Eckhart Tolle

Originally Posted by sky123

I was referring to your belief that GL has a deficiency in understanding....

He does, but he's pretty enarmored with it.

Originally Posted by God-Like

The whole thing that is overlooked about attachment is that it's not about the money per se . It's about the attachment to it . I have tried to illustrate that even if Tolle gave half of it away to 1000 different charities in a act of kindness, it still reflects an attachment to the money in order to reflect upon what it can potentially do for others .

You should probably stop speaking for Tolle - I find your insights & understanding to really be quite limited and limiting.

If you like, I could do a detailed psych analysis of you too...

JL

Originally Posted by God-Like

Yepper's it totally alright to have them and impossible to not have them while experiencing life in reflection of self .

This is why I mentioned the 'non functioning' example because there is at this point no dude walking around sniffing the scent of roses, there is no dude standing up teaching other's, there is no dude calculating how much revenue was made on the last retreat lol .

All these instances are self reflected and as Tolle has said where you still see yourself there is the attachment .

You see what can also be a little confusing to some is even when you have realized that there is only what you are or all that is, is Source or God that you walk around the earth in this non self bubble lol .. Well for starters you need a reflection of self to see Self in everything .

It's not everything seeing everything as everything .. it is what you are reflected as everything in your eyes . Your eyes, your perception is self related .. and BOOM!! there is an attachment made through that perception of how 'you' see things ..

Otherwise nuffin would make any sense at all even the realization that everything is God .




x daz x

1. You are the only person who thinks you're realized or anywhere even near mastery - so maybe you want to incorporate this context into your brainwork

2. Experiences, no matter how grand - do not equate to enlightenment or spiritual depth

3. Yes the Masters taught & functioned just fine - teaching, eating, sleeping, creating - ALL of them

JL

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by janielee

1. You are the only person who thinks you're realized or anywhere even near mastery - so maybe you want to incorporate this context into your brainwork

2. Experiences, no matter how grand - do not equate to enlightenment or spiritual depth

3. Yes the Masters taught & functioned just fine - teaching, eating, sleeping, creating - ALL of them

JL

4...and if he was truly enlightened, he would know that.

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

4...and if he was truly enlightened, he would know that.

Indeed.

Namaste,

JL

Originally Posted by 7luminaries

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

I understand, 7L and understand you have a certain way and thought process, which I can respect and understand.

It's funny - because this thread shows me two things: the way of the inner to the outer, and the way of the outer to the inner. Fundamentally the inner is the outer.

The outer is the easy stuff of course: our ideas and such; the inner also has a similar theme but I suspect it's a little more malleable, at the end of the day.

Namaste,

JL

Originally Posted by ajay00

Also, there had been personal attacks and slandering on Tolle regarding his hoarding of millions which has now been proved false.

But that's not going to stop God-Like and his un-God like judgements...

He also calls people "wrong" "deluded" "mad" and all that nice stuff, says dogs go "ape ****" when they are excited - this is a man with a filter and an interesting one if I may say so. If love is attachment then let us all be attached!

JL

Originally Posted by iamthat

You seem to be projecting particular motives onto teachers and then declaring that this is why they teach. The reasons why someone might teach may have nothing to do with the motives you ascribe to them.

Of course, there are many teachers around who are driven by ego, by spiritual pride, by the desire for recognition and reward. They will attract their own followers - everyone gets the teacher they deserve.

But someone may experience a shift in consciousness and find themselves in a state of peace and non-resistance, and suddenly life becomes very simple and everything flows easily. Then they look around and see other people searching for answers and struggling with life. Such a person may well decide to share what they have realised with others, not out of any attachment to what they teach nor desiring any specific outcome. They are simply saying that this was possible for me and therefore it is also possible for you.

The motives of such a teacher may simply be compassion for those who find life difficult and are searching for answers. They may simply teach without caring whether anyone listens. Maybe no-one listens or maybe thousands listen - it makes no difference to what they are. Such a teacher may also teach because they realise that it is their dharma to teach, their spiritual duty. It does not automatically mean that they are bound by attachments. They are neither attached to nor averse to any particular result.

The state of detachment is a state of complete emptiness which is also complete fullness. Nothing can add to it, nothing can take away from it.

Peace.

I heard it said that when Buddha was first awakened, he wasn't sure whether to teach or not, but a Deva asked him to and said there are those "with little sand in their eyes" who would understand and penetrate Dhamma.

Appreciate the input of the many, Altair, you, Greenslade, sky etc.

JL

Reflecting on God-Like's belief of no awareness as the ultimate, I came across this today, and found it of relevance. This very famous and respected Buddhist meditation Master calls meditation without awareness as "wrong Samadhi" and points out that the meditator is oblivious and can even think they have reached the Ultimate, although s/he is just mired in ignorance.


We must use Upacara Samadhi. Here, we enter calm and then, when the mind is sufficiently calm, we come out and look at outer activity. Looking at the outside with a calm mind gives rise to wisdom. This is hard to understand, because it's almost like ordinary thinking and imagining. When thinking is there, we may think the mind isn't peaceful, but actually that thinking is taking place within the calm. There is contemplation but it doesn't disturb the calm. We may bring thinking up in order to contemplate it. Here we take up the thinking to investigate it, it's not that we are aimlessly thinking to investigate it, it's not that we are aimlessly thinking or guessing away; it's something that arises from a peaceful mind. This is called "awareness within calm and calm within awareness." If it's simply ordinary thinking and imagining, the mind won't be peaceful, it will be disturbed. But I am not talking about ordinary thinking, this is a feeling that arises from the peaceful mind. It's called "contemplation." Wisdom is born right here.

So, there can be right samadhi and wrong samadhi. Wrong samadhi is where the mind enters calm and there's no awareness at all. One could sit for two hours or even all day but the mind doesn't know where it's been or what's happened. It doesn't know anything. There is calm, but that's all. It's like a well-sharpened knife which we don't bother to put to any use. This is a deluded type of calm, because there is not much self-awareness. The meditator may think he has reached the ultimate already, so he doesn't bother to look for anything else. Samadhi can be an enemy at this level. Wisdom cannot arise because there is no awareness of right and wrong.

With right samadhi, no matter what level of calm is reached, there is awareness. There is full mindfulness and clear comprehension. This is the samadhi which can give rise to wisdom, one cannot get lost in it. Practitioners should understand this well. You can't do without this awareness, it must be present from beginning to end. This kind of samadhi has no danger.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/.../atasteof.html

[JosephineB]

Originally Posted by janielee

Reading iamthat, Altair, Greenslade, sky123, Gem

All these beautiful people and perspectives...

None condemning another for their (supposed) motives, none labelling dogs as going "ape ****" for simply being happy and excited to see an old friend.

God-Like is projecting, in a negative way, and how sad is it that someone can't see the simple beauty in life but wishing and feeling compelled to call people "attached" - when in truth, such a person is blinded. Unable to imagine the expanse that others hint and talk of - unable to know what life unencumbered is like.

And with all the projections onto (nice) Eckhart Tolle, all negative, I can't help but wonder if this is who God-Like is. We all are mirrors to each other after all, and the more God-Like reveals of how he sees others and the world, the more I pity his opinions.

JL

Gathering other posters names around you while trying to isolate a single poster is bully behaviour. Addressing muliple other posters about a single poster is also bully beahviour. Instead of addressing the individuals point or ignoring them, these tactics are then used when other attempts have failed to get to your goal.