johnw@farside.eng.ready.com (John Wheeler) (06/25/91)
In Article: 170 of soc.religion.eastern Mr. YEE writes:
"The spiritual process is something else totally. It is an ordeal that
will break your heart, your mind and your ego...."
I think this statement is based on a rather unclear view of the matter. Since
the goal of sprituality has as its aim the awakening to the source of
happiness and freedom, it follows that each step towards the goal must
itself be an experience of happiness and freedom. Mr. YEE seems to have
overlooked this in his evaluation of the spiritual path.
If this is so, to experience spiritual practice as being an ordeal,
struggle, battle, etc., could only be a sign that one has veered off into
a mistaken, unfruitful approach, in my opinion.
The notion that the spiritual process "breaks" the ego, is somewhat
humorous. Philosophies such as Buddhism and Vedanta, point out that the
"ego" is the mistaken idea that one is a separate, limited, individual
entity. The ego being an illusory notion, it is in fact non-existent. That
which does not exist, by definition cannot be broken.
Perhaps Mr. YEE was being facetious and humoring us? dogen@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (John Chq) (06/26/91)
In article <1991Jun24.231537.14825@nas.nasa.gov> johnw@farside.eng.ready.com (John Wheeler) writes: > >In Article: 170 of soc.religion.eastern Mr. YEE writes: > >"The spiritual process is something else totally. It is an ordeal that >will break your heart, your mind and your ego...." > > >I think this statement is based on a rather unclear view of the matter. Since >the goal of sprituality has as its aim the awakening to the source of >happiness and freedom, it follows that each step towards the goal must >itself be an experience of happiness and freedom. Mr. YEE seems to have >overlooked this in his evaluation of the spiritual path. Even though the goal might be happiness and freedom, the path can (not always) be rocky. It is quite naive to think that once you "follow the right path" all of your experiences will be happier and happier. Much of awakening--I obviously cannot speak of all awakening--is the letting go of previously held beliefs, i.e., prejudices, which for the most part we cling to tenaciously. If this is so, to experience spiritual practice as being an ordeal, >struggle, battle, etc., could only be a sign that one has veered off into >a mistaken, unfruitful approach, in my opinion. Or rather, the other way around. I'm not saying that one has to be in a constant state of agony, but many times an insight can be too intense for an individual to grasp fully; and this could lead to the proverbial "dark night of the soul". >The notion that the spiritual process "breaks" the ego, is somewhat >humorous. Philosophies such as Buddhism and Vedanta, point out that the >"ego" is the mistaken idea that one is a separate, limited, individual >entity. The ego being an illusory notion, it is in fact non-existent. That >which does not exist, by definition cannot be broken. Now lets be fair. Even though the ego is "not real'(according to these philosophies), unless one is fully enlightened (whatever the hell that means) we still suffer the pains of holding on to this illusory entity. I think Mr. Yee was speaking about the experiences of the non-awakened struggling on a spiritual path, and was NOT advocating a metaphysical stance of the "ego". Its so easy to say the ego does not exist, but to have a true insight into it is a totally different matter. >Perhaps Mr. YEE was being facetious and humoring us?> John, sometimes I think, seriously, YOU are trying to humor us. BTW, for the UMPTEENTH time who is your teacher? I'd like to read something by him (not for flaming). I'll take a totally wild guess; Zen Master Rama? No, it couldn't be. J. Cha -- ******************************************************************************* -- John Cha "The present is always more interesting than the future or the past" *******************************************************************************
johnw@farside.eng.ready.com (John Wheeler) (06/26/91)
**Please post this article to soc.religion.eastern. Thank you.** In Article: 184 of soc.religion.eastern, Mr. Cha writes: >> Even though the goal might be happiness and freedom, the path can (not >>always) be rocky. It is quite naive to think that once you "follow >>the right path" all of your experiences will be happier and happier. Much >>of awakening--I obviously cannot speak of all awakening--is the letting go >>of previously held beliefs, i.e., prejudices, which for the most part we >>cling to tenaciously. >>I'm not saying that one has to be in a constant state of agony, but many >>times an insight can be too intense for an individual to grasp fully; and >>this could lead to the proverbial "dark night of the soul". My own teacher once humorously remarked, "If spirituality itself is a source of suffering, who would want or need it? There are plenty of other ways to inflict suffering on oneself!" He has always stressed that genuine spirituality is "sweet in the beginning, in the middle, and in the end." >>BTW, for the UMPTEENTH time who is your teacher? I'd like to read >>something by him (not for flaming). That's a relief! I am pursuing the philosophy of non-duality under a teacher by the name of Master Nome in California. Email me if you want more information about this path. I will be happy to let you know more about it. For those who may be interested, here are some of my experiences with this particular approach to life: Several years ago, I was seeking for some answers to spiritual questions, but had very little guidance that I could rely on. Consequently, I made several fruitless excursions into teachings and practices that were not able to deliver the results I hoped for. I had heard of enlightenment, self-knowledge, reality, etc., but actually had very little idea what these meant and how I could discover them for myself. Books were inspiring, but also at times confusing because of all the contradictory teachings and practices set forth. Eventually over time my discrimination sharpened and I began to be interested in the teachings of Buddha and other enlightened sages. I also learned of the enlightened sage Ramana Maharshi who lived in this century. About that time someone made me aware of a teacher in the San Francisco Bay Area where I was living. What luck (grace)! He was an American by birth who had discovered the truth, self-knowledge, within himself at a fairly young age. These are merely some biographical references that may be of interest. The extraordinary thing was (and is) his absolutely unshakable and penetrating wisdom into the depths of life. Words cannot do justice, but the experience of being in his presence is quite different than anything I had experienced before. By the way, he has never been widely known in the "spiritual marketplace," yet he is available for those of a sincere heart who yearn for guidance in pursuing the spiritual path to its highest conclusion. He never puts himself above others or condsiders himself a special being; he always shows others how they can come to the same profound realization he has found. Yet it is clear from his actions, words, and demeanor, that his state is very, very deep. After getting to know him, it is easy to see that this must be enlightenment, self-realization. What was only glimpsed in books, stands clearly before one. Having had the good fortune of spending several years in his company, I can say from experience that his realization and teaching are in perfect accord with other genuine sages from history. Also, in contrast with some popular teachers, his daily life is in perfect harmony with what he teaches. It is remarkable how clear and deep his wisdom is. It has a power to bring others to the same experience. To me, this is one of the greatest confirmations of its genuineness.
jeffty@sco.COM (Jeffery Tye) (06/27/91)
In article <1991Jun26.060307.26874@nas.nasa.gov> johnw@farside.eng.ready.com (John Wheeler) writes: > [Proseltyzing about the Sage Nome deleted] >Having had the good fortune of spending several years in his company, I >can say from experience that his realization and teaching are in perfect >accord with other genuine sages from history. Also, in contrast with some >popular teachers, his daily life is in perfect harmony with what he teaches. >It is remarkable how clear and deep his wisdom is. It has a power to bring >others to the same experience. To me, this is one of the greatest confirmations >of its genuineness. I disagree. All of the great Sages invited *anyone* who is interested to come to Satsang with them. Your teacher has built an *organization* around himself which screens people before they can come to Satsang. If the person wants to continue attend Satsang they must pay $100 per month for a six month trial period. After that discipleship costs $200 per month. The organization, Society of Abidance in Truth (SAT), is very rigid on these rules. In my view this is not in harmony with non-duality, Love, or Truth. It is just another organization set up to worship the Guru. I've been told master Nome is in complete agreement with the policies of the organization. Obviously, he has *landed* in the role of Guru and all the traps that come with it. Forget Gurus, teachers, and enlightened beings. The only teacher I've met that I truly respect is one that continually pointed me back to the Self and told me I do not need them for answers. All answers are right before our eyes, so to speak, and Truth will manifest itself from a variety of sources. Teachers are great in the right context but ultimately fail when the seeker starts identifying with them as, "My teacher", "My Sage", "My Guru." It's a trap that the mind sets up. A person is exposed to a great Truth, expands their consciousness/awareness, but *lands* in it and becomes a follower of someone else. You are the Self, the "I" behind all this illusion. Jeffery -- ``You have been so accustomed to objectification that you lost the knowledge of yourself, simply because the Self cannot be objectified.'' -- Ramana Maharshi
johnw@farside.eng.ready.com (John Wheeler) (06/27/91)
In article: 193 of soc.religion.eastern, Mr. Tye writes: >>All of the great Sages invited *anyone* who is interested >>to come to Satsang with them. Your teacher has built an *organization* >>around himself which screens people before they can come to Satsang. >>If the person wants to continue attend Satsang they must pay $100 >>per month for a six month trial period. After that discipleship >>costs $200 per month. The organization, Society of Abidance in Truth >>(SAT), is very rigid on these rules. In my view this is not in >>harmony with non-duality, Love, or Truth. It is just another >>organization set up to worship the Guru. I've been told master Nome >>is in complete agreement with the policies of the organization. >>Obviously, he has *landed* in the role of Guru and all the traps >>that come with it. Etc., etc... Come, come Mr. Tye! Yes, there is an organization of those interested in supporting the teaching of Master Nome. What of it? How else do you expect people to find out about it? To go hijack an auditorium somewhere then advertise "It's all free!"? Please do enter the real world, Sir! What club, society, or organization with regular events, facilities, etc., have you ever belonged to that paid your way for you? This is not hypocrisy; it is basic economics. If you choose to ignore this and live in a fantasy world where "it's all free," by all means do so. By the way, next time you get your payroll check (minus twenty to thirty percent in taxes) think again about how free everything is! The philosophical society, SAT, does indeed exist to make the teaching of non-duality, presented by Master Nome, available to interested seekers. It is a non-profit group, consisting of a small staff of full-time office employees. The organization owns and manages the office headquarters and facilities where Satsang is held. It's all very upfront. Membership fees simply cover operating fees and staff salaries. It's simple mathematics: overhead divided by number of members = membership cost. Incidentally, no funds are used to support Master Nome or compensate him in any way for his services. His teaching is done voluntarily and and he receives no financial renumeration from SAT in any form. So there you have it. Rather banal, isn't it? By the way, if you have a better, more efficient or economical plan for running a non-profit group, speak up. A lot of struggling churches and non-profit groups could use a hand. As far as your other comments, they are of a necessity (considering your brief acquaintance with SAT) somewhat uninformed. But you are certainly entitled to your opinions. >>Forget Gurus, teachers, and enlightened beings. The only teacher >>I've met that I truly respect is one that continually pointed >>me back to the Self and told me I do not need them for answers. All >>answers are right before our eyes, so to speak, and Truth will >>manifest itself from a variety of sources. Teachers are great >>in the right context but ultimately fail when the seeker starts >>identifying with them as, "My teacher", "My Sage", "My Guru." >>It's a trap that the mind sets up. A person is exposed to a great >>Truth, expands their consciousness/awareness, but *lands* in it >>and becomes a follower of someone else. Again, you are entitled to your speculations and opinions. I have, in previous postings, responded to the attitude of "paranoia" about having a teacher or competent guide on the spiritual path. I would maintain that you simply have not considered the matter very deeply. Any number of enlightened sages throughout history have had a spiritual master. This is historical fact, and need not be disputed. To do so would be laughable. Sri Shankara, the preeminent Vedantic sage of antiquity, once said: "By the word of my master, I have come to realize I am not an ego, I am Brahman." Surely, Shankara, had no hang ups about having a good master on the path. Gratitude? Yes! I am not telling you what you should believe. If you are not interested in a teacher, by all means do not seek one. Do not however assume that your opinions are valid for everyone. In your post you close with the following quote: >>``You have been so accustomed to objectification that you lost the >>knowledge of yourself, simply because the Self cannot be objectified.'' >>-- Ramana Maharshi If you are not beyond quoting, perhaps I may be allowed a quote also-- it happens to be yours. In a previous post you said: "I am interested in hearing from you, from your own heart, not from someone elses words." Perhaps, Mr. Tye, we may ask the same of you?
moskowit@paul.rutgers.edu (Len Moskowitz) (06/28/91)
John Wheeler writes: > Email me if you want more information about this path. I will be > happy to let you know more about it. I would enjoy seeing John post Master Nome's (or his organization's) address and phone number on this newsgroup for all to follow up at their discretion. May one ethically withold such information? Len Moskowitz