I love it when a Church of the Churchless post comes back to life. Resurrection! Praise Blog!
The past week there's been an intense high-quality discussion on last November's "Another RSSB initiate bites the dust" – a 75 comment interchange since February 12. I've followed the conversation mostly from afar, though I've thrown in a comment or two of my own.
As frequently happens on this blog, the specifics often have to do with Radha Soami Satsang Beas, the mystic-religious organization I was involved with for thirty-five years.
But the general themes are universal.
One of which, to my mind the central topic, is whether spirituality involves doing anything at all. My innate laziness likes this notion.
Just be. Simple.
And entirely in line with deep mystic philosophy, from all sorts of sages. Including the guru, Gurinder Singh, who currently heads up Radha Soami Satsang Beas (RSSB).
I went to India in 1998. While I was at the Dera, RSSB's headquarters in the Punjab, I heard Gurinder say at an evening meeting of Western disciples, "How difficult is it to do nothing?"
He was talking about meditation. Interestingly, this is the only thing I remember from any of the meetings where he spoke (aside from some comments he made to me about a book I was working on).
It struck me at the time as being both remarkably trite and remarkably true.
Meaning, it was one of those statements that sound profoundly wise coming from a distinguished looking Indian guru, replete with beard, turban, and flowing white garments, and profoundly simplistic coming from almost anyone else.
Of course, it's indeed difficult to do nothing if this is taken to mean stopping all thoughts, emotions, imaginings, and what not in meditation.
But there's a broader meaning, one which kept arising in the comment conversation that started February 12. Doing nothing except being what you are. Now that's really doing nothing, because there's nothing to be done.
For example, on February 17 Tulsi said:
The One is playing a game of hide and seek with itself. All paths lead to nowhere because there is nowhere to go. Just be as you are, really are, right now, which is just fine as it is.
On the same day Aman replied:
Yes there's no where to go or reach in the end the final realization is of the self which is present now agreed but just the knowledge of the self is not enough there has to be a process which will unfold the real self & that realization will not be a mere thought or belief system which you've come to understand but instead it will be a result & conclusion to your experiment with your self & your soul.
And so the dialogue goes. Where it stops, nobody knows. At least, I sure don't.
More and more, I find myself tilting toward the nothing to do, nowhere to go, no one to become camp. But what do I know? I could be completely wrong.
Maybe my soul needs a total makeover, and I'm sitting here contentedly unkempt, not realizing what a shabby state my self is in.
Who knows for sure? Again, not me.
I'll end by mentioning that while I read and enjoyed all of the 75 comments, Manjit's February 18 submission was particularly interesting. I appreciated his openness and honesty in talking about the validity of his "mystical" experiences.
However, my intense desire for the truth caused me a great, great deal of problems. I began to question, REALLY question, what my inner experiences really showed. I tried testing them. Astral projecting to a place and counting the money on top of a cupboard and then subsequently checking in 'real' life if I was correct (never). Reading the testimonies of countless other 'seekers' who saw the 'radiant form' of their obviously deviant 'guru'. Reading Neural surfer and Chand. Etc etc etc. The avenues which disprove the RS theology quite convincingly are both obvious and many.
Thanks to all for this stimulating interchange. Per usual, no answers. Just great questions.
"Is there anything to do but be?" is a nice little philosophic teaser.
But equally it can be suggested:
"If we don't change direction soon, we'll end up where we're going"
It's easy to take either view depending on what you want to do, or not do, with your life. Or what today's game is on 'Church of the Churchless'
As long as we're all having some fun.
Posted by: poohbear | February 19, 2008 at 09:52 PM
What if there isn't an answer that can be known by someone as any kind of object because the seeker is the sought.
As Tao provided and worth repeating:
there is neither "something", nor "nothing".
there is no "BEING" as an object to remove.
there is no "merging".
there is no necessity to "reach that state" of "just being".
being is not a "state".
the so-called "cosmic" is an illusion.
there is no one to have "knowledge".
no "knowledge" is necessary.
the so-called "journey" is an illusion.
the so-called "duality" is an illusion.
there is no "self" existing that can separate from an illusory "duality".
there is no "duality" existing for an illusory "self" to separate from.
no "journey" is "essential".
no such "knowledge of your self" exists.
there is no "state" to be "experienced".
there is no "going from duality to non-duality".
and again: The seeker is the sought.
Could that be THE answer?
The intellect won't like it because there is nothing to chew on.
Posted by: tulsi | February 19, 2008 at 09:53 PM
'won't like it because there is nothing to chew on'? Actually, that is not the only effect that this narrative has on the mind.
This nugget of wisdom will also lead the mind to fool itself in thinking that 'it got it'--while of course pretending that there is nothing to get--such that it feels now entitled to spread this bit of wisdom on the net for instance... Actually, the message is quite comforting for the mind. Why do yout think we read regularly on the internet stories of people who have been 'seekers' all their life and then , after flurting with your narratives or the neo-advaita groud, suddenly and finally 'realize'--imagine would be a more precise word though--the end of seeking--because there is no end of seeking?--through these simplistic and incomplete narratives?
'won't like it because there is nothing to chew on'? To the contrary, the mind loves it and indulges itself into it. But I guess this is a story that some minds do not like to tell.
You write --I guess quoting Tao: "there is no "going from duality to non-duality"
Here something from Niz:
"The mind can only focus the obstacles; seeing an obstacle as an obstacle is effective, because it is the mind acting on the mind. Begin from the beginning: give attention to the fact that you are." (I AM THAT, section 98)
"By all means use your mind to know your mind. It is perfectly legitimate and also the best preparation for going beyond the mind." (I AM THAT, section 99)
"M:. Self-realisation definitely comes first. The mind cannot go beyond itself by itself. It must explode.
Q: No exploration before explosion?
M: The explosive power comes from the real. But you are well advised to have your mind ready for it. Fear can always delay it, until another opportunity arises.
Q: I thought there is always a chance.
M: In theory -- yes. In practice a situation must arise, when all the factors necessary for self-realisation are present. This need not I discourage you. Your dwelling on the fact of 'I am' will soon create another chance. For, attitude attracts opportunity. All you know is second-hand. Only "I am' is first-hand and needs no proofs. Stay with it."
(I AM THAT, section 100)
By quoting Niz, I do not mean anything beside simply being contrarian. Quoting him does not entail anything about what I think of the teaching of this fool :)
Posted by: the elephant | February 20, 2008 at 02:53 AM
the Elephant wrote above, shortened in quotes here:
"Actually, that is not the only effect that this narrative has on the mind..."
--For Elephant's mind.
"This nugget of wisdom will also lead the mind to fool itself in thinking that 'it got it'--"
...The egoic mind can't get it, although it may think it does. In which case it doesn't. Nobody "gets" it, because the entity that would get it is a phantom. It is not a thing gotten by a someone. It is a getting.
"Actually, the message is quite comforting for the mind."
--You don't seem very comfortable with it!
"such that it feels now entitled to spread this bit of wisdom on the net for instance"
--and that's a good or bad thing? So what? We're just jibber-jabbering here.
"'won't like it because there is nothing to chew on'? To the contrary, the mind loves it and indulges itself into it."
--That's OK. No rules. Would you be happier if all the pages here were blank?
"..after flurting with your narratives or the neo-advaita groud (crowd? group?), suddenly and finally 'realize'--imagine would be a more precise word though.."
--Absolutely true, in your opinion. By the way, neo is paleo in modern idiom. The egoic mind resents neo-advaita because it thinks it should get it and can't, but the egoic mind in the old days was frustrated with paleo-advaita as well and it is you who imagines I am imagining whether I am or not. Either way, it doesn't matter. No matter what I say or what perspective it comes from, it is not the truth spoken about if there is such a "thing".
"..through these simplistic and incomplete narratives?"
--It is simple, no PhD. required. How could it be completely said?... A rose is a rose right under your nose? A blank page? A galaxy of galaxies?
...Niz talked too much, but he was just trying to help.
Posted by: tulsi | February 20, 2008 at 09:14 AM
Everything that manifests in the individual's field of experience is a continuum. What appears as a world of apparently external phenomena, is the energy of the individual him or herself. There is nothing external or separate from the individual. This is the 'Great Perfection' or 'Self-Perfected' state of primordial awareness that is discovered in the Dzogchen practice.
According to schools of Tibetan Buddhism and Bon, Dzogchen or Maha-Ati is the natural, primordial state or natural condition of every sentient being, including every human being.
Our ultimate nature is said to be pure, self-existing, all-encompassing awareness. This 'intrinsic awareness' has no form of its own and yet is capable of perceiving, experiencing, reflecting, or expressing all form. It does so without being affected by those forms in any ultimate, permanent way. The analogy given by Dzogchen masters is that one's nature is like a mirror which reflects with complete openness but is not affected by the reflections, or a crystal ball which takes on the colour of the material on which it is placed without itself being changed. Other evocative phrases used by masters describe it as an 'effulgence', an 'all-pervading fullness' or as 'space that is aware'. When an individual is able to maintain the dzogschen state or ati-yoga continually, he or she no longer experiences dukkha, i.e., feelings of discontent, tension and anxiety in everday life.
"Dzogchen" has been translated variously as Great Perfection, Great Completeness, or Total Completeness. These terms also convey the idea that our nature as intrinsic awareness has many qualities that make it 'perfect'. These include indestructibility, incorruptible purity, non-discriminating openness, flawless clarity, profound simplicity, all-pervading presence and equality within all beings (i.e., the quality, quantity and functionality of this awareness is exactly the same in every being in the universe).
It is said that the impressive personal qualities of the fully-enlightened Buddha derived from the fact of being fully aware and 'aligned' with this already-existing primordial nature. Descriptions of the Buddha nature as omniscient and omnipresent refer to one's ultimate nature as this primordial awareness. The term "Dzogchen" is a Tibetan rendering of the Sanskrit term maha-sandhi or maha-ati and its variants, and is also used to render the Sanskrit term ati-yoga.
The homonymous term "Dzogchen" designates a meditation practice and body of teachings aimed at helping an individual to recognize the dzogchen state, the self-perfected state, to become absolutely sure about it, and to develop the capacity to maintain the state continually.
The instructions that point to the Dzogchen state are sometimes described as a set of "inner" or "heart" teachings. Practicing Tibetan Buddhists consider that the state pointed to by these teachings is very difficult to describe, and can only be discovered through its direct transmission by an authentic Vajra Guru. Some teachers also regard Dzogchen as a teaching completely in its own right, entirely independent from Buddhism or Bon. They (rightly) say that, as primordial nature, Dzogchen has existed prior to the beginning of time and has been pointed to by various masters throughout the universe and time immemorial.
The essence of the Dzogchen teaching is the direct transmission of awareness from master to disciple. Garab Dorje, the root dzogchen guru in this cycle of time, epitomized the Dzogchen teaching in three principles, known as the "Three Statements of Garab Dorje":
* Direct introduction to one's own nature.
* Not remaining in doubt concerning this unique state.
* Continuing to remain in this state.
In accordance with these three statements, Garab Dorje's direct disciple Manjushrimitra then classified all the Dzogchen teachings transmitted by his master into three series:
* Semde: the series of Mind, that focuses on the introduction to one's own primordial state.
* Longde: the series of Space, that focuses on developing the capacity to gain familiarity with the state and remove doubts.
* Men-ngakde: the series of secret Oral Instructions, focusing on the practices in which one engages after gaining confidence in knowledge of the state.
The Dzogchen teachings focus on three terms or aspects: View, Meditation, and Action. To see directly the absolute state of our mind is the View; the way of stabilizing that View and making it an unbroken experience is Meditation; and integrating that View into our daily life is what is meant by Action.
Dzogchen or Ati-yoga is recognized as the most direct approach to Nondualism.
Three aspects of energy
Sentient beings have their energy manifested in 3 aspects:
* Dang: Energy of an individual on the dang level is essentially infinite and formless.
* Rolpa: In the form of rolpa energy forms appear as though seen with 'the eye of the mind'. Many practices of thödgal and yangthig work on the basis of functioning of the rolpa aspect of individual's energy. It is also the original source of the deities visualized in Buddhist tantric transformational practices and of manifestations of one hundred peaceful and wrathful deities in bardo.
* Tsal: Tsal is the manifestation of the energy of the individual him or herself, as apparently 'external' world.
External world versus continuum
According to Dzogchen teachings, energy of an individual is essentially totally formless and free from any duality. However, karmic traces, contained in the individual's stream of consciousness give rise to two kinds of forms:
* Forms that the individual experiences as his or her body, voice and mind and
* Forms that the individual experiences as an external environment.
What appears as a world of apparently external phenomena, is the energy of the individual him or herself. There is nothing external or separate from the individual. Everything that manifests in the individual's field of experience is a continuum. This is the Great Perfection that is discovered in the Dzogchen or Ati-yoga practice.
Causality and interdependent origination
In Dzogchen teachings the interdependent origination and any kind of causality is considered illusory: '(One says), "all these (configurations of events and meanings) come about and disappear according to dependent origination." But, like a burnt seed, since a nonexistent (result) does not come about from a nonexistent (cause), cause and effect do not exist.
Being obsessed with entities, one's experiencing itself, which discriminates each cause and effect, appears as if it were cause and condition.
The practice of Dzogchen
In Dzogchen, self-liberation is achieved by discovering or recognizing one's own primordial awareness or mental state, and remaining in that natural state of primordial awareness in which all phenomena are experienced without creating karma through reaction, attachment, or conceptual labelling.
Chögyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche and other teachers provide different practical sets of instructions for the practice of Dzogchen. The central practice of Dzogchen teaching is Dzogchen contemplation.
Silent and prolonged meditation is also used to allow the obscurations of the mind to dissipate like clouds dissolving to reveal the empty, luminous sky. Through meditation, it is possible to dissolve the conditioning of our minds and to glimpse our true nature, the self-perfected state.
According to some teachers (in particular Chögyal Namkhai Norbu), Dzogchen is a practice rather than a doctrine or a religion. It does not require the practitioner to be anywhere special, or doing anything special; in fact, to be normally active while in a state of primordial or natural awareness is the ultimate practice of Dzogchen/Ati-yoga.
The goal of Dzogchen practice is to remain in the clear, undeluded state of the actual nature of the mind, unconditioned by thoughts — which is not the same thing as not having any thoughts, which is in any case impossible. At the beginning, a Dzogchen teacher introduces one directly ( introduce, point out) to the real nature of one's mind, even if only for a few seconds; being a Dzogchen practitioner thus implies that one must have a qualified Dzogchen teacher, one who has actually mastered the nature of the mind. Historically, Dzogchen teachers have been very selective in choosing initiates, but current lineage holders in the Nyingma and Bön traditions such as Chögyal Namkhai Norbu have made Dzogchen teachings available to a wider (Western) audience.
Reality vs Dreams
According to contemporary teacher Chögyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche, in Dzogchen the perceived reality is considered to be unreal. All appearances perceived during the whole life of individual through all senses, including sounds, smells, tastes and tactile sensations in their totality are like a big dream. It is claimed that on careful examination the dream of life and regular nightly dreams are not very different, and that in their essential nature there is no difference between them.
The non-essential difference between our dreaming state and our ordinary waking experience is that the latter is more concrete and linked with our attachment; the dreaming is slightly detached.
Also according to this teaching, there is a correspondence between the states of sleep and dream and our experiences when we die. After experiences of intermediate state of bardo an individual comes out of it, a new karmic illusion is created and another existence begins. This is how transmigration happens.
One aim of dream practice is to realize during a dream that one is dreaming. One can then 'take control' of the dream and do all sorts of things, such as go to different places, talk to people, fly and so forth. It is also possible to do different yogic practices while dreaming (usually such yogic practices one does in waking state). In this way the yogi can have a very strong experience and with this comes understanding of the dream-like nature of daily life. This is very relevant to diminishing attachments, because they are based on strong beliefs that life's perceptions and objects are real and, as a consequence, important. If one really understands what the Buddha Shakyamuni meant when he said that everything is unreal or of the nature of shunyata, then one can diminish attachments and tensions.
From "Dzogchen, the Self-Perfected State" – by Chögyal Namkhai Norbu:
"All the various types of teachings and spiritual paths are related to the different capacities of understanding that different individual have. There those not exist, from an absolute point of view, any teaching which is more perfect or effective then another. A teachings value lies solely in the inner awakening, which an individual can arrive at through it. If a person benefits from a given teaching, for that person that teaching is the supreme path, because it is suited to his or her nature and capacity. There’s no sense in trying to judge it as more or less elevated in relation to other path to realization.
There are three principal paths or methods of teachings: the path of renunciation, the path of transformation, and the path of self-liberation, based respectively on the teachings of the Sutras, the Tantras, and on Dzogchen. These corresponds to the three aspects of body, voice, and mind, called "the three gates", because they are the three ways to enter into the state of knowledge.
In Dzogchen the method of self-liberation is a method in which there is nothing to renounce or to transform. If one does not have sufficient capacity, however, this self-liberation will not bring real results. For this reason, in the Dzogchen teachings it is advised that one should know how to apply what ever kind of method is most adapted to the circumstances one finds oneself in, and most suited to ones level of capacity, until one has really acquired knowledge of the state of self-liberation. This is something the practitioner him or herself must be aware of. The Dzogchen teachings are also known as Ati-yoga, or "Primordial yoga".
The word "yoga" is used here with the sense that it has in the equivalent Tibetan term "naljor", which means "possessing the authentic condition", this condition being the primordial state of each individual. A further name for Dzogchen is "the teaching of the state of mind of Samanthabadra", or primordial enlightenment. The method practiced in the path of Dzogchen is called "self-liberation", because it is based on knowleage and understanding. But it is not that there is some object that has to be known; rather it is a matter of entering into the experience of a state beyond the reasoning mind, the state of contemplation. There is no way to begin to understand this state, however, if one does not take the mind as ones starting point. That is why the Path of self-liberation is said to be more linked to the factor of mind then the paths of renunciation and transformation. In Dzogchen, introduction is given directly to the inherent state of the individual, by means of an explanation of primordial base of existence which is the original condition of all beings.
The Dzogchen teachings are linked to a direct transmission, which resides in the master and which is of fundamental importance for the development of the knowledge and realization of the disciples. When a Dzogchen master teaches, he or she transmits the state of knowledge through three types of transmission: oral, symbolic, and direct. In Dzogchen, rituals of initiation are not indispensable, as they are in Tantrism. The real meaning of initiations is transmission of the state of knowledge and this can take place through just giving of a simple explanation. Everything depends on the disciple’s capacity to understand. The master in Dzogchen, is not just like a friend who helps and collaborates with the disciple; rather the master is himself or herself the path. This is because the practice of contemplation develops through the unification of the state of the disciple with that of the master.”
Posted by: tAo | February 20, 2008 at 01:22 PM
Brian, perhaps you can rename your blog:
The United Colours of Radha Soami Satsang.
On the one hand there are extreme devotees like Rakesh Bhasin. On the other, there are neophytes like Aman. Then there is Giant Tao with his vast experience in Advaita and tears to shreds any arguments that reeks of duality. Plus there are non-dual variations in Tulsi, Osho Robbins and Tucson.
Plus there are dithering visitors like me and Manjeet. There is only one variety missing. That is the David Lane variety who claims that all spiritual experiences are nothing but neural fireworks. As for you (Brian), you seem to be wobbling between skepticism and faith.
Anyway I like this quote of Sri Sri Ravishankar: We are divine beings having an human experience.
Posted by: Deepak Kamat | February 20, 2008 at 07:47 PM
Tao, interesting description of Dzogchen. But it strikes me as an example of how Buddhist and Zen sorts of teachings can be as "religious" as Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and such. Lots of beliefs that have to be taken on faith.
Direct transmission sounds very much like "grace" to me. Or Jesus-like mediation between God and disciple. A guru or master enlightens the soul of an initiate; Jesus saves those who believe in him. Not a whole lot of difference between them, seemingly.
Posted by: Brian | February 20, 2008 at 08:57 PM
Thanx for a beautiful post of dated February 20, 2008 at 01:22 PM. It is really quite informative and makes a lovely reading. I shall love to read more similar ones from your end.
I have delibrately reduced commenting on this blog but i simply could not stop myself from scibbling this one.
Thank you once again,
Posted by: Rakesh Bhasin | February 20, 2008 at 10:44 PM
It appears that you have somehow arrived at a mistaken interpretation.
Dzogchen has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with "beliefs" or religiousness, or with "grace", or with any kind of "mediation". And it has nothing to do with "beliefs that have to be taken on faith". It is also more or less fundamentally independent of Buddhism and Zen.
Dzogchen is entirely about 'self-liberation', the 'self-perfected' state, primordial awareness. To really understand what that actually means I would say...
Perhaps before you make such premature and erroneous assumptions and conclusions, I would like to suggest and urge you to first read and study the primary works of Chögyal Namkhai Norbu such as his "Dzogchen - The Self-Perfected State, and especially his:
"The Supreme Source" (The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde - Kunjed Gyalpo) by Chögyal Namkahi Norbu, published by Snow Lion
Also as well as:
"Primordial Experience" by Manjushrimitra (translated by Namkhai Norbu and Kennard Lipman), published by Shambhala
"The Golden Letters" (translated by John Myrdhin Reynolds), published by Snow Lion
"The Flight of the Garuda" (translated by Keith Dowman), published by Wisdom Publications
Posted by: tAo | February 20, 2008 at 11:13 PM
It's really funny to see that many talk about such great theories & teachings of Buddha & taoism etc. But they fail to realize that the ones who gave out these teachings did not stumble upon such realizations just by chance or knowledge they had a profound experience of that state. I wonder whether people who talk so much about these teachings have had any real experience or just write these theories becasue they believe that just by reading about such realizations even they have attained enlightenment like Buddha etc.
Posted by: Aman | February 21, 2008 at 12:03 AM
Why is it that you continue to presuppose that what is being discussed is merely just "theories", or you assume that others here have not "had a profound experience of that state", or that "they fail to realize"?
And also what makes you so certain and assume that "the ones who gave out these teachings did not stumble upon such realizations just by chance or knowledge"?
And what makes you so certain that "people who talk about these teachings have not "had any real experience" or that they have not "attained enlightenment"? How could a beginner like yourself presume to have any real insight into the "experience" and "realization" of others?
So actually I think that your compulsive and baseless and unfounded presumptions about others, is the thing that is really most "funny". Yet you continue to make an utter fool of yourself by making such comments. Unfortunately, you will never make genuine progress by acting in that manner towards those who are wiser than you. Life has a funny way of doing that to people like you who are so impudent towards those who have gone before you. And the very fact that you so blindly assume that others have had no direct experiences or any realization, is actually the very thing which clearly reveals and admits your own immaturity and ignorance, and your own lack of experience and realization.
Posted by: tAo | February 21, 2008 at 11:15 PM
Thanks for your kind words, and here is some more info for you (and other readers) if you are interested:
Introduction to Dzogchen
Dzogchen is the approach within Buddhism based on recognising our enlightened nature. ‘Dzogchen’ in Tibetan means ‘utterly complete’. It is the most complete or inclusive teaching of Buddhism. From the point of view of Dzogchen, we are also each already complete. There is nothing we need to obtain or jettison in order to realise enlightenment. We need only recognise and allow ourselves to be as we actually are. This the path of immediate self-liberation.
To learn more about Dzogchen and self-liberation, start with our essay ‘An Uncommon Perspective’. There is much information about Dzogchen to explore elsewhere on this web site as well, particularly in the ‘Teachings’ section.
The Aro approach to Dzogchen
Dzogchen is ‘complete’ in that all other Buddhist teachings are contained within it. All Aro teachings—whether on Dzogchen, Tantra, or Sutra—are rooted in the Dzogchen perspective. Aro is quite unusual in teaching even basic concepts of Sutra, such as the Four Noble Truths and Five Precepts, from point of view of Dzogchen.
The base, or starting point, of Dzogchen is rigpa: instantaneous enlightenment. If one has not experienced rigpa, it is not possible to truly practice Dzogchen.
Fortunately, the Dzogchen teachings contain a ngöndro—or ‘preparation’—which brings you to the base. This ngöndro is a series of four meditation practices whose result is rigpa. These practices have the style or texture of Dzogchen – although they are not strictly speaking Dzogchen itself. In this way it is possible to approach Dzogchen on its own terms, rather than via Sutra and then Tantra. This direct approach was traditional in Tibet not only for hermits – but for people with families and jobs.
More about Dzogchen:
Aro Encyclopedia site-home:
Posted by: tAo | February 21, 2008 at 11:24 PM
Truth is always bitter Sir Tao, maybe you felt hurt when you realized that what I asked whether are these people really enlightened or just write about such thoeries without any realization :-) might actually be true. May be you were forced to look inside yourself. You accuse me of preassuming what others have realized & have not, when in fact I'm not passing judgement on anyone but what are you doing by telling me that I'm a begginner? How can you know my level of attainment? Judging others is very easy & just by calling me an utter fool doesn't make any difference. It's a very simple question that people really need to ask themselves whether are they just barking out theories or have they attainted something real. It's a question everyone needs to ask & asnwer to themselves & not to me :-)
Posted by: Aman | February 22, 2008 at 12:50 AM
Please go through the links below...You will love it...
Posted by: Yerneni | February 22, 2008 at 03:35 AM
Right on Aman!!!
You've nailed when you’ve said:” It’s a very simple question that people really need to ask themselves whether are they just barking out theories or have they attainted something real..." I totally agree. With a few clicks of the mouse and a few searches on Google, any fool can sound very scholarly on any subject matter; spiritual or otherwise. Many Talk the Talk, but Few Walk the Walk.
Posted by: Zion | February 22, 2008 at 12:23 PM
Truth is only "bitter" to impudent fools like yourself.
Aman wrote: "what I asked whether are these people really enlightened or just write about such thoeries without any realization might actually be true."
-- Exactly who are "these people" that you are referring to? Its not clear who you are referring to, so please be more specific.
-- And what do you really know about them? Its pretty obvious that you know nothing.
[Aman wrote: "I'm not passing judgement on anyone but what are you doing by telling me that I'm a begginner?"]
-- You have made numerous judgements and unfounded assumptions, and you have also admitted to being a beginner. Go back and read your own comments.
Aman wrote: "How can you know my level of attainment?"
-- That's exactly what I have already asked you. In fact it is YOU who are the one who has assumed that you know that others have not had any "experiences", and that they only talk "theories". So ask yourself why you think that you know others "level of attainment".
Aman wrote: "Judging others is very easy"
-- That must be why it is that you seem to think that you can easily judge and assume that you know that others have only theories and no "experience". It's all about your own tendency to make false assumptions and judgments about others when in fact you actually know nothing about them.
Aman wrote: "It's a very simple question that people really need to ask themselves whether are they just barking out theories or have they attainted something real."
-- No "theories" were put forth. But that question is exactly the question that you need to ask yourself. No one cares about your claims of experiences. So-called "experiences' are a dime a dozen. What matters is direct insight and realization, not some mere inner "experiences".
Aman wrote: "It's a question everyone needs to ask & asnwer to themselves & not to me"
-- You don't know that. And you clearly don't know about other people. You are just full of ignorant assumptions and puffed-up dogma.
-- Like I said, you're an idiot, your're a neophyte, you act like a fool, and the role that you have chosen to take here in this blog comment discussion forum is obviously one of being an immature and impudent Radha Soami dogma touting internet troll. And you have proven that again and again.
Posted by: tAo | February 22, 2008 at 02:40 PM
I'm glad you agree & Mr. Tao after reading your comments & your way of expressing yourself it's very clear how much you've evolved. By the way you're too boring dude, get a life & first learn to respect other beings & then talk about these theories & spirituality. Your words show exactly how much you've attained spiritually. God bless you!!
Posted by: Aman | February 23, 2008 at 03:15 AM
Do you mean to say that we should shut our mouth when a neophyte advises us? Keep your silly opinions to yourself. We have a right to lambast immature guys like you and Aman.
Posted by: Deepak Kamat | February 23, 2008 at 03:19 AM
You are just another dumb-ass sycophant like Aman. "Many Talk the Talk, but Few Walk the Walk"... Yes, you and Aman are quite obviously among the "Many", and not among the "Few". Neither one of you has said (written) anything of any substance at all here, not to mention your total lack of intellectual maturity that comes from direct experience (walking the walk). So do us favor and take your drivel and go back to wallowing in your pathetic phony-guru-cult cesspool where puffed-up little punks like you belong.
After reading your numerous comments and vain expressions, it's very clear how little you have evolved. Not to mention being incredibly "boring".
Its clear you have no life apart from your insipid pseudo-mystical astral bullshit. I have no respect for you because you have earned no respect. In fact, your pathetically lame comments have revealed just exactly how arrogant and impudent you really are. If you want respectr, then earn it. As the saying goes: "If you can't take the heat, then stay out of the kitchen."
You have about as much grasp on "spirituality" as a shit-gobbling swine.
Your words show exactly how little (zero) you've attained spiritually. And your so-called "God", can go to fucking hell.
But I have no doubt that you will get exactly what you deserve for being such a peabrained poseur and dipshit troll... an entire life wasted in pseudo-spiritual nonsense and rubbish.
Unfortunately for you, the joke is all on you dude... or should I say dudette. heh heh
Posted by: tAo | February 23, 2008 at 04:22 PM
I posted a comment in response to Rakesh Bhasin | February 20, 2008 at 10:44 PM. I submitted it a day or two ago, but you have still not released it from out of the TypePad spam holding file. It contained several web-links. So would you kindly check for it, and then ok it? Tnx
Posted by: tAo | February 23, 2008 at 04:31 PM
tAo My good friend I have compassion for you.
Why do you feel the need to personally attack anyone that DOES NOT agree with you and use such profanities to prove your points? Why so much bitterness in your words?
You always sound so frustrated and hurt and take everything so personal. If you’re so sure about yourself why then does it bother you so much what me, Aman or anyone else say? I would advise you to mindfully do some serious introspective scanning of your conscious and try to find the source of your unhappiness; what is making you so resentful. Once you’ve found that, please work it out the best you can and see if you can grow and eventually find the inner peace that you so much need. My thoughts and silent prayers are with you as your success in this endeavor will also bring me much pleasure.
Posted by: Zion | February 24, 2008 at 01:18 PM
Man, you are so lost!
And I certainly don't need your pathetic pretense, your mask of pseudo "compassion" which you use to veil your underlying sarcasm.
"Why do you feel the need to personally attack anyone that DOES NOT agree with you"
-- Anyone is entirely free to not agree with me. But if are going to disagree, then you are going to have to offer some credible evidence to support your claims. Otherwise, you are jujst another mystical bullshit babbling fool. But you don't offer any evidence, and neither do other fools like your little buddy Aman the RS troll. The real question is why do others feel the need to attack me just because I don't agree with their ridiculous pseudo-spiritual dogma and cultism.
"and use such profanities to prove your points?"
-- I can use any DAMN words I choose to get my point across. And it's certainly not my problem if you have some hang-up regarding "profanities". You are living in la-la-land. You really need to grow up and be a mature adult.
"Why so much bitterness in your words?"
-- My words have no "bitterness" at all. I have no reason to be bitter. My words are simply designed to make self-possessed people like you look at yourself and your unexamined nonsense beliefs.
"You always sound so frustrated and hurt and take everything so personal."
-- Like I said, you are really lost. You don't have the slightest clue about where I am coming from. I take nothing "personal". Nada. But evidentally, by the looks of your rather insipid comments, you "take everything so personal".
"why then does it bother you so much what me, Aman or anyone else say?"
-- It doesn't "bother" me at all. I just happen to think that you two don't know what the hell you are talking about, and this is a forum where I can express my views. If you can't accept me expressing my views and criticisms, then don't assume that others will accept yours. That's just basic common sense.... which you and Aman seem to be rather deficient in.
"I would advise you to mindfully do some serious introspective scanning of your conscious and try to find the source of your unhappiness"
-- I don't need to "mindfully do some serious introspective scanning". Nor do I have any such "unhappiness". But it is clearly YOU who is not at all happy with my views and what I have to say. And that's all YOUR "unhappiness", not mine. If you were more mature, you would understand that.
"what is making you so resentful."
-- I am hardly "resentful". I just don't buy the nonsense theology and garbage dogma that believers like you and Aman like to come and push and dump in forums like this. Go to RS satsangs if you want to do that. The rest of us have enough of that crap already
"Once you’ve found that, please work it out the best you can"
-- I nothing to "work out". I have nothing to do with the kind of spiritual nonsense that fools like you and Aman believe and promote.
"and eventually find the inner peace that you so much need."
-- Thats another illusion that you have. Those are just words. You know nothing about "inner peace". If you did, then you would not be talking the rubbish that you do.
"My thoughts and silent prayers are with you as your success in this endeavor"
-- You can take your phony pretentious "prayers" and shove them right back up your asshole where they came from. And then go fcuk yourself while you are at it. You are nothing but a naive and whiney and dimwitted little poseur. You are way out of your league here. Go back to your usual stupid sucking on your religious guru-cult trip.
Posted by: tAo | February 24, 2008 at 05:49 PM
tAo my good friend get a grip on yourself…you’re loosing it and badly!
I am really concerned for your well being now. I mean REALLY!! It's amazing how the REAL you surface in your comments that are full of rage and profanities. Why do you really feel the need to always be on the defensive and bring yourself so low? Don’t you see that you are making a fool of yourself? On the one hand you are constantly here yapping and preaching all these spiritual theories, the essence of the Dzogchen teachings so on and so forth and blah blah blah; sounding like a venerable all knowing guru, but on the other hand you act like a raging fool contradicting, through your pitiable words, your own sayings? I mean can’t you really see that? I presume not…and that is a pity because you sound like someone that, with some guidance and self esteem, could make a fine sentient being. Let go of the rage, forgive yourself. No need to vent out your anger and anguish in such fashion. Love yourself and in doing so you’ll find love and kindness for others. As for me I have nothing but true compassion for you. I will reinforce my prayers on your behave. May you find the inner peace that brings true happiness that you so much need.
P.S. before you respond, take a deep breath and look within yourself..Is what you put out here in words the REAL you? Is that really your core? if you respond with more profanities you will have proven my case and I will have no need to waste my time and hold any further discussions with you.
Posted by: Zion | February 24, 2008 at 08:00 PM
It is you who is "making a fool of yourself"
And I am certainly not "preaching spiritual theories".
Dzogchen teachings have nothing to do wih "theories".
It is only you who thinks that I "sound like a venerable all knowing guru"... and "contradicting" what?
You "presume" too much... and you're nothing but an impudent idiot with an inflated ego, who feigns "love and kindness" and "compassion" as if such empty words mean something.
And by your stupid "prayers", you have already "proven my case" once again.
Posted by: tAo | February 24, 2008 at 11:58 PM
tAo my good friend,
I really want to thank you for not compromising your integrity once more and considerably cutting down on the profanities on your last message. I highly commend you for that as it must’ve taken a lot of guts from your part to compose and conduct yourself in such a “gentleman” manner. For a while there you really had me worried about you my friend. I mean in one of your last messages you said to me “You are living in la-la-land. You really need to grow up and be a mature adult.” Just because I saw no need in you venting yourself in such a degradable fashion as to constantly be so foul-mouthed. You also told me “You are way out of your league here” which took me by surprise and completely baffled me as I always thought of this as the league of the experts, matures and the respectful and then to have you express yourself in a completely opposite fashion.
My friend this is a happy day as it might as well be the resurrection of the REAL tAo…the one who has been departed from his TRUE self and buried for so long under deceptive spiritual/religious pretense to finally put into action what he so much talks about; recognizing your enlightened nature. Bravo indeed!
Posted by: Zion | February 25, 2008 at 12:44 PM
You can take all of your disingenuous pretense and "God" bullshit and shove right back up your ass, you stinking little creep.
I am not your "friend". I don't have or want so-called friends like you. Even the thought of you makes one want to vomit.
You are a nothing more than a supercilious and condescending slimey little worm. Everyone knows it because it oozes like rotten puss out of every comment you make.
So go fuck yourself and fuck your fake phony spirituality, you stupid pretentious little dipshit. You are so shallow you wouldn't understand truth or compassion or righteousness even if it hit you upside the head.
Let me spell it out for you since you are such a slimey little nitwit:
Zion is a fool, an idiot, an asshole, an imbecile, a moron, a ninny, a jackass, a simpleton, a dope, a ding-dong, a jerk, a bore, a drip, a schmuck, and a dweeb. (and btw, just like his buddy Aman.)
Is that clear and civil enough for you, you fucking little dimwitted sack of pig-shit?
People like you are scummy pseudo-spiritual slimeballs. Go back to your troll hole in hell where you came from.
Posted by: tAo | February 25, 2008 at 03:09 PM
Wow!! Tao Sir I don't know what path of spirituality you follow but if your theories & path have lead you to become something like this which I see in your words & complete lack of love & compassion towards others then seriously sir I'm very happy in my fool's way to enlightenment which you think I am. Please Sir go to the doctor & get your blood pressure checked you really need to relax & calm down :-) By the way this hot kitchen of yours doesn't seem to bother me but you are definitely suffering from heat stroke or something :-) Peace to you Sir Tao really I agree with Zion you need all our prayers :-) If your instant presence state is this raging, anger, hatred etc. then congratulations on such an enlightened state of being but this is not for me :-) Sir you really need to think if you can't even control your anger what state are you talking about? May God help you.
Posted by: Aman | February 26, 2008 at 01:32 AM
Zion and Aman have one problem.
They confuse pacifism with advanced spirituality.
THat is not the case. You can be enlightened and continue to abuse. It works the other way round also. You can abuse your way to enlightenment if you do it totally.
Tao, continue with your abuses. These dimwits think that spirituality is about sterile pacifism. They don't know that it is the way of an active warrior.
Posted by: Deepak Kamat | February 26, 2008 at 02:24 AM
tAo my good friend,
Thank you for all those “kind” and colorful words…you must’ve gone real deep down into your vocabulary storage and come out with your BEST yet.
I now believe that what you put out here in words IS the REAL you and that IT is really your core. Sadly you have responded with more profanities and have once more proven my case, therefore I have no need to waste my time and hold any further discussions with you. May you find inner peace and contentment in your life.
Posted by: Zion | February 26, 2008 at 07:59 AM
Keep it up Tao! Thanks for replying to these phony satsangis. But you are wasting time with them, if they had any sense of understanding, they wouldn't be RSSB satsangi anyway.
My 75 year old honest neighbor spend entire day making food for my dear satsangi friend as a nice gesture. This guy refused to eat at her place as he didn't want to get any bad karmas from her (or her past life, worrying she might have earned by dishonesty). This is racism at its height..so what its not about black or white or Brahmin or Shudra...its new racism ...Satsangi vs non satsangi..And these people talk about compassion? Satsangis can kill you emotionally while trying to prevent themselves from killing any bacterias accidentally.
The only way to deal with them is to ignore them. Let them burn in their own artificial ego. Once they will waste 35-40 years of their precious life in the cult and are lucky enough to come out of their depressions, anxieties, bipolar disorders, then they will realize how precious life was. You can't help them.
Posted by: sapient | February 29, 2008 at 03:01 AM
I totally agree with you. Though not physical, RSSB is the greatest practitioner of apartheid. It is what I can emotional / spiritual apartheid.
Posted by: Deepak Kamat | February 29, 2008 at 04:48 AM
"You can be enlightened and continue to abuse. It works the other way round also. You can abuse your way to enlightenment if you do it totally."
* * * * *
"The trouble with the rat race is that even if you win, you're still a rat."
One can certainly be an enlightened asshole -- as there are no rules -- but then you're still an asshole.
Posted by: | March 05, 2008 at 09:16 AM