« Paul Davies’ “Cosmic Jackpot” comes up empty | Main | The positivity of unbelief »

November 27, 2007

Comments

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

who...?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVXEiYyZKcY


"Prior to detaiiling 118 meditation practices, shabd yoga amongst them"-FALSE; I just read all 112(not 118)of the Vijnanbhairava tantras online and there's nothing similar to shabd yoga listed.

Then you didn't read well. All the three techniques of Surat Shabd Yoga (dhyan, simran and bhajan) are detailed in Vighyan Bhairava Tantra.

"All the three techniques of Surat Shabd Yoga (dhyan, simran and bhajan) are detailed in Vighyan Bhairava Tantra."-BULLSHIT;if you can't prove it by Listing each one by number then don't even bother replying.

Hi DJ
I'm just curious which path do you follow?

It is obvious that DJ has not read Vigyan Bhairava Tantra. That is why he is barking.

If not, he has not been initiated. That is why he does not know what RSSB meditation means.

Vighyan Bhairava Tantra contains 112 forms of meditatation. According to classical texts, only 112 texts, nothing more nothing less. If there are additions, they are only derivatives of 112. IF there are less, then somebody has missed something.

According to legend, Shiva tells Parvati about 112 forms of meditation when she asks how an individual can dispel his ignorance. Read the translation by Paul Reps. If you want more detail, read commentaries by Osho Rajaneesh.

I am not here to convince fools like you, DJ.

Anywhere DJ here is the similarity between Vigyan Bhairava Tantra and Surat Shabd Yog.
THe numbers are references to VBT sutras.

5. Attention between Eyebrows,
let mind be before thought.
Let form fill with breath essence
to the top of the head
and there shower as light.
(This is the first RSSB technique of centring on the third eye. IF you do it, the form essence fills on the top of the head that is why you see radiant form of the master)

29. Devotion frees.
(this is the essence of RSSB)

30. Eyes closed,
See your inner being in detail.
Thus see your true nature.
(This is what happens when you advance in the technique)
34. Listen while the ultimate mystical
teaching is imparted.
Eyes still, without blinking,
at once, become absolutely free.
(This is what happens at the time of RSSB initiation)
38. Bathe in the center of sound,
As in the continuous sound of a waterfall.
Or, by putting the fingers in the ears,
Hear the sound of sounds.
(This is the Shabd technique of RSSB)
46. Stopping ears by pressing
And the rectum by contracting,
Enter the sound.
(This is also the shabd technique)
47. Enter the sound of your name And, through this sound, All sounds.
(This is your classic simran or mantra or chanting)
99. Feel yourself as pervading all directions, Far, near
(This is what an advanced RSSB meditators feel like)
For your information, these sutras are only indicators. If you do these techniques, the consequences are similar to Surat Shabd Yoga.

You still have any questions, DJ. Feel free to ask. Surat shabd yog is cut and paste from these lines.

Deepak, Your still full of shit! Here's the webpage for the translation of Vighyan Bhairava Tantra I'm refering to and it's nothing like the version by that cultmaster Osso Rajneesh you quoted: http://www.shivashakti.com/vijnan.htm
I would'nt believe anything that scoundrel wrote.

FYI, Osho didn't translate it. Paul Reps -- the writer on Zen -- translated it. Get your facts right. DJ.

DJ, I checked your link. It's dubious. Paul Reps -- best known for Zen Flesh, Zen Bones -- is considered an authority on Oriental spiritual literature. Osho quoted him in his book while acknowledging the translation. If you still don't believe me. You may buy the book -- Zen Flesh, Zen Bones by Paul Reps. It is in the initial chapter.

The translation in you link has some flaws. Even then, the cut and paste of RSSB is obvious. Is it not?

I won't say it is the RSSB flaw. VBT has quoted just about every meditation technique in the 112.

Dj, if you still don't believe me, then search VBT in Wiki. You will find Paul Reps at the top. And, if you still don't believe me, I can't help you. Then I am afraid there is only one conclusion. Ask me what? I will tell you.

Dear Anonymous/DJ, your question has got me to re-read the Vijnanabhairava tantra! It has been several years since I last read this work, and I am sure my posts are full of what I would consider to be inconsequential & irrelevant mistakes, such as absent-mindedly recalling 118 meditation techniques not 112! I would hope I have the courtesy of double-checking the details on issues of slightly more consequence?

As an aside and whilst keeping Brian's latest blog on internet courtesy in mind (with which I wholeheartedly agree, despite myself being one of those who has many times engaged in less than edifying 'debates' :), I would like to note a pet concern of mine. What is it with multiple ids, anonymous posters who appear familar, new posters who don't even introduce themselves and just abrubptly interject with aggressive comments, and appear familiar with the poster(s) they are responding to? No personal context, history, pov etc? Of course this is the right of people to do, but is it really just me who thinks this whiffs of insincerity, deception etc?? It certainely isn't conducive to genuine debate and/or intellectual growth?

Anyways, I've just reread the VBT. Here's a good link:

http://www.hsuyun.org/Dharma/zbohy/Sruti-Smriti/Sutras/Vijnanabhairava.html

I remember when I first read this piece, I was blown away. Up until then, I had read hundreds upon hundreds of different meditation practices from both eastern & western mystical & occult schools. I used to continuously research, addicted to the buzz of finding a new meditation technique, perhaps hoping that the next would be the secret, special one! Reading the Vijnanabhairava for the first time, I was convinced that this special piece contained within it the basic essence of every single other meditation technique I had come across! I strained to think of something which was not *hinted* at within this work, and I don't really recall that I did?

It really is very special.

Personally, I'm not really sure where you're coming from in saying shabd yoga is not in there? I will *speculate* though, though of course I may be wrong entirely. A couple of points to keep in mind. The VBT is like the BASIC indices of every meditation method. It does not go into any depth at all, just provides a basic overview, like an index of methods. Secondly, there is the shabd yoga that has evolved in India over the last few thousand years, of which the RS method is only a sub-division of, with it's own peculiarities and individual 'quirks'. However, the VBT contains every aspect of the RS path amongst it's 118 methods. The only difference is the DEPTH into which it goes (obviously very limited), and the conceptual/theological/cosmological clothing with which the techniques are draped. In essence, the RS method is clearly described.

Of course, if you took shabd yoga in it's most complete form, such as that practised by Kabir & Nanak, then there are many more parts of the VBT which are relevant, but those techs are not taught or explained to RS students, so will not be recognised! This text's relevance can only fully be grasped if it is understood how it relates to texts such as hathayogapradipika, gherandasamhita etc to yogis like Kabir & Nanak, on to today's RS path. Also, the text is pretty advanced, there are 'methods' described therein which are actually more like 'attainments' within this RS path. Ahh, a very many pathed subject! All in all, I personally think it beyond doubt contains the essence of the RS yoga, as well as even more advanced practices!

Here are the relevant parts to the RS shabd yoga:

Dhyan (nirat):
"31. Focus your attention between your eyebrows, keep your mind free from any dualistic thought, let your form be filled with breath essence up to the top of your head and there, soak in radiant spatiality. "

"36. Plug the seven openings of your head with your fingers and merge into the bindu, the infinite space between your eyebrows. "

37. If you meditate in your heart, in the upper center or between your eyes, the spark which will dissolve discursive thought will ignite, like when brushing eyelids with fingers. You will then melt into supreme consciousness. "

Shabd:
"38. Enter the center of spontaneous sound which resonates on its own like the uninterrupted sound of a waterfall. Or, sticking your fingers in your ears, hear the sound of sounds and reach Brahman, the immensity. "

And, my favourite part of this text:

"11-13. From an absolute standpoint, Bhairava is not associated with letters, nor with phonemes, nor with the three Shakti, nor with breaking through the chakras, nor with any other belief, and Shakti does not constitute his essence. All these concepts taught in the scriptures are aimed at those whose mind is still too immature to grasp the supreme reality. They are mere appetizers meant to spur aspirants toward ethical behavior and spiritual practice so that they can realize some day that the ultimate nature of Bhairava is not separate from their own Self.

14-17. Mystical ecstasy isn’t subject to dualistic thought, it is completely free from any notion of location, space or time. This truth can only be touched by experience. It can only be reached by those entirely freed from duality and ego, and firmly, fully established in the consciousness of the Self. This state of Bhairava is filled with the pure bliss of unity between tantrika and the universe. Only this state is the Shakti. In the reality of one’s own nature thus recognized, containing the entire universe, one reaches the highest sphere. Who then could be worshipped? Who then could be fulfilled by this worship? Only this condition recognized as supreme is the great Goddess."


Dear Mr. Brian Hines,
I believe that you are the writer of "Life is Fair" book, which is a very good book.
Refer to your story above, I hope that you actually have been initiated by the Master.
As it has been mention in any Sant mat book, you need to have a fully concentrated meditation to be succesful, and also should be brave enough to pass the Gate.
Keep trying and don't loose faith. Regards


The readers will find amazing material in this simple book on the

Relationship between a Guru and the disciple

by

Dadashri

I have recently translated it and it is on the web , free

http://www.dadashri.org/gurudisciple.html

Hope it helps those who have been confused between gurus and enlightened masters

Cheers

shuddha
http://www.dadashri.org

hi all,
i wanna know that in present`s time is there any true sadguru like kabirji is present in todays time who takes the power to reach us satlok..i m n search for last too much years...

Vishu,

No one can answer your question.

Let's say I tell you Guru X is a true satguru. How do you know if I know that?
If I tell you the guru says he is a true satguru like Kabir, how do you know he is telling me the truth? If he is being honest, how do you know if he is deluded or not? If 10,000 followers say he is a true satguru, how do you know they really know this? How do you know Kabir was a true satguru? How do you know there is such a thing as a true satguru? What if there isn't such a thing and people just think there is? How do you know? It is a matter of faith because no one can know. How do Christians know Jesus was the son of God? How do Muslims know Mohammed was Allah's messenger. How do Muslims know Allah even exists? How do you know satlok exists? If the guru says there is satlok, how do you know if he really knows this?

Find a guru you like and follow him/her. Maybe you will find what you seek, maybe not. Maybe what you seek can't be found.

Type O's advice is good.

If you want a guru, find one you like and follow him/her (most likely him). Then you will learn something--either it works for you or it doesn't. taking action is a good way to learn.

Why bother following a guru whatsoever?

Robert Paul Howard

You start off by saying that it IT IS A PLEASURE TO HEAR FROM ANOTHER HERETIC??? Why do you find it pleasing that somebody is disrespecting a faith without fully understanding what this faith is about? It is very pleasing to see internet sites such as these because to me it shows how wrong all the information is and makes me even more happier to know that I understand the teachings and what this path is about? I am sorry to hear that people like Fred, who have been on this path for 37 years, have not understood this path at all. It is because of people like Fred that The Master stresses the importance of reading, researching into all the faiths and practices in this world and then making a decision about this path. Before one applies for initiation on this path, they stress the importance of reading sites on the internet such as this one beforehand so that people understand.

Fistly, Fred is talking about how this path has become an organisation! People in this world are imperfect and no matter how much The Master has objected and advised satsangis not to do certain things, if they don't listen what more can he do??? Yet he still humbly tries.

If somebody folds their hands and says Radha Soami - this is a sign of respect. Some pepole just use it as a greeting and it reminds one another of the master and the path. However, some people just use it instead of saying Hello...but what is wrong with that. If the master one day said 'do not use RS at all'...wouldn't that be over the to top and stupid??? Then you would all be saying how the master has taken a trivial issue and turned it into a major one. And again, Radha Soami as a greeting is used by the people of this world? Nevertheless, if you look up the meaning of RITUAL - this is something that is repeatedly done. Meditation can be a ritual. Everything you do at regular intervals is a ritual. How do you expect to live in this world??? Now are you going to call eating your evening meal a ritual? Yes, No...Just think about it.

Babaji has never allowed any photographs to be displayed in the satsangs in the UK! one master to the left the other to the right, that sounds silly and i'm sure The Master would object to this - solely because there is no need to place a photo in a certain area. However, these pictures are placed there by people with love in their hearts. I don't know why they are being placed in your centre. I will write to the Dera to advsie them of this! But in any case, if a photo is displayed it is in rememberance of babaji and that is why the satsangis placed them there.

In a question and answer session in the UK, Babaji has himself humbly said that sant mat is not the only way to god realistion - "IT IS ONE OF THE WAYS" Those are his exact words!

Faith in the master and on this spiritual path, comes with experience in personal and spiritual matters. When one experiences this - then firm belief in the path is there.

Kind Regards.

Arjun, you're wrong. Many people who comment on this site, including me, understand Sant Mat very well. All we're doing is sharing our experiences, which is what you say (at the end of your comment) is all-important: experience.

What bothers you, it seems, is that other people haven't had the same experiences you've had. Yet you also admit that even the guru has said that Sant Mat is only one of the ways to god realization (I'd say "truth realization.")

So some people have found that other ways are better than Sant Mat and RSSB meditation. And they enjoy sharing those ways. What's wrong with that, given that Sant Mat isn't the only way?

It doesn't matter what 'spiritual' group you are part of, members will always start rituals.

For me, Sant Mat is much more scientific when I don't attent satsangs becaues I don't have to deal with others on the 'path' (particularly religious minded Eastern practitioners). This way, I practise meditation at home and don't have to deal with the 'religious' alarm bells that go off when some satsangis discuss their understanding of that path or what is right and wrong.

I understand the hurt some here feel after they threw themselves into Sant Mat wholeheartedly, just believing the teacher was God incarnate, believing it all of it blindly. That is bound to happen when you try to delude yourself into believing something by taking someone's word for it rather than from your own experience and when the assertions you believe in are not easily and quickly verifiable.

I went through the same thing. But then I returned to Sant Mat - at least to the practise of it rather than the belief, so that now I only truly believe what I experience directly.

Occasionally I attend a satsang, try to take in anything I find useful, discarding the blind faith elements (of which there can be many). I usually find I can make use of at least one thing from every satsang. I may stay and chat, but then generally make a run for it before someone says some religious or cult-like and spoils it all for me.

Actually I think one of the problems I have with satsang is as soon as I am around satsangis my inner brainwashed cult child comes out... and I hate that little naive judgemental bastard with a passion. Maybe it was my religous upbringing? I can feel there's a little brainwashed cult child gap in my brain that is constantly trying to get filled.

Smack,

You stated,

"I went through the same thing. But then I returned to Sant Mat - at least to the practise of it rather than the belief, so that now I only truly believe what I experience directly."

---Could you explain the need to "practice" meditation? What is it about meditation, that requires practice? Does practice bring something special to meditation?
---If you have experienced somthing directly, then, why the the need to truly believe in it? Are you saying - your not sure what you are experiencing directly,
or just like the idea of a belief system?
---Any meditation visuals or sounds, you could comment on? Would be interesting to read.

Thanks,
Roger

Arjun,

Interesting collection of statements,

"Nevertheless, if you look up the meaning of RITUAL - this is something that is repeatedly done. Meditation can be a ritual. Everything you do at regular intervals is a ritual. How do you expect to live in this world??? Now are you going to call eating your evening meal a ritual? Yes, No...Just think about it."
---Worth the time to reexamine the word: ritual. So, meditation is a spiritual or religious ritual?
---What happens in the absence of a ritual? Do bad things occur? Such as a non-conceptual non-mental activity?


"It is because of people like Fred that The Master stresses the importance of reading, researching into all the faiths and practices in this world and then making a decision about this path. Before one applies for initiation on this path, they stress the importance of reading sites on the internet such as this one beforehand so that people understand."
---So, which Master stresses the importance of reading this site(church of the churchless?)beforehand, so that they will understand? Kinda confusing, that a Master would recommend the Churchless website.

"Faith in the master and on this spiritual path, comes with experience in personal and spiritual matters. When one experiences this - then firm belief in the path is there."

---Another reference to "faith" and how it is generated from personal and spiritual matters.
---In addition, how a "firm belief" is produced from such experiences.
---So, is it correct to state that faith and firm belief, are an important aspect of the SantMat path and teachings?


Thanks for any replies,
Roger


The masters, maybe all those that are concerned with true seekers after truth, encourage these seekers to satisfy their intellects to the utmost absolute satisfaction.

That is they would rather the adherent or seeker takes 30 or 50 years or his entire lifetime in satisfying his inquisitive intellect to its absolute unencumbered satisfaction initially rather than to take initiation into a discipline or path and then later in his journey to start doubting and detracting and looking to start satisfying his dissatisfied intellect only then.

This is tantamount to going about the business back to front, wrong way round, cart before the horse.

So if it requires that true spiritual seekers need to satisfy their entire intellectual reasoning and inquisition up front, then it is far better to do so in advance and not later so as to avoid bitter disillusionment later on, as is found in many visitors to this site.

And therefore if one is seeking this intellectual ratification through mediums such as reading internet sites such as this one before making ones mind up unequivocally, it is far better to be exposed to such alternate consternating deliberations in advance than to get buffeted by such seriously debilitating intellectually stimulated doubts later on.

joshilan,

Thanks for your comment.

You stated,


"The masters, maybe all those that are concerned with true seekers after truth, encourage these seekers to satisfy their intellects to the utmost absolute satisfaction."

---Is "intellectual activity" involved in the "true seeking" of the truth?
---Or, is the "absolutely true seeking" a non-intellectual non-conceptual activity?
---If not a "true" seeker, what kind of seeker, is there, for One that is utmostly and absolutely not satisfied, intellectually? What happens to those seekers?

Thanks for any replies,
Roger

There are four functions of the psychic organ. The internal psyche, which we generally call Manas or mind in ordinary language, has four functions. In Sanskrit these four functions are designated as Manas, Buddhi, Ahamkara and Chitta. Manas is ordinary, indeterminate thinking - just being aware that something is there. Manas is the work of the mind. Buddhi determines, decides and logically comes to a conclusion that something is such-and-such a thing. That is another aspect of the operation of the psyche - Buddhi or intellect. The third form of it is Ahamkara - ego, affirmation, assertion, 'I know'. "I know that there is some object in front of me, and I also know that I know. I know that I am existing as this so-and-so." This kind of affirmation attributed to one's own individuality is the work of Ahamkara, known as egoism. The subconscious action, memory, etc., is caused by Chitta. It is the fourth function. So Manas, Buddhi, Ahamkara, Chitta - these are the four basic functions of the internal organ, the psychological organ.

These are the mouths through which consciousness grasps objects from outside, and we feel secure and happy because all these things are acting at the same time in some form or other, with more emphasis or less emphasis. Any one can act at any time, under special given conditions; and inasmuch as any one can act at any time, it is virtually saying that all are acting at the same time. Therefore we are objectively conscious through the operative media of the individual consciousness acting in the waking condition. We are aware of this vast world of sensory perception, and we go on contacting these objects of the world through these media.

The human individual is a microcosmic specimen of the entire creative process of the cosmos. The layers or degrees of reality which constitute the composition of the universe of creation are also to be found in the human individual in the form of the Kosas or the sheaths, as they are called - physical, vital, mental, intellectual and causal-known in the Sanskrit language as Annamaya Kosa, Pranomaya Kosa, Manomaya Kosa, Vijnanamaya Kosa and Anandamaya Kosa. These are the five layers of objectivity which, in a gradational form, externalize consciousness.

The grosser the sheath, the greater is the force of externalization, so that when consciousness enters the physical body we are totally material in our outlook, physical in our understanding and assessment of values, intensely body-conscious, and know nothing about ourselves except this body. It is only when we go interior that we have access to the subtler layers of our personality - not otherwise.

johilan, you state nice theories. But there's little or no evidence that what you say is correct. Repeating religious dogma, whether or East or West, doesn't make it true.

Roger

Is "intellectual activity" involved in the "true seeking" of the truth?

We can only operate from the state of conscious awareness that we find ourselves, if this state of awareness is limited to the level of experiential understanding as derived by the Buddhi or intellect at this level of conscious awakening, then it is by way of the intellect at this limited level of our existing experiential capacity by which we need make our limited assessments and deductions.

However in spite of this limitation there remains a higher more subtle force at work behind the veil that is the grosser limited curtain of the conditional Buddhi or intellect.

To some a theory is true and to others it remains a dogma.

To Einstein the theory of relativity was true before it became readily accepted by the scientific community at large, through which medium of acceptability did the scientific community and humanity at large eventually accede that the Theory of Relativity is in actuality true?

Because one cannot readily accept a truth to be true does not make it any less true than it already is.

joshilan, there was (and still is) plenty of objective evidence that the theory of relativity was true. Early on, some astronomical observations showed that the curvature of light around the sun was exactly as Einstein predicted -- if I recall the history correctly.

So you're wrong: if a theory can't be proven to be true, it isn't true until it can be proven. Sure, there are all kinds of subjective truths, but we're speaking of objective truths here -- those which don't depend on the subjective consciousness of any individual.

You're free to accept certain things as true, just as you're free to like vanilla ice cream more than chocolate. But that doesn't make vanilla objectively more tasty than chocolate. People often make the mistake of confusing personal experiences with objective truth, just as you seem to be doing.

Joshilan wrote: "So if it requires that true spiritual seekers need to satisfy their entire intellectual reasoning and inquisition up front, then it is far better to do so in advance and not later so as to avoid bitter disillusionment later on, as is found in many visitors to this site."

--One may satisfy their intellect for the time being, but after years have passed perspectives change and new insights, doubts and questions arise. My point being, the intellect is subject to change. No?

One thing I would like to clear up. I have noticed that many RS believers who visit this blog assume that those who left RS and comment here are "disillusioned" and "bitter". Well, that may be true for some, but in my view most ex'ers who comment here do not seem to be bitter.

The word "disillusioned" has two meanings according to Websters:

a) disappointed, dissatisfied
b) to leave without illusion or naive faith
and trust

I can only speak for myself, but I do not feel bitter or disappointed. RS was just shed like an old skin and I moved on without illusion or naive faith and trust in RS. However, I find the topic of RS interesting at times because of my long association and familiarity with it. Hence my frequent discussion of it here.

I am now amazed that I 'bought into' RS hook, line and sinker. It is stunning to me how so many continue to do so, but at the same time I understand. The struggles of life and the dilemma of death can be overwhelming. It is nice to have a rock to stand on, but the rock can be confining. I now enjoy the freedom of the mysterious, unknowable and wonderous abyss. I enjoy facing empty space like the guy on the sofa. There is peace in that vastness.

tucson, nicely said. People like Joshilan don't understand that life isn't a matter of intellectual understanding, but of directly experienced existence. Thinking things out is fine for some problems, like "why is my computer acting up?"

However, life isn't a question that can be answered intellectually. So all the ponderings in the world about whether Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Sant Mat, or whatever is the right religion don't answer the question: What is life all about?

As you said, we understand more and more about life by living, not merely by thinking. The sort of theological investigation Joshilan advocates doesn't get us very far, in my experience. Try something, see how it works, then adjust your trying -- that's what I've found to be effective, not sticking with a failed approach.

SmackDat says:

"I understand the hurt some here feel after they threw themselves into Sant Mat wholeheartedly, just believing the teacher was God incarnate, believing it all of it blindly.'

-- I'd like to mention that I am not quite so sure that so many here actually "threw" themselves "into Sant Mat wholeheartedly, just "believing it all of it blindly".

I certainly did not. I did not ever believe that "the teacher was God incarnate", and I also did not believe it all "blindly". I approached it pragmatically, and only as a particular type of yoga practice - minus dogma and theology, and minus the 'master is GIHF' belief.

I also did not "delude" myself "into believing something by taking someone's word for it"

[note: and also, contrary to the notions expressed in some other comments, I have no sort of 'bitterness']

"I went through the same thing."

-- No, I really don't think so. I am quite sure that you did not go through "the same thing" at all.

"But then I returned to Sant Mat - at least to the practise of it rather than the belief, so that now I only truly believe what I experience directly."

-- I doubt that too. Because if you are practicising, then you must be believing to some degree.

"Occasionally I attend a satsang, [...] I usually find I can make use of at least one thing from every satsang."

-- What are you looking for there, that you feel that there is something there for you to "make use of"?

"there's a little brainwashed cult child gap in my brain that is constantly trying to get filled"

-- Yes, thats exactly why I said that its unlikely that you have been through "the same thing" at all.

But hey, if you like to do the RS brand of meditation, then thats entirely your choice.

Joshilan,

No, I do not agree that these Santmat masters "encourage these seekers to satisfy their intellects to the utmost absolute satisfaction". That is nothing but typical standard RS cult propaganda.

I have no such "bitter disillusionment", and I also do not see that that is true of "many visitors to this site" either.

You said: "if one is seeking this intellectual ratification through mediums such as reading internet sites such as this one before making ones mind up"

-- Please identify who here is into "making ones mind up"?

Also, there is no necessity for you to post yoga system dogma about "Manas, Buddhi, Ahamkara and Chitta", and "Annamaya Kosa, Pranomaya Kosa, Manomaya Kosa, Vijnanamaya Kosa and Anandamaya Kosa".

You said: "To some a theory is true and to others it remains a dogma."

-- No, theory is only theory, and not necessarily "true".

You said: "Because one cannot readily accept a truth to be true does not make it any less true than it already is."

-- No, it is not "already" "true", unless it is clearly proven to be true. You are trying to blur the line between mere assumptions, and truth.

Response to tAo (and Roger re meditation experiences ):


"I went through the same thing" "-- No, I really don't think so. I am quite sure that you did not go through "the same thing" at all."

Yes, as I am not able to assess what everyone here subjectively experienced I cannot say that I indeed went through the same thing. My experience involved: ignoring the inconsistencies, then questioning the inconistencies, lots of research on the net (David Lane's work is outstanding), getting annoyed, hurt, angry that I even got sucked into it all and then I got rid of the books, stopped meditating and completely left it for a few years.

"But then I returned to Sant Mat - at least to the practise of it rather than the belief, so that now I only truly believe what I experience directly." "-- I doubt that too. Because if you are practicising, then you must be believing to some degree."

Yes, I do believe to some degree. My belief is based on experience in meditation (limited as it might be).

Let's say you are in another country and ask a local to recommend a tourist attraction. The local says "Go straight ahead and you'll see a yellow lamp post, turn right, walk 500 metres and you'll see a christmas tree, cross the road and walk through the alley where two buskers are singing Dixie... etc, etc, etc. and then you will come across an alien spaceship".

So I walk down the street - and I see the lampost. So I stand there for a moment and think "He was correct about the lamp post, maybe if I turn right here there will be a christmas tree". I don't know if there is a christmas tree, maybe he just knows about the lampost and nothing else... but he was correct about the lampost... so, as a result, I develop have a teeny weeny bit of trust in this crazy local (tempered with my ever present cynicism).

Sure, the trust will be shattered if I don't see that christmas tree, but for now I'm turning right and following the directions.

As to the content of my 'experiences' - I'll think about posting them. They're not mind blowing, but they're enough to keep me meditating and to keep me enjoying meditation. Yes, I know one of the problems with Sant Mat is that the teachers say you shouldn't share your experiences, which keeps everyone in the dark. But I work so hard for my little morsels that I don't feel like risking them in the off off chance that the teachers are right. But I will consider posting - I mean, it's anonymous right?

"Occasionally I attend a satsang, [...] I usually find I can make use of at least one thing from every satsang." "-- What are you looking for there, that you feel that there is something there for you to "make use of"?"

Probably for the same reasons I visit this site: to learn from others' thoughts on Sant Mat, positive or negative. I like the topic, I'm interested in it. I don't know why I like the topic. Why are we all here?

I guess sometimes I attend for the community, to be around others who are involved or were involved in Sant Mat. Just as a model railway enthusiast might enjoy meeting other enthusiasts at the annual model railway convention.

"there's a little brainwashed cult child gap in my brain that is constantly trying to get filled"

-- Yes, thats exactly why I said that its unlikely that you have been through "the same thing" at all.

Not sure. You may be right but I don't have a way of proving of disproving this.

Tucson,

I would be interested in your thinking as to why in fact ppl do appear to buy into RS 'hook, line and sinker' as you say.

It appears most on here, even the dissillusioned or skin-shedding ex-satsangis did at one stage make this buy in.

You must have given some thought as to why RS, as opposed to various other mystic or spiritual traditions, appears to have such a pull?

Seems to me RS encourages the intellect up to a point.

But at that point there must be a disconnect, since one has to let go of the intellect to pierce the veil and connect with a different state to achieve some sort of mystical experience or gnosis.

I do not know if I believe this personally, since my skeptical western mind is simply conditioned to question and to reason; but perhaps this is precisely why many ex-satsangis do become disillusioned with RS. Perhaps deep down they always harbour this doubt, however rigidly they try adhere to the mechanical tenets of the RS tradition.

Seems to me its not so much a case of following these mechanical tenets religously, as opposed to them being tools to try and open up the mind and release it from the supposed clutter of the intellect.

It follows that those that have had a mystical experience continue to follow RS, while those that do not become dissilusioned.

Such a mystical experience may be an illusion, and herein seems probably lies the fundamental problem, which is if one truly lets go from the intellect, the question then becomes do we enter a realm of raised consciousness or do we enter a realm of make-believe, fantasy and illusion?

I guess that is the million-dollar question.

And I do not know if its resolvable, since those that enter RS with a western questioning mind geared more towards rationalism, would seem inherently predisposed away from entering into this different state, one has to almost let oneself go fully. The danger of this appears to me to be the potential for cult followers.

But this seems to be the quid pro quo, which is that one has to risk one's mind as it were, to let it go totally, and i'm not sure if the dissillusioned ex-satsangis wherever truly able to do this. I doubt very much I would be able too either.


Joshilan,

You stated,

"We can only operate from the state of conscious awareness that we find ourselves, if this state of awareness is limited to the level of experiential understanding as derived by the Buddhi or intellect at this level of conscious awakening, then it is by way of the intellect at this limited level of our existing experiential capacity by which we need make our limited assessments and deductions. However in spite of this limitation there remains a higher more subtle force at work behind the veil that is the grosser limited curtain of the conditional Buddhi or intellect."

---What is the "higher more subtle force" at work behind the veil? The veil, being the intellect. Can the intellect comprehend this higher subtle force? If not, then how does One know of a higher force, in the first palace?


Smack,

You stated,

"As to the content of my 'experiences' - I'll think about posting them. They're not mind blowing, but they're enough to keep me meditating and to keep me enjoying meditation. Yes, I know one of the problems with Sant Mat is that the teachers say you shouldn't share your experiences, which keeps everyone in the dark. But I work so hard for my little morsels that I don't feel like risking them in the off off chance that the teachers are right. But I will consider posting - I mean, it's anonymous right?"

---So, meditations experiences require "hard" work? Were you trained to think in this manner?
---Did the teachers train you on the "risk" that would come into play, if you discussed your meditation experiences?

Thanks for any replies,
Roger

George, a couple of responses:

I don't think there's any correlation between mystical experience and remaining on a mystic path -- such as RSSB. I'm aware of many initiates who say they've never had a mystical experience, yet have remained an active part of the organization. Others, like some who regularly comment on this blog, have reported significant mystical experiences and are no longer members of RSSB.

It depends on the mystical experience, for one thing. In my case, I've had what I consider "mystical" experiences, if what we mean by this word is direct intuitive insight into the nature of reality. The only thing was, those experiences weren't very compatible with the RSSB philosophy and have led me in a different direction.

Your million dollar question is a good one. However, I also don't think there is any correlation between totally letting go of the contents of one's mind, and having a mystical experience (or staying on the RSSB path).

The RSSB meditation approach decidedly advises against totally letting go. The initiate is advised to continually keep his/her mantra in mind, along with visualizing the form of the guru. If inner sights or sounds appear, the mantra is to be repeated as a supposed check on the validity of the experience.

So this is by no means totally letting go of the mind. To do that, I'd say someone has to let go of dogma, expectations, and any defined belief system.

Brian,

I find that strange, but i take your word for it.

Surely the goal of RS is to unite with the sound, othewise why do it? Elements like vegetarianism or meditation or living a chaste purer life exist in many other mystic traditions.

The mechanical tenets for achieving this, i.e. vegetarianism, purity, etc are surely all just tools forming part of a method that have been found through practical experience by the saints/satgurus through the ages to supposedly be the best method for achieving such a connection or unity.

I don't really want to get into semantics about what constitues a mystical experience, but rather focus on the plain intended meaning, which is as you indicate some sort of unity or connection with a creative force or sound where one experiences this gnosis or direct intutive insight into the nature of reality.

Such a feeling must surely be overwhelming if experienced, supernatural in effect. Why would someone get off the RS path having had such a profound experience. Surely, the love for their guru and his teachings would be massive.

In contrast, I understood your experiences to be very different and far more banal when I asked this to you a while back. Perhaps I have misunderstood your reasons for leaving Sant Mat.

"Such a feeling must surely be overwhelming if experienced, supernatural in effect. Why would someone get off the RS path having had such a profound experience. Surely, the love for their guru and his teachings would be massive."

---So, a meditation experience is an "overhelming" feeling, which is supernatural, in effect? Is this correct? Do feelings and the Supernatural, go hand in hand?
---"Why would someone get off the RS path having had such a profound experience." This is a good question. Must be something, possibly incomplete, about such experiences. Including, the profound ones.
---How would One obtain a massive love for the guru and his teachings? Does this come from training sessions?

George, you're making a logical (and existential) error. You're assuming that you know what reality -- let's call it "ultimate" -- is, and then making a further assumption that if someone doesn't experience that assumed reality, they haven't been in touch with what is real.

This is circular reasoning. What I mean is, your comment assumes that the practices enjoined by a particular spiritual system, in this case RSSB, lead to an experience of ultimate reality. However, what evidence is there for this? Why don't you assume that Zen Buddhist practice, or Christian practice, or Wiccan practice leads to higher knowledge?

Such is the foundation of my churchlessness. Which also is the foundation of many deep mystical teachings. Or rather, unteachings. Either we approach ultimate reality with a belief that we already know what it is (the "via positiva," as its called), or we approach ultimate reality in a spirit of unknowing ("via negativa").

In your comment you imply that ultimate reality manifests as sound and light. But this puts bounds around reality, and there are many other hypotheses about the foundation of existence (including the Buddhist notion that there is no foundation).

Do you see what I'm saying? Meditators and mystics have many different kinds of profound experiences. There is no evidence that any of these are more real (a word that is tough to define in mysticism) than the other experiences.

Zen, for example, along with Advaita, puts little or no emphasis on having a particular sensual experience, whether inner or outer. Rather, the notion is to change one's whole way of seeing, of flipping consciousness around, in a sense.

Thus I don't think it is possible to set up benchmarks for a "true" mystical experience, and then say this person had one, and this person didn't. That's why my blog tag line is "preaching the gospel of spiritual independence." Each of us has our own subjective experience of inner reality. There's no way around that.

Everything relative to true spiritual or mystical experience is a by product of love, prem, bhakti. Those hoping to have elevated spiritual or mystical experience without the fuel of the elevated consciousness propelling the experience are looking to try and achieve an impossibility.

Without the jiva or soul attaching to a higher more subtle and more powerful psychic energetic force and piercing the veil of the encrusted layers of karmic patterns that shroud and blanket the consciousness from penetrating into a state of rapture or love one can simply forget any talk or any idea of mystical or spiritual experience.

It is almost an anomaly that the soul or jiva will not be able to penetrate through the eye of the needle while still flabbergasted with the preconditioned covering and the attached intellect preventing its progress.

It is simply a natural process, no amount of discussion or ideological or intellectual ramification will create the circumstance or condition for the state of rapturous transport to take place, one would have to lose the one in order to gain the other, just as two lovers would have to lose each other in each other in order for love to be truly consummated.

Love is not something one can teach or get taught.

This is the anomaly of Love.

Capture it, or be captured by it, grasp it, lose yourself in it, become absorbed in it, lose your identity to become the other being, this is Love, and the beginning of mystical or spiritual transport or experience.

Love and thought or intellect are from differing facets of the human creative spectrum, one aspect is for functionality within the metabolism of the creative transference within the realms of the human experience and the other is for the elevation of the inherent energetic psychic or spiritual power at the core of all of it.

jyotisha,

You stated,

"Love is not something one can teach or get taught. This is the anomaly of Love.
Capture it, or be captured by it, grasp it, lose yourself in it, become absorbed in it, lose your identity to become the other being, this is Love, and the beginning of mystical or spiritual transport or experience."

---Nothing wrong with love. So, no teaching of Love? Sounds ok.
---Therefore, this unteachable Love (caputed by, absorbed in, and lost identity in) is a non-conceptual non-mental activity? Sounds interesting.
---So, is "becoming the other Being" a non-conceptual non-mental... Being?
---If this is true, then, this is the beginning of the mystical or spiritual transport or experience?

---jyotisha, have you converted into this other being, as you described?

Thanks for a reply,
Roger

George wrote:

"Tucson,

I would be interested in your thinking as to why in fact ppl do appear to buy into RS 'hook, line and sinker' as you say."

--To me it is simple. Sant Mat seemingly provides a solution to mortality and a way to cope with the difficulties of life. It offers a description of why life is the way it is. Since life is tough, people want a way to feel better, to feel they have a protector, a guide in all the uncertainty.

"It appears most on here, even the dissillusioned or skin-shedding ex-satsangis did at one stage make this buy in."

--Yes, it is seductive, all the glorious inner regions, guidance and protection by the loving perfect master. Guaranteed return to "our true home" or God. To some, there is the appeal of belonging to a select group of "marked" souls destined out of billions to return to God.

"You must have given some thought as to why RS, as opposed to various other mystic or spiritual traditions, appears to have such a pull?"

--Of course you could also ask why Zen Buddhism or any other 'way' has more of a pull for some than RS. Different strokes for different folks. RS theology is more dramatic, with all the inner regions, than zen which may seem a bit dry to some. They like to surrender to the care of the father figure, the perfect master. It's a warm coccoon.

"Seems to me RS encourages the intellect up to a point."

--Only up to the point where you accept unquestioningly the dictates of the master. After that, in sant mat, intellect is seen simply as a tool to do your job and attend to your responsibilities, fullfilling your karmic obligations..to decide whether to put the car in drive or reverse and that sort of thing.

"But at that point there must be a disconnect, since one has to let go of the intellect to pierce the veil and connect with a different state to achieve some sort of mystical experience or gnosis."

--Well, you can't let go of the intellect because it goes its merry way despite all our efforts. We are mind and all appearance. Can an ocean stop oceaning? Different states are simply appearance. However, there may come a time when we recognize we are oceaning.

"I do not know if I believe this personally, since my skeptical western mind is simply conditioned to question and to reason; but perhaps this is precisely why many ex-satsangis do become disillusioned with RS. Perhaps deep down they always harbour this doubt, however rigidly they try adhere to the mechanical tenets of the RS tradition."

--This is probably the way it is for some. As I said, for me it just dropped away. It no longer applied.

"Seems to me its not so much a case of following these mechanical tenets religously, as opposed to them being tools to try and open up the mind and release it from the supposed clutter of the intellect."

--All this trying to release the mind from its clutter is like a dog chasing its tail. Just relax and peace comes automatically. Easier said than done because it is giving up the idea of a doer.

"It follows that those that have had a mystical experience continue to follow RS, while those that do not become dissilusioned."

--Speaking for myself, I have had 'mystical' experiences, some of which I have touched upon occasionally on this blog, but that is all they are...experiences. Sometimes impressive but ultimately no more profound than This right now. I don't need Sant Mat for This. This is it for me.

"Such a mystical experience may be an illusion, and herein seems probably lies the fundamental problem, which is if one truly lets go from the intellect, the question then becomes do we enter a realm of raised consciousness or do we enter a realm of make-believe, fantasy and illusion?"

--We enter realms of appearance. All appearance passes. In that way everything is an illusion in the sense that nothing stays the same or is permanent.

"I guess that is the million-dollar question."

--The question is the answer.

"It follows that those that have had a mystical experience continue to follow RS, while those that do not become dissilusioned."

--Speaking for myself, I have had 'mystical' experiences, some of which I have touched upon occasionally on this blog, but that is all they are...experiences. Sometimes impressive but ultimately no more profound than This right now. I don't need Sant Mat for This. This is it for me.

"Such a mystical experience may be an illusion, and herein seems probably lies the fundamental problem, which is if one truly lets go from the intellect, the question then becomes do we enter a realm of raised consciousness or do we enter a realm of make-believe, fantasy and illusion?"

--Is a flower an illusion? It eventually disappears from awareness or it withers and dies. Same with all experiences whether exalted or mundane. We enter realms of appearance. All appearance passes. In that way everything is an illusion in the sense that nothing stays the same or is permanent.

"I guess that is the million-dollar question."

--The question is the answer.

And I do not know if its resolvable, since those that enter RS with a western questioning mind geared more towards rationalism, would seem inherently predisposed away from entering into this different state, one has to almost let oneself go fully. The danger of this appears to me to be the potential for cult followers.

--Just let go, although it is not a choice but rather a recognition that letting go is already the case. Life goes on despite the idea of 'I'. Cults never let go. They cling to ideas and objects.

"But this seems to be the quid pro quo, which is that one has to risk one's mind as it were, to let it go totally, and i'm not sure if the dissillusioned ex-satsangis wherever truly able to do this. I doubt very much I would be able too either."

--If you follow sant mat, you must let go of rational thought regarding the teachings because there is no evidence or rationale for belief. Some continue on for decades in the face of this and refuse to come to terms. They fear being cast adrift. 'What do I do now?'. I say live. That's all there is. Accept that and the ordinary becomes extraordinary.

jyotisha,

You stated,

"It is simply a natural process, no amount of discussion or ideological or intellectual ramification will create the circumstance or condition for the state of rapturous transport to take place, one would have to lose the one in order to gain the other, just as two lovers would have to lose each other in each other in order for love to be truly consummated."

---So, no amount of discussion or ideological or intellectual ramification will create the circumstance or condition for the state of rapturous transport to take place.
---Only the "other" being can engage in this state of "rapturous" transport?
---Does the "other" being get off, when this rapturous transporting occurs? I mean, does the "other" being feel rapture?


---Sorry, I'm starting to giggle again, I don't know why, I'm just giggling away. I know, I know, I'm being silly. I agree.

Jyotisha wrote:

"This is the anomaly of Love...Capture it, or be captured by it, grasp it, lose yourself in it, become absorbed in it, lose your identity to become the other being, this is Love, and the beginning of mystical or spiritual transport or experience."

--This is the crux of the matter. Sant mat teaches there is some 'other' being to become. Some 'other' state or place to be. In sant mat time and space are reality.

To me there is no 'other' being, for It is what is living. No 'other' place to be for place is purely conceptual, an idea or appearance in mind. Whatever appears, I am there. I am already home. No matter where I go I am 'here'. It is impossible to be anywhere else. How do we become what we are if we are it? How do we go where we are if we are already there?

Time and space do not exist in their own right. They come into apparent existence only as a mechanism by which events may become cognisable. They are only appearances and their apparent existence is deduced from the events they accompany and render perceptible. They are hypothetical inferences to aid in the cognisance of the universe we objectify, and they neither pre-exist nor survive apart from the events they accompany. So, we must Now be in the lap of god. Or better..we are the lap of god.

Hi Rog,

You old questioning devil you ... wish i could answer, but am just trying to work my way through the RS minefield while searching for answers not more questions.
You might be a fan of Socrates who was a great fan of the question, he was also a great midfielder for Brazil.


Brian,

Nope i dont assume to know a single thing about ultimate reality, i find such a concept in itself quite overwhelming and am not even sure such a state or means of perception exists.

My limited understanding into such vague concepts is that RS is one of many mystic traditions that supposedly allows one to enter into some sort of raised consciousness in which one is able to unite with something bigger, with the one or ultimate reality or whatever ppl like to call it. I understand it is a feeling of a kindling like being in love, like returning home to the source and so on and so forth.

I have never experienced this, in fact i'm totally skeptical of anything remotely like it, but i presumed that this is the goal ppl entering RS are trying to achieve.

If not, what are ppl after? What were you after? I mean why did you not just go the zen route or yoga if it was mere meditation and clean living you were after?

I don't argue for the existence or non-existence of such an ultimate reality. I don't assume that any form of religion - mystical, mainstream or otherwise - provides any type of higher knowledge, but am interested in trying to find out.

My religion is science, but I like to try understand the viewpoint of others. Hence I simply am wondering what the goal is of ppl who join RS and this i assumed was reasonably self-evident, searching for this unity or some sort of profound mystic experience or gnosis.

It sounds like my understanding of RS is incorrect and that many ppl entered RS for other reasons, which means i obviously totally misunderstand the main aim or goal of the tradition itself.


Tucson,

Thanks for your answers on RS, i speculated as much on some, but I was wondering what the pull was for you yourself personally to RS?

What was your goal? Why did you chose and stick with RS for so long?

What i find quite amazing is one hears for example that many disillusioned ex-satsangis get that way after a long time, like 30 years, instead of say 2 or 5 years.
Its quite bizarre.

Any of you ever really ask yourself the question what its all about, the whole entire big bang shoot shenanigan.

Its really very simple when you strip it all away, all the rationalization and almighty hullabaloo contemplation.

'He is loving himself through us'

that is 'He, or 'Who', or 'What'

Its all a big show of love from Alpha to Omega, nothing but love, nothing 'else' whatsoever, just Love, loving itself, through itself, all so beautifully immaculately, immeasurably simple. Only Love loving Itself.

George, I understand your puzzlement. One person's experience is tough to explain to someone else. Heck, mostly we don't even understand ourselves (given how the brain works, largely below the level of conscious awareness).

The key to your questions is, I think, that people remain in a religious or spiritual organization for many reasons, many or most of which don't have anything to do with the theology or belief system of the organization.

People enjoy feeling part of a group. Associating with like-minded folks. Attending meetings. Drinking coffee afterwards and chatting about this and that. Feeling a warm and fuzzy sense of community.

Staying or not staying with an organization isn't solely a matter of believing or not believing. There's a lot more to it -- all the relationships that have been built up with people inside the group have to be considered, for example.

So when you say "its quite bizarre," I don't really see it that way. People can live in a town for 30 years, and then decide to move. People can own a house for 30 years, and then decide to get a condo. People can be married for 30 years, and then decide to get a divorce. People can stick with a job for 30 years, and then decide to enter a new career.

Thus what is bizarre about changing one's religious affiliation after 30 years? People change in so many other ways; why not in this way also?

The 'other' being, is the absence of 'me', 'my', 'I'. The epitome of selflessness or absorption in Samadhi, Oneness, the 'Other' Being, same strokes for different folks.

It is becoming the 'Other' being that is in fact the secret to becoming 'You'.

It really all depends what you seek out of the association, if its to feel part of an organization, a club, an association, or of feeling important, being looked up to, warm and fuzzy cocoon, and all those 'nice' little associations we have when joining the 'movement', 'cult', 'organization', 'affiliation', 'club', whatever, then thats about all you ever going to get out of it, and when that wears off, what you have left is yourself, you got to then stare yourself hard in the mirror and ask yourself the million dollar question, what on earth did I join that following for to begin with, maybe it was all for the emphatic wrong reasons.

But George asks, there must have been 'something' sincere deep down in your quest, that led you in that direction, so what exactly was 'It'.

It was you, looking for 'You', and you still looking, except now you starting to ask some pertinent question about who the hell 'I' am?

Still don't know?, Join the club.

Except some 'clubs' they pose some 'apparent answers'.

Now your intellect gets into overdrive, you start checking it all out again from every corner of every angle through every tenet of every facet of every philosophy, from Siddhartha Buddha, through Plotinus, through them all, and back to 'You'.

When all that intellect gets to point zero, like Krishnamurti was so fond of taking his disciple-less students to before leaving them high and dry in no mans land, then the little penny's going to start to drop, plinkity plonk.

And Oh what a mighty reawakening we gonna be having then, just like Siddhartha Buddha under the Gobi tree. Klunk!!!

And guess who's gonna be waiting otherside of the rainbow, arms folded and smiling like a Cheshire cat, guess Who.

Brian,
maybe, but then those ppl who stay part of such orgnaisations without necessarily subscribing to their tenets are either:
- being irrational, or
- are treading water and are not likely to progress. if such profound experiences are there to be had, it makes sense that to have any chance of experiencing them requires a profound change of thinking or perception.

Which brings me back to my initial query as to whether a more skeptical mind is implcitly incapable of reaping the benefits or achieving the goal of RS; and hence will lose interest over time by not having such an experience.

I mean RS may well all be dogma and illusion, i dont know, but then why join up in the first place since it seems implicit that such a person would not be equipped to reach the exhaulted spiritual heights that would seem to be the goal?

I thought there was an application process of sorts in RS before the satguru will initiate a satsangi. presumably the point of this is to try and weed out the wheat from the chaff at an early stage?

We all got the minds we have, some skeptical, others loving, others appreciative, others rational and calculating, its all part of your 'package deal' what you 'arrived' with this time round.

Neither is good nor bad, just 'are' what we are. Its part of the antashkaran, the 'impressions', remnants of actions, reactions, and likes and dislikes, through myriad of experiences, both pleasant and unpleasant, attached to our 'personality', left like sediment covering the pure unsullied conscious mind, and in turn the jivatma or soul, the essential reality of 'who' we are.

So like slaves we get dictated to by the reactionary preconditioned 'habits' we have formed through our association with those sensations we like or are attracted to and away from those we dislike or are repulsed by. This forms our so called traits our 'habits', our personality why some like this and others like that, why some can see this in something and others see something else. Subjective reasoning, attached to I, or 'me' or 'my'.

All along, behind the scenes, Love is still throbbing away, loving itself, in spite of all the surface activity, and each little bubble, each little spark is still in tune with the throb, though a faint memory of what it once was, the throb remains constant, pulling, tugging, against the stream and current of the outer sensation, the likes and dislikes, the cravings and desires.

When the bubble gets close enough to the murmur of the 'stream' the throb gets louder, the awakening starts tugging harder, yet the sediment holds fast, stuck like glue, like incessant clinging, wanting, likes and dislikes, to that which it has accustomed itself with over all its associative experience.

The conditioning when gets close enough to the power of the stream, it get washed clean, over time, maybe now, maybe soon, maybe later, but soon as the bubble gets absorbed in the stream, no possible other option, bubble gonna burst, and water gonna flow, just like it been designed to do from inception, river gonna flow all the way back to the ocean.

George wrote: "Which brings me back to my initial query as to whether a more skeptical mind is implcitly incapable of reaping the benefits or achieving the goal of RS; and hence will lose interest over time by not having such an experience."

--The master will say to accept the hypothesis and do the work in the inner laboratory of meditation to verify it. So, one could be unsure and still follow the vows, do the meditation which theoretically will be effective along with the master's grace, karmas, etc. Any honest satsangi will admit they don't know if sant mat is true or not. If they knew it, they wouldn't need it.

I suppose for some a moment comes when they decide sant mat isn't working or they're tired of it. Or, they find out about some dirt on the master, the organization, etc. Or, they just quit and go their merry way for no particular reason at all.

I know a satsangi with good intelligence who has been meditating daily for 38 years and admits to never having a mystical experience. All there is for him is darkness, silence and dry repetition. Still he keeps at it because he likes the routine and the discipline and the structure it gives to his life. Others would say "I've been at this for nearly four decades and it isn't working. I'm the same slob I always was. I'm done with this and I'm moving on."

It's individual.

very interesting allround, thank you.

tAo
We dont care about your stupid cultish and boring videos.
Give us a break with the "there is no "someone" existing who is "into all this"". If there isnt anyone You watch them and stop trying to make every one to come in agreement with You. Asshole

George posted the following comments:

"one has to let go of the intellect to pierce the veil and connect with a different state to achieve some sort of mystical experience or gnosis."

-- But that which you describe is not the actual practice of shabda yoga. First, the intellect can not and need not be let go of. Shabda yoga meditation is simply listening to an 'inner' sound current and seeing an 'inner' light. And also, there is no "connect with a different state". The prescribed meditation is to put attention upon the inner sound current (the 'shabda' or 'nam'), and that is itself the goal. From then on, the shabda then supposedly draws the consciousness of the practitioner into higher and higher subtle planes, and supposedly, ultimately beyond the realm of the mind into a transcendent purely spiritual realm. The "mystical experience" that is achieved, is simply the action of drawing of the individual's consciousness (the "surat" or "soul" in RS parlance) beyond the body and material plane, and up into inner higher subtle planes, supposedly eventually reaching the imperisible spiritual realm.

"these mechanical tenets [...] them being tools to try and open up the mind and release it from the supposed clutter of the intellect."

-- No... again, the practice of shabda yoga meditation is not done to "open up the mind and release it from the supposed clutter of the intellect". It is done specifically to bring the attention of the practioner to directly perceiving the shabda/nam or the inner sound current (which supposedly emanates from the highest spiritual plane), which then supposedly has to power to automatically draw the practioner's consciousness upwards into higher more subtle inner planes.

"those that have had a mystical experience continue to follow RS, while those that do not become dissilusioned."

-- I don't agree. It is actually more the opposite. Most of those who do continue to follow RS, have by and large achieved little or no mystical experiences; and many of those who have left RS (or "disillusioned" as you say), have indeed had unique and profound mystical experiences (but not derived from or related to the practice of RS meditation), but which the RS meditation has not brought about and not proven effective in achieving such experiences. So I would not say that those who stay with RS are the ones who have achieved "mystical experiences". They only stay because they hope and believe in the promise of someday achieving those experiences, not because they have had any experiences.

These are all things that are much more obvious to those of us who are very knowledgeable and experienced in Santmat, and not to people like yourself who basically have little understanding and knowledge and no experience in Santmat. There is no criticism in this. It is simply a matter of having correct understanding of what is the actual practice and the goal of Santmat, of the shabda yoga meditation.

"those that enter RS with a western questioning mind geared more towards rationalism, would seem inherently predisposed away from entering into this different state"

-- That may be true to some extent, but the eastern mind can be very inquiring as well. But neither eastern nor western is more predisposed. Achieving results in shabda yoga is much more simplyt a matter of focusing upon the inner sound current, and having experience of traversing the inner subtle planes as outlined in the Santmat cosmology.

"But this seems to be [...] that one has to risk one's mind as it were, to let it go totally, and i'm not sure if the dissillusioned ex-satsangis wherever truly able to do this."

-- I beg to differ with that notion as well. It is the "dissillusioned ex-satsangis" who are really the ones who have "let it go" far more than the RS believers who hold on to Santmat dogma and beliefs. The believers have not "let go" at all. They are rigidly holding onto the master/savior figure, the body of dogma, and the hope that the practice (shabda meditation) will deliver them to the goal.

[George's comments to Brian]:

"the goal of RS is to unite with the sound, othewise why do it?"

-- The goal is not so much as to "unite" with the sound, but rather to simply hear and meditate UPON the sound current (and light)... so that the sound & light current (shabda/nam) will then draw the consciousness (or 'soul') up into higher more subtle realms and beyond... eventually to the spiritual realm. So the practice is not to "unite", but rather to focus and maintain attention upon the sound. [the practice also includes internal repetition of a mantra, and visualization of the form of the guru]

"mechanical tenets for achieving this, i.e. vegetarianism, purity, etc are surely all just tools forming part of a method that have been found through practical experience by the saints/satgurus through the ages to supposedly be the best method for achieving such a connection or unity."

-- Yes that is generally true of many poaths, but in Santmat those things (vegetarianism, purity, etc) are simply peripheral aids intended to assist in a more effective meditation... and they are not the primary practice.

"the plain intended meaning, which is [...] some sort of unity or connection with a creative force or sound where one experiences this gnosis or direct intutive insight into the nature of reality."

-- That is somewhat correct, but not specifically. Yes, the "intended meaning" or purpose is to 'connect' with the shabda/sound-current, but that is not really stated as being to have "direct intutive insight into the nature of reality". The stated purpose of 'connecting' and meditating upon the sound current is all about facilitating the so-called "soul" to be drawn up through and beyond the material, subtle, and mental planes... and into the (supposed) supreme transcendatal spiritual realm. The practice and the goal of Santmat is not generally stated as being for any so-called "direct intutive insight into the nature of reality". That is much more the orientation of traditions such as Ch'an/Zen, and advaita vedanta, jnana yoga, siddha yoga, and dzogchen.

"Such a feeling must surely be overwhelming if experienced [...] Why would someone get off the RS path having had such a profound experience."

-- Again, the reason that people remain on the RS path is not because they have had, but because they have NOT had "such a profound experience". They remain because they are seeking that, and because they believe that Santmat will eventually give them that. It is far more likely that those folks who HAVE had "profound experiences" realize that such experiences are not at all dependent upon, or limited to Santmat. In fact, some of the practices and beliefs of Santmat may be impediments to realizing such mystical experiences.

But ultimately, all such suppoed "mystical" experiences are phenomenal, transitory, and they do not equate with actual realization/recognition or as you say "direct intutive insight into the nature of reality".

"the love for their guru and his teachings would be massive."

-- The so-called "love" for the guru is simply an aspect of cult mentality. It is not actual real love, as the disciples never have any closeness or proximity, or any actual personal contact or interaction with the guru... the guru who basically remains aloof and inaccessible to the masses of followers.

"Perhaps I have misunderstood your reasons for leaving Sant Mat."

-- Yes, I believe that is definitley the case. But that is not your fault. To really understand why someone would leave, requires that you know quite alot about the RS path, its dogma, its practice, its guru worship, its authoritarianism, its organization and sangat, and various sorts of other aspects that a non-intitiate would not be privy to, or familiar with, or have had any direct experience of.

I hope this helps you to get a better picture as to the actual practice and intended goal of Santmat.

"i dont assume to know a single thing about ultimate reality, i find such a concept in itself quite overwhelming and am not even sure such a state or means of perception exists."

-- Thats good observation and thinking George. I agree with you.

"My limited understanding [...] is that RS is one of many mystic traditions that supposedly allows one to enter into some sort of raised consciousness in which one is able to unite with something bigger, with the one or ultimate reality or whatever"

-- Yes, that's more or less the supposition of Santmat.

"I understand it is a feeling of a kindling like being in love, like returning home to the source and so on and so forth."

-- No... thats not really quite how it is, or how it turns out.

"I have never experienced this"

-- But that is irrelevant. You HAVE experienced many other things that are no less important and meaningful. There is nothing special that you do not have. Life itself is whats its all about, not some particular special meditation experience or extraordianry altered state. There is nothing lacking for you to gain, in that respect.

"what are ppl after? What were you after? I mean why did you not just go the zen route or yoga if it was mere meditation and clean living you were after?"

-- Its all simply a matter of the vagaries of the search. Each person's process and journey is unique.

"I don't assume that any form of religion - mystical, mainstream or otherwise - provides any type of higher knowledge, but am interested in trying to find out."

-- Thats a resonable question. But the best path (imo) is to be content with, and proceed on YOUR OWN unique path, as it is revealed and lived from moment to moment.

"It sounds like my understanding of RS is incorrect and that many ppl entered RS for other reasons, which means i obviously totally misunderstand the main aim or goal of the tradition itself."

-- Yes, that's much what I was trying to tell you awile back. But you reacted in a negative way. Yet I and others have been trying to better explain Santmat to you. Its not your fault. It takes awhile to corrrectly understand what Santmat is all about.

Ander,

I don't know what you are talking about, or what you are referring to when you say "your stupid cultish and boring videos".

I have not posted any such "cultish" videos.

You apparently have some sort of chip on your shoulder about something, but whatever it is, its not my negativity or my problem.

Maybe you should come more up to date regarding this present discussion, and shift into a more positive direction.

Jyotisha,

I am sure you mean well, but your preaching of spiritual platitudes and rhetoric like...

"Everything relative to true spiritual or mystical experience is a by product of love, prem, bhakti"

...and so on and so forth, is not particularly helpful here.

You said: "Without the jiva or soul attaching to a higher more subtle and more powerful psychic energetic force and piercing the veil of the encrusted layers of karmic patterns that shroud and blanket the consciousness from penetrating into a state of rapture or love one can simply forget any talk or any idea of mystical or spiritual experience."

-- This is all purely doctrine and dogma. Are you not aware of that? And why do you assume that you have the final word on "mystical or spiritual experience"? You are just preaching more dogma of spiritual and yoga principles, and not engaging in discussing of any issues.

You said:

"Love is not something one can teach or get taught."

"Capture it, or be captured by it, grasp it, lose yourself in it, become absorbed in it, lose your identity to become the other being, this is Love, and the beginning of mystical or spiritual transport or experience."

-- Well... that may sound nice, but those are all just words and beliefs. "Love" is just a word. Living life in the present moment is all that ever matters... whatever you may be feeling, and whatever may be happening.

tAo, nice work with your comment to George. Very clear and complete.

After reading it, I thought: "There's not much more that could be said on this subject" (why people leave Sant Mat, and why people stay with Sant Mat).

But of course there is...more to say. You just said your saying well.

Yes, tAo does an excellent job of clarifying the issues raised. George, you can take tAo's comments above to the bank.

Thanks for that little bit of appreciation Brian.

I recently decided to take your suggestion and advice, and get into a more positive approach to discussing the relevant issues here, instead of my usual same old critique and personal criticism of other posters. Like you, I was getting quite tired of all that anyway, because in the end it's rather a downer. I haven't changed my basic way of thinking, but I do plan to keep my comments on much more polite and constructive level, rather than focusing on targeting the faults of others. I am doing this primarily out of respect for you and to elicit a nicer vibe on your site.

There are much bigger issues on the horizon than wasting my time in inconsequential bickering over words and beliefs:

Like, we've just been robbed by the globalist bankers to the tune of more than 12 trillion dollars and the world economy is now literally on the brink; there are immense dangers to the entire population from out-of-contol fatal biological threats that are rapidly advancing (if not immediately, then surely in the coming weeks, months and years) and whether you like it or not; and there are dozens of other equally serious threats and problems that most people are (unfortunately) totally unaware and ignorant of.

My life is generally structured around the range of my priorities... and the time is now long overdue, in that I don't have time to worry about relatively inconsequential things such as... nonsense posted by dogmatic RS believers etc etc.

I also believe that my future physical survival depends largely upon some very specific and important things:

A.) being very highly informed (which I already am); and,

B.) being as prepared and as self-reliant and self-sufficient in terms of the basic necessities of living as possible (which I have yet to achieve totally)... such as having an independent water source, sustainable non-gmo food growing and essential food storage, off-the-grid solar power and communications, sustainabkle transportation, etc... and also, informed and cooperative local like-minded community.

I feel that the time has now definitely arrived to do what it takes, or be swept away by the approaching storm.

And there will always be those who scoff and laugh at the warnings until its too late... too late for them that is. That's just the way its always been. It is nature's way of sifting the wheat from the chaff so to speak.

Now I certainly don't mean to sound in any way religious here. I am talking about some very real and serious issues and threats that are happening right now, and that are also are fast advancing upon both the people of North America and Europe, as well as Asia and the rest of the world.

And I have already given excellent links to information where interested and concerned people can become better informed and educated as to all these various impending issues.

Here is, by far, the best place to start to become truly informed: http://www.infowars.com

In any case, I just wanted to say thanks, and I don't wish to be perceived as ranting, so I will sign off for now.

Anyone heard anything about George A Boyd? He's a former initiate of just about everything (including Darshan Singh).

www.mudrashram.com

The difference here is that some, like tAo, who reckons he is so 'well informed', is still so attached, so absorbed in his absolute fear ridden physical attachment, he has not, even in spite of all his profound so called intellectualized spiritual 'wisdom', begun to understand, nor acknowledge, in fact, what on earth he is actually doing here.

I doubt very much whether tucson or Brian quite know exactly either, else they would not be beating about the churchless bush on their rationalized drums about 'their' particular disillusionment or experience, they think it is about 'being here now' like Richard Alpert tried teaching them when they were still young hippies back in the 'good 'ol days' about letting go to their current existentialist non denominational non prescribed experience.

What they have failed to do, and why they are the 'disillusioned ex spiritual seekers' they think they might not be, is see themselves within all the song and dance discrepancy.

They may have 'intellectually' grasped the ramifications and so called rationalized understandings of the ideals or tenets of the path of Sant Mat, (which could really be any spiritual path for that matter) but they have not even begun traversing it, not even by a whisker, their dogmatic attachment to their highly inflated preconceived notion of 'who' 'they' might be, and how important 'they' value that egotistical attachment to 'themselves' is really the entire crux of the failed 'experiment'.

You see under such 'self absorbed' circumstances and conditions, no way in hell will the mind be ever able to 'grasp' any real or true or even slightly 'elevated' an understanding of anything beyond the limited scope of their so called 'rational' self centered minds eye.

So to George, you may like to take tAo's rather one sided synopsis of how the spiritual experience in relation to RS teachings does work to 'the bank' as tucson so grandiosely suggested to you to do, but if you are in any way a sincere, (that is possibly a little more sincere than the three jolly disillusioned musketeers around this here cult following are), then you would do well to stretch your envelope of imagination and consideration just a little further than you have already.

'Talk is cheap', as the old saying goes, especially such frazzled fragmented non personalized talk across the internet stratosphere, you would be far better off meeting those who your mind is trying to assess face to face and making your deductions from there.

Just as one cannot glean any real insight into anything anybody said here, or now, or then, in any printed media or through hearsay here or hearsay there, the only ultimate reasonable form of contemplative deduction is by looking into every consideration on a personalized face to face experiential communicative association level, then, and I believe only then, is one in any way a little more capable of making a so called 'rational' reasonably 'astute' deduction, as much as ones preconditioned state of 'unconditional rationalization' allows, and take it from there.

The soul, that is all souls, are on a journey, some this a way and others that a way, we find ourselves here, right now treading this pool of water under these conditions based on our current 'assumed' attribute of understanding, but under the entire scope of the grand disillusionment, it is all a case of becoming, no individual is more or less attributable to that 'becoming', ultimately in the end analysis, as much as we kick and fuss about it this a way or that a way, it is hardly within our hand whatsoever, you may think that 'you' have all the answers, all the keys to the treasure chest within your hand, the irony or the anomaly of it all, is that you don't, not a single one of us, have much to do about the any-thing or no-thing or every-thing we are becoming to be.

tAo

"These are all things that are much more obvious to those of us who are very knowledgeable and experienced in Santmat, and not to people like yourself who basically have little understanding and knowledge and no experience in Santmat. There is no criticism in this."

--- I don't want to get into another round with you, but I will just say the following. No criticism intended.

Firstly i have acknowledged my limitations on RS, not to be talked down to, but to be honest as to the position I am coming from and to try and work through all the contrasting viewpoints presented on this site logically. I have a logical mind which I believe is capable of comprehending any concept put forward on this forum.

The problem is there appears to be many on here with a great deal of knowledge on RS, not just you, and yet these many often have diametreically opposed viewpoints to yours. As such I will weigh up for myself what I consider to be correct or not.

While your comments are taken in, they will be given equal weighting as the others. I am sure you will be the first to admit that you are not a fan of RS. This does not make your viewpoint of RS either more right or wrong than someone like joshilan above, just different.

I would hazard a guess that your outlook is more similar to mine, in being more rational and skeptic; however I want to hear the views of someone like joshilan and zenjen precisely because they are so different.

The very tone of these other posts often speak speaks volumes about this difference. And to be quite honest, I believe there is something, possibly quite profound in their writing, which is intuitive, which gets to the guts of the matter.

Now I understand that all this metaphoric poetry might well be a mechanism inculcated in RS folk, which is designed to draw ppl into it. But I am also a pretty shrewd guy and in my opinion there remains something quite beautiful, sincere and even profound about it. They are sometimes able to create imagery which surpasses words and in fact I wonder how much of this was a pull to RS for others?

In short, I thank you for your input, but I will not be browbeaten into accepting your account as authorative. There is no criticism in this.

joshilan

i appreciate all your views and there is no ways i will be swayed one way or the other, i like to listen to the various arguements and assessing them first.

seems there are alot of preconceived opinions in general and not so much flexibility in thought. when it comes to topics like spirituality, this area is even more unclear.

to his credit, the one thing tAo is able to do, is set out the various tenets clearly and to sharpen up on my perhaps slightly unclear thinking, which is fine, but i dont want to get into semantic discussions so much as understanding why ppl have chosen to remain or skip out on this RS, and why it seems to invoke such passions.

George,

You said you were interested in as to why in fact people do appear to buy into RS 'hook, line and sinker'. This really struck home and it gave me a lot to ponder on.

When I first heard about Sant Mat even though I was very young and asked a lot of questions my innermost gut feeling was that this path was something I recognized on a very deep level.

It was all very new and exciting. The 60s/70s seemed to be the beginning of a new era of awakening and hearing about the path was so new and wondrous, whereas nowadays we have so much access to information and it seems to be more the age of skepticism.

I spent a lot of time reading all the Sant Mat books and listening to the audiotapes of Maharaj Charan Singh answering questions. I fell in love with this kind and loving person who answered each question so patiently and I could never find fault with him.

Now that I am more questioning I feel maybe this is also part of the path. An aware mind is a questioning mind.

It’s a kind of discarding of old concepts and beliefs and more like a renewal than an ending. You know how artists have to learn all the skills, disciplines and techniques of their craft and then there comes a time when they have to let go and unlearn so that a more individual kind of naturalness can emerge.

I still believe in a soul and think of Sant Mat as a science of the soul and not a science of the mind, but then learning how to deal with the mind is also ongoing.

I recently sent my son a quote from Master Sawan Singh about the inner form of the Master who guides the initiate and he (my son) said: Cool, I like the description of it.... So remember that he's looking over your shoulder....this astral inner master dude....and thinking that Jen is just going through a phase....

I agree, just another phase ... its still a wondrous path.

Ashy = Joshilan. So desperate.

"You old questioning devil you..........."

---Please, I'm an old pickup driven, questioning devil........

---With heavy emphases on "devil"......

joshilan,

You stated,

"The soul, that is all souls, are on a journey, some this a way and others that a way, we find ourselves here, right now treading this pool of water under these conditions based on our current 'assumed' attribute of understanding, but under the entire scope of the grand disillusionment, it is all a case of becoming, no individual is more or less attributable to that 'becoming', ultimately in the end analysis, as much as we kick and fuss about it this a way or that a way, it is hardly within our hand whatsoever, you may think that 'you' have all the answers, all the keys to the treasure chest within your hand, the irony or the anomaly of it all, is that you don't, not a single one of us, have much to do about the any-thing or no-thing or every-thing we are becoming to be."

---My Soul, just now, jouneyed down your longest sentence.
---So what is all this "grand" disillusionment stuff?
---Why do you think that 'they' have all the answers, all the keys to the treasure chest within their hand?
---So, whats the big deal with: you don't, not a single one of us, have much to do about the any-thing or no-thing or every-thing we are becoming to be?


Jyotisha,

You stated,

"The 'other' being, is the absence of 'me', 'my', 'I'. The epitome of selflessness or absorption in Samadhi, Oneness, the 'Other' Being, same strokes for different folks. It is becoming the 'Other' being that is in fact the secret to becoming 'You'."

---So, why cann't the "other" you become the other being, in the absense of me, my and I? Remember, different strokes for differnet folks. No need for this to be a secret.


Hello everyone,

You might recognize me from the comments section on one of the other posts. I said I would stick to lurking but I have decided against that. I'm liking the positive vibe here and feel that I have something to share. So from now on, if I have something to contribute I won't hold myself back. What's the point in that right?

Anyways, the discussion on why people join RS has led me to share a little bit of my experiences/views on this subject. A lot of what has been said about it can apply to anyone but I think is mostly about people who are coming into RS from another reigion or people who are discovering RS for the first time.

I say this because for me, there was no choice really. And I feel it is the same way for many people like me. My family converted to RS and got initiated way before I was born. It is the same for many of the people my age in the RS community in my home town. From birth, I was raised to believe the RS tenets and dogma. My parents encouraged me to 'pray' to Gurinder every night before I went to bed. The pressure to get initiated when I reach the minimum age for initiation is extreme (although I will not get initiated into a path I don't believe in). I, and other like me, are raised to believe that the RS teachings are truth and that Gurinder is God. When we grow up, there is a lot of family pressure to get initiated and become a formal member of the path. I'm glad I developed a questioning mind in my teens and actively searched for websites such as this.

Other people seem to be different. Sure, Gurinder encourages people to read the criticisms before committing to the path but really, family pressure is pretty great and it seems to me that some people think that because someone has been raised on RS there is really no need to read the criticisms. To illustrate, I recall an incident where some friend of the family decided to get initiated. She's also been raised on RS. I asked my dad if he thought she'd read the criticisms before deciding. What he said was that she's been raised on RS so she has no need to read those criticisms. Reading criticisms and having an open mind about Sant Mat is apparently for seekers who are new to the path. At least that is what he thinks. Gurinder does say people should not force their children to follow RS just because they themselves do. But that just does not happen. Everywhere around me, children of RS parents in my local RS community end up getting initiated. Not because they feel some sort of pull or are looking for something in particular but because of social pressure and the fact that they are raised to believe that the teachings are the truth.

I personally feel that this is the worst way to go into the path because you're never encouraged to question the teachings for yourself. Of course, you may do but this is not socially encouraged. My mother still asks me if I pray to Gurinder. I don't, ofcourse but I don't tell her that because of consequences I want to avoid. Uninitiated kids of RS parents often get up to speak in the Q&A sessions and ask Gurinder to make sure they do well in studies, take care of them, etc. I don't like this. So why do people get initiated into RS? For some, this is all they have ever known. But ofcourse, that can be said for all religions really.

But well, this is my two cents on the matter from the perspective of someone raised on the RS religion. I hope it has proved useful.

George,
Joshilan, aka Ashy, is mostly robotically parroting what he has read. His phrasing and the structure of his comments are like reading an RS book imbued with the emotion and acceptance of a true believer. tAo also understands the teachings very well, but is more objective in his approach since he is not 'invested' in RS as his personal path to salvation. Hence, from him or me you will not hear all the flowery metaphor and imagery which can be appealing, enchanting, seductive and sound authoritative but is still no more than that..beguiling flowery imagery and metaphor from one who only imagines what IT might be like.

Rose, thanks for sharing your experience. I suspect you are speaking of an Indian community of initiates, where family pressures are indeed usually considerably stronger than among "Westerners." That said, when I was a teenager I felt family pressures in a different sense -- to work in a family business when I got out of college -- and it was tough to go against the tide.

However, like you I concluded that I needed to be true to myself. Plus, if my heart hadn't been into that profession, I wouldn't have been very good at it. So the decision worked out well all around, in retrospect. It just was a emotional moment when I told my mother, "I don't want to be a business major."

I can imagine that saying, "I don't want to be initiated" would be even more difficult, given that it is the state of someone's soul that supposedly is in question, not what sort of job they end up working at.

George, explaining the passions RSSB/Sant Mat arouses in people would require quite a few words -- which I don't have time to write at the moment. Maybe that will become a post subject.

Brief answer: it's sort of like the passion one has for a coffee maker, versus an expensive car. If the coffee maker doesn't work as promised, you just chuck it in the trash can and say "oh, well, not a good choice."

But if you've made a big commitment to a supposedly high performance car, and it turns out not to work like the sales pitch said it would, the negative passion is about as great as the positive passion would have been if you'd been able to cruise around happily, looking good, with the top down, engine purring smoothly.

There's more to the issue than this, of course. Just wanted to offer some sort of reply to your comment.

Rose,

Thanks for your comment.

One interesting statement,

"From birth, I was raised to believe the RS tenets and dogma. My parents encouraged me to 'pray' to Gurinder every night before I went to bed."

---Interesting, that your parents encouraged you to pray. Nothing wrong with prayer, imo.
---However, I'm curious, as to why your parents didn't encourage you to engage in some simple meditation exercise. Say for 15 minutes, at a time.
---I have no background in SantMat teachings, other than through the Internet.
So, absolutely no expertise from my end.
---With that said, I think, I remember reading something, regarding children, given some simple intructions in mediation.
None of the 5 mantra names, but maybe something in "sound only" meditation.
---Never read anything, regarding "prayer" in the SantMat teachings, is my point.
---Rose, did you ever mediate, as a child?

Thanks for a reply,
Roger

Brian,

You suspect right. My local RS community is indeed an Indian community. There is probably only one foreigner I can think of there.

And yeah the reactions I will get for not wanting to get initiated will be very disapproving, as is the case in general with ex-satsangis. The difference being, that for me I will get those negative community reactions without even being initiated! But well, I don't care what they think.

Roger,

No there's definitely nothing wrong with prayer. But the problem is that I was not encouraged to address 'God' in general in my prayers. I was taught to address Gurinder, the Present Master. I may have believed he was God In Human Form then but I now know that he's just an ordinary human being. There's nothing Godly about him. So, that means I was encouraged to pray to another human being, who is not telepathic, so couldn't hear my prayers not grant them. That's why I take issue with the whole praying to him aspect. It's because he is clearly not able to listen.

Prayer is not explicitly in the teachings, no but it's one of those implicit social things. Satangi parents believe that he is God in Human Form so encourage kids to pray to him, to believe that he watches over people, etc. It isn't just the parents too. I went to Children's Satsang before I was old enough to attend regular Satsang. It's a bit like Sunday School. We were given a generic prayer to recite, and that was unrelated to Gurinder. But during the Children's Satgangs the GIHF is encouraged by those who teach the kids, at least in my opinion. So it's a social thing and generally how RS kids are raised.

About meditation, I once expressed interest in trying to do so but I was told that I should never attempt to meditate before I reach the minimum age for initiation. Something about my young mind not being ready and not having an internal guide.

Hope that answers your questions.

Joshilan wrote:

"strange how those that ditch the teachings of the saints have even half the audacity to proclaim they know any of them."

--Why not. Can't someone who was once a muslim and converted to christianity know anything about isalm?

"They don't, their assumed understanding is actually a lack of understanding almost to the extent of a debauchery of such."

--examples please

"... this conglomeration of negation driven, non spiritually inclined, purely intellectual cohorts of high strung individuals will only give you their very limited and self indoctrinated, self centered and self righteous version."

--please, examples.

"And what is even more evident is that they come across as inverted cowards, because they have in fact set up this forum specifically, (even though it may be couched in other more illustrious type of generalized terms), as a venue to air their inherent frustrations about their specific lack of spiritual experience and casting their anxious array of negation inspired rhetoric as the gospel truth."

--examples?

"Whereas they are too cowardly to address their lack of vision, love, clarity or understanding to the source of their frustration, they pound away as disillusioned ex initiates of a particular system on this site as some kind of psychological pick me up cooperative support group amongst themselves as a means to compounding and collating their negation, yet they are too scared or too cowardly to address their fallible psychological complexity to the very source of their negation and frustration."

--It is you who is frustrated. What pisses you off is that no matter how you phrase it, you have failed to convince anyone on this forum of anything and this is because what you believe can't be proven. Admit it. You have simply chosen to believe. That's fine, but don't expect that others will see it your way. If you continue to do so your frustration will continue to mount.

George,

I will simply say this to you:

My last comment to you was in no way shape or form intended to "talk down" to you, nor have you be "browbeaten into accepting" anything. I was simply trying to clarify and explain the RS meditation system, to alleviate any confusion that you might have. You take that being "talking down" and "browbeating" you. Fyi, that is not at all the attitude I have towards you. You seem to want to continue to remain negative and closed-minded towards me, so I will refrain from any further attempts at sharing information and explanations reagding Santmat with you. I was simply trying to help you and communicate with you in a positive sense.

I was also not trying to sound "authorative" as you claim. I was simply trying to give you a better understanding of the actual workings and basic premise of the Santmat/RS meditation method. In as much as I have been extremely well acquainted with much experience in the Santmat meditation system for more than 30 years, I do happen to know what I am talking about.

However, you seem to assume that the info and details about Santmat that I explained to you - about RS meditation - is merely my one isolated opinion, but that is not the case.

You said: "The problem is there appears to be many on here with a great deal of knowledge on RS, not just you, and yet these many often have diametreically opposed viewpoints to yours."

It appears that you do not see that what I explained to you is basic and factual information, and it is precisely the method of the RS meditation system. There are not differing opinions. This can and will be verified by other knowledgable long-time initiates.

Yet it appears that you (probably because you are just not familar with the inner workings of Santmat), believe that some of these other more fanatical dogmatic believers here have other opinions that are "opposed" to mine, and that their opinions are equally as authoritative. That also is generally not the case.

So fyi, there is only one standard basic method of meditation in Santmat/RS, and that is exactly what I have described for you. The difference between myself, Brian and Tucson etc, and these other fanatical believers is not about the meditation method, but rather about all of the baggage of theological dogma and belief and guru-cultism that they attach to the meditation method.

In any case, I again want to reiterate that my intent was and is not to "talk down" to you or to "browbeat" you. I want to make that very clear. My intent was and is positive and good-hearted, and I meant no criticism or offense to you.

But since you have assumed otherwise and you seem to still have a rather closed-minded attitude and bias towards anything that I might share, I will therfore simply not be offering you any more input or information on the subject. I will just leave it to others to sort that all out for you.

Since you are not willing to accept that what I have to share here is both accurate and is put forth with a sincere and positive intention, I do not wish to engage in further debate with you. I am simply not going put myself in a position of being compared to mentally disturbed religious fanatics such as ashy/joshilan.

Before I close, I want to make sure that you understand that I respect your right to your point of view, and that I have no ill feelings towards you. And if you choose not to be receptive and accept my views and insights, and my considerable knowledge and experience in Santmat, than that is your business. And if you feel that these neophyte RS religious fanatics have some sort of special unique and subtle wisdom (that Brian and Tucson and I do not), then so be it... and that will be for you to sort out.

Best of luck to you George... and thank you for responding and expressing your thoughts and views.

Also, hopefully, perhaps someday you will go take a look at the papers on Categorical Analysis that I referred you to. I think that would expand your perspective relative to all of these RS doctrine and mysticism issues.

Joshilan aka Ashy is now back again... and is posting loads of personal derision and endless meaningless and indecipherable mumbo-jumbo.... all over again.

So, for as long as this type of mentally disturbed troll continues to to be allowed to post nonsense personal ridicule and general insults, and wandering meaningless babble in this forum (and still supported and defended by George)... I am out of here.

To show my point, the following are the most recent examples of Ashy aka Joshilan's fanatical rantings, twisted mumbo-jumbo, and personal derogatory ridicule, all assembled here in plain view:


"tAo, who reckons he is so 'well informed', is still so attached, so absorbed in his absolute fear ridden physical attachment, he has not, even in spite of all his profound so called intellectualized spiritual 'wisdom'....." -- What?????

"doubt very much whether tucson or Brian quite know exactly either, else they would not be beating about the churchless bush on their rationalized drums about 'their' particular disillusionment....." -- ?????

"the ideals or tenets of the path of Sant Mat [...] they have not even begun traversing it, not even by a whisker, their dogmatic attachment to their highly inflated preconceived notion of 'who' 'they' might be....." -- ?????

"no way in hell will [...] the limited scope of their so called 'rational' self centered minds eye....." -- ?????

"you may like to take tAo's rather one sided synopsis of how the spiritual experience in relation to RS teachings....." -- ?????

".....especially such frazzled fragmented non personalized talk....." ?????

"one cannot glean any real insight into anything anybody said here, or now, or then, in any printed media or through hearsay here or hearsay there, the only ultimate reasonable form of contemplative deduction is by looking into every consideration on a personalized face to face experiential communicative association level, then, and I believe only then, is one in any way a little more capable of making a so called 'rational' reasonably 'astute' deduction, as much as ones preconditioned state of 'unconditional rationalization' allows, and take it from there." -- ?????

"under these conditions based on our current 'assumed' attribute of understanding, but under the entire scope of the grand disillusionment, it is all a case of becoming, no individual is more or less attributable to that 'becoming', ultimately in the end analysis, as much as we kick and fuss about it this a way or that a way, it is hardly within our hand whatsoever, you may think that 'you' have all the answers, all the keys to the treasure chest within your hand, the irony or the anomaly of it all, is that you don't, not a single one of us, have much to do about the any-thing or no-thing or every-thing we are becoming to be." -- ?????

"strange how those that ditch the teachings of the saints have even half the audacity to proclaim they know any of them." -- ?????

"their assumed understanding is actually a lack of understanding almost to the extent of a debauchery" -- ?????

"this conglomeration of negation driven, non spiritually inclined, purely intellectual cohorts of high strung individuals will only give you their very limited and self indoctrinated, self centered and self righteous version." -- ?????

they come across as inverted cowards, because they have in fact set up this forum specifically [...] as a venue to air their inherent frustrations about their specific lack of spiritual experience and casting their anxious array of negation inspired rhetoric as the gospel truth." -- ?????

"they are too cowardly to address their lack of vision, love, clarity or understanding to the source of their frustration, they pound away as disillusioned ex initiates of a particular system on this site as some kind of psychological pick me up cooperative support group amongst themselves as a means to compounding and collating their negation, yet they are too scared or too cowardly to address their fallible psychological complexity to the very source of their negation and frustration." -- ?????

[To Tucson]: "I am here purely to challenge the likes of you who supposedly think you know, or have experienced enough about life or spirituality to go and caste a whole lot of inaccurate dispersions about it." -- ?????

"contrary to so many of your assumed allegations about me or the path you have conveniently ditched purely because you don't have the stomach for the ask of it, is I don't actually give two little hoots about what you may think or deduce about my application or approach to the truths of its teachings." -- ?????

"my feeble approach in getting you off your high horse of sanctimonious conceited arrogance has very little to do with what any soul is inclined to appreciate or accept as true." -- ?????

"This so called 'conversion' is by no means in my puny hands to contemplate or dictate, that is for a much higher and more noble of attribute and coercion to utilize its influence, and it won't be pulled this way or that way through me here, or by you here either." -- ?????

"The entire debauchery from your perspective comes as a show of lack, you base almost your entire life philosophy on what you have gleaned and what you have learned both intellectually and from personal experience whilst treading the sant mat path amongst other information and 'knowledge' from other sources, and imbibing some of its teachings." -- ?????

"you were unable to convert them from philosophy or intellectual reason into experience shows only a lack on your part, if you are unable to recognize truth that is staring you in the face, then the blindness is purely yours." -- ?????

"here we have a very small collection of highly strung and highly skeptic, spiritually devoid intellectual adherents who proclaim with all their might that there is no such thing as a spiritual experience, and that the living teachers of a particular system of teaching or philosophy are just frauds." -- ?????

"the current master even goes as far as to challenging you to assume it, he even himself on many occasions has said from the very platform while giving discourse or answering questions, he has acceded 'how do you know I am not just a fraud', and so he throws out the very challenge you in your intellectual stupor cannot grasp, test the value of your limitation." -- ?????

-- I really hope that Brian deletes all this sort of crap before its starts mounting up again, and turning this forum into a cesspool of fanatical bickering and ranting and abusive ridicule again. This is all I am going to say, because I am going to stay out of this mess until it is put to rest.

Adios for now.

tAo,
Who cares about your stupid videos. If, and I quote: there is no "someone" existing who is "into all this", or to "admire"; then You watch it and You understand it, and let Us then Be. If there isnt a thing, dont try to make everyone be in accordance with you. Idiot and rude a******

Is that better Blog God Brian?

tAo and all, I've been deleting Ashy's/Joshilan's comments because he agreed to stop commenting if I left a few last comments up, then went back on his word. Plus, his rants belong on the I Hate Church of the Churchless blog, not here.

I was off doing other things (Tai Chi and exercising) and wasn't able to get to Ashy's/Joshilan's latest rants until now.

He is indeed pathetic. I feel sorry for him in a way -- most of us are living a life, and Ashy Heller seems to live only to insult people and post profane rants on this blog. The way I see it, he's a marvelous advertisement for what happens to someone if he/she becomes a fundamentalist Sant Mat believer who isn't willing or able to discuss philosophy or spirituality in an adult manner.

So it doesn't hugely bother me when his comments stay up for a while. He undermines his own arguments by how poorly he makes his case.

tAo

I have been listening to Alex Jones on http://www.infowars.com and have also watched his DVDs.

I am in Australia and usually listen to his radio show about this time, it is now 11.30am on 30th April. I cannot access infowars.com at the moment. Any ideas? Have they gone off the air?

Thanks for any info.

Brian,

Hey no problem. I figured you'd get around to the matter whenever you could. And I much agree with you when you say:

"he [Ashy]'s a marvelous advertisement for what happens to someone if he/she becomes a fundamentalist Sant Mat believer who isn't willing or able to discuss philosophy or spirituality in an adult manner."

"He undermines his own arguments by how poorly he makes his case."

That's really true.

And like I said, I've really taken your suggestion and your wishes to heart, and have already begun to try and avoid using any sort of harsh personal criticisms or impolite language. If I can refrain from that sort of thing, then so can others. I'd like to present a nicer vibe in any future comments that I make. That's why I took the initiative to change my style.

Zenjen,

Re: Infowars.com

Sometimes that happens, but very rarely. Alex gets a unbelievably huge amount of traffic to his sites. He regularly pays out tens of thousands of dollars for the servers and bandwidth.

I just checked Alex's infowars.com site a few minutes ago and its fine. No problems. In fact, I am listening to Alex discussing the exploding Swine Flu epidemic with Dr Len Horowitz right now (about 11 pm California time). His radio show repeats every 4 hours on the net, so you can tune in any time, day or night.

tAo,

Thanks for the feedback. I did eventually manage to access the Infowars website this afternoon. It was interesting to hear that they were apparently being hacked and are hit constantly in an effort to shut them down.

I like to listen to the show through the internet and keep in touch with what's happening over there especially with the swine flu epidemic so will listen later on to the repeats.

Thanks for the info.

tAo,
Your efforts were appreciated and I said as much, but there were paragraphs which came accross to me as being very arrogant, perhaps its just me.

I am more than happy to be corrected, but I will inevtiably also want to question your views to try and satisfy myself of their validity. I will challenge most things, however correct you hold them to be.

I don't assume anything about your opinion, I simply am not prepared to accept it as gospel, there are others who disagree and i like to listen to them too. I guess i felt their views were getting browbeaten and supressed. I dont want ppl to conform to someone else views, I want to hear different views.


You talk about your information being 'basic and factual'. I believe there are very few facts in existence, rather our complex minds are able to distort and apply spin to these facts, however honest we like to pretend we are. What you consider a basic or factual tenent of RS, others might not. My impression is that you do indeed have a good understanding of the actual philosophical and tenents, but probably miss out on the practical or deeper aspects, tho i might be wrong on this, i still like to prefer to hear the opinion of others.

Perhaps we just don't really understand each other, and indeed for peace on this site, perhaps your suggestion of not responding to one another is then the best option.

To summarise, i do respect and take in your viewpoint, but i will extend exactly the same courtesy to the other posters that disagree with you or whom you apparently consider to be fundamentalists like ashy.

For the record, I did not see any of ashy's personal comments on here, they all look pretty useful to me (but perhaps the offensive ones have been removed).

I suppose there's no place for that sort of personal thing, but then that needs to cut both ways. I dont believe Ashy will simply go off in a vaccum, there is something that is provoking him.

Look you guys have to deal with it as you see fit. Whoever you want to ban is fine with me, its your site and you spend alot of time on it. Do whatever you want.

Rose,

Thanks for your reply.

Apparently, the "God in human form" issue is still alive and well, in certain SantMat families. Interesting, how this is part of a "sunday school" like environment. I wonder, how and where the school teachers get their teaching instructions?

You mentioned,

"About meditation, I once expressed interest in trying to do so but I was told that I should never attempt to meditate before I reach the minimum age for initiation. Something about my young mind not being ready and not having an internal guide."

---This is interesting, with regards to the four life cycle process. That is, if I am in my 2nd life cycle, and have been initiated in my 1st life, then it seems kinda strange that I am waiting 24 years to receive my second initiation.

Reasoning: Because of my young mind and not having an internal guide.

---Surely, One that has their 1st santmat initiation, has their guide(guru) setup?
---Would be interesting to chat with someone in their supposed 2nd, 3rd, or 4th
cycle.
---Do these persons, mentally, know they are in such cycles or not?


Anyway, Rose, just some questions to ponder. I'm glad you are around to provide commentary. Keep it up.

Best wishes to you,
Roger

George, you wrote:

"I will inevtiably also want to question your views to try and satisfy myself of their validity."

-- You can verify my so-called "views" simply by reading the RS literature, where you will find that what I have related is exactly and no different than what the RSSB itself teaches.

"I will challenge most things, however correct you hold them to be."

-- It's not a matter of what I "hold" things to be, or what I believe, or my "opinions". It is simply a matter of what the RSSB itself teaches.... which is exactly what I have related. Any sane and sober RS initiate can also verify this.

"I don't assume anything about your opinion, I simply am not prepared to accept it as gospel"

-- I never offered anything to you as "gospel". I simply related what the RS itself teaches in the initiation, and in ALL of its literature, and by ALL of its past and present leaders/gurus. You can verify that for yourself by reading the literature, or by going to an RS satsang meeting and asking RS initiates. They will no doubt tell you the exact same thing about the RS meditation procedure, as I have related.

"there are others who disagree and i like to listen to them too."

-- Is that so? Well then just who are those who disagree? and WHAT exactly do they disagree about? You need to be specific if you are going to make this assertion. For your information, the RS meditation is the same for all intitiates, and all initiates know what that is. So where, and in whom is this disagreement specifically?

"I guess i felt their views were getting browbeaten and supressed."

-- I have not "suppressed" anyone's views... nor have I "browbeaten" anyone. The arguments here have been all about theologogical and fundamentalist judgements, guru/savior-cultism, and derisive ranting... and not about the facts of the RS meditation process and its related cosmology.

"I dont want ppl to conform to someone else views, I want to hear different views."

-- I am not stopping you from hearing "different views". But you are assuming that the information which I have related to you about the RS meditation procedure is merely my personal "view" or "opinion". That is not thew case. What I related is only what the RS itself teaches in its initiations, its satsangs, and in all of its literature. And that is not a matter of debate. You would already know that if you had read the RS literature. Not being inititated and not having read the literature, you are ill-equipped to make any such assumptions. You don't have to believe me... just go read the RS literature and verify this all for yourself.

"You talk about your information being 'basic and factual'."

-- Yes, I simply related the basic orientation and procedure of the RS meditation practice and method, as it is taught in the RS initiations and in all the RS literature. That is not MY own personal views and opinions, it is exactly what the RSSB itself teaches.

"I believe there are very few facts in existence, rather our complex minds are able to distort and apply spin to these facts, however honest we like to pretend we are."

-- That may be true to some extent in other matters, but that has nothing to do with my relating the fundamentals of the RS meditation exactly as it is taught by the RSSB in all of its literature. Just go read the literature if you don't believe me. All I have done here is to tell you exactly what the RSSB itself teaches. You say that others have different views (about the structure and orientation of the RS meditation), but that is not true. All initiates know and practice the SAME exact meditation procedure, as it has been taught to them by the RSSB and its gurus/leaders. There are no such differing opinions in the RS sangat regarding the meditation procedure. Your assumption that this is a matter of different opinions, is quite mistaken and incorrect.

And it shows that you have some sort of unreasonable bias, when an outsider like yourself argues against the facts as related by initites like Brian, Tuscon, and myself... where each of us has 30 plus years of knowl;edge and experience in RS compared to your zero experience. Yet you choose to listen to the derisive rants of someone who is clearly fanatical and mentally disturbed.

"What you consider a basic or factual tenent of RS, others might not."

-- All that I have related is the same RS meditation, exactly as it is taught by the RSSB in all of the RS literature. Just go read the RS literature if you don't believe me. I find your persistent yet unfounded doubting a bit annoying, especially when all I have done here is to tell you exactly what the RSSB itself teaches. You say that others have different opposing views about the RS "tenets", but that is not true. All initiates are taught, know, and follow and practice the SAME exact meditation procedure and principles, as they have been taught by the RSSB. There are no such differing opinions regarding the meditation procedure and practice.

I believe the underlying problem here is that one, you are not an intitiate so you have no experience with RS or the RS meditation, and two, you have not read the RS literature (as far as I know).

You are looking at all this as if it is merely a matter of personal opinions. But this has nothing to do with my opinions or other peop[le's opinions. It is simply about what the RS itself teaches - at the time of formal initiation, and in all of its literature. And it is also exactly what I related to you previously. If you doubt this, then just go read the official RS literature.

"My impression is that you do indeed have a good understanding of the actual philosophical and tenents, but probably miss out on the practical or deeper aspects {...] i still like to prefer to hear the opinion of others.

-- You are still approaching this as if there is something "deeper" that I am missing and do not understand.... which is pretty absurd coming from someone such as yourself who knows little or nothing about RS, and has not had 30 plus years of study and sadhana (meditation practice) and experience like I have. Neither have these other folks that you seem to think have a "deeper" understanding than I do. Your bias in favor of the less experienced believers is unreasonable, and your premise that I am "missing" something is absurd.

"Perhaps we just don't really understand each other"

-- No, I don't think its because we don't (ie: we can't) understand each other... its because you remain unreasonably biased against me, and so you refuse to understand.

"i do respect and take in your viewpoint, but i will extend exactly the same courtesy to the other posters that disagree with you"

-- There are no other RS initiates who "disagree" with me about the RS meditation. All initiates are taught the same thing. All initiates know the same meditation procedure. It is not a matter of different opinions. Who disagrees with me? Where and what do they disagree about? No one has diagreed. If they do, then lets see it... what exactly do these people you are referring to disagree about my explanation of the RS meditation procedure? Unless you can show specific evidence of your allegations, then there are no legitimate differences.

All you have to do is to go read the RS literature yourself, and you will find that my simple and brief explanation of the RS meditation procedure and its orientation, is identical to what RS teaches. All initiated RS satsangis have the same information and knowledge. So your doubts, coming from an outsider such as yourself, are mistaken.

"or whom you apparently consider to be fundamentalists like ashy."

-- Ashy's fundamentalism and fanaticism has nothing to do with the basic facts about the RS meditation procedure. Ashy's problem has all to do with Ashy's theological and guru-cultism aspects, and his anger and derisive personal judgements and comments... not the RS meditation process. You are confusing these issues.

"You can verify my so-called "views" simply by reading the RS literature"
-- They are not so-called, they are your views. What you say is not gospel, RS or otherwise-ordained. I have read some of the RS literature and i have listened to alot of ppl with varying opinions.

"Is that so? Well then just who are those who disagree?"
-- Yes, it is so imo. And whats more, its not so much a case of who disagrees as opposed to who actually agrees with you apart from tucson and brian and roger. Whenever RS rears its head, there are many that have portayed a very different VIEW to yours.

"There are no such differing opinions in the RS sangat regarding the meditation procedure."
-- Firstly, this is not what i said. I am not interested in the meditation procedure. Moreover, i actually do believe there will be satsangis who argue with you over many things, for example: the purpose of the guru, the intentions of RS, the experiences that are achievable and many more.

"I find your persistent yet unfounded doubting a bit annoying, especially when all I have done here is to tell you exactly what the RSSB itself teaches."
-- Tough, i dont really care what you find annoying. If it annoys you don't respond as you keep seem to be suggesting. As i have stated i have taken in your views of what RSSB teaches as well as those of others, but i dont treat yours as gospel.

"I believe the underlying problem here is that one, you are not an intitiate so you have no experience with RS or the RS meditation, and two, you have not read the RS literature (as far as I know)."
-- you don't know any of that, all you know is what i have acknowledged which is that i know very little, but i know enough to not be browbeaten into accepting someone else viewpoint without considering the alternatives and weighing them up.

"You are still approaching this as if there is something "deeper" that I am missing and do not understand"
-- what is so absurd about that? are you saying it is impossible that anyone could have had a deeper spiritual experience than yourself or that it is impossible that someone has understood something you have not? In either case, i would say you are being absurd in drawing such absolute cnclusions, which support my feeling that you are not quite as open-minded or wise as you seem to believe.

"Your bias in favor of the less experienced believers is unreasonable"
-- By this i assume you mean Ashy. First how do you know he is less experienced? I would hazard a guess he is more experienced. Second, i listen to both of your views on RS equally whether you care to believe it or not. If you don't care to be put on the same plane as Ashy or somehow feel you are superior, tough, i do not think you are, just different. Our issue was a more personal one, which we are trying to work through in the interests of peace and politeness.

I repeat i am not interested in the meditation procedure so am not quite sure why you are harping on it.

Roger,

I honestly have no idea about where the teachers get their instructions from. I assume there are basic guidelines but I don't know much about that.

The GIHF thing is definitely alive and well. We get told myths/stories about various things including past masters. The myths about past masters may propagate the idea that he is other than a simple teacher.

George,

With regards to tAo's description of the Sant Mat practice and meditation method, while I have never meditated myself, I have attended many many Satsangs. The description given seems to be an accurate one to me. I have heard similar things about the purpose of meditation talked about in Satsang.

And I do agree that the method itself is not open for debate. The master instructs people on how to meditate during initiation and then that method is set in stone and not up for discussion.

As for the rest of what you said I don't know/don't really have an opinion. But, the description of the actual practice is faithful and in accordance to what is being taught, according to my knowledge. You would probably find similar stuff in the RS publications.

Rose,
I am not interested in the meditation method. I don't know where that comes from. In fact if you had read what i said above, i said that i felt tAo probably had a very good understanding of the mechanical tenets behind RS

Also, i believe everything is up for debate, especially where ppl are pro and anti something. Simple mathematical statistics can be spun lets alone words.

On another matter, i did find your background given above to be extraordinarily brave and honest. It seemed quite a striking account of indoctrination to me, but i come from a very secular background. HArd to believe children are pushed by their parents faith into their beliefs in this day and age.

George, if I may make a suggestion:

I'm not sure what questions you have about RSSB/Sant Mat, or what principles of this belief system you consider to be open to debate. This would be an interesting topic to discuss.

I've written a book that was published by RSSB, and another book that was distributed by RSSB. I've read every word in each book published by RSSB up to the early 2000's, and have taken extensive notes on the core tenets of the teachings.

I don't agree that those core beliefs are open to a lot of interpretation. So far as I recall, tAo and Tucson, among others, have done a good job describing those beliefs. However, like I said, it'd be interesting if you laid out the tenets that you consider to be open to debate.

For example, I think it is clear that "the guru is God in human form" is a core RSSB tenet. Sometimes people disagree about that on this blog. I can see why someone would question the reality of that tenet. But there's little doubt that this is one of the foundations of the Sant Mat system.

Yes, initiates have individual approaches to how they experience Sant Mat. But the core teachings themselves aren't open to individualistic interpretation.

George,

You keep missing the point. You think that the RS "tenets" differ according to different individul's opinions. That is not so. All RS initiates know these same so-called "tenets", especiallly with regard to the meditation.

I said: "Is that so? Well then just who are those who disagree?"

You responded: "Yes, it is so imo. And whats more, its not so much a case of who disagrees as opposed to who actually agrees with you apart from tucson and brian and roger."

-- You still have not specified who, in your opinion, disagrees. This is not about anyone agreeing with ME. It is simply about what the RSSB itself teaches. I gave a brief description of what the RSSB teaches, which you or anyone can verify by going to the RS literature. And furthermore, Roger's opinion is irrelevant here, as he is not an RS initiate.

"Whenever RS rears its head, there are many that have portayed a very different VIEW to yours."

-- That is NOT so. There are no differing views about the meditation procedure that the RSSB teaches, which is what I had presented, and what you have disputed. If you are going to assert that others have different views about the RS meditation, then provide specific instances and evidence of that.

I said: "There are no such differing opinions in the RS sangat regarding the meditation procedure."

You responded: "Firstly, this is not what i said. I am not interested in the meditation procedure."

-- Yes it is what you said. I presented a simple explanation of the RS meditation procedure, which you then doubted and said that others have disagreed with my explantion. Yet no one has disagreed, not now and not previously. You are creating a straw-man argument. All I did was to offer you a simple explanation about the RS meditation as it is taught by the RSSB, so that you would better understand what it entails. You then said that others disagree with that explantion. Yet you can not show where anyone has disagreed and what they disagree about. Your argument is ridiculous. There is no basis for it. You apparently refuse to accept anything that I say, no matter what it is or how accurate it is. Thats your own personal problem, and not a matter of the facts about the RS meditation or "tenets".

"i actually do believe there will be satsangis who argue with you over many things, for example: the purpose of the guru, the intentions of RS, the experiences that are achievable and many more."

-- But, I was not debating about or arguing over: "the purpose of the guru, the intentions of RS, the experiences that are achievable" I simply relaed the RS meditation procedure and its cosmology. The "purpose of the guru", "the intentions of RS", and "the experiences that are achievable" are entirely separate issues. You are tying to mix these in. I did not address these issues in the current debate.

I said: "I find your persistent yet unfounded doubting a bit annoying, especially when all I have done here is to tell you exactly what the RSSB itself teaches."

You responded: "Tough, i dont really care what you find annoying."

-- You are arguing about issues that I did not address by creating a straw-man, and then saying that others don't agree with me (on other issues that I did not address). I simply gave you a brief description of the orientation and process of the RS meditation. You are now bringing in other issues which have nothing to do with what I said about the RS meditation, and you are trying to pin those issues on me. There may well be disagreements regarding those various other issues, but those issues were not what I addressed in my explanation of the RS meditation procedure.

"i have taken in your views of what RSSB teaches as well as those of others, but i dont treat yours as gospel."

-- But I never said or implied that my views were "gospel". I simply offered a basic explanation of the RS meditation as it is taught by the RSSB and its gurus and in its literature.

It's rather ridiculous that you - someone who apparently has little knowledge of the RS teachings and who is not an intitiate and who has never practiced RS meditation - to be debating and doubting the validity of the information about RS meditation that someone like myself (who has 30 years experience) has related. If you doubt what I have said, then all you have to do is go read the RS literature and you will find that what I said is accurate and precisely what RSSB teaches. There is nothing in what I said that was presented as "gospel". You don't have to take it from me, you can go verify it in the RS literature.

You don't fool anyone. You are not really argueing about my explanation of the RS teachings... you are arguing solely for the sake of arguement, and as a ridiculous and unnecessary attempt at discrediting me. You are not simply openly discussing RS or hearing what RS initiates (like myself) have to share with you, you are playing a one-up straw-man game with me, and you are distorting the issues to suit your straw-man game.

I said: "I believe the underlying problem here is that one, you are not an intitiate so you have no experience with RS or the RS meditation, and two, you have not read the RS literature (as far as I know)."

You responded: "you don't know any of that, all you know is what i have acknowledged which is that i know very little"

-- You are being evasive. If you "know very little" as you say, then you must not be an initiate. Its as simple as that. So why deny that?

"but i know enough to not be browbeaten into accepting someone else viewpoint without considering the alternatives and weighing them up."

-- I did not "browbeat" you in any way. I simply shared some basic factual information about the RS meditation. You can "weigh" that or anything you like, but the RS meditation is not a matter of debate. It is known by all initiates. If you doubt the validity of my information, then you can verify it in the RS literature. This arguement is unnecessary and pointless. You are obviously argueing only for the sake of arguement, and you're doubting and denying my explanation of the RS meditation for the same reason.

I said: "You are still approaching this as if there is something "deeper" that I am missing and do not understand"

You responded: "what is so absurd about that? are you saying it is impossible that anyone could have had a deeper spiritual experience than yourself or that it is impossible that someone has understood something you have not?"

-- I did not say that it is "impossible". And it was not about a "deeper spiritual experience". I have 30 plus years of knowledge and practice in RS meditation. Either you understand RS meditation, or you don't.

But if you are referring to deeper experiences in terms of meditative and mystical states, well then that is another issue altogether. And as far as that goes, I very much DO doubt that fanatical and narrow-minded dogmatic RS guru-cult believers have anything even remotely comparable or deeper than the mystical experiences that I have had. But that was not the issue here. The issue was simply my explanation of the RS meditation procedure and oreintation as it is taught in Santmat and by the RSSB.

"In either case, i would say you are being absurd in drawing such absolute cnclusions"

-- What "conclusions" are those? That I have an excellent and accurate understanding of the RS meditation process and the RS teachings? Well in fact I do, but you are not in any position to judge or determine otherwise. As I said, you can easily verify what I said by going to the RS literature or by asking other knowledgeable initiates at an RS satsang meeting.

"my feeling that you are not quite as open-minded or wise as you seem to believe.

-- That may be your "feeling"... but you since you don't know that, then it is YOU who are not "open-minded", and your doubts do not diminish my wisdom in any degree.

I said: "Your bias in favor of the less experienced believers is unreasonable"

You responded: "By this i assume you mean Ashy. First how do you know he is less experienced? I would hazard a guess he is more experienced."

-- And what makes you think that you have any ability to determine that? Do you have extensive experience in RS? The individual is clearly mentally and emotionally disturbed. He is also extremly fanatical and dogmatic and cultish. Those are not at all signs of an individual who has had deep mystical experience, insight, and realization... nor extensive experience in RS meditation.

"i listen to both of your views on RS equally whether you care to believe it or not."

-- And just what "views on RS" has Ashy shared here? The bulk of, if not all of, Ashy's comments here have been personally derogatory attacks and rude abusive ranting aimed primarily at Brian, and to a lesser degree Tucson and myself. Ashy has engaged in no sharing of his own views on Santmat, nor any reasonable RS related discussions.

"Our issue was a more personal one, which we are trying to work through in the interests of peace and politeness."

-- If that was really true (ie: "in the interests of peace and politeness")
then you would simply accept my simple explanation about the RS meditation as being generally accurate, instead of creating an argument by inserting other unrelated issues that have nothing to do with my simple factual information about the RS meditation.

"I repeat i am not interested in the meditation procedure so am not quite sure why you are harping on it."

-- You may not be interested, but THAT (RS meditatin) was what I had initially related to you. You then reponded with doubt that my explanation was accurate, by saying that others disagreed with me. Now you are trying to shift the focus to something else. All I can tell you is that if you don't agree with my explanation, then go check it out in the RS literature. But don't tell me that others disagree with me when all I have done is to relate the exact RS teachings as they are taught to all RS initiates, and which are expressed throughout the RS literature.

Brian,

The mechanical tenets like medititation, vegetarianism, etc are not my interest. I understand these are merely tools, which anyone can read about. Indeed I thought RS stressed the practical experience over all else.

But since tAo and yourself do appear to have the bit between your teeth with these tenets, I do wonder how many of your 'core' tenets would acutally be agreed on by those pro-RS, perhaps thats a good starting point.

However, what is an obvious observation is that there are huge disagreements between satsangis and ex-satsangis on many RS issues and that there is often very little agreed on, as evidenced by the impassioned debates that consume these RS threads.

Its these issues that ppl disagree on that are of interest - i.e. the satguru concept, the intention of RS and the Dera, the intellect/mantra issue, the goal of uniting with something, what that thing is, the mystical experiences achievable, etc.

Your 'god in human form' is indeed such an issue. Is this actually the belief? What is the intended meaning of 'god' here? I thought different spirtual realms had different gods? Is the eternal 'sound' current considered to be a god or remnant of creation? Is god a supernatural being or an ultimate reality or consciousness?

Finally, even if such a belief in a man-god exists, what is so different about this as compared to the christian belief in JC? So what?

Where i do miss the point is that it seems many of the ex-satsangis on here are scientific when it suits, but not at other times. In fact, having been initiated it follows that once upon a time all of you ex-satsangis bought wholeheartdly into RS, but now choose to examine it from a scientic or rationale perspective. If not, why get initiated in the first place since clearly you are not the type of candidate that the tradition can help achieve the experiences possible.

It seems many have then tried to create a more 'sophisticated' spirituality of sorts, which is based on hodge-podge of rational science as well as various unscientific unprovable vague beliefs like oneness, voidness, no-thing-ness, etc.

I would suggest that none of your, tAo or Tucon's spiritual experiences are objectively provable, which is what makes them 'spiritual'. I would argue that there is no objective proof whatsoever for some sort of primordial state in Dzogchen or the existence of chi in tai-chi. Yet these appear to be your beliefs.

If you are entitled to such unscientific unprovable beliefs, why not the others in a god or RS?


Tao,

It is you who keeps missing the point.

I dont know how many times I need to say this but i am simply not interested in the 'meditation procedure'. You don't get it. where do you get this from? Its you and Smack and others above that were arguing about the meditiation procedure, i dont care. I spoke generally about these tenets being only tools used to open one's mind, to which BRIAN brought up RSSB meditation.

Go read the thread above, its all there. The problem is you are reading what you want to and not what is actually there.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

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

Working...
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.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

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

Welcome


  • 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.