Spiritual Forums

Home


Donate!


Articles


CHAT!


Shop


 
Welcome to Spiritual Forums!.

We created this community for people from all backgrounds to discuss Spiritual, Paranormal, Metaphysical, Philosophical, Supernatural, and Esoteric subjects. From Astral Projection to Zen, all topics are welcome. We hope you enjoy your visits.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to most discussions and articles. By joining our free community you will be able to post messages, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos, and gain access to our Chat Rooms, Registration is fast, simple, and free, so please, join our community today! !

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, check our FAQs before contacting support. Please read our forum rules, since they are enforced by our volunteer staff. This will help you avoid any infractions and issues.

Go Back   Spiritual Forums > Spirituality & Beliefs > Non Duality

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 18-11-2017, 12:50 AM
Gem Gem is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 22,075
  Gem's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moondance
Very insightful observation, Gem. It’s an important distinction.

He’s not a teacher of Advaita Vedanta methodology. And this type of direct pointing is not new. Neo Advaita is a complete misnomer.

I have heard the term sloppily applied to Ramana Maharshi, Alan Watts, Eckhart Tolle, Sri Nisargadatta, U G Krishnamurti, J Krishnamurti, Ramesh Balsekar, Wei Wu Wei… I could go on. This is not a movement. It’s a different approach - one of direct pointing, sharing, reporting. It often borrows from the traditions while stripping out that which is superstitious, archaic and superfluous.

If this approach is not effective then people will naturally drift away from it. In that sense the whole thing is self-regulating.

I don't know much about Advaita or it's contemporary variations, so could only have ill informed opinions about that - if I cared at all.

To me it comes down to 'the art of listening', which means the mind won't raise agreements and disagreements... and it is very similar to talking to friends, like, nothing seeking a profound truth or anything. When the speaker speaks you 'relate' to it so as to understand it. Thus I don't need to know what Advaita is or concern myself or Parsons being right or wrong. Then there's no noise in my head forming any argument. Ain't no body got time fer dat!.

I practice in the Buddhist discipline of vipassana, which is very different to Parsons seeming 'no-practice', though it does bear similarities to Tolle's meditations, and I have heard J. Krishnamurti talks on meditation, which again are different. Of course Ramana's self inquiry is different again.

The meditation to me is, when Parsons, Ramana or other spiritual teacher speaks, I notice how it moves myself, because it can reveal a sense of lack accompanied by the impression that the speaker has something 'I want'. Then I understand what is being pointed out, because I become self-aware, as the one who knows what the mind is doing.

Hence there is no practice, as Parsons says, apart from being aware of 'this', which is just the same as listening to the speaker, and not something I'm gonna do later on. Even as I write this I know readers will be forming arguments to agree, disagree, find me right or wrong and so forth, but it's not for me to be aware of the noise in other people's heads, only to be aware of my own mental movements. If I'm trying to be right, or make someone else wrong or right, then that's something I need to be aware of, and the entire motive driving that need.

It is far easier for me to simply listen, try to understand what is meant, and reply in some meaningful way, so that's all I want to do.
__________________
Radiate boundless love towards the entire world ~ Buddha
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 18-11-2017, 12:56 AM
Shivani Devi Shivani Devi is offline
Master
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 10,861
  Shivani Devi's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by blossomingtree
3. People may not understand what they do not yet know - if I joined a new knitting club, I admit I wouldn't know the wood for the trees and couldn't tell. The thing is, everyone has interests. If someone wants to knit upside down, I wouldn't mind but if someone goes shopping for teachings comparable to Ramana Maharshi, Sri Nisargadatta, Krishnamurti, J Krishnamurti, Ramesh Balsekar, Sri Auribindo, then they are not getting the product they seek.

BT
Also for some, if they go shopping for teachings comparable to Adi Shankaracharya, Patanjali, Tulsidas, Swami Svatmarama, Valmiki et al, then they are not going to get the product they seek either.

I understand this though, as it stands...people like myself (and there are not many of us left now) are what is left of the 'final wave' of scholars and sadhaks with links to the foundations of 'modern Hindu thought' and with our passing, nobody will remember what holds the building up, because as long as it stands...that is good enough.

I can take any sacred Hindu text, for example we'll take the Vijnana Bhairava Tantra...then, somebody like Osho will come along, put his 'mark' on it and repackage it under 'The Book of Secrets' (when there is absolutely nothing 'secretive' about it) and then, another like Lorin Roche will take Osho's 'Book of Secrets' and further repackage it under 'The Radiance Sutras'...and then one reads The Radiance Sutras and tries to compare it to Vijnana Bhairava Tantra...yeah, good luck doing that.

It's like when a message is passed down a long chain of people...and what comes out the other end is never the same as the initial message which was told in the first place because cognitive dissonance always gets in the way and distorts it to personal ends.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 18-11-2017, 02:19 AM
blossomingtree blossomingtree is offline
Suspended
Ascender
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 937
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shivani Devi
Also for some, if they go shopping for teachings comparable to Adi Shankaracharya, Patanjali, Tulsidas, Swami Svatmarama, Valmiki et al, then they are not going to get the product they seek either.

I understand this though, as it stands...people like myself (and there are not many of us left now) are what is left of the 'final wave' of scholars and sadhaks with links to the foundations of 'modern Hindu thought' and with our passing, nobody will remember what holds the building up, because as long as it stands...that is good enough.

I can take any sacred Hindu text, for example we'll take the Vijnana Bhairava Tantra...then, somebody like Osho will come along, put his 'mark' on it and repackage it under 'The Book of Secrets' (when there is absolutely nothing 'secretive' about it) and then, another like Lorin Roche will take Osho's 'Book of Secrets' and further repackage it under 'The Radiance Sutras'...and then one reads The Radiance Sutras and tries to compare it to Vijnana Bhairava Tantra...yeah, good luck doing that.

It's like when a message is passed down a long chain of people...and what comes out the other end is never the same as the initial message which was told in the first place because cognitive dissonance always gets in the way and distorts it to personal ends.

I believe all cults, or say other new age movements, have elements of truth - often "borrowed" and repackaged from the traditional teachings. This is what makes it so tricky for a new aspirant or non-Adept to distinguish what is real i.e. effective and what is not.

It could in fact be the Dharma Ending Age or Kali Yuga as you said though, and if this is the case, it doesn't mean that the Truth is not available, it's just that less people will find it for themselves. Sad perhaps, but if so, so be it. All we can do is play our own role

Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 18-11-2017, 07:36 AM
ocean breeze ocean breeze is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,978
  ocean breeze's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by blossomingtree
I suspect we'll see some different creativity soon

This reminds me! Did you ever hear that song "I'm too sexy"?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5mtclwloEQ

Yes, way back in the day lol. Don't think i've seen the video until now or at least i don't remember so. Hey, if you got it, flaunt it.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 18-11-2017, 11:46 AM
Moondance Moondance is offline
Experiencer
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: UK
Posts: 268
  Moondance's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by blossomingtree
1. It's not a different approach - it's a convolution of genuine spiritual teachings
2. Would you point out this POTHOLE just before someone was about to step into it?
3. People may not understand what they do not yet know - if I joined a new knitting club, I admit I wouldn't know the wood for the trees and couldn't tell. The thing is, everyone has interests. If someone wants to knit upside down, I wouldn't mind but if someone goes shopping for teachings comparable to Ramana Maharshi, Sri Nisargadatta, Krishnamurti, J Krishnamurti, Ramesh Balsekar, Sri Auribindo, then they are not getting the product they seek.

BT

I think that the satsang approach (direct pointing, sharing, reporting) is clearly a different approach to traditional Advaita methodology which is a gradualist approach. The arguments between gradualism and subitism have raged for centuries and I’m not here to advocate one over the other - just to suggest that they both have a place.

Yes, do watch out for those potholes - they can cause a nasty sprain to the ankle. But also be wary of sinkholes - they drag you into their murky depths and twenty five years later you might just clamber out battered, bruised, disillusioned and depressed. That happens.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 18-11-2017, 12:01 PM
Moondance Moondance is offline
Experiencer
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: UK
Posts: 268
  Moondance's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shivani Devi
Thing is though, who gets to say whether something is 'superstitious', 'archaic' or 'superfluous' and what is it that gives people the right or the 'authority' to basically cherry-pick a central tenet and then put their own spin and biases on it, totally irrespective of the context or origins for it?

Hello Shivani Devi

That’s a fair point. But we must not lose sight of the fact that Nondual realization/revelation is timeless and borderless. No one originated it, no tradition can claim ownership of it. It’s an energetic shift in perception - a non-conceptual gnosis. All attempts to conceptualize, systemize and formulate it are, to some degree, subject to human limitation, interpretation and bias. Hence the differences in the traditions.

But I think you are right to flag this up - and intelligence and sensitivity are needed when borrowing from or acknowledging the traditions.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 19-11-2017, 08:21 PM
blossomingtree blossomingtree is offline
Suspended
Ascender
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 937
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moondance
I think that the satsang approach (direct pointing, sharing, reporting) is clearly a different approach to traditional Advaita methodology which is a gradualist approach. The arguments between gradualism and subitism have raged for centuries and I’m not here to advocate one over the other - just to suggest that they both have a place.

Yes, do watch out for those potholes - they can cause a nasty sprain to the ankle. But also be wary of sinkholes - they drag you into their murky depths and twenty five years later you might just clamber out battered, bruised, disillusioned and depressed. That happens.

I doubt they've raged for centuries, the traditional way e.g sudden enligtenment in Zen is, in practice, also through a path of zazen and the like - but realization always seems instant.

Here we are talking convolution and it is a different context.

However -- an interesting response, nevertheless from you, "smart" and telling. Good luck with them holes lol

BT
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 19-11-2017, 08:24 PM
blossomingtree blossomingtree is offline
Suspended
Ascender
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 937
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocean breeze
Yes, way back in the day lol. Don't think i've seen the video until now or at least i don't remember so. Hey, if you got it, flaunt it.

Yes indeed back in the day #iamsothat
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 28-03-2018, 05:40 AM
Eelco
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shivani Devi
I can take any sacred Hindu text, for example we'll take the Vijnana Bhairava Tantra...then, somebody like Osho will come along, put his 'mark' on it and repackage it under 'The Book of Secrets' (when there is absolutely nothing 'secretive' about it) and then, another like Lorin Roche will take Osho's 'Book of Secrets' and further repackage it under 'The Radiance Sutras'...and then one reads The Radiance Sutras and tries to compare it to Vijnana Bhairava Tantra...yeah, good luck doing that.

Grmbl.. Just started reading Osho's Tao of Tantra(saraha's royal song)(for me) as a precursor to the Book of Secrets so we could have something to talk about..

Me I love me some Osho. So we'll see how that goes.

With Love
Eelco
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums