Eckhart Tolle

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Greenslade

There are teachers who teach without any attachments to any outcomes -

Lets take a backwards step for a minute first .

Why are they teaching?

Forget about the outcome, there has to be a reason for why they teach .

It will be through an attachment to the teachings themselves and to why they teach .

There is a orderly structure here I would say ..

Otherwise it's the cart before the horse


x daz x

[muffin]

Originally Posted by Greenslade

If it's a good morning where you are then it's a good morning where you are, but it did make me wonder where your 'here' and my 'there' were. Is. Or something. I'm more interested in where people come from.


You're welcome for the colouring sessions, you did hold your crayons properly I hope? Sometimes having something a little more tangible helps and the diagram helped me, everything exists in relation to something else and there are some deep understandings there.


I don't try and figure out any more because I am the answer looking for the question, and if I stand still for long enough the question comes to me. It's just the way it is.


I found it strange that for all the Spirituality that seems to be about leaving the human behind, when so many Spirits who have passed over seem to miss the human. It doesn't make sense, does it? But then it's human to want to be on the other side of the fence.


No it's not attachment, it just is. The enjoyment of the moment with no need for a specific outcome, no need to have a pre-defined experience from it. The communion with nature that can only happen when there is nothing underneath it. It just is.


We need to spend time looking through each other's eyes, again for the first time.

Good afternoon Greenslade

Truth be told it's evening here

Yes, no marks outside the circles.

And yes agree, for me it's like looking at a spiders web with fresh morning dew drops, each has it own myriad of colours.

One of the things that surprise me was just how vast it is, each piece is interwoven with the next and it all works like clock work.
And that only from where I sit, yet to see beyond that, me thinks that takes time.

That one was a learning curve for me, I was asking questions and getting the correct answer, only to get another 10 more questions.
Ask the right question and you'll need no answer.

To me this is attachment and one of the many hurdles, you have to face, if your ever put in that position.
Whats the rush, we all get there in the end, and there still wonder and beauty to be had here.

Enjoy the rest of your day or night Greenslade

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Greenslade

As for Tolle's millions, (and I know what you've already said time and again) he can have millions but not be attached to them - having it and being attached to it are two very different things.

Why would someone keep on attaining more and more of what they are not attached too in some shape or form?

There has to a reason for why one holds onto something be it a good reason or not . Maybe I only have one of a pair of socks somewhere in my house that I couldn't care less about if I threw it out or not ..

But if I knew that each week I had more and more socks that I don't actually need then what would the point be in attaining more and more socks?

What does it mean to have 70 million pairs of socks I am not attached too?

Even if I said that I was saving them for charity, I would still be engaged within an attachment of that .

This is what I am pointing out we can't shed the attachments we just swap them around and dress them up differently ..

I am not attached to eating chicken but I am attached to the love of my loved one's etc etc .

See what I mean?



x daz x

[7luminaries]

Originally Posted by ajay00

Tolle's version of spirituality deals with understanding the psychological nature of the mind, its patterns and reasons for its emotivity and reactivity, and how to transcend them. His books are highly insightful in this regard.

Charity work may not be useful for all. I have read of a mass shooter who was involved in charity work enthusiastically and so on, but lost his cool and shot dead many in a school.

Knowledge of the working of the mind, thoughts and emotions, is necessary for transcending them, and ensuring one is not carried off by them to extreme emotive and reactive expressions.

Ajay...exceptions like you mention (shooter) do nothing to invalidate the rule.

I personally know of no great spiritual leader in history who has cultivated fortunes for branding, aggrandizement, or other personal use.

Having said that, if these works have been helpful for you, then fine. However, I see you have engaged in a lot of egregious personal attacks on various folks here, for which you have not made amends. Do you think that Tolle's advise to detach and transcend or step away from your excesses has failed you here? Or perhaps has not yet taken root? Perhaps it's more like a bandage which now has fallen off.

The thing is...advising folks to detach or put aside those equally integral aspects of the self is not a path to integral awakening. Compartmentalisation of the dirty bits, so as to separate and "transcend", does not in fact resolve, heal, or transform those bits. Only full immersion and acceptance can begin this process. And then only ownership, repentance, and making amends can accomplish this. It is the crucible in which we forge the mettle (metal) of our core. As they say in the Far East, it is the bitter work which yields and tempers the sweet -- there is no other way.

Peace & blessings
7L

[Altair]

Originally Posted by God-Like

I am however attachment to the belief that I need food and water and shelter in reflection of how I perceive myself .. I mean even dogs act upon their hunger because they believe in a sense of I AM in there own way that is and feels hungry or sad or happy . My mums left two young dogs when she passed and now one of them has died last week, the dog that is left can't bring himself to eat as yet . He whines for his playmate . This is attachment in effect through his belief system isn't it .
If there was no attachment to this sense there would no acknowledgment that the hunger and the suffering is associated to himself or what he believes himself to be on some level ..
This is why animals show signs of suffering because it is 'them' that suffers and they know that they do .
It's to do with being self aware compared to not.

You are confused, and projecting a sense of ''humanness'' on other creatures here. Dogs having a sense of ''I AM''..? They have learned and innate behaviours, these are not 'beliefs', and these do not rest on having a ''sense of I''. Those are your uniquely human conceptualizations. What's next.. do talking parrots or barking dogs have big ''ego's''..? lol!

This fake self or ''I'' or ''ego'' depends on an intellectual, rational mind. Without it there is no sense of THIS ''I''. Perhaps other hominoids may have had it, but they're not around any more. I think some people would do well to familiarize themselves with animal behaviourism, as well as observing animals, or maybe just human babies. No animal needs any sense of ''I'' or ''self'' or ''ego'' to be able to experience suffering, happiness, or have attachments. To say otherwise will rest on conceptualizations that in proper science are rightfully dismissed..

[7luminaries]

Originally Posted by janielee

Well I say thank God Almighty that no teacher or priest is subject to your moral constrictures 7L, I’m sure you’d love to be God, but your judgements are just one of many, and won’t hold sway.

With respect

JL

JL, we can agree to disagree.

The standard I seek to bring into my own life is one of actively seeking and supporting the highest good of the other(s) equally to the self, equally to the self.

And the self, equally to that of all others.

As I said to Ajay, I know of no great spiritual master who amassed a fortune for branding, aggrandisement, or other purely personal use.

If Tolle is helpful to others, that's fine. But I personally find some core aspects that are disturbing and misaligned, because they reflect a core part of what is deeply misaligned in our culture -- and thus he does not resonate.

Peace & blessings
7L

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Altair

You are confused, and projecting a sense of ''humanness'' on other creatures here. Dogs having a sense of ''I AM''..? They have learned and innate behaviours, these are not 'beliefs', and these do not rest on having a ''sense of I''. Those are your uniquely human conceptualizations. What's next.. do talking parrots or barking dogs have big ''ego's''..? lol!

This fake self or ''I'' or ''ego'' depends on an intellectual, rational mind. Without it there is no sense of THIS ''I''. Perhaps other hominoids may have had it, but they're not around any more. I think some people would do well to familiarize themselves with animal behaviourism, as well as observing animals, or maybe just human babies. No animal needs any sense of ''I'' or ''self'' or ''ego'' to be able to experience suffering, happiness, or have attachments. To say otherwise will rest on conceptualizations that in proper science are rightfully dismissed..

Animals have a sense of themselves in reflection of what is perceived .

My mum used to say to all her dogs that dazzle would be popping round in a minute ..

As soon as the dogs heard my name they would go ape $hit, they would go charging down the drive way and wait for me there until I arrived .

We don't have to talk about fake self's or pushing human traits on animals, just observe what they do ..


x daz x

[Altair]

Originally Posted by God-Like

Animals have a sense of themselves in reflection of what is perceived .

My mum used to say to all her dogs that dazzle would be popping round in a minute ..

As soon as the dogs heard my name they would go ape $hit, they would go charging down the drive way and wait for me there until I arrived .

We don't have to talk about fake self's or pushing human traits on animals, just observe what they do ..


x daz x

They associate the name with a specific experience. As I said, it's learned behaviour.. it doesn't mean they have a sense of ''I AM''. Thinking that they have is a projection, which is what science avoids (parsimony). You are very much projecting your own experience upon the dogs, placing yourself in their shoes, thinking they must have ''beliefs'' in suffering, or a sense of ''I am going to that door''. But they just go to the door, associate a name with an experience, or they may know at what time a day a person comes home. It's learned behaviour. No evidence exists that shows they do have the mind behind it in the way we do..

They do not need an ''I AM'' belief to experience these things, nor do they need it to be attached to something or someone nor to feel sadness. You don't need to be an ''I'' for this. The ''I'' is not some root cause of suffering, most creatures don't have this identity yet many can suffer..

[7luminaries]

Originally Posted by God-Like

Hey ..

Yer, I rez with what you have said here, I love prayer work and in a similar vein reflecting what you have touched upon where yoga is a practice of bringing or allowing union in it's own way, so is prayer in it's own way . Both entertain the heart energy if done in the right way and that speaks volumes doesn't it .

There is a point that some know where the longing for God or Love or peace, an ending of suffering derives through the attachment to the sufferer and the attachment to that which is beyond suffering .

The longing is intense for those that have experienced it . The grief for lost loved one's is a similar longing through an attachment that's on another level that's all .

Without the longing attachment one would be like a cold slab of concrete not feeling anything .. They say it's better to of loved than not at all and I agree however painful it can be and when you are desolate and in despair the longing for God or what you are is so genuine and intense this is why genuine sufferers can have awakenings and realizations because there is a point when they have suffered enough .

What has brought a peep to this threshold limit is another story, for some their issues were simply created in order to reach that point, for others the issues are karmic based ..

This can complicate matters because certain peeps think how can a peep be ready to realize what they are when they are filled with so much self hate .



x daz x

Hey Daz...very interesting...I agree, embracing the longing is core to integration and living from the awakened heart-led consciousness. The Tibetans often allude to riding the wind-horse of Spirit. It requires great discipline and fortitude to do so consciously, with full ownership, and in right-alignment...which is why many will fear and avoid grappling with their core longing till they are able to cross this bridge.

The longing is I think where perhaps the greatest grey areas occur.
The transcendentals (angels) burn with longing to commune with Source...they are associated with fire. It's why they appear to glow in presentation unless they are masking that.

On the other hand...per Kabbalah, the longing of transcendent Source is communion with the material realm and with lowly humanity, who are in a sense (or, in essence) the spiritual children (souls borne of the divine). This is evidenced by the contraction (tzimtzum) of One prior to the birth of the existence, a null space of anti-matter where some particles tranformed into matter, allowing the surplus of matter and thus the universe to come into being. That's the likely modern physics explanation.

As Kabbalah would say, The Tzimtzum concealed the Or Ein Sof (i.e., God prior to any self-manifestation in the production of any spiritual realm) so that within the circle is left a void within which something finite can be created. The next stage of creation was the introduction into this circle of a beam of pre-Tzimztum light called the Kav . Contained within this Light were all the ingredients for the creation of the various worlds.

Point being, this is intelligent design and it was done with intention (as far as we can apprehend )...so there is a desire to experience not only creation but also communion.

Some of humanity have this fire burning very strongly...and we do understand the longing for communion with Source and self and others in this deepest and most profound way. For others, the fire is smouldering and their longing has been dispersed and muted. It lives at the level of their being -- their legions which make up the physical consciousness of the cells and organs -- and the legions also speak truly and with innocence -- but for most it is muted and harder to hear and apprehend with the conscious mind or even the heart, if denied or ignored too long.

The longing may be corrupted into base manifestations in which a lot of violence, deceit, coercion, abuse and exploitation are brought into play. Thus...the longing for many is no longer experienced as a longing of our soul, of our deepest centre. It's more external, more superficial, and not (at all) deeply transformative in aligning us with centre.

That's why, for one, the way of detachment is not ultimately The Way. Equanimity is not detachment to who and what we are...but rather a foundational balance and a perspective of parity in our mutual humanity, from which to be and do lovingkindness. Where we embrace our core longing at centre in right-alignment.

Peace & blessings
7L

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Altair

They associate the name with a specific experience. As I said, it's learned behaviour.. it doesn't mean they have a sense of ''I AM''. Thinking that they have is a projection, which is what science avoids (parsimony). You are very much projecting your own experience upon the dogs, placing yourself in their shoes, thinking they must have ''beliefs'' in suffering, or a sense of ''I am going to that door''. But they just go to the door, associate a name with an experience, or they may know at what time a day a person comes home. It's learned behaviour. No evidence exists that shows they do have the mind behind it in the way we do..

They do not need an ''I AM'' belief to experience these things, nor do they need it to be attached to something or someone nor to feel sadness. You don't need to be an ''I'' for this. The ''I'' is not some root cause of suffering, most creatures don't have this identity yet many can suffer..

Animals learn from other animals in their natural habitat also . The young learn from their elders and their siblings .

They observe and then the follow suit . That's why certain animals hunt in a pack for example .

They know what dinner is and they know what there own kind is .

How can they tell the difference between the two if they don't have a sense of themselves .

animals know when they are hungry cos they go and hunt .

If they didn't relate the hunger to themselves they wouldn't hunt .

If the lioness didn't recognise her own cubs as her cubs she would defend them with her life .

Animals don't need to know the inns and out's of beliefs and what I AM means on an intellectual level for there to be a sense of themselves present .

How they behave reflects that same sense .


x daz x