What do you make of Eckhart Tolle's The Power of Now?

[Gem]

Originally Posted by django

“cut the link between what you're thinking and how you're feeling". https://youtu.be/Aujrhxwu8CA

I don't think spiritual teachers should do psychoanalysis - at all - but I think he makes a fair points generally speaking. I just wouldn't take it as advice.

DSM-5

They made the whole thing up, and the fact it is taken-to-be-true is, itself, madness.

This is what he did in the midst of his famous depression, he cut the link between his thoughts and his feelings.

This is how he described it in PoN":

"I cannot live with myself any longer." This was the thought that kept repeating itself in my mind. Then suddenly I became aware of what a peculiar thought it was. `Am I one or two? If I cannot live with myself, there must be two of me: the `I' and the `self' that `I' cannot live with." "Maybe," I thought, "only one of them is real."
I was so stunned by this strange realization that my mind stopped. I was fully conscious, but there were no more thoughts. Then I felt drawn into what seemed like a vortex of energy. It was a slow movement at first and then accelerated. I was gripped by an intense fear, and my body started to shake. I heard the words "resist nothing," as if spoken inside my chest. I could feel myself being sucked into a void. It felt as if the void was inside myself rather than outside. Suddenly, there was no more fear, and I let myself fall into that void. I have no recollection of what happened after that".

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...Meditation#pff

Theoretical academic stuff gives me a headache.

In Tolle’s ‘talk’ I posted a link to in my previous post, he tells of a woman who he shared a house with

I saw that and thought Tolle was self-aggrandising.

the meditator makes no value judgement on the thoughts or feelings s/he is having whereas Tolle dislikes ‘painful’ thoughts and wants to separate from them.

That's a complex topic with nuances, but to make a quip, it's fine to be non-judgmental in the sense that it doesn't reflect upon ones self, but to discern how thoughts are constructive or not, or true or not, is valuable.

General thoughts are like remembering things, planning things, solving problems or just fantasising, but we also have self-referential thoughts which can be self-depreciating, and we generate adverse reactions that not only create our own suffering, but generate ill-will toward others. If these sorts of tendencies are there, then accept they are there without judgment because that's true, but rather than regard them as acceptable in an apathetic way, recognise how futile and destructive they are. Catch yourself in the habit, and deliberately cease thinking like that. Not in a judgmental way where it reflects on you personally, but in that way where you know such thinking unnecessarily makes you unhappy.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by lemex

Here's a question, practice is practice yet isn't practice knowledge. The hangup is between knowledge and experience. It is like there are things I know I shouldn't do (knowledge) but do (experience). I know I should practice train the mind for instance instead I tell myself give up. Should I then not practice?

I'd suppose there is a bunch of thoughts that lead to 'give up' which are for the most part negative in nature, and being aware of what's going on with that is what practice is, so there's really only two options: self-awareness or oblivion.

Typically we get a bit frustrated with practice, so we follow distractions instead, but we also tell ourselves stories like I don't have time, I'm getting nowhere, I'm useless at this, what's the point, I don't feel like it and any number of things, and, we tend to find tha these sorts of stories are both negative and self-referential. In that case I would not follow the thought. Instead I would do what I know is for the best - as far as I am able to. Hence when I meditate I set a time to do it and a duration to do it for, and stick to the schedule. Many people are into this 'whenever I feel like it', but I think one has to understand that it's work and requires commitment, diligence, determination and all that boring stuff. Feeling like it isn't part of the equation. 'What is for the best?' is what I'd be concerned with.

I use to think in terms of experience not knowledge, but consider and aware both offer information about self. Sometimes knowledge isn't the experience. The experience one realizes can be false if one is aware and mindful. Karma to.

There's two levels I guess: There is the experience as you experience it, and then there is understanding the underlying nature of experience.

About DSM-5

Originally Posted by Gem

They made the whole thing up, and the fact it is taken-to-be-true is, itself, madness.

If I may say so, a bit glib because a) DSM5 is used widely as a reference across the western (anglosphere) world and b) it isn't taken to be true. It's recognised as a consensus - which may be right/wrong; appropriate/inappropriate. The detractors (who include me) who believe there's no such thing as "mental illness" unless it's known to have a biological cause, think it suspect. Treating varieties of behaviour as diseases with no known biological abnormality is highly questionable. It seems to be the pursuit of psychologists keen to appear credible and make money from books by inventing new disorders.

But that's a big subject, a big discussion and I'm likely to have Miss Heavyhand come down over diverting the topic. However, the mention of DSM5 needs comment.
Also applicable is that the same "they made the whole thing up" could be levelled at much spiritual material here on this forum. But who could answer the implied question?

.

From reading responses through this topic it seems that Tolle is more about giving people an escape hatch than coming to terms with aspects of their Selves they find undesirable/unpalatable.

Just my opinion but that doesn't lead to good spiritual hygiene. His approach doesn't seem to lead someone to getting to know themselves.
.

[FairyCrystal]

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

From reading responses through this topic it seems that Tolle is more about giving people an escape hatch than coming to terms with aspects of their Selves they find undesirable/unpalatable.

Just my opinion but that doesn't lead to good spiritual hygiene. His approach doesn't seem to lead someone to getting to know themselves.
.

Yes, but oddly enough teachers that do not offer the full whack, or even miss the mark a bit, can still help some people with their first steps.
I've seen the same thing with The Secret. I watched some trailers, info, interviews etc. at the time and intuitively knew it was off. Something wasn't right, or something was missing.
I didn't know exactly what except for that Inner Guidance told me it was off.
Years later when I found Abraham Hicks -and with Esther the source of Rhonda Byrne's info- why: she wasn't the source, she was merely relaying information that in actual fact was a wisdom and knowledge sourced by other people.
You can never properly, fully relay that when it's not yours unless you yourself fully embody it. And I think this is why my Inner Knowing told me to not watch it and not read the book, while Abraham resonates like crazy! I need the pure wisdom & knowledge and she didn't give that.

Yet, millions of people were thrilled and began to see the light because of The Secret. Even though the info is not entirely complete or spot on and not as in depth as the source (Esther).

I think maybe with Tolle it is the same. Many love him, he sells loads of books and stuff.
Since he resonated quite well with my from-the-head ex I think maybe more mentally oriented people will like him? But that's just a guess.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

Also applicable is that the same "they made the whole thing up" could be levelled at much spiritual material here on this forum. But who could answer the implied question?

Basically, a bunch of western-educated upper middle class people collect behaviours together and vote to include them in the DSM as diagnostic categories. It's embedded in social discourse and taken-to-be-true in accessing help, prescribing medicine, court cases, the education system and other departments, and also pervades common parlance. It is perhaps the most widespread, deeply entrenched and most persuasive dogma of all. There's no science behind it, like medical studies, or anything like that, but it arbitrates abnormalcy against the normalcy of those who deem the categories. From any reasonable standpoint that's at least as ludicrous as loopy spirituality. Most mental health professionals would agree with that I think, and no one is actually buying it, are they? It's just ebbed it's way into the system that professionals and patients alike are stuck in. We have to talk the language to get the diagnosis so people can access care etc, so we all pretend to go along with it.

^^^ Quite. And Amen to that.
.

[ajay00]

An enlightened master whom I was in contact with had certified Tolle as enlightened, when I had presented a book of Tolle to him. He had read the book earlier, and considered his observations authentic.

He stated that Tolle's mind was punctured by his experience of intense suffering, which resulted in his enlightenment without any previous spiritual practice. He considered it as a sort of freak accident.

The issue I think is that enlightenment or Buddhahood as a phenomenon is still not properly understood or comprehended in the west, as it is in the east which had a much longer civilizational timeline.

So this is why the likes of Tolle and other enlightened masters in the west are still seen by some as weirdos who state a lot of odd stuff that doesn't make much sense.

I similarly consider Jesus himself, if he existed, as an enlightened master who was similarly misunderstood by those around him.

I would say that one would need a certain state or necessary level of mental health just to apply Tolle's teachings diligently to get the results they seek.

But those on chronic abuse of drugs and alcohol or suffering from mental health issues like bipolar disorders or schizophrenia or others will not be able to benefit much from his teachings, imho.

The same goes for the practice of meditation or vipassana, as some of those mentioned above had their issues worsened rather than alleviated after the practice.

I would say expert psychiatric care is the best option for such.

Originally Posted by ajay00

suffering from mental health issues like bipolar disorders or schizophrenia or others will not be able to benefit much from his teachings, imho.

Schizophrenia and Spirituality light up the same areas of the brain. It could also be argued that declaring oneself as a 'Spiritual Being' is dissociative, and you'd be surprised how much psychology there is in Spirituality. The ancients didn't distinguish between what we call psychology and their religion/philosophy, to them there was no difference.

Psychology is the framework for one's Spirituality and if people don't want to understand that then......

The Power of Now is dissociative because what it doesn't do is tackle the real issues, which are often caused by dissociation in the first place. Sometimes people simply don't want to deal with their created internal realities so they look for an avoidance/denial mechanism, which is often Spirituality.

[Spiritual_Light]

I've watched quite a lot of videos of Eckhart Tolle and read parts of his books (I couldn't read them all as they did not resonate for me), and I would say his work comes across more psychology and psycho analytical focused than Spiritual. Thought forms and all that stuff may be helpful for people looking into the psychology of their beliefs about themselves and life, and it mght be a useful application/toolset for some people, but it didn't resonate for me spiritually.