File under: Real True Gurus
How to experience enlightenment from Alan Chapman on Vimeo.
Labels: Real True Gurus
posted by guruphiliac @ 12:27 AM
 |
 |
 |
Look Ma! We've made Boing Boing! Again! And again! Once again! Yet again! And once again!
.... I try to poop *in* the toilet, not *on* it.While we understand that gurus are held sacred by many, they are also public figures deserving of scrutiny. Our primary aim is to inject a little humor into what can be an excessively self-righteous enterprise, and to illustrate the primary truth that no matter how divine their devotees believe them to be, gurus poop on the same pot we do.
© 2005 - 2010
81 Comments:
oh geez, nice guy and all however cant these spiritual types just pull their heads outta their backsides...
enuf already!
for the amount of misery spirituality, meditations, religions et all have managed to cause in the world, one would've thought the world would have ditched the thing LONG AGO!
Why does he make something so mind boggling easy so damn longwinded and complicated? "There is no God. There is only God." That's it. Substitute "God" with Self or Divinity or Truth or Consciousness or Being or whatever pet name you have for What Is. Even this is too complicated. Ramana said it best- just "be as you are".
Don't give up your day job, Jody. Deeply disappointed in you for promoting such dull tedium like this. And as for that ponderous prat Alan, why are you indulging his fetish of becoming a wannabee guru? Soon enough he'll be back on your page for misbehaving himself, just like all the others and then who'll have egg on their face?
Its funny IMO, this dude said "enlightenment" is actually an "experience".
Only a thing can be experienced. Deeper consciousness is not a thing and if he did think it is a thing then he already messed it up a lot.
The other parts are ok. but he can never play a effective guru role but just an underground freedom speech recorder.
In any case he is cool with a face worth looking and a voice worth hearing.
What I like most about this video is that Alan isn't leaning on mysticism or supernatural dimensions. He's just saying this is it, it's right here, and you can know it. His use of the word "experience" is unfortunate, but what else are you going to say? Whenever somebody takes this subject on, no matter who they are, folks are going to be able to find something to shoot down.
I didn't see Alan's finger pointing back at himself. That's a rarity in this business. He gets my blessing for that alone.
Is it a little long? Yes. I didn't watch the whole thing. But what I did see made me very happy, because to my mind it was a good attempt at communicating some clarity about our nondual selves, in a world that does everything it can to wrap that up in ignorance, mysticism and mythological nonsense.
It gives rise to this pertinent doubt my friend, if you are trying to tell only a white male american (perhaps unmarriagable like you) alone is a real true guru and knows it all while all the gurus from east, only flimflam and knows no truth to tell point blank?
Thumbs down to you if you consider this dude as the parameter of truth telling. Thumbs down because I find him just ordinary and plain informative. I dozed off a dozen times as he spoke the "truth".
He is appealing for only one reason that he is not giving it to the guroos but reserves the credit to self. But, hell we know that pretty well already.
Even you Jody, sound so helpless in your you tube video. I was excited when I found your video but when you spoke at length it somehow failed to hit the nail. You are a brilliant writer but a insipid speaker just like this honkatonk in the video.
But sure you have your own benchmarks and this is your blog but I just over stepped in my expectations.
Well he is just academic and he may not even know what the true meaning of most words he was using, which is apparent. You will meet a dozens of this type in every spiritual gathering across India. Just that they did not do a video recording of it. Shallow, hollow and mediocre.
The glue of the truth that stick the spoken words to the listener's mind is painfully missing. See a video of most other gurus, even if they are in your black list, you will see the words come from some depths.
You should be aware that Alan Chapman is also the author of "Three Steps to Heaven : How to Practice Magick" available from his earlier web-site The Baptists Head".
This free E-book is an introduction to Magickal practices in the tradition of Alasteir Crowley and makes observations such as: "Two of the most 'powerful' offerings that entities from all walks of life seem to prize above all others are blood and sex."
I doubt his particular cosmology is one that Jody would actually wish to promote.
I am the #2 anonymous poster here. Yes Jody I do agree with you to a point. My point is, however, why do these "spiritual" types have to say anything? We have so many out there already. I love the expressions of Adyashanti, david carse, Ramana, Nisargadatta, etc etc but enough already. Still, I guess the world does as it does. "Sitting quietly, doing nothing, the spring comes, the grass grows".
#2 again (probably an appropriate name for me at times) Why would any true "enlightened" person put themselves out there anyhow? Adyashanti sat by himself for months before anyone joined him (although I think his operation has grown too big) Ramana never sought followers, david carse just wrote a book but doesn't even has a web page much less do teaching, Nisargadatta never travelled looking for devotees or anythng. The ancient Chan masters just lived where they lived and people who were interested were naturally drawn to them. I guess I'm just saying I don't trust any "teacher" who puts themselves out there as a teacher. Then again, that's just me.
Wow, one thing for sure....Anyone who talks like the way Alan does, will land up where Alan is hiding presently(under the stair case), the store room.
Who is really bothered about this guy ?
Hey Blade!
Good to see you back, although I'm sorry to have become such a disappointment. :(
if you are trying to tell only a white male american (perhaps unmarriagable like you) alone is a real true guru and knows it all while all the gurus from east, only flimflam and knows no truth to tell point blank?
What I appreciate Alan doing is talking about what is nondual in us without resorting to misinterpreted, ancient boilerplate. I present him as a contrast to the flimflammers, as Alan seems like a decent guy who wants to help, rather than someone who is trying to work the space-daddy angle, his interest in things "magick" notwithstanding.
You are a brilliant writer but a insipid speaker just like this honkatonk in the video.
I appreciate the honest feedback. I tend to agree. But you should hear me on radio! ;)
If Alan also managed a following which is if not as big as srisris or nithys or ammachis, but at least a handful faithful, sitting in front of him then we grant it that what he speaks really matters.
This guy is just talking to himself and he can talk anything. The gurus who flimflam know as well the truth but when they have to face a crowd they tone down. It can be compassion or help or exploitation. Each one can interpret according to their own misgivings.
Quite a contrast from this guy:
http://samadhi.net/
I always wanted to become a flimflammer, scheming to fleece lots of sheeple. A Wackadoo guru who make people fall from a tree like a monkey, but this blog has made me decide to earn my living honestly. Hmm! Jody won and my flimflamming, scheming, wackadoo gurudom plans are shelved now thanks to new light shown by Jody and his crack team of gurubusters. :) hihihi - just kidding! I just love some of the words Jody has been using of late and thought to write comment using them for some fun. That'all all folks.
Do you remove comments after its published? if you do that why do you that ? and what makes you rethink on something which looked alright at the first time ?
"You should be aware that Alan Chapman is also the author of "Three Steps to Heaven : How to Practice Magick" available from his earlier web-site The Baptists Head".
Well, thanks for this. Sure puts a different slant on things...anybody who can combine Crowley, Gurdjieff, Reich and Ramana Maharshi in one website is sure creative! Probably oneof the most interesting "lineages" I've encountered since the Osho days. This guy's ramblings on his "enlightenment" are hilarious, kind of like the things you do when you're a teenager infatuated with vampires. But I see he has managed to keep a straight face while expounding on NeoAdvaita.
I would highly suggest a visit to The Baptists Head to read the account of his "enlightenment" in India...it's really very funny (not that it is meant to be but, hey, if you're going to listen to a "teacher", then checking out his "story" is important). And, guess what, he hopes to have a book out in 2010 or 2011 outlining the whole process....oy gevalt.
Jody.....ewwwwwwwwwww!
seen too much of this s**t
You are kidding me right? This guy sounds and looks like the TA in philosophy 101..He has no experience of enlightenment. He is not a jnani, nor is he a yogi of any kind,.
pff, just a bit of hypnosis.
I agree with the other poster. Don't give up you day job.
Why did you think this was so good???? He really said nothing new or specific about enlightenment. Yea, you can say it went over my head. Not.
well actually, i agree with myself the other anon:
atleast he aint prancing about like other flimflammers with a huge fake gold crown and a flowing robe talking outta his a**
and atleast he aint prancing about on stage doing a wobble dance, jiggy wiggy disco dancing like my unfortuanate guru...
>"and atleast he aint prancing about on stage doing a wobble dance, jiggy wiggy disco dancing like my unfortuanate guru..."<<<
Is this on You Tube? I'd sure like to see it. Somebody should do a new reality show: "Dancing With the Gurus"..now THAT I would watch!
not seen enough, apparently
"..rather than someone who is trying to work the space-daddy angle..."
Where can find myself a space-daddy? match dot com??
Wow, some great comments here! Quite unlike the mental masturbation going on in the comments under the video on Alan's blog.
Jody, I think blade is spot on in his analysis. I've thought along the same lines, that you do have a propensity to promote "normal" white folks (who resemble you) as paragons of jnana, because the market is unfairly cornered by the brown folks (whether flimflammers playing God, or not).
I think Alan, Duff and you need to contemplate deeply on one point which is neglected in discussions of (Neo)Advaita Vedanta, namely that Atma jnana is not the be-all and end-all of realization.
Nisargadatta himself, who is most often held to the gold standard of jnana has said that there is realization that you are Brahman, but then there is a step further of realization of Atman as Parabrahman.
A friend of mine spends time with an old Bengali gentleman living in Bangalore who shuns publicity and doesn't call himself a "Guru", but is obviously a true adept, sage and Kali devotee. He has said that he went through 5 stages of realization, in succession: Atma jnana, Paramatma jnana, Turiya ateet, Avadhoota and Shoonya. He added, that most Gurus today only attain to the first stage, Atma jnana and start preaching.
I think he's right.
Vimalananda (of Aghora fame) pointedly remarked that Shankara was a jnani, but not a vijnani. Ramakrishna too made the distinction between jnana and vijnana.
Is this on You Tube? I'd sure like to see it. Somebody should do a new reality show: "Dancing With the Gurus"..now THAT I would watch!
--------
Dancing is part of Indian culture, no matter what you think. Even gods dance in Hinduism. This whole cosmos is said to be the dance of shiva. Krishna comes dancing always to tell life is a celebration. Most gurus dance atleast on special occasions and people love it. Famous gurus have live bands as well. some gurus became famous because of that.
Asaram Bapu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNoyfFCzLQo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlBpPNyib1g
jaggi vasudev
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNBFOTb3FMw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icMCkoNsw1k&feature=PlayList&p=4E257131EAFA5F45&playnext_from=PL&playnext=1&index=12
sri sri with ramdev
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cgxbQ3q1d4
icchadari baba
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIUza8p1C1E
THESE WERE JUST SOME SAMPLES..
its whole lot of fun though....if you have the heart for it...ENJOY.
it sure is,
you aint seen enuf apparently but i've seen way too much...
esp his dhotis flapping in the wind as tries to hop to the beat...
and that he's the size of a elephant sure dont help much.
you do have a propensity to promote "normal" white folks (who resemble you) as paragons of jnana, because the market is unfairly cornered by the brown folks (whether flimflammers playing God, or not).
I'd promote a "normal" Indian guy if he showed up. I really liked Bored Guru. It's not about who is or isn't white or Indian, it's not about who has the market or not, it's about whose teaching is direct and unpolluted with the superstitious nonsense that the space-daddies ply us with.
Atma jnana is not the be-all and end-all of realization.
I'm totally onboard with this sentiment. However, jnana is the beginning, and that beginning is blocked for most because their heads are full of nonsense about it, nonsense put there by gurus and the literature of Hinduism.
So, in order for folks to get to the real starting point, they need to be disabused of the notions about what that is. I feel Alan makes a good attempt at this. So does Bored Guru.
that beginning is blocked for most because their heads are full of nonsense about it, nonsense put there by gurus and the literature of Hinduism.
It really depends on the individual. In fact, I think many of the concepts and the literature proved useful in my own case; I can't say they acted to occlude my understanding.
Much of the "nonsense" actually facilitated my devotion, and helped the growth of my awareness more than just listening to some bore like Alan talk would ever have.
Like it or not, pure Vedanta will only remain an intellectual (non-experiential) exercise for most without a solid foundation of Bhakti. And like it or not, Bhakti does come with many so-called occluding ideas. So be it, I wouldn't have it any other way.
Those with intelligence and discernment will eventually learn to see the concepts and beliefs in the right light, and drop what's no longer useful.
"Hinduism" has always been a socio-religious force which absorbed ideas and rituals from diverse sources; it's primary function is to ensure harmony and moral living. I think it does an admirable job. Vedanta, the "secret doctrine" was typically for the few who were willing to inquire more deeply. It's still the case today.
BTW, reading Bored Guru in his other avatar (sans nom de plume) was what gave me clarity to leave the ashram life behind. But I am glad I went through the phase where I entertained magical beliefs prior to that :)
another anon but not me said
"but Dancing is part of Indian culture, no matter what you think. Even gods dance in Hinduism. This whole cosmos is said to be the dance of shiva. Krishna comes dancing always to tell life is a celebration. Most gurus dance atleast on special occasions and people love it. Famous gurus have live bands as well. some gurus became famous because of that. "
trouble is these gurus are hardly krishna, shiva and the rest of the mythical creatures.
ay ay ya, i thought it was only my guru, and the sight of that was bad enuf but now it seems theyre all getting on down with the boogey!!
if krishna, shiva and the rest danced like my guru, i'd say to hell (i guess it would be literally then) with creation, stop that jiggying right now young man, or in my gurus case old man with flappy jowls.
Sri Sri needs to come out of the closet :)
I bet the devotees' excuse for his effeminate moves is "oh, but guruji is Ardhanarishwara - Half Shiva, Half Shakti. That's why he has such feminine grace".
Ermm. Riiight.
" Like it or not, pure Vedanta will only remain an intellectual (non-experiential) exercise ..."
Comment posted above.
Highly preposterous. This fundamentally erroneous thinking has been so succinctly pulverised by Swami Omkarananda (of Chidbhavananda Ashram Theni).
All experiences take place only in & through Brahman/Aathma.
Brahman hence is always Poornam not shoonya.
Aadi Shankara's Viveka Chudamani if read & ruminated over well would not give rise to such doubts AT ALL.
Wow Jody, thanks for the kudos! I really appreciate it.
The reactions here are very interesting. A few things:
I'm English, not American.
I'm not a 'spiritual type', I'm a human being.
If you find open and honest discussion around enlightenment unnecessary, why does this blog exist and why are you commenting on it? Is the discussion of any value?
Does saying the phrase 'there is no god but god only', or any other glib pseudo-nondual sentiment, provide a useful, accurate and healthy view of awakening, how to go about experiencing it (don't have a stroke, we'll get to it) or what it means for us as a species? Or should we pretend there are no issues around the subject, that left unchecked, breed pathologies in teachers, students and communities? Again, why do you think this blog exists?
If you think a person cannot EXPERIENCE enlightenment, then you do not understand what NON-DUAL means. 'Non-dual' does not mean there is some vague empty space 'witnessing' an illusion we call the world; it IS the world, thereby making it possible for the unconditioned to be conditioned in order for it to EXPERIENCE itself. Wow - who would have thought, it's right HERE.
If you think magick or other forms of ritual (puja, devotion, divination, invocation, etc) are somehow separate from the world's enlightenment traditions, then you either have no experience or knowledge of those traditions. Please tell me what is wrong with a devotional or magical route to awakening.
My record, just like my first book on magick, is supposed to be funny, because life - and that includes your special and precious nondual spirituality - is funny too. The guru I met in India had moobs.
If you think I'm not enlightened, please demonstrate how I am not. Does my experience not match those of the world's great teachers and traditions? Does it fail to match your experience? What is the view you ascribe to, do your peers agree with it, and does it match our historical heritage on the subject?
If you think my advocation to ensure you never give away your power and responsibility to awaken to a guru or tradition is evidence of me trying to become a guru, you're monumentally confused.
Finally, I'm surprised by how much I'm literally hated by some of you people for making a free video where I'm just being honest. I've even engendered racial slurs. Would you prefer it if no one addressed the culture surrounding enlightenment or attempted to offer a SANE and NORMALIZED view of the phenomenon? Or should we sit back and let the bullshit continue unchecked, along with pathologies and abuses that go with it?
I look forward to seeing any of you actually do something about it.
" If you think a person cannot EXPERIENCE enlightenment, then you do not understand what NON-DUAL means."
Spot on Alan !
I completely agree with your entire post.
Vikram is totally wrong when he writes " pure Vedanta will only remain an intellectual (non-experiential) exercise for most without a solid foundation ...".
Every experience takes place only in and through Brahman / Aathma / God.
anon "Sri Sri needs to come out of the closet :)"
mine needs to go back in his cage!
Alan said "The guru I met in India had moobs."
not as big as my guru he didnt!
plus you can add thunder thighs
jowly jowls the size of jabba
and a gut busting wobble stomach
and the worst: he used to dance
and the worsest: he used to do it with his titties, thighs and midrif hanging out...
in the most revealing speedos and malas combo outfit...beat that kiddo!
and to top it off, he sported the most smug self satisfied grin you can imagine...while he was grooving on down buddy!
Enlightenment can never be an experience unfortunately. Just like how sobriety can never be an experience.
The same street experienced by a drunken man in the night and again in the morning when he became sober can be different. But the sobriety or drunkenness themselves are not 'experiences".
Sobriety is not an experience in itself because its his natural state of being but what he undergoes in the world as a result of his sobriety can be called as "experiences" as much as the "experiences" he had undergone while being drunk.
Ignorance is like being drunk and enlightenment is like being sober. Both ignorance and enlightenment are not experiences but what they encounter in the world as a result are 'experiences".
"where effort and grace meet" - love that. this is the first time I've ever seen your blog and I've really enjoyed it.
I'm glad that you finally published the comments, Jody.
If Alan is just an ordinary bloke with an ordinary experience, why is he trying to start a "new lineage" ?..smacks of empire building to me.
Something notable in all Alan's writing and videos is that it all about his 'experience'. For a teacher, or even an aspiring teacher, he gives no help to the students all, they seem to exist just to reflect himself and his 'experience' back to himself.
What really bugs me about Alan is his glib assumption that he has anything to teach at all. He really needs some humility and life experience before putting himself in the position of messing with other peoples minds in the name of 'enlightenment.'
He reminds me of the arrogance of the young Andrew Cohen, who also got a glimpse of something and decided he was 'special' enough to make a career out of it as a result.
Alan & Jody ,
I have mentioned the following fact earlier also. I know as is their pavlovian wont , trust Indians to pounce upon me with useless diatribe.
Indians whatever be their religion or caste are abominably full of hubris. They delude themselves they alone are descendants of Vedic Rishis , the custodians / inheritors of great civilization blahblah.
Hence the very thought of any Westerner ( Whites , Blacks , Chinese , in short nonindians ) accessing the same Enlightenment/ Self/Brahman/God call it whatever is anathema to them.
I don't want to amplify further. Have done enough already in this blog.
Buddha also had to put up with similar silly flak from His wife.
Who is said to have remarked:-
(selfstyled transliteration)
" ...You enlightened??... But you look the same person with the same two legs , two arms , eating & sleeping like the rest of us..." .
To the Anon @ 7/16/2010 12:02 AM:
You missed the part where I said "for most people." You also seem to disregard that some of the most famous Vedantins of the modern age, including, but not limited to Ramana Maharshi and Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj (in his early years) had very strong bhakti expressions which are often overlooked.
Shri Atmananda (Krishna Menon) is about as pure a Vedantin as they come, but he stressed the importance of the karana Guru (and usually where there is a Guru, there is Bhakti - at least traditionally). He also said that one may perform puja with reverential devotion *only* to one through whom one attained to realization. If it were a useless ritual / bhava, I doubt he would bother explicitly talking about it, especially since his own awakening happened without Bhakti Yoga.
Oh and don't forget the fact that Vivekananda said about Ramakrishna, "Outwardly he is a pure Bhakta, but inwardly he is a pure Jnani."
My comment to the Anon @ 7/16/2010 12:02 AM contd.
I believe your objection was to my use of the word "experiential" relating to jnana.
Well guess what, just reading the Vivekachudamani and "getting it" (or *really* "getting it") doesn't necessarily equate with being liberated from your self-perpetuating delusions.
There's a reason why the tradition of Vedanta insisted first on purity of mind, and then on Sravana, Manana and Nididhyasana. Most people seem to be lazy enough to abandon the last, critical step. Nisargadatta took three years of pretty much non stop contemplation / deep meditation before he was truly free. I doubt many so-called enlightened ones are even firmly established in jnana (not referring to Alan here, I really have no opinion of his enlightenment either way, the expression just didn't do anything for me personally).
Part of my first response to Jody was because of my learning about the mindset of two American teachers who he has praised. Their communication with a certain girl friend of mine revealed just how much they were still subject to their vasanas, and hence by definition, not truly free.
I leave you with this quote from Ramana Maharshi:
"Jnana, once revealed, takes time to steady itself. The Self is certainly within the direct experience of everyone, but not as one imagines it to be. It is only as it is. This Experience is samadhi.
Just as fire remains without scorching against incantations or other devices but scorches otherwise, so also the Self remains veiled by vasanas and reveals itself when there are no vasanas. Owing to the fluctuation of the vasanas, jnana takes time to steady itself.
Unsteady jnana is not enough to check rebirths. Jnana cannot remain unshaken side by side with vasanas... To remain unshaken in it further efforts are necessary."
Most of these comments make Alan's points beautifully -- "it's not enlightenment if it doesn't fit into my tradition's framework, boo hoo!"
A good video, Alan. Thank you for posting it, Jody. And to the anonymous commenters, thank you for demonstrating yet again the headache-inducing quality of most online discussions of nonduality... ten thousand scared mostly-white mostly-males competing to be "alpha dog" by throwing mud at whatever wisdom pops up.
jacfalsh, just what i was thinking.
" ten thousand scared mostly-white mostly-males competing to be "alpha dog" by throwing mud at whatever wisdom pops up."
crap again, aint white, aint male!
Vikram: which two teachers are those?
Also, I know a certain Indian guru who displayed his vasanas to a number of his "girl friends." ;)
Jody: Doesn't matter, don't want to embarrass them. They seem OK otherwise.
And, touché!
Just so you know, Vikram, I never doubted the veracity of X's realization. I just see it as existing in a context that is all too human, as is true in every case.
To Vikram ,
In general I like the American/British in short the Westerner because of his/her skills in communicating the relevant sans undue verbal pyrotechnics. I find them laudably original , creative , unpretentious , honest & excellent trouble shooters. These are MY strong OPINIONS. Certainly not looking forward to debating with patriotic nationalistic Indians.
Yes , the same qualities are present in several Saints / Poets / Prophets belonging to India who have given us such rich literature including our Epics , Puranams , Hymns etc.
Aadi Shankara needs absolutely no overemphasis.
I like the way Jody expressed the ultimate TRUTH by telling " my dog's *** is no less DIVINE than ...".
If your apprehension/cognition of what is taught by a competent Teacher is right at the first time itself , successive readings & hearings tantamount to but Nidhithyasana. Which is "being anchored in the Knowledge" gained. Finetunes one's clarity.
Once a person understands , the Sun does NOT go around the Planet Earth , there is no need for him/her to chant or remind daily "the Sun does not go around , the Sun does not go around ...". He/She can perfectly follow sunrise , sunset timings for whatever activities pursued accordingly WITHOUT the knowledge leaving him/her.
Swami Vivekananda is not the only disciple of Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsar.
Girish Chandra Ghosh the so called 'baddie' an alcoholic etc etc who was thoroughly disinclined to meet RP on others' exhortations has been extolled by the same Vivekananda as :-
" I have never seen anyone as spiritual as Girish Chandra Ghosh.."
After taking a dip in The Ganges , Girish Chandra Ghosh went & took a second dip. When asked why he said:-
" A Jnani's dip is said to purify the Ganges. I wanted to purify Her further enhancing Her potency...hence the second dip.."
You are presuming all of us discussing here place no value on Ethics by your phrase " purity of mind ".
The whole body of Vedas exhort us all not to BECOME a Nisargadatta Maharaj or x y z.
They eloquently assert " you are essentially , verily THE SAME ".
Hence I like Jody's audacious " dog's ***" phrase.
Thank you Jody & awfully sorry. Some glitch in my computer .Hence might have received multiple postings of the same .
Vikram ,
A lot of people talk about purifying the mind & surrendering it at the Feet of Lord , saranagathi tathva yadayada with a lot of florid imagery thrown in.
Ramana Bhagavan says :-
" On closer focussed scrutiny one finds this so called mind to have a seeming existence , a chimera ( as its non existence is proved for all in dreamless sleep ).
Hence this tall grandiloquent claims of surrendering/offering the mind to Feet of Lord is the biggest FRAUD of all ".
There is absolutely no difference between Jnana & Bhakthi. Only a Jnani's bhakthi is real.
Who are we to fathom whose mind is pure or how much impure ?
There is a very telling story when Lord Krishna tells His Consort Lakshmi Devi:-
" Of the two friends proceeding in different directions the " pure " to a pravachan ( discourse ) in a Temple & the other "impure" to a disco joint , the latter alone is my dear Bhaktha. As the former is full of sighs having heard the same discourse several times secretly pining for a visit to disco club , a taste of what it has to offer.
The latter is thoroughly disenchanted inwardly pining & seeking me which I alone am aware of ."
I am pretty sure Jody would not have spent years learning Sanskrit , Panini Grammar and mastering Upanishads.
Yet Jody spontaneously writes from the heart :-
" I am a bit of trash floating on Ma's ocean. She can do whatever She wants with me. If She wants me to have an ego, it will be bore in this life with gratitude ".
THAT is EXACTLY the essence of Kena Upanishad which is extolled as one of the most potent though very concise. (Like say Habanero chilli).
Once the Disciple understands in the beginning itself , The Guru permits Him to leave as he needs no further classes & detailed elucidation.
Incidentally certain illinformed scholars refer to The Lord appearing as some vague celestial entity / yaksha etc.
Ramana Bhagavan has categorically stated She ( Uma/ Haimavathi ) is none other than Arunachala Himself.
At least , that ought to have busted well entrenched gendre biases among us Indians.
But it has not. What is the point in carrying quotations & various analogies inside one's memory ??
The day Ramana Bhagavan decided to leave His Body , certain very close " devotees " in close physical proximity to Him were asked to leave .
Only one among them stubbornly refused and Ramana Bhagavan said :-
" You want to prove you are *the most devoted* to me ? "
And he left in poor grace.
>>"Buddha also had to put up with similar silly flak from His wife.
Who is said to have remarked:-
(selfstyled transliteration)
" ...You enlightened??... But you look the same person with the same two legs , two arms , eating & sleeping like the rest of us..."
Or...she could have said, "YOU 'enlightened?...but you sure enjoyed eating, sleeping and sticking it in me and all those other women in your harem. Too bad about those annoying 'impediments' (also known as children)"
Let's just leave Buddha's wife and mother out of it, ok? If these guys don't want "silly flak" from women, then they can just keep it in their pants, dhotis, lungis, robes, etc.etc.etc. At least the Buddha allowed women to sit and listen to his discources...in a separate section from those poor men...so they wouldn't get "distracted"...lol.
seen too much
http://www.dailypioneer.com/272022/Cult-leader-jailed-for-rape-case-in-UK.html
Anon @6:59 AM ,
Know what , the Original Buddha did not actually establish any cult or new fangled religion called buddhism.
There were a lot of imitators who started calling themselves Buddha & establishing monasteries enforcing celibacy & monkhood on all.
Human nature being what it is , hedonism ( as we find in Nithyanandas , SSRavishankars etc etc today) followed. Political chicanery is invariably inextricably linked with various dubious cults.
For all their purple eloquence on ' ahimsa / non injury ' buddhist monks were extremely violent people. Ditto with alleged Jainism & the persecution unleashed by them in Madurai.
Indologists like Romila Thapars distort Truth.
In Brihadaranyaka Upanishad the doctrine of buddhism is simply torn to shreds with scintillating elan by Sri. Aadi Shankara.
Jains got their well deserved retribution from ThiruJnana Sambandhar.
seen too much
"Or...she could have aid, "YOU 'enlightened?...but you sure enjoyed eating, sleeping and sticking it in me and all those other women in your harem."
lol! its mind boggling the amount of abuse within cults today that is explained away as blessings etc etc...
but abuse is abuse is abuse...
what these fatheaded cult leaders dont realise that true masters refrained from any kind of abuse ever...
and thus never had to justify anything...
but what the current fatheaded "masters" do is abuse others and then try to justify it...
which can never be done, cos abuse can never be justified!
"masters"? the current crop are spiritual master con artists!
seen too much, me too mate!
In the Zen tradition, "enlightenment" is a teaching word, and only a teaching word. Enlightenment isn't framed as some thing that you can get. It's a pointer to this moment: what do you perceive, what are you doing, just now?
Alan uses the word in the opposite sense, speaking of enlightenment as some thing that you don't have now but may acquire tomorrow; some thing that he has that other people don't. At the very least, he shouldn't pretend that he speaks with any understanding of the Buddhist/Zen tradition.
On his website, Alan makes the claim "I am enlightened" over and over and over. But Truth has already appeared, right in front of you: why make "I", why make "enlightenment"?
Why use this word to glorify I/my/me and collect more conceptual baggage?
If you saw someone carrying a bag full of rocks, you might reasonably ask him, "Why are you hauling around that apparently useless sack?" Likewise when some is lugging around concepts and claims about enlightenment.
Many many months ago, when I first saw Alan's site, I noted how he put "enlightenment" in its title, and uses the word over and over and over. So I asked him why he uses the word so much. For what? For who? He's never addressed this in the slightest. Rather than address the key question of why he carries around this sack of rocks, he criticizes or bans anyone who asks the question.
A very very common pitfall in meditation practice is that, when people loosen their attachment to the names and forms of the world, it often brings astounding experiences (which last for a while then disappear). It becomes a problem when people cling to the experiences, to concepts about it, to the idea that they've now got something special.
The function of a good teacher is to help the student not to attach to ideas, to I/my/me, to past experiences. Someone who just reads about Buddhism from a book can easily discard their attachment to stuff, and replace it with concepts of I/my/me enlightenment. It's like using a medicine that cures one disease and creates a new one.
Stuart
http://stuart-randomthoughts.blogspot.com/
>>"Someone who just reads about Buddhism from a book can easily discard their attachment to stuff, and replace it with concepts of I/my/me enlightenment. It's like using a medicine that cures one disease and creates a new one.
Stuart"<<<
This so beautifully hits the nail right on the head! And it is an illness that is running rampant through much of the "Non-Dualist" community. The conceptual rigidity is mind-boggling.
It just seems like the same old thing...another rigid concept, a new language that describes the concept with particular "buzz words", a separation out of those who "get it" from those who don't (the secret linguistic "handshakes"), an "elite" of "awakened ones" who talk alot about how "awake" they are or allow others to do it for them, etc. It's kind of interesting when you've lived through several of these conceptual systems and realize just how similar they are.
seen too much
Well said, Stuart, can't agree more.
Osho on Master Disciple Relationship
Osho - There are relationships and relationships, but none is comparable to the relationship that exists between the master and the disciple. All other relationships are conditional, even the best. For example, a love relationship is still demanding. The only relationship which is unconditional, undemanding, is that which exists between the master and the disciple. In fact, it is so rare, so unique, that it should not be categorized with other relationships. It is the poverty of language that makes us call something a relationship which is not a relationship. It is a merger, it is a meeting -- for no reason at all.
The disciple is not asking anything, and the master is not promising anything; yet there is thirst in the disciple and there is promise in the master. It is a closeness in which nobody is higher and nobody is lower -- yet the disciple is a woman, always a woman, because the disciple is nothing but an opening, a womb, a receptivity. And the master is always a man, because the master is nothing but a giving, a giving for no other reason than that he is so full. He has to give. He is a rain cloud.
Just as the disciple is in search, the master is also in search. The disciple is in search of where he can open himself without any fear, without any resistance, without holding anything back -- totally. And the master is also in search of such a human being who can receive the mysterious, who is ready to be pregnant with the mysterious, who is ready to be reborn.
There are many teachers, and there are many students. The teachers have borrowed knowledge. They may be very scholarly, very knowledgeable, but inside themselves there is darkness; their knowledge is hiding their ignorance. And there are students who are in search of knowledge. The master and the disciple is a totally different thing.
Great post, Stuart.
Allie
oh yes osho disciple!
if there ever was a whacked out bozo of a guru who had itchy pants to get on down with the ladies
it was osho, and the way he disguises his lust in flowery language is all the more hideous!
" It is a closeness in which nobody is higher and nobody is lower -- yet the disciple is a woman, always a woman, because the disciple is nothing but an opening, a womb, a receptivity. And the master is always a man, because the master is nothing but a giving, a giving for no other reason than that he is so full. He has to give. He is a rain cloud."<<
Oh geez! take a look at this language....the misogyny permeating spiritual paths and religions is so deeply ingrained that people send in quotes like this as an example of a worthwhile teaching. Nobody is "higher and lower" but the langauge is filled with judgment and hierarchy. It's really hard to imagine somebody quoting Osho with a straight face.
and,hey, how about those folks in Oregon who actually believed what Osho said back in the day and trusted that they had one of those "rare and unique" relationships with Osho? well, alot of them are busy cashing in on the current crop of naive seekers looking for that ideal "guru/disciple relationship"....egad, what a world.
seen too much
Everyone seems so wrapped up in words when it's not about them. Very clearly Alan has put forward an honest state of presence which has been met with honest comments that speak volumes to your own current states.Here is our mirror right here.
Have a lovely day or night wherever you are.
oh thankyou, thankyou our holiness shriji fountain mountain of knowledge shri shri guru maharajji
JOEL
thankyou for your all encompassing judgement of us mere loafers of this site
with maha maharaji gurus like yourself, we are certain to reach the epitomic (my own made up word!)
heights of realisation,
oh thankyou divine one for your input...
once again i thankyou!
and please forgive this humble umble bumble for using WORDS cos i am just so wrapped up in them, for which i would like to again humbly umbly bumbly request your forgiveness...
the big Q who is really the small q (hint hint)
riddle griddle wiggle squiggle yadda yadda ya ya....
jeez....
Thanks Anonymous- You put a great smile on my face. Obviously you are in the same struggle as everyone else on the planet and finding it hard to find contentment and its no different for me. Yours words are great and being able to communicate well is a true gift you have. All I wish to communicate is that whatever we believe we know or what ever words we write don't really matter when we can't find peace within when our head finally reaches the pillow at night. None of us want to see Guru likes taking the piss of humanity and so you are rooted in care from my point of view. Anyway all the best mate
to the (s)mighty joel: (pun so intended)
i certainly didnt want to put a 'great big smile' on your face, thnx.
but anyway sounds like you are having trouble sleeping at night because of a ailment called "contentment"...
tried sleeping pills? no? then i suggest you do.
Hi Jody,
just letting you know that the 'blade' who wrote above is a different 'blade' to me, the one who used to frequent your site some time back.
This is my new ID and name. Hope to come back and say more. Keep up the good work,
-D
P.S.
It's been a funny experience coming back and then, before I write, seeing someone with the same handle as me being mistaken for me and welcomed back! I liked how you took what you thought was criticism from me and still welcomed 'me' back!!
:)
Hey David (AKA the real Blade),
Great to have the real you back. I have to admit I was a bit gutted by the criticism of the fake Blade, but since I haven't seen the tape myself, I couldn't really disagree with him.
--jody.
Great to have the real you back. I have to admit I was a bit gutted by the criticism of the fake Blade, but since I haven't seen the tape myself, I couldn't really disagree with him
-----------
First off, you call me fake which does not vibe well with me. Blade is such a common, un patented handle, I didn't even have registered the nick as blade.
Then because you heard me saying stuff which rubbed you quite on the wrong side that makes you call me fake?
Aside, you claim to have not even seen the video but put it up for others and also passed your judgement about Allen in a hurry.
Nevertheless, David R, whoever you are, I have not a clue and I hate to be your fake handle. But that said, I am curious to see your comments here as Jody seem to pander you badly.
There is no such thing as enlightenment Alan. You're a fool. And a very boring, British one.
There is a moment where one comes to a point of recognition of one's true nature. This recognition becomes an ongoing revelation of that nature. That's what I believe Alan is talking about.
I call that realization, with enlightenment being a process that begins and continues after the moment of realization. Realization comes, enlightenment follows, in my book.
Enlightenment is not a process. It does not exist in time. There is no such thing as enlightenment.
This. Here. Now. What else is there?
There's no such thing as enlightenment. Any chap talking about it to you is fooling you (and himself, in the case of being a non-intentional cheater). Ah, God, if I had a cam... I'd put all those comrades in their right place, once and for all.
"the only thing you can do" (laughs), obviously you have got it figured out buddy. Thanks for enlightening us out of our ignorance and showing us the "one and only" true way! : )
This dude makes enlightenment sound so cheap. Is he enlightened? In the beginning he denounced methods and techniques as a way of enlightenment and after a few minutes he says techniques will help.
The westerners first dollorize Indian religions, gurus, thoughts and methods, and then they get cheated by frauds. After that they get into the business of exposing frauds. They then cheapen the very concept by themselves preaching like frauds.
We have had fraud gurus since the days of Guru Nanak (1469-1539). He also denounced frauds, but he did so from an enlightened perspective, we don't need these types of videos. Criticism is welcome but don't become a fraud yourself.
1. Mindfulness is NOT enlightenment.
2. This person is as unenlightened as one gets.
3. Spiritual training which does not lead to special powers is BS.
4. Any religion which cannot be scientifically proven is a lie.
5. There can be only one Supreme Truth.
This is all I have to say.
Seymour, your "Light" is nothing more than the thickest avidya. When you've got a "power" to show me, I have a parapsychologist to show you just how deluded you are.
"Enlightenment is your birthright"?
Having never been born I guess that leaves this who I am out of luck. Back to my old mantra I guess.....
"OH WELL" (said with a Yiddish accent)
Form access to insight:
"Finally, one rule of thumb that I've found helpful: someone who goes around claiming to be enlightened (or dropping hints to that effect) probably isn't — at least not in the sense the Buddha had in mind."
Post a Comment
<< Home