...........continued from response to vajra.............

Seekers must be vigilant if they want to proceed. There is a need to realize that once we make a conscious decision to move forward, we are not responsible for anyone else's similar God-given decision or how it unfolds. This needs to be a conscious operative principle in a real seeker's life.   iow's - Once one commits to 'the Path' in whatever form, God takes care of the seeker's life-guidance - this is true in regular life in a general way, but it is more specific, or a different kind of directed attention while on the Path. Therefore not our business - everyone else who is seeking, either nominally in the case of 'insincere' or 'corrupt' versions (again, our own 'objective' assessment), or functionally in the case of 'genuine forms' (again, not our personal business unless we want to borrow inspiration or information). Actually why even make the distinction? I don't think God does since it is all part of the same process. In fact, if most seekers are honest with themselves, they will immediately see that they cover both categories, even on a minute to minute basis.

Another problem brought up by this issue is that seekers often substitute outer form for inner content, then compare and rank appearances which is a mistake -
The quality of appearances or outer forms presented by guidance are often a compassionate presentation for our benefit, so we can see and recognize content according to our own conditioned symbol set, whether racial/genetic, cultural, geographic, intellectual, etc. - and to have access to very specific needs at very specific times. God and His Instruments appear in many forms, yet are essentially one - and the form we do the best with right now is the one that is given. Especially true or I should say important to see this in dealing with the issue of divine presence on earth in the forms of various Teachers, and teachers - all essentially the same for our purpose - only the one that is best for us right now is the one we get right now, even collectively.  That doesn't mean that any way or teacher is necessarily superior just because they are most appropriate or expedient for us right now, they just are for us. For someone else, maybe this is not the case. That is the real relativism.  The Divine exists in all. If one experiences a contact or evidences an interest (which is the same as a contact) in a specific form, it is for reasons of expediency according to the necessity of the seeker. Otherwise there would be no way to recognize and work with essential energies and experiences. Many people who go on endlessly about the superiority of one Teacher or another, would never even recognize them if they did not appear in the form that was already pre -established. There are stories in India about Shiva taking the form of a vagrant or untouchable, just to test the sincerity or integrity of a devotee. According to legend most fail.

The specific form used for this purpose in no way renders others' similar experiences as invalid. This is why it makes no sense, nor does it benefit anyone's search for truth - in fact it severely hinders it - to deny others experiences by exclusion, including the exclusion by a professed superiority, or by devaluing and invalidating others methods, choices, leaders - ie: Chosen Ideals. If someone who calls themselves a truth seeker and God lover is saying that X is all, and consequently Y is not, then they are quite stuck in a self-referrent, self-generated comparison that takes the seeker away from the inner content, which is the true means, and focusses on the outer form as a means, which is an error.

Faith in its very nature is blind -  it has to be - for if it were not, it would simply be a reasoned conclusion dervied from observed phenomenon, and that is not faith. But neither is it real faith, a conviction originating from the part of us that is the Knower of the Real - which mutually excludes others' by dint of its own presence in any one's life. It would have to be something else then - perhaps fanaticism - since the real faith is based on the essential unity of divinity.

Both institutions and individuals are the results of countless choices - the embodiment of accummulated choices all contributing to the present consciousness. As they change, we may find ourselves no longer in alignment with their motives, means and manifestations. What is not urgently needed is to fret about, revitalize and relive our own and others' unsatisfying past - or concern ourselves about others' present by finding fault, or by asserting our own superiority. If we choose to ignore what is unsatisfying and only pursue what creates joy, progress, and satisfaction - that in itself will create new kinds of connections and institutions that are very urgently needed.  We need to choose for ourselves what works for us right here and now without excluding others' same choices. That will be more inspiring for ourselves and others rather than debating those, who in our present view may represent 'narrow minded ignorant beliefs', when all they are doing is simply adhering to their own self-chosen God-given principles whatever the form.


ok stick a fork in me - I'm done now
- u

I didn't see Ultra as being critical at all of anyone. He/she was merely responding to Vajra from my pov as to Vajra's apparent concern that this board was and is on occassion called to task for it's premises. such criticism will happen in society no matter what our posted guidelines say that sharing in a friendly environment without criticism should be practiced. Thats what I heard him say. I also heard him say keep your cool, we're all in the same boat, no matter what religion or belief tenets.

I welcome our new member Ultra, and I salute this person for giving of his time and energy here that perhaps there will be a few who actually see, he/she gave their time and energy forth in good intention. I liked it Ultra, I followed it easily, it was written well, it's balanced and appropriate, as Vajra was bringing the subject up himself.

I'm also glad you yourself Ah So, have contributed similar works such as Ultra gave us. I read every word.



thanks for your response.

     Yup, kool beans Ultra. 

Hey you're right, who knows maybe Einstein is in your Disc, either way whether you thought so or not, i wouldn't judge you and that belief like some have judged and degraded me about some of my beliefs along those lines.    Reason why i wouldn't judge you or your belief in that, is simply because i realize i just don't know, and i don't have enough interest to really find out.... 

And after all, one thing i've learned from my own experience with guidance, and reading about many other people's experience with their own guidance, is that guidance is always most concerned with us, our growth, our relative and ever changing positives and negatives, etc. and not so much with others in the more specific and personal sense (in the more general and impersonal sense, this is different, but they are essentially specially "assigned" to us).     I guess that somewhat ends when one does become fully attuned to Source consciousness.  Dunno since i'm not there yet.

  Also, in general, i've noticed that some people have so constantly suppressed or repressed their innately strong superiority feelings, tendencies, and complexes (particularly those very heavily involved with and invested in certain eastern teachings or religious organized Christianity), and so have a tendency of unconsciously projecting judgment towards others whom they perceive as "arrogant" or whom have superiority issues.
To me, we all have that within us since we all have ego to varying degrees, and it's usually a good idea to be consciously aware of, and make friends in a sense with that shadow side of us.   On a personal level, i tend to prefer the honest and conscious folks with superiority complexes..and lol i guess that's because like attracts and likes like.

  Fire is a very important element (well all are, but Fire is the most innately transformative one), and oft times when people really strongly lack Fire or mostly have it connected to more unconscious indicators in the chart, like the Moon, South Node, or 4th house energies for example, well sometimes they can really dislike the more conscious Fire energy within others, and or against Fire energy in general.    Personally, i feel we all need a perfect, conscious balance of Fire, Earth, Air, and Water type energies if we are to be truly happy and fulfilled (interestingly, Fire is the only element which is not directly related to a more concrete material energy or rather 'form', Fire is much more a pure process than the other elements).

in my perception I see the superiority complex as pure ego and nothing to be proud about. Being open and more willing to except others beliefs will get all of us closer to home and to personal enlightenment. Some may be happy being with a Christian God or a Buddha (etc) like leader. (You know pigs and cows can be led with a ring through their noses.)  Whomever you personally choose to connect with, enjoy and feel enriched by your choice. There is nothing wrong with any of your beliefs except the one where one is better than the other. What I find wrong is the assumption that one has the better or true belief and that the other is not correct. There is no right or wrong. Walking around with blinders on will only lead you into walls.
Joe

Hi Ultra. Welcome. I took a look at the post, thought i'd get back to it when I had time and then forgot. Sorry. At least I have some competition now for title of the longest poster!  This is my riposte!

I'm not sure how this discussion got a bit edgy, but I don't think posts like these are about superiority complexes or putting others down, although they may get interpreted as that.

I guess they wouldn't arise either though if we were all of the same mind. The acid test is I guess as you say Justin our own behaviour relative to others, and to what we say - our intention. Whether we are acting out of love or out of ego ourselves.

Although in this I know I partly post to clarify my own thinking on stuff too -  I'm selfish to at least that extent. I also like to share some of the Buddhist insights that have helped me a lot, though I'm far from a Buddhist and would be horrified if I was regularly coming across as judgemental. But maybe I am. Perhaps some wiggle room is appropriate in that I suppose we all pitch vision somewhere ahead of our reality/capability.

I guess the difference between offering an opinion/making an observation and judging somebody is a fine line. We often perceive the former as judgement, while the latter can be judgement masquerading as information. Style plays a part too, we tend to pick up a dogmatic style because that's how a lot of what we read is written. Both sides in the exchange have tasks - the writer to be careful not to come across as tooty, and the listener not to be over sensitive. But bear in mind that even a judgemental post (and we've had a few) may contain lots of use which we lose if we can't handle it.

Perhaps this is why we place so called 'genuine' teachers on a pedestal - we'll only take teaching from what are accepted as superior beings. When the reality is that each and every one of us is our own and the other's guru if we can only remain open and receptive. The alternative is a dumbed down political correctness which to me would be a pity.

Brevity is great too, but some of us ( errm like me) are not that good at it. This board is actually very patient in that regard.

But viewed another way the sentence 'love is all' is all that need be said IF we all had it figured out. But we don't, and so it gets unavoidably complicated to communicate at C1/conceptual/language level unless we are either incredibly skilled, or talk in meaningless sound bites. The religious traditions bear this out - the Bible, ACIM, or the body of written Buddhist teachings are not exactly concise.

Sogyal Rinpoche of Rigpa fame tells a joke when speaking to the effect that it's just as well that the Gideons don't go around leaving copies of the Buddhist scriptures in hotel bedrooms - you wouldn't get in the door.....

To Ultra's post:

Yes, why supress or reject? Let a thousand flowers bloom as they say. I think that is my point, or one of them anyway.
However, I actually did not speak of seeking truth 'within' any person vs reject his/her methods or traditions - but to fully and completely accept the entire reality of others' beliefs, which come out of the same universe of possibilities we also have complete access to. There is a difference.

I think  this is another of these multilayered issues. We in our attitude must learn to remain open to all views, to see all with equanimity. But when it's time to act we have to make decisions, and so have to decide what's best in our own case.  Which requires wisdom and compassion if we are to get it right. A one size fits all view simply would simply lead to chaos.

I guess too that while there are absolute truths (like love) at the highest level that at this level they do express in highly relative terms - which means we have to stay light, open and flexible to capture true meaning. This stuff is just a crutch pending awakening. The saying 'when you meet the Buddha, kill him...' comes to mind.

What usually goes wrong between people is that egotistical prejudice or sensitivities close their minds to other views. Or even worse they fear them so much that they seek to stamp them out, by genocide if necessary, or by more subtle means. Which means they miss out  on input that may be useful, or may at least be harmless. Which is problematical, because you can't make wise decisions or progress without good input data.

This surfaces in lots of ways - the spiritual path requires remaining open as your view must always evolve, and to evolve generally requires adopting an ever wider view/higher truth.  Likewise if you're going to resolve disputes you have to be able to see both sides of the game as a prelude to offering a solution that satisfies both parties needs enough to avoid trouble. Which amounts to drawing on both sides' views, and transcending the right/wrong digital argument using a higher perspective to show how they can (instead of it being about winners and losers) co-operate to mutual advantage. The higher principle builds from the lower level views and integrates, it doesn't reject.

Having made the decision we still have to remain open to other views, and accepting of the fact that lots of others may not agree with us - and could be right. We never dig in and seek to make dogma of our position.

It's the classic Zen 'caring but not caring' deal. As usual it's rigidity and intensity in beliefs that causes the problem.

Frankly, I do not see how anyone is locked in. There is nothing but freedom. And if there is freedom, why use it to direct energy to institutions or attitudes which are not progressive in our view, whatever that view is?

There may well be nothing but freedom, but you wouldn't think so to watch our behaviours. The problem is rigidity and what's goes on in our heads. We lock ourselves into belief systems, and having done so start behaving like we somehow have to defend them.

It is the play of life itself in all its evolving forms within the ignorance of the physical, and these travails are not limited to the inevitable distortions of the Christian Church, Islam, or even Bruce Moen!

The problem of grasping and rigid egotistically driven beliefs applies to all religions, it's where most of us are. But conventional conservative Christianity has actually built into it dogmatic beliefs/attitudes which very intentionally try to block people from taking a wider view to protect so called eternal truths, infallibility and the like. But so also do many other (most?) institutional religions.

Surely grounds can be found through respectful debate for some movement on this??? This site in reconciling these positions through that debate has surely the ability to make an enormous contribution to all our futures???

There first has to be at least enough openness so that it makes some sense. Though you can never quite know the impact of your words.


I personally do not see the need to have any 'debate' in this matter per se., since there is really nothing to reconcile, and the requisite 'enormous contributions to everyones' futures reside within themselves already, totally accessible.

At one level I pretty much agree, but not entirely. At the absolute or God level none of this matters. Even at this level there is enormous scope for freedom of beliefs. We don't have to agree, just get along. But there is unfortunately a point beyond which beliefs can do enormous harm. Especially beliefs that encourage people to go out and force themselves on others for whatever reason. For example rigid self reinforcing beliefs that encourage people to go out and convert or make war on unbelievers.

Pretty much all of this sort of belief and resulting debate is as you say  inauthentic, or ultimately ego driven, and not at all the same as seekers hoping to expand their knowledge.

The problem is that the attempt to debate (especially when beliefs are rigid) is often counter productive, while argument and attack by causing escalation just drives people deeper into their holes. But I can't help feeling that there are very limited circumstances where the greater good is to engage robustly - if only because a totally passive response perhaps means that error or wrong is never challenged. But it's a tough judgement, because so often the effect is to cause an escalation of aggression and even violence.

The bottom line is as you say that we can never set up camp, must always move on....

There is a need to realize that once we make a conscious decision to move forward, we are not responsible for anyone else's similar God-given decision or how it unfolds. This needs to be a conscious operative principle in a real seeker's life.   iow's - Once one commits to 'the Path' in whatever form, God takes care of the seeker's life-guidance - this is true in regular life in a general way, but it is more specific, or a different kind of directed attention while on the Path. ......That doesn't mean that any way or teacher is necessarily superior just because they are most appropriate or expedient for us right now, they just are for us.

This is the issue of trusting in Grace, basic goodness or whatever you call it. If we release belief and rely on intuition (with sound teaching, intellect and common sense riding shotgun just in case we get it wrong) we eventually as you say find that we get the guidance that we need.

Tradition and exact teacher are not important as long as the message is in there somewhere. What matters is Grace, or wise discrimination so that we can pick what we need. As I've been saying a lot recently 'many paths lead to the top of the hill, and the cows all get to the barn just the same'. Truth surfaces in many forms, and is required in many forms depending on our situation.

But neither is it real faith, a conviction originating from the part of us that is the Knower of the Real - which mutually excludes others' by dint of its own presence in any one's life. It would have to be something else then - perhaps fanaticism - since the real faith is based on the essential unity of divinity. 

Faith and fanaticism are very different. The former (in its true form) seems to come from the same place as Grace/basic goodness, and has little to do with belief. It's identifiable by an openness and lack of fanaticism

Both institutions and individuals are the results of countless choices - .....As they change, we may find ourselves no longer in alignment with their motives, means and manifestations.

The temporal interests of the institution seem very often to come to transcend their legitimate mission....

hawkeye wrote on Nov 26^th, 2007 at 3:07pm:




Hi Joe, i think you kind of missed the point of my reply to you.  Either way, thanks for the apology and honestly no harm done.  I didn't get offended at all.  After having had my Greater self in the guise of Saturn crush and then burn my ego in various ways somewhat recently, i rarely take things too personally anymore.   


P.S.  my name is in actuality Justin, and my hair isn't "bright red".  It's a mix of light brown with moderate reddish and golden highlights.   If you don't like my hair and looks, then i guess you wouldn't like my teacher or his hair and looks either.  He's going to go public again at some point.   

Hmm, maybe you don't like my looks because you didn't like him and his looks in another experience, there is quite a bit of similarity (looks wise at least)?  Oh well... 

  Hi Joe, my experience so far leads me to believe that most people don't like hearing about the whole entire picture of the changes.   Most just want to skip the materially difficult parts, and get to the 'we're all ascended' scenario.   

  Also, astrology only deals with probabilities, tendencies, and the like.   Much is and has been written to occur, but the exact time frame is not exactly set, nor how people will respond to same (the more freewill aspect of the changes). 

So, i guess what i am saying is, what would be the point of starting such a thread.   Anytime i've tried to talk about the Changes, many labeled me a "fear mongerer" and the like.   

  You know, i use to believe that Joe McMoneagle was the real deal, until i read his book Time Machine, and met him    Oh, i do believe he is the real deal as regarding remote viewing objects in space/time, but reading his book i kept getting feelings of "wow, this guy doesn't have a deeper clue or is purposely trying to mislead people about the true nature of the changes".    I met Joe at TMI, scanned his aura, and later on got guidance about him.   He is most definitely NOT a spiritual teacher.   He has some developed abilities, but that doesn't take real spirituality to develop.  I asked him about future events, and said something like, "isn't there a certain amount of flexiblity, freewill, and probability factors involved in perceiving future events and them unfolding like we pre see them?"    He told me flat out "no".   

  As far as my teacher coming back, well he hasn't been reborn and won't be.   Same body image he re-formed and the outines of which is now imprinted on a certain controversial artifact.  Yes, very strange indeed, a reddish haired and blue gray eyed Jew!  But then again, he was an unusual person in many respects.   

  I find it interesting that a Jewish lady who did not believe in this person, and who wasn't exposed too much about him, when she died and met him, she reported that he had reddish hair.    Funny enough, this also jives well with what Cayce said about this person's looks (on 2 different occasions). 

  I saw an expertly recreated bust of the Shroud person's face and not only did it look different from some of the 2d image depictions of him, but i was a bit weirded out by how much my teacher and i look alike, facial features, same colored hair and eyes, etc.   Don't think it means anything deeper, but it is rather odd and puzzling. 

  Joe McMoneagle also relates trying to remote view Christ, and also picks up on the reddish haired thing.

  You know Joe, i'm kind of curious of why you brought up the whole red haired thing to begin with...  I mean why would you tell me that you don't like red hair and my looks?    Seems kind of strange in the context of what we were talking about at the time.   

  As i'm sure you know Joe, half truths are worse than whole lies for they can deceive even the Soul.   There are people out there in the business of half truths, aren't there?