Leaderboard

Some of you may decide otherwise, but we are in fact STILL the same people who used to have more time to chat with you before we took on this thankless and unpaid job out of love for the board and your company. We were, and are, STILL your friends.

Imo spiritual practice is not about ‘leaving my body’, but about becoming aware that God/Krishna is ‘inside my body’.

Mhm, that has been a constant struggle for me as my mind is like the wind. During Jappa (chanting) and Kirtan («singing mantra) at the temple it becomes calm tho, it is wonderful. Kirtan: https://youtu.be/VP623hMbAIA?si=u2LX_5ce_oBXhSSw

ah yes, the erudite tomes on the other thread. curiously there is no thread on how many hours a day a person spends on Netflix and how many shows are on the "my watch list." There are 72 shows ready for me to watch. My fun reading is not even reading, my fun reading is pure Netflix. i love the post above !!!

No Sir, my health might be quite far from ideal, but I am certainly not dyeing : ) I am confident that they were not refering to that either, as they stressed that I could continue my material experience in this very body and this life time. Not a bad idea, all three of them will be gone for about a month or so.

It´s true, as Old3bob has suggested, that spirituality and politics are interconnected, because, well, everything´s interconnected. It´s also true that a person can have an opinion on Trump or Gaza or gun control laws and decide not to share it in deference to forum rules.

Makes lots of sense. God/Krishna conciousness is really about that, is it not? Sort of realates to this as well: Does it not? We also had the pleasure of having HH Dhirasanta dasa Goswami paying us a visit last month, he repeated that the ACB of the movement is: "you are not your body."

maybe ask them, ask the teachers. what it means and how to go about it.

The most realized teachers are calm, kind, thoughtful, and humorous. They are unperturbed by almost any NORMAL life circumstances. Having said all of that, they are earth-bound, live in human bodies. They are experiencing what we would call "enlightenment with residue", that residue being the human story they still experience. The Buddha and Jesus still got angry for short spells as any "enlightened" master you meet on this planet will. I personally think it is good to see someone you respect handle a difficult situation with aplomb, even when the first thing they say is, "Shit!". Emotions should come and go like rain, or the tide, or the sunset. They are manifestations of impermanence that don't ultimately belong to a person. Where there is an hour, or a day of non-stop fretting and worry watching such a teacher closely or offering to help is not only human, but the reply should be illuminating.

Yes that is true for this site. But the topic is behavior of spiritual masters and that category indicates a high level of attainment in not only "learning" something but also in "putting it into practice" in their daily life. They live it. That is why in many traditions the students not only study the masters lessons, and listen to the master's lectures, and participate in the master's classes. But also closely study how the master conducts himself in his own daily life. In my own tradition i love the stories of students who would hide in the sage's closet or cupboards to observe the sage doing simple things in daily life. Not because they were voyeurs but because of wanting to study and emulate that high level of mastery. when someone says one thing, but does another; when the actions don't match the words; it is a red flag. And spiritual masters are held to a higher bar, and rightly so.

You shall !

a related question for me is does the teacher walk the talk. Looking at a teacher's actions and behavior in daily life. If a teacher claims to help people with addiction, but chain smokes and drinks then their clients and students are going to question the benefits and effectiveness that teacher can offer. "You can only take your clients as far as you have gone yourself" is an excellent benchmark for anyone in the healing arts. An angry contentious fighting argumentative hot-headed quick to explode persona simply can not effectively teach or model peaceful ways of interaction. It is not about expecting anyone to be perfect, becasue teachers on a spiritual path are human and not perfect. But if they fall off the path how do they handle it, or do they even recognize and acknowlege it, or do they justify defend and rationalize it. Same for their students. When a teacher has questionable behavior and it is called out, do the students tend to dismiss the concern, rationalize defend justify the behavior. Or do they discuss ways to handle it moving forward, and how to prevent future instances from occurring within the community? Is there an apology from the teacher or do they double down and refuse to change or even acknowledge. I also feel that whatever is going on with the teacher is transmitted through the work, even if the work itself is solid. For instance if someone teaches relaxation and healing techniques, but is habitually angry and fighting and name calling on line, then that anger and fighting is transmitted with whatever they are teaching about relaxation and healing. I am facing that at the moment myself, i really like what the work a teacher offers, and have been using it for some time now, but i am growing increasingly uncomfortable with how they carry themself online. It is tainting the work for me. Those for me are very much related to "spiritual masters" engaging in contentious angry fighting activity of any kind. Activists see themselves as fighting as warriors as disruptive and use and incite violence. Most spiritual traditions are not about promoting those values. So again, do they walk the talk

Some spiritual masters DO go to protests. Here is a picture of my late teacher Jana Drakka at a protest: She isn't shouting, or giving money, or waving a flag, but I think her message is quite clear, and its effectiveness can be measured by the space she is creating, both mentally and physically right where she is, though its real effects are much larger and less visible. It is the policy of the San Francisco Zen Center that NO monk living there can demonstrate at a protest EXCEPT by doing just as Jana is here.

Was Sean's directive ever about eliminating politics from spirituality and not allowing its discussion on his site OR Was it about not allowing a specific touting of 'non - spiritual' , materialist based , anti environmental , right wing ,obviously negative ( and should be self-evident ) prejudicial, bull shit ? It seems a case of ; the Captain has retired to his cabin and won't come out , he already pointed the direction . Now a bunch of 'mods', which changes and recycles through the 'ordinary sailors ' ( but not the mutinous ones .... some got a go for a while but, Cap came out and invited them to go overboard , then went back in the cabin ) who together grasp the handle of that big sluggish rudder and try to do their best to hold the ship on course , through all sorts of different conditions and other sailors yelling advice and abuse .... and the storms and reefs that assail it .

I don't think he would either ... he said twice it isn't about that . . . and I cant see the 'dying' label anywhere in his posts .

Its a Bhakti Yoga practice - so 'union' . or maybe even 'cultivating a non - dual awareness ' ?

The realization of that , although not the same as 'leaving your body ' at least expands awareness from / beyond the body

OMG! I thought I was talking to highbrow people

Perhaps you´re right, Apech, perhaps you´re right.

I can answer from the point of view of Vajrayana which I practice. If you have followed proper procedure, observed your teacher for about 12 years before deciding he/she is learned in the dharma, has realisation and follows proper ethical conduct ... and then with growing confidence have received empowerments from them which include samaya vows, have practiced guru-yoga in which one views the teacher as a perfect Buddha and so on. You are effectively bound by the vows you have taken. This is a serious matter and goes well beyond any normal human to human interaction. Then, unfortunately for you, your teacher is found to have committed sexual misconduct etc. then you are within the framework of guru-yoga required (since you have samaya vows) to regard his/her behaviour as a kind of test ... that the perfect Buddha is teaching you something profound. This does not mean though that if asked by them, you have to engage in such acts, since the dharma teachings on this point say you should refuse to do so saying such things are undharmic. It does not mean you should brush said behaviours under the carpet, you should if appropriate report such things to the police for instance (with the awareness that this too is part of the teaching and while holding on to the bond with your teacher). They remain as far as you are concerned a spiritual master. I know this is hard to understand but it illustrates that the vajrayana is a difficult path and that you should stick to the other yanas if you think this would be too difficult to stomach. Do their behaviours demonstrate spiritual mastery? No but yes but maybe. On the one hand they are unacceptable and should be addressed as I said above. But if you read the lives of the mahasiddhas you will find that did all kinds of things which would make you gasp. What Tilopa did to Naropa for instance. Now ok these were already very advanced practitioners but again if they did it today they would certainly be in prison (not that they would give a damn about that) - and justly so. Having said this, we don't live in the extraordinary times of great yogis - so generally you can be sure that the acts you hear about or observe are not spiritual mastery. How does it colour our view of their teachings? It gives us a big, big problem which is a teaching in itself. In one sense these things are clearly undharmic. We can say to ourselves clearly why that might be. Not just shock horror at the thought of it - but clearly and rationally what is it that breaks the vows and so on. From this we can learn a lot. But on another level the shock to ourselves might be the teaching. It could be quite ego smashing to go through this kind of thing - if you yourself are committed practitioner. As it says in Lo Jong 'turn everything on to the path'. When you sign up to the bodhisattva way it is not for a safe and gentle ride. It might be a series of shocks. From the other point of view it is quite possible for someone who is quite off the path to deliver a talk which perfectly follows the dharma. If so would you throw those teaching away if you found he was sleeping with his students? The last point to make - which may sound a little trite but is necessarily true - is that the teacher, the lama or guru is simply an external focal point for you to get to know your own buddha-nature. It is this that you are relating to fundamentally. Provided this is what you are doing the rest doesn't matter.

I like the way you slipped the T word in there. This is a bit like sending drones in to soak up the Iron Dome before hitting it with hypersonics. Moderators sleep ... but with one eye open

Yes the mind is like the ‘wind’. oh yes, that is wonderful. Also helps to get in the right virtuous frame of mind which imo is necessary for stilling the mind.

Don´t even get me started on my TV watching habits. My tastes are decidedly low-brow, although in my defense I´ll mention that, try as I might, I couldn´t make it past episode two of Dating Naked.

Yes Exactly. And the way to become aware of this, is to go ‘inside’ and still the mind.

So, Hare Krishnas, yes? A quick google says that leaving your body seems to refer to a death practice. Are you dying? Enlightenment wouldn't require that you leave your body, but would show you that "you" are not your body.

I have the same.

The way I figure, pointing out other people´s alledged moral failings is a moral failing. (Oops!) I´m grappling with the enjoyment question in my reading right now -- should I try to read difficult books that maybe I don´t enjoy so much because they´ll stretch my mind or be somehow virtuous? Or should I take the life-is-short approach and just read what makes me happy? Curiously, I was a very literary teen. In high school I read Moby Dick and The Brothers Karamazov and lots of Steinbeck -- for fun -- but now I mostly read crime thrillers. There´s a popular thread on the forum dedicated to the books "on our bookshelf" and it´s chock full of erudite tomes on spiritual topics and great literature, not a Jack Reacher novel in sight. Surely I´m not the only Bum who enjoys reading about street brawling tough guys?

my brother and i are polar opposites in pretty much everything including this. He is the kid who growing up when we were in grade school so about age 9 to 11 or so, he would come home from school and sit down to (i kid you not) read the encyclopedia for fun. The hardcover World Book Encyclopedia (22 volumes), he started with the first volume "A" and read straight through start to finish. And then when we were in university, what did he do in the summer? He would read ALL the books that he did not get to or did not finish, from ALL the courses he took that year in college. Even though the courses were over and done. Even if the subject matter did not interest him. This always baffled me. If he started a book, then he finished it. According to him "that's what you do." Whereas if i start a book and don't like it i just toss it aside. He sees this as a moral failing (he sees my entire life as a moral failing but that's another story, like i said we disagree on basically everything). I'm not sure if reading for fun exists in his vocabulary or in his brain. It has served him well though in his profession, he is an attorney. It fits his aggressive argumentative caustic persona to a tee, as does his unbending conviction that he is always right. about everything. and he can prove it. As an adult i find him quite scary and keep my distance.

Let me put it this way: Most of us are quite convinced that Santa Claus isn't likely to be visiting this December because we now understand that it was just a story our parents told us. That knowledge is true no matter WHAT events take place in our day to day life, regardless of how difficult they are. So it is with understanding of the Dao. I stand by what I said above 100%. "Self" is a pernicious delusion that is at the heart of our suffering. Once that delusion is understood it is always present, regardless of how one behaves. The knowledge does not create a perfect "person", but does alter one's behavior substantially. Justification is a different issue. What we are talking about here is "spiritual bypassing" - using real or imagined "enlightenment" as some justification that all behaviors are "perfect" is delusion. Gnostic knowledge does not excuse bad behavior. This sort of teacher is deficient in compassion training. Any teacher that acts in a questionable manner would call it out immediately and correct themselves, or submit to correction at whatever level necessary. Again - it doesn't mean that they aren't enlightened necessarily. It takes many years after "awakening" to drop the most pernicious aspects of "self". Some things never go away. Some will never be teachers, and it isn't important that they ever are. An understanding of the Dao is always present, even when anger arises, and a master with no "self" may witness anger arise in the body, but not experience that as "self", or "mine". It's just plain human and kind to open up to those you see struggling, even a "master", if you have a close enough relationship. What could be learned about the teacher's process in examining their feelings and thoughts about a sticky issue? If this person really knows that all appearances are ultimately "empty", possibly a lot.

What matters is whether the teacher has attachment or aversion to smoking or drinking. Chogyam Trungpa was a famously heavy drinker, but only a fool would question the depth of his understanding or teachings. His book "Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism" is a stark but kind bitchslap that many people could use. Ultimately the fabric of this "universe" is a mirror for each of us, showing us our attachments, aversions and where we are stuck in our solidified ideas about how things have to be. For some, it will takesa smoking, drinking teacher to wake us up and see that what we are seeking is deeper than the facade of the human that might be presenting the teachings.

100%! For the record, I'd argue any spiritual teacher who got deeply tangled in politics is by definition not a spiritual master... Of course, that includes Jesus, Mohammad, the many popes, Confucius, Ghandi, and every other name dropped in this thread. Advocating is good, but creating an entire political system, leading revolution, or steering the world from a seat of political power, even for the sake of the unfortunate, is inherently an egotistical act. It generates many karmic links, does harm, and will inevitably be corrupted by time. This is wonderful for the physical world, but again, not the act of a spiritual master. ...then again, this is coming from someone who has no moral qualms in killing/torturing the rich (or any other person who chooses to kill thousands for their pleasure), so perhaps I myself am misled!

I generally like Eco’s writing but when I finished this book I have the vivid recollection of promising myself to never again force myself to finish a book if I’m not enjoying it.

I wonder if Gerard is referring to “The Pit”?

so that's a 'yes' righto

Cool.

Yes... but they are still 'down here ' . Yes, in some traditions they do ... nosey ! I am thinking of Genesis 9 : 20-27 " Fer goodness sakes ... cant a guy sit alone and bother no one in his own tent and have a beer in his undies and then take a nap .... I mean I just planted a vineyard ! " That's valid ... my perspective was 'teacher' and his value ; from pupils results achieved not the private morals or veracity of the teacher . In some cases the teacher should present an archetype for the student to emulate or be inspired by ... both might not be able to live up to that 100% . However I firmly agree with you in the case of corrupt and fake teachers . One can also tell (if one is aware enough ) from observing the 'fakeness' of the students as well

Reading the GIta , eating prasad , practicing bhakti * following directives of teacher in that tradition * this is pretty much like magical invocation in the western tradition ; say I want to invoke Venus ? One would decorate the temple ( spiritual working space ) in pattern form and furniture and color that relates to Venus , have a statue of Venus , clean wash and dress, feed and fumigate ( with Venus related incense ) the statue .... a bit of 'good ol' fashioned idolatry ' . of course in your case , you would have seen all this when you visit Hare Krishna Temple (if you stick around before and after the ' asat -sanga ' are there ) .

The original question may be seen as a bottom-up view or as top-down Thus the human perspective of what is a spiritual master may be quite narrow, based on dense observations and beliefs. A top-down perspective might be quite different where those out of or beyond incarnation (within various species) may cause flows of emotional and mental energies and use higher intent to promote political outcomes that contribute to the development/purposes of the civilization and of this planet. It seems that each culture comes to a time of bearing fruit, after which it declines and is replaced by the next development in humanity

I have had personal experiences with entities that has the flavour of some higher consciousness. Giving some guidance, provide assurances and safety that things will be okay in hard times. But now as I understand phenomena a little more, it is cool, but I don't think there is anything particularly special about it. Devas if they ever interact with humans, are often in wholesome manners. Because they do recall how they ended up in heavenly realms, and are generally gracious and helpful. What interest me is how this all works, and how the concepts of gods developed in the minds of humans. And the a framework that answers all these questions. There is a deva the Buddha interacted with, Maha Brahma, a deva who resides in the highest heavenly form realms. He has the view/assumption that he created all of existence, and declares this to everyone. If a human happen to interact with such a deva, with such power, and hear him declare this, it makes sense to not question that declaration. It takes a very special kind of person like the Buddha to see what it is all about. The suttas has a really fun story about it. I have friends who has the eye to see spiritual realms. They are not buddhist, but describe to me what they see often when they practice in certain spiritual sites. How devas look, interact or move around spiritual sites, spiritual people. And it is surprisingly accurate to how the Buddha describes it. Specifically how devas sometimes change their sizes to become really small so thousands can flood into various spiritual sites to hang out. Devas again, in the context of Buddhism, are beings that reside in heavenly realms. There is no teaching of some permanent God at the top that governs/ made this whole existence. Interesting stuff. Devas, heavenly realms. Good to know how it fits into the path. Not something to worship. But something to understand in the right context.

If I get involved in that yes it is duality and I am thinking of the 'clash of swords' / 'sparks of truth ' .... on the philosophical level . On the physical level , I have said it enough here ... someone gotta be on the 'front line' .... I have many times . We get arrested and carted off and do it to stall and extend time (if its done right * ) .... that way the peaceful protesters at the back get 2 chances ... time to do their thing , and they get to home at the end of the day . * my advice during Chaleundi protest ; " Hey everyone , don't all go block the road together and refuse to move and get a mass arrest ; all go out and block the road and move when told to , except for one or two . The they will be arrested and when they get ready to open it again, do the same . If it looks like they are going to arrest everyone , don't go out together , go out single or in small groups . That used up so much of their time it took all day , the road never fully opened , by morning tea time the next day , the matter had got to a court decision announced that morning ... we won . It was not violent and it was not non-action or even reaction ... it was intelligent response to achieve the end desired. Ps. our 'Buddhist' protesters were a group of old pensioners , that heard about this and decided to support us due to their outrage ... those nice old ladies lined upo there looking like your grandma helped immensely but 1. showing wider community support - no we not a bunch of crackpots and 2 . if they did to them what they did to us it would have been outrage . So I am not saying there is not value in that approach . If one want the whole 'action' to be grandmas or passive Buddhists .. or HIndus ... then you better have a massive amount of them ... Gandhi style .

I shall take that under advisement, sir.

response to Stirling ; " Some of you may decide otherwise, but we are in fact STILL the same people who used to have more time to chat with you before we took on this thankless and unpaid job out of love for the board and your company. We were, and are, STILL your friends " Indeed , but when one takes on a position of responsibility ..... By the way, don't misunderstand , I think we are still generally on the plotted course though ... so well done ! if I might offer ... and I have seen some here already doing it . 'Change hats ' ... I used to have to do it all the time in my 'administrative role' in my 'fraternal group ' ; signified by what form of greeting and signing off one uses . When the mod hat is on and directives need to be issued from ' a moderator' they type in red or some other agreed color (and that is reserved for them ) and when posting as 'Good ol' Sterling still your friend '/ 'everydayobum ' ( did you like that one ? ) use the other colors .

If i get involved in something that is polarized, contentious, high drama, and has conflict then that is duality. And i am not walking the talk of oneness, peace and non-duality.

Divinity has no gender. Gender is not a characteristic of Divinity. Divinity has no politics. Politics is not a characteristic of Divinity. Divinity has no professional sports affiliation. Teams are not a characteristic of Divinitiy. Divinity has no conflict or polarization. Conflict and polarization are not characteristics of Divinity. Peace be still. Be still and know that.

Yes. I did however say 'some types of ' Buddhism . And I probably should have specified ' God ' not Gods . https://www.buddhanet.net/ans73/ I'm not saying its valid or not or traditionally right or wrong, I am saying some Buddhists don't believe in ' A GOD ' . How do you know what I think they are ? 'Gods' are many things . Ya know I have been studying anthropology ( and its related subjects , especially the religious philosophical spiritual side of humanity ) for sooooo long , I have a wider view of things than just my perceptions ... its like as time goes on , the 'human experience' is part of my experience . Going back to the very early ideas ( I get that from the still extant Aboriginal system I learn in ) , through the ancient Egyptian concept of 'Neteru' - where each God is more than a human or animalistic divinity but a whole range of manifestations and forces under each God , but also art of it and its identity . Through the ancient Greek , which often seem a projection of our higher and base psychological drives (one part of the 'neter ' ) and so on ..... through all sorts of developments up to the present . In short , in regard to your experience that 'gods are real' , I agree , as it is affirmed by my experience as well . Then again , I have a broad understanding of what 'reality' is . Other have a narrow understanding that requires ruling out a lot of things . No ... not 'the gods' but perhaps he is right about 'God' as in some people's concept of God .... that God , and here I will quote Crowley ; " God made Man , but Man made God " its been this ongoing feedback loop

Of course Buddhism mentions MANY gods, but they are missing something that any being with enlightenment realizes and understands - even a god does not exist as a being with its own intrinsic existence, which completely changes the hierarchical landscape. Despite having always been an agnostic, my experience is that gods are real... but they aren't what you might think they are. They certainly aren't in charge. As Ramana Maharshi suggests:

I am never separate from God, it’s always together. It’s not “merges”, it’s ‘together’, we’re friends.

I know this is an older thread, but what comes to mind for me in reading this thread (and the many wonderful posts in it): Reading the book Power of Now by Eckhart Tolle, and listening to his videos on you tube. For me he provides the most compassionate, practical, and humorous perspective on how to live this in our daily life. The way he describes "the pain body" is brilliant and effective in my experience. Particularly when someone is going through the dark places and feeling overwhelmed. He can make the most serious issues very funny and that is marvelous. Also on you tube there are dozens of free videos hearing him speak and present. They are hilarious and illuminating and effective and healing. When i was bedridden and despairing and too overwhelmed or scattered to even pick up a book i spent hours listening to his videos and they made a huge difference. His Zen stories still have me burst out laughing even after hearing them dozens of times.

Sifu Terry has said FP is NOT a martial art energy. He said FP could not be used for martial arts. The Doo Wai forms that Garry Hearfield teaches in Australia are for kung fu. It's a different energy. FP is an energy for health.

It's both medical and martial. Sifu Terry has mentioned that it can be used "for any purpose" (healing, combat, enhancing daily activities)