|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4514 Posts |
 Posted - Mar 16 2007 : 01:11:52 AM
|
Hi Yogani,
quote:
Yes, I would agree that Adyashanti is at risk, just as all adored teachers have been. All it takes is a few wayward desires on the part of the teacher (who doesn't have them?) and it can run astray in a hurry.
I am really confused now. Surely Adyashanti doesn't have any wayward desires? I thought that was the whole point? That's why he's an enlightened teacher. If someone is residing in the transcendent glory of their Divine nature and see the All as their true Self, who, or what is going to have wayward desires?
And how can you mythologise someone who has merged eternally with the Divine consciousness? What could be greater than that? Anything else you could say about them would be like so much chaff.
I must be missing something (again).
Christi |
 |
|
|
yogani
USA
5241 Posts |
Posted - Mar 16 2007 : 09:46:28 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
Hi Yogani,
quote:
Yes, I would agree that Adyashanti is at risk, just as all adored teachers have been. All it takes is a few wayward desires on the part of the teacher (who doesn't have them?) and it can run astray in a hurry.
I am really confused now. Surely Adyashanti doesn't have any wayward desires? I thought that was the whole point? That's why he's an enlightened teacher. If someone is residing in the transcendent glory of their Divine nature and see the All as their true Self, who, or what is going to have wayward desires?
And how can you mythologise someone who has merged eternally with the Divine consciousness? What could be greater than that? Anything else you could say about them would be like so much chaff.
I must be missing something (again).
Christi
Hi Christi:
Time will tell. Adyashanti's condition cannot be conclusively decided to be permanent at this early stage. To assume such would be premature, no matter what appears to be. Which is not to say many cannot benefit. It is only a matter of separating the myth from the reality, until the myth becomes reality, or not. It really doesn't matter as long as there is wheat, because we can always let go of chaff. Likely there will some of both.
Ask again in 10 years, and again 10 years after that. Applied knowledge must be verified over and over again, forever. The same goes for AYP. In the meantime, make hay while the sun is shining, or seems to be! 
To do that, there is no need to draw permanent conclusions about anyone else. Our enlightenment does not depend on anyone else's guarantees, successes, or failures. It depends on us. Even the sages are illusions on this earth plane. But our abiding, unshakable inner silence is not an illusion. It just is. No myth there. Go for That undoing, and all else will be done...
The guru is in you.
|
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4514 Posts |
Posted - Mar 17 2007 : 01:38:58 AM
|
Hi Yogani,
Thanks for the reply.
quote:
Time will tell. Adyashanti's condition cannot be conclusively decided to be permanent at this early stage. To assume such would be premature, no matter what appears to be. Which is not to say many cannot benefit. It is only a matter of separating the myth from the reality, until the myth becomes reality, or not. It really doesn't matter as long as there is wheat, because we can always let go of chaff. Likely there will some of both.
Agreed. It is always good to be cautious, and just because someone says they have attained "final enlightenment", doesn't always mean they have. But from the way he writes, he does seem to be well out of danger to me, and of course, I hope he is.
Christi |
|
|
|
riptiz
United Kingdom
741 Posts |
Posted - Mar 17 2007 : 09:35:33 AM
|
Hi Christi,
Be aware that there are different levels of enlightenment and even if one is enlightened that does not end there.Even then one still has to meditate and live their life correctly to maintain that level.When in India I asked guruji if I would gain enlightenment in this lifetime.He told me that the difficult part once one reaches enlightenment is to maintain it.Hence continuing meditation etc.
L&L
Dave |
|
|
|
emc
2072 Posts |
Posted - Mar 17 2007 : 2:17:23 PM
|
Agree, riptiz! And also: From what I have understood, even if one is enlightened one will focus on teaching or bringing messages of that which has been one's previous own hang-up or area of interest! That is why Katie is obsessed with painful thoughts, Tolle with awareness and observation, Yogani with yoga  , Barry Long with relationships etc etc... |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Mar 18 2007 : 01:58:52 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by yogani
To do that, there is no need to draw permanent conclusions about anyone else. Our enlightenment does not depend on anyone else's guarantees, successes, or failures. It depends on us. Even the sages are illusions on this earth plane. But our abiding, unshakable inner silence is not an illusion. It just is. No myth there. Go for That undoing, and all else will be done...
The guru is in you.
Hello Yogani & All,
A couple of quick observations, per this Adya-related conversation:
1. The "ask again in ten years" is good advice, to be sure ... I would just add that what we ask with can make a rather significant difference ... if we're asking with our ego-distorted "rational" mind ... any view of Adyashanti (or AYP, or anyone / anything else) at that time will be skewed by where we are ... not where Adyashanti (or any other object of our perception) is! As counter-Western-culture as this approach is, I have actually found the best teacher-authenticity meters to be direct energetic perception (subtle energies) and intuition (The Guru, in "me" - and you, and you and you ...  ).
Adyashanti has been actively teaching for just over ten years (as he said recently, "... and I know so much less than I did ten years ago; if it's knowledge you want, well ..." (laughter from audience) "... refunds at the door, I guess!" (more laughter)
The only thing Adya's approach tends to be missing is the "physical" approach - bodily actions (including breathing, moving subtle energies), etc. - even including the effects of mantric meditation ... (which is still an action, which has neurophysiological effects, in preparing the body-subtler bodies-mind system for higher energies) - which is why I find AYP to be such a perfect compliment to Adya's mind-oriented approach. I see Adya as Inquiry>Silence and AYP as Bhakti>Silence ... kind of like two corners of a triangle, with Silence as the .... well ...... point.
2. I feel as though I have a fairly sensitive BS-meter, spiritual teacher wise ... but who knows? Maybe my ego has me convinced ....!
Adya says things relatively often that give me a powerful sense of reassurance though ... I have at least heard more of the "right noises" out ofr him, than almost anyone else (and seeming complete authenticity and consistency in action and demeanor, to back them up) ... though if someone wants to find out where Adya is contributing to his own mythologization (or how Yogani is doing the same for that matter ...) -- I'm almost willing to bet that evidence would be found ... in the minds / egos of the person(s) doing the looking ... just because that seems to be the way it works.
Examples (of Adya's "Non-Mythologization" Orientation)
Satsang Attendee: But how will I know when I've really awakened??
Adyashanti: When you realize that you need me just about as much as you need a hole in the head!" (laughter) "... I'm not kidding - the last thing a realized being is going to do, is follow me around. You might still hang out here, if you're drawn to this ... or find it entertaining ..." (laughter) "... or whatever. But you might hang out at 7-eleven, just as easily. You'd be surprised how many realized beings hang out in some of the least expected places - because only the non-realized have any expectations about such things!"
(And please note: the Adya quotes are not verbatim ("Kirtanman's Memory is Subject to Change without Notice ) ... but they're very, very close paraphrases. Quite probably. )
At one of Adya's last satsangs before I moved, he even went as far as to say, "Why in the world do we all do this? These gatherings? They're not necessary, you know!"
He usually ends satsangs by saying, "Namaste ... enjoy yourself!" - but that night, he said, "Namaste - have a nice life!" - and I honestly thought he might be "done" ("Screw the satsang thing; I'm going fishing ...!")
I could be completely wrong, and/or egoically-deluded ... but Adya very much gives the impression of someone who has a 50/50 chance of becoming a global teacher, or becoming a file clerk ... on any given day. Especially for what/how he teaches, and his seeming level of realization ... this apparent self ... finds that very reassuring.
Peace & Namaste,
Kirtanman
PS - "How do you know if someone is enlightened? Easy. If they say they are -- they aren't" -- Adyashanti
|
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4514 Posts |
Posted - Mar 18 2007 : 04:08:21 AM
|
Hi Dave,
quote:
Hi Christi,
Be aware that there are different levels of enlightenment and even if one is enlightened that does not end there.Even then one still has to meditate and live their life correctly to maintain that level.When in India I asked guruji if I would gain enlightenment in this lifetime.He told me that the difficult part once one reaches enlightenment is to maintain it.Hence continuing meditation etc.
L&L
Dave
So what Adya called his "final enlightenment", would then in fact be his first taste of enlightenment, and there would be levels of enlightenment beyond that? I suppose he could call the next one his "really final enlightenment", and the next his "Oh, my God not another enlightenment, enlightenment"? 
Sorry... I couldn't resist that.
But seriously, what are these levels of enlightenment that you speak of? Is there any way of recognising them?
Christi |
Edited by - Christi on Mar 18 2007 04:52:12 AM |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4514 Posts |
Posted - Mar 18 2007 : 04:20:26 AM
|
Hi Kirtanman,
quote:
Adya says things relatively often that give me a powerful sense of reassurance though ... I have at least heard more of the "right noises" out ofr him, than almost anyone else (and seeming complete authenticity and consistency in action and demeanor, to back them up) ... though if someone wants to find out where Adya is contributing to his own mythologization (or how Yogani is doing the same for that matter ...) -- I'm almost willing to bet that evidence would be found ... in the minds / egos of the person(s) doing the looking ... just because that seems to be the way it works.
I just wanted to pick up on this. The way you write does seem to imply that any critical statement about someone or something is by necessity an act of their ego. This would mean that anyone who has transcended their ego, and no longer sees themselves as seperate from anything or anyone else, would not be capable of critical analysis of a situation which I don't think is true. There have been many enlightened beings who have been very critical of many aspects of life and many situations. It could be that we become much better able to assess situations as they arise because our vision becomes clearer, more direct, more intuitive etc.
Christi |
|
|
|
riptiz
United Kingdom
741 Posts |
Posted - Mar 18 2007 : 05:32:00 AM
|
Hi Christi,
Well I think this might go some way of explaining.This is from Wikpedia.
quote 'Laja Samadhi is a latent ("laja"), potential level of samadhi. It begins in deep meditation or trance—even with movement, such as dancing. This kind of samadhi is a state of joy, deep and general well-being, and peaceful meditation.
Savikalpa Samadhi refers to the initial temporary state of full-valued samadhi. The conscious mind is still active, as is the kalpa, meaning imagination. One should compare this meaning to that of sankalpa, which is "wish." Kalpa takes on a different, but related, meaning to sankalpa because one must use imagination or consciousness (kalpa) to envision a wish or desire (sankalpa). Conversely, vikalpa means "against imagination." At this final level of samadhi, the mind has become quiet and given up its desires and attendant. Vikalpa leads to the Truth, releasing one from any binds of mind (which are mostly imaginations). In Savikalpa Samadhi, we get the taste of Bliss and Beingness, but are still attached to our erroneous identification with the body as well as to our numerous worldly attractions.
Nirvikalpa Samadhi is the end result. There are no more kalpas (imaginings, wishes or other products from work of the mind), because the mind is finally under control. Upon entering Nirvikalpa Samadhi, the differences we saw before have faded and we can see everything as one. In this condition nothing but pure Awareness remains and nothing is missing to take away from Wholeness and Perfection.
Entering samadhi in the beginning takes effort and holding on to a state of samadhi takes even more effort. The beginning stages of samadhi (Laja and Savikalpa Samadhi) are only temporary. By "effort" it is not meant that the mind has to work more. Instead, it means work to control the mind and release the self. Note that normal levels of meditation (mostly the lower levels) can be held automatically, as in "being in the state of meditation" rather than overtly "meditating." The ability to obtain positive results from meditation is much more difficult than simply meditating. It is recommended to find a qualified spiritual master (guru or yogi) who can teach a meditator about the workings of the mind.
Samadhi is the only stable unchanging reality; all else is ever-changing and does not bring everlasting peace or happiness.
Staying in Nirvikalpa Samadhi is effortless but even from this condition one must eventually return to ego-consciousness. Otherwise, this highest level of Samadhi leads to Nirvana, which means total Unity and the logical end of individual identity (and also death of the body). However, it is entirely possible to stay in Nirvikalpa Samadhi and yet be fully functional in this world. This condition is known as Sahaja Nirvikalpa Samadhi or Sahaj Samadhi (sahaja means "spontaneous" in Sanskrit). Only the truly Enlightened (Satguru) can be and remain spontaneously free.
In Nirvikalpa Samadhi, all attachment to the material world and all karma is dissolved. All awareness is withdrawn step by step from the physical, astral and causal bodies until self-realization or oneness with the soul is achieved. During this process, breathing ceases and the heart stops beating. Aware and fully conscious oneness with soul is then achieved in a most loving way, and all cells of the physical body are flooded with the Ocean of Divine Love and Divine Bliss for any period of duration—hours, days, weeks, until the individual shifts his awareness from the soul back to the physical body. Being fully functional in this world, his awareness stays in connection with the Divine. But some "strange" conditions accompany this state—better health (the body is sustained by Divine Grace), better feelings (even for other people who may contact the body which the enlightened soul has reidentified with) and various miraculous happenings may occur in connection with the Enlightened one.'
When sitting in my satgurus presence many experience the feelings of peace and joy and are certainly different when they leave.Even though he is a siddha and the body is only considered to be needed to remain in our presence, he still meditates daily and performs japa and other austerities.This is still considered necessary to maintain the purification needed for this state.Can you recognise these levels? IMO if one talks about what they can do for you and promotes themselves rather than what you can do for yourself, then they are probably not as enlightened as they think they are. Guruji has told me in the past not to tell others he is a great guru but to simply tell others of my experiences.
I am sure Adya talks in the same way if he is of such a level.What my students were impressed with when they met guruji last November was his openness and willingness to answer any questions they had and explain the meaning of their experiences. One of my students is originally from the Punjab and told me you can wait many days in India to meet some gurus and only get a glimpse never mind a private audience.Guruji sat with 6 of us for over 2 hrs and when I returned the following week he sat with 2 of us for the same amount of time.
Are levels important to us, well I guess it's more about the genuiness of the people around us?
L&L
Dave
|
|
|
|
Manipura
USA
870 Posts |
Posted - Mar 18 2007 : 09:46:08 AM
|
| Kirtanman - The popularity and admiration of Adyashanti that you describe are the exact pitfalls to which this thread has been referring. Adya himself is fantastic; hopefully he won't be corrupted by the uncensored adoration of his students. While I agree that egos abound when assessing the merits of a teacher, it's also true that even a small dose of unbiased, 'awakened' intelligence can go a long way. |
|
|
|
yogani
USA
5241 Posts |
Posted - Mar 18 2007 : 11:06:22 AM
|
Hi Kirtanman:
The essential point in all of this (and your Adyashanti paraphrases cover it well) is that it isn't about the teacher. It is about the aspirant!
Isn't it odd that the teachers keep telling the students, "It is about you!" while at the same time the students keep telling the teacher, "It is about you!"
So what's the answer?
The guru is in all of us!
|
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Mar 18 2007 : 11:08:15 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
But seriously, what are these levels of enlightenment that you speak of? Is there any way of recognising them?
Christi
Hi Christi,
I can't answer for Dave, obviously - and his answer may well differ from my own - but based on both experience and doing my best to learn from teachings which seem to be true, and which seem to jibe with reality as best I can tell, here is how I understand the Awakening-Enlightenment process - or rather, their various "phases".
Disclaimer: "Phases" is my own unofficial term, loosely defined, etc. etc. -- however it has been my observation that these phases seem quite consistent, at least in the order in which they fall -- though have a vast amount of variety, in terms of the duration of each phase, and in terms of the specific things, and even types of things / events / experiences, "evolutions" (in awareness, physically, emotionally, mentally, spiritually, etc.) that occur within each phase.
There are many "maps" (overviews given by people / teachers from various spiritual systems) around ... and in the world of esoteric mysticism (practices-centric, based on the premise that the answers are to be found inside oneself, and not in external people* or organizations), which tend to agree on the highest ("broad brush-stroke")-level points, and the lowest-level (most detailed ... i.e. types of feelings, "awarenesses", etc.) points --- can seem very different, if the middle-level points are considered.
((SEMI_SIDE NOTE: *"People" (as mentioned and asterisked in paragraph above) in this context refers primarily to ecclesiastical personnel - the priests and ministers of the world's churches and temples, and to "cult of personality" spiritual leaders and teachers. It does not refer to the traditional yogic guru-disciple model, for two key reasons:
1. If the disciple is following the person that their guru is, they're missing some very fundamental aspects of both the opportunity of that relationship and the teaching (imo).
2. As a cool guy with a good voice (David Newman/Durga Das - Western Kirtan recording artist) once said to me, in a personal conversation about the guru-disciple relationship (he begins and ends every kirtan by paying honor to Sri Neem Karoli Baba, his guru) -- "The guru is not a person".
(The guru is a symbol of God / Divine / Self, in form. The Yoga Sutras emphasize the benefits of "practicing the presence of God", and two of the key ways this can be done are "Guru Kripa" - utter devotion to the divinity who your guru represents for you, and devotional practices to "Ishta Deva", the God, Goddess or Ideal, which represents the best qualities of the divine, for you. There are a lot of very scientific reasons why both practices can be very effective ... but as with all practices, they have their potential pitfalls, as well.)
// END SEMI_SIDE NOTE ))
An Adyashanti-AYP comparison is a good example of how different, effective consciousness paths agree on the "high points" (most general aspects) and the "low points" (most detailed aspects) of Awakening / Enlightenment, but can emphasize and focus on very different aspects of the all-important (and usually fairly lengthy) "middle-phase" of Integration (after Awakening, before Enlightenment).
Based on a fair amount of exposure to the teachings of both Adya and Yogani, I would say that they would (and do, and have) define the highest-level ("this is what usually happens in the beginning, middle and end of spiritual development, more or less") points of "consciousness unfolding / evolution", and the lowest-level points ("these are some of the things you may notice happening in your body / mind / life.") quite closely to one another ...
... but the whole, vast "middle", which ranges from "somewhat before Awakening" to "somewhat after Enlightenment" - has completely different emphasis, between the two groups -- Adya is inquiry-centric ("Notice what is happening in your mind, your sense of self" - "Who am I, Really?"), and AYP is practice-centric ("Notice what is happening in your practices, their seeming effects, and how your life is going, in general" - "What are the effects of yogic sadhana, in my life, including my 'internal world'?")
As mentioned repeatedly and often , I find both sets of practices (AYP), and teachings (AYP, Adyashanti) to be highly complimentary to each other - "the whole is greater than the sum of the parts" , and therefore highly useful, when "taken together" -- in a consummately pragmatic way: it is my experience that my own yogic evolution has progressed more quickly, and comprehensively, due to my own relatively deep involvement with both sets of teachings.
Pleeeeez Note, Though: I am NOT saying, "so - therefore - you should become directly and deeply involved with Adyashanti, too" (per my "official" introduction of Adya to the Forum, via this thread). For one, I wouldn't see that as my place to do, and "for two" - very much not the way I'm "wired". What I am saying, is: "By the way, here's another resource, which has been very, very helpful to my overall sadhana, along with AYP - so, check it (/"him" - Adyashanti) out, and see if this might be useful for you, too. One of the main reasons I feel so comfortable doing even this, is: unlike so many other yogic paths and practices, Adyashanti's teachings seem to have zero areas of conflict with AYP, per the essentially different foundational aspects (bhakti/practices - AYP, bhakti/inquiry - Adya). <--- And yes, I know ... I credited AYP with bhakti-focus, and said something different about Adya, just a single post (of mine) ago ... but, as Gandhi said, "I am not interested in consistency; I am interested in Truth".
And now, Ladies, Gentlement and Everyone In-Between - Presenting, for Your Yogic Edification and (Hopefully Literal) Enlightenment .... the ACTUAL PRIMARY POINT OF THIS POST/REPLY ...
GENERAL PHASES OF AWAKENING / ENLIGHTENMENT
(with brief summary of identifying characteristics of each phase)
Please note that yogic traditions teach, and observation would indicate, that a given human life or incarnation can begin within any phase.
Pre-Spiritual Interest
No interest in looking within, regardless of religious activity levels. Even "religious professionals" - priests, nuns, ministers, etc. - can fall into this category.
Spiritual Interest
Bhakti awakens - interest in what is True and Real motivates focus in various ways, and to various degrees, including the aspect that "within" at least bears consideration. There seems to be a "draw" in that direction, even if there are quite a few layers of belief/perception which obscure this - meaning: certain sadhakas -- utilizing any/all systems of spiritual practice -- can do a lot of looking within via spiritual symbols and practices, before they ever consciously realize that "looking within" is happening.
Initial Awakening
Spiritual practices - of any efficacious type - (bhakti/devotion, jnana/study-inquiry, raja/combined yogic practices, tantra/discovery of truth through manifested reality, etc.), combined with a sufficient degree of bhakti -- give the sadhaka an authentic experience of the true nature of the Self, and a conscious awareness of same - though, per comments in the next paragraph, this can be very, very subtle - and nearly glossed over by the ego (Awakening ranges from "Hm, I guess it happened ..." to essentially falling at the feet of God-Self -- which the vast majority of us having Awakenings which fall somewhere in-between those two extremes. A yogic practitioner's first full, true samadhi is often the earmark / catalyst of this Awakening - which is always experienced the single most important event in the life of the sadhaka, to date - though (ultra-important, so that it's not "missed via expectation of something else" ...) ---->>> (Next Paragraph) ...
Very Important Note: Awakening is not always a "burning bush" or "fireworks" type of event, and often a much more subtle unfolding process of increasing awareness / consciousness ... but which can still be accurately identified through observation, by noting how life seems and feels. For instance - if you've noticed a +/-75% reduction in emotional pain / disturbance of peace in recent times, along with a sense of things like Oneness / Self being real ... not via mental belief, but via the sense or feeling that this is how things are - how Life is - it's quite possible you have crossed the line of Awakening, and are into the Integration phase (though please consult your Guru - the one In You , if you wish to gain clarity on this, for yourself.
NOTE: The true, initial awakening, is the shortest of the phases, in terms of physical-plane time duration ... and ranges anywhere between "effectively instantaneous" to (up to - though this is unusual) several months in duration (I've known people who were at least six months into full awakening - sure they were "done" - only to have it dissolve / dissipate. For anyone this side of full enlightenment - which, by definition, would be anyone experiencing this dissipation ... that's gotta suck! ) As the saying goes, "Anything can happen - and often does!"
Integration / Systemic Preparation for Enlightenment
A period of time, usually several years at minimum, wherein the sadhaka has repeated awakening experiences, and where various practices and increasing awareness, and bodily-systemic / energetic roller-coaster-ishness / evolution prepare the sadhaka ("body, mind and soul" - literally) for the energies of full enlightenment to "take over management" of the given body-mind.
Enlightenment
The break with identification with the given body-mind becomes complete (the awareness of "I am not my body, I am not the thoughts or emotions of this body-mind" and "I am not transient; nothing Real, including this Self, can be threatened - I am Safe, I am Whole - I am" and "Love is always the answer; Love and Freedom are synonymous; Love is who I am; Love IS" - become the most real aspects of Life and Awareness -- the felt-sense of these things switches from belief and hope, to "ON" / actual awareness - and the unhappy insanity of ego-identification switches OFF, and life becomes infinitely easier, and more fun. Where awakening turned ego-volume down, enlightenment turns it off.
The "I" that I was so sure I am, for my entire life, dissipates in the great, juicy existential belch of enlightenment -- and shows itself to have been what it always kinda really felt like .... an existential gas bubble, whose only job was to cause discomfort, to a greater or lesser degree. The most noticeable aspect of Enlightenment is the "infinite-sized" "Ahhhhhhhhhhh - better! NOW Life is! YES!" - which attends it. Life and people are experienced as they are - holy, perfect and One - even when the cat urps on the carpet, the mechanic is trying to rip you off, or your boss patiently explains why there will be no raise, and why you have to work this weekend. Emotions don't stop arising, bills don't stop showing up, kids don't stop breaking stuff, and news doesn't stop seeming strangely repetitious. 
The difference - which makes all the difference - is that there's no more confusion concerning the flow of life (largely because not-knowing and not-controlling are accepted as natural), and no more sense of internal conflict.
What is this really like?
Once again, I turn to my dear friend Adyashanti for elucidation:
"(The benefit of) Enlightenment is actually more like the ending of someone smacking your head with a hammer --- it feels so good when it stops!"
&
(Enlightenment) "... is truly like waking up from a dream; it's like - what was that all about?"
Enlightenment-as-Life
(the final phase, which carries forward from Enlightenment, through the remainder of that body-mind's physical-plane existence, and into ... whatever may be next! )
Despite all my verbosity on the topic, I'll let Adya speak to the dynamics of this phase ... and please note, the following statement was made by Adya with a big smile, and a very, very intriguing (to me) sense of ...... happy wonder ....
"It never stops .... it never stops ..."
-- Adyashanti, on the ever-expanding, ever-unfolding Awareness-Enlightenment with creatively .... creates/emananates ... ever and ever and ever .....
Even from my as-yet-incomplete perspective, I get that this is a very fundamental aspect of Enlightenment -- the inherent sense of, as Yogananda said, "Ever-New Joy" -- forever and ever, amen - hari aum, and aum, shanti!
Peace & Namaste,
Kirtanman |
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Mar 18 2007 : 11:16:42 AM
|
Kirtanman said:
1. The "ask again in ten years" is good advice, to be sure ... I would just add that what we ask with can make a rather significant difference ... if we're asking with our ego-distorted "rational" mind ... any view of Adyashanti (or AYP, or anyone / anything else) at that time will be skewed by where we are ... not where Adyashanti (or any other object of our perception) is!
...
though if someone wants to find out where Adya is contributing to his own mythologization (or how Yogani is doing the same for that matter ...) -- I'm almost willing to bet that evidence would be found ... in the minds / egos of the person(s) doing the looking ... just because that seems to be the way it works.
Kirtanman,
unfortunately, you are using a standard cultic argument-form at this point. ( This doesn't mean Adyashanti's group is a cult, nor does it mean he or you is a bad person, or that I or we are bad people. It just means that you are using standard cultic arguments, for whatever reason. )
The argument has the following scheme: if someone finds <something to criticize> in my Teacher/Group, it is because <there is something wrong/inadequate/limited in them>. To put it even more simply, it is 'If someone finds <our-fault> it is because of <their-fault>.
That's the number one form in the defensive-offensive battery of a religious group. The argument-form reflects a thought-form and dynamic. The details inside the carets <> vary enormously -- the form itself is universal and as common as muck. In your case the form is more or less "If someone finds <self-mythologization> in Adyashanti, it is because of their <vaguely, ego/stuckness in 'mind'>.
Groups usually have their own characteristic versions of <their-fault>. Some Christians have 'the devil is in them' as <their-fault>. One major group (TM) over the last few decades had 'their negativity'. Many, many groups have some version (often in their own colloquial language) of "ego".
It might not have been obvious to you at the time of writing, but the argument-form is presumptuous and aggressive.
|
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Mar 18 2007 : 11:44:12 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by meg
Kirtanman - The popularity and admiration of Adyashanti that you describe are the exact pitfalls to which this thread has been referring. Adya himself is fantastic; hopefully he won't be corrupted by the uncensored adoration of his students. While I agree that egos abound when assessing the merits of a teacher, it's also true that even a small dose of unbiased, 'awakened' intelligence can go a long way.
Hi Meg,
Hey, good to hear from you!
(Though my perception of your not being around as much may well be colored by *my* not being around as much, lately ...)
I'm not quite sure I get what you're saying - unless maybe (no, really - it's been known to happen ... ) - *I* wasn't entirely clear in what I was attempting to convey, vis a vis Adya.)
I have great respect for Adya, and I have great respect for Yogani - but I don't feel a sense of hero-worship, "guru-worship", etc. (and by "worship", I mean "deep reverence for divine reality / consciousness" - not the "me low, you high" faux-worship that most of us have been conditioned with) for those two people (though for the Self which is their essence, definitely ... and candidly, as with most of us, I'd guess ... my egoic self "notices" this essence more in seemingly highly-conscious teachers, than in life / the world / everyone around me .... until awareness catches the egoic tendency ... which it is thankfully doing faster and faster, these days.)
And I would agree that of all the people who work with / enjoy / love / follow (for those who have a sense of this) / place on a pedestal (for those who may do this) -- both Yogani and Adya, that there are certainly some who project a sense of idol-like adoration onto them ... which egos, at a given phase-range of developmental, especially based on cultural condition ---- and psychological-karmic tendencies to project .... facilitate a tendency toward.
However, Adya himself seems and appears to me (<--- strong disclaimer-ish statement, in case anyone missed my meaning / intent) to be quite immune to this .... literally unaffected by it.
My guess, though - based on observation, my own experiences, and what I've heard Adya say, about similar things ... is that this does not mean that egoic feelings ("Hey, I'm the cool, enlightened teacher!") don't arise ... it means that there's no attachment to, or identification with, such thoughts or feelings, and that they therefore dissipate, prior to having any effect (or more than ultra-minimal ones, depending on how hair-splitting certain people may wish to get, with the philosophizing - i.e. "what constitutes an effect?", etc.)
A couple of months back, a woman said to Adya, "Well, you don't have judgmental thoughts, any more!"
(Her context clearly being, "So you don't know what it's like; I'm still dealing with this!")
Adya laughed, and responded, "Sure I do; judgmental thoughts arise - that's not a personal thing - it just happens. But do I believe them? Nope. Can't. Literally - can't."
(Adya knows / experiences the truth of the Self - and that Self does not include judgmental thoughts as part of its identity.)
In my experience / opinion, this is why yogic teachings emphasize the ending of attachment to desire - both attraction and aversion - as being SO key -- and "in the same breath" - such an unspeakably powerful benefit ... quite possibly the greatest one of all, to enlightenment, as it lives through a given human body-mind.
Yac'ca Kaama-sukham Loke
Yac'ca Divyam Mahat-sukham
Trishnaa-kshaya-sukhasyai'te
NaarhataH Shodashiim Kalaam
Whatever sensual pleasure there is in this world
and whatever great pleasure there is in heaven
these cannot equal a sixteenth of the happiness
derived from the cessation of desires
(Comments by the great rishi, Vyasa - probably the primary commentator on Patanjali's Yoga-Sutras, commenting on Yoga-Sutra II:42:
"Santosha anuttamah sukha labhah"
"From an attitude of contentment (santosha), unexcelled happiness, mental comfort, joy, and satisfaction is obtained.
Reference: http://www.swamij.com/yoga-sutras-23545.htm#2.40
As far as Adya's susceptability to "corruption" - I'd bet against - but (please don't tell anyone .... ) - I have been known to be .... wrong .... before (not about Adya per se, though ... ... at least yet).
I do agree with Yogani, 100%, though: time will tell - especially since Adya's popularity is snowballing (he's gone from "mostly local" to "internationally known" in a bit over a year ... for instance, he's now having his books / materials being distributed via Sounds True* - which is the New Age / Yogic equivalent, kinda-sorta ... of being on Oprah ....) -- and so, is just about where Tolle was, right about the time The Power of Now was released, but with (I believe) much more of a pre-established global audience.
I would guess that it's after this stage, "name and fame"-wise, that many teachers trip a bit (depending on how one defines tripping - for me, at least, enlightenment and "being human" are not mutually exclusive ... )
All I can tell you is: in four years (pre-move) of close association with Adyashanti, I have literally seen / heard / experienced nothing - not a single thing - which would indicate to me that Adya is affected by the attitudes or behaviors of those who associate with / follow him (he's almost as "non-guru" / "I am not a guru"-oriented as Yogani ... Adya just emphasizes this somewhat less, because it tends to come up less, in those (Western-Flavored Zen Buddhist-Based, as opposed to Indian Yoga-Based) circles.
Hope this helps clarify.
Peace & Namaste,
Kirtanman |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Mar 18 2007 : 11:46:13 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by yogani
Hi Kirtanman:
The essential point in all of this (and your Adyashanti paraphrases cover it well) is that it isn't about the teacher. It is about the aspirant!
Isn't it odd that the teachers keep telling the students, "It is about you!" while at the same time the students keep telling the teacher, "It is about you!"
So what's the answer?
The guru is in all of us!
"Amen!!"
I couldn't have said it better myself ... and so, won't even try!
(Hey ...... do you hear that? Sounds like ....... cheering! )
Peace & Namaste,
Kirtanman |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Mar 18 2007 : 12:03:54 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
Hi Kirtanman,
quote:
Adya says things relatively often that give me a powerful sense of reassurance though ... I have at least heard more of the "right noises" out ofr him, than almost anyone else (and seeming complete authenticity and consistency in action and demeanor, to back them up) ... though if someone wants to find out where Adya is contributing to his own mythologization (or how Yogani is doing the same for that matter ...) -- I'm almost willing to bet that evidence would be found ... in the minds / egos of the person(s) doing the looking ... just because that seems to be the way it works.
I just wanted to pick up on this. The way you write does seem to imply that any critical statement about someone or something is by necessity an act of their ego. This would mean that anyone who has transcended their ego, and no longer sees themselves as seperate from anything or anyone else, would not be capable of critical analysis of a situation which I don't think is true. There have been many enlightened beings who have been very critical of many aspects of life and many situations. It could be that we become much better able to assess situations as they arise because our vision becomes clearer, more direct, more intuitive etc.
Christi
Hey Christi,
Thanks for this - I genuinely didn't mean to imply what you suggest, above. Almost the "inverse", in fact:
That as human beings, we tend to feel as though we're exercising clear, discriminative wisdom ... and don't realize that our seemingly clear and rational views have been distorted by ego / conditioning (aka "maya").
Enlightenment (from what I can tell / surmise, from where I sit) doesn't mean opinions aren't rendered, or that discriminative wisdom isn't used ... it just isn't (though I would guess there may be a spectrum to this) driven by the egoic conditioning of the past, nor egoic conclusions, drawn by the apparent effects of experienced ("I was attacked by a man, ten years ago - so men can't be trusted", "I've had two women leave me, so women can't be counted upon to be loyal, or commit", etc. etc., ad infinutum, so on and so forth ....)
I've given this example / story before, but it bears repeating, I think, per its perfect fit, here:
This guy was feeling "un-awake" because he had chewed out his son's soccer coach, for making a call, which resulted in his son being hurt (physically, not badly - but the coach seemed "to blame", to the father - and he called the coach an "S.O.B."
Adya responded, "Truth isn't always 'nice' - truth moves as truth moves - sometimes it's nice - and sometimes it calls the guy an 'S.O.B.'"
My tone in the post to which you're responding, and a few of my recent posts - is kind of a reminder to me, and to us all - to simply watch out for where our egos may be "jumping into the fray", and distorting our views / outlooks / comments / actions.
In Enlightenment, "Truth takes up residence" (<-- YAAQ - Yet Another Adya Quote ) - which usually involves allowing and enabling the body-mind to flow with the Tao, with life ... and Yogani has said many similar things, in somewhat different ways.
As many of you have seen / read - Jim and His Karma provided an excellent, kinda fun little analogy, about the ego being like a little kid, sitting in the passenger seat of a real car, in a toy car seat / "car", with a toy steering wheel ... with (as always) Life truly being at the (real) wheel, of the (real) car.
My comments were / are intended to simply help us notice the difference between the intuition of truth, and the affinity, and/or unconscious pull that we may each feel (ironically, especially in discussions of this type, it seems! ) from the conditioned opinions and perspectives of our egos.
Yes, the Enlightened have opinions - and yes, they may be driven by that body-mind's conditioning (the Tao, and a given teacher saying a certain thing on a certain day, based on 30-50 - or whatever it is - years of conditioning in a given life - are not mutually exclusive, imo.)
I can't speak for anyone else, of course - but in my experience - yoga helps our entire "internal landscape" to change, and the power of egoic conditioning tends to lessen, in almost all (and I presume, eventually ... all) circumstances.
Prajna (discriminative, harmonious-with-life "heart wisdom") is then free to shine through, unencumbered by the mud of the ego on our "windshield".
Hope that helps - and very sincerely: thanks for mentioning this!
Peace & Namaste,
Kirtanman |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Mar 18 2007 : 12:47:11 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by david_obsidian
Kirtanman said:
1. The "ask again in ten years" is good advice, to be sure ... I would just add that what we ask with can make a rather significant difference ... if we're asking with our ego-distorted "rational" mind ... any view of Adyashanti (or AYP, or anyone / anything else) at that time will be skewed by where we are ... not where Adyashanti (or any other object of our perception) is!
...
though if someone wants to find out where Adya is contributing to his own mythologization (or how Yogani is doing the same for that matter ...) -- I'm almost willing to bet that evidence would be found ... in the minds / egos of the person(s) doing the looking ... just because that seems to be the way it works.
Kirtanman,
unfortunately, you are using a standard cultic argument-form at this point. ( This doesn't mean Adyashanti's group is a cult, nor does it mean he or you is a bad person, or that I or we are bad people. It just means that you are using standard cultic arguments, for whatever reason. )
The argument has the following scheme: if someone finds <something to criticize> in my Teacher/Group, it is because <there is something wrong/inadequate/limited in them>. To put it even more simply, it is 'If someone finds <our-fault> it is because of <their-fault>.
That's the number one form in the defensive-offensive battery of a religious group. The argument-form reflects a thought-form and dynamic. The details inside the carets <> vary enormously -- the form itself is universal and as common as muck. In your case the form is more or less "If someone finds <self-mythologization> in Adyashanti, it is because of their <vaguely, ego/stuckness in 'mind'>.
Groups usually have their own characteristic versions of <their-fault>. Some Christians have 'the devil is in them' as <their-fault>. One major group (TM) over the last few decades had 'their negativity'. Many, many groups have some version (often in their own colloquial language) of "ego".
It might not have been obvious to you at the time of writing, but the argument-form is presumptuous and aggressive.
Well, David, what you said is not what I thought you think I thought I meant.
Hopefully, that clears it up.
But seriously - VERY - I see your comments as an ultra-important point - and thank you.
My comments honestly did not emanate from the perspective you describe - and was not intended in any way to communicate the defensive-aggressive stance which you outlined.
(And those comments are not said in a "you're wrong" sense, but (yet again -- I've gotta take a look at some of my communication tendencies ... yet again ... ), in an "Oops, I did it again" -- somehow missed communicating my genuine point, and caused at least one person to interpret it in a nearly opposite way, from what I intended. My genuine apologies to all, for that.)
My comments were made from the perspective that our egos distort the way things actually are ... per the famous quote: "When you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail."
When you're a person who mistrusts gurus and spiritual teachers (in general), it's likely that you can find evidence than any guru or spiritual teacher might well be be untrustworthy.
This can be a potentially useful self-protection tool ... but it can also throw the baby out with the bathwater, so to speak. I did this myself, for years. I was raised Catholic, decided at a young age that I didn't "resonate" with the teachings of the Catholic church; tried a couple of other Christian belief systems / denominations, on for size ... didn't much care for those, either .... and so .... closed my mind to all exploration of religion / spirituality / God for a number of years.
In my opinion, and purely my opinion - the "lens" of "this seemingly decent / enlightened teacher, and his students / followers, better watch out ... because the nearly-universal trend is for the students to idolize the teacher, and the teacher to be egoically corrupted by that influence" -- is a dangerous lens to use ... just as the lens you suggest ("MY group couldn't possibly be wrong, and the issue is clearly with those criticizing -- not MY teacher or group") is equally dangerous / distorting.
And to hopefully be clear: the "danger" is that a given person will miss trusting a given enlightened teacher, and/or self-truncate their own development, based on decisions and outlooks tied to a perspective which emanates from past experience and conditioning.
Please (anyone, but specifically David, per this exchange) - tell me if you disagree with this ... but let's say someone had a bad experience with a couple of gurus, they turned out to be more of the "I want your money, and/or your body" variety, than "the truth is radiating here" variety ... so they come to AYP, or Adyashanti ... feeling very wounded / jaded.
I could easily see such a person feeling that certain comments or actions of either Yogani or Adya showed them that both people were "just like the others" - and then go away - before they got hurt / abused again.
Exactly like the guardedness / fear / tendency to say "you can't fire me, I quit", by controlling (or trying to) the relational-severance process in romantic partnerships.
My comments truly weren't Adya-specific; unless I'm FAR more deluded than I'm capable of perceiving, I'm honestly not that "tied" to Adya in my own heart / mind ... anyone here (or anywhere) is not only free to form their own opinions ... but strongly encouraged (by me) to do so.
My comments were designed to help take a (hopefully useful) look at "what do we bring to a given 'analysis party'?
Whether we see gurus as primarily / probably subject to ego-traps, OR infallible god-men and god-women ... it is my honest opinion that we are equally deluded (if we hold either one of those preconceived, prejudicial attitudes - or any others which have been "egoically carved in stone" for us, and equally (regardless of the specifics of our rigid prejudice) unlikely to allow ourselves to experience the actuality of the situation / teacher / group -- whatever it may be.
And (David) since you've always been respectful enough to speak with complete candor, I will do the same (not that I wouldn't with someone else - just that I would likely soften my comments, out of consideration for their feelings ... you've indicated feelings aren't part of this for you - and they're not for me, either -- which I find simplifies the process -- and I thank you) -- I'll give you my perspective on what appears to me to be your perspective:
You seem quite "pre-jaded", and even your comments to which I'm responding, seem to have been distorted, at least a bit, by prejudices (pre-judgments) you're bringing to this discussion. For instance, you seem to be presuming that a participant in a given group (i.e. me, vis a vis Adyashanti / Open Gate Sangha <-- Adya's organization, just as AYP is Yogani's organization) will be identified with a teacher and group to a degree where they will wish to "deflect" genuine criticism, by using arguments and tactics similar to what you felt I was using.
I'll re-read my comments, and I always assume 100% responsibility for my own clarity in communication (or lack thereof) ... but I would see it as being at least possible that your perspective on my comments, was colored at much by perception that you had prior to reading them, as perception that was formed when you read them (my comments, in the post to which you responded).
Is it possible that my "Pro-Adya" stance is ego-driven?
Sure - it's possible.
Is it my best and most honest guess that this is what's going on?
No.
My my best and most honest guess as to what's going on with my "Pro-Adya" stance, is that it is essentially identical to my "Pro-AYP / Pro-Yogani" stance - which is: my direct experience with both teachers and groups, continues to reinforce my initial positive experiences and perspective.
When people (which seems to simply be the majority case, logistically) who have not had any, or much, direct experience with Adyashanti, theorize that "such and such" may well be the case ... or that Adya will have to watch out for "such and such", because this happens to "so many" or "most" (or whatever the number / percentage is, in your own mind and experience) <--- anyone reading, I mean) spiritual teachers ....
... my perception is that because I've had quite a bit of direct experience with Adya, his teachings, his group - that chiming in, and saying, "This has been my personal, actual experience" -- will be useful data.
I'm a techie by former trade - when I hear people theorize, and I've had actual experience, and/or more direct experience ... I feel that it is inherently helpful (for anyone serious about conducting honest evaluation - and it is my presumption that the vast majority of people at least, and possibly everyone - reading this dialog ... is serious about conducting honest evaluation / consideration), by definition - fully understanding and accepting that another person with a similar amount of direct experience -- may well have an opposite, or at least very different - conclusion.
For me, at least -- that's what healthy dialog / conversation / exploration is all about - yes?
Thanks all -- gotta pop back into 3D Life for a bit ...
Peace & Namaste,
Kirtanman |
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Mar 19 2007 : 12:49:22 AM
|
Kirtanman said:
My comments honestly did not emanate from the perspective you describe - and was not intended in any way to communicate the defensive-aggressive stance which you outlined.
I am quite sure you didn't feel defensive or aggressive. Generally the people who use those forms don't. They can even feel 'loving' as they use them. But you spoke as you spoke in the context in which you did. People are talking about the risks involved in this--and you are saying that When you're a person who mistrusts gurus and spiritual teachers (in general), it's likely that you can find evidence than any guru or spiritual teacher might well be be untrustworthy. And you are saying that if someone wants to find Adya contributing to his own mythologization, they will find it in their own egos/minds.
Let's put it this way: it still looks very much the same to me after you clarified.
Never mind. Maybe you can find something useful in what I said, maybe not.
Please (anyone, but specifically David, per this exchange) - tell me if you disagree with this ... but let's say someone had a bad experience with a couple of gurus, they turned out to be more of the "I want your money, and/or your body" variety, than "the truth is radiating here" variety ... so they come to AYP, or Adyashanti ... feeling very wounded / jaded. I could easily see such a person feeling that certain comments or actions of either Yogani or Adya showed them that both people were "just like the others" - and then go away - before they got hurt / abused again.
I'll answer that since you asked me specifically. Sure I agree with that.
FWIW, I'm not jaded or hurt by any guru or spiritual teacher.
I have nothing against Adya at all, and have never said a word against him.
From what little I have seen, he shows signs of not letting his self-image get out of order, which is very rare I think among 'big' spiritual teachers, even those who are 'humble'. It's hard to keep your self-image in order in the spiritual teaching role.
I'm a techie by former trade
Shame on you then, for not closing all your parentheses!
|
Edited by - david_obsidian on Mar 19 2007 12:51:24 AM |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Mar 19 2007 : 8:08:54 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by david_obsidian
Kirtanman said:
My comments honestly did not emanate from the perspective you describe - and was not intended in any way to communicate the defensive-aggressive stance which you outlined.
I am quite sure you didn't feel defensive or aggressive. Generally the people who use those forms don't. They can even feel 'loving' as they use them. But you spoke as you spoke in the context in which you did. People are talking about the risks involved in this--and you are saying that When you're a person who mistrusts gurus and spiritual teachers (in general), it's likely that you can find evidence than any guru or spiritual teacher might well be be untrustworthy. And you are saying that if someone wants to find Adya contributing to his own mythologization, they will find it in their own egos/minds.
Let's put it this way: it still looks very much the same to me after you clarified.
Gotcha. I'll take a bit of a deeper look at that ... and would be curious if my comments seem to anyone else, the way they seem to you. <--- and pleeeez note: that could sound like a "'Hmpf; - let's see if anyone else agrees with you!" - and that's not what I mean, at all; where I'm coming from, is: I have re-read my own comments, and I'm truly not seeing how you reached the conclusions you did -- either time. If you and/or anyone else can help me see it, it will be appreciated. I'm not concerned that I'm deluded into "teacher-defense", as much as I'm concerned that per my *cough* ... somewhat unique .... writing style and volume .... that I may be thinking I'm clearly expressing myself, and making a given point -- and yet, it actually seems to hold different meaning, for most readers.
If this happens with 1 out of 10 readers / co-Forum members, that's probably an individual-perception thing, that I (nor anyone else, who posts) can't do much about.
If this happens with 8 or 9 out of 10 readers - then maybe I have (picture Desi Arnaz, as Lucy's husband) "Som ad-justin' to do!")
^
|
|
"You know you're too immersed in yoga, and 'things India' WHEN: you see the name 'Desi' Arnaz, and think: 'I didn't realize he was Indian!"
quote:
Never mind. Maybe you can find something useful in what I said, maybe not.
"I'm cool" (fine with this dialog / exchange) - if nothing else, I find that exploring a given item, and/or specific comments, etc. -- has some value in and of itself ... even if only to confirm that one or both people were being clear and/or on the right track.
In an instance where some sort of error (me, you, anyone) or lack of clarity is brought to light --- then such an exchange really has value.
As they teach in Buddhism ... the sword of discrimination (and willingness to use it, and/or learn what it teaches) is one of the most fundamental, and most important, tools on the path of consciousness-evolution - whatever the label ("Yoga", "AYP". "Spirituality", Etc. Etc.)
So - truly: it's all good, and no problem - and I'm not blowing smoke when I say I appreciate it!
(Heck, if I *was* coming from the perspective you suggested, especially if I was not consciously aware of it .... I'd wanna know!) Fumbling about blindly in Maya one second (<--- part of Maya, too, though ) longer than absolutely necessary - is "not our friend".
quote:
Please (anyone, but specifically David, per this exchange) - tell me if you disagree with this ... but let's say someone had a bad experience with a couple of gurus, they turned out to be more of the "I want your money, and/or your body" variety, than "the truth is radiating here" variety ... so they come to AYP, or Adyashanti ... feeling very wounded / jaded. I could easily see such a person feeling that certain comments or actions of either Yogani or Adya showed them that both people were "just like the others" - and then go away - before they got hurt / abused again.
I'll answer that since you asked me specifically. Sure I agree with that.
FWIW, I'm not jaded or hurt by any guru or spiritual teacher.
I have nothing against Adya at all, and have never said a word against him.
From what little I have seen, he shows signs of not letting his self-image get out of order, which is very rare I think among 'big' spiritual teachers, even those who are 'humble'. It's hard to keep your self-image in order in the spiritual teaching role.
Cool - appreciate all those comments - and fully agreed, on "all fronts".
My working hypothesis is simply: Adyashanti has attained what anyone in a position to know / confirm would agree is full enlightenment - and is therefore not subject to the pull toward ego-land, that most teachers are susceptible to experiencing.
As with any hypothesis - it may be disproven, at some point - but I've had it re-confirmed to my satisfaction on many occasions.
And while I'm not a "golfing buddy" of Adya's, I know people who effectively are -- one acquaintance of mine is a literal "poker buddy" of Adya's - or was, as of the last time I talked with him (the acquaintance, not Adya ) -- enlightened teachers enjoy Texas Hold 'Em, too, it seems .
And, per my post which started this thread - the anecdote mentioned there, about my friend running into Adya and his wife Annie (now Mukti) at Whole Foods (the one on Bascom Avenue, in Campbell, CA for any Silicon Valley-ites, out there) - which is quite true, and happened not all that long ago -- Adya is almost "more normal than normal" - which it makes sense that enlightenment would be, yes?
Enlightenment is the fulfillment of human potential, and ultimately, what we're all designed for ... it's not a "lofty, superhuman" thing.
And, if all the consciousness-teaching of the last several thousand years from what we in the West think of as "the East" (i.e. India, China, Japan, Korea, Etc.) -- one of the major "identifying characteristics" of true enlightenment ... is that there is enough literal Self-Awareness, so the the (apparent) person where enlightenment is "shining through" (Adyashanti, in this case), is not fooled, on any level ... by the games of the ego.
So, when a dynamic which is a temptation for most (i.e. the adoration of students or followers, nubile young women - or men - throwing themselves at one's feet or other anatomical appendages, etc.) happens, there may be "temptation-related" energy which moves within that body-mind ("Yes, I am awesome!" or "Wow - she's really cute, y'know ...") - but - there's zero "stickiness" - the Self is a lot like Teflon ! Not only is there nothing for egoic arising to stick to ... there's nothing there to grab at that which is arising, and tries to make it stick ... no Ahamkara (literally "I-maker") to grab a given movement of energy within a body-mind, and say, "This is mine, and it means such-and-such, and therefore ...!"
And so, the energy may arise, and it may be noticed, but will dissipate completely without being grabbed -- when complete enlightenment has happened - again: it is part of my understanding and awareness that this is part of what defines "complete enlightenment" - there is enough actual realization of one's true nature, as the Self, that there is no longer a Maya-maintained Ahamkara present to grab at attachment or aversion.
And please note (everyone reading) - I don't mean to get "all conceptual on you" -- this is not about what I conceive enlightenment to be, but the logical / intuitive end point, as generated in my awareness by study of yogic teachings and by my own experience.
I'm not free from attachment and aversion - but am about 90% more free of both than I was even a year ago, and a good 50% more free than I conceived as possible, even six months ago ... so I'm not just parroting things I've studied ... I'm speaking of something that I have a very, very strong sense of ... it feels like rolling downhill, rapidly ... while at the same time, trusting what credible teachers have repeatedly said the bottom of the hill is like.
Which seems to be getting much closer, very quickly ... provided "I" don't get caught on a branch, or wedged between a couple of boulders ... or ... overly tied to the idea that I'm actually on a hill, in the first place!
So, I have at least some basis for my assertions of Adya's apparent "enlightened but normal" level of Realization (which Zen and other Tantric paths seem to be good at helping create - certain non-Tantric yogic paths seem to stop at the "enlightened but on-the-moon" stage, which precedes the final "bringing it all the way home" final embodiment phase of enlightenment.
Forgot to mention this in my phases thingy; I guess I think of this as more of a "sub-phase", but it's probably worth mentioning: enlightenment without embodiment, leads to the result of a realized being who may authentically know his or her Self - but who can't function in the day-to-day world, too well (I'm thinking Sri Ramakrishna).
Candidly, my ego tends to see this as "less" than fully embodied realization. Fully Embodied Realization - "Kirtanman Definition" = Nisargadatta Maharaj, Eckhart Tolle, Adyashanti (based on what I've observed and experienced), Etc. -- those who experience an ongoing awareness of their full, true nature - yet can also function in the "everyday world", without handlers to keep them from walking into walls, when the spontaneous samadhi kicks in) -- i.e. those who can "manifest universes and chew gum at the same time" ...
However, this may be simply a "different than", rather than a "less than" --- who am I to evaluate anyone who has experienced a full realization of the Self?
I actually feel just fine about stopping at the "appears to be the case, from where I sit" - as far as evaluating anyone's enlightenment is concerned ... which is likely a slippery slope at best -- I actually don't resonate with Adya - or Yogani - or any other teacher, for that matter - because they fit a preconceived notion that my conditioned mind has, regarding what enlightenment looks like, or doesn't -- but rather, because the application of what they teach has proven very beneficial, and because I feel an intuitive draw to associate with them, and their material --- and last, and most certainly least .... because their teachings make sense to my rational mind.
quote:
I'm a techie by former trade
Shame on you then, for not closing all your parentheses!
Jargon-Watch (my own) Time ... I meant "Techie" in the Macro (anyone who works / has worked in High Tech), rather than the Micro (a coder, programmer, and or professionally software-centric type person) sense of the term.
I was actually the highly-expressive (no, honest, it's true ... ) yet relatively conscientous sales dude, who bagged the big deals, open parens and all ... ... and who the literal techies and bean-counters would grumblingly clean up after ... often forgetting that my "type" gave them something to clean up with (the revenue that kept the lights on, computers running, salaries paid, etc.)
Despite that lofty (or not ...) justification, I do agree with your point, and will now go self-flagellate (Hm? What's that, high-pitched but unintelligible little voice, just offstage? No .... I don't think this paragraph means this entire post will need to be moved to the Tantra section ... ) with a copy of Strunk & White's ... and will do my best to punctuate, properly (and parenthetically) posting-forward.
Peace & Namaste,
Kirtanman |
|
|
|
Jim and His Karma
2111 Posts |
Posted - Mar 19 2007 : 11:59:35 PM
|
Kirtanman, thanks for another ice cream sundae of a post. If we're not going to all just go "om" 24/7, we may as well sprinkle liberally with digressions, witty knots, and emoticons, no? I always get a kick from your postings!
Question: Adya is a rare non-dualist who admits to energy being an issue (e.g. he says he's screwed up some people via something akin to shaktipat, and won't give energy now even if people "beg"). I find that interesting. Has he written or spoken on the issue of energy (I don't mean just shakti) anywhere that can be seen or downloaded? it's of acute interest to me, as every time I let go an iota more, I become much more awash in energy, and I'm always banging right up against the amount I can maximally handle. And not being interested in magic tricks and personal power, it's nothing but hindrance to me. But I do recognize that opening to What Is involves opening to flavors and intensities of energy we usually insulate ourselves against.
Anyway, i'd like to hear his take on it, because, again, it's so unusual to hear about a non-dualist talking about this (I think many advaitans open their minds but not their hearts and bodies - which is why they tend to be a bit cranky and arrogant - and stop there. But I'm digressing). |
Edited by - Jim and His Karma on Mar 20 2007 12:02:29 AM |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Mar 20 2007 : 01:28:30 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jim and His Karma
Kirtanman, thanks for another ice cream sundae of a post. If we're not going to all just go "om" 24/7, we may as well sprinkle liberally with digressions, witty knots, and emoticons, no? I always get a kick from your postings!
Question: Adya is a rare non-dualist who admits to energy being an issue (e.g. he says he's screwed up some people via something akin to shaktipat, and won't give energy now even if people "beg"). I find that interesting. Has he written or spoken on the issue of energy (I don't mean just shakti) anywhere that can be seen or downloaded? it's of acute interest to me, as every time I let go an iota more, I become much more awash in energy, and I'm always banging right up against the amount I can maximally handle. And not being interested in magic tricks and personal power, it's nothing but hindrance to me. But I do recognize that opening to What Is involves opening to flavors and intensities of energy we usually insulate ourselves against.
Anyway, i'd like to hear his take on it, because, again, it's so unusual to hear about a non-dualist talking about this (I think many advaitans open their minds but not their hearts and bodies - which is why they tend to be a bit cranky and arrogant - and stop there. But I'm digressing).
Thanks for the kind words -- I'll take that Ice Cream Sundae comparison, any time!
As far as Adya / Energy goes ... I'm not exactly sure what to suggests ... mostly because Adya is very big into "downplaying" the part that energy may play in consciousness advancement ... because he's seen so many pitfalls from people who misperceived the importance of energy focus. I get his perspective and intent (same as Patanajali's - which is basically: steer students toward what works, and away from what can get them in trouble) - which overall, is a good general-framework type of approach ... or at least the one likely to produce some of the best results, if your student base represents a general cross-section of the population.
Some good news, though: I believe Yogani may be a good resource, especially if it's specific guidance, in terms of what you might do.
With Adya, I should be clear ... he makes it clear that shaktipat does not involve energy transfer - people just presume it does. The actual dynamics, he describes as being like each person having a guitar in their lap, and the teacher plucks a string ... and the student feels a vibration at that frequency ... a much higher frequency that they're used ... and so, they feel it has come from the teacher ... when all the teacher did was generate his own energy ... which caused the student's energy - already fully present and available in the student -- to awaken, essentially.
And by the way ... I'm dealing with exactly that same phenomenon right now .... feeling maximum, amazing energy, and opening ... and getting almost overwhelmed ... not of the "will be fried later" Kind (have had some of that, too - and have self-paced accordingly) - but of the VAST variety.
I've been around Adya enough that I can just about hear his voice in my head:
Kirtanman: Oh my God, this is BIG energy!
Adya: Yes. Open to it.
Kirtaman: I am - but every time I open more .... it gets ... way ... more .... intense!
Adya: I understand. Open all the way.
Kirtanman: But that's crazy, it's too bi ...
Adya: Open. All. The. Way.
Kirtanman: Okay, fine, I will, and you'll ..........oh. Wow. Good call.
And it has happened like that ... though I don't know if he'd work with you like that -- as with Yogani -- every teacher-student situation is a different one - and treated freshly.
FWIW, if doing a certain thing (say, spinal breathing) is generating huge energy for a while .... clearly, back off of that practice for a bit). However, if "big energy" is already present ... I've found that truly and fully opening to it ... actually allows it to dissipate in intensity, and feels best that way. If I constrict around it, mentally, physically or energetically OR try to focus it - it's harder to be with; being willing to let it expand / open - and expand me with it, if that's the way it goes ... has worked fine, recently.
And I'm kinda like you -- certain Siddha-ish things seem to be making their possibility known, but I don't feel a big draw to dive in deeper. The most reason one is 360-degree vision - as Yogananda described in his Autobiography ... it's really cool for a few minutes, but that's about it (it's really cool for a few minutes). I'm not saying it holds zero interest ... but my ego used to imagine how "amazing" it would feel to have "powers" (not all that much, thankfully ... but I did think of it) ---- and therefore, I'm ultra-grateful that I'm drawn far more to Reality, than any set of parlor tricks - no matter how cool they may be.
In conclusion: I just don't see Adya as the guy who's likely to help you out here; if it were me experiencing this, I'd probably "ping" Yogani, over Adya -- each one (between those two gentlemen) has areas of teaching focus ... and Adya tends to "play" in the realms of mind / psychology ... to ultimately give us an awareness of our Self, and Yogani tends to play in the realms of yogic science, bodily actions and energy ... to ultimately give us an awareness of our Self.
Hope that helps!
Peace & Namaste,
Kirtanman
|
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4514 Posts |
Posted - Mar 20 2007 : 02:56:39 AM
|
Hi Kirtanman,
Thanks for the great posts.
quote:
With Adya, I should be clear ... he makes it clear that shaktipat does not involve energy transfer - people just presume it does. The actual dynamics, he describes as being like each person having a guitar in their lap, and the teacher plucks a string ... and the student feels a vibration at that frequency ... a much higher frequency that they're used ... and so, they feel it has come from the teacher ... when all the teacher did was generate his own energy ... which caused the student's energy - already fully present and available in the student -- to awaken, essentially.
This is amazing. This is how I described how I felt the energy in my body was effecting people arround me in this post on ecstatic radiance:
http://www.aypsite.org/forum/topic....D=2096#18216
I had never heard anyone else describe it in that way and wasn't sure if I was seeing it clearly. Nice when things start to tie up isn't it?
Christi
|
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4514 Posts |
Posted - Mar 20 2007 : 03:44:55 AM
|
Hi Dave,
Thanks for that.
quote:
'Laja Samadhi is a latent ("laja"), potential level of samadhi. It begins in deep meditation or trance—even with movement, such as dancing. This kind of samadhi is a state of joy, deep and general well-being, and peaceful meditation.
Savikalpa Samadhi refers to the initial temporary state of full-valued samadhi. The conscious mind is still active, as is the kalpa, meaning imagination. One should compare this meaning to that of sankalpa, which is "wish." Kalpa takes on a different, but related, meaning to sankalpa because one must use imagination or consciousness (kalpa) to envision a wish or desire (sankalpa). Conversely, vikalpa means "against imagination." At this final level of samadhi, the mind has become quiet and given up its desires and attendant. Vikalpa leads to the Truth, releasing one from any binds of mind (which are mostly imaginations). In Savikalpa Samadhi, we get the taste of Bliss and Beingness, but are still attached to our erroneous identification with the body as well as to our numerous worldly attractions.
Nirvikalpa Samadhi is the end result. There are no more kalpas (imaginings, wishes or other products from work of the mind), because the mind is finally under control. Upon entering Nirvikalpa Samadhi, the differences we saw before have faded and we can see everything as one. In this condition nothing but pure Awareness remains and nothing is missing to take away from Wholeness and Perfection.
Entering samadhi in the beginning takes effort and holding on to a state of samadhi takes even more effort. The beginning stages of samadhi (Laja and Savikalpa Samadhi) are only temporary. By "effort" it is not meant that the mind has to work more. Instead, it means work to control the mind and release the self. Note that normal levels of meditation (mostly the lower levels) can be held automatically, as in "being in the state of meditation" rather than overtly "meditating." The ability to obtain positive results from meditation is much more difficult than simply meditating. It is recommended to find a qualified spiritual master (guru or yogi) who can teach a meditator about the workings of the mind.
Samadhi is the only stable unchanging reality; all else is ever-changing and does not bring everlasting peace or happiness.
Staying in Nirvikalpa Samadhi is effortless but even from this condition one must eventually return to ego-consciousness. Otherwise, this highest level of Samadhi leads to Nirvana, which means total Unity and the logical end of individual identity (and also death of the body). However, it is entirely possible to stay in Nirvikalpa Samadhi and yet be fully functional in this world. This condition is known as Sahaja Nirvikalpa Samadhi or Sahaj Samadhi (sahaja means "spontaneous" in Sanskrit). Only the truly Enlightened (Satguru) can be and remain spontaneously free.
In Nirvikalpa Samadhi, all attachment to the material world and all karma is dissolved. All awareness is withdrawn step by step from the physical, astral and causal bodies until self-realization or oneness with the soul is achieved. During this process, breathing ceases and the heart stops beating. Aware and fully conscious oneness with soul is then achieved in a most loving way, and all cells of the physical body are flooded with the Ocean of Divine Love and Divine Bliss for any period of duration—hours, days, weeks, until the individual shifts his awareness from the soul back to the physical body. Being fully functional in this world, his awareness stays in connection with the Divine. But some "strange" conditions accompany this state—better health (the body is sustained by Divine Grace), better feelings (even for other people who may contact the body which the enlightened soul has reidentified with) and various miraculous happenings may occur in connection with the Enlightened one.'
I assume that this is all a quote from wikipedia (I wasn't sure when the quote finished). Thanks for finding this stuff. It is a detailed description of various kinds of samadhi states. These are states of absorbtion of the consciousness in the various Purushas (levels of divine souls). But I don't understand which one of them is synonymous with enlightenment as you understand it? Presumably the last (Sahaja Nirvikalpa samadhi)? But do absorbtion states really have anything to do with enlightenment? These are still states that we can become attached to. Even at a very high level of consciousness there can be a subtle act of the being which identifies itself as the posessor of these states (and their accompanying powers) and the ego can reform itself as before, but now magnified one thousand times. This is what is symbolised by the Titan in western mythology. I believe that this is what is being discussed in this thread, and what people are talking about when they say that Adya is certainly in danger. As I see it, enlightenment is not a state of consciousness but rather something that is beyond all states of consciousness.
quote:
When sitting in my satgurus presence many experience the feelings of peace and joy and are certainly different when they leave.
Thanks for sharing your experiences with one of your teachers.
This process that you refered to happens to people around me. It is what Yogani calls "ecstatic radiance", and what Adya seems to call the "radiant heart". It is something that seems to come once a certain amount of ecstatic radiance is present in the body and the nadis are purified to a certain degree.
quote:
Even though he is a siddha and the body is only considered to be needed to remain in our presence, he still meditates daily and performs japa and other austerities.This is still considered necessary to maintain the purification needed for this state.
These sound like purification practices to maintain a high level of energy in the subtle body. Maybe your teacher has to do this if he is engaged in a lot of Shaktipat work. But to maintain the enlightened condition, nothing is needed. If it is, then if we don't do those practices we would stop being enlightened, and so it would just have been another experience in the realm of time. A state of consciousness which has to be maintained by doing certain practices every day. Enlightenment is not an experience.
quote:
Guruji has told me in the past not to tell others he is a great guru but to simply tell others of my experiences.
Good job you didn't mention it then!
Don't forget, if I tell someone not to tell anyone that I am a Great Guru, but just to tell others about the Love that they feel in my presence, what else am I doing other than promoting myself? I gave up doing that weeks ago.
L&L
Christi |
|
|
|
Manipura
USA
870 Posts |
Posted - Mar 20 2007 : 08:54:54 AM
|
Hey Christi - I'll be sure not to tell anyone that you're a great guru. Kirtanman - since you asked, yes, your posts seem to generate an automatic defense mechanism whenever potential criticism for Adyashanti pops up. Not egregiously so, and I wouldn't even mention it but for the fact that you seemed to genuinely want to know. And again, I don't think anyone here has criticized Adya, not yet anyways. But his students have been criticized here for their sometimes reckless devotion to someone who is, after all, partially human.
So when I hear someone say, "If you're having a hard time with Adyashanti's teachings, it's because your ego is in the way", it's not unlike hearing someone say, "If you're not receiving the blessings of our Christ-based ministry, there must be some sin that's preventing you from receiving." Ego is the new buzzword for sin.
(and I'm not suggesting that you've said the above. I did hear it, though, at an Adya group that I attended). (and it wasn't subtle!)
It's as old as the hills to go on the defensive when one's tribe or tribe leader is perceived to be attacked. In fact, it's often the attack that makes the tribe stronger, as the bond overrides the individual differences in the group. I've defended Yogani and AYP to critics who argue that it's irresponsible to be using a potentially volatile energy (shakti) without hands-on instruction. It's a valid point, and it would be foolish of me to deny the wisdom in it. But the experienced benefits far outweigh the perceived dangers, as the testimonies of so many at AYP would imply. To defend one's tribe or leader without considering the possible truth of the criticism leads to cultish activity and blind faith in one's leader, as well as giving the leader too much unchecked power over the tribe.
|
|
|
|
Jim and His Karma
2111 Posts |
Posted - Mar 20 2007 : 10:06:27 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by meg
But his students have been criticized here for their sometimes reckless devotion to someone who is, after all, partially human.
I've got to say, something in me deeply recoils when watching those videotapes, whenever he says something the least bit cute, the audience erupts in greasy giggles and applause. It reminds me of Bob Hope getting laughs without being the least bit funny just 'cuz he's Bob Hope.
Exploring why this turns me off so much (more with Adya than with Bob Hope), I think it's two things:
1. I worry Adya is in danger of being churned by this dynamic into runny butter. I'm not saying it's ego, but....I get the feeling he likes it.
2. I worry that the more fawning students are never going to get anywhere. If the entire spiritual path is just a skillful means for realizing something that can't be taught or shown, so it's all just tools and pointers, then I think one of the most efficacious tools and pointers in any tradition is the Zen Buddhist injunction "If you see the Buddha walking down the street, kill him." (actually, that's a mis-translation. A scholar once assured me that it is actually "$hit on his head). The Buddha doesn't hold the key to enlightenment. The Buddha doesn't "give" you enlightenment. You must become like the Buddha, not worship him as an untouchable paragon.
There's something about a teacher earnestly insisting that he is not necessary while he's being absolutely adulated ("yes! That's SO insightful! Yes, yes, you're not necessary! Please...go on!") that just seems "off" to me. I'm not judging anybody, it's just my visceral reaction. |
Edited by - Jim and His Karma on Mar 20 2007 10:07:49 AM |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
American Guru Tradition, Non-Guru - Adyashanti
