Hi emc,
First, I don't recall if I've said this, but I'm reading End Of Your World by Adyashanti right now ... and very much enjoying; thanks for mentioning it!
![[:)]](http://www.aypsite.com/plus-forum/Smileys/akyhne/icon_smile.gif "Smile")
quote:
Originally posted by emc
My point with these posts is that I'm certain we realize deeper and deeper, and that we are wise to continue to inquire even though we think we are without any type of self-reference.
quote:
Kirtanman: I agree ... if there's thinking/self-reference in the first place ... and especially if there's suffering. ...suffering is a signal to inquire.
quote:
Yes, true. And not only one's own suffering, but others as well!
Something interesting just happened here in Stockholm a while ago. One of those quite newly realized teachers who travel the world, holding satsangs, got into a rather nasty conflict with the people arranging his satsangs. They accused him of being ego-driven and not truly realized. (I don't know how he responded, I only heard the upset people.) After a while, the upset people even contacted the teachers former master and asked him for help to reach the teacher and make him listen to their complaints. The answer from the master to the teacher was spread (the original email) and read something like:
"Such upsetness and negativity never comes from nothing. If these people are so upset about your behaviour, then it might be time for you to do some inquiry again." And he actually recommended him to do some Byron Katie's The Work!
It's difficult to really comment on this, without having more of a sense of it .... though sounds like there may be "more to the story" than any one side of it.
When people criticize a teacher strongly, it's been my experience that most people are playing "fight the teacher", as an acting out of their own psychology. Obviously, this doesn't apply if the teacher is doing empirically horrible things (by almost anyone's definition -- literal and overt physical, sexual or emotional abuse) ... but that's hardly ever been the case, in my experience.
In fact, at least one of the teachers I've never had any problem with, or seen why anyone else would, and who has behaved in a completely benign, helpful and exemplary manner in all instances I've observed ... still elicited anger to the extent that someone was going to speak out publicly against that teacher .... which is A. Purely mystifying to me (anytime I have strongly "not resonated" with a teacher, I merely go elsewhere ... "no fighting required"), a B. much more of a statement regarding the ex-student, than the teacher.
But, again .... maybe the "upset" people had some cause for their upset; I couldn't say, of course, without knowing a lot more.
quote:
So this passage is quite interesting (if it's not a part where you are joking):
quote:
For some strange reason, I had a sense:
Hey, if I let other people know it's possible .... people will feel like:
"Awesome ... so AYP *does* work; I *can* get enlightened!" (<-- Or, more accurately ... get past *all* the crazy me-stories, including the enlightenment-related ones ....) .... but ... as some may have noticed .... the general response .... or, at least the more vocal ones ... have not been like that (((shrug))).
I really just am here to help, if possible .... not in a "big deal" way; just in a "like always" way.
quote:
In this at least I see underlying assumptions and expectation that was not being fulfilled the wanted way - others are giving you feed-back of a totally different kind. Why is that? What does that tell you? And you just want to help... Hm. Could be a subject for inquiry, in my world anyway. ![[;)]](http://www.aypsite.com/plus-forum/Smileys/akyhne/icon_smile_wink.gif "Wink")
I truly respect and understand this insight; all I can tell you, simply and honestly, is:
Zero upset, here (and no joking).
I just meant my comments above literally; the fairly lengthy dialog with TI and Christi in the Wayne Wirs thread was just unexpected ... but it's fine, in both cases, from "here" ... and hopefully ... good for all, overall.
If nothing else, readers will see views regarding enlightenment from a few different angles ... which will hopefully help their own experiencing of enlightenment, sooner and more completely, and/or other clarity, as pertinent.
And I meant my last comment ("only here to help" in the sense of "to contribute positively" .... in the same general sense that everyone here presumably has, in some way, with essentially every post ..... my point was more: I was just making what I felt was a "general, positive comment" ... and didn't realize the term "enlightenment" could be so charged for either Christi or TI ..... just literally: hadn't realized this .... primarily because conditioning "here" is pretty mellow; if anyone else ever "announces" experiencing of enlightenment ... I'm fairly likely to say: "Hey, great; good news!" ... if I say anything at all.
This is *not* better or worse than Christi's approach, or TI's .... simply a clarification of why I was literally a little surprised .... and even that (suprised) is more figure-of-speech than any felt experience, per se.
And, from here, at least, there's been no negativity that's unresolved (TI had felt insulted, if that's the right term -- TI, please comment, if not -- and when I realized that he was upset, and why, I simply and genuinely apologized ... if we'd been in the same room, he might not have gotten upset ... but words on a screen can be a lot different than live voice ... and it *did* sound like I was disparaging his "seriousness" ... which I have never felt for one second ..... one of the reasons I engaged in so much dialog with both Christi and TI, is even though they were challenging some things I said ... they're both clearly sincere about how they feel, and about their spiritual paths.
And so, any "negativity" was experienced by one person, temporarily, based on an understandable misunderstanding which was quickly resolved.
Not the same as the Stockholm Situation, as far as I can tell.
quote:
This is a quote from Yogani around the question "Does Truth ever create negativity?":
quote:
Inner silence has inherent within it a morally self-regulating quality. The same is true as we act in the world to help others. If we do so from within stillness (stillness in action), there can be no harm. To the extent there is harm, it will be due to an impure expression of stillness, which we all do to greater or lesser degree. Noticing this in a natural way is actually part of our spiritual development, an aspect of automatic self-inquiry occurring as inner silence grows in us.
Of course, people can be offended by all sorts things, even the presence of a light being. Don't we know it? But I think there is a difference between someone being offended (harmed by their own limited perception), versus being harmed by an impurity coming from someone who is helping. Either way there are opportunities on both sides, and we should not stop acting for fear of making a mistake. The process of acting and learning in stillness is part of the path -- learning by doing. We get better at it by doing it.
Very much agreed.
quote:
I don't know about others, but I react on being helped when not wanted. It's creating if not negativity here, so at least a noticing of it being someone declaring my needs to me without having a clue of what my needs are. Being active on a "support forum" doesn't always imply I need support at the moment!
Most of us do ... and or respond-by-ignoring.
That's never been my intention; one of the reasons I used the term "inviting" ... and invitation can be accepted, rejected or ignored, and it's all fine.
And in general, I'd say unsolicited advice is relatively rare, here, [
]unless I'm missing a lot, somehow.
quote:
What I see is potentially a trap here with "newly realized".
If you wouldn't mind, emc ... could you please tell me what you mean by "newly realized".
I'm simply kind of unclear on who might fall into that category ... from the words alone, I kind of picture someone who just had their first "realization" ... "I am not simply this form, these thoughts and feelings; I am awareness", etc. etc. ... which has possibly subsided (hence the potential troubles you cite) ... yet, the Stockholm teacher you mention, gives (as you said) satsangs around the world ... implying, it would seem ... and active teaching practice.
And I know you've said you're not referring to me ... yet, per your quoting of my own words .... I'm not sure if you are, or not (and fine either way ... I'm truly just trying to understand).
For instance: I probably wouldn't call Adyashanti or Yogani "newly realized" ... would you?
In my experience, what most people call realization/awakening ... is the first set of experiences .... followed by the back-and-forth, and fight with ego-gravity Adya describes so well in End Of Your World.
What I've been called enlightenment/shift .... the sand running out of the hourglass ... is the other end of that often/usually multi-year process ... when it finally does all dissolve.
*IF* ego arises for more than a moment here, it will be dealt with in-as-with awareness.
That just hasn't happened in several weeks.
This isn't said in the egoic sense of "And *I* have no ego!!" ... just in the accurate-as-possible sense of: it's amazingly *quiet* here, now; it's nice ... all the stuff the took effort (maintaining awareness, keeping egoic thought in check, etc.) ... is now not an issue; it just doesn't arise.
Per that non-arising ... there's no real caring if "this is it" ... or if this is "technically definitely" enlightenment.
There's the experiencing of this as enlightenment ... but only because that's the most applicable term, as far as I know; the sharing was about the experiencing .... not about any need to call it anything, or to be thought of in any way.
quote:
When you've reached a certain state of realization, people around you will find it very hard to bring any critique to the person, suggesting they might have own impurities causing "negativity" in the receiver of the message. It will most often be thrown back as "You are only being hurt from your own interpretations, and projecting back onto the realized" (argued both from the realized person and/or from the devotees around who wants to idealize the person).
Well, as kind of alluded above, empirical behavior counts for a lot, here, in my experiencing.
If there are ongoing, multiple negative reactions to/from a given teacher ... and this teacher engages in behavior that almost anyone would find problematic ... then yes .... "evidence of issue" for sure.
On the other hand, when most people (good example: Yogani; another good example: Adyashanti) either A. observe a teacher to be helpful and benign (kind, calm, etc.) in all interactions, and/or B. See no evidence whatsoever of overtly harmful behavior (physical, emotional or sexual abuse, etc.) ... then any small group (which again -- all teachers tend to attract ... and this is almost always a very small, very loud, very angry minority) .... who plays "fight the teacher" is acting out their own unresolved psychology, and the teacher likely doesn't have anything to do with it.
Point Being: In my experience, there's usually no mystery, here .... if a teacher is creating a lot of strife .... the reasons/issues and primary source tend to be somewhat obvious ... whether it's the teacher or the students.
In my own case, if it's applicable at all (and I don't know that it is) ... I'm just a forum member, here .... offering encouraging commentary on enlightenment was/is the same, here ... as any other "benefits" of practice I've discussed .... enlightenment ... and the implications of it being actual, are seemingly problematic for one or two people here.
The differences from any of the "problematic teaching" dynamics, as far as I know, are:
A. I neither think of myself as a teacher, nor proclaim myself as one; I'm a forum member here, that's it.
B. There's no feeling of "above or beyond" the group; authentic enlightenment is literally the absence of that possibility, let alone the actuality; if anything, I simply feel more happily, easily and genuinely connected with all.
C. I don't think either TI or Christi perceive me as engaging in negativity, unfairness or unkindness, per se ... ever. Being direct at times, possibly .. as are they ... as is fine with me, and, I presume, fine with them (and I always invite them to say so, if anything I say about our shared dialog seems untrue, to them).
D. I don't feel any sense of conflict or unhappiness ... and I don't think they do, either (though, again, invite them to say so).
quote:
At work I am in constant training of this, since the whole organisation is built on empowerment/equality, thus, when anyone puts him or herself above and takes the preferential right of interpretation it will hit back quickly from the other colleagues, and most certainly from the students who begin to be "impossible" to handle when the impurity hits back.
I like that line "preferential right of interpretation" ... and yes, indeed ... this can be a conscious or unconscious ego play, for sure (speaking very generally ... as in: we've all seen this in action, I'm sure ... in multiple instances).
In my experience, the inherent solution is:
Shared, genuine respect.
This can't be faked .... but if it's truly present ... if the group is truly a cohesive group with mutual trust, respect and affinity ... any "preferential right of interpretation" won't stand a chance.
There's confidence with enlightenment .... but it's not confidence that needs to make anyone else wrong; no one else is wrong ....... we're all on the same side; heck ... we're all the *same* .... and actual enlightenment experiences this .... anything else is either ego-ploy, or "not enlightened yet".
The unconditional loving that's said to be part of enlightenment ... *is*.
It may not always "look" the way ego-minds think it should look ... but enlightenment cannot behave in empirically unloving (self-serving) ways ... and there's no one to take "credit" for either condition (loving/unloving) ... it's just the way actual awareness, without ego, moves.
And I get how that *might* sound (I can remember a time when I could have felt "Riiiiight there's no ego!!"
![[8D]](http://www.aypsite.com/plus-forum/Smileys/akyhne/icon_smile_cool.gif "Cool")
.. upon reading those words) ... once again, though ... I'm just attempting to describe the "feel" ... ego-story here finally fell away ... actually.
If it returns, I have no issue saying so ... yet, there's the simple knowing it won't-can't ... which is not a concept to be defended ... simply a felt actuality.
Most people take this as a "prouncement thing" .... "*I* have no ego ... whereas *you* there ... *you* clearly have ego" ...... and it's not like that.
Ego is just the untrue concept called me; that distorted, unnecessary self-reference that we all live with, for a lifetime.
I'm just happily sharing: "Oh My God ... it actually goes away; very nice ... better than could have been expected .... try it ... you'll like it ... it's everyone ... everyone's ... equally."
No attachment to being believed, accepted, taken as a teacher ...... "zero zip nada" ..... I'm kirtanman at the AYP forum; as always; that's it.
*ALL* I'm saying, is:
If there's any non-peace out there, in anyone reading .... it can and does, cease permanently ... and you're in exactly the right place (AYP) to help bring that about.
If there was even a little bit of ego/mind left here .... there could so easily be a sense of "I am surprised about experiencing this as anyone else might be, reading about it" (kirtanman, experiencing enlightenment) .. but even that's not here .... it *all* falls away.
I remember reading in the Gita and other sutras/scriptures .... that there's "only action" (though no doer, etc. etc.) .... and I though that ranked right up there with "stillness and silence" as a fairly miserable outcome of years of spiritual practices ... but I get what they meant, now ... "only action, no actOR" ..... it's a flow/harmony thing.
Words (enlightenment, etc. -- and any ways my words "might" seem) create impressions in mind; feeling deeper than the impressions, the truth of intent is felt ... and please feel my simple unattached intention/invitation.
We all have this capability/intuition ... because the guru is {in} {all} of us.
And I'm not inviting anyone to pay any attention to *me* ... purely to what's possible within *you*.
quote:
Nisargadatta once said that "The master is happy with the seekers as they are"!
Absolutely. I don't presume myself as a master in any way; but I'm naturally happy with everyone/everything ... any sense that anything should be different is land-of-the-ego stuff, and no fun at all, as Byron Katie so wisely points out. ("When you argue with reality, you always lose ... but only 100% of the time.")
Wholeheartedly,
Kirtanman
