amoyaan

I always found it quite interesting reading threads on TTB, especially some of the older ones. A lot of posters go back and delete all their posts in entire threads, so there's nothing but " . " I sometimes wonder why they go back and delete their messages, whether they think they said too much, or they changed their opinions or weren't expressing themselves in the right manner. I sometimes wish we could go back and do that with conversations in real life. I sometimes second-guess myself after posting things. I suppose because whatever you post, it's open to misinterpretation, and sometimes it's just not worth the time and energy to have to explain yourself. Again, much like real life. Ramana never had these problems

Hey, this is an interesting question. I'm like you. I love talking about this stuff because it's my passion and purpose in life. I can engage with regular people fine, but I do get bored when conversation never rises above the mundane. Most people are stuck there. Which is cool, I don't have a problem with that, it's just frustrating when you want to relate to people on a much deeper level and talk about things that actually matter. Everyone else has given great advice. The internet makes it much easier connecting with like minded people. It can still be hard finding decent environments where people aren't simply being a$$holes to each other (yup, even spiritual forums are full of that haha). TTB is a great place. I don't post that much but I always come back here even when I don't have much to say. Also, finding like-minded people might happen by going to workshops, groups or satsangs, etc. I live in the middle of pretty much nowhere so that's not really an option for me unless I travel, but life has given me the opportunity to do that lately, and I met some amazing people there I have stayed in touch with. Back home, conversation is generally limited to....well, the weather. But British people are like that

this is neat, thank you! I've always been very curious about Kriya yoga since reading Autobiography of a Mystic years ago....well, listening to it, I downloaded the audio book. I may check this out. Does anyone here practise KY?

Never a truer word was said

It is a great read isn't it! It's true, he's not a guy who's not afraid of sharing blunt opinions. It's not so much he sees vedanta as the "one true method" but the best, clearest and most concise method. This is of course up for debate, but in my experience of being around the spiritual block a few times, I would be inclined to agree. But we are each different. (on the apparent level, anyway!) Well, vedanta encompasses jnana yoga, yes, which emphasises using the intellect to examine the unquestioned logic of our own experience and to see that we are in fact pure awareness. But it also offers karma yoga, bhakti yoga and meditation as means of dealing with the emotional and psychological levels and cultivating a reasonably still and pure mind, which is necessary for realisation. So it shouldn't really be a lopsided approach at all. It should integrate and balance all aspects. I think one of Swartz's greatest contributions has been highlighting the difference between the path of experience and the path of knowledge. I'd guess that most spiritual paths, including many forms of yoga are experiential-based; they are still in the duality of subject and object...there's me, and some object or experience that I want to add to me. We tend to assume that enlightenment is an experience we can add to ourself, and there certainly is an experiential component to it. But experience is fickle, fickle, fickle.......experience is in maya and as such is always impermanent, changing and is not under our direct control. Breaking through the stargate as you said (i like that term ) is an awesome epiphany, and the important thing is not the experience (which like any experience comes and goes - 5 mins later we gotta take walk the dog or make dinner!), but the knowledge that we derive from that experience (i.e., that we are whole and complete, pure awareness - the stargate is not something we experience - it's what we are). Vedanta defines enlightenment as the hard and fast knowledge that I am awareness (big Self and not little self). Energetic methods are helpful for preparing the mind for this realisation but are an indirect means of enlightenment. They create the right mindset for Self knowledge to take root. It's really the intellect that needs enlightening - if it's a nondual reality as the scriptures say, then we're already the Self, and we cannot be anything else. But the mind doesn't know that As Swartz says, we don't have an experience problem (since everything we're experiencing can only be the Self), what we have is an ignorance problem (we don't know it). So enlightenment is really getting the mind up to speed on the true nature of reality and ourselves rather than adding new sets of experiences to us. Of course, once this truth is assimilated then our experience of life will change, but that's kind of a byproduct of self knowledge rather than anything. This article explains it really well http://www.shiningworld.com/top/files/satsang-2/(1)%20Experience%20and%20Knowledge%20-%20The%20Whole%20Argument.pdf James says it better than me - "If somebody says that there is a special kind of experience that feels good and never ends, I am ready to sign up. If I have an experience of uncaused bliss, one that is not dependent on an outside event, I may be even more inclined to accept the idea of experiential enlightenment. Perhaps I reason that I can make the experience permanent, even though every time it happens, it ends. When the great sage Patanjali says that all I have to do to make it permanent is to remove my thoughts, I am ready to become a yogi. How hard can it be? This is wishful thinking because samsara, the world of experience, is change. There is no special experience in samsara that does not change. The experiencer, me, is in time and the objects of experience are in time, including all states of mind. How is it possible for two things that are constantly changing to produce a state of mind that does not change? .....The idea that I can obtain the experience of enlightenment means that I am not experiencing the self—the light of awareness—now. It so happens that the non-experience of the self is impossible because consciousness is eternal and omnipresent and non-dual. It is everything that is. How can I get what I already have by doing anything? If I am going to get what I already have, I am going to have to lose my ignorance of who I am. This is not to say that meditation, epiphanies, or other spiritual practices are not valuable. We will later argue that epiphanies are very helpful as they give us an idea of what we are seeking. And we will also argue that spiritual practice is essential, not because it produces enlightenment, but because it prepares the mind for enlightenment. Without a prepared, qualified mind, enlightenment will not happen." Haha, yeah he'd certainly rough around the edges! He calls a spade a spade, which sometimes shocks people used to the more cuddly and Eckahrty teachers. Swami Chinmayanada was indeed one awesome guy!! Indeed, all esoteric traditions have the same goal really (even if they don't know it), but James is pretty clear that not all paths are equal. It sounds horribly undemocratic but it's true. I mean, it'd be infinitely easier to 'get' enlightened with a good vedanta or buddhist teacher than, for example a fundamentalist Christian preacher, or a hardline Muslim, or a fluffy New Ager. Although I guess not entirely impossible...but not very likely. Finding very clear spiritual teachings is surprisingly hard. Maya is confusing. Spiritual maya is even more so. Yes! James's autobiography is a fascinating read. He had all manner of incredible energetic experiences and epiphanies in India during the late 60s, but once they wore off, he was just the same guy. Where was his enlightenment?! He almost gave up. It wasn't until he met his guru, Swami Chinmayananda that he realised with the greatest humility, that in spite of all his wild epiphanies and experiences, he didn't have a clue. I guess it's amazing going through the stargate, but even better is when you truly know who it is that's going through it. And the realisation that I'm not in the stargate, the stargate is in me (as awareness). Haha, I struggled with that word for a long time. It's not my favourite term for some reason.

I think the issue of anti-intellectualism in spirituality is actually quite an important one. The truth of what we are, pure nondual awareness, is beyond mind and intellect, yes...but the intellect is the vehicle that takes us to that realisation. Otherwise it's all just about getting high and trying to experience bliss states like energy junkies. I mean, we can travel all the way to India to see a shaktipat guru or get a hug from Amma and be high for a little while, but after it wears off we'll still be, in the words of my teacher, 'as dumb as a loaf of bread' James Swartz, my aforementioned teacher, wrote the following. (it's vedanta specific because he's a teacher of traditional vedanta, but I think the logic of his argument is pretty clear ) "When we are confronted with existential problems, the tendency to become anti-intellectual and 'spiritual' often causes us to believe that we can just feel our way to reality. But this is like trying to see with our ears. If we have no means of knowledge to arrive at the already existing truth that sets us free, we live in a spiritual wilderness. In service of self ignorance, the intellect can never know the Self, but it becomes wise when it serves the teachings of a valid means of Self knowledge like Vedanta. A tool used for the wrong purpose is not a defective tool. It comes into its own when it is used as it was intended to be used. The intellect is designed for Self inquiry, not for making ignorance work. The anti-intellectualism that sounds so loudly in the spiritual world is understandable because most spiritual teachers are self deluded and claim that the ignorance they speak is actually truth. This makes seekers turn to feelings or intuition or the belief in ego loss or fantasy that some kind of incredible experience will set them free. This anti-intellectual stance imprisons them within the confines of their senses, emotions and thoughts and makes them unavailable for the transforming action of a legitimate means of knowledge." In other words, I guess, the intellect plays a vital role in Self-realisation because we use it to make sense of our experience and to come to the realisation..the knowledge...that we are pure awareness, the Self, or whatever you'd like to call it.

I find it hard to understand this post. Maybe because it's late and I'm tired. I think the faculty of intellect is an important one though, and helps us separate illusion from truth, which is something that's highly important in maya and indeed in the whole spiritual world of ideas, concepts and thought.

I can definitely relate to this a lot. I've been called an empath before and didn't really know what it meant at the time.

Nice

James Swartz makes it's clear that it's not a grinning-like-a-cheshire-cat kind of bliss. He describes it more as a complete fullness and confidence in the knowledge that you are whole and complete...and from that there may come an experiential sense of bliss. Although it's unlikely to be sustained 100% of the time because even the enlightened have the cycling of the gunas to contend with. In someone like Ramana, who was extremely sattvic, the experience of bliss may have been more or less continuous. Although even he got bored or occasionally annoyed by all accounts PS I just noticed Rongzomfan has been banned. I'm sure he will be greatly missed

This guy is surely a new Mike Myers character? Was getting an Austin Powers vibe. But it might just have been the hilarious dramatic music at the start made me think it was a parody

I'd heard of Easwaran from his translations of the Gita and Upanishads, both of which I love. I didn't know much else about him. I liked his 8 point program, it lays things out in a nice and clear way and seems like a great sadhana. I think adding the karma yoga mindset would have benefited it. Thanks for sharing, I'll refer to his website again I think

I think this is one of the best thread titles ever! It should really be made into a t-shirt slogan or something lol

Love this buddy! Always so inspired by your talents and ability to paint energy

Thanks. Dreamlight Fugitive is me in another incarnation. I just changed my username

Heck no. I'm sure if there are any out there they'd have better things to do than to channel shit at me. I know a woman who is into all that kind of stuff. She believes it's been adversely affecting her health so she's had to tell the high level galactic beings to leave her alone. (not making that up btw. you couldn't, right? )

Hey, Would it be possible to change my username? I'd like to change it from dreamlight fugitive to amoyaan. Hope that isn't a problem? Thanks for your help Rory

Thanks BKA Um yeah, I don't have a PPF but that might be quite cool!

I also found new age books helped me when I was a teenager. My mother had some and I used to surreptitiously borrow them ...they actually helped me make sense of my experience and realise that there was more to life/myself/reality than met the eye. They opened up my mind and made me realise there was more to life than the the orthodox homogeneous worldview that pervades mainstream society. Of course, there comes a point (hopefully sooner rather than later) when you realise that those teachings aren't going to get you far in terms of genuine spiritual realisation. New age stuff is generally a very westernised and materialistic spin on ancient perennial philosophy, wrapped up in a way that's designed to hold maximum appeal to the western marketplace. Hence all the focus on manifesting and creating your reality and stuff. Osho capitalised on this with his whole 'zorba the buddha' thing. Looking back on it now, a lot of it is pretty daft, all these supposedly high-level galactic beings channelling oh-so important information riddled with pseudo-science and bizarre contradictions. It can be very enticing i guess, if you have a certain mindset...kind of an addictive sport or entertainment. But it's all just spiritual maya. I've known a lot of new age people, many of whom are genuinely lovely people (and some of whom were just nuts) but I don't know if any of them ever advanced much from their pursuit. It's all about the experience, the latest technique or fad, the latest book, or workshop. When one thing fails to deliver everlasting happiness, bliss and abundance as it claimed (and it never does, huh?) it's onto the next thing. It tends to be very extroverting - focusing on angels and ascended masters (and I believe Diana Cooper talks about mermaids and unicorns haha)...whereas genuine spiritual teaching strips all that away and takes you inward to realise the self. But hey, like I said, it helped me at a certain point in my life and opened me to alternate ways of thinking at a time when I really needed that. It eventually led me to Buddhism, Taoism and Vedanta for which I'm grateful.

The difficulty comes from trying to understand the absolute/totality/ultimate reality from within maya. Not for the faint of heart haha. It seems only logical to me that phenomena require what Kant called a noumenon, and that as the upanishads state, this noumemon is the changeless amid the changing and is beyond time and space. If it's beyond time and space then it must surely be immortal because if it had a beginning and an end it would be within time and constrained by it. And also, if this noumenon/atman/unmanifest/whatever suddenly started one day, then it had to have arisen from something else, as something cannot come from nothing. Considering 'immortality' is almost more than the human mind can do, because everyone we experience here is time-bound... but I don't see how the atman can be anything other than immortal.

Hey Chris, how are you doing? This is really interesting ... I've been aware of both the aspect of consciousness that has a deep drive to 'wake up' and the aspect that has a resistance to it, that can't abide being comfortable in the present moment without distractions and stuff. It's interesting to witness these dual mechanisms. Can you say any more about this?

Not higher, but same sampradaya. When he teaches he teaches directly from the Bhagavad Gita, Shankara, etc, unfolding them sentence by sentence as was taught him. Thanks for the link, that book looks cool

Yes, we really need much more research put into this. Our bodies are, after all, basically food. You wouldn't believe how backward orthodox medicine is here in that regard. I was referred to a dietician because I was a bit underweight and was struggling to put on weight. I was amazed at the advice I got. I was told basically to eat junk: have extra sugar with meals, everything had to be full fat and the diet sheet suggested eating cakes, scones, pancakes and chocolate bars between every meal. This was professional advice and it was like a recipe for diabetes and heart disease. So much for food as medicine. We still have a long way to go!

Interesting posts! Yeah...I've seen and known people who are into all kinds of 'emotional eating'...as if piling on fat can somehow insulate/shield them from the world. And then, because of our superficial looks-oriented society, they just end up hating themselves and feeling even worse, but the cycle perpetuates. It's funny, I had a few childhood traumas and ended up being a bit overweight until I was in my teens. Now I have all kinds of stomach sensitivities and digestive problems. I can't get away with eating heavy food, meat, or much dairy, wheat, caffeine, etc. And I've struggled to keep my weight up. I'm definitely a lot more emotionally and energetically sensitive than I ever was before. I wonder if that can change your digestive system?

James Swartz teaches traditional vedanta in the lineage of Swami Chinmayanada and Dayananda, it's certainly not neo advaita. Anyway, I'll butt out again