Christi said:
Is it a problem if enlightened beings say that they are enlightened? Wouldn’t they be doing the world a great disservice if they didn’t and just kept quiet about it?
No, I don’t think that would in itself be a problem.
However, words do not have pre-given meaning. The English word “Enlightened” is no exception to that. It does in fact carry all sorts of connotations in so many minds that are not necessarily rightly applicable to the person who says that they are enlightened. Rightly or wrongly, so many people receive the claim as though it indicates some sort of perfection, extreme purity or genius – a superhero sort of thing. Your own posts Christi suggest to me that you conceive of enlightenment in that way.
With a powerful, wildcard word like that, people who allow a word to apply to them should take responsibility for what the word connotes in practice. In practice, it connotes a very, very, high place. My point above is that if a person accepts a very high place they should be scrutinized highly. That in itself is an answer to a possible implication which can be read from what Kritanman said, (not that he is necessarily saying it himself), that scrutinizing teachers is inherently coming from a negative, fault-finding place.
And how do you know that Krishnamurti is saying anything wrong when he says that yogic practices (and mantras specifically) are dangerous for the majority of people, should be avoided and will not lead to enlightenment?
Actually, I’ve never said he calls them dangerous at all, or even talks about a ‘majority’ of people. He pooh-poohs them, indicating that they are nonsense. I know it to be wrong because I have experienced a lot of their power, particularly to assist in the process of ‘enlightenment’.
It doesn’t help the world or yourself to go around proclaiming you’re enlightened. People will just follow you around and split into two opposing groups, and talk about you. Both groups will want you to prove it, which you can’t. All you can do is make enlightened statements and enjoy your life while people either worship or hate you, all the while invading your space and time.
So enlightened people usually choose to be unknown.
Just sat and read the whole of this thread in one sitting, having recently got interested in Adyashanti’s teaching’s. I think he offers a direct and clear approach to awakening and expresses it all so eloquently and simply and like it is possible for us all- the buddha is in all of us. It allows you to accept what is now, and helps you to recognize egoic tendancies- I feel it helps me with what I have experienced as the more difficult aspects of kundalini awakening- that it is when my ego has taken front seat- as opposed to the true self which is always there alongside i.e. the depression I have felt at times I think relates to the ‘ego’ feeling so despairing about the apparent loss of self and deciding to see it in negative terms. I feel he presents teaching very humbly and that this would help protect against too much of a projection and putting on a pedestal from people interested in his teachings.
I feel people who are awakened may or may not wish to share and teach from their experience. For some, they may have great skills at passing on their acquired wisdom and would benefit the world through their teachings (like Adyashanti, Tolle…), for others it may be a quiet wisdom they emit as they go about an outwardly appearing normal life… . There are many more things I would like to draw on from this interesting thread, but it is my time for sleep now…
Yes, and some are natural born leaders while others are not. I recall that in his book Emptiness Dancing, Adyashanti refers to his zen teacher, a woman he studied with for many years and under whom he became enlightened. She became ill at some point and was no longer able to teach, so she dropped the role of teacher and did menial tasks in the zen center, and quite happily. He didn’t say specifically whether or not she was enlightened, but I don’t know that it matters; her humility and lack of ego made a great impact on him.
Yes, and some are natural born leaders while others are not. I recall that in his book Emptiness Dancing, Adyashanti refers to his zen teacher, a woman he studied with for many years and under whom he became enlightened. She became ill at some point and was no longer able to teach, so she dropped the role of teacher and did menial tasks in the zen center, and quite happily. He didn’t say specifically whether or not she was enlightened, but I don’t know that it matters; her humility and lack of ego made a great impact on him.
Her name is Arvis Justi; she regularly attends Adya's satsangs, and volunteers quite a bit, in the Open Gate Sangha office (which is staffed by volunteers). Take a sweet little old grandma, and cross her with the Buddha -- and that's basically Arvis.
:sunglasses:
Peace & Namaste,
Kirtanman
Well said
I agree entirely… There are some very beautiful fruits here.
it is early days, but it is certainly starting to look like Krishnamurti was wrong…
Christi
Hi Mike,
Thanks for the kind words, and insightful comments.
I see certain parallels between Adya and Tolle as well - and I know Adya thinks and speaks highly of Tolle, I don’t know if Tolle is even aware of Adya - but per Adya’s rising star with Sounds True (producer / publisher of many Tolle materials as well) - this may change.
A couple of points of hopefully useful clarification, in terms of my own experience (and I totally respect if your own evaluation of Adya remains different, even after reading my words) …
*I’ve never heard Adya or Tolle say “I am enlightened” - they said things like “when awakening occurred”, or “when enlightenment happened” - carefully avoiding use of the personal pronoun, because, as Adya says fairly frequently, “I’s don’t get enlightened” (or more grammatically-correct variations on that statement).
I’m not saying that neither teacher overtly or covertly claims enlightenment in one way or another … it’s just been my experience that A. they don’t trumpet it, and B. they make clear it’s not personal … which seems to be just about the best any public spiritual teacher could do in that regard (the only other option is for those who are not enlightened to state that, and despite all the extensively mixed-press he’s received … the only well-known spiritual teacher who I’ve heard have the humility to state that {his own non-enlightenment} is Swami Kriyananda.
The way I see it: enlightenment seems to have legitimately happened for both Adya and Tolle … and they both seem to do their best to state this truth honestly and clearly. I don’t really see how else it could be handled (or how it could be handled better).
On the “energy thing” - yeah, some teacher do “scary-magnitude” stuff with energy - either intentionally (don’t know, but see that as possible) or unintentionally … but regardless: they end up with large numbers of relative-zombie devotees, and (often, it seems) vast piles of money.
Adya (in my experience) does not seem to be one of these, or inclined to become one; if anything, he’s reigned energy in, in recent times. The increased energy in my own experience … is a result of my own increased capacity, and related experience in consciousness-value, from seeking it out, proactively (specifically with Adya - though have experienced equivalent or greater “energy boosts” from other teachers).
My guess is: energy is emanated in direct proportion to the teacher’s realization, pretty much automatically (consciousness shines, in a manner rather amazingly similar to, say, the Sun) - and the experience of variety (of consciousness emanation) is more on the part of the receiver than the “sender”.
*Adya actually is very shy. Like: really. He’s gotten a lot more comfortable with public teaching over the years, but in small groups - he’s very quiet, almost shy. I’ve spoken with him with anywhere between one and three other people present … though am guessing those days are gone) - he’s a truly quiet, truly humble guy (unless he’s one of the best people in history at faking humility, and I don’t think that’s the case).
I think he’s honestly enlightened, and the related humility is a natural aspect of that … which just happens to dovetail with his natural shyness. Adya has pointed out that personality and sense-of-self don’t dissolve with enlightenment … and that some enlightened teachers are very extroverted (he has cited Yogananda as an example). Adya however is not. He may have a bit more cultural extroversion than standard Asian Buddhist teachers - but I see him as very similar; essentially humble, yet having no issue with making any direct or incisive comments which may be useful to eliciting higher consciousness in satsang attendees … even if it is not comfortable for them to hear.
*Annie / Mukti (Adya’s wife) … actually keeps a pretty low profile. I know of one retreat they gave together (the one I mentioned), and she used to give about two satsangs a year (usually sitting in for Adya, when he was doing “whatever else”) - and lately, has been leading a silent meditation group. So I don’t see any “Adya letting his wife drive” kinda thing.
I didn’t know Tolle even had a partner; interesting (I have a weird habit of only paying attention to the teachings … ) <– not a “back-handed” comment in the least; you actually have me curious … I’ll probably Google “Tolle”, and see what I can learn.
“I’m out” <– tired, done typing. (And yeah, I do type pretty fast - and sleep fairly little … no idea what my “rate” is on either one, though … )
Peace & Namaste,
Kirtanman
Very good points, David - thanks.
And that’s why I’ve found myself head-scratching with much of the dialog surrounding Adya:
I have yet to see “1+1=3” out of him (not saying it can’t happen; enlightenment doesn’t necessarily mean “perfected articulation of all teachings”, imo – though I imagine people largely expect that).
If anyone can point to a teaching that is “1+1-3” (i.e. “in error”) from Adya, I’d like to be aware of it, and/or explore it together.
As far as Krishnamurti, I’m honestly not familiar enough with his teachings to really comments, other than to say: a lot of advaitic, or advaita-like teachers, pooh-pooh practices on purpose … because practices can be almost as likely to involve sadhana-derailing misunderstandings, as they are to facilitate enlightenment.
Enlightened teachers known this, and often articulate it.
Others articulate the need for unquestioning devotion to practices.
Neither, in my awareness, are wrong.
Both approaches (and all others, from truly enlightened teachers - thinking of Nisargadatta, Ramana, etc.) are designed to give the highest number of students the best shot at Realization – knowing full well that the vast majority are highly unlikely to make it, no matter what you (the teacher) do or say.
Like the Bhagavad Gita says, “… only one in a thousand”.
Most people just don’t want it badly enough, or don’t understand the importance, or will allow themselves to be distracted by day-to-day life.
And, in my experience, most people blindly scribbling “1+1=3” will do so for whatever reasons they may have … and are fairly unlikely to alter the inclination, due to anyone else’s saying so.
That’s one of the reasons that focusing on our own sadhana seems to be the biggest “favor” we can do for anyone else; pointing things out, or trying to directly help / change / influence anyone else - especially in terms of their spiritual path and practices … doesn’t seem to be effective, to put it mildly.
Peace & Namaste,
Kirtanman
Been meaning to address this. I’d like to check a couple of things to see if I’m in synch with what you’re describing. I’ll phrase it as questions, just 'cuz I can’t think of another way. I’m not trying to lead the witness! I certainly won’t be disappointed if you don’t agree on any/all points:
You experienced, I’m guessing, that what “got” you to the all-the-wayness was bhakti? And this vastly improved your realization of what bhakti is? And what you experienced on the other side of this (so to speak) was a kundalini opening? And that what got you there wasn’t a pushing, but, rather, a courage to cease a lifelong habit of pushing THE OTHER WAY?
If not, I’d be interested in hearing your thoughts. Hey, i’m interested regardless!
Kinda-sorta .... (same "flavah", slightly different specifics, maybe ...)
It was more: most of us are very unconscious of how much resistance we have, and how "close in" we hold that resistance.
If we're willing (and possibly, in a group-consciousness / enlightened-teacher environment ... I don't know how big a part that plays, but at times ... per my comments which you're referencing, it plays some part) .... the experience of a significantly more open consciousness is (possibly) much closer ... and much more vast ... yet much more "able to be handled and enjoyed" - than many of us may realize.
In the spirit of "de-myth-ing" enlightenment (per the other thread, of that title) ... we have drawn lines in some very arbitrary places ("my" consciousness stops "here", yours starts "there" - when, in reality ... at the atomic and/or sub-atomic levels ... it's all 99%+ (apparently) empty space, anyway).
Expansion of consciousness is a much more gradual, and far more available thing, than many of us realize.
It's like: we keep it "close in", awaiting the day when the "enlightenment angel" will descend, and bonk us on the crown chakra, with the HEB - Holy Enlightenment Bonker - and we will live happily ever after."
Adya just helped me to become aware that much expansion is available, simply by become aware ... and opening (with attendant willingness to allow the opening, without restraint) ... without thinking about it, and (again) with no resistance, or as little as possible.
I experience Kundalini as much more on the "Ecstatic Conductivity" side of the "house" --- this was much more on the Inner Silence side of the house (per the Reality that we're pointing toward Realization that it's all Inner .....)
:slight_smile:
Peace & Namaste,
Kirtanman
Kirtanman said:
… a lot of advaitic, or advaita-like teachers, pooh-pooh practices on purpose … because practices can be almost as likely to involve sadhana-derailing misunderstandings, as they are to facilitate enlightenment.
Kirtanman, I believe the reason they pooh-pooh mantras is usually just ordinary ignorance – prejudice even. They just don’t know enough – they don’t know the phenomenon of enlightenment (and the cause-and-effect relationships that can catalyze it) well enough, and with sufficient nuance and depth to give a better answer.
Sometimes it’s no better than a 19th-century British medical doctor arriving in India and saying ‘That can’t possibly work, that’s native medicine’.
If someone is asked if mantras are effective, let’s simplify his possible answers to two: (a) “Yes, the are an effective cause of the enlightenment process in some people” and (b) “Bah! They are nonsense!”.
The answer (a) is correct; the answer (b) is wrong, a mistake, ignorance. I think in general, people say (b) because they do not know (a), and for no better reason than that. No need to mythologize them. They aren’t perfect all-knowers and their teachings usually have significant inadequacies, which is to be expected. It’s no different or better to when in the Medical field, doctors prescribe a regimen of treatment that is discovered in future years to be very inadequate or even negative in its effects. There’s nothing holy about it, nothing terrible about it, they just didn’t know better. C’est la vie.
If anyone can point to a teaching that is “1+1-3” (i.e. “in error”) from Adya, I’d like to be aware of it, and/or explore it together.
BTW, I’m not suggesting that I see mistakes like that in Adyashanti.
I recognize your points. In this case, we are probably both right, just emphasizing different angles. Nice to thrash the ideas out.
Just to clear up a (possible) misunderstanding… I wasn’t calling you a guru (or anything else) basher, I was addressing a point you raised, and merely mentioned it as an aside in reference to the way the thread in general seemed to be heading to me (partly tounge-in-cheek… sorry, I left the tongue-in-cheek smiley out by mistake, but I think I did put the wink-a-dink smiley in ).
Hi David,
Just to mention, to their credit, nearly all the people that I have heard of who have said they are enlightened, or strongly alluded to their true nature being the enlightened condition, have then spent an incredible amount of time and energy trying to explain to people what it is all about. They don’t (in my experience) just say, “I’m enlightened” and then sit there, lapping up the praise. I am thinking of people like Adyashanti, Ammachi (the hugging mother) and Krishnamurti. Interestingly, if you count the number of people that someone talks directly (in person) to, Krishnamurti spoke to more people in his lifetime than anyone else who has ever lived. So he certainly can’t be accused of not trying to explain what he was talking about!
And he didn’t just shoot the breaze, he only talked about one thing, although he did have a few words for it like love, freedom, truth etc. But as far as I can tell, these terms were absolutes for him, and synonymous.
Yes… for me enlightenment is related to our Divine nature. We understand words because of the way that people use them. If people start using a word in a different way, to mean something different, then the word itself changes meaning. If we look at the way that people who claim to know about enlightenment use the word, they don’t seem to be saying “As we progress on the spiritual path we get happier and happier, and more and more loving and its really great”. In fact, they never seem to say that. They talk a lot about a realization, about dissolution and about an awakening. They also talk a lot about identification, the identification of the self. They talk about illusion, conditioning and about higher and lower natures. They say that our higher (true) self is Divine, and that the realization of this, is enlightenment. And they very often talk about this process as a remembering of something forgotten, and of the time-span of this forgetting being in the region of thousands of years.
The higher self is described in an amazingly similar way by all of them. It seems to be the one thing they all agree on, apart from the personal/ impersonal nature of it, and the question of whether it is empty or full.
So yes, for me, divine nature means divine nature. Unsullied, pure, transcendent, eternal, uncreated. Not a superhero thing, because superheros need to have someone (else) to save, and that’s one of the things that is left behind (that’s part of the illusion too). But certainly a supernal consciousness, which is in fact our birthright.
So I hope that explains a bit why I talk the way I do about enlightenment. It isn’t (just) pure ignorance, but actually a theory based on a great deal of study of the way the word is used by spiritual teachers. I don’t think there is any lack of science in my reasoning and I believe my method is pretty much what any semanticist would use.
Of course on the path we are occasionally blessed with glimpses of the Divine state. Personally, I think if I hadn’t had such glimpses of what the enlightened are talking about, I wouldn’t have believed a word of it. I certainly wouldn’t have the confidence that I do have that what they are talking about is true.
Christi
SAID I
“To whom belongs Thy Beauty?”
HE replied
“Since I alone exist to Me
Lover, Beloved and Love am I in one,
Beauty and Mirror and the eyes which See”
Abu Sa’id Bin Abi’L Khair
Ad 967- 1049
I can’t stop constantly thinking back (this will date me) to the Palmolive dishwashing liquid tv commercial, where the person touting the product notes that her friend has had her hand “soaking in it” the whole time.
Over and over that echoes for me…
I just watched this one today… and as we have all managed by now over half a dozen pages talking about some fellow without seeing him in action thought I would clip it here.
Its a real nice and inspiring talk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELTiD7L_nU8
Enjoy!
Mike
) <– not a “back-handed” comment in the least; you actually have me curious … I’ll probably Google “Tolle”, and see what I can learn.
(And yeah, I do type pretty fast - and sleep fairly little … no idea what my “rate” is on either one, though … 