14 Spiritual Myths? For inquiry.

[jeff]

Thanks for the kisses.

[Anthem]

quote:Originally posted by yogani

quote:Originally posted by Anthem

I see this in a different way, that we are already perfectly human, there isn't some perfected state to obtain. This idea would be a source of pain and suffering for someone in my opinion if it was believed that there was a lack or flaws within that prevented or blocked someone from achieving some perfected state in the future. We are perfectly beingness as we are, any experiences that arise aren't signs of imperfections, but simply opportunities to learn and expand consciousness.

Hi Anthem:

Yes, there are many illusions, trails and goals we follow for whatever reasons. But these all comprise our journey, don't they? Can they be skipped over out of hand, or are we doing best to grow through and eventually beyond them, according to our needs in the present, and the unique path we are each following? The very lessons we need from life are embedded in the illusions and the seeking, and that is the perfection. It is the rise of abiding inner silence that penetrates the illusion, not the mind. In stillness the perfection becomes apparent.

Hi Yogani,

Yes, I see it this way as well,  all paths are unique and the lessons are imbedded in the illiusions. I would make one distinction, that it is the seeing that is critical and not the seeking. Seeking externally leads us away from ourselves in my experience, and it is in the seeing (from silence) that the learning becomes apparent. I think people would be better served to direct any undesirable emotional energy to see with intensity into the present moment. This way, what is being shown can become apparent in time, rather than looking outside of themselves which in itself is the beginning of suffering.

quote:
For some, your view above will be a useful inquiry, or affirmation. For others, it will be a mental trap. It all depends on how much inner silence (witness) is available. One will be relational in stillness, bringing more freedom. The other will not. There is a world of difference. While ultimate truth is what it is, that does not mean one way of approaching it will fit all.

Yes totally agree, one way does not fit all, but are you suggesting not to share a differing perspective if there is a risk it will be unrelational to some?  Some will find value, some will not and eventually move on. The primary teacher of Life (What Is) will sort out the details for each I expect in time. From my experience, there can be great value in hearing differing perspectives from others which can also serve to expand consciousness and increase silence as fixed ideas fall away.

People can say they are perfect all they want, it doesn't pre-empt that there will always be learning to do, integration and expansion of consciousness to come. Only in a system which promises an end goal, is there a need to prompt people to continue their walking along the path. If life is seen as it is, a continuous learning experience of consciousness expansion, then there is no need to stop.  We can try to avoid learning but I suspect it won't last.

quote:
This is a common mistake made in neo-advaita teachings - the assumption that all have equal conscious beingness (witness) available, and that there are no prerequisites like meditation necessary. It simply is not true. If it were true, the world would be a very different place.

I agree that consciousness varies from person to person. As you point out, I practiced for many years and enjoyed it immensely and derived great value. In regards to the masses, no doubt meditation would be a reliable tool for many, but there are clearly examples where other tools have been used with equal success. As you mention, each path is unique.

quote:It is good that you have arrived at this understanding after years of practice. But it does not mean others can arrive there without their years of practice.

I agree that practices can be highly effective at helping people to see through their illusions.  Are you getting the impression that I am saying otherwise? It would be a funny assertion from someone who practiced as much as I have. The original questions above are simply rough examples of limiting beliefs that I have observed as being prevalent in many spiritual circles and can create a great amount of confusion and suffering. In my own experience, some were certainly impediments and I am grateful to those who shared differing perspectives that enabled me to let go of fixed ideas and open my mind to other possibilities.
 

quote:And even with this understanding, can we be sure we are are not using the logic of it to avoid the challenges of reaching a deeper understanding and integration?

Personally, I don't see value in avoiding life's challenges, the learning in these situations can be immense. Any avoiding would lead to attracting these challenges with greater intensity anyway, so there really is no avoiding possible in the end. The flow of life is the primary teacher for greater understanding, all I have to do is listen and observe. To me, this is part of the essence of what I am and happens automatically as I live the path set out in front of me. I would imagine that others would have to find what works for them.

quote:
With a stable daily practice, we are not left with such an uncertainty.

In some cases, a stable consistent practice loses its effectiveness and can be the very impediment to greater seeing and understanding. I am living proof of that. Practices had to moved from fixed initially and had to become flexible and interchangeable as each situation presented. Eventually all practices had to be surrendered, it was the only way forward. Continuous surrender in every moment, which at first is a practice, but eventually understood to be the absence of resistance. Resistance is released with the seeing of it which is all that is eventually required. I don't advocate a particular path for anyone, though I have no doubt consistent practice would be highly beneficial for many if they wanted to see through life's illusions as efficiently as possible.

quote:
If accepting life as it is has, by necessity, become your stable daily practice, and you know with certainty that this is all there is for you to do, then this is very good. But this will not be a useful approach for everyone.

I agree, each ultimately has to go forward with what works for them. I don't advocate a particular path for anyone, each person is ultimately responsible to find what works for them. I think you have done a great service by introducing the AYP practices and emphasis on consistency and self-pacing to so many, I think they are very effective tools for each to use as they require.

quote:
There is a lot of history of seeking and practices that brought you to this point, and that history was certainly not a waste of your time and energy. Nor are seeking and practices a waste of time and energy for anyone else. All things in their own time...

Would never suggest it was a waste of time. Neither is sharing a differing perspective like you have through AYP, if not now, but maybe at some point in the future, someone may find value.


Best wishes,[]

A

[jeff]

^^^^ very well said.

Wish we had a like button.

[Etherfish]

<----Like button

[jeff]

quote:Originally posted by Etherfish

<----Like button

Excellent point.

[yogani]

Hi Anthem:

Sorry for the delay coming back. Have been "awakened" with a lot of additional administration lately.

Yes, nothing wrong with speaking from where we are. But we should keep in mind that suggesting attitudinal knowledge is a two edged sword. My point was to caution that "viewing daily life experiences as the primary path" will work for some and not for others, depending on the degree of pre-existing inner silence/awareness. It is not good advice for beginners especially, most who will do much better in the long run by developing a reliable daily meditation practice.

There is the age-old presumption that knowledge is for "those with eyes to see and ears to hear," which is pre-existing awareness/silent witness. Nothing wrong with that either. Of all the seeds thrown, a few will sprout, and most will not. So we throw out as many seeds of knowledge as we can and hope for the best.

But the real question is, how do we improve the seeing? the hearing? the sprouting? That is the primary concern in AYP, and why I often challenge advice that says, "Consider the path being to look at it this way," which is really only for the few who already have the eyes to see and ears to hear.

The way we improve our seeing and hearing is not by developing an attitude, but by working systematically to expand our underlying awareness. For this, something more than an attitude is required. Sure, our attitude can change and even satisfyingly take root in whatever stillness we have, but cultivating basic seeing and hearing beyond that is far more fundamental.  

Therefore, I am against encouraging all to engage in passive non-seeking, without qualifying it. For many, seeking will be the essence of their journey for years to come, and this is a good thing. If no seeking means no suffering (a good sales pitch), it can also mean little awakening beyond present awareness, and present suffering (the result of non-relational inquiry).

So...

"Blessed are they who hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled." ...and... "Seek and you will find. Knock and the door will open."

Even "non-seeking" requires that. The art of doing nothing is a something, and that something is bhakti (spiritual desire). What happens as a result of bhakti is practice and divine flow. Then we will find ourselves in a position to experience and suggest attitudinal changes, as you have. But let us not forget where we have come from, because it is important for those we are advising to know, so they will not be fooled into thinking that developing an attitude in the mind is a shortcut to enlightenment/liberation/happiness/non-suffering (or whatever). Not so.

Regarding the "spiritual myths," neti neti (not this, not this) only works when what is beyond "this and this" (and the mind) is clear abiding awareness/witness. Until then, the myths are rungs on the ladder of increasing wisdom.

All the best!  

The guru is in you.

[Will Power]

quote:Originally posted by yogani

Therefore, I am against encouraging all to engage in passive non-seeking, without qualifying it. For many, seeking will be the essence of their journey for years to come, and this is a good thing. If no seeking means no suffering (a good sales pitch), it can also mean little awakening beyond present awareness, and present suffering (the result of non-relational inquiry).

Totally agreed.
If you seek, you'll do a sadhana, and results will come (depending on the sadhana you choose).
No seeking=>no sadhana=> no experimenting the truth (in most cases)

[Anthem]

quote:Originally posted by jeff

Hi Anthem,

I guess I would slightly disagree with you. I don't see heightened awareness as "anger" while someone one cuts in to your lane, that is just paying greater attention. Anger would be more like road rage where you become more distracted wanting to "get even". If it is true anger (not pretending), then it is always about you and not the other person. Anger can be good at highlighting our own issues, but projecting it on others is rarely helpful.

Hi Jeff,

We can certainly have different points of view, just my 2 cents worth.  Just to clarify one thing though, I am not talking about anger to the extent and duration of road rage. Also, anger may not be the emotion that presents in the situation, but some other. It can be a subtle emotional energy impulse which simply serves to bring the attention firmly into the here and now. It comes, it leaves, and the result is being more alert and having the attention present.

As mentioned, the emotional energy that arises serves to bring the attention to the situation at hand and is critical to illuminate our preferences in the moment. How else would we know to move on from a person deliberately trying to monopolize our time, or know to prevent a child from running into the street, or be sensitive to another person's needs etc. What prompts a person to respond to a post they don't agree with? It is very subtle, but there is an emotional impetus at the root. I see life as being about balance in some ways and that emotional energy helps us maintain our balance and respond in a natural way that helps others maintain their balance as well. It is just life free flowing and bouncing off itself as it does. A person can be yelling at you and be very emotional and a calm mute reaction could be the last thing they need to regain their equilibrium or the very thing, it all depends and when our responses are natural, it is usually the very thing that is needed. I am open to responding in any way required.

All emotions that arise are equal in value from my perspective and none better/ or more sinister than others. I see having all emotions functioning naturally as vital to navigating the world with our full potential and keeping our attention more firmly rooted in the here and now.  Again small distinction, but just my 2 cents.

quote:
On my response to point 10, it ties into above regarding the difference between emotional responses and being in the moment (like fully aware when driving). If one is "feeling stuff" like emotions or bliss, they are not naturally driving the car, they are subconsciously thinking about that asshole jerk who cut them off on the road.

Regards,
Jeff

Thanks for clarifying, I am not talking about emotions like you describe here but momentary impulses with much less intensity. Thinking the person is an asshole suggests historical thinking that is referencing previously conceived definitions for beliefs etc. I am talking about responding naturally in the moment without historical context.  The emotional impulses come, they go and I agree if they are long and drawn out and if we are thinking about them, we are not present in the moment externally but lost in meanings, labels and history. These emotional impulses arise for the situation at hand without any baggage. They arise to provide the necessary "jolt" to be more fully engaged and depart in a nano second,  leaving us free respond as the situation requires. Hope this clarifies.

All the best![]

A

[jeff]

Hi Anthem,

Thanks for the discussion (and the slight disagreement ). The question with things like conscious anger (even for a nanosecond) is that it is often just the tip of the proverbial subconscious iceberg. Many are very good at suppressing things like anger, but that does not mean that it has been released and let go. Rather than just react and engage in things like anger, I prefer to use it as a tool to point the way to the underlying subconscious fears and issues. As we release the energy trapped in those obstructions, one finds that jolt you describe to be a constant aspect of our natural state.

Best wishes.

[kami]

quote:Originally posted by yogani



Yes, nothing wrong with speaking from where we are. But we should keep in mind that suggesting attitudinal knowledge is a two edged sword. My point was to caution that "viewing daily life experiences as the primary path" will work for some and not for others, depending on the degree of pre-existing inner silence/awareness. It is not good advice for beginners especially, most who will do much better in the long run by developing a reliable daily meditation practice.

There is the age-old presumption that knowledge is for "those with eyes to see and ears to hear," which is pre-existing awareness/silent witness. Nothing wrong with that either. Of all the seeds thrown, a few will sprout, and most will not. So we throw out as many seeds of knowledge as we can and hope for the best.

But the real question is, how do we improve the seeing? the hearing? the sprouting? That is the primary concern in AYP, and why I often challenge advice that says, "Consider the path being to look at it this way," which is really only for the few who already have the eyes to see and ears to hear.

The way we improve our seeing and hearing is not by developing an attitude, but by working systematically to expand our underlying awareness. For this, something more than an attitude is required. Sure, our attitude can change and even satisfyingly take root in whatever stillness we have, but cultivating basic seeing and hearing beyond that is far more fundamental.  

Therefore, I am against encouraging all to engage in passive non-seeking, without qualifying it. For many, seeking will be the essence of their journey for years to come, and this is a good thing. If no seeking means no suffering (a good sales pitch), it can also mean little awakening beyond present awareness, and present suffering (the result of non-relational inquiry).

So...

"Blessed are they who hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled." ...and... "Seek and you will find. Knock and the door will open."

Even "non-seeking" requires that. The art of doing nothing is a something, and that something is bhakti (spiritual desire). What happens as a result of bhakti is practice and divine flow. Then we will find ourselves in a position to experience and suggest attitudinal changes, as you have. But let us not forget where we have come from, because it is important for those we are advising to know, so they will not be fooled into thinking that developing an attitude in the mind is a shortcut to enlightenment/liberation/happiness/non-suffering (or whatever). Not so.

Regarding the "spiritual myths," neti neti (not this, not this) only works when what is beyond "this and this" (and the mind) is clear abiding awareness/witness. Until then, the myths are rungs on the ladder of increasing wisdom.

Such perfect clarity and wisdom. Thank you Yogani. Wish many modern teachers that advocate doing nothing could read this, perhaps on a daily basis!

This could be made the description for the Jnana Yoga forum; only because you don't seem to have much admin stuff going on these days.

Gratitude.

[Anthem]

quote:Originally posted by yogani

Hi Anthem:

Sorry for the delay coming back. Have been "awakened" with a lot of additional administration lately.

Yes, nothing wrong with speaking from where we are. But we should keep in mind that suggesting attitudinal knowledge is a two edged sword. My point was to caution that "viewing daily life experiences as the primary path" will work for some and not for others, depending on the degree of pre-existing inner silence/awareness. It is not good advice for beginners especially, most who will do much better in the long run by developing a reliable daily meditation practice.

 
Hi Yogani,

Sorry, I am equally slow, just getting back as I can fit it in.

You use the term "attitudinal knowledge" which I am taking to mean, encouraging others to take on an attitude or a new fixed belief that they can apply to their lives. I would see this as counter-productive as well. You'll have to point out where you think you are seeing this in my posts? It is the absence of fixed beliefs and attitudes that releases us from our limiting mental constructs.

This is what is intended in a discussion: If someone says, "that dog is always angry". If I don't necessarily believe this and communicate that in my experience the dog is sometimes pleasant as well, it gives a person’s mind the potential to see different possibilities in the situation (or not). People aren't necessarily going to jump over and say yes, I now see it as you do, the dog is always pleasant and apply this to every interaction with the dog even as it continues to bite them. They have seen/ experienced the dog as angry already, this is real, they may now look for evidence of this assertion that the dog is also pleasant. Or not. They may decide to hold firm to their original idea or something in between. It is an invitation, nothing more, not a new way that should be adopted. If it enables people to see infinite possibilities in every instance then great, if not, nothing lost. As you point out below, potentially another rung on the ladder of wisdom.

I am pretty disciplined about being clear that something is only my opinion/ perspective etc. and not the way things are or that another should see it the way I do. This would all be counter productive in my opinion and a disservice to others.  

From where I sit, our daily life is the primary path whether we like it or not. Making a practice of that is something else entirely and as you point out, not for everyone. Also, just to reiterate my previous post, I don't endorse a particular path for anyone, each path is unique and people can use whatever tools they need for as long as they need them.

quote:
The way we improve our seeing and hearing is not by developing an attitude, but by working systematically to expand our underlying awareness. For this, something more than an attitude is required. Sure, our attitude can change and even satisfyingly take root in whatever stillness we have, but cultivating basic seeing and hearing beyond that is far more fundamental.

Yes, it isn't about taking on any attitudes but letting go of all attitudes, fixed or limiting beliefs (seeing things only one way). It is the absence of all this that allows for seeing things as they are.  

quote:
Therefore, I am against encouraging all to engage in passive non-seeking, without qualifying it. For many, seeking will be the essence of their journey for years to come, and this is a good thing. If no seeking means no suffering (a good sales pitch), it can also mean little awakening beyond present awareness, and present suffering (the result of non-relational inquiry).

You will have to point out where you believe you are seeing some encouraging for all to take on some passive non-seeking somewhere in this thread? Or are you just stating your position in general on this?

If you re-read the above post, you will find that I see seeking externally as leading to suffering. I point out in the same paragraph that the seeking would be better served if directed internally, (into our hearts) so that we can see. Whether seeking externally is necessary at some point on the path, I have no idea. Personally, I see nothing but eventual dead ends from searching outside of ourselves but perhaps it is the pain of this that eventually drives our desire internally.

 

quote:Even "non-seeking" requires that. The art of doing nothing is a something, and that something is bhakti (spiritual desire). What happens as a result of bhakti is practice and divine flow. Then we will find ourselves in a position to experience and suggest attitudinal changes, as you have. But let us not forget where we have come from, because it is important for those we are advising to know, so they will not be fooled into thinking that developing an attitude in the mind is a shortcut to enlightenment/liberation/happiness/non-suffering (or whatever). Not so.

Yes there aren’t any short cuts to being free from beliefs that I have found at least. I wouldn’t personally promise any more or less than that, which I would say those other words would imply.  Another way it can be said: an ongoing process of recognizing the infinite in every moment and continuously letting this go. I am always learning.

Best wishes,

A

[Anthem]

quote:Originally posted by jeff

Hi Anthem,

Thanks for the discussion (and the slight disagreement ). The question with things like conscious anger (even for a nanosecond) is that it is often just the tip of the proverbial subconscious iceberg.

Yes it can be, but anger can also be a natural and useful reaction to a situation at hand that doesn't have any historical thinking attached to it. For example, if an unprovoked dog bites my hand, I might have an initial reaction of fear that some damage is happening to my body and try to flee or withdraw my hand. If that fails and the dog continues to bite me, some anger may arise which can initiate some other kind of response leading to perhaps more assertive action to stop the unprovoked attack.

My point of view is that all our emotions are useful. Yes they are often indicators of subconscious beliefs, but also at other times vital for providing instant information about my environment from my experience and integral for the natural function of the human being. I don't see practices as eliminating any emotions over time (nor the potential for any thought), but simply allowing them to operate in a balanced way and to arise and let go in silence like thoughts. Information to be considered, nothing more. If they hang around and infuse a variety of reactions to things that aren't necessarily happening in the moment, then that is another thing entirely and some opportunity for inquiry, as you point out, is there.

quote:
Many are very good at suppressing things like anger, but that does not mean that it has been released and let go.

I agree.

quote: Rather than just react and engage in things like anger, I prefer to use it as a tool to point the way to the underlying subconscious fears and issues.

If a dog is biting my hand, I would prefer to use my anger to extricate myself first. If I am angry because someone didn't say hello to me, I might inquire if it hung around for any length of time.

In my opinion, emotional responses become more about the external than the internal at a certain point. As long as I have preferences, which I will have while in a body, there will be emotional responses in my opinion, albeit arising and departing in silence.

Let's say the default state was to indulge in love or bliss at all times. The dog bites my hand, how wonderful I might say, where is my impetus to react or attempt to change the situation? Our bodies take care of that with the emotional energy required in my opinion.

Yes contentedness can be there at all other times, but there is room for all our emotions too.

Just my 2 cents, thanks for engaging with this.
 

[jeff]

Hi Anthem,

I am not trying to say that there is not a wide range of reactions or that we do not have sort of "instinctual" responses sort of built in. Maybe our difference is in the connotations of the word anger?  If a dog bites you, what is your "anger" response? What do you think or do to the dog?

Best regards,
Jeff

[yogani]

Hi Anthem:

Could be wrong, but it still looks like an attitude from here. And even if it were not, and even if it is only your point of view, it still has an influence on others when left unqualified without the prerequisites.

Which raises the question, "What are the prerequisites for developing this experiential point of view?" Can anyone do it right out of the gate at age 23 or 63?

This is where my concern is, not for what it is for you, but what it is for everyone else. That is just my orientation -- what is this for the beginner, the intermediate, the advanced? Is it just Anthem's experience? Okay, so how does that apply to everyone else? Should we forget all this seeking and practice and just let life give us the cues on what is true and what is not? And then we are back to considering who that can work for -- yada yada.

Aside from all that, your underlying premise is suspect. Is it really seeking outside that causes suffering? Is it setting goals and working toward them that causes suffering? Is it whether we regard the dog as angry or not that determines our state of being? Is it our beliefs that cause suffering? Must we let go of all that to find peace? I think not, at least not in how we continue to function in the world.

In all of these, it is not the act, attitude, or belief that causes suffering. It is the identification of our awareness with these things (seeing them as part of self) that causes suffering. Likewise, identification with the goal of ending seeking and beliefs will also cause suffering. It is as much a trap as all the rest of it. Again, not necessarily talking about you, but looking across a wide spectrum of seekers.

To emphasize, what ends suffering is not changing our point of view, or attitude, or considering doing so. It is the cultivation of inner awareness that dissolves the identification of self with all of these simultaneously.

Inquiry can be used help dissolve identification, but as we have discussed again and again, the effectiveness of that for any given individual will depend on the degree of abiding inner silence (awareness/witness) present. And that is a function of meditation more than any other practice. It can't be bypassed. I know you are not saying that it can be bypassed, but by omission there is the implication that it can be.

So what am I asking? Not that you change anything you are doing. Only to consider that others who read about what you are doing can easily misunderstand. When we share what we are doing, that is sure to influence others, and therefore we are obliged to qualify how we got to where we are if we want to convey the whole truth.

By now I think it has been said enough in this discussion, so no need for us to dwell on it. If I have overdone it, forgive me.

However, you might want to take a closer look at what the real cause of suffering is. Is it our beliefs and motivated actions in the world, or is it the underlying identification of self with all of that?

I have found that there is nothing wrong (binding - causing suffering) with having beliefs, goals and seeking, and they still are functioning fully here, while at the same time having little influence on my sense of self. In stillness, all of these things provide a medium for the divine flow to act in the world in a unifying way. Even prejudices have a role to play in this (like, "that dog is always angry"), being purified as they are released in stillness.

If that is what you are talking about, then it makes perfect sense. But still people ought to know how you got to the understanding of how liberating it is to let intentions and inquiries go in stillness, and where that enabling stillness comes from in the first place.

Oops, I did it again.

All the best!

The guru is in you.

[Experientialknowing]

Interesting the way this topic has gone. Yogani sir, you have once again put it correctly.

 The biggest problem with non duality discussions is the only way to have one is to remain silent.

The minute someone goes to talking or writing their mind with all the opinions, emotions likes and dislikes come out no matter how much the writer protests otherwise and people reading it pick up on it.

Invariably the ones attempting to communicate just wind up looking like know it all's with big egos and allot of serious flaws they appear to not even be aware of.

Not saying this is anthems case because I do agree with Yogani, I am saying this is the case with everyone attempting to discuss Non-Duality and it is likely unavoidable.

MU.