.   Yet there is a necessary balance, and we must also tap into the passive, receptive, meditative yin energy as well, so that we can act and serve from our centers in the 'outer' world.  

 Unfortunately though, the East and its ways, tends to be too imbalanced to the passive, void, yin aspect of the All that Is.  Like attracts, likes, consciously perceives, and begets like, and so those who align more to one over the other in self, concentrate on, like, perceive, and agree more so with that half of the truth.  
Yeah, ultimately its all 'divine', and all works towards that end, and yet at the same time there are differences, this is because BOTH  the reality of Oneness, and completely unique individuality are eternal co existing, but different and paradoxical truths.  If one doesn't have this balance and merging within to some conscious extent, via like attracts and begets like energy reaction/law, then they will have a hard time perceiving this in an 'outward' manner as well.

 There is nothing wrong, or destructive with mentally, intellectually understanding in a logical manner what one feels and knows to be truth in a right brain way, the point is to merge them.    The above post and teaching seems to be saying to me, "cut out the left brain, only the right brain will lead you to truth." same old eastern, particularly Zen stuff perpetuated down the centuries.  There is beauty and truth within that teaching you posted (and i enjoyed that aspect of it), but its incomplete, imbalanced, and overly Zen in my sometimes humble and other times not so humble perception.  

 

 There is the 'occult' way and path, that of "head" and of mental and intellectual understanding and acting in physical way, and there is the "mystical' way and path, that of the "heart" of feeling and becoming receptive within self...but these must merge for the complete picture to be seen and known fully.  Head and Heart, Heart and Head, both very different, and yet complements, just as woman and man are complements to each other in this illusionary, polarized dimension of super slow vibratory energies.   They are One.

SO, in this excessively passive and non-interactive environment, we can call for the monk with the stick to come and whack us a few good ones to wake us up. The point of "bodhi" is literally "wakefulness", although to me this is carrying things a mite too far. And as for self-mutilation in the service of bodhi, I am reminded of my old psychoanalyst profs telling the class to be aware of insanity in service of the ego. An hysterical trait that most of us would label differently. It might be too much right brain, or too much left brain. or perhaps too much fussing with the brain, which is my own estimation.

Most of Japan favors the Shin approach in which we are viewed as essentially incapable of perfection at the level required to become enlightened, and thus must rely upon the grace of the Buddha to save us. Thus, in the eyes of the Shin priest, there are no living buddhas, and we await the Savior Buddha, Maitreya, to come and rescue us. Seems to me that we've heard that song sung in other tongues in other lands. It certainly fits the Hinayana philosophy of perpetual improvement by slow degrees, and doesn't do too badly in comparison with St John of the Cross and "The Dark Night of the Soul".

However, there remains the tradition, observed at every "tea ceremony" that if one can make a good cup of tea, one has arrived. (I like that idea, together with its various ramifications. Aside from substituting coffee for tea, it works for me.) ;-)

d

dave_a_mbs wrote on Oct 11^th, 2007 at 2:26pm:

S Most of Japan favors the Shin approach in which we are viewed as essentially incapable of perfection at the level required to become enlightened, and thus must rely upon the grace of the Buddha to save us. Thus, in the eyes of the Shin priest, there are no living buddhas, and we await the Savior Buddha, Maitreya, to come and rescue us. Seems to me that we've heard that song sung in other tongues in other lands. We certainly have. I don;t think that was what the Buddha was suggesting at all. I think he taught to take responsibility for yourself and not rely on a saviour. i also think he would not have wanted to be turned into some god-like figure to be worshipped, as seems to happen a lot in the east as far as I know. I do find it disappointing though that there seems to be pretty much no Buddhists claiming to be enlightened. If no one ever quite reaches it , it makes you start doubting if it exists at all. Then , there is the claim, you sometimes hear, that one should not say so, even if they are elightened, as this shows pride etc, but IMO it doesn;t, as long as it is a fact and not a vain boast to impress people. As far as i know the original Buddha made no secret of the fact he considered he had done it and others could too. It certainly fits the Hinayana philosophy of perpetual improvement by slow degrees, and doesn't do too badly in comparison with St John of the Cross and "The Dark Night of the Soul". However, there remains the tradition, observed at every "tea ceremony" that if one can make a good cup of tea, one has arrived. (I like that idea, together with its various ramifications. Aside from substituting coffee for tea, it works for me.) ;-) LOL. I guess it's something to do with just being in the moment and not thinking about anything other than carrying out the tea-making perfectly, so you forget your past and future and ego etc. I am not entirely sure I believe in elightenment other than as a momentary thing, which you can build up - ie less worry, less ego, more "in-the-moment-ness". I wonder if , after all, enlightenment isn;t just an example of humanity's thirst for an absolute, as in, for example, another example - Plato's "ideal forms". i.e. life is always imperfect and somewhat unsatisfactory, so we like to imagine there is a state of continual bliss and perfetion that can replace that d

dave_a_mbs wrote on Oct 11^th, 2007 at 2:26pm:

SO, in this excessively passive and non-interactive environment, we can call for the monk with the stick to come and whack us a few good ones to wake us up. The point of "bodhi" is literally "wakefulness", although to me this is carrying things a mite too far. And as for self-mutilation in the service of bodhi, I am reminded of my old psychoanalyst profs telling the class to be aware of insanity in service of the ego. An hysterical trait that most of us would label differently.

 One of the issues i have with Zen modes and teachings relates to the belief they seem to hold that by thinking or  rather nonthinking in a certain manner, they will become enlightened.   To me, Zen is primarily a practice of learning how to become receptive and still, so that one can change belief systems and gain a clarity and balance on the emotional and mental levels, and in that sense, i consider it a very worthwhile practice.   Any meditational practice, i consider worthwhile and perhaps even completely necessary.   But, changing belief systems in and of itself, will not lead to complete enlightenment, which is actually what it means, to become full of and completely light personaified.  No one will become "enlightened" by meditating on a Koan, or by being whacked over the head with a wooden baton!  Utter illusion.  When this (complete enlightenment) happens, certain outer and inner things become obvious to the individual who has completed this.   No linear space/time limitations, and no so called "natural" aging or illness (though plenty of gurus have made excuses for showing signs of one or both), for example.  

 It's how you live in relation to others and to the rest of Creation, which brings that full enlightenment, and of course, conscious belief systems have an influence in this process, but aren't the end all or be all.




Quote:

It might be too much right brain, or too much left brain. or perhaps too much fussing with the brain, which is my own estimation.

 Right brain, left brain, these are arbitrary labels.   When i speak of these, i'm not primarily talking about the physical brain, but rather the Archetypal, eternal Polarity contained within the Creator and Creation, and from which in a polarized, densified and projected world (physical Earth for one), patterns such an 'object' known as the brain with its two main, different but connecting hemispheres.      When i speak of left and right brain, i'm also addressing the balance and interaction of Yin and Yang, of Feminine to Masculine in a broader sense.  Stillness and expansion.   The Hemispheres of the brain, have the 'job' to perceive these different aspects of Creation which are really One in essence, but because we find ourselves in a polarized temporal reality, seem like two different and paradoxical things.

 Most things in this world, generally fall into the category of seeming "separation" between these two, which is really just based not on real separation, but rather imbalance ratios.   And yes, i very much believe the East in general, as a toto, has been too imbalanced to Yin.   The opposite with the West and Yang.  Isn't it funny how so many westerners have over idealized Eastern teachings, teachers, and gurus, and now so many easterners are over idealizing the western ways of living and thinking...    Sad, ironic mess, and yet its come about through searching for the perfect balance and merging, it just hasn't had all the 'kinks' worked out yet.   It will though.  They need each other, and are compliments.  


 

Interesting comments!

I see this message as rather complete, because I don't look at the "eyelids" as real eyelids. Osho makes the distinction that they are metaphysical eyelids. Therefore, as a parable, it is not meant to be literal.

And, as for passivity, there is a way to look at the parable in which the wall itself is simply any obstacle that we face. We can face "walls" of many kinds in life, and we can become obsessed with "staring each of them down," but that will not lead to our freedom. We will learn from our obstacles, but we will not become free.

Freedom is to see "no wall" at all. To "wake up" to no walls.

Yes, it has been said many many ways before.

The tea....now, the tea...is our gift. The tea is what is before us, when we can observe it, smell it, taste it, share it.

To see, smell and taste the tea is one thing....but to share it. Now, that's even better.

love, blink :)

Agreed, Orlando.  And as I look at the people participating in this forum I see many in various states of enlightenment, and being enlightened in various different ways. Enlightenment, or bodhi, thus being viewed as a process that leads ultimately back to the Initial Point, and is potentially infinite in extent. But if we view people as being more or less enlightened, we are viewing bodhi to that extent, and thus we have a world populated entirely by buddhas, all in different stages of hatching -  even as thee and I, although I still can't walk on water unless the temperature is very low. :-)

Perhaps the proper thing to do at this point is to have a cookie with our tea - or coffee if you prefer.

d

:)  perhaps so! A  lot to be said for simple pleasures.  However, whether it's possible to be "elightened" or not, in some absolute, one-and-for-all sense, I guess it does no harm to try to be more so

Hi Blink, i very much believe in concentrating on the solution, or on the 'real', but does that mean that there is no error to grow out of in the first place, or that understanding the problem and how it came about isn't necessary at all?  

  In the ultimate sense (from the Creator's point of view), the "wall" doesn't exist, but sorry, we're the ones who imagined up the wall to begin with, and we don't transcend the wall by 'seeing it not there', but by living, and concentrating on what is real.   It's not purely a mental, belief system thing, but whole being thing.

 Either way, in the end, i will listen only completely to those who have transcended the wall, and not to those who are still very much immersed in the dream.  Only the pure White Light ones know the way truly.  And in my experience and listening, they teach a different perspective than many earthly limited teachers have and do whether eastern or western in origin.

 Bruce teaches something which i very much agree with.  He essentially says that the more a person lives, practices, concentrates on, etc. PUL in relation to the rest of Creation, in every moment of their life, the more their perception opens up on all levels--there is a direct connection of sorts.  I would say that those who are pure PUL incarnate, are pure perception incarnate as well, and thus have the full understanding from all perspectives and angles of reasoning.  

  The important question to always ask in relation to anothers info, beliefs, or teachings, is, for example "Osho" PUL  incarnate and thus does he have the whole enchilada, the whole perception and understanding?

Ah, Blink! maybe thats where the saying came from "it's not my cup of tea!"

Sometimes, AaSoLaoTsuAhhOmmra, concentrating on the problem and how it came about is necessary, of course. Change does not come about by doing or thinking the same thing over and over. And change is sometimes necessary, for the increased happiness and peace of all beings...but does not always happen.

I do not say the wall does not exist. The wall exists, but by making the sacrifice -- there is the tea, there is the clarity, there is the reward. Suddenly the wall begins to look like a shelter. Suddenly the wall begins to look like a friend. Suddenly we realize that we chose this wall, when we sat down to contemplate it.

But the wall is not our friend. It is the tea that is our friend, the tea that has given us new life. This true friend helps us see every wall differently.

love, blink :)

LaffingRain wrote on Oct 11^th, 2007 at 3:53pm:

Ah, Blink! maybe thats where the saying came from "it's not my cup of tea!"

 Good one Alysia! ;)

 I love tea, and now that its starting to finally cool down, i will be drinking tons of it, you got your red tea, your green tea, your white tea, your tea with mint leaves, your herbal teas, your relaxing teas, your invigorating teas.... (all said in the manner of Bubba in the movie "Forrest Gump").  

wrote on Oct 11^th, 2007 at 3:58pm:

Sometimes, AaSoLaoTsuAhhOmmra, concentrating on the problem and how it came about is necessary, of course. Change does not come about by doing or thinking the same thing over and over. And change is sometimes necessary, for the increased happiness and peace of all beings...but does not always happen. I do not say the wall does not exist. The wall exists, but by making the sacrifice -- there is the tea, there is the clarity, there is the reward. Suddenly the wall begins to look like a shelter. Suddenly the wall begins to look like a friend. Suddenly we realize that we chose this wall, when we sat down to contemplate it. But the wall is not our friend. It is the tea that is our friend, the tea that has given us new life. This true friend helps us see every wall differently. love, blink :)

 Completely agree, and very well said!  

That's right Alysia! Maybe so! There are so many kinds of tea out there in this big world....and I don't particularly care for all of them!  But I will try anything once...

love, blink :)

try Valarian tea for the calming of the nerves; only problem is it smells like cat urine!
:P

Hi Blink I had never heard of that before about tea,it was really interesting and i feel tea does bring us together as it seems to be a favorite drink in most places of the world and i love tea as well.

dave tea with crumpets is the best,beats cookies anytime  :)

Love and God bless    Love juditha

OK Juditha - a toasted crumpet, dripping with butter and oozing marmalade ... no argument there!

I recall the very Zen story about the monk who had been chased by a tiger.  He wound up jumping over a cliff where he grabbed a root, and soon was suspended in the air above a yawning chasm, with the tiger snapping at him from inches above. About then a mouse appeared and began to gnaw at the root he was holding. The monk noticed that a wild strawberry was growing from the side of the cliff, and reaching out, he popped it into his mouth. Delicious! It was the best he had ever tasted.

This seems to be where we get when we are whacked by the wake-up stick. 100% awareness. But of itself, that's just another way to be in the world. The brain wakes up, but can only tell us brain-thoughts about the brain-world. There seems to be good reason to look a little farther, in which case we discover a spiritual reality underlying the physical one. And looking a little farther than that we arrive at Event One, and behind that we see nothing - but that seems to be where the action really is.

Hmm - coffee shop is out of crumpets, so I had to rough it with banana nut bread. Life is hard some days. ;-)

d

Hi dave Not fair,the coffee shop out of crumpets but the banana nut bread sounds good,i will have to try it  :)

Love and God bless   Love  juditha

I love that story about the cliff and the strawberry. I can almost feel myself dangling there and then, the bliss of the strawberry.

I don't always dangle so gracefully as that monk. But we all dangle in one way or another, don't we? What did the tiger look like for you? I think my tiger is called time. It chases me until I stop running.

But, yes, Dave, Juditha, all of you, this is bliss, to return to see a tea party in progress :)

After all, there is no tea party exactly like this one, crumpetless, or not....

love, blink :)

Nice thread!


Quote:

Can you find anything more trivial than tea? Can you find anything more ordinary than tea? No, you cannot--and Zen monks and masters have raised this most ordinary thing into the most extraordinary. They have bridged "this" and "that"... as if tea and God have become one. Unless tea becomes divine you will not be divine, because the least has to be raised to the most, the ordinary has to be raised to the extraordinary, the earth has to be made heaven. They have to be bridged, no gap should be left.

As I read this part it reminded me of how even the most lowly is essence of the divine... exalted as being one with God and that when we are able to truly see and feel our own divine essence, we then are able to see and feel the divine within all that is.

Love and peace (and plentiful crumpets & tea) to all,
Kathy

good thought Kathy, being one with god is like a daily thing I agree.

ok, Rob Calkins is my friend! and yours too. he's a dear forum member who is about to do Gateway, where one gets in touch with one's guides, and/or higher self.

Oct 20th he's going to TMI. Send him positive thoughts if you will. he's a sweetheart and guess what he did? he dropped in to see me as he was traveling around through arizona and brought me TWO packages of real honest to goodness crumpets which I never laid these particular eyes on in this particular lifetime. then he made me buy some strawberry jam to go with. so there they sit in me fridge unopened. everytime I look in the fridge I am reminded of Rob's visit and how we talked each other's ears off about these topics here on the board mostly.
I can't bring myself to eat the crumpets!  ::)  for one thing gang, I swore off eating butter when I lost weight and everyone knows you need to pour butter on a crumpet right?
besides, I like to open my fridge and get this burst of happiness that he came to see me! (please don't let them turn into fungus dear god..)

love, alysia

Hi Dave,

why didn't the monk feed the strawberry to the mouse, who then would be satisfied and leave, so that the tiger could then catch the mouse and eat it, and then be satisfied and leave the monk alone, who could then climb back up the cliff?

Just wonderring,
Bets

PS Hi Alysia,
if you can get those crumpets to dry out gradually, they'll be preserved forever---- :) at least that's what happens to some stuff in my fridge!
Do they still bronze baby shoes? Maybe you could get them preserved that way!  Such memories are definitely worth keeping.   :)

First of all, for most of his life Osho was known as Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh. He was a guru with a terrible reputation. Does anybody remember reading about a guru who had a farm in Oregon where he and his followers lived? The one who owned 150 Rolls Royces? This is him. Near the end of this life he changed his name. If I remember right, he told his followers he was doing so in order to announce that he is the reincarnation of the Buddha. A funny thing to do after so many years.  Some would say he did so in order to dissassociate himself from all of his legal problems. Including when the United States kicked him out of the country.

It isn't completely accurate to state that Boddhidarma started Zen. He traveled from India to China and started Chan Buddhism. Years later Zen started in Japan.  Even though there is a connection, there are some differences. Koans weren't used in China.  Zen would use them with the hope that a person would experience satori, which in Zen terms means to become enlightened.  Hitting people with a stick served the same purpose (the stick hitting also occurred in China).

The main thing Chan Buddhism was about was trying to obtain instaneous enlightenment. No practice is needed they would say even though things such as monasteries, disciplined life styles and teachers were a part of their tradition. I used to read Chan texts quite a bit, and funny thing is that none of them explained how to become enlightened. They would simply say to rid your self of conceptual thought over and over again without explaining how.

I've found that even though insights can be helpful, no one insight is going to make you a master. If you want to be free to live as the spirit being you are, you have to put in the effort to overcome the thought patterns and attachments that prevent you from doing so.  When you do so you are liable to find out that you are a part of a larger vaster self referred to with terms such as higher self, oversoul, I-there, disk and total self (for Ahso).  I have never read a Chan or Zen text which speaks of such things. Nor do they speak of things such as chakras and spirit guidance. Such teachings certainly don't acknowledge the existence of a Soul. I find it hard to understand how teachings that supposedly represent ultimate wisdom can miss such important things.  

It is from traditions such as Zen that people get the belief that you have to reincarnate over and over again without any say about the matter, until you finally become enlightened. There are numerous sources which show that when it comes to reincarnation, there is much more flexibility.  Related to this, one well known Zen teacher is Bankei.  He used to tell people that after he became enlightened he traveled all over Japan looking for another Zen teacher who was also enlightened. He couldn't find one. One well known Zen teacher told him his knowledge was only intellectual. If what Bankei shared is true, how does the numbers game work out? If only rare exceptions such as Bankei become enlightened, how long will we have to keep reincarnating until we are the rare exception? My feeling is that we just need to grow in love as much as we can while here, and we'll find that there are many ways to grow in the World of spirit.

Eastern teachings are filled with dogmatism just like other religions.  One can see this if one takes a close look at a teaching system such as Tibetan Buddhism and Zen.  For example, there are people in Tibetan Buddhism who as a part of their practice, do 10,000 full body prostrations a day. How can this help a person?

I don't mean to say there haven't been any masters. I believe Jesus was a master. However, I don't believe that somebody who really knew, would associate his or self with a dogmatic system that has been teaching people in a "textbook" manner for years.

Is a dogmatic system more likely to lead to a belief system, or to freedom?

P.S. I agree with Ahso that there is more to finding wisdom than using a technigue that causes your flow of thought to come to a stop.  If one really abided as who/what one is, one could think as much as one wanted. Rather than going around trying to stop your mind by thinking about a koan all day (such as, what is the sound of one had clapping), or waiting for a teacher to suddenly stop your mind by hitting you with a stick, it is better to look for a way to become free of the thought patterns that bind you.

I am aware of how Osho was involved in various scandals later in his career as a guru (but I think some of that was more to do with some of his follwers' behaviour than his). Also if his rich followers wanted to give him rolls royces etc and he liked them, well it's a bit over the top, but I guess there are worse things you can do. Maybe he just wanted to test how detached he could be from them  ;)

Also, I have been thinking about this myself - about this person and other gurus (some far more widely respected than Osho - Krishnamurti and Ramakrishna, for example) who I have read some negative opinions about on the net criticisng alleged aspects of their behaviour and lifestyles, and wondering what to make of this. I guess we like to see spiritual teachers as "perfect'people to look up to and we are disappojnted and think they are fake if we hear about some less than admirable side to them, but maybe that's unfair. It also doesn;t mean that they can;t have had valuable insights and written good books etc - maybe it's sometimes a case of "do as I say and not what i do"!  (and I have coincidentally been reading the Osho book that the "tea" thing comes from, and have found much of it to have genuine spiritual messages to offer, even if they are maybe mainly in the "live in the moment": vein of that tea piece).  

However, aside from that, it can make you wonder, as I mentioned in a different thread, about whether or not "perfection"or complete "enlightenment"is possible and if we don;t just have to make the best of things and accept life is full of imprefection and compromises. Also I am sceptical of people who think the perfection comes after death in some form - why should it? If it's possible, it should be possible here and now, no? I feel torn between the perfectionist side of me that wants absolutes, and experience saying to me that life's generally not like that and you just have to make the best of things.

PS I understand Osho's writings are still widely admired in India, so it is perhaos unfair to sweepingly say  his reputation is "terrible" because of some scandals surrouding his community after he moved the the United States

Orlando:

If you really researched Rajneesh (he used Osho for such a short time), you would find that his followers aren't responsible for his bad reputation.

Regarding expecting gurus to be perfect, the thing is, many of them claim to be perfect and all knowing, and put themselves on a pedestal. If you got to know their followers, you'd find that they tend to view their guru as being infallible, and resultantly limit themselves to whatever limited wisdom their guru has to share. My feeling is that if people who don't claim to be all knowing and perfected masters can be loving, ethical, moral and honest, then why can't a famous supposed all knowing master such as Sai Baba refrain from being a child molester?

I found that you can't discriminate a source of information simply by focussing your attention on what sounds true. Just about anybody can say something that sounds true or teach techniques that have an effect.  It is obvious that Rajneesh was an avid book reader. Started out by getting a masters degree in philosophy. Afterwards, he became a professor of philosophy. Eventually that wasn't enough for him, and he decided to become a guru. It is obvious part of his rap was influenced by Krishnamurti. He spent a lot of time talking about Krishnamurti. He did so with the intention of getting people to interpret Krishnamurti's anti guru words differently.

Regarding spirits being able to grow while in the World of spirit, why not? Sources of information that seem to be valid (as far as I can tell), state that there are many beings who never incarnate physically. Sources also state that souls are closely connected to other souls in the spirit World (this goes along with my experience). Whether one uses a term like disk or a term like soul group,  such souls share their experiences with each other and aid each other's growth. This precludes the necessity of manditory numerous incarnations.

It is also important to consider that the World of spirit doesn't have the limitations we have in the physical World. Therefore, there are countless ways in which one can grow. For example, in his book "Voyage to Curiosity's father" Bruce wrote about Sylvia. She was an abusive person. After she died, because she was a Christian, she remembered to think of Jesus and received help instead of remaining stuck in a lower realm. Light beings came to her aid. They exposed her to PUL, and this enabled her to become honest about the kind of person she was.  This was followed by energetic work that enabled her to become free of the energetic/thought energy that limited her. Also consider the life review factor. Many near death experiencers have found that life reviews can have quite an effect.

When the above is considered, it seems reasonable that physical incarnations are chosen not because a soul is "required" to live one, but rather because a soul believes a physical incarnation will help in some way. Are there exceptions? Perhaps. I don't know. Whatever the case, I belive it is partly human vanity that causes people to believe that human incarnations are the "only" way to grow. I believe a real master would have a more expanded viewpoint.

P.S. Overall, I guess it is okay when people find words of wisdom in false sources of information. The problem occurs when they listen to words that aren't true. Our minds are tricky things. Once we're exposed to something, that something becomes a part of our memory banks.  When our minds start interpreting things they aren't limited to what we consciously chose to believe.  Sometimes restrictive thought patterns are formed unconsciously.  This is more likely to happen if a person is overly quick to accept what he or she reads. Even if a person chooses to not believe a particular part of a source of information, this person's overall accepting attitude toward the source might cause he or her to form a belief system unconsciously. Just go to any forum where people who believe in Eastern teachings hang out. They are just as bound to their beliefs as Western religious people.




orlando123 wrote on Oct 12^th, 2007 at 3:56pm:

I am aware of how Osho was involved in various scandals later in his career as a guru (but I think some of that was more to do with some of his follwers' behaviour than his). Also if his rich followers wanted to give him rolls royces etc and he liked them, well it's a bit over the top, but I guess there are worse things you can do. Maybe he just wanted to test how detached he could be from them  ;) Also, I have been thinking about this myself - about this person and other gurus (some far more widely respected than Osho - Krishnamurti and Ramakrishna, for example) who I have read some negative opinions about on the net criticisng alleged aspects of their behaviour and lifestyles, and wondering what to make of this. I guess we like to see spiritual teachers as "perfect'people to look up to and we are disappojnted and think they are fake if we hear about some less than admirable side to them, but maybe that's unfair. It also doesn;t mean that they can;t have had valuable insights and written good books etc - maybe it's sometimes a case of "do as I say and not what i do"!  (and I have coincidentally been reading the Osho book that the "tea" thing comes from, and have found much of it to have genuine spiritual messages to offer, even if they are maybe mainly in the "live in the moment": vein of that tea piece).   However, aside from that, it can make you wonder, as I mentioned in a different thread, about whether or not "perfection"or complete "enlightenment"is possible and if we don;t just have to make the best of things and accept life is full of imprefection and compromises. Also I am sceptical of people who think the perfection comes after death in some form - why should it? If it's possible, it should be possible here and now, no? I feel torn between the perfectionist side of me that wants absolutes, and experience saying to me that life's generally not like that and you just have to make the best of things.

I thought of this, for the Rolls Royces  ;)


While He was in Bethany at the home of Simon the leper, and reclining at the table, there came a woman with an alabaster vial of very costly perfume of pure nard; and she broke the vial and poured it over His head.

But some were indignantly remarking to one another, "Why has this perfume been wasted?

For this perfume might have been sold for over three hundred denarii, and the money given to the poor." And they were scolding her.

But Jesus said, "Let her alone; why do you bother her? She has done a good deed to Me

For you always have the poor with you, and whenever you wish you can do good to them; but you do not always have Me.

New American Standard Bible (©1995)

Mark 13

Orlando:

I first read Rajneesh about 25 years ago, and it has been more than a few idle thoughts that has enabled me to see that he was a fake who has mislead and taken advantage of many well meaning people. I wonder how much money is collected by the people who now own the rights to his books.

Does the book you own state that Osho used to be called Rajneesh?


orlando123 wrote on Oct 12^th, 2007 at 3:57pm:

PS I understand Osho's writings are still widely admired in India, so it is perhaos unfair to sweepingly say  his reputation is "terrible" because of some scandals surrouding his community after he moved the the United States

orlando123 wrote on Oct 12^th, 2007 at 4:51pm:

I thought of this, for the Rolls Royces  ;) While He was in Bethany at the home of Simon the leper, and reclining at the table, there came a woman with an alabaster vial of very costly perfume of pure nard; and she broke the vial and poured it over His head. But some were indignantly remarking to one another, "Why has this perfume been wasted? For this perfume might have been sold for over three hundred denarii, and the money given to the poor." And they were scolding her. But Jesus said, "Let her alone; why do you bother her? She has done a good deed to Me For you always have the poor with you, and whenever you wish you can do good to them; but you do not always have Me. New American Standard Bible (©1995) Mark 13

 ::)

 So one bottle of perfumed oil is akin to many, many rolls Royce's and all that other extra stuff that Recoverer mentioned?    Actually, i do get your deeper message behind this post, but you also have to look at this incident in context of what was going on.

  Yeshua knew his public, consistent time with his friends was soon nearing an end. He told them this more than a few times.   They heard, but many did not really listen.   Many (like Judas) still had hopes of a political, King like Messiah coming forth, and leading Israel out of the mouth of the Romans, and its own internally corrupt systems (priests, lawyers, much like today).  

 Miriam M., was one who believed and listened to Yeshua's words, and felt moved that moment to show her love, affection, and respect in a physical act, and he knowing that she would probably become quite upset about the near future conditions surrounding him, decided to just accept her gift in the spirit of which it was given.

 Maybe under different circumstances and with less extreme conditions coming to a head, maybe he would have counseled her to sell this oil, and use the money for others and the poor?  Relativity....

 As far as Osho is concerned, one doesn't end up with 150 R.R.'s just because a bunch of people spontaneously decide to give gifts from the heart, to one not expecting or asking for anything.   It's quite apparent that Osho must have had some kind of liking for R.R.'s, and perhaps even asked for them from others, or put out 'hint, hints'.   Yeshua did not ask for the perfumed oil and it was as far as we know, a one time dealio.

 Or maybe that first part of the above paragraph does happen in your reality and universe?  

 This is why the left brain is important, because in its highest function or purpose, the left brain represents clear discrimination of what's helpful/constructive and what's not.   Otherwise, we would just get lost down the rabbit hole of the Right brains, 'dude believe and do whatever you want to believe' regardless of the positive and negative affects on self and/or others.  Notice how so many stoner types, also tend to be rather right brain lopsided too?

Thank you for this Recoverer



If you really researched Rajneesh (he used Osho for such a short time), you would find that his followers aren't responsible for his bad reputation.

OK, thanks. I don;t really know that much about him to be honest, I was just trying to provide balance. Also, I didn;t say I thought he was prefect, I said I thought someone imperfect could still have some spiritual insights.

Regarding expecting gurus to be perfect, the thing is, many of them claim to be perfect and all knowing, and put themselves on a pedestal. If you got to know their followers, you'd find that they tend to view their guru as being infallible, and resultantly limit themselves to whatever limited wisdom their guru has to share. My feeling is that if people who don't claim to be all knowing and perfected masters can be loving, ethical, moral and honest, then why can't a famous supposed all knowing master such as Sai Baba refrain from being a child molester?

I see. Yes, I guess they do. My feeling is that if someone really has "perfected" themselves and are "enlightened"then why not say so? However, I'm not sure what criteria some people go on, in making such claims, and no doubt many are deluded. Also I do wonder what "perfect" means anyway. reading parts of the NT for example I do not see Jesus, as depicted, as always "perfect." Would a "perfect" person never get angry, never have envious or lustful or proud or vengeful thoughts, never feel sad apart from for others, and spend every minute of the day in humble and loving service  ? I don't know. I think however that there must be a danger in too much focus on a guru in that you might forget they are just human like you, and not to be worshipped and set up as something different and unobtainable. I find Sai Baba a bit dubious, not only for the reason you said, but also, eg his obsession with materialising trinkets and so on - it just looks like it could be conjouring.

I found that you can't discriminate a source of information simply by focussing your attention on what sounds true. Just about anybody can say something that sounds true or teach techniques that have an effect.  

But just because "just about anybody"can say something that sounds true, surely you could also turn that around and say "just about anybody can say something that is true, or teach me something" - isn;t that the case as well? But you have to be discriminating and not treat people as infallible.


It is obvious that Rajneesh was an avid book reader. Started out by getting a masters degree in philosophy. Afterwards, he became a professor of philosophy. Eventually that wasn't enough for him, and he decided to become a guru. It is obvious part of his rap was influenced by Krishnamurti. He spent a lot of time talking about Krishnamurti. He did so with the intention of getting people to interpret Krishnamurti's anti guru words differently.

I see. Yes, I noiced the Krishnamurti connections. I find Krishnamurti inspiring from what I've read, but, for example, I read someone who knew him who said he could be somewhat cold and  haughty towards people who he regarded as not on the same rarified spiritual level as himself (I forget the precise wording), which I thought was a shame, and not what you'd expect. Also he apparently had a long-running affair with someone else's wife.

Regarding spirits being able to grow while in the World of spirit, why not? Sources of information that seem to be valid (as far as I can tell), state that there are many beings who never incarnate physically. Sources also state that souls are closely connected to other souls in the spirit World (this goes along with my experience). Whether one uses a term like disk or a term like soul group,  such souls share their experiences with each other and aid each other's growth. This precludes the necessity of manditory numerous incarnations.

I don' t think I said they didn' t, did I? No, i agree, that's how it sounds like things work to me, from what I've read. I said people are wrong if they think you are suddently perfect in spirit. However even spirit communications and OBE journeys etc seem to become vague when you start talking about perfection and ultimate goals. They speak vaguely of merging with the One and such-like, but aren;t sure what this is like or really means. I have been reading Jouney of Souls, which is an intersting book about spiritual development other various lifetime snad in-between lives. one thing I find a little odd and vaguely off-putting though, is the way the author seems to be claiming there are seemingly a limited number of quite rigidly-defined levels of spiritual evoultion, which he ascribes certain names and colours of aura to; whereas I would have thought things would be more complicated than that.

It is also important to consider that the World of spirit doesn't have the limitations we have in the physical World. Therefore, there are countless ways in which one can grow. For example, in his book "Voyage to Curiosity's father" Bruce wrote about Sylvia. She was an abusive person. After she died, because she was a Christian, she remembered to think of Jesus and received help instead of remaining stuck in a lower realm. Light beings came to her aid. They exposed her to PUL, and this enabled her to become honest about the kind of person she was.  This was followed by energetic work that enabled her to become free of the energetic/thought energy that limited her. Also consider the life review factor. Many near death experiencers have found that life reviews can have quite an effect.

I see, thanks for the example. It;'s good to think we can always progress

When the above is considered, it seems reasonable that physical incarnations are chosen not because a soul is "required" to live one, but rather because a soul believes a physical incarnation will help in some way. Are there exceptions? Perhaps. I don't know. Whatever the case, I belive it is partly human vanity that causes people to believe that human incarnations are the "only" way to grow. I believe a real master would have a more expanded viewpoint.

Uh-huh. Yes, maybe it's quite a human viewpoint

P.S. Overall, I guess it is okay when people find words of wisdom in false sources of information. The problem occurs when they listen to words that aren't true.

Sure

Our minds are tricky things. Once we're exposed to something, that something becomes a part of our memory banks.  When our minds start interpreting things they aren't limited to what we consciously chose to believe.  Sometimes restrictive thought patterns are formed unconsciously.  

I see what you mean; yes, and sometimes we need to reexaminne our habits of thought and beliefs about the world and ourselves to see if the old ideas we have acquired are useful or not

This is more likely to happen if a person is overly quick to accept what he or she reads.

Yes, you shouldn't think everything is true just becasue it's written in a book!

Even if a person chooses to not believe a particular part of a source of information, this person's overall accepting attitude toward the source might cause he or her to form a belief system unconsciously. Just go to any forum where people who believe in Eastern teachings hang out. They are just as bound to their beliefs as Western religious people.

I see what you mean. and I am sure you are right about "eastern" believers. Historically in the west we have tendancy to think anything from the "East" is wise, but you should take a questioning and not gullible approach to that as well, no doubt, and try to think for yourself and not think any one person or system necessarily has all the answers

recoverer wrote on Oct 12^th, 2007 at 4:53pm:

Orlando: I first read Rajneesh about 25 years ago, and it has been more than a few idle thoughts that has enabled me to see that he was a fake who has mislead and taken advantage of many well meaning people. I wonder how much money is collected by the people who now own the rights to his books. Does the book you own state that Osho used to be called Rajneesh?

Yes, i know about that. Hopefully i just replied more fully to your post
I am sorry he apparently misled a lot of well-meaning people. Do you have personal experience of that, or know people who were hurt? I am not doubting you, just interested in knowing more. As for making money from bokks, well if people want to buy them I gues it';s up to them. i didn;t buy the one I am reading, by the way, I borrowed it from my neighbour who lived at Rajneesh's ashram in India for a year in the 1970s and still admires his teachins, although I think he is probably blissfully ignorant of the later scandals (he didn;t even know he latterly called himself Osho when I mentioend this)

 ::)

 So one bottle of perfumed oil is akin to many, many rolls Royce's and all that other extra stuff that Recoverer mentioned?    Actually, i do get your deeper message behind this post, but you also have to look at this incident in context of what was going on.

Haha. It was only semi-serious.

  Yeshua knew his public, consistent time with his friends was soon nearing an end. He told them this more than a few times.   They heard, but many did not really listen.   Many (like Judas) still had hopes of a political, King like Messiah coming forth, and leading Israel out of the mouth of the Romans, and its own internally corrupt systems (priests, lawyers, much like today).  

 Miriam M., was one who believed and listened to Yeshua's words, and felt moved that moment to show her love, affection, and respect in a physical act, and he knowing that she would probably become quite upset about the near future conditions surrounding him, decided to just accept her gift in the spirit of which it was given.

Did you know there is not actually any proof this woman was MM and some people find it an unwarranted slur on her name that the Catholic church traditionally associated her with this woman (who Luke says had led a sinful life) and also made out she was a prostitute before becoming Jesus follower. I believe I read the Church has now admitted this (i.e. that this is an old tradition, but there is no evidence for it). However i do see the point you are making about how Jesus behaved (reacting to her spontaneous love etc, not proud of having expensive perfume poured on him). BTW, not saying there's something terrible about being an ex-prostitute, just that, it would seem, there is no particular reason to think MM was one, and this image of the sinful woman saved by jesus has predominated instead of instead of her being depicted as what she possibly was - a strong, independant female follower of Jesus, who is, possibly uniquely in the Bible (?), named after the place she is from and not her father or husband, who is reported to have been the first person to see the risen Jesus, and in some apocryphal literature is even called his "companion" and said to be his most loved disciple

 As far as Osho is concerned, one doesn't end up with 150 R.R.'s just because a bunch of people spontaneously decide to give gifts from the heart, to one not expecting or asking for anything.   It's quite apparent that Osho must have had some kind of liking for R.R.'s, and perhaps even asked for them from others, or put out 'hint, hints'.   Yeshua did not ask for the perfumed oil and it was as far as we know, a one time dealio.

 Or maybe that first part of the above paragraph does happen in your reality and universe?  

Oh yes, people donate Rolls Royces to me all the time, and I am sure it is just out of love  ;D

You're welcome Orlando.

A lot of truth in what you wrote below. I was one of the people who assumed teachers from the East had all the answers. After all, they meditated, seemed quite exotic, and all that. After a number of years I found that even though they have some good things to say, they don't have all the answers.

Part of my problem was that because I couldn't find it within myself to play the role of all knowing master without being one, I figured others would have the same level of morality. The thing is lots of people become involved with Eastern teachings, and only a few need to be dishonest enough to assume the role of all knowing master without being one. The guru business has been really big in India for many years and has spread to other countries.  

Regarding Krishnamurti, I used to be a big fan.  I lost interest before I found out about the shenanigans you mentioned.  He had some good things to say, but he wasn't completely accurate. At least ways he decided to "not" go along with the order of the star Theosophy tried to start (If I remember correctly, Annie Bessant's idea). Why, I don't know. Maybe he didn't want the Theosophists to have control of him.


Orlando wrote:
"I see what you mean. and I am sure you are right about "eastern" believers. Historically in the west we have tendancy to think anything from the "East" is wise, but you should take a questioning and not gullible approach to that as well, no doubt, and try to think for yourself and not think any one person or system necessarily has all the answers"

Orlando:

I don't have personal experience with Rajneesh/Osho, but I used to belong to another group led by another false guru (there are so many), and a number of people came from his Oregon operation to my group (If I remember right, after his Oregon operation was shut down).  These people were nice, but you could tell that their experience with Rajneesh had some negative consequences.


orlando123 wrote on Oct 12^th, 2007 at 5:25pm:

recoverer wrote on Oct 12th, 2007 at 4:53pm: Orlando: I first read Rajneesh about 25 years ago, and it has been more than a few idle thoughts that has enabled me to see that he was a fake who has mislead and taken advantage of many well meaning people. I wonder how much money is collected by the people who now own the rights to his books. Does the book you own state that Osho used to be called Rajneesh? Yes, i know about that. Hopefully i just replied more fully to your post I am sorry he apparently misled a lot of well-meaning people. Do you have personal experience of that, or know people who were hurt? I am not doubting you, just interested in knowing more. As for making money from bokks, well if people want to buy them I gues it';s up to them. i didn;t buy the one I am reading, by the way, I borrowed it from my neighbour who lived at Rajneesh's ashram in India for a year in the 1970s and still admires his teachins, although I think he is probably blissfully ignorant of the later scandals (he didn;t even know he latterly called himself Osho when I mentioend this)

Hmmmmnnn, yes, all, anyone seeking a guru can certainly find one. Perhaps one's favorite guru is like one's favorite artist, who might also have eccentricities and imperfections, as do each of us, and that is part of our fascination.

But, anyone seeking to avoid a guru...I am not so sure on that one. Can it be done? Should it be done?

Bets, good one....the picture I've always seen shows the monk dangling by one arm, so I always thought maybe he was tasting the strawberry all the way to....enlightenment. Enlightenment.

No one seems to know what it is. We know what it feels like to wake up...but there are all kinds of waking up. Some "pop out of bed" days and some "groggy out of synch" days. Some lazy days, and some days that begin with a special smile. Some days, the answer is no...I call those "pajama" days.

The little mouse is just kind of like that last straw on the camel's back, like in the story.

you know, the one that "makes" you scream at the top of your lungs in your car for no real reason, because it was just a little thing that took you right over the edge....

Lights of Love, thank you for pointing out the phrase you did. I enjoyed looking at it through your eyes.

love, blink :)

Must say I have a very high level of respect for Osho's writings which while i've not read that widely I've not been able to fault.

While I can't judge his ultimate status,  I get the impression that many of the scandals erupted out of his not exerting control on those around him. He's far from the first great teacher to find himself in that situation.

Get the impression too that there were powerful forces out to nail him for whatever reason...

A lot of truth in what you wrote below.

thank you

I was one of the people who assumed teachers from the East had all the answers. After all, they meditated, seemed quite exotic, and all that. After a number of years I found that even though they have some good things to say, they don't have all the answers.

I see, well I expect that's a healthy thing to find out. It's also like I said about the BUddha in another thread - he didn't seem to want to be put on a pedestal; he wanted people to think about his teachings and see if they worked for them and also , not see him as any different from them - from what I understand anyway

Part of my problem was that because I couldn't find it within myself to play the role of all knowing master without being one, I figured others would have the same level of morality.

Ah , yes, that can be a problem... (assuming , if you have high standards of honesty others will behave in the same way.. i have learned to try not to make that assumption)

The thing is lots of people become involved with Eastern teachings, and only a few need to be dishonest enough to assume the role of all knowing master without being one. The guru business has been really big in India for many years and has spread to other countries.  

yes, I understand it has. There must be a lot of disappointed people if they go looking for perfect wisdom and morality from people who turn out not to have been worth the trust. howveer it would also be a  shame if all Indian spirituality got tarred with that brush
Regarding Krishnamurti, I used to be a big fan.  I lost interest before I found out about the shenanigans you mentioned.  He had some good things to say, but he wasn't completely accurate. At least ways he decided to "not" go along with the order of the star Theosophy tried to start (If I remember correctly, Annie Bessant's idea). Why, I don't know. Maybe he didn't want the Theosophists to have control of him.

At first glance it seems he rejected it out of a high-minded feeling that he did not want to be placed on a pedestal and wanted people to find their own spiritual paths, and rejected the power and adulation of being head and guru of a large religious order etc; which with my limited knowledge still seems to me plausible to some extent; but then I have also heard that throughout his life he did not entirely stop thinking he actually was some unique "world teacher" with a special mission, so I am not sure of his exact motives either

Blink:

There's a lot to read on this thread. Did you catch what Ahso wrote below?  The reason so many fake gurus get away with their nonsense, is because people are too quick to apologize for them. In the end they don't do themselves a favor, and they misguide other unsuspecting people to a false source of information.


Ahso wrote:
"This is why the left brain is important, because in its highest function or purpose, the left brain represents clear discrimination of what's helpful/constructive and what's not.   Otherwise, we would just get lost down the rabbit hole of the Right brains, 'dude believe and do whatever you want to believe' regardless of the positive and negative affects on self and/or others.  Notice how so many stoner types, also tend to be rather right brain lopsided too?"


[/quote]

He nailed himself by his own actions.


wrote on Oct 12^th, 2007 at 5:57pm:

Get the impression too that there were powerful forces out to nail him for whatever reason...

Here's a site that explains about Rajneesh's name change, plus the key paragraph:

Name Change

In 1988 thirty years after taking the title, ''Bhagwan,'' (which means ''the embodiment of God'') Rajneesh admitted the title and his claim to be God were a ''joke.'' ''I hate the word... I don't want to be called Bhagwan (God) again. Enough is enough. The joke is over,'' stated Rajneesh saying he was really the reincarnation of Buddha and claiming for himself the new title of ''Rajneesh Gautaman the Buddha,'' (Star Telegram, Dec. 29, 1988; Sec.1, p. 3). Later he took the title, ''Osho Rajneesh,'' a Buddhist term meaning ''on whom the heavens shower flowers.'' (Ibid, 1/20/90).

http://www.apologeticsindex.org/b40.html

Late P.S.

I didn't find out about the details of the name change at the site I cited. I read about it in a book written by a Rajneesh devotee. If one scrolls down the link I provided, they'll find the paragraph I pasted.

According to the attached article, Rajneesh also claimed to be the reincarnation of Jesus Christ on a video. I haven't seen it, so I can't speak from first hand knowledge. Footnote number 3 leads to the videos. I didn't want to take the time to listen to them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_who_have_claimed_to_be_Jesus

Orlando wrote,
Quote:

Did you know there is not actually any proof this woman was MM and some people find it an unwarranted slur on her name that the Catholic church traditionally associated her with this woman (who Luke says had led a sinful life) and also made out she was a prostitute before becoming Jesus follower. I believe I read the Church has now admitted this (i.e. that this is an old tradition, but there is no evidence for it). However i do see the point you are making about how Jesus behaved (reacting to her spontaneous love etc, not proud of having expensive perfume poured on him). BTW, not saying there's something terrible about being an ex-prostitute, just that, it would seem, there is no particular reason to think MM was one, and this image of the sinful woman saved by jesus has predominated instead of instead of her being depicted as what she possibly was - a strong, independant female follower of Jesus, who is, possibly uniquely in the Bible (?), named after the place she is from and not her father or husband, who is reported to have been the first person to see the risen Jesus, and in some apocryphal literature is even called his "companion" and said to be his most loved disciple

 Honestly, i go less by what's exactly in the Bible (and other peoples interpretations of same, whether it's commonly accepted or not), and what's in the Cayce readings which talk quite a bit about biblical history from many varied perspectives.   Cayce's info is not infallible, Cayce at times was not a particularly 'clear' channel, and even sometimes if people were around him and feeling and thinking very strongly about something, it could and did occasionally skew the info coming through.    

  For example, waking Cayce was one of the least 'racist' people of his times and place, even though he grew up in an extremely prejudiced environment, the south during the late 1800's and early 1900's.    He had a lot of major conflicts with his father, and one of the many conflicts was that his father was a hard core racist who vehemently disliked black people*, and in his failed insurance business, refused to sell insurance to people with dark skin.   Edgar didn't like or agree with this at all, from his Christian perspective, all were brothers in Spirit.  He was one of the first people known to have integrated his Sunday school classes because he believed in basic equality.  

 Anyways, sometimes his father would get involved with the readings and be there near Edgar during some readings.   In one particular instance, it seems like some of that skewing went on because of strong, material, outside energies.  

  All in all, the Cayce readings have been verified in many ways, on many subjects, and i just trust them more than not.  Its a deeper inner thing (along with dreams, direct guidance, etc), and also from years of analytical study, synthesis.    Well anyways, the Cayce readings affirm quite a few of the major assumptions about the N.T., like with Mary M., though it gives a different twist to the story, saying that she wasn't a common prostitute so much as that her parents were part of the Jewish resistance against Rome, and basically used her from a young age as a pawn to get information from Roman leaders..and eventually this kind of lifestyle and upbringing, had a rather detrimental and unbalancing affect on her psyche.   Cayce's source said that Yeshua did not know a woman in that sense, and if he had decided to be with one, wouldn't have been with Mary M. because when he first met her, she was kind of a 'harlot', and not one he would have been innately attracted to in that sense.

 Eventually though, she became one of his strongest supporters, and really "got" his teachings at a deep level, and Yeshua recognized this in her.  See, its not black and white, either way, many shades of gray.  The woman whose Total Self had expressed the lifetime and personality of Mary M., supposedly and apparently had gotten readings (both health and Life readings) from Cayce.   Her Life readings are to me, quite fascinating.  To me, her's is a story of the redemptive power of love, particularly for those who have gone far astray.   Of course many, particularly women authors want to believe and want us to believe that she was a near pure priestess type, and a companion of Yeshua's.   Many of us have an ego need to bring him down to our vibratory patterns.      

 In other cases, the Cayce readings flat out contradict certain accepted notions about the Bible and biblical history.  For example, Cayce says that there were actually two women, and two examples, where Yeshua stopped the stoning of two women.    Again, in the end, it's an inner thing, and one has to go within for answers, or to check outside info.  


Quote:

Oh yes, people donate Rolls Royces to me all the time, and I am sure it is just out of love  Grin

;)  You lucky bastard you!  You must have attended some of the Abraham Hicks conferences. ;D



* interestingly, in his father Life readings, Cayce's source attributes his deep dislike and hatred of black people, partially to a karmic issue.  Apparently in another life, his father had been an ancient gaul, and had been taken as a slave on a row boat type ship, and one of the over seers who whipped him had been a man of color.  

Ahso:

Regarding what you wrote about Cayce picking up on the thoughts of people around him during readings, since he was in a hypnotic state, and since Michael Newton's clients were in a hypnotic state, I wonder if they sometimes picked up on his thoughts about how things are.

I've had meditations where I picked up on the mental noise that belongs to other people. I experienced this quite a bit when I came back from Spain last summer (2006). The flight from New York to San Francisco took 9 1/2 hours due to runway problems. I tried to pass the time by meditating. Problem is I kept seeing and hearing things that didn't have anything to do with me. I figure some might've come from the other passengers (the plane was crammed), and some might've come from people the plane I was on flew over.  One those stars I've talked about just flashed by the word "other." Perhaps this means the noise came from other people.  Occasionally this will happen while driving. I'll pick up thoughts that seem to come from other people. I call it noise because I can't make sense out of what I'm seeing and hearing.

;)  :) To lob in a few curve balls:

Do you guys think that most of us ordinary punters actually have the means by which to judge whether or not a person is realised???

Can we judge whether or not behaviours are enlightened by applying conventional rule based social judgements??

Does an unenlightened person have the toolkit on board to judge whether or not another is realised??

To show my hand a little. If you were to take it that a realised action is one that does the greatest good are we truly with our normal one dimensional tunnel vision  and consequent very limited take on mostly just this reality (never mind all of the others) in a position to judge what this good is, or whether an action is appropriate to achieve it??? (think of the butterfly effect and the problems we have predicting even tomorrow before answering that one)

It's anyway sometimes said that a realised person needs considerable life experience following the initial experience of realisation to become able to live from this new found view. That the old personality (the selfish instinct has been lost, but not all of the learned behaviour) needs time if it is to be replaced by the fruit of the new view.

I should say by the way that I've no very clear view of what (in truly practical as opposed to theoretical terms) realisation amounts to. Or even if it truly exists in this world, is capable of expression through a human body and mind.

My bottom line view though is that since i don't know for sure what a realised person is like that it'd be unwise in the extreme to either (a) indiscriminately believe what any teacher has to say or (b) diss the entirety of what any teacher has to say just because there is one part of his/her teaching that I feel is or may be wrong.

The journey is surely about remaining open so that we can based on our best judgement take provisionally on board what makes rational and intuitive sense whatever the source - gradually firming the view only as experience and deepening understanding repeatedly show it to be true.

But never (in the knowledge that our understanding must continuously evolve) getting hung up on needing absolute truths, or always being right. Because in this relative reality there exists no such thing as absolute truth. (we can of course speak vaguely of the possibility of truths existing in other  absolute realities, but that's different)

My sense is that there's many that are taken to be enlightened that are not, that get by on the credulity of followers and for whom they make excuses. But that likewise that there are some that are enlightened but unnoticed - who or if truly spoke 'truth'  speak would be regarded by most as nutters.

Put another way. It seems fairly clear that should an enlightened person decide for some reason to speak out that the majority would regard him/her as either a lunatic or a threat. It wasn't by accident that Jesus was crucified....

?????

Vajra:

You make it sound like a person has to be an all knowing master before he or she can discriminate whether or not a person is the enlightened master he or she claims to be.

What if turns out a person who claims to be enlightened isn't? If this is the case, there is no need for an enlightment litmus test of some kind.  All one has to identify what is false.

Once a person becomes clear about the shortcommings of certain types of teachings, it doesn't take long to see where a guru is coming from. At this point I don't have to read a lot, before I can tell where a guru is coming from.

Plus, after one has seen what guru after guru is about, one finally comes to the understanding that a person who really knows something wouldn't take part in an approach that resembles the approach taken by false gurus. Such a person would find a way to distance his or her self from such an approach.

Regarding their going through growing pains, many of them go through growing pains until they die. Many claim to be perfected all knowing masters despite their growing pains.  Plus some of their growing pains are inexcusable. Plus it goes beyond their behavior. They say things that are false, and never get around to saying things that are key. So many of them are like parrots. Repeating what false gurus before them said.





 

 Those are good questions and points Vajra.   I'm reminded of what Yeshua said and taught relating directly to this question, and also said that others would come proclaiming themselves or others as Christ, and to keep our eyes open to these false teachers.

 He said, and its just so simple, "You will know them by their fruits".   Again it relates back to the energy reaction and law of Like attracts and begets like.   Those who are truly enlightened will bring forth primarily good fruits in others and in life, not considering their own freewill.  

  And various psychic and channeled info out there can also fill in parts of the puzzle to these questions.   Quite a few of the more credible and verified ones, like the ones connected to TMI or the Cayce readings, agree that someone living from the true self will show certain outer signs automatically, beyond just their loving vibes, clear concise thoughts, etc.     One of these is that these people truly and completely in touch with their God selves, do not age, do not die, do not become sick.   They are not limited to linear space/time laws.  

 True, one's own spiritual development relates to how well and deeply perceive about others, but you are presupposing that none of here are near completion.   Personally, i feel that Recoverer has a very real and perhaps even probable shot of realizing Christ Consciousness in this life.    He's one of the few people that i've had this perception about.   I pick up a lot on people's energy emanations in the form of colors at times.  

 The colors do not lie about the state of a person's spiritual development.   If i sense a lot of golden shades, deep clear blues, true violets, and white light energies in relation to a person, i *know* that this person is rather rare indeed, and probably close to completion.  

 I also get pretty fast vibrating energies in relation to Bruce Moen, even though i don't agree 100 percent with everything he says.  I get the sense that he and his Total self is getting rather close to full completion and lift off.   Does this mean that i hang on his every word, and always agree with him?   Nah, i think he still has belief system blockages relating to animals, and the wrong use of same.    Neither he nor Recoverer are vibrating at the pure White Light levels yet, like Yeshua was towards the latter part of his public teaching.  

  My guidance has made it clear to me in many various ways, that Yeshua achieved full and complete "enlightenment" while partaking of physical energies, and thus is the ultimate pattern and example to look at, no matter what one's belief systems are and what they are called.  

recoverer wrote on Oct 12^th, 2007 at 7:51pm:

Ahso: Regarding what you wrote about Cayce picking up on the thoughts of people around him during readings, since he was in a hypnotic state, and since Michael Newton's clients were in a hypnotic state, I wonder if they sometimes picked up on his thoughts about how things are. I've had meditations where I picked up on the mental noise that belongs to other people. I experienced this quite a bit when I came back from Spain last summer (2006). The flight from New York to San Francisco took 9 1/2 hours due to runway problems. I tried to pass the time by meditating. Problem is I kept seeing and hearing things that didn't have anything to do with me. I figure some might've come from the other passengers (the plane was crammed), and some might've come from people the plane I was on flew over.  One those stars I've talked about just flashed by the word "other." Perhaps this means the noise came from other people.  Occasionally this will happen while driving. I'll pick up thoughts that seem to come from other people. I call it noise because I can't make sense out of what I'm seeing and hearing.

 I'm sure that's possible, but in Cayce's case, it seemed to mostly happen in obvious ways when people near him were thinking and feeling in a particularly strong way, i.e. being "emotional" about it as we say nowadays. Usually he tried to surround his readings with a prayerful, humorous, and appreciative type of environment.   But, as in the case of his father (who was kind of a negative person in general), sometimes it couldn't be helped, or sometimes he just ate particularly unhealthily, smoked too much, etc. or occasionally had the wrong motivations for getting a reading...

 But yeah, i do know what you mean about meditating around others and picking up on 'noise'.    In Michael Newton's case, my sense is that its more skewing relating to his conscious interpretation of what his patients did say, not in obvious ways, but in more subtle ways inserting his own beliefs or belief blockages.   For example, the existence of Atlantis, many of his clients talked about advanced ancient cultures and lands that we as a society don't know about today, but Michael wrote it off as them talking about experiences on other planets.  Or saying that it was an allegorical myths or experiences in other dimensions which get translated as physical but really aren't.  

 What seems clear is that he doesn't believe in "Atlantis" and so info that comes up as possibly supportive of Atlantis, he tries to interpret differently.  Most of us do this to some extent or another.

Fascinating, all of you.

I realize that I have had occasion to spend time with many gurus in my life...and I am grateful for each one. The ones I felt that I chose, and also those accidental meetings along the road. It is a life of riches to enounter gurus of all sorts. As a matter of fact, gurus are everywhere I look...how lucky am I!

love, blink :)

Ah So and Recoverer. Thanks for that. My thought is actually that we're in a pretty similar space on this, so don't view this as disagreement or argument. Nor was the point to in some way cast doubt on motives.

My intention was to move us towards discussion of the practical issue of how to approach possible teachers or spiritual friends.

What I was trying to bring into focus is the fact that many of us seem to (as in most human affairs) head for for the polarities when deciding how to approach a teacher. Those on the doubting wing (if they even get beyond prejudice to make an approach) often tend to apply simplistic rule based criteria in judging them, with a 'one miss and you are out' mindset learned from politics and other forms of competitive public debate. Others suspend their disbelief and natural intelligence. Many seek an ability to 'play the part' in a teacher - if they don't fit some stereotype they can't be real. There's also a tendency to view enlightenment as a sudden transformation that confers some sort of infallibility on the  person concerned.

The result is that lots of teachers with a lot of wisdom to communicate are dismissed out of hand. Equally lots of fairly obviously dodgy characters enjoy total acceptance until something busts the bubble leading to the often heard refrain 'I was misled'.

Which implies that our own innate wisdom and intuition (or stage of enlightenment) is also a big part of successfully working with a teacher - especially given that early on our judgement is fairly poor.

My sense is that enlightenment (whether applied to the student or the teacher) is as you suggest not all that simple. We're all capable of moments of enlightenment - 'ah-ha' moments  when the discursive mind gets out of the way and we open to all. At the other end of what's probably a very complicated multidimensional continuum there's those (probably a very few) like Jesus and the Buddha who reputedly achieved and lived complete enlightenment. (whatever that is!)

With all of those variables in play it's probably no wonder that the student teacher relationship creates lots of froth!!

It's maybe worth considering what the reality of the situation may be:

Your teacher is probably not fully enlightened.
Even if he/she is their actions may not yet fully reflect this.
Much of what is attributed to teachers is often generated by followers or commentators, and would not be subscribed to by the teacher.
You are almost certainly not enlightened either.
Your ability to discriminate in this regard between teachers is consequently probably limited too.
Your teacher won't always be perfect.
Your teacher won't always fit your expectations.
Your teacher is primarily responsible for doing no harm.
But it's your responsibility to apply discrimination - to avoid ego trips, to properly balance caution with openness, to be prepared to assume some considered risk to achieve progress while not being naive.
Trust and commitment (in both directions) can with validity build only with mutual experience.

Much like most life situations there's usually good in there (often lots) mixed up with the not so good or occasionally the downright bad. Our task (our spiritual path) requires us to with flexibility, openness, dedication, discriminating intelligence and compassion find our way through this maze.

All the while knowing that while we may in our weaker moments hope for it that there's no such thing as a free lunch....

Just my 2C of course, which may or may not be all that useful. Thoughts on how to approach teachers?

Maybe I'm getting too worldly....

my new image stabilized binoculars arrived two days ago. They are...

almost as good as Enlightenment.

I feel like I have new eyes, and there is so much more that I can see. I can see into the expressions of the animals in the gardens and alley surrounding the balcony on which I sit. I can see their private contentment at this brief moment of plenty before the winter sets in.

Perhaps I should be more like them. While I'm in this world.

love, blink :)

wrote on Oct 13^th, 2007 at 8:06am:

Fascinating, all of you. I realize that I have had occasion to spend time with many gurus in my life...and I am grateful for each one. The ones I felt that I chose, and also those accidental meetings along the road. It is a life of riches to enounter gurus of all sorts. As a matter of fact, gurus are everywhere I look...how lucky am I! love, blink :)

 This thread as become as varied as tea itself.   Hi Beautiful Blinking one, very important Heart balance and point you bring up.   I agree, and realize that most of us (me very much included), could stand to focus more on the truth that we all are teachers or students at different moments.  

  All in all, i feel that for me, i should try to follow more my own inner guru, than looking outside.

 But, beyond these broad generalizations, i thought we were talking more specifically about those individuals who set themselves up as teachers of truth to others either directly or indirectly, such as Osho?

 When these are knowingly false, and being destructive to others, sometimes they need to be blasted away (their falseness), just as did Yeshua with the false teachers of his time, the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Scribes.      

 Water first, then Fire, Blink, Fire.....

 Nice and well balanced post Vajra.   Again it goes back to what i've emphasized here before.  Living that which is Life and truths, will get us to the knowingness part, not talking, thinking, theorizing, or communicating about these things.


Quote:

At the other end of what's probably a very complicated multidimensional continuum there's those (probably a very few) like Jesus and the Buddha who reputedly achieved and lived complete enlightenment. (whatever that is!)

 Pure Life, Pure Love, Pure White Light?


Quote:

Thoughts on how to approach teachers?

 As one should approach self?  In a balanced, loving, and yet discriminating manner, always listening for the pure tones amongst the discordant, inharmonious noise, then acting from those pure tone resonations?


Quote:

Just my 2C of course, which may or may not be all that useful.

 False modesty?   Shine Brother, Shine, know your worth and speak from your Center with no Fear.  Look ever to the Teacher of teachers example, was he a shrinking violet... yet he was truly humble.

thoughts on how to approach teachers...

just to approach your higher self as a teacher for yourself.

if you do find a guru or teacher "out there" somewhere, and if they are a genuine teacher of spiritual measure, meaning at mastership level or approaching that, it will be their born and sworn duty to dash all your expectations that they have some secret knowledge which you do not possess.
I noticed you're a meditator who often enters that blissed awareness. that is where your teacher is hiding.

love, alysia

Alysia brings the voice of sanity.

As I read through this, it seems like the general opinion is that enlightenment is not real,  I'm not enlightened, you're not enlightened, our teachers are not enlightened, nobody is enlightened, everybody is a fraud and it's all a fake made up out of string, tissue paper and spirit gum anyway, and you can't get there from here. We can dump on all the authorities as self serving liars, and find something bad to say about everyone. For example, Jesus could be blamed for the Spanish Inquisition. Many of Rajneesh's followers could be criticized because they engaged in extra-marital sex. And there were people that Cayce failed to cure.

Respectfully, I suggest that that's not a very useful direction to go. For example, how do we talk about "enlightenment" unless we can define it? And once given a definition, then it either becomes evident that somehow we are all sluggishly oozing in that direction, or we are not. If not, what value is all the dissention? And if so, same question?

To my mind, Jesus had a lot of useful things to tell me, as did Rajneesh as did Cayce, as did Lao Tse etc. Maybe they weren't so useful to you, but there are others who speak to you and your specific needs, like Ramana Maharshi, perhaps or the cryptic rhetoric of Nisargadatta Maharaj, or some of my old hippie friends who found themselves in the words of Ram Das and Timothy Leary, or even Terrence McKenna ... As we look toward what we can get from these people, regardless of whatever else they represent, we find that there is often much gold hidden amongst the dross. Not all gold glitters any more than all that glitters must be golden.

Without arguing against anything said here, it still seems like there is another point to be made, and that is why I personally Alysia's remark so telling - My hearing seems to work best when my mouth is closed.

But even more than that, there are two things that we must do alone, passing the doorways to eternity. We must be born - Mom helps, as does the midwifery, but it's up to us to take the first breath. And then, we die alone. We might be surrounded by friends, but we still do it alone. In fact, friends may interfere - Ambrose Bierce (if memory serves) on his death bed told his friends, "Shut up! I'm busy dying."

So I'm inclined to go with Alysia's remark. The voice to seek is not the great wind that breaks rocks, nor the shaking of the earth, nor the howling of the elemental forces in all their bluster, but simply that still small voice within. Interestingly, that voice seems to have something good to say about virtually everyone. Perhaps everyone is right - Then we would also have Vajra and Blink showing the way, and from time to time, each of us would be guru to some other being in need. - In fact, isn't that the role that we admit to when we begin to do therapy with stuck souls?

All that having been said, I find that I have no Rolls Royces. However, I did marry a Mercedes who has transported me farther and better than any mechanical vehice - and besides, she's about all I can afford anyhow. :-)

dave

what did I do before enlightenment? chop wood, carry water. what did I do after enlightenment? chop wood carry water  :)

Dave's comments: But even more than that, there are two things that we must do alone, passing the doorways to eternity. We must be born - Mom helps, as does the midwifery, but it's up to us to take the first breath. And then, we die alone. We might be surrounded by friends, but we still do it alone. In fact, friends may interfere - Ambrose Bierce (if memory serves) on his death bed told his friends, "Shut up! I'm busy dying."
_____

haha! love it Dave. as a matter of fact u just gave me some grist for my mill; I have a whole rote coming in I need to write down after this post..so thanks. love to write stuff down.  I don't think honest seekers after truth realize we are dying every day; some belief system dies, or some thought dies that one used to be happy and content with, or attached to, I should say. a mini death, a feeling of death upon the soul which strives after truth only to lose it, the best idea they ever had.
so yea, its best if you see someone dying, not to flap the lips on them but listen to their sound of dying, so if they need you, you can just hold their hand and thats all they really wanted anyway. we all want to be loved and we all want to love.

then u mention your wife Dave, and I'm getting this picture over here that she is your cup of tea...then I think about high maintenance partners, and I see our wonderful Dave here, in his own words, sluggishly oozing, in tube worm fashion, again, his own words, towards enlightenment ...Dave, I have to stop here and congratulate you on your use of the english language..I see entire pictures in my mind when you talk..so talk on!

ok, I'm moseying on over to my rote to unfold, its like a map, words are maps and the mind is the magnifying glass you use to focus in on them.

then I have to chop wood and carry water... [smiley=vrolijk_1.gif]

I'm personnally - I don;t think you were only referrring to me) not saying enlightenment doesn't exist, but I'm not completely sure if it does or not, and what it would resemble - for example you still couldn;t avoid (presumably) some bad things happenning to you, but would you no longer sufffer as a result and just have this serenity that would come from having a really big perspective on things? But then again how would it be if you just reacted with the same serenity to everything - would you have no more, varying, emotions as we experience them? Would that be good, or would it get boring, or would "boring"have no meaning to an enlightened person? What about love? If we loved truly everyone absoutely equally, what would happen to the special relationships ordinary people have? - I mean if you totally loved a stranger off the street just as much as you love your wife (just that you know her better) - how would that be? How about things we find fun or pleasurable, would they lose their special qualities too, if we felt serene about everything? (I believe there are Buddhist exercises concerning trying to think of pleasurable things as worthless or as not better than things typically seen as disgusting - but maybe that's all they are - exercises?) Would you still enjoy a good meal, or beautiful music? Maybe you'd still enjoy pleasant things the same if they came along but not "need" or "crave" any of them, or miss them if they were not there (would an elightened person still cry when a loved-one died?).  Just pondering. maybe I'll know one day ! Also, if you were fully enlightened, would you also be omnicscient, or not? What would that be like? Having nothing more to learn or be curious about, and knowing everything about everybody?

I don;t think this lack of knowledge, or uncertaintly, stops me thinking I want to be a better person though, more at peace, more loving, more positive and useful to other people and the world, less scared and unhappy, with a wiser perspective on things etc (or thinking that I have made progess already to some extent).

As for recognising a person with great spiritual growth (whether they are "enlightened "or "realised"or not) as I've said before, I had a powerful experience on being close to the Dalai Llama - a strong sense of well-being and warmth - that suggests to me he's well on the way. I don't know if he's "perfect"but I've not heard much very negative about him, apart from, eg some followerers of some spirit called Dorje Shugden who claim he has tried to suppress their traditions. He has, I think, denied he has especially tried to repress it, but that in his tradition this spirit is seen as negative, so I guess if he's discouraged this, he's just doing what he sees as right.

I do find it disappointing if I read seemingly well-founded negative comments about people I admire (not refeerring to the above) but then, I guess it also , as I said, encourages you not to worship other humans or see them as infallible, and try more to improve yourself. Also, like I said, I feel that just becasue someone doesn;t always behave perfectly (whatever that is) , it dopesn;t mean they can;t have some useful things to say.

Oliver said: Also, if you were fully enlightened, would you also be omnicscient, or not? What would that be like? Having nothing more to learn or be curious about, and knowing everything about everybody?
____

I think enlightenment or ascension, is a process, not like poof! now you are enlightened. if u look at some of our avatars down thru the centuries, they don't stay for long lifetimes, at least not in the public eye. I believe that is because they have learned to "appear and disappear" at their own discretion, sort of like being visible or invisible, they are able to do what we would consider magic, but to a master it's just natural.

and knowing everything about everybody is another way to look at that:
there are some people who read minds. it's not that they study how to do this; the one I am thinking about was born this way for a purpose. not sure what the purpose is, and it was annoying for him and he had to think of a way to shut it down and turn it back on if he needed it. think of the constant bombardment of useless thoughts that would come into him until he learned how to close it down.

I believe the nature of the universe is found within the nature of infinity. therefore I see no reason to feel trepidation over the loss of curiosity.  :)

thank you. Some interesting examples, and I'm glad you think there might still be new things to find out about and be curious about.  That certainly makes my (not enlightened yet) life more interesting  :)  

;) I think maybe we were getting a little heavy and intellectual about it all there. Thanks for bringing up this and for emphasising the heart side guys.

That said I think we're in more or less the same space, more that the style of expression and the aspects  addressed are a little different.

The bit that's clear is that we have to take ownership of our own path, with or without the help of an external teacher. But that equally we come equipped for this journey - that if we will look within we will find what we need as and when we need it......

Yes, the fire, which must be watched. And handled with care... :) blink





wrote on Oct 13^th, 2007 at 11:32am:

wrote on Oct 13th, 2007 at 8:06am: Fascinating, all of you. I realize that I have had occasion to spend time with many gurus in my life...and I am grateful for each one. The ones I felt that I chose, and also those accidental meetings along the road. It is a life of riches to enounter gurus of all sorts. As a matter of fact, gurus are everywhere I look...how lucky am I! love, blink :)  This thread as become as varied as tea itself.   Hi Beautiful Blinking one, very important Heart balance and point you bring up.   I agree, and realize that most of us (me very much included), could stand to focus more on the truth that we all are teachers or students at different moments.     All in all, i feel that for me, i should try to follow more my own inner guru, than looking outside.  But, beyond these broad generalizations, i thought we were talking more specifically about those individuals who set themselves up as teachers of truth to others either directly or indirectly, such as Osho?  When these are knowingly false, and being destructive to others, sometimes they need to be blasted away (their falseness), just as did Yeshua with the false teachers of his time, the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Scribes.        Water first, then Fire, Blink, Fire.....

Blink:

I don't regret the time I spent with false gurus because it was a part of my growth process. Consider one group I was with. Some of the teachings were true and I benefited accordingly.  I spent a lot of time meditating during this period and this was beneficial. I got to know and live with some wonderful loving people. Their hearts were purer than the guru who led the group. I had two cats that I otherwise wouldn't of had. I learned about eating healthy. It did take some time to clear away the false ideas I picked up while with the group.

The feeling I get from you is that you're a very nice and loving person. When you're done with your current physical life, you're bound to end up in a very nice higher realm. I didn't write what I wrote because I want to be a hard case. It is just that I feel compelled to share what I've learned.  Perhaps others will benefit.



wrote on Oct 13^th, 2007 at 8:06am:

Fascinating, all of you. I realize that I have had occasion to spend time with many gurus in my life...and I am grateful for each one. The ones I felt that I chose, and also those accidental meetings along the road. It is a life of riches to enounter gurus of all sorts. As a matter of fact, gurus are everywhere I look...how lucky am I! love, blink :)

I agree with what you say Alysia.

When it comes to learning from others, I feel I can learn more from the people who visit this forum, than I can learn from gurus.  One big difference between us and them, is that none of us here seem to be suggesting that we have all of the answers or are perfected masters. Therefore, none of us needs to be limited by what the other has found.

I believe it is rare for people to become a perfected, all knowing master while here in the physical. This is okay. We just need to get pointed in the right direction.  We can sense this direction by seeing how much PUL is found.


LaffingRain wrote on Oct 13^th, 2007 at 1:16pm:

thoughts on how to approach teachers... just to approach your higher self as a teacher for yourself. if you do find a guru or teacher "out there" somewhere, and if they are a genuine teacher of spiritual measure, meaning at mastership level or approaching that, it will be their born and sworn duty to dash all your expectations that they have some secret knowledge which you do not possess. I noticed you're a meditator who often enters that blissed awareness. that is where your teacher is hiding. love, alysia

Dave:

My definition of enlightenment is being able to live "completely" according to love, and understanding things according to what universal mind reveals, rather than what our beliefs assert.

This seems to be a hard state to reach, because our egoic tendencies of mind have a different goal.  Such tendencies try to secure safety, continuity, happiness, peace and love, by defining what reality is all about according to their whims.  They make it so one isn't willing to completely let go, so one can see how things really are. Once one does so, I doubt that what one finds can be boxed/packaged within a particular system of thought, whatever that system of thought might be.

Good stuff R, and broadly my view as well. I think that much like in everything we often tend to think of gurus (teachers is maybe a better word with less baggage attached) in terms of polarities (perfect or a fake) when the reality is that everything from your inner guide to your cat to life circumstances to your awkward neighbour to the guy at the local meditation centre with delusions is to one degree or another your guru.

But that our ability to draw from any of these is determined by our degree of awakening.

That in a way the most important step is to drop the expectation of finding or needing a perfect guru (that's not to say that they haven't or don't exist, although as already said i suspect that our ability to truly judge this increases only as we ourselves progress), and to start to work with what presents - both within and without of us....

That sounds sensible to me

Right Vajra:

There are many things that can teach us. For example, I have a boss who isn't into spiritual things, but I can learn a thing or two from her about being patient.


wrote on Oct 15^th, 2007 at 6:07pm:

Good stuff R, and broadly my view as well. I think that much like in everything we often tend to think of gurus (teachers is maybe a better word with less baggage attached) in terms of polarities (perfect or a fake) when the reality is that everything from your inner guide to your cat to life circumstances to your awkward neighbour to the guy at the local meditation centre with delusions is to one degree or another your guru. But that our ability to draw from any of these is determined by our degree of awakening. That in a way the most important step is to drop the expectation of finding or needing a perfect guru (that's not to say that they haven't or don't exist, although as already said i suspect that our ability to truly judge this increases only as we ourselves progress), and to start to work with what presents - both within and without of us....

I like this definition, Recoverer, because it makes the important point that the universal mind reveals what it will, according to our understanding.  

It seems that our ego does, indeed, have a different goal, and would like for this ilfe, and this universe, to fit neatly into a rather small package. On our rather small packages we each have fastened or written signs of all sorts to the Creator, as we see the Creator. "Good things belong in here!" "Leave my package alone!" "Don't drop on the floor, PLEASE!"

But our packages get all tossed around in transit. Some of us end up in the astral conveyor belt by accident, or deliberate intent. "Astral traveler, here."

The Creator says, "Please don't shoot the messenger....but we're awfully busy back here. We'll try to get you where you need to be, but we can't promise you'll get there from point A to point B.

As a matter of fact, you may go from point A to point T and then back to point C again. Just the way it works here. But I'll make sure you have a good view, that is, if you want one."

love, blink :)


recoverer wrote on Oct 15^th, 2007 at 2:29pm:

Dave: My definition of enlightenment is being able to live "completely" according to love, and understanding things according to what universal mind reveals, rather than what our beliefs assert. This seems to be a hard state to reach, because our egoic tendencies of mind have a different goal.  Such tendencies try to secure safety, continuity, happiness, peace and love, by defining what reality is all about according to their whims.  They make it so one isn't willing to completely let go, so one can see how things really are. Once one does so, I doubt that what one finds can be boxed/packaged within a particular system of thought, whatever that system of thought might be.

The subject of Osho came up at another forum.

http://www.kundalini-support.com/forum/index.php/topic,1591.0.html

So, is one ruined forever by association with "another's" foolishness?

Not to dismiss accountability, but aren't each of us different people than we were yesterday?

Is my word bad because I lied years ago? Am I the little boy who cried wolf? I see a tumultuous journey, and one who was both wise and foolish in a lifetime....

If someone were to take a picture of me twenty years ago, and now, do I look the same? Or could you find good and bad wrapped up in every moment?

It is inexplicable how we change in our lives...in ways we cannot imagine. And some of us have some rather "interesting" devils to contend with, being born as we are...

And so, it is our job to become a human being. It is becoming, always becoming.

love, blink :)

Nice thoughts Blink & R.  I'm not a big believer in the idea that have somehow to attach ourselves to a perfect guru, or even to a single teacher. Not surprising I suppose given my view that most teachers do not exhibit perfect realisation. Its probably is a good idea to commit to a clear path as defined by one tradition though, in that too much 'sleeping around' risks dilution of our focus on what is a pretty tough task anyway - one that requires focused work.

I've only read a few of his books, but my inclination is to defend Osho  because I've never read anything that he wrote that didn't stand up. As before I suspect that much of what he gets fingered for was the doing of his group, or is down to misunderstandings based on differing societal values.

I'm a huge cat fan too, our cats have taught me so much about resting in presence, about catching that vibe. Animals I guess are in some ways much closer to realisation than we often are simply because a less complex and more passive intellect provides less opportunity for them to get lost in ego. So they are much better at remaining in the now.

On the other hand they all seem no more than ourselves to be lost in the dream of belief in physical selfhood. With the disadvantage of not having enough intellect to provide the alternative overview that seems to be the first step on the way to the different unselfish (loving) view that enlightenment entails.

We in contrast have this crazy almost uncontrollable monkey brain which causes almost as many problems as it solves. But at least (with Grace) it gives us the potential for realisation.

I often think though that enlightenment while of itself an absolute phenomenon (its taught) may be a relative rather than an absolute phenomenon at this level despite the opposite being implied. In the sense that if we're physically or intellectually challenged there may be limits to what we can manifest. Or that if in a future life we end up driving a massively faster and more capable brain it may take time for us to learn to maximise our use of it to manifest PUL - even if we remain free of the basic misconception of physical selfhood.

PUL is for sure the indicator of an enlightened person. But while at core we all have it and all can recognise it given right circumstances I suspect it's often the case that the static created by egotistical mind obscures both transmission and reception.....

recoverer wrote on Oct 16^th, 2007 at 7:37pm:

The subject of Osho came up at another forum. http://www.kundalini-support.com/forum/index.php/topic,1591.0.html

 I laughed my butt off when i read this line from that article, "At least one of those twelve Buddhalicious Babes"

 Buddhalicious..., i'm gonna start using that one!   "Becky, you're vibing so Buddhaliciously right now"   :D ;D  (i'm not trying to be negatively irreverent to the Buddha, i sometimes make fun of Yeshua and my respect for him is deeper and wider than the ocean).

Hey AhSo:

It wasn't Osho's fault that he did things such as have women he referred to as Buddhalicious not wear any panties. His evil followers must've possessed and him forced him to this and the other negative things he did.


wrote on Oct 18^th, 2007 at 10:33pm:

recoverer wrote on Oct 16th, 2007 at 7:37pm: The subject of Osho came up at another forum. http://www.kundalini-support.com/forum/index.php/topic,1591.0.html  I laughed my butt off when i read this line from that article, "At least one of those twelve Buddhalicious Babes"  Buddhalicious..., i'm gonna start using that one!   "Becky, you're vibing so Buddhaliciously right now"   :D ;D  (i'm not trying to be negatively irreverent to the Buddha, i sometimes make fun of Yeshua and my respect for him is deeper and wider than the ocean).

Osho has this to say about the Master:

The Master in Zen is not a master over others, but a master of himself --and this self-mastery is reflected in his every gesture and his every word. He is not a teacher with a doctrine to impart, nor a supernatural messenger with a direct line to God, but simply one who has become a living example of the highest potential that lies within each and every human being. In the eyes of the Master, a disciple finds his own truth reflected. In the silence of the Master's presence, the disciple can fall more easily into the silence of his own being. The community of seekers that arises around a Master becomes an energy field that supports each unique individual in finding his or her own inner light. Once that light is found, the disciple comes to understand that the outer Master was just a catalyst, a device to provoke the awakening of the inner.

love, blink :)

thank you Blink! that was perfect description of what happens. love, alysia

I cannot believe you posted this Blink:

"[quote author=blink link=1192113462/60#74 date=1192890162]Osho has this to say about the Master:

The Master in Zen is not a master over others, but a master of himself --and this self-mastery is reflected in his every gesture and his every word."

The article I posted clearly shows that Osho "DID NOT" live according to his own words.

This might sound off topic, but please bare with me. One of the main reasons George W. Bush was re-elected, is because human beings are largely emotional beings.  So often we think according to our emotions, without allowing the rational part of ourselves to balance things out. People who run political parties realize this. In the case of the people who ran George W. Bush's re-election campaign they used this fact to get the state of Florida (a very key state in the election process) to vote for Bush rather than John Kerry,  by really placing emphasis on the swift boat incident. If the voters in Florida used their discrimination, they would've realized that an interpretation of what happened in Vietnam years ago, is not more important than current issues. But the Republicans realized that many people would allow their emotional responses to determine who they vote for. They used the same type of emotional manipulation when they emphasized the gay marriage issue.

With the above in mind, it is important to realize that when it comes to discriminating sources of information, it isn't enough to do so in an emotional manner.  Too often such an approach leads to folly. What are the emotional factors that might cause a person to falsely access that a source of information is valid? One factor is that some of us have an inner yearning to know what spiritual truth is. If we find a source that makes statements that sound true, we are liable to become excited about doing so. If somebody finds particulars about a source that invalidates such a source, one might not be willing to see them, because one's false association of spiritual validity with a false source, causes one to cling. All one needs to do to free one's self from such a conundrum, is see that the existence of spiritual truth isn't dependent upon any particular source of information. Spiritual truth has been here long before mankind started to present it in various ways.

Another reason one might be overly quick to validate a false source of information, is because one wants to have an open minded, trusting and loving approach to life. It is certainly fine that one wants to be open minded, trusting and loving; but if one doesn't balance things out with reason, errors in judgement will occur.

Why do I feel so strongly about this issue that I keep discussing it? One reason is because I believe that a lot of us have come into this World to help change the World for the better, by increasing its vibrational rate and increasing its love level. People who have an inclination to move in such a direction, are quite often the people who get attracted to the many false gurus etc that exist. Even though they might find some valid information while with a false guru, they will also find some false information. I've found that this false information is more abundant than many people realize.  When we take on a limiting false belief system it doesn't help us reach our spiritual goals, it gets in the way.

Another reason I feel so strongly against false gurus, is because many people become disenchanted with their spiritual quest after going through what gurus cause people to go through. I wonder how much higher this World's vibrational rate would be, if these people weren't disenchanted.

Another reason I feel so strongly against false gurus, is because in addition to the disenchantment factor, many people go through negative things while with false gurus. For example, many people have problems with kundalini that was awakened while with a false guru. Their gurus promissed them that their kundalini would unfold very smoothly because of their guru's "spiritual" influence. The fact of the matter is that in many cases gurus couldn't help their followers with their kundalini problems. Numerous people with awakened kundalini have gone insane. Some have committed suicide.  For some things haven't been as extreme, but it has been a rough ride.

Many people have had negative experiences with false gurus because they have had their money taken from them; familial relationships ruined; and have been emotionally, physically and sexually abused. Often, people go their entire life without getting over the trauma they went through.

In a way, being under the spell of a false guru is the same as being a schizophrenic. One lives in a World of delusion that isolates one from the rest of reality. Many people, including myself, have found that this is the case when one follows a false guru.  

You're welcome, Alysia....I am glad you enjoyed the quote because I believe that it is a beautiful passage that describes perfectly what happens in Presence.

love, blink :)

"Another reason I feel so strongly against false gurus,..."

Recoverer, you have repeated this phrase several times in your well-defined statement.

Thank you for sharing your heart with us here. This is a place where the heart talks, and I am glad that it does.

love, blink :)

You always give us poetry Blink and so today I put up some poetry of Mary Oliver for everyone's pleasure.
do you have any poetry that you wrote I could read? if you do, tell u what..I will give you guys one of my originals..lol...I'll have to dig around for the best one I guess!  :D anyway, the invitation stands for all, and I don't think it's off topic because we have a basically open thread here most the time.
love, alysia

You're welcome Blink:

I believe that most people are interested in sharing love on this forum. Sometimes people have differences of opinion on what loving behavior is. If some people want to view me as an ogre that is fine with me.


wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2007 at 6:58pm:

"Another reason I feel so strongly against false gurus,..." Recoverer, you have repeated this phrase several times in your well-defined statement. Thank you for sharing your heart with us here. This is a place where the heart talks, and I am glad that it does. love, blink :)

 Lol if you're an Ogre Recoverer, then you are a beautiful one!    Hah, maybe you are Shrek's long lost, more spiritually inclined, identical Twin? :D

wrote on Oct 18^th, 2007 at 8:29am:

So, is one ruined forever by association with "another's" foolishness? Not to dismiss accountability, but aren't each of us different people than we were yesterday? Is my word bad because I lied years ago? Am I the little boy who cried wolf? I see a tumultuous journey, and one who was both wise and foolish in a lifetime.... If someone were to take a picture of me twenty years ago, and now, do I look the same? Or could you find good and bad wrapped up in every moment? It is inexplicable how we change in our lives...in ways we cannot imagine. And some of us have some rather "interesting" devils to contend with, being born as we are... And so, it is our job to become a human being. It is becoming, always becoming. love, blink :)

Good points Blink, but i would also like to expand this a bit more.   We human beings a curious mixture of True and false self, of nonphysical and physical energies, etc.  

 In the more purely nonphysical dimensions, change, vibrational uppage, and belief system transformations can happen pretty 'quickly'.  The nonphysical is very fluidic.   Physical on the other hand, is a collective thought form of a range of rather slow vibrating, more static, and thus much more "dense" for a lack of a better term.  In other words, the physical is much harder to push or move, than the nonphysical.  

 In my long years of studying astrology and people's charts, i've noticed that so many people, while there is constant flux and change from one day to another on the emotional levels and spectrum's of energy, that on the mental and spiritual levels...well these are much slower changing relatively speaking when compared to the emotional.   In the physical, we rarely have the Sylvia type experiences as Bruce outlined.    Occasionally does happen, and anything is possible of course.  So while you are not exactly the same person as you were 20 years ago, there may be still many similarities, tendencies, and general ranges of energy vibration.  You may be one of the more extreme and unusual cases as i just mentioned, but you must understand that this is not the average.

 These changes on the various energy levels can be seen in the aura of a person.  Again, like with astro. charts, many people's mental and spiritual energy levels don't change all that much while physically incarnate.   Usually a little tweaking here and there.   Yet emotionally, we may run the entire gamut of feelings and thoughts in just one day!  

 Let's apply this to Osho.   Osho seems to be one who really strongly and consistently indulged  and concentrated on the false self nature.   Does this mean that he was made up of only the false self, and never acted, felt, thought, etc. from the True self?   Of course not, but what was his tendencies, what was consistent about him throughout his life, as far as we are aware?   This, and these patterns are what links to that term "spiritual development".    As Recoverer said in many various ways, it does no one any immediate good to pay to close of attention to teachers of lower spiritual development and who had such destructive consistent tendencies in this life, even if their words sound fancy or good.  

 I'm sure Osho had his good moments, and truly wise acts, thoughts, words, and deeds, but what happens when others align to his vibrational patterns, which in reality were rather inharmonious and slow vibrating?    It can have a resonating affect on a person's consciousness, it's like an astrological 'influence' it impels, but does not compel.  Meaning, that a person's will is potentially the strongest factor, but that outer energies do have a tendency of influencing us both consciously and espeically unconsciously.

 This, this is why it is so important to follow the teachings, words, and especially living examples of those who are truly Enlightened first, and to those near so.   There are more "objective" ways of finding this out, the core colors of a person's Soul in the nonphysical sense, and then the color indications and harmony or lack thereof of the overall aura, can indicate in a more objective, and universally perceptible way the degree of spiritual development of a person in that moment, and in the broader, Soul sense.

 Having had occasional and temporary "extreme" and more negative than not periods in my life, such as once viewed on this site, i know full well the importance of forgiveness, and overlooking of faults and temporal actions, but i have not set myself up as a spiritual teacher to others in the ways that Osho or others have.  I'm not trying to materially profit off anyone here, or trying to gain a following.    I may someday write one book, but that's about the extent of it.  

AhSo....it is always perfectly okay if you and Recoverer do not receive "good vibrations" from Osho. I'm sure Osho has no problem with that.

But I do receive those good vibrations.  I know what good vibrations feel like. And perhaps some others do as well.

Of course, I respect your opinion on this issue. Each person must determine for themselves whether a given source of truth meets their needs or not. For you and Recoverer, and perhaps many others, Osho is not a preferred source.

I think there is a danger sometimes in generalizing about a person who is not here to explain themselves. Perhaps a few of us should pay Osho a visit to see what he has to say now. :)

I have found that if something sings to me, I cannot help but listen. And sometimes, I will sing along too.

You see, I enjoy many kinds of music. You are right about certain tendencies and patterns remaining with a person. My tendency is to hold onto everything, and to let everything go at the same time.

I don't know any other way to be.

love, blink :)

Can you tell me, Recoverer and AhSo, who would be your choice to join you in a cup of tea? That is, if Osho leaves the room for the moment.

I don't actually have a preference, if you want to know. I am willing to be dazzled and enlightened by anyone or anything at all.

Everyone is invited to this tea room, and there is plenty of tea to go around.

love, blink :)

Excuse me, but Osho has returned. Sorry:)

Imagine sitting down and facing Osho. You are meditating together. He has a past. You have a past.

You look into each other's eyes. You both continue meditating. Both of you have your eyes open.

No words are exchanged. You look into each other's eyes. Neither one breaks his gaze.

Who are you?

Are you thinking about who Osho slept with? SLAP!

Are you thinking about what Osho said he was in this world? SLAP!

Are you imagining all kinds of things? SLAP!

You look into each other's eyes.

Who are you now?

love, blink :)

Wow! More responses for a very enjoyable conversation. :) But I've got to run, and will post tomorrow. Love you all.

Hi Blink I admit I haven't been following anything said about Osho but I'm sure I would find something to love about him as I even like the bums in the alley I can find something wise and something to love about each person I come across because life is a gift and adventure is everywhere..just never know when spirit will speak to me thru another person..lol...the world is full of phenomenal truth once you stop looking to find fault with others..then spirit speaks through everybody. so don't worry about when others get uptight..its something they are working out for themselves.

I don't say nothing about nobody and I like it that way. just about myself.

love, alysia

LaffingRain wrote on Oct 26^th, 2007 at 12:14am:

I don't say nothing about nobody and I like it that way. just about myself. love, alysia

 Are you being for real?  You just recently insinuated (actually more than insinuated) all kinds of personally negative things about Albert, which you had no right nor basis in reality to do so--you seemed to have been reacting out of defensiveness and over-emotionality.  In any case, i would count that as saying stuff about others.
 Albert on the other hand, has admitted in the past when he was being to judgmental or what not with others on a personal level.  
 Please don't take this too personally Alysia, as i do like, respect, and care for you.  I like and appreciate your usually upbeat, and oft humorous vibe.  

 Hi Blink,

 As regards Osho.  I'm more than open to the possibility that he is now a different person with more constructive attitudes towards others and self.

 I hope that is the case, i hope that he can find or has found true happiness, which comes from living spiritually, and being constructive to both self and others on all levels.  

  You seem to confuse stating temporal, and more mental perceptions about someones actions and general patterns, to that of emotionally based and more fixed judgments.   The latter is always destructive to self and to others, the former can be constructive in the right circumstances to self and others.    It's kind of like the difference between saying, "you are a ahole" verse, "you're acting like an ahole".   The difference is subtle, but important.   As i've pointed out oft to you, and which you never seem to address directly, one came who was PUL incarnate and yet he occasionally spoke what seemed like strong or negative words in relation to others. And who was this always addressed to, to the false spiritual teachers of his day, because he knew that half truths are worse than whole lies for they deceive even the Soul.  

 Some or many of these spoke half truths, which had the effect to snare people in mental/emotional belief system traps.  Some of this was conscious manipulation, and much also unconscious and just distorted self beliefs and perceptions.  Point is, that many people looked to these because they were in positions of cultural respect and leadership.   It seems that Yeshua spoke out against false teachers well before he fully phased into the pure White Light state of being.   Some accounts have him as a teen traveling in India and speaking out against the Brahman Priests who tried to strengthen the caste system.

 Tell me, should he have kept his mouth shut, should he have not warned the people listening too or following these?   Maybe Love is bigger and more encompassing than just gentleness, affection, and feel good stuff?  Maybe Love also contains discrimination and occasionally seemingly 'hard words' as well as acceptance?  Maybe it changes according to the need and situation at hand?   Maybe only those who fully and consistently live love, really know and perceive all there is about love?  I don't, to date, and that's why i look to and talk about Yeshua's example.

 Hi Alysia,

 I saw a huge contradiction between what you preach and said about yourself, and your actual actions, and tried to point that out in as nice a manner as i could.  I was hoping that you would see the huge discrepancy between the two, and thus be more self honest about and towards self.  

 You can insinuate, judge, make up, and fling at me whatever barbs you want.   Now, emotionally i can take it well, and i'm glad its directed at me and not somebody more emotionally fragile.  

 Notice how you spoke of me as a person, as if you totally knew me and my issues, how you attached more fixed labels to me.. Notice that i just pointed out and spoke on certain things about what you were doing, and didn't say anything negative about the kind of person i think/perceive you to be?   That is the difference between judging a person, and stating a mental perception about their actions and whether or not they are constructive or destructive.  

Not sure what to say for risk of stirring trouble, but an observation is (a) not necessarily true and (b) of itself not inherently a judgement of anybody - unless it's used to attack. It may be of course, but even then is probably best to bite the tongue.

The issue we seem to be stuck with is that two views seem to have emerged on teachers - the 'bin them if they seem not to have been perfect so they can't mislead' argument, and the more relative view that says take responsibility for yourself and apply discrimination to draw on what they have to say that's good to you.

This is no trivial issue, because many high profile teachers (most of whom I have drawn a great deal from) have been accused of sexual and other funnies - and i think it's unwise to reject their teachings and writings wholesale for this reason alone.

I've my own (complex) views on why this may be, but wonder if it's not the case that any attempt to generalise or to 'win' on this debate on this debate does not amount to a refusal to allow others to take responsibility for themselves??

Point being we're all entitled to a view, and there's nothing wrong with expressing it but surely it's down to those hearing to choose???? Even God leaves us free to choose our own path...

At this point, I am suggesting to Bruce that this thread be moved to off-topic posts.

E.
[smiley=engel017.gif]

Yes, this is what happens sometimes when we "use our words," as we ask children to do rather than physically "duke" it out.

So, I think it is okay. When the breath slows our views always become clearer. But it can take time.

As an aside, and not because I feel compelled to keep this topic alive in this particular form, I should say that I do believe this thread is totally on topic, and involves very important and very basic concepts which make a difference in how we perceive people here on earth and in all metaphysically oriented explorations.

Justin, you mentioned one who came and reportedly spoke words which sound harsh to some, but were used to expose what he considered to be false teachings, and he did reportedly occasionally become extremely abrupt and emotional.

But what did he teach the "common" folk? Those who would listen?

Gentleness, love, sharing, mercy, forgiveness. He said, let the children come to me.

love, blink :)

Blink,

I agree that these posts may contain important information to some; however, Bruce writes that "this forum provides a space for sharing questions, experiences, wonderings and ideas regarding the exploration of human existence beyond physical life. To maintain an atmosphere of open, free discussion please follow the Posting Guidelines." Okay, so we are free to discuss issues that regard exploration of human existence beyond the physical, rather then personal opinions of people in the physical. When topics become personal in nature, Bruce has posted guidelines, which are very specific. In that vein, the idea of this topic should concern how this information affects Afterlife Explorations and Knowledge rather than how we on earth relate and metaphysics in general. Those more general topics can be considered under Off-Topic posts because although they relate to explorations, they may only tenuously be related to Afterlife explorations. I may be a lone voice on this point, which is okay, because I figure that someone will post about censorship, etc., which is funny because it isn't about banning discussions, only placing them in the correct forum as designated by the Forum owner.


E.
[smiley=engel017.gif]

Thank you Eternal Essence.....I suppose this thread may disturb some who view it.

I think there is quite a lot of excellent content here, though, from all. The boundaries between this world and the other are not always well-defined, and I find much here to ponder regarding the motivations behind our intentions, which is exactly where we begin when we travel.

love, blink :)

Placing a thread in a different section of the forum doesn't sound like a big deal. Only housekeeping or administration.

That said my personal view is that it's important to place afterlife exploration within some sort of context or larger overview - much of the importance afterlife exploration lies in grounding in experience aspects of the bigger issue of spiritual path...

Eternal Essence:

If you thoroughly consider what is being discussed, you wouldn't be so quick to hide the thread at a place where nobody can see it. Certainly one doesn't grow by sticking one's head in the sand like an ostrich.

Plus many threads on the main forum seem to be off topic.


EternalEssence wrote on Oct 26^th, 2007 at 9:02am:

At this point, I am suggesting to Bruce that this thread be moved to off-topic posts. E. [smiley=engel017.gif]

recoverer,

I have followed this "topic" from beginning to end. The farther along you take it, the less there is to it. My original suggestion remains and you have supported my point brillantly.

E.
[smiley=engel017.gif]

Blink:

You asked Ahso and I what our cup of tea is. Speaking for myself, I no longer read books about spiritual practice. Not to suggest I'm above such a thing, but I've done so a ton, and things have gotten to the point where it is no longer helpful. At this point I've found it is much better to figure things out myself, along with the help of spirit guidance.

Not to say there aren't any books I like. I'd say my favorites are Bruce Moen's Voyage to Curiosity's Father, Robert Monroe's Ultimate Journey, Rosalin Mcknight's Cosmic Journeys, and Howard Storm's near death experience book. These books don't say much about spiritual practice. They do indicate the importance of love. I don't believe one needs to read a bunch of guru books in order to figure out how to live according to love. I also like the notes I make while journaling and such.  I find out a lot about myself this way.


Alysia:
I do not have any pent up anger about gurus. Surely a person can feel strongly about the wrongs some people do to others, without personal hurt being a factor. Perhaps it is simply a matter of a person feeling strongly about the spiritual welfare of the human race.

Ahso:
You made some good points. For example, some people believe that unless you're enlightened you can't judge whether another person is enlightened. Boy am I familiar with that line of thinking. Many false gurus have thrived partly because their followers think in such a way. As you pointed out, some people can tell what a person is like by his or her energy field. I doubt Osho radiated pure white light. Also, unless a person actually lives his life in a balanced and loving manner, I could care less how good he is at coming up with words that sound profound. It really makes a difference to me whether a person is serving the light or his or herself.

Your point about tuning into the energy level of a person one follows is also key. Their are some gurus who are known for having a lot of shakti (an Indian word for energy), yet they are clearly not enlightened. Why is this so? One reason might be because their followers have made an energetic connection to them. If you connect to such a guru, not only do you connect to the guru, you connect to an energy field that includes the followers of that guru. Despite how things might seem,  spirits who are currently making use of bodies, can make energetic connections at a spirit level. If one feels an energetic attraction to a guru that has many signs of being false, one might ask what part of one's energy is connecting to this guru.  

I also agree that when we are in the physical realm, it is a mistake to try to act as if we are living in a higher realm. Your ahole analogy is accurate. It makes no sense to tell somebody like Adolph Hitler, "That's okay fella, you're just living your light in your own way." One does everybody including "him" a big favor when one tries to point out his errors.

Regarding receiving criticism, I've grown a lot by being open to it. Ironically enough, some of this occurred while I was with the group I speak of. But this criticism didn't come from the guru. It came from some of the group members I lived with. These people were very loving people, and gave me criticism for my sake. Sometimes my spirit guidance will also points out my  faults. This is also very helpful.

Eternal Essence:

Perhaps you wouldn't feel the same about a topic that is important to you. Some people might wonder why an important topic gets hidden.

Sorry for suggesting you didn't read the whole thread without knowing whether or not you did so. :)

EternalEssence wrote on Oct 26^th, 2007 at 12:48pm:

recoverer, I have followed this "topic" from beginning to end. The farther along you take it, the less there is to it. My original suggestion remains and you have supported my point brillantly. E. [smiley=engel017.gif]

recoverer,

It is important to you? Yes, I understand that. I realize that it is important. But that is a side issue to whether it is in context with the thread that it appears on? Because the topic appears on a different thread, it should not be considered hidden. I read the off-topic posts just as frequently as other threads.

Also, I appreciate the gesture at the end of the post and assure everyone that I do not post any reply without having read all the replies or topics referencing it prior to answering.

Perhaps this thread will straighten itself out. Only time will tell.

E.
[smiley=engel017.gif]

So you all do not think that I miss the humor I find in some of these topics and to show you how I try to read every word, I bring to you a funny comment. I know blink did not mean to post this as it was written, but I find that it seems quirky and I loved it, so I mention it here.

"Your ahole analogy is accurate." I am not sure what that meant, but it was a pleasant fit of giggles I got, which is why I guess I should have found it to begin with.

With Affection,
E.
[smiley=engel017.gif]

Please excuse me, E, but I did not say anything close to what you have "quoted" here. That was not me, if it was said.

But I'm glad if it made you laugh anyway.

love, blink :)



EternalEssence wrote on Oct 26^th, 2007 at 2:05pm:

So you all do not think that I miss the humor I find in some of these topics and to show you how I try to read every word, I bring to you a funny comment. I know blink did not mean to post this as it was written, but I find that it seems quirky and I loved it, so I mention it here. "Your ahole analogy is accurate." I am not sure what that meant, but it was a pleasant fit of giggles I got, which is why I guess I should have found it to begin with. With Affection, E. [smiley=engel017.gif]

I did refer to the below paragraph from Ahso.

Whatever the case, I've got some really bad news. Because the weekend is coming up, after today, I won't be around for a few days so I can contribute additional posts to this thread. What well happen to the universe then? Auggggggggggggggggggggggggggh!!!!!!!!! :'( :'( :'(

"You seem to confuse stating temporal, and more mental perceptions about someones actions and general patterns, to that of emotionally based and more fixed judgments.   The latter is always destructive to self and to others, the former can be constructive in the right circumstances to self and others.    It's kind of like the difference between saying, "you are a ahole" verse, "you're acting like an ahole".   The difference is subtle, but important.   As i've pointed out oft to you, and which you never seem to address directly, one came who was PUL incarnate and yet he occasionally spoke what seemed like strong or negative words in relation to others. And who was this always addressed to, to the false spiritual teachers of his day, because he knew that half truths are worse than whole lies for they deceive even the Soul."

Yes, I am quite familiar with Ahso.

:)

E.
[smiley=engel017.gif]

If I might make a suggestion to "All of you"...... try making yourself that "cup of tea". I think you may find it much more injoyable and fulfilling than the cup offered by another.
Joe