Quote:
Originally Posted by ajay00
Imo, it is more of a new way of interpreting old teachings and traditions in a way understandable to the current generation, and providing more insight to these teachings, and transforming the vagueness into coherence.
|
For example, the original meaning for 'karma' is 'action' and now it's reward/punishment mentality. For example everyone has a lot to say about the ego yet nobody mentions Ahamkara. #For example many have so much to say about the self but never a mention of Atman. None realise that talking of the ego and self is psychology and any wisdom on both of those is conjured up. There are so many words and terms that have been taken from other areas of human understanding and their meanings have been changed beyond any real understanding.
Adyashanti talking about the Gospel of Thomas is one thing because there is wisdom there, I'm familiar with the Gospel of Thomas myself. The difference is he's referencing the material directly and gaining new understandings that suit this day and age. I don't have a problem with that, not do I have a problem with Tolle reinterpreting the Bible.
What doesn't help understanding is reinvention, and that's a corruption.