I don't know why, but the edit feature isn't working now, so I ended up quoting myself rather than editing my post.

i see your point.
i also feel annoyed by people who repeat advaita slogans in mantra-like manner, saying things like "and who does it experience?" in every second sentence.
difficult to communicate with them when getting always useless comments on everything you say.

the teachers who preach non-duality all the time, maybe they feel it to be their mission, and maybe people get attracted to them until they heard enough and got the point and then go on their own ways.

i was for some years attending a guru's satsangs and retreats, and most the time, and more and more, i didn't listen to the talks anymore, i was content to sit in the teacher's presence and feel the "energy field", i would have preferred the teacher not to talk at all, but sit silently in meditation.

i'm not saying that mind and thinking are bad and no-mind and non-thinking good, i like to have both, sometimes i get weary of the thinking and then want stillness and peace, and when i had enough rest in no-mind, then i want action again, or something in me wants to do something creative.

observing my mind and ego and states of consciousness, i noticed that there are different modes, and that not all modes are useful in all conditions.
for example the rational thinking is useful in certain conditions. it is blocking the other modes of consciousness, which is useful for some things, but detrimental for some other things.

your experience of source/awareness (beautiful!), that would also be a mode of consciousness, or of mind, but the word "mind" is over-used for too many different things, and this can lead to lots of misunderstandings.
some people think that "mind" means the "ego-mind's half-conscious conditioned thinking processes", and call it a bad thing.
when regarding "mind" as a personal awareness in the space of consciousness, then it's much different view of the term "mind", much different from that other view.
and then there are many other meanings and connotations.

Sometimes it seems as if language is an invention of the devil. Telepathy would be the direct way of communi(cati)on without all those misunderstandings.
Do you remember in Bruce Moen's and Bob Monroe's books about the extraterrestrian race which is telepathic? It has advantages and disadvantages to be a telepathic race. The advantage is that they can work in group consciousness and have greater power of information processing and awareness. The disadvantages is that they are limited in the range of their experiences, and that might be the reason why we humans here on earth are non-telepathic or semi-telepathic. I think we do have these telepathic possibilities, it is there in the subconscious, and we could activate it if we want, and often we use it unconsciously. Maybe we evolve towards more freedom and individual soverignty and awareness, and then can use more of our potential, and can also work with group consciousness when we want, and use even more modes of consciousness.
I'm a great fan of evolution!

p.s.: editing works again!

Telepathic beings:
Yes, i read all books of Bruce and also of Bob.
I found that telepathy is the norm, not the exception, and that we still have it, it is due to the separation of awake-consciousness/sub-consciousness that our awake-consciousness can pretend to ignore it or be unaware of it, while still using it subconsciously in communication and other areas.

Gurus:
Good analysis! Yes, that may be so.
There are ego-traps on all levels of so-called spiritual development. There is always opportunity for self-delusion and clinging to phenomena, as long as there are phenomena perceived subjectively. One who tries to get through those pitfalls must be extremely cautious and self-reflective, always doing reality checks and questioning oneself.
It is like a scientific project where we ourselves are the instruments for our scientific research, we fine-tune the instruments and do experiments and observe the results with as little manipulation as we can.
You know of course that thoughts and all sorts of energy movements in consciousness do influence our perceived reality. Even natural scientists like physicists have found that.
So the difficulty is to influence the object of observation as little as possible. When we think and/or have emotions or both together, then we create ripples in the fabric of reality, and those ripples interact with our perception in a sort of feedback-loop, it actually creates what we call reality, and we want to minimize these effects, so we try to minimize our emotional interest in the outcome of our experiments, and at the same time maximize the alertness of our senses.

Here's another story.

With the group I used to belong to there was one Satsang that was attended by a man who was a spiritual teacher. At the time he had a small number of followers. He told the guru I used to see that he teaches others even though he isn't enlightened because he likes the love he receives from his followers. The guru I used to see was able to relate to what he said (I wonder why ) and told the guy that such an approach will delay his spiritual progress.

After Satsang I ended up speaking to this guy and he was speaking as if he was enlightened. I could tell that this wasn't true at all. He was very assertive. A few years later I saw an adverstisement for his guru-based center. Apparently, he deluded himself to whatever extent was necessary so he could follow his desire to be a guru and receive adoration from his followers.  In a way such an approach isn't any different than people who try to obtain adoration from others by being a pop or rock star.

I suppose that eventually his soul will become bored with such a false approach and seek to find love and self worth in a wiser way.

Oliver:

I haven't read that Jack Kornfeld book.

I know of Osho. About 30 years ago I read 3 of his books when he went by the name Rajneesh. 

I don't believe it is good to speak about gurus just for the sake of gossiping. Sometimes it is useful to consider what some of them do partly so we can determine how legit they are and partly so we can develop a better understanding of the psychological traps that exist.

I believe this World would be a better place and soul evolution would be easier if there weren't so many things that lead souls off track. But I guess the universe can't have free will if you put in place too many restrictions.

Or to put in another way, a lot of people don't know how to truly think for themselves.

This applies to obtaining medical help. Quite often people have too much of an attitude of following their doctors blindly. There are some doctors that take a holistic approach that considers mind, body and spirit, but there are many that follow the psychological conditioning that Western medicine includes.  They allow themselves to be overly influenced by what the drug companies are selling.

I wonder how Doctors who take a holistic approach are viewed by other doctors. Not to say that western procedures are never called for. For example, I believe there are some occasions when surgery is probably required.  If a person has a heart attack there might not be time to wait for an alternative approach other than heart surgery.

Regarding free will, I believe we always have it, it is just that sometimes people are so caught up in their psychological conditioning that they don't end up using their free will in a wise way.  Or in other words, they lose touch with their free will. Eventually their souls will evolve so they can use their free will fully and wisely.

Regarding the negative things that happen, I'll compare life to a football game.  Quite often football players get injured without it being desired that they get injured. If you want to be involved with the game of life you have to accept the possibility that things will go wrong at times. However, just as you can try to minimize football injuries by having the players wear protective gear, you can try to minimize the pitfalls of the soul development process by dealing with the factors that interfere. 

I believe we are all connected. I haven't read enough of Jung to know what his collective unconscious theory is all about.

I agree that children need to be allowed to have some freedom when it comes to decisions and their growth.

By the way, Eckart Tolle reminds me of Madonna. She can sing, dance and act a little, but her talent level doesn't match her fame. Similarly, Eckart Tolle might have some good things to say, but his wisdom level doesn't match how famous he is. Sometimes marketing is a factor.