|
|
Post by Reefs on Apr 12, 2024 23:19:47 GMT -5
This is really good. I think he explains it quite well why some of us say that you cannot practice your way to SR and yet recommend to continue practice at the same time.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Apr 19, 2024 11:48:56 GMT -5
This is really good. I think he explains it quite well why some of us say that you cannot practice your way to SR and yet recommend to continue practice at the same time. Thoughts? Sue really liked this one. She said: "now there, is a true Christian!".  I agree with the point you make about his talk. I can tell he didn't even take the "neo-advaita" straw-man all that seriously as he stated it. It was an interesting, momentary hitch in his speech as he started speaking about the dichotomy. Also, talented speaker. His critics accuse him of hypnosis, I'm not sure if that aspect of his presentation is necessarily deliberate, it might rather be a poetic expression. Dunno' either way for sure off of the one talk. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Apr 19, 2024 16:01:16 GMT -5
This is really good. I think he explains it quite well why some of us say that you cannot practice your way to SR and yet recommend to continue practice at the same time. Thoughts? The pointing in this video seems to be totally clear, but apparently many people claim that Shunramurti is a cult leader who exploits people attracted to his ashram in Costa Rica. If the claims are true, then this may be a case of someone who has attained a deep understanding of what's going on, but has not yet escaped a narcissistic and manipulative mindset. It may be a case of listen to message but ignore the messenger. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Apr 20, 2024 8:18:07 GMT -5
See edited response, above.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Apr 20, 2024 13:49:37 GMT -5
This is really good. I think he explains it quite well why some of us say that you cannot practice your way to SR and yet recommend to continue practice at the same time. Thoughts? The pointing in this video seems to be totally clear, but apparently many people claim that Shunramurti is a cult leader who exploits people attracted to his ashram in Costa Rica. If the claims are true, then this may be a case of someone who has attained a deep understanding of what's going on, but has not yet escaped a narcissistic and manipulative mindset. It may be a case of listen to message but ignore the messenger. I know nothing about him, but the topic of behaviourism is an interesting one. Mooji has had ugly accusations levelled at him. I read recently that Spira has been getting negative press for being unfaithful and lying. Again, I don't know much about any of it, so don't take what I said too seriously. Osho another obvious example though. It's not that I have a judgement of them, as humans....I believe humans are subject to flaws and imperfections, it's all part of the life process. It's more like....given they are spiritual teachers....how are we supposed to interpret their behaviour? What does their behaviour say about their teaching? Or simply, what are we supposed to do with this information about them? Another example is Adya...who is retiring from teaching, citing anxiety as one of the factors (relates to an illness he had). Adya...anxious? What do we do with that info? I reflected a while ago on my own time following the gurus...the only one I closely followed for a while (couple of years) was Tolle. Oh, and Byron Katie too, also about a year (after Tolle). At the time I was following them closely, I think I was looking at them, and there was something inside of me that said, ' I want what they've got'. Or perhaps even more than that, ' I want to be them'. If I look back, I think there was a phase in which I really was trying to be like Tolle. And at some point (over a longish period) I had to release that, and accept that...like everything else in life.... spirituality manifests itself individually, and according to conditioning/personality. My spiritual expression was never going to look like Tolle's and Katie's. And I'm sure that, in terms of personality, I wasn't much like them even before their awakenings. If I'm correct, and nobody can ever really have what each teacher offers, and that people unconsciously follow the gurus to try and 'be' them, does that mean teachers are redundant? Of course not! I still really like a bit of Tolle and Katie in my life. In fact, I love seeing their quotes pop up on my travels around the internet. It's still of value to me. But I think it's more now that I really appreciate their unique spirituality. I can appreciate the 'flavour' of their wisdom. I just appreciate having them in the world as examples of spiritual expression. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Apr 20, 2024 13:50:36 GMT -5
As many know I can't do long posts or videos, but watched a good 2 minutes lol.
I think some non dualist see the connection made with what you are with what you are as a bit of a red herring.
As this dude say's it a deeper level that isn't known on the surface.
It's similar to the unrealised and the realised even though there is only what you are.
So we have this point within self awareness that either reflects a deeper connection or realisation of what we are or not.
It's about getting to the point of this deeper connection or realisation.
As always said, if one is ripe there isn't much to do, if one isn't then there is plenty.
|
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Apr 20, 2024 14:11:46 GMT -5
As many know I can't do long posts or videos, but watched a good 2 minutes lol. I think some non dualist see the connection made with what you are with what you are as a bit of a red herring. As this dude say's it a deeper level that isn't known on the surface. It's similar to the unrealised and the realised even though there is only what you are. So we have this point within self awareness that either reflects a deeper connection or realisation of what we are or not. It's about getting to the point of this deeper connection or realisation. As always said, if one is ripe there isn't much to do, if one isn't then there is plenty. Yes, and this is why each human has to find out for him/herself what's going on and what it will take to attain satisfaction with what has been realized and/or experienced. One fellow in TAT was a serious seeker until he lost interest in seeking when he decided that seeking is solely a mind game. He thinks that he's enlightened because his seeking came to an end, and many other people have accepted this idea and think that he's enlightened. The question he pursued was, "Who or what am I?" He never found out because he lost interest in the search, but if a cessation in seeking isn't accompanied by a realization of what one IS, then IMO the search ended way too soon. If a cessation in seeking is considered to be enlightenment, then every fundamentalist believer who thinks s/he understands the nature of reality because of adherence to some religious teaching (and therefore isn't seeking anything) is enlightened, and I don't think anyone on this forum would agree with that. There are also many people who have genuine breakthrough realizations who then acquire followers. The admiration and acclaim of followers then makes them feel special or superior, and self-centeredness creeps back in through the spiritual backdoor, so to speak. The general rule is that if a guru wants anything (money, sex, admiration, etc) from followers, then the followers need to run in the other direction. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Apr 20, 2024 14:12:14 GMT -5
This is really good. I think he explains it quite well why some of us say that you cannot practice your way to SR and yet recommend to continue practice at the same time. Thoughts? The pointing in this video seems to be totally clear, but apparently many people claim that Shunramurti is a cult leader who exploits people attracted to his ashram in Costa Rica. If the claims are true, then this may be a case of someone who has attained a deep understanding of what's going on, but has not yet escaped a narcissistic and manipulative mindset. It may be a case of listen to message but ignore the messenger. The patience he shows in that video is interesting. He is going to attract people with emotional issues for a number of reasons .. demeanor, patience, and at least the appearance of compassion. I asked sifty about this once and he said he tends to attract people who are near the end of the rope anyway so it's not an issue. I skimmed a page with complaints about Shunramurti, and didn't see accusations of any of the types of flagrant abuse that were leveled against Andrew Cohen. The accusation was that he promoted a dependency by his students, but I can see that happening through no fault of his own, and as he is dependent on them for his living, that just is what it is. They also complained that he wasn't a perfect saint, that he wouldn't allow the students to "reflect" onto him (he wouldn't accept criticism), but that he expected them to bare their souls. The allegation was that he would deflect any questions about his own emotions, but then sometimes get emotional in private. Obviously, this is just me gossiping, but I see a peril here in inviting people to explore based on any concept of "ego". People are complicated, ego-mind is the seat of cleverness, and resentment. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Apr 20, 2024 14:17:51 GMT -5
As many know I can't do long posts or videos, but watched a good 2 minutes lol. I think some non dualist see the connection made with what you are with what you are as a bit of a red herring. As this dude say's it a deeper level that isn't known on the surface. It's similar to the unrealised and the realised even though there is only what you are. So we have this point within self awareness that either reflects a deeper connection or realisation of what we are or not. It's about getting to the point of this deeper connection or realisation. As always said, if one is ripe there isn't much to do, if one isn't then there is plenty. Yes, and this is why each human has to find out for him/herself what's going on and what it will take to attain satisfaction with what has been realized and/or experienced. One fellow in TAT was a serious seeker until he lost interest in seeking when he decided that seeking is solely a mind game. He thinks that he's enlightened because his seeking came to an end, and many other people have accepted this idea and think that he's enlightened. The question he pursued was, "Who or what am I?" He never found out because he lost interest in the search, but if a cessation in seeking isn't accompanied by a realization of what one IS, then IMO the search ended way too soon. If a cessation in seeking is considered to be enlightenment, then every fundamentalist believer who thinks s/he understands the nature of reality because of adherence to some religious teaching (and therefore isn't seeking anything) is enlightened, and I don't think anyone on this forum would agree with that. There are also many people who have genuine breakthrough realizations who then acquire followers. The admiration and acclaim of followers then makes them feel special or superior, and self-centeredness creeps back in through the spiritual backdoor, so to speak. The general rule is that if a guru wants anything (money, sex, admiration, etc) from followers, then the followers need to run in the other direction. I perceive a subtlety here in that there still is room for professional teachers. The story you tell of Seung Sahn comes to mind .. "give money, or don't!" |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Apr 20, 2024 14:41:55 GMT -5
Yes, and this is why each human has to find out for him/herself what's going on and what it will take to attain satisfaction with what has been realized and/or experienced. One fellow in TAT was a serious seeker until he lost interest in seeking when he decided that seeking is solely a mind game. He thinks that he's enlightened because his seeking came to an end, and many other people have accepted this idea and think that he's enlightened. The question he pursued was, "Who or what am I?" He never found out because he lost interest in the search, but if a cessation in seeking isn't accompanied by a realization of what one IS, then IMO the search ended way too soon. If a cessation in seeking is considered to be enlightenment, then every fundamentalist believer who thinks s/he understands the nature of reality because of adherence to some religious teaching (and therefore isn't seeking anything) is enlightened, and I don't think anyone on this forum would agree with that. There are also many people who have genuine breakthrough realizations who then acquire followers. The admiration and acclaim of followers then makes them feel special or superior, and self-centeredness creeps back in through the spiritual backdoor, so to speak. The general rule is that if a guru wants anything (money, sex, admiration, etc) from followers, then the followers need to run in the other direction. I perceive a subtlety here in that there still is room for professional teachers. The story you tell of Seung Sahn comes to mind .. "give money, or don't!" Yes, but that was a different situation. Apparently this guy has reportedly asked for lots of money from followers, suggested that people get divorced and give him the settlement money, tried to keep followers away from outside influences, etc. If any of this is true, then people would probably be well advised to stay away from his ashram. Maybe listen to his videos, but stay out of reach. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Apr 20, 2024 14:50:02 GMT -5
As many know I can't do long posts or videos, but watched a good 2 minutes lol. I think some non dualist see the connection made with what you are with what you are as a bit of a red herring. As this dude say's it a deeper level that isn't known on the surface. It's similar to the unrealised and the realised even though there is only what you are. So we have this point within self awareness that either reflects a deeper connection or realisation of what we are or not. It's about getting to the point of this deeper connection or realisation. As always said, if one is ripe there isn't much to do, if one isn't then there is plenty. That's fine, butt, because we're dealing with the human mind there are always two sides to every coin. The existential truth is a birthright. It's not a reward for hard work or good behavior or wisdom that comes from life experience or a talent you can train to enhance or some special knowledge that can be learned. It's always and ever, here and now. Different people will advise different approaches based on their own past experiences and what they may have observed of others. The "ideal candidate" - so "ripeness" - will vary based on those approaches, so, that might vary quite wildly between perspectives. I'm always willing to give the benefit of the doubt - which comes in the form of an initial, unearned respect - to anyone who pipes up on the topic.  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Apr 20, 2024 14:51:04 GMT -5
I perceive a subtlety here in that there still is room for professional teachers. The story you tell of Seung Sahn comes to mind .. "give money, or don't!" Yes, but that was a different situation. Apparently this guy has reportedly asked for lots of money from followers, suggested that people get divorced and give him the settlement money, tried to keep followers away from outside influences, etc. If any of this is true, then people would probably be well advised to stay away from his ashram. Maybe listen to his videos, but stay out of reach.  .. perhaps he meant well! |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Apr 21, 2024 23:48:39 GMT -5
TBH, I’ve never heard of Shunyamurti before. Some of his videos just popped up one day in the suggestion column on youtube, so I watched a couple of those and found them to be exceptionally clear. And so I posted one video. Then ZD mentioned those rumors. I looked it up and there seem to be some folks dedicated to badmouthing Shunyamurti, they set up a website especially for that purpose. And you know what that reminds me of? Gab! Spiritual communities are tricky business. They attract of lot of needy, confused and also egomaniacal people, with lots of interpersonal dynamics. Consider this: imagine a newbie coming to ST and reading a couple of posts by ZD (or yours truly) and finding them to be of exceptional clarity, and thinking “Wow, awesome. Such clarity! I like that guy.” And then that newbie goes to gab and starts reading what’s written there about ZD (or yours truly). And not knowing anything about ST’s history, he’s probably going to think “Woah, I had no idea that guy was such a fraud and bully! Apparently he randomly bans members as soon as they dare to disagree with him, threatening his oversized but fragile spiritual ego! He seems to be running his own personal cult on that forum, like a dictator, having all opposition silenced or banned, surrounded by yes-men, who don’t have the balls to point out this blatant abuse of power... very much like society these days!” Now, what is fact and what is fiction here? How could the newbie ever tell without knowing the whole story, first hand? I think we are in a very similar situation with Shunyamurti and many other gurus who have been accused of questionable behavior, like Osho, Sadhguru, Mooji etc. Those allegations could be all true, or not. It could all be true and then it would be a bad case of supersized spiritual ego gone wild. Or it could be someone envying their popularity and success, one of their direct competitors in the spiritual circus, just trying to get some of their market share. Or it could be a former disgruntled follower of them, who had been rejected for whatever reason and his/her ego bruised and is now trying to get even from afar. The pointers are crystal clear though. And that’s why I posted the video and why we are still discussing these other gurus. So, while on the one hand, if the walk doesn’t match the talk is an indicator that clarity isn’t really that crystal, we can’t verify the walk of these people first hand, only based on hearsay, and so have to stick to the talk for the time being and take what we hear about the walk with several grains of salt. But as far as I can tell, having watched only a couple of videos, Shunyamurti’s talk is exceptionally clear and also very elegant, one of the best you can find these days. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Apr 22, 2024 0:08:51 GMT -5
"The ego is a PDF file. PDF meaning, Projections, Decisions, and Fixations." |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Apr 22, 2024 9:44:40 GMT -5
TBH, I’ve never heard of Shunyamurti before. Some of his videos just popped up one day in the suggestion column on youtube, so I watched a couple of those and found them to be exceptionally clear. And so I posted one video. Then ZD mentioned those rumors. I looked it up and there seem to be some folks dedicated to badmouthing Shunyamurti, they set up a website especially for that purpose. And you know what that reminds me of? Gab! Spiritual communities are tricky business. They attract of lot of needy, confused and also egomaniacal people, with lots of interpersonal dynamics. Consider this: imagine a newbie coming to ST and reading a couple of posts by ZD (or yours truly) and finding them to be of exceptional clarity, and thinking “Wow, awesome. Such clarity! I like that guy.” And then that newbie goes to gab and starts reading what’s written there about ZD (or yours truly). And not knowing anything about ST’s history, he’s probably going to think “Woah, I had no idea that guy was such a fraud and bully! Apparently he randomly bans members as soon as they dare to disagree with him, threatening his oversized but fragile spiritual ego! He seems to be running his own personal cult on that forum, like a dictator, having all opposition silenced or banned, surrounded by yes-men, who don’t have the balls to point out this blatant abuse of power... very much like society these days!” Now, what is fact and what is fiction here? How could the newbie ever tell without knowing the whole story, first hand? I think we are in a very similar situation with Shunyamurti and many other gurus who have been accused of questionable behavior, like Osho, Sadhguru, Mooji etc. Those allegations could be all true, or not. It could all be true and then it would be a bad case of supersized spiritual ego gone wild. Or it could be someone envying their popularity and success, one of their direct competitors in the spiritual circus, just trying to get some of their market share. Or it could be a former disgruntled follower of them, who had been rejected for whatever reason and his/her ego bruised and is now trying to get even from afar. The pointers are crystal clear though. And that’s why I posted the video and why we are still discussing these other gurus. So, while on the one hand, if the walk doesn’t match the talk is an indicator that clarity isn’t really that crystal, we can’t verify the walk of these people first hand, only based on hearsay, and so have to stick to the talk for the time being and take what we hear about the walk with several grains of salt. But as far as I can tell, having watched only a couple of videos, Shunyamurti’s talk is exceptionally clear and also very elegant, one of the best you can find these days. I agree, and without knowing firsthand what went down, it's impossible to know what's going on and whether S walks the talk or not. Rick Archer has run into the same thing. He posted one video of a guy who had what appeared to be a genuinely huge realization. The guy attracted a lot of followers, but subsequently many followers fell away and began describing actions that made everything far more problematic. Apparently there was an addiction and the guy borrowed lots of money from his followers that he didn't pay back. Rick took down his interview, and the guy posted a rebuttal explaining his side of the story. I read the claims from both sides of the aisle and concluded that the guy had some serious problems. For that reason I quit recommending that people listen to the guy. Rick told me that this has happened about 25 times which is not bad considering he's done 800 interviews. It does, however, bring up the issue of what it means to walk the talk. S is very clear concerning ND, but if the allegations are true, what does that imply? To me it implies that a human can discover the non-dual nature of reality but still have some deep--seated personality issues/flaws that would NOT make them good in-person teachers. It would be safer for a newbie to listen to the satsangs, but not get involved personally with the teacher. I suspect that this is more of a problem with independent teachers than ones who teach in traditional structures among people who have equal insight. Even then, there's no certainty because there are several well-known Tibetan figures of some renown whose high-ranking cohorts hid their bad behavior for years. It appears that there can be enlightened insight by both mature psychologically well-adjusted people and enlightened insight by immature psychologically-screwed up people. Perhaps this is why some Zen Masters distinguish between enlightenment and "Holy Buddhahood." Thoughts? |
|
I agree with the point you make about his talk. I can tell he didn't even take the "neo-advaita" straw-man all that seriously as he stated it. It was an interesting, momentary hitch in his speech as he started speaking about the dichotomy. Also, talented speaker. His critics accuse him of hypnosis, I'm not sure if that aspect of his presentation is necessarily deliberate, it might rather be a poetic expression. Dunno' either way for sure off of the one talk.
