Become spiritually stronger, not weaker

If spirituality doesn’t make you stronger, what good is it? Not much. Yet often people lean upon religion as if it were a crutch. Instead of walking on their own they hobble along, dragging the weight of dogma, ritual, and slavish dependence with them.

Yesterday I got an email message from “Joe.” He said that I could share his thoughts if I cleaned up his syntax, English being his second language. I’ve done just that below.

Joe makes some important points. He’s addressing himself to members of Radha Soami Satsang Beas (RSSB), the group that both he and I have been associated with for many years. However, strength through self-reliance is a universal spiritual virtue.

“God,” however this term is conceived, is almost universally conceived as the ground of our being—Atman, soul, consciousness, whatever you want to call it. So the “self” in “self-reliance” is much more than the individual ego. It is the Whole Shebang—Brahman, God, Buddha-nature, whatever you want to call it.

If years of spiritual practice/devotion aren’t leading you to greater self-reliance (or rather, Self-reliance with a capital “S”), then you’re not going in the right direction. Which is, of course, no direction, because the Self is right here, right now.

“That thou art.” “Atman is Brahman.” “Be still and know that you are God.” “Soul is a drop of the spiritual ocean.”

Spiritual masters, like other sorts of teachers, point the way. But as Joe says, they aren’t the way. The goal of a master should be to help others become similarly mastered. A master musician who isn’t able to get students beyond playing scales mechanically isn’t much of a master.

His protégés should eventually be able to play music on their own, to compose, to improvise. And yes, to sound their own wrong notes. Similarly, spiritual growth won’t occur when people remain passively dependent on a guru or master.

Every master once was a disciple, and the goal of every disciple should be to become a master. By which I mean, to attain the same spiritual realization (whatever that might be) of the teacher, just as a music student should aspire to be as competent a musician as the person he or she is learning from.

Here’s Joe’s message, edited slightly for clarity:

Hello Brian,

I read your articles once in a while and I am amazed at how many satsangis [RSSB initiates] feel really betrayed. I was initiated in 1986 and in 1992 I realized that the path was feeding my own misery in three dimensions. As the Master said in one of his books, "misery is the worst karma...."

I consequently said to myself: “Joe, (which is not my name) if you cannot personally take care of yourself, who will?” As I slowly came back into this world I realized my own mistakes. As satsangis we believe that the Master will take care of everything in our life.

As many of us know, this is not true. So my first thought is that those who are initiated have to understand that the Master is in your life, but is not your life. This is a big subtlety.

Each of us has to deal with the physical world in all of its facets. The Master mentioned many times that what he did to the initiates was “only” to connect him/her to the Sound Current [spirit] and after that “it is all in His hand” (meaning the Lord). We cannot have any expectations concerning the Master. This is our life.

My second thought is that if as a human being we have the potential to become like God, the many trials must serve the purpose of making us stronger, not weaker. This means that we need to stand for ourselves and accept only the acceptable according to our own wisdom at the time. There is no place for guilt or any other negative feelings. We are growing because we react. We are not living a book; we are living our life.

My third thought is that as satsangis we need to stop accepting spiritually what we would not accept in this world. For example: Would you keep going daily to the University to attend a lecture with a professor who never shows up? Same applies spiritually if your Master is not showing up.

Let go. The Master is there waiting for us to master ourselves. Who wants to deal with the weakest? Certainly not the Masters.

If you think that this article may help, please feel free to correct the syntax (English is my second language) and publish it.

Kind regards, Joe

Comments

[ET]

Well Brian and ‘Joe’ I can see why you all are pretty disappointed and have no faith in the age old science (and art) of Sant Mat and you even have lost confidence, and allegiance to Master. But faith is not scientific, it does not require any logical proof or material evidence. Mark Twain says it most directly, (Pudd’nhead Wilson):

“Faith is believing what you know ain’t so.”

John Donne said;
“Reason is our soul’s left hand, Faith her right,
By these we reach divinity. It is the heart
which perceives God and not the reason.
That is what faith is:
God perceived by the heart, not by the reason.”

So - we use the soul’s left hand, reason or clear thinking to learn and to inculcate the Sant Mat Teachings, and then we change our lifestyle so that we can devote 2 or 3 hours of our time each day to our meditation. Then we use faith, the soul’s right hand, to focus our attention at the eye-center, the spiritual heart, where our soul perceives God.

Now that is real simple to understand and pretty hard to do. However, some people have done a pretty good job of doing it for decades and have had no results. While a few others, for some reason God only knows, have found that it works pretty much as the Master says.

So it seems unfair. I agree with you all on that point, but that does not mean that it doesn’t work. It just means that to some it comes easy and to others very hard. Now, for example when my wife and I first got married she was not very familiar with this path of Sant Mat. She is a person of faith, a very religious person that you talk about, and she follows her own path happily and diligently. She had attended a few RS meetings with me and knew the 4 vows. However, at that time she had never read an RS book, nor had any interest in my path. She had seen some pictures of the masters and I had explained who they were. However, about a month after we were married she got up in the middle of the night to go to the bathroom and saw me sitting in meditation. Then when she went back to bed she closed her eyes to go back to sleep and Bingo! There was Master – looking at her face to face - nose to nose. He was not bashful.

In the morning she told me about her delightful experience. Now Brian, and ‘Joe’ - she had done absolutely nothing to get this treat and she had no expectations, in fact she did not even fully understand who the Master was. However, she had a wonderful spiritual experience that most satsangies have never had. Needless to say she has a lot of faith in who the Master is now. Her faith is unshakable in Him even though she is not an initiate on the RS path even today.

[tao]

"Bingo"... bleep bleep bleep (alarm sounds)... More preaching of the R.S. "master" and "faith" (c)Rap. Why can't guys like ET just go over to some Sant Mat believer's support site, and do their faith preaching there.

[ET]

Thank you for your opinion Tao. Sorry to bother you all. I apologize for interfering. I have misunderstood this forum.

I am happily leaving.

[Bob]

In my opinion, and although I disagree with a good portion of what he said, ET has every right to post here. Since when do we limit discussions here to one particular leaning?

To my knowledge, this isn't an "EX" site where tao's request would be appropriate.

[ET]

Well Brian, thanks for the reassurance.
However, it could be that Tau has it right. I could be in the wrong blog. I am not interested in arguing or proving anything. I simply have my own experiences that are different from yours and Tau’s. Thus my view point is different than yours and Tau’s.
Some how I had the impression that this blog was about the sharing of different view points on the subject of spirituality. Since we are all different, naturally we each have a different point of view, a different paradigm.
I see Reality through the ET portal, and Brian sees Reality through the Brian portal, and Tau sees Reality through the Tau portal. None of us has the true picture of Reality, just our own individual slant on it.
However, if we share our different views, rather than insist that ours is the only view and listen to each other, then perhaps we can gain a better perspective of Reality, we can develop synergy by listening to each other and respecting each other’s view portal. Then we may gain a better comprehension of Reality than any one of us could all alone. A group can develop synergy! Synergy is where 1 + 1 is more than 2.
Am I off base?

[Brian]

No, you're not off base, ET. Though it wasn't I who replied to you positively, but Bob, I agree with what Bob said. I don't consider this an "ex'er" blog, in part because I don't consider myself an ex-anything.

I mean, I'm trying to expand my current spiritual perspective, not deny any perspective I've held in the past.

Today I went to the RSSB meeting/satsang, like I do almost every Sunday. Three of us listened to the speaker. Then we all went out to a coffee house and had a pleasant and stimulating conversation--about metaphysics, politics, television, many subjects.

I find it easy to listen to a RSSB satsang for 45 minutes. I don't have to agree with everything a speaker is saying to enjoy the talk. I just try to listen without too much judging. Same goes for comments on this weblog.

Keep on commenting, ET. You too, Tao. The more the merrier. It isn't agreement we're after. It's conversation and the exploration of differing perspectives.

[tao]

First...well thanks to Brian for being tolerant of my critical opinion regarding ET's Sant Mat preaching.

Second...To Bob: What I meant and what was implied by my fairly blunt comment, was not at all that this blog comment area should be limited to discussions of "one particular leaning". Nor is it that ET does not have "every right to post here". What my comment was about is simply that many die-hard RS satsangis have come here and repeatedly tried to preach the standard Sant Mat teaching and dogma, even to the point of rebuking both Brian and myself for questioning the presumed RS authority and belief system. I myself am quite familiar with the RS teaching and I know Brian is well versed as well. Moreover, As far as I have seen, Brian himself has indicated quite a few different times that he prefers that this blog not be used as a forum for such repetitive RS preaching. (If I am wrong about that, then Brian can correct me.) That being the case, in my view the particular comment by ET was generally composed of the same type of Sant Mat and RS dogma and preaching that is not necessary or productive here. Yes, all spiritual views and orientations should be tolerated and given fair consideration, but since Brian and others here are already quite familiar and practiced in the Sant Mat path, it is not useful for Sant Mat followers and believers to keep asserting the same dogma over and over. So in regards to Bob's comment, I did not either say or imply to "...limit discussions here to one particular leaning". Nor did I say or imply that this is "an "EX" site". I am interested in the same expansive and inclusive orientation towardsn spirituality that Brian has, and I enjoy reading the diverse offerings that he shares here. No doubt ET can post any comment or opiniopn that he/she chooses, but the same repeated Sant Mat preaching is not useful or productive, in MY OPINION. So ET posted his/her comment-opinion, and I posted my comment-opinion.

Third...To ET, I will individually address a few of your response-comment statements:

ET wrote: "Some how I had the impression that this blog was about the sharing of different view points on the subject of spirituality."

Yes, it is a place where Brian shares his views, insights, and researches. It is also a place where outside comments are posted. So it is true that "different view points on the subject of spirituality" are welcome to be shared here, but when so many RS believers continually and repeatedly post comments which are composed primarily and totally of the Sant Mat dogma and "point of view", then it becomes excessive.

ET wrote: "Since we are all different, naturally we each have a different point of view"

Yes, we each have different points of view, but as I explained above, the Sant Mat view does not need to be continually re-asserted over and over again. If you had read a sampling of Brians articles, you would have probably noticed that he (and others like myself) was a long-time practitioner of Sant Mat, and so he does not need to be informed, advised, or educated about the Sant Mat spiritual path and its "point of view".

ET wrote: "None of us has the true picture of Reality, just our own individual slant on it."

I would not say that. I would say that "Reality" is not a "picture", nor can it ever be portrayed in any "picture", any concept, any point of view, any belief, or any philosophy. That being said, you previous comment about the Sant Mat teaching is clearly your "slant" on Reality.

ET wrote: "...if we share our different views, rather than insist that ours is the only view and listen to each other,.... and respecting each other’s view"

Well it sure sounded like you were presenting and promoting the RS Sant Mat view. It did not seem to me that you were respecting Brians alternative views.

ET wrote: "Then we may gain a better comprehension of Reality than any one of us could all alone"

"Comprehension of Reality" does not necessarily come about from a combination of many different individual views. In my own experience, it simply comes from an abandoning of all views and an acceptance of simply WHAT IS always right now.

[Bob]

Hi Tao,

Regarding the repeated RS dogma written by various individuals, I think it's up to Brian to set limits on this since this is his blog.

Personally, if someone comes here and goes on and on about RS, I don't have a problem with it. I can choose to read or not read it.

And, who knows, maybe the folks that come here and preach RS are, on some deeper level, looking for more understanding to support their spiritual path and possibly expand their view. Just a guess.

[ET]

I would like to thank you Bob - for your continued support, and to apologize for my earlier post which confused you with Brian and to respectfully invite you to exactly say what you do not agree with in my previous postings and in this posting too.

Thank you also Brian for your invitation to all of us all to continue to make comments here.

Finally, thank you Tao (he/she) for taking the time to clearly state your views and to respond to by postings. I will now respectfully address the gist of your comments as I see them:

“..More preaching of the R.S. "master" and "faith" (c)Rap. Why can't guys like ET just go over to some Sant Mat believer's support site, and do their faith preaching there.”
This statement is more than “fairly blunt” it is most definitely rude, and I am very much offended by it. It clearly implies that in you opinion I am not welcome to post on this weblog and it assumes that just because I happen to have an RS master, like some others who post here, that I am trying to convert people to the RS philosophy. Which, as you well know, is entirely against the RS philosophy itself.

The facts are that I have never rebuked anyone here or elsewhere for questioning the “presumed RS authority and belief system”. Likewise I am not using this forum or any other to repetitively preach the RS teachings. Most of what you refer to as RS teachings I have learned from other sources anyway - long ago --- even lifetimes before my initiation into the RS tradition which I have obtained in order to gain the association with a more advanced soul than myself.

Tao also said:
“Yes, it is a place where Brian shares his views, insights, and researches. It is also a place where outside comments are posted. So it is true that "different view points on the subject of spirituality" are welcome to be shared here,

Yes I agree with this statement. However Tao, I don’t believe you do because you then entirely negate your own statement, by using the conjunction “but” and flatly stating:

“..when so many RS believers continually and repeatedly post comments which are composed primarily and totally of the Sant Mat dogma and "point of view", then it becomes excessive.”

And then later you said: “your previous comment about the Sant Mat teaching is clearly your "slant" on Reality. “

This is what you are really communicating. If you would have used the conjunction “and” instead of “but” I might have believed your first statement.

To put it concisely Tao, you appear to have grudge against Sat Mat and you are projecting that anger onto me. You are the only person on this entire weblog who has attacked me. I am not looking for a fight. I have no dog in this race that you have conjured up in your own mind -- this RS faith, belief, dogma preacher or whatever image that you have fancifully created and then spat out onto ET is pure crap, and I resent and reject it entirely!

It appears to me that you are not the least bit interested in a mind expanding dialogue at all. Even before stating my views you are attacking me like a mad dog. Just because I am saying something that happens to be part of the RS teachings too does not mean that it is the exclusive property of the RS community. Also, it does not mean that just because the lens that I view Reality through is partially colored by the RS teachings does not it mean that I am a dogmatic preacher of the RS philosophy. In fact I came to the RS tradition with much more than they believe or teach and I retain that (i.e. – many years of meditation - raw vegan diet –astrology - soul travel, etc). You were probably out of the room when I explained a non RS meditation that I use most successfully.

Rather my intention here is to simply share some of my ideas and concepts, - my own unique ET paradigm on spirituality which is entirely within the framework of this forum as I understand it. My view is not a dogmatic Sant Mat slant that you have so graciously endowed me with. My slant is and can only be purely ET’s.

Tao said: “I would not say that. I would say that "Reality" is not a "picture", nor can it ever be portrayed in any "picture", any concept, any point of view, any belief, or any philosophy…..

Certainly -- practically everyone would agree with that. No picture, belief or philosophy etc. can capture Reality.

However, we have to use words to communicate our concepts and ideas through this Internet media. I am an engineer not a poet and I am using a simple metaphor to convey a concept. I am relying upon the reader to be a little imaginative and go along with my metaphor as a means of communication.

Finally Tao said:
"Comprehension of Reality" does not necessarily come about from a combination of many different individual views. In my own experience, it simply comes from an abandoning of all views and an acceptance of simply WHAT IS always right now.

Great! That is your Tao portal that I was referring to in my previous post. Your view is to abandon all views. That is your real and only positive contribution to the discussion.

Thank you for your attention
BTW I am a “he” -- that is right now, today in the present time and space. I have a male anatomical structure to experience this world with. However I choose the ‘ET’ moniker to associate my self with because my mind does not relate or vibrate well with being a human being. IMO I am actually an Extra Terrestrial being -- an intergalactic monk who’s soul got trapped here while visiting this mad world of yours.

[Bob]

You're welcome ET. Stay in touch!