|
|
Post by Reefs on May 1, 2019 0:59:44 GMT -5
Here is where it seems to me that ET isn't using your vocabulary in the same way that I understand you to understand it. In the terms that you've expressed, I'd say ET is a kensho guy, and while I'd definitely say ET is SR, he doesn't talk directly about the nature of the person - how it's an illusion. Instead he points out how all the personal associations are mistaken for what they're not: how personality, is at the center of a sort of mass, collective insanity. Similar to Adyashanti, and unlike Jed or Niz or, in my perception Ramana or U.G. or Spira, ET doesn't talk alot about a final realization that ends the seeking. In fact, as far as I recall (unlike Adya), I don't remember ever hearing or reading ET expounding on that. He confronts ego directly but counsels the reader not to fight it, and he doesn't say anything about "ego death". He's sorta' like the Catholics that way.  Yes, he's definitely referring to what we call kensho. Well, I think his awakening story is pretty clear on the nature of the person matter. And while he may not call it illusory, he makes it rather clear that it's not the real deal deal either, or at least not all of what you could/should consider YOU. Notice also that he talks about enlightenment as a 'feeling-realization'! And compare that to Jed's mental demolition model. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on May 1, 2019 2:42:06 GMT -5
Mental positions
ET: If you identify with a mental position, then if you are wrong, your mind-based sense of self is seriously threatened with annihilation. So you as the ego cannot afford to be wrong. To be wrong is to die. Wars have been fought over this, and countless relationships have broken down. Once you have disidentified from your mind, whether you are right or wrong makes no difference to your sense of self at all, so the forcefully compulsive and deeply unconscious need to be right, which is a form of violence, will no longer be there. You can state clearly and firmly how you feel or what you think, but there will be no aggressiveness or defensiveness about it. Your sense of self is then derived from a deeper and truer place within yourself, not from the mind. Watch out for any kind of defensiveness within yourself. What are you defending? An illusory identity, an image in your mind, a fictitious entity. Eckhart Tolle, The Power of Now, Chapter 2 I suppose there is a conversation to be had that reflects being right or wrong and what constitutes the truth of the matter . I mean two peeps can argue to infinity about being right or wrong about something but there is however the truth of the matter that in a way supersedes the need to be right . I have a strong resonance with getting to the heart of a matter .. it's not always the case however for it depends on the situation at hand but as an example when I felt I had to know myself or know the origin of my suffering I sat daily for 10 or so years looking into myself until that eventually happened . So getting to the heart of some matter on the forums is a walk in the park for me because the same energy is present in both instances .. it's in my blood so to speak . |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on May 1, 2019 12:40:23 GMT -5
Here is where it seems to me that ET isn't using your vocabulary in the same way that I understand you to understand it. In the terms that you've expressed, I'd say ET is a kensho guy, and while I'd definitely say ET is SR, he doesn't talk directly about the nature of the person - how it's an illusion. Instead he points out how all the personal associations are mistaken for what they're not: how personality, is at the center of a sort of mass, collective insanity. Similar to Adyashanti, and unlike Jed or Niz or, in my perception Ramana or U.G. or Spira, ET doesn't talk alot about a final realization that ends the seeking. In fact, as far as I recall (unlike Adya), I don't remember ever hearing or reading ET expounding on that. He confronts ego directly but counsels the reader not to fight it, and he doesn't say anything about "ego death". He's sorta' like the Catholics that way. Yes, he's definitely referring to what we call kensho. Well, I think his awakening story is pretty clear on the nature of the person matter. And while he may not call it illusory, he makes it rather clear that it's not the real deal deal either, or at least not all of what you could/should consider YOU. Notice also that he talks about enlightenment as a 'feeling-realization'! And compare that to Jed's mental demolition model. A third sample that can allow you to triangulate is Spira. He describes a sort of quiet awe that he conveys quite viscerally with his demeanor. He doesn't have the same light, playful, humorous sense about him as Tolle. The truth is expressed in different ways as filtered/modulated by the different people who've discovered it. So "Jed's" "personality" doesn't necessarily disqualify him from realization, and I get the impression the author sort of amplified that aspect of things to challenge the spiritual cliche's of 20 years ago. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 1, 2019 14:38:27 GMT -5
I'll have to give Jane's stuff a more thorough read and get back to you. I can comment on Tolle's idea from the perspective of an unconscious seeker following Tolle's invitation into meditation. His distinction between types of time is meant for someone "watching the thinker" to get present to how the mind is constantly throwing shade over what Niz would call the "I AM" by drifting attention to the past or the future. Now, it's definitely possible to get hung-up on what Tolle means by "clock time". I noticed myself getting tempted into trying to nail it down in intellectual terms, and I've read along with many others losing themselves in the TMT of it. There's a 100% parallel between that and the times in the past folks on this forum questioned what the 2nd 'A' in "ATA" is supposed to mean. But that's self-defeating of the intent. Ultimately, he's just pointing to the false, as false: the constant tug at attention away from the present. Here, the subtle seduction of his gentleness is evident again. It's natural to pursue the question "what is that pull?", but he doesn't put that on the reader's plate directly .. or, at least, that I recall. Seth, also challenges the reader to meditate, and, unlike Tolle, does so directly. So although the meditation advice is similar, it seems to me different from Tolle, in that Seth is suggesting that the reader open their perception to something new, to trans-sensory stimuli the reader spent their entire lives oblivious to. So while Tolle is pointing to the false, as false, I don't think we can same the same of Seth, but like I said, I'll have to re-read it, and more of it. And frankly, I don't think I can really understand it unless I follow the practice suggestions that are woven into the material, to find out for myself what Jane was "channeling". An intellectual model of it might be interesting, and even helpful if not over-thought, but the "inner senses" are never going to be within the grasp of intellect. so that we can talk about it, and therefore rather arbitrary but in reality non-existent. Same applies to A-H (see streams of consciousness metaphor). So I think this is an important point people often seem to forget when they compare those teachings with let's say Advaita. So while they don't call self straight-out illusory, it is always implied somehow. People just tend to lose sight of this as people in Advaita circles tend to lose sight of the fact that the personal is an aspect of the impersonal. So in a sense, advaita and A-H/Seth are two extreme ends of one and the same stick. Yes, I agree. I have no issue with what Tolle is trying to say. Seth recommended regular 'dissociation practice' - which is basically quieting the mind. And if you look at the Tolle quotes I've just posted about moving into the NOW etc., you'll see that Seth and Tolle are not that far apart because what Tolle describes as recognizing beauty or seeing beyond the mere form is basically what Seth means by using the inner senses or what A-H call seeing thru the eyes of Source. You have to keep in mind that according to Seth, the outer senses are part of the camouflage, in fact, they create the camouflage. So they cannot be used to see beyond/prior to the camouflage. And camouflage is nothing more than 'solidified vitality' anyway. So the outer senses only allow you to see the solidified aspect of vitality while the inner senses allow you to realize vitality directly. There is a distinction between inner and outer because the door doesn't swing both ways. The inner might know the outer but the outer doesn't necessarily know the inner. Again the image of Russian dolls helps here (but the metaphor reverses the names, as the outer here encompasses the inner, not vice versa). Meditation is what connects the two, what brings connection. I read a nice little book years ago which illustrated this, The Book of Paradox by Louise Cooper. A student goes on a journey of trials, sent by the Master. Via the trails the student becomes the Master, literally. He himself sent himself on the journey of trials. www.goodreads.com/book/show/1839159.The_Book_of_Paradox |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 9, 2019 9:13:52 GMT -5
Presence and Being
ET: When you become conscious of Being, what is really happening is that Being becomes conscious of itself. When Being becomes conscious of itself - that's presence. Since Being, consciousness, and life are synonymous, we could say that presence means consciousness becoming conscious of itself, or life attaining self-consciousness. But don't get attached to the words, and don't make an effort to understand this. There is nothing that you need to understand before you can become present.
Consciousness takes on the disguise of forms until they reach such complexity that it completely loses itself in them. In present-day humans, consciousness is completely identified with its disguise. It only knows itself as form and therefore lives in fear of the annihilation of its physical or psychological form.
Can you now see the deeper and wider significance of becoming present as the watcher of your mind? Whenever you watch the mind, you withdraw consciousness from mind forms, which then becomes what we call the watcher or the witness.
Consequently, the watcher - pure consciousness beyond form - becomes stronger, and the mental formations become weaker. When we talk about watching the mind we are personalizing an event that is truly of cosmic significance: through you, consciousness is awakening out of its dream of identification with form and withdrawing from form.
When consciousness frees itself from its identification with physical and mental forms, it becomes what we may call pure or enlightened consciousness, or presence.
Eckhart Tolle, The Power of Now, Chapter 5
|
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 11, 2019 21:39:29 GMT -5
Impersonal
ET: There is nothing personal in this: I am not teaching you. You are consciousness, and you are listening to yourself. There is an Eastern saying: "The teacher and the taught together create the teaching." In any case, the words in themselves are not important.
They are not the Truth; they only point to it. I speak from presence, and as I speak, you may be able to join me in that state. Although every word that I use has a history, of course, and comes from the past, as all language does, the words that I speak to you now are carriers of the high-energy frequency of presence, quite apart from the meaning they convey as words.
Eckhart Tolle, The Power of Now, Chapter 5
|
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 11, 2019 21:40:57 GMT -5
Being and I am
ET: "Water? What do you mean by that? I don't understand it." This is what a fish would say if it had a human mind. Please stop trying to understand Being. You have already had significant glimpses of Being, but the mind will always try to squeeze it into a little box and then put a label on it. It cannot be done. It cannot become an object of knowledge. In Being, subject and object merge into one.
Being can be felt as the ever-present I am that is beyond name and form. To feel and thus to know that you are and to abide in that deeply rooted state is enlightenment, is the truth that Jesus says will make you free. Free from the illusion that you are nothing more than your physical body and your mind. This "illusion of the self," as the Buddha calls it, is the core error.
Eckhart Tolle, The Power of Now, Chapter 6
|
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 18, 2019 10:12:55 GMT -5
Reclaiming consciousness from the mind
ET: Underneath your outer form, you are connected with something so vast, so immeasurable and sacred, that it cannot be conceived or spoken of - yet I am speaking of it now.
You are cut off from Being as long as your mind takes up all your attention. The one thing that truly matters is then missing from your life: awareness of your deeper self - your invisible and indestructible reality.
To become conscious of Being, you need to reclaim consciousness from the mind. This is one of the most essential tasks on your spiritual journey. It will free vast amounts of consciousness that previously had been trapped in useless and compulsive thinking. A very effective way of doing this is simply to take the focus of your attention away from thinking and direct it into the body, where Being can be felt in the first instance as the invisible energy field that gives life to what you perceive as the physical body.
Eckhart Tolle, The Power of Now, Chapter 6
|
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 18, 2019 10:53:37 GMT -5
A third sample that can allow you to triangulate is Spira. "The world is known by the senses. The senses are known by the mind. The mind is known by Consciousness. And Consciousness is known by itself." - Rupert Spira He describes a sort of quiet awe that he conveys quite viscerally with his demeanor. He doesn't have the same light, playful, humorous sense about him as Tolle. The truth is expressed in different ways as filtered/modulated by the different people who've discovered it. So "Jed's" "personality" doesn't necessarily disqualify him from realization, and I get the impression the author sort of amplified that aspect of things to challenge the spiritual cliche's of 20 years ago. I agree, different personalities may have a slightly different take on one and the same thing (or no-thing) because there's a different filtering/conceptualization process going on. And different people are attracted to different personalities, most likely because of that. But there needs to be a line drawn between mere difference in personality/preference but essentially same understanding and an actual difference in understanding that may come off as just a difference in personality/preference. Said that, I have no actual issue with Jed's personality or even his poking, it seems all too similar to what UG does. So when I read the book I was willing to make a lot of allowance in that regard. But at some point, about half way thru the book, it was clear that there is a realization issue, not merely a personality issue. At times it even seemed that the personality issue had been intentionally created in order to cover up the realization issue. I didn't get that impression from Tolle at all. He has his narrow focus, yes, but he comes across as genuine, and in a very simple way that is almost adorable. I'm still not a Tolle fan and probably will never be, but I do recognize the truth of what he is talking about and so I can wholeheartedly recommend his book, even though from a personality perspective we may be worlds apart. Now compare that to Jed. From a personality perspective Jed feels a lot closer and a lot of what he says is spot on, but ultimately, what he teaches doesn't ring true. That's why I can't wholeheartedly recommend his book. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 18, 2019 10:57:26 GMT -5
The Unmanifested
ET: Presence is pure consciousness - consciousness that has been reclaimed from the mind, from the world of form. The inner body is your link with the Unmanifested, and in its deepest aspect is the Unmanifested: the Source from which consciousness emanates as light emanates from the sun. Awareness of the inner body is consciousness remembering its origin and returning to the Source.
The word Unmanifested attempts, by way of negation, to express That which cannot be spoken, thought or imagined. It points to what it is by saying what it is not. Being, on the other hand, is a positive term. Please don't get attached to either of these words or start believing in them. They are no more than signposts.
But since in your essence you are consciousness, we might as well say that it is an awakening of consciousness from the dream of form. This does not mean that your own form will instantly vanish in an explosion of light. You can continue in your present form yet be aware of the formless and deathless deep within you.
Eckhart Tolle, The Power of Now, Chapter 6
|
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 23, 2019 8:06:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 28, 2019 5:32:40 GMT -5
Portals into the Unmanifested (1)
ET: You take a journey into the Unmanifested every night when you enter the phase of deep dreamless sleep. You merge with the Source. You draw from it the vital energy that sustains you for a while when you return to the manifested, the world of separate forms. But in dreamless sleep, you don't go into it consciously. Although the bodily functions are still operating, "you” no longer exist in that state. Can you imagine what it would be like to go into dreamless sleep with full consciousness? It is impossible to imagine it, because that state has no content.
The Unmanifested does not liberate you until you enter it consciously. That's why Jesus did not say the truth will make you free, but rather: "You will know the truth, and the truth will make you free." This is not a conceptual truth. It is the truth of eternal life beyond form, which is known directly or not at all. But don't attempt to stay conscious in dreamless sleep. It is highly unlikely that you will succeed. At most, you may remain conscious during the dream phase, but not beyond that. This is called lucid dreaming, which may be interesting and fascinating, but it is not liberating.
Eckhart Tolle, The Power of Now, Chapter 7
|
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 28, 2019 5:40:41 GMT -5
Portals into the Unmanifested (2)
ET: Another portal into the Unmanifested is created through the cessation of thinking. This can start with a very simple thing, such as taking one conscious breath or looking, in a state of intense alertness, at a flower, so that there is no mental commentary running at the same time. There are many ways to create a gap in the incessant stream of thought. This is what meditation is all about. Thought is part of the realm of the manifested. Continuous mind activity keeps you imprisoned in the world of form and becomes an opaque screen that prevents you from becoming conscious of the Unmanifested, conscious of the formless and timeless God-essence in yourself and in all things and all creatures.
When you are intensely present, you don't need to be concerned about the cessation of thinking, of course, because the mind then stops automatically. That's why I said the Now is an essential aspect of every other portal.
Eckhart Tolle, The Power of Now, Chapter 7
|
|
|
|
Post by bluey on May 29, 2019 16:26:06 GMT -5
I don't feel Eckhart will be too bothered how Shawn rates him after all Shawns ratings are just that his ratings. He may say is that so if told of where he was rated. I would too. Some sages feel a need to see how switched on the lights are in another some don't As an experiment it would be interesting if Eckhart brought out a book with a great title and just repeated F**k Y*u in all the pages After all whether a sage can write or draw a masterpiece surely the same applies if he or she does the opposite and draws a straight line or publishes a book full of errors As they are free of the limitations of the mind It's just not the book but his presence too. I'm sure he's not to bothered about the PON As he is pointing at Here and Now in everything even away from his book Well, sure. The ratings are mostly just personal opinion. I've just finished reading TPON. And I have to say, I like it a lot. I think Shawn didn't like the sole focus on money-making of the Tolle website. To me, that's not necessarily an issue, because to me, ET teaches thriving. And why should he say no to thriving financially? So I disagree with the 3 star rating. However, I wouldn't give him a 5 star rating either because there's a couple of things in his ontology that didn't ring true at all to me and seem a bit TMT: - the pain body - the alarmism Apart from that, the book is excellent. His style is very simple, his language very clear and no matter what topic, he always brings it back to his main message, presence - the power of NOW. Actually, it felt a lot like reading A-H, just with a different set of vocabulary but basically very similar concepts. And both A-H and ET are very heavy on the kensho aspect of SR. The only difference is that ET also mentions the satori aspect of SR, A-H don't. And I'd give A-H a 4 star rating, so I think ET should get at least a 4 star rating as well. It is what it is. As it's Shawns platform and his understanding of different teachings and teachers out there. I don't know him. I've never sat opposite him to look in his eyes. I've just read the words on a screen I feel Eckhart is an important sage of these times. Away from the sages of the past. As for the pain body I feel for most people it is relevant Even for sages waking up. I 'awakened' but the body definitely had to go through a process over many years as I had never sat in meditation or placed attention on the body Sages who teach meditation or teach placing attention on the body where there maybe the past emotions or mind trappings held in the body can be a very important practice But for me a sage who is still is better than any practice keeping their company. As they lead to the inner teacher through their silence than any practice For sages who are celibate avoiding relationships the aspect of talking of a pain body may not enter the teachings for some They may dismiss them or cover them over. To point at That. And this may be because of the time span of the average man and woman But for most seekers now they have to live pay bills work or live in a relationship of some sort Not everyone can set up shop as a teacher of That I work, Ian works and teaches too. But for most the pain body it will be present in any relationship. Even as you become more Nothing As for Eckhart accumulating wealth it's probably the wealth chasing him now not the other way around Sages in India have amassed billions in their Satsang environments. Their set up. When I was younger a Hindu sage would appear teaching me healing appear in may bedroom placing his hands on the right side of my chest and forehead. But I knew this knowledge but something was in the way. I would go still and in my minds eye we would be riding a tiger through a mountain place. A friend of mine recently his wife fell ill and I asked him to place his hand on her back And the body knows what to do as the hand just moved on his and their minds went still. She became well. He later became ill depressed but could feel a stillness behind it all So the pain body his past was making itself known. The ignorance of living as we all know well. As he hadn't done any practice His business friends were saying the doctor 👨⚕️ has said you definitely need a pace maker fitted. So go by the advice. And they were saying get on with it But he didn't want that. And his wife was upset his children were worried But just placing my hands on his head as I wasn't there saying I can heal you It was just happening And he could feel drops 💦 enter his heart I was just in the silence yet he could feel much At the hospital the surgeon said this is strange as your heart is healed. He tried to gift me with a Porsche a watch as that was his way of dealing But as we were driving I said I would love a baked potato 🥔 I remember Osho talking of a sage where he would talk of non duality but would love his wife's food And she would say your Satsangs point at one thing But your appetite points at something else And he said when I stop desiring your food then I'm finished here. And the story goes after one Satsang he refused his wife's food she cried knowing that he was going When I went to Vancouver a few years back I met people who knew Eckhart before he was well known One girl who had been in a gang and knew only this type of lifestyle. Her partner was killed through gang violence but she met Eckhart And she could feel the stillness tearing through her past even when he was saying hello I know this feeling having met my first teacher on the marketplace. This feeling of coming home. Even at work working with the chamber of commerce recently they all kept telling me to get used paying a bribe to ge a deal but Thst has its own play. |
|
|
|
Post by bluey on May 30, 2019 16:49:13 GMT -5
Yes, he's definitely referring to what we call kensho. Well, I think his awakening story is pretty clear on the nature of the person matter. And while he may not call it illusory, he makes it rather clear that it's not the real deal deal either, or at least not all of what you could/should consider YOU. Notice also that he talks about enlightenment as a 'feeling-realization'! And compare that to Jed's mental demolition model. A third sample that can allow you to triangulate is Spira. He describes a sort of quiet awe that he conveys quite viscerally with his demeanor. He doesn't have the same light, playful, humorous sense about him as Tolle. The truth is expressed in different ways as filtered/modulated by the different people who've discovered it. So "Jed's" "personality" doesn't necessarily disqualify him from realization, and I get the impression the author sort of amplified that aspect of things to challenge the spiritual cliche's of 20 years ago. My own experience the sages I've been with the eyes, humour especially the belly laugh ( a good way of experiencing That btw) the stillness where our eyes meet and faces change in Darshan have been important I do feel many non duality teachers no matter how clear their pointing is There's a covering over the eyes. I once pointed it out to Donna when I first met her as she presented a book on Swami Muktananda. The words arose he's not good to children I see it with Spira a little clouding over his eyes and not what I Am used to. And having met non duality teachers in the past where they have pointed at seekers to see it's all an illusion but when their own health or a parent passes they collapse against the advice and pointing they've given to others So it's important to be honest to say that's not been my experience yet. I don't know. A young girl I've been working with made me laugh recently She wrote a poem and at times I've had the rejection from publishers especially on poems. Even placing Ian out there wasn't easy but the right people came along As it's difficult in the marketplace to have your poems published very difficult I can work with Coach, Barbour, TK maxx, QVC and it's very easy Why for Eckhart as I've met people who he has served I know the silence no money can match what's shared over If Eckhart becomes a billionaire so be it. Good for him Here's the poem from this young girl who made it into a book of poems which I said you're so lucky it's so difficult to get a poem published. She's only 5 years old. In The Garden I am green at the bottom of me I am yellow in the middle of me I sometimes am in people's garden on the grass What am I Answer: A flower 🌺 Ian Wolstenholme once wrote in his book he gave me Bach, Keep all meaning simple |
|
