« Not seeing is believing | Main | Sam Harris shakes up a Christian nation. And, me. »

October 07, 2006


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Shorter Mike Weston: I reject Sant Mat because it doesn't add up...intuitively speaking.

Mike - Why do you say that people are following the path blindly. Isn't it possible that they are following their intution and accepting the Radha Soami path just as you are following your intution and accepting the "follow your intution" path? Regards, Dinesh

I found Mike's decision to forgo becoming an RSSB believer to be reasonable and practical. I also found his wish to remain open-minded to be wise.

However, I found his statement: "...we simply will not objectively and scientifically be able to come up with all the answers", to actually be rather contradictory and closed-minded, relative to what he had previous said.

If one is truly open-minded, then one must acknowledge and accept that it is also always possible that one may indeed be able to "come up with", or discover, understand, and even know "the answers".

"Not knowing" as Brian says, or self-honesty open-mindedness is clearly a good thing. But then just because one may "not know" at the present, does not mean that it is impossible to achieve true knowledge, and the answers to the great questions. It is better to only speak about ones own self, and not attempt to speak and make conclusions for all.

You just don't really know if and what someone else may indeed know.

In answer to Dinesh Moorjani:

Life realizations are intensely personal and those are my personal feelings based on personal experience. Yours do not have to be the same as mine. I think it is important to establish as sound a foundation as possible from which to draw your conclusions, to your and only your satisfaction and watch out for the "power of suggestion."

Regards, Mike

To Tao:

I don't agree at all with your interpretation of what I said. Firstly everything I say is exactly my opinion and nothing more, unless I'm discussing a fact that has been proven scientifically. I never speak for anyone else. The beauty of it all is that I find that a harmonious rapport exists when reading something that you "grok" with. I do feel that we will never know all there is to know about all of reality because then we could go around and recreate ourselves, and it seems to me that the more we learn about something, the more new mysteries open up, so we never reach that "know it all" endpoint. Life would sure be boring otherwise, although you can argue it is anyway. A trick by Kal to keep us trapped here, like a beautiful rainbow, I don't think so, watch out for the power of suggestion again. The only way we will know for sure what is real is either through objective scientific analysis or direct experience (watch out again), but intuition plays a big part in getting the ball rolling on the right track (ask many of the great song writers).

To Mike:

I did not say that any such "know it all endpoint" can, or need be reached. I was simply pointing out that you had said yourself that: "we will not be able to come up with all the answers". However, you cannot say that with any significant certainty. Consciousness and the universe seems to be a mystery, but the mystery is not necessarily bound to remain unknown forever. A present mystery does not prohibit a future understanding. Clearly, there is the Known, and the Unknown, but there may, or may not be, the Unknowable.

Also, it is not clear what you meant by your comment: "A trick by Kal to keep us trapped here..." I am not a subscriber to such notions and related belief systems. The term "kal" itself simply means "time". Also, "objective scientific analysis" is contained within and is bound by the observer, by consciousness. Intuition is quite fallible and offers no proof of anything. On the other hand, tacit direct experience, in terms of the awakened state of pure Self-knowledge, transcends relative and objective intellectual knowledge.

On my previous visits here you have outlined that the sages, jnanis and realisers have in a sense 'solved' the 'mystery' through non dual Self realisation.

So in that sense it is not a mystery waiting to be solved.

According to my reading of some of the sages, and my own 'insights' it is perhaps confusing to talk of 'being' and 'knowing' in the same sentence.
Being implies simply abiding and resting in the flow of what is (whatever it is), whereas when we talk of 'knowing' it implies an immediate objectification and thus a separation into duality.
This would be Krishnamurti's description of the knower and the known, for instance.
Obviously these are only words, and the sages also talk of 'knowing' as gnosis or being. Words are indeed maya, as Buddhism suggests.

To Tao:

I enjoyed your statement, "If one is truly open-minded, then one must acknowledge and accept that it is also always possible that one may indeed be able to "come up with," or discover, understand, and even know "the answers."

I prefer to agree with that statement too.

Many of the "like-minded" agree too.

We all can debate the process of "Enlightenment," or, even if there is a process in the first place.

However, I personally am in tune with your statement.

Forgive me for being stupid and obvious, but that was a rather abstracted explanation of why he did not join Rahda Soami. Yes, it was interesting, but I kept waiting for the punch line, the point where these lofty thoughts were applied in a practical way to the subject of the article.

To Nick:

You wrote: "So in that sense it is not a mystery waiting to be solved."

I don't think that I indicated anywhere that it was a "mystery waiting to be solved".

You wrote: "it is perhaps confusing to talk of 'being' and 'knowing' in the same sentence."

Being is pure Knowledge, and pure Knowledge is not "objectification" or a "separation into duality".

Dear tao
Just to gain some clarification.
You said in response to Mike Weston;

"Consciousness and the universe seems to be a mystery, but the mystery is not necessarily bound to remain unknown forever. A present mystery does not prohibit a future understanding".

Do you mean here that the mystery will not remain unknown with Self realisation?

It's just that your paragraph here has a more collective and objective feel to it, in the sense of a mystery being solved by science. Apologies for reading into what you are saying, but thats all that can be done sometimes.

For what its worth (and I don't sense you are saying this at all) I don't see how consciousness will ever be 'solved' by scientific reductionism, as it involves breaking consicousness apart into subject and object.

I hate to rain on your parade but the inner experiences are very real for us exp ONES>>>better luck next time around. At that point try to leave the intellect where it belongs. Behind.

doctor heal, please tell us more. In detail. About your experiences. How did you achieve them? What were they, exactly? Why are you sure they are genuine?

Don't leave us unfortunate ones in the lurch. Place your spiritual knowledge where it belongs. Out front.


You are starting to sound like me!! These irritating questions, they spread like a virus. Oh curses..........

Yes, Roger, we're infected with reasonable skepticism. I'm happy to have that malady.

This won't surprise you, but I exchanged some emails with "doctor heal" and he declined to share any more info about what he knows, and we don't.

What a tease. I'm leaning toward blogging about this tomorrow, as this attitude of "I know spiritual truths that you don't but I can't tell you what they are" galls me.


Excellent idea for a future blog.

There are so many references to, "finding the answers from within." It would be nice to have some awareness as to what is actually meant by that!

Some reference meditation, such as the following, I found on a particular website:

In a very general sense, there are two forms of meditation. One requires that one focuses the mind on something concrete, such as the breathing process, a concrete object or a word or a thought, and there is what may be termed as "formless meditation", in which one focuses on the inner silence, inner self or on nothing at all. This form of meditation can only be practiced after one is well trained in the first form.

Here are a few general suggestions and tips help:

1. It is important to meditate every day.

2. Meditation should be approached with patience, love and an open mind. This is the attitude that brings results.

3. Do not meditate when you are tired.

4. Find a place where you can be alone and undisturbed.

5. Sit in a comfortable position with the spine erect.

6. Take a few slow deep breaths.

7. For a minute or two, evoke in your mind some pleasant memory.

8. Think for about one minute about the benefits this practice will bring you.

9. Start meditating calmly, yet with focused attention. The more focused the attention is, the easier it is to ignore thoughts and other distractions.

10. Start with a simple meditation, such as:

a) Focusing your attention on your incoming and outgoing breath.

b) Thinking about an inspiring quote.

I know, I have asked this question before, I'm still trying to put a few of the pieces to the big puzzle together.

Any comments from our group, would be nice.

I must say that what You write Mike in no way interfere with my experience of living with RSSB:s so called teachings in 35 years now, rather I think it very beutifully describe the essence of Sant Mat, love, intuition and an open mind. I am quite certain that Your love, intuition and an open mind will lead You in the right direction.
Regards Anders Backman
ps hope i got the english right.

It was interesting to learn what he’s concluded. And why. Here, with Mike’s permission, is his story. Read on.
Radha Soami are a spiritual group of people's organization.

To Mike or whoever wrote this,

Usually, I don't pay much attention to what others say, but your words ----

(To me, I think it’s a shame that so many people are following so blindly this “emperor who wore no clothes” paradigm). wonders me that which RSSB satsang you have attended & which Master you have seen. This is so in true, Master' S body is all covered, all the times with nice & clean full dress.

Following any path, is your choice but writing something like that, is unacceptable. God bless you.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)


  • Welcome to the Church of the Churchless. If this is your first visit, click on "About this site--start here" in the Categories section below.
  • HinesSight
    Visit my other weblog, HinesSight, for a broader view of what's happening in the world of your Church unpastor, his wife, and dog.
  • BrianHines.com
    Take a look at my web site, which contains information about a subject of great interest to me: me.
  • Twitter with me
    Join Twitter and follow my tweets about whatever.
  • I Hate Church of the Churchless
    Can't stand this blog? Believe the guy behind it is an idiot? Rant away on our anti-site.