On being agreeable to one another

[Jyotir]

Originally Posted by FallingLeaves

it isn't a 'principle' for me to be averse to gurus... just a practicality.

Because if any of them had achieved anything 'real' they would have 'fixed' this place instead of going off to have fun while leaving the rest of us all to suffer all the time.

The fact that the place isn't fixed (obviously) means noone got anywhere I would find interesting... and thus while there may be valuable information to be attained from the works of the gurus I can't find it in my heart to take the overall directions such people are going in any more seriously than I take unbridled commercialism as a viable path for me to go down. The answer apparently lies elsewhere.

spin your response to that any way you want but the fact is certain things exist regardless of whether or not anyone is a guru. And none of this pontificating about how nice it is for some people to attain being a guru makes up for the fact that most of us simply don't have what it takes to get there, if for no other reason than that those who are already there have staked a claim to the place and they put up resistance to others joining their club. And OUR lives have to be endlessly painful. So what use is guruhood to us?

Print that, frame it, hang it up, and read it 1000 times!!!





How's that for "being agreeable to others"?

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by FallingLeaves

it isn't a 'principle' for me to be averse to gurus... just a practicality.

Because if any of them had achieved anything 'real' they would have 'fixed' this place instead of going off to have fun while leaving the rest of us all to suffer all the time.

The fact that the place isn't fixed (obviously) means noone got anywhere I would find interesting... and thus while there may be valuable information to be attained from the works of the gurus I can't find it in my heart to take the overall directions such people are going in any more seriously than I take unbridled commercialism as a viable path for me to go down. The answer apparently lies elsewhere.

spin your response to that any way you want but the fact is certain things exist regardless of whether or not anyone is a guru. And none of this pontificating about how nice it is for some people to attain being a guru makes up for the fact that most of us simply don't have what it takes to get there, if for no other reason than that those who are already there have staked a claim to the place and they put up resistance to others joining their club. And OUR lives have to be endlessly painful. So what use is guruhood to us?

One way to reach a goal is to lower its requirements ...

Some gurus could be stepping stones on one's path. One error is to stop on any of them, or stay too long. Another error is to not watch your step, and step on a fake, or trap.

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by FallingLeaves

just for the record I agree...

That's democracy ...

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by Jyotir

In the mundane world this is seemingly an irreconcilable problem. But spiritual practice leads to higher truth which necessarily does reconcile these paradoxes and apparent contradictions by the higher more comprehensive and inclusive perspective. That is the simple direct point - and result- of any legitimate practice.

The only true agreement, true and enduring harmony, true perfection, and true satisfaction is when the entire individuated being is in full identification and confluence with the truth-consciousness, or supramental consciousness of the Divine Will of the Highest/Supreme Being. This is not a contradiction because it is fully available to human beings as it is present in the being, but must be aspired to.

It is the consciousness that knows - because it is - the Will of the Highest for all Bbeing(s) simultaneously, not (apparently) separated, ignorant of, and in conflict with any "other" accordingly, because in that consciousness there is no other...only The One, as experienced instrumentally by, in, and through any 'one' within the multiplicity.

Of course, This is anathema to the objective rational mind and therein is the whole crux of the matter. Spirituality requires the transcending of mind as focus of consciousness.

Suggested reading would be Sri Aurobindo on the supramental consciousness, truth-consciousness, super-mind etc.
If one is averse to gurus, their writings, or both - in principle - then by all means avoid and revel in self-perpetuated mystery and consternation!

~ J

My dearest friend,

From what I can surmise, it appears that both you and I are relating from an entirely different plane of awareness than the majority does on here. We both speak in terms of the Absolute as opposed to any subjective relativism...still, we cannot help but spare a thought for those who just can't see beyond the tip of the nose on their face....we both have been there and know it and occasionally these unresolved Samskaras drag us back into that space whenever the subject of sociology comes into play. Yes, we both should know better...and we do...and yet...

Any disagreement that arises between parties in the mundane world, comes from people (either individually or collectively) projecting their own beliefs, needs, desires etc onto others and hoping, praying and expecting they are going to "stick" so they may feel a sense of accomplishment, self worth, acceptance and purpose in their superficial existence.

Having a desire to "be right" is purely driven by ego and it is also the ego which will justify itself as being necessary for survival of the individual and thus of the species....we haven't had a great track record of that at any time in history which the ego will also chalk down to being a necessary prerequisite for human evolution..

Then, it seems to me that many who say they are "spiritual" are only that way in name only...paying lip service to the concept which is just as much a material lifestyle choice as any other concept they are most probably trying to avoid or bypass because it is just way too painful to deal with any other way.

These projections also affect those "spiritual people" too.."why can't mankind be more like ME?" and "why are people so disagreeable and thus ignorant/intolerant/narcissistic/egotistical/contrary....it really just is what it is!

Nobody can force another to change their behavior unless they are READY to..and that usually requires a substantial motivating factor...a million dollars...a gun pointed at their heads, a Near Death Experience and doing it for the sake of becoming a "self realized person" or doing it without 'doing' it (Karma Yoga) doesn't seem to cut it anymore according to the brain's (ego's) "reward system"...ie "if it doesn't give me an instant dopamine, serotonin or oxytocin hit, I don't want to know about it" and for many, fighting and arguing with each other does JUST that.

It harkens back to a prehistoric time when mankind felt elation from killing a bear which had been threatening the tribe for months...and while any wild threat endangering "self preservation" may have long since gone... mankind's primitive desires and urges still lurk in the deep recesses of the limbic system and amygdala, just waiting for the signal to kill or destroy the "threat" vocally because God knows they would be locked up with the key thrown away if they were to do that in any other way which would totally invalidate the act of "self preservation" anyway.

Some of us come from "wisdom traditions" while many more will say that "wisdom traditions have had their time and are no longer needed or necessary" however, opinions need to be taken and reviewed on an individual basis because the fallacy for many who have an "opinion" is believing they speak for and on behalf of everyone when it is obvious they do not, yet they cannot accept any insecurity which arises from being that "lone voice in the wilderness" as they believe this also self-refutes and invalidates any argument they are attempting to make.

Thus we can only say...as my departed, beloved grandma used to..."whatever you say, dear" but then just do one's own thing regardless.

Originally Posted by FallingLeaves

it isn't a 'principle' for me to be averse to gurus... just a practicality.

Because if any of them had achieved anything 'real' they would have 'fixed' this place instead of going off to have fun while leaving the rest of us all to suffer all the time.

The fact that the place isn't fixed (obviously) means noone got anywhere I would find interesting... and thus while there may be valuable information to be attained from the works of the gurus I can't find it in my heart to take the overall directions such people are going in any more seriously than I take unbridled commercialism as a viable path for me to go down. The answer apparently lies elsewhere.

spin your response to that any way you want but the fact is certain things exist regardless of whether or not anyone is a guru. And none of this pontificating about how nice it is for some people to attain being a guru makes up for the fact that most of us simply don't have what it takes to get there, if for no other reason than that those who are already there have staked a claim to the place and they put up resistance to others joining their club. And OUR lives have to be endlessly painful. So what use is guruhood to us?

Well, as gurus go, I can take them or leave them on a case by case basis. But I don't see any reason to toss them all out just because they have not fixed up the place to my liking. After all, perhaps it is me who is the problem, not the place. Perhaps I am at the gym to get in shape and complaining about how heavy all of the equipment is. Or maybe I don't really want to be at the gym at all, but took a wrong turn on my way to the pub. If one of my favorite gurus is right, then there is a version of reality out there fixed up just the way I like it, I just need to find my way there.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...ett-biography/

[Jyotir]

@ Shivani Devi,

I don't disagree with much of what you say.
Ultimately one can only depart on their own journey. For others, its up to them if, when, and what kind of journey. In a way it's the entire point of life.

In that case, we can pray for the receptivity of Will of the Highest in ourselves and others. It's foolproof, even if it might take a very long time.

That is the significance of spirituality: it accelerates the process in the individual journey, and indirectly contributes to the acceleration within the collective.

~ J

[Ewwerrin]

You don't need to fight if you know the unchanging truth. Because it is simply an unchanging law of existence. It doesn't make it more or less real if you fight. Because your ability to fight is hingent upon your understanding of the unchanging law of existence.

In the same way, people don't go to school and learn about 1+1=2. And then they go out into the world and fight with others, well... Then they are basically creating 1-1=0. Cancelling themselves out.

The reason they do that, is because they have resistance. And they all want to be free from that. And sometimes fighting may be a way to release the need for fighting. Just as more war only brings about more peace. Either we live the peace, or we cancel out our need for war, by cancelling out ourselves. It's really simple. In the end you cannot become less than who you truely are. That is why there is no vulnerability in allowing yourself to know who you truely are being and becoming evermore here and now. Because you cannot ever become anything other then your own true self. As it is ever expanding. And only the aspects of it which are not compatible with you fall to the way side. So there is no difficulty in letting them go. There is only difficulty in trying to hold on to that. That which is no longer neccessary or relevant.

[BigJohn]

If another person has a different view on a subject then we do, we can either over look what they said/wrote or we can try to reason with them toward our view. The latter takes much effort and time to master the skill.

[Ewwerrin]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

If another person has a different view on a subject then we do, we can either over look what they said/wrote or we can try to reason with them toward our view. The latter takes much effort and time to master the skill.

The reason it is difficult, is because you have not yet agreed with yourself first. After that it becomes easy.

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by Ewwerrin

The reason it is difficult, is because you have not yet agreed with yourself first. After that it becomes easy.

Also, as I have just got through saying to David; the reason why it is so difficult involves the question of why it is that the person believes that it is SO imperative the other person should know or understand things from their own viewpoint and from whence does the need to be understood to the point of mutual agreement arise? From the ego or from beyond the ego?

The reason why it is not easy is because there is a veritable smorgasbord of related opinions, views, experiences etc on the internet now, that one voice saying "something" gets lost in the millions of other voices all vying and competing for public attention in the form of "views", "subscriptions" and "likes" who may also be saying "something" or who may be saying "another thing" and there are even people who will pay others to listen to them and agree with them because they are desperate.

The reason it is so difficult is that the method of delivery leaves a lot to be desired and they need to take a crash course in effective communication so as not to include too many "you" statements..."so, here is what I think....AND you are a fool if you don't agree".

Basically, effective communication begins and ends with one sentence..."you don't say?....please tell me more"...granted, the communication will only ever be one sided, but it is better than nothing.