The spiritual conversation is difficult, and therefore, skillful

[naturesflow]

Originally Posted by Gem

I think the basic problem is making a special category for masters as compared to the rest of us. Isn't that just a social construct loaded with all sorts of role play and behavioural expectations? Does it not also set a human figure in place for one to attempt to emulate in view of their own deficiency? And in that process of comparing lesser to greater, and consequent emulation, do not such social issues that you mention arise?

Yes.

I feel the whole concept of labelling and segregating people into roles and separate groups brings up a question of "how do I identify myself in and as this"?

It can lead to its own rift within the mind/body, especially if it contains itself to measure up to something 'better than' or 'worse than' or holding beliefs or others up against itself unknown in this attachment. While the mind identifies itself in this way and is not opened to all life, as life shows in everyway life as an inward reflective process, one can miss deeper the nature of the potential for any person on this planet, regardless of what they are being and doing and their own potential as one.

“As I have said, the first thing is to be honest with yourself. You can never have an impact on society if you have not changed yourself... Great peacemakers are all people of integrity, of honesty, but humility.”
― Nelson Mandela

Until now all my spiritual teachers have been woman. Except for my meditation teacher. He was invited to teach for a month by a woman who usually teaches there...

That that stretches along the board. My Guru ShantiMayi is a woman. My reiki masters were. My shiatsu therapisy teachers, Imagine that.

Anyway. Masters in this world are usually not the problem. It often is those that wish to learn from the master that project their stuff on the master or on the outside worlds.

I agree with Gem. Masters are people too. All they have is some experience or insight that might help the rest of us live more at peace with ourselves. I for one am grateful they are there.
Didn't Jezus tell his mum to get lost as he had noting to do with her.. WOMAN..

If we pry hard enough everybody will have some trait we don't like or particularly care for. Something we sense they lack or have to be jealous of. This goes for anyone in any capacity in our lives. Can you love the other with their perceived faults, even if they don't want to save the dolphin's?

With Love
Eelco

[blossomingtree]

Originally Posted by 7luminaries

BT - I very much appreciate your response and your sincere dedication and appreciation of the received traditions and masters such as those noted. I also generally appreciate your thoughtful responses, in general, on most threads

In that most respectful and frank line of response, I will further comment just a bit, not too much, since I feel I've already laid out my concerns, which are appropo to humanity at large, including our best and brightest.

Yes, this still includes nearly all our masters and certainly all of our received traditions, though of course in the cases of the best and most faithfully received insights and the most realised masters, they will have many compensatory aspects where their offerings shine brightly and have guided many further along their paths -- alongside the oversights and integrity gaps which apply universally to humanity at large, or certain have done to date.

1. The transcendentals are at higher levels of consciousness and unlike us, incarnation is not a necessary, regular, or foundational part of their being. Thus, whilst not exactly "fair" to look to them to model, yet in many ways, it is fair IMO because we too need to aspire to Oneness and to feel the burn, the flame of that desire, that love, which is holy and pure and which is not tainted by ego or lust. That is their norm.

Humanity can certainly strive to attain their level and purity or strength of consciousness, and I believe that is the fruit of our eventual realisation. But no human or once-human master is at that level, to my knowledge, and when we do attain it, we will have mastered transcending the residual filters that most still have, even masters.

2. When I say human society historically, I mean East, West, and everything in between. Historically means at least the last several thousand years of recorded history. And when I speak of spiritual traditions, I mean East and West. No received spiritual tradition and no known major culture over the last several thousand years anywhere in the world has been immune from the biases and prejudices of society.

Regarding class/ethnicity (typically mutually causal and overlapping if multiple cultures or ethnicities in any one place) and certainly regarding gender. No major spiritual tradition has been immune to gender bias and clearly favouring men, aligned with cultural norms of the day, and the self-actualised have not been universally immune to these oversights or biases. The reality is that whilst actualised to a (perhaps far) greater degree than many others of their day, they were still only human.

To reference Swami Chi (our Swami Chi ;) ), each of them had a piece of the truth, but not the entirety of the truth. That is also what I am saying...it is partial, and specifically, it is known to be partial IMO because of the underlying biases to which they either ascribed, allowed, denied, or simply failed to see...all perfectly human and understandable.

There is no other way to slice it IMO and get around this point. Although I am not a christian, my experience with the consciousness of several of these masters puts Jesus and mystics closer to the unfiltered reality. However, very few of even those mystics are without residual filters once they engage with the rest of humanity and human consciousness. Again, not bad...simply partial truths due to these frankly rather enormous gaps in the spiritual integrity of humanity to date. Including most masters but to lesser degrees, perhaps far lesser, in all fairness.

I'm just saying, the teachings are not complete and are not perfected. Just like humanity. Just like humanity's human masters. And IMO we are better served taking the good, acknowledging the gaps wherever they lay, and getting to the work at hand :)

3. I agree with the caveats stated in #2. For example, a realised woman has rarely been given opportunity to teach, to become a part of the received wisdom. Rare exceptions abound...there are some western mystics (nuns usually) and same in the East. But generally a few here & there does not a tradition make, nor a major contribution make. Nor would all but the most realised, historically...someone like Jesus...even see the higher realisation and perfections (as you noted) in the lay woman, particularly the outcast lay women, etc. What I'm saying is at a certain point in your realisation and in your mainstream life journey (having kids, etc), you may very well have much to teach your teacher or any of the historic masters. But he and they will need to be ideally where Jesus is at, in order to deeply apprehend this wisdom and this reality.

I've said before that Jesus was more than 2000 yrs ahead of his time with regard to equality and parity of the manifest sort...and still is today. He was integrated and thus integral to humanity. He was closing the gap with his simple, direct, manifest word and deed. He was living the law in its core truth. Beyond that, though, he was not weighed down by most of the residual filters that humanity have. By way of comparison against the transcendentals. That is a truly elevated master IMO. And we've had very, very few by these measures. Though we've certainly received wisdom and deep truths from many.

I'm not knocking what works for you or others, not at all. It a system or tradition works for you, that's a beautiful thing and my heart is gratified. I'm saying it's not enough for everyone, however.

Peace & blessings
7L

7L

I'll make this brief(er)

1. We first have to contextualize this discussion as you and I are talking about two issues here.

We first of all have religions and traditions. Inside of these. There are spiritual practices and there are novices and adepts. Buddha for example was one such Master. We can call him a very senior adept. Sri Nisargadatta can be considered another in Advaita-Vedanta. Jesus is a Master etc. Within these, these Masters offer i.e volunteer to guide and teach. The conversations initially referenced (from other threads in the Buddhism forum) posit that such people are not worth listening to, and/or listening to them or reading what they say puts one in the very possible position of becoming "like a trained dog sitting at the Master's feet waiting for some delectable treat" and furthermore if one's experience or thoughts differs from them, to take oneself as the standard. It's somewhat both a little bit cheeky and a bit of a mind game, IMO. Like in learning martial arts, no-one thinks that listening to a Tai Chi master share his view and experience and inner practice secrets of form and chi is equivalent to losing one's autonomy or practice. Or that the Master is positioning him or herself as a "social status issue or power game". Au contraire, it is probably a sign of maturity and dedication to one's chosen art form. But that is enough on that topic.

2. You speak of the general context now and take it up level whereby you posit, quite confidently, that no spiritual masters effectively walk this Earth and none of the past ones really could get past "all the filters" so to speak. I have to smile a little bit for this one, 7L and with complete respect to you, I offer the following points:

a) I don't share the same absolute confidence that you appear to have in knowing who or what is completely realized, but if you are confident, I rejoice for you

b) The Masters speak of and point directly to the Actual. God. Spirit. Such things are the focus and focal point of their teachings for good reason, in my view. Such things do indeed transcend the society, whether it is culture, norms, form, body or habits. That said, in God realization and actualization, such people are transformed inwardly and cannot help be "different" in society. The Masters are working in to out and not out to in. The inner secrets transform at the very essence of the personhood and that is beyond gender, caste or religion. Just as a side note, these enlightened persons also had to work within culture, and a culture dominated mostly by minds of thought (ego thought) - therefore to lay at their feet all and any gender inequality etc. is not completely well founded in my personal opinion. Buddha for example established a wandering Sangha, for safety reasons, women were not part of this but Buddha taught man and women alike and had disciples of both genders.

c) It is very admirable to do the work you feel that is necessary for humanity to work on and we see this in daily affairs. Egypt once had the Spring revolution, Mugabe was overthrown in Zimbabwe, in some parts of the world, environmental awareness increases, and there are other turns and folds that will always be part of human history, some of those are advancements, some of those will not be. Through the course of history, has anything in the world of name and form been able to be maintained - in whatever endeavor? And yet, of course there are trends, there are trajectories and we all benefit from these enlightened episodes and personages in our midst. I admire and respect what you seek, but I personally like working at Source and allowing that transcendental insight to reveal its own in the world. This doesn't take away from what you call the work humanity has to do, and it is in this great social-activism context that you speak of the need for equality and teaching Masters. I have no doubt with a smile, that you can school a Master on such matters which is why I speak of context. Context in this case is spiritual realization/actualization of God and upper most transcendence where they excel. You can call this "division of labor" if you want As I said in point a, you don't believe such a thing has occurred and I, with a smile, am happy for you to think that.

Be well, bud.

BT

[blossomingtree]

Originally Posted by catsquotl

Masters are people too.

Has anyone here said masters are not just people too? Enjoyed your post.

BT

[hallow]

Originally Posted by blossomingtree

Has anyone here said masters are not just people too? Enjoyed your post.

BT

i understand everyone learns differently, but reading about "masters" and "gurus"
Confused me. If i labeled myself one of those would people listen to what i say more? Yes experience is very important but its your own path shouldn't you make it your own? Most teachers only teach what they consider important. I can understand going to someone more experienced for some guidance "that's why i am here". I don't know, just an idea.

Originally Posted by blossomingtree

Has anyone here said masters are not just people too? Enjoyed your post.

BT

No I don't think they did..
I was merely stating the obvious. That said it seems that the masters behavior comes under a looking glass when they are set against the values we wish to see in them.

From 7 lights post I got the impression a master should conform to what she beliefs are the traits a master would embody and act upon.

I don't necessarily share that view.

With Love
Eelco

Originally Posted by hallow

i understand everyone learns differently, but reading about "masters" and "gurus"
Confused me. If i labeled myself one of those would people listen to what i say more? Yes experience is very important but its your own path shouldn't you make it your own? Most teachers only teach what they consider important. I can understand going to someone more experienced for some guidance "that's why i am here". I don't know, just an idea.

Yes if you say and act like you've mastered something seekers find desirable they will listen more. Until you are disgraced or not because you've played the part very well. I would even go as far as to say you may get rich from it.

With love
Eelco

[7luminaries]

Originally Posted by catsquotl

No I don't think they did..
I was merely stating the obvious. That said it seems that the masters behavior comes under a looking glass when they are set against the values we wish to see in them.

From 7 lights post I got the impression a master should conform to what she beliefs are the traits a master would embody and act upon.

I don't necessarily share that view.

With Love
Eelco

Cat, hello there. No, that's not what I intended to convey, but to have a conversation is to encounter just these difficulties in conveyance of meaning

I was saying only that we are not perfected. The masters are not perfected. The teachings are not perfected. Perhaps the masters are farther along in some ways. Yet not in others and there is no uniformity, of course. We are all individuals.

The masters of yesteryear may still have much to teach many of us, perhaps most of us. But not all masters of yesteryear will be as advanced in many areas that we consider and know to be intrinsic to our humanity as some of the masters we have now -- even of many enlightened lay persons such as a Dorothy Day or similar. Pele was great in his day but he would be a middling international player today, acc'd to those who know the sport. And this potentially applies to all things...i.e., that growth and expansion may occur.

It is not to disparage what we have received from the masters who came before. But neither is it to enshrine and fail to challenge ourselves to go further. We need to be the masters we seek, and IMO that should be our goal. Then we can address the gaps that remain and address our individual and collective work as needed, which went unaddressed in times past when humanity was not yet ready to see it.

I hope that this explains better and if not, apologies and no disrespect intended.

Peace & blessings
7L

[7luminaries]

Originally Posted by blossomingtree

7L

I'll make this brief(er)

1. We first have to contextualize this discussion as you and I are talking about two issues here.

We first of all have religions and traditions. Inside of these. There are spiritual practices and there are novices and adepts. Buddha for example was one such Master. We can call him a very senior adept. Sri Nisargadatta can be considered another in Advaita-Vedanta. Jesus is a Master etc.

Blossom hello! I want to repeat myself again on this point...I'm not saying we disregard what others have revealed. Though I do feel that not all masters may equally give you what you need...rather, you will hopefully take more from those masters who address your areas of lack or weakness. That's probably why I look to the mystics and others seek equanimity. Having said that, you will eventually reach the edges of many of the contextualised teachings and you will need to go beyond on your own. Perhaps we are saying the same thing here but with a different emphasis.

I am saying teachings and masters do not and should not be expected to provide the wisdom in all areas. We are all human. But rather in certain areas where they excelled. They are not perfected, even if advanced in some areas far beyond others. We are not perfected either. Nor are the teachings perfected. None of it. And there are areas of particular oversight which exist and which fall to us today to address on our journey of growth and expansion.

2. b) Just as a side note, these enlightened persons also had to work within culture, and a culture dominated mostly by minds of thought (ego thought) - therefore to lay at their feet all and any gender inequality etc. is not completely well founded in my personal opinion. Buddha for example established a wandering Sangha, for safety reasons, women were not part of this but Buddha taught man and women alike and had disciples of both genders.

I understand the usual reasons given and the limitations for failing to address class or gender based oppression. The same can be seen in nearly any tradition, probably in all of them, just as in all societies. The reasons for the gap would be the same as those you gave. This is my point. It falls to us with eyes to see, to address these things now when we are able to perceive them and to do so. I also respectfully disagree that there is any true distinction between our inner work/world and our manifest outer self. I definitely do think, however, that our understanding of integrity and transparence in this regard have expanded or evolved over time.

c) It is very admirable to do the work you feel that is necessary for humanity to work on and we see this in daily affairs. Egypt once had the Spring revolution, Mugabe was overthrown in Zimbabwe, in some parts of the world, environmental awareness increases, and there are other turns and folds that will always be part of human history, some of those are advancements, some of those will not be. Through the course of history, has anything in the world of name and form been able to be maintained - in whatever endeavor? And yet, of course there are trends, there are trajectories and we all benefit from these enlightened episodes and personages in our midst. I admire and respect what you seek, but I personally like working at Source and allowing that transcendental insight to reveal its own in the world.

This doesn't take away from what you call the work humanity has to do, and it is in this great social-activism context that you speak of the need for equality and teaching Masters. I have no doubt with a smile, that you can school a Master on such matters which is why I speak of context. Context in this case is spiritual realization/actualization of God and upper most transcendence where they excel. You can call this "division of labor" if you want As I said in point a, you don't believe such a thing has occurred and I, with a smile, am happy for you to think that.

Be well, bud.
BT

Again, see response to #2. I too like working at Source and allowing the transcendental (adj) to unfold in our lives. I see no clear distinction between inner work and outer manifestation and to me, I am who I am. I feel the distinction is artificial, as is the division of labour. This is perhaps at the heart of our different perspectives. And thank you for this conversation, so that I might better hear your position and better convey my meaning, as well.

Peace & blessings
7L

[7luminaries]

Originally Posted by Gem

I think the basic problem is making a special category for masters as compared to the rest of us. Isn't that just a social construct loaded with all sorts of role play and behavioural expectations? Does it not also set a human figure in place for one to attempt to emulate in view of their own deficiency? And in that process of comparing lesser to greater, and consequent emulation, do not such social issues that you mention arise?

Sorry Gem I almost missed this.
I think there is a two-word/two-part answer for that...
"It depends"...

I think there have been deeply transformative figures in recorded human history who have had an outsized effect on the progress of human consciousness, like Jesus and Buddha. With vast and far-reaching influences on the social landscape whether you followed their tradition or not. In both cases the impact was also due to the integrity of their lived selves, IMO. The spiritual attainment that one gains by looking to how these men lived their lives and saw the world has been beneficial to many, for very straightforward reasons...these men's lived selves and their belief systems possessed an integrity and transparency. And from that integrity, they advocated lovingkindness and equanimity. That's it, really.

On the other hand...these same views have been used to aid in propagation of great wrongs like religious war and the caste system (even if neither of them created the category of caste or war, per se).

I think knowledge is wonderful and should be shared, and that there are many who benefit from the guidance of a teacher AND fellow travellers, at various places on the journey. Perhaps most, even, if the teacher is right and that's another topic. What I meant in my response to Blossom...the needs are individual.

But regardless, we are all works in progress and the onus can't be on the teacher to do your work and his or hers too. So, IMO we have to use this category less to elevate or enshrine someone, and more as a functional one (today, and for you and you, I'm a teacher if I can share something to aid you both on your way...but meanwhile I too am forever a student and you may have knowledge I need as well). In that way, yes, I think the title of teacher and master should be used sparingly unless in the functional sense I described.

So whilst I acknowledge the great contributions of all who have come before, I don't think we are done or they are the pinnacle of humanity and human consciousness, not even the greatest masters. Jesus sets a particularly high bar because he was from a different reality...which as I am learning means you move up to 7D to get to an entirely different 6D multiverse of possibilities and spacetime reality, not even our own. Where folks were already more advanced. Either that, or simply an outlier parallel reality in our own multiverse/reality where things were quite different and folks were much more advanced in consciousness and love. So that he could look at these filters most struggle with and pass through them.

But you know what the parallel is? Superman, who was just an ordinary dude where he was from and was only above par when he was taken here. If we wonder where is the source of Jesus's humillity (or Cal-El's), it's because they knew this, in the very core of their being. Their different reality gifted them with a higher starting point...like being spiritually wealthy...and provided their own gifts a place of free flourishing. Their elevation was real, but it also points directly at our own human potential. The difference is higher consciousness with a deeper centre in lovingkindness and equanimity, IS possible for us. It's not like flying or bending steel...requiring great gifts that routinely defy laws of physics in our material realm etc. Ultimately, higher consciousness simply requires a great desire and a great perseverance for the work at hand, along with both teachers (lower case "t") and fellow travellers.

The benefit of a person like Jesus is the expansion of our beliefs in what is possible and what our capacities are and not just internally but seamlessly, in the manifestation of the lovingkindness on the ground to one another...in that way, again, IMO you merit the title of teacher. And my hope is, one day very soon, this title will be commonplace, and we will all be both teachers and fellow travellers for one another.

Peace & blessings
7L