I love questions. And me. So when someone asks me questions about me, I'm in double love.
Today Georgey left a comment on this post that included five questions. I started to reply via another comment, but then realized that even though I'm practicing non-verbosity through Twitter now, I needed the space of a blog post to do the answers justice.
Georgey started with...
No problem. I'm a revealing guy. Here's the questions and my answers.
(1) Why and how did you turn to Sant Mat initially?
"Why" has so many layers and levels. "How" is easier to tackle. I've told the (strange) story of how I became a Sant Mat initiate here.
Having done the devoted disciple thing with a Yoga teacher who melded his crazy style of Christianity with various Eastern teachings, including a Greek Orthodox'ized version of Sant Mat, I smoothly flowed into accepting Charan Singh as my guru.
Looking back on my 22 year-old self from my current 60 year-old perspective, I can theorize about some psychological "why's."
Having spent just one hour with my father, the notion of a cosmically close relationship with a wise, kind, loving bearded much older guru must have appealed to my father-deprived psyche. Plus, Charan Singh liked to speak about God as the Father.
Also, I applied for initiation in 1970, which was, obviously, right after the '60s. I'd just graduated from a college in the San Francisco Bay Area, so had been immersed in the free wheeling Flower Child sex, drugs, and rock-&-roll culture.
Some stability in the form of religious rules and vows was a counterpoint to the chaos of the sixties. I'd started on a straighter and narrower path through my yoga practice. That continued with the following thirty-three years of so of Sant Mat practice.
(2) Why do you think you never had a spiritual experience despite 30 years of devoted meditation?
Like I've been saying in several posts lately, including here, I'm not sure what "spiritual" means anymore. I had plenty of experiences in meditation.
What I didn't have was the sort of out-of-body, astral projecting, soul-flying, blasts of cosmic light and sound experiences that the Radha Soami Satsang Beas version of Sant Mat tells disciples to expect in meditation.
A few days after I was initiated I heard loud bell sounds inside my head while I was meditating. These never came back. I've had other glimpses of inner light and hearings of inner sound, but these could be (and probably are) produced by the brain, not immaterial soul or spirit.
Over more than three decades I've talked with lots of fellow RSSB initiates about their experiences in meditation. More accurately, their lack thereof.
When these people spoke honestly and openly (which usually isn't done in the formal satsangs, or talks), I learned that my lack of mind-blowing meditation experiences was par for the course in Sant Mat.
(3) Do you believe such spiritual (transcendental) experiences actually exist or that they are creations of our minds?
I lean toward the second hypothesis -- mind created -- but am open to the "actual" possibility. What helps tilt me in the skeptical direction is how members of different faiths almost invariably experience what their religious teachings tell them to expect.
Christian mystics feel the presence of Jesus or a personal God. Hindus, something quite different. And so on. If Buddhist monks came back from a meditation session and said, "Islam has it right! Allah is the One!," I'd pay attention.
But this happens extremely rarely. Yet the word "actually" in this question points toward a reality largely independent of human expectations, desires, mental conditioning, and the like.
At the least, it seems clear that meditators tend to experience what they expect to experience.
Sant Mat, in fact, instructs initiates not to pay attention to any inner sights or sounds that aren't accompanied by the presence of the guru. So this is a good example of a faith trying to prohibit certain inner experiences that aren't consonant with party-line teachings.
(4) These Sant Mat gurus might be fairly remarkable people, albeit with flaws, did you ever get the feeling you were in the presence of some sort of ultra-enlightened being?
I gave myself that feeling -- which was aided by all the hoopla and devotional rituals surrounding the RSSB gurus. But I never saw any evidence that the gurus really were "ultra-enlightened" (whatever that means).
They forgot things. Made mistakes. Misspoke. Just like a normal human being. Yes, they had charisma and what the current guru, Gurinder Singh, likes to call "the gift of gab."
But I'm a good public speaker myself. And I'm sure not enlightened. Unless I'm unaware of my divinity, which I'm pleased to consider as a possibility (my wife, however, would beg to differ).
Speaking of my wife... her skeptical non-Sant Mat self would frequently say, during our nineteen years of marriage, "I'd like to see what the guru is doing twenty four hours a day, not just during his public face time."
Her point, based in part on her experience as a psychotherapist, is that people can project an idealized image, and others can resonate with it, which is at odds with how they are at unguarded moments.
Laurel has had some close-up time with Gurinder Singh. She sees him as just a normal person, nothing special. This also is how I saw the guru when I didn't recognize him, as described here.
(5) Do you ever wonder if you would get back on the Sant Mat path?
Not really. But this question gets me doing so. Answer: almost certainly not. At least, not in the way I viewed the path before.
One of my favorite Church of the Churchless posts is "Believers, I'm even more deluded than you think." This pretty much answers your question.
I don't consider that I've left Sant Mat. Meaning, to me there's a core of non-religiousness in this teaching which is a useful guide to seeking whatever reality (if any) lies beyond appearances.
It's the same core that is in almost every mystic teaching that I've studied or have heard about. I'm still on that pathless path.
What an open and honest series of answers from someone who's been open-minded to give it all a shot. Gave me alot to think about.
Most on your site appear to have a religious bent or mystical leaning.
Organised religions with personal gods and dogma put me off completely, but this site has freethinkers with more rational beliefs.
There is something intriguing about mystical belief such as gnosis, budhism and even the tenets of SM (tho the guru idea puts me off); which seem to be able to the basic principles of many mainstream religions.
Also, these ancient eastern philopsophies appear to often overlap with their modern scientific counterparts, albeit in a more abstract way.
I suppose tho that a mystic ultimately does have to believe in a higher supreme sentient force or intelligence or god (however intricately that is defined).
Taoism and Zen are more earthly, but one wonders what is achieved from something so simplistic and seemingly arbitary? Is simplicity really profundity? Perhaps life is complex, perhaps our wonder and mystery comes from unravelling the complex. Evolution of life and the universe appears to tend towards complexity.
There certainly are many unexplainable phenomena and mysteries that seem to point to a higher power. Concepts such as infinity, randomness, life, love, etc.
Love and the emotional bonds we form with our loved ones would seem to me to be closest and strongest pointer for us to believe in the existence of such an otherworldly dimension (rightly or wrongly). Or the human race trying to find meaning for itself in a world where all of that love inevitably has to come to an end through death.
A materialist such as myself probably tends to the view that as human beings we have evolved a complex consciousness with a range of powerful emotions that make us human. However they also make us search for meaning. Why are we here and what happens after? An existential belief is that we create our own meaning and that when its over, thats it. It seems cold, but perhaps thats the reality of the universe, i hope not.
Sorry for the long post. I'm sure you've dabbled with these ideas before, but hope u get some time to respond to some of it.
Posted by: Georgey | March 28, 2009 at 04:28 AM
OK now this is more or less how I sum up this Monty Python experiment or in other words 'The Life of Brian'.
May I be so bold as to assume the psychoanalysts coach for awhile and analyze the psychosomatic psychosis itself.
If Brian's wife would for a moment become a truly enlightened psychologist herself she would by all accounts be able to see the wood for the trees, and set this wayward child on his straight and narrow journey once again, but due to the fallible flaw of the unenlightened learning that these aristocratic schools of enlightenment produce, the lenses of clear perception have become so emphatically clouded by the prejudicial indoctrination that these skeptics have been weaned on that any amount of truth no matter how absolutely unequivocal it may be, would be shrouded from the sight of such learned indoctrinated blindness even at the best of times.
So the pity of it is such, Brian will have to come to his own understanding and his own discovery, alone, unaided by the crutch of imperfect marital blindness, as two blind mice for wont of a better phrase are even worse off than one.
Posted by: ashy | March 28, 2009 at 06:44 AM
Seems you feel our modern day institutions with their bias on rational thought and questioning skepticism, indoctrinate and cloud our lenses of perception such that we are unable to see the truth.
Agree that modern academic institutions have limits and faults. I personally believe most learning comes from the individual himself in his search for knowledge, thru his own reading, thoughts and experiences.
Except we all have personal belief systems and conditioning built up over a lifetime of experience, even you.
However, i would argue that rational thought is one belief system that encourages one to examine their own beliefs from first principles. It does not require unthinking obedience to follow a particular path, quite the opposite it demands questions be asked.
A rational thinker is not totally skeptic and believes in many things, but which are shown to be objectively accurate.
By your reasoning it would seem the only true purity is that of an unthinking child who knows nothing about anything, totally pure and untainted. Perhaps that is the state of innocence one tries to get back to when meditating, which i could kind of buy, but then i notice that you are not a pure untainted child and have your own belief system or SM lens through which you view the world.
Who is to say the SM lens is any clearer than a scientific approach? At least the latter encourages free and different thought, whereas SM seems to be exactly against that since it seems to be about foregoing or supressing the intellect.
This is what all damaging faiths and cults want their disciples to believe. So how do we distinguish? Surely we must question, otherwise we constantly get duped like a naive albeit pure child who becomes tainted and brainwashed with untruths.
Posted by: georgey | March 28, 2009 at 08:22 AM
Q and A about me and Sant Mat
If my barring from posting was purely a technical glitch then you have my unconditional apology Brian, and you can safely and happily ignore the emails.
Posted by: ashy | March 28, 2009 at 08:40 AM
Here is a post I tried posting a little while ago as a succession to the previous one, perhaps it sets some light on the rational questions posted by georgey above, perhaps not.
I will try answer in little more detail to your well worded and thought out post above hereafter.
Sorry about the length of this one.
So let us resume the psychoanalytical synopsis a little further.
Just like so many of us that came to seeking or experiment via those heady revolutionary days of drugs, sex, rock n roll, Timothy Leary, Richard Alpert, Jimi Hendrix and Carlos Castaneda, the confines of our material existences were challenged and the envelopes stretched, in some cases beyond the limits of their very own elasticity.
And so like some of the icons of our generation, we started searching into realms of understanding further afield than the narrow explanations of the materialist regimes that were our impregnated psyches crystallized heritage.
This in some cases lead the sincere seeker after truth towards mysterious paths of inner awakening, most commonly found from out of the bosom of those richly endowed mystic schools as are inherently founded in the near and far East.
One of such paths towards self realization is the RSSB lineage of Sant Mat teachings as espoused and brought to human conscious thinking by Sri Sant Seth Shiv Dayal Singh or affectionately known by his disciples as Soami Ji.
These teachings and tenets of spiritual science, as explained and brought to light by Soami Ji Maharaj were made manifest as a formulated system of meditation and experience over 100 years ago and have been passed through this relatively short corridor of time from generation to generation via 5 living teachers or gurus.
I believe we are at the throes of the end of this line of teachers at the present juncture between mystic revelation school of discovery and the beginnings of a new crystallized formulated religious movement.
Nevertheless each and every practitioner and seeker after truth would need to make up his own mind (as best as he is capable of knowing how) as to the authenticity and elevated spiritual status of the current living teacher of the time.
No amount of hypothetical reasoning whether for or against between the pro's and the con's of the inaccurate presupposed conditional states of perception (or lack thereof) would be able to one way or the other prove here or there whether I or he or you or anyone is any further spiritually advanced than Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck or Goofy.
The absolute beauty of true spiritual experience or revelation is that it is absolutely personal, anyone denoting any amount of inner or out of body experience or exquisite elevated states of consciousness out here on an internet blog site or even in a public forum of mass communication I would almost go so far as to say they perhaps are lying, and just blowing their own trumpets, which by virtue of the exercise would be to negate and detract from any credible inner spiritual experience that might be prevalent or possible or available.
Spirituality, just like love, is caught, it is not bought, nor taught, it is an inherently exquisite experience of absolute intoxicating beauty that is not subject to the frailties of judgmental intellectual analysis.
One either has the good fortune to appreciate its magnificence and imbibe its generously unifying and overwhelming uplifting force of attraction, or one is subject to the vilifying ravages of the skeptical, overwrought, prejudicial and closed off, self consumed, usually highly intellectual and over learned mind.
It does still in spite of all of this consternation help for the skeptic and derogatory practitioner who still seeks some form of truth to be brutally honest with himself.
And if he is as bold as that to stare himself square on in the mirror he will blatantly recognize that the flaw or the fallacy, the limitation and the inadequacy, rests purely and solely with himself, no one out there, not the teacher, nor the disciple, nor the follower, nor the unenlightened, but only with himself.
We after all are the only ones who are still in search of some truth, for our own perceived well being. If one follows the tenets of the existentialist it is but we who are the absolute sum total of our every aspiration or desire, or by the tenets of the true scientist we will but have to conclude the experiment is by no means complete, it may as yet hardly have begun in all true blatant realization, and that ultimately the proof is in the pudding. When the dross of unclear thinking or unclear rationale is removed from the laboratory of perception, the conclusion can then be deduced, in the clear light of day, and not before then.
So my honest suggestion would be to all those skeptical illusionists out there, focus your lenses of perception, sharpen your utensils of reasoning, tune in your apparatus of awareness and find the core of the exercise, hearken to the tune of the perfect audible consonance of reality, and only then make your emphatic absolute deductions.
By then it would be true to consider, you will have no need whatsoever by which to proselytize or convince anyone else of us of its authenticity, because by then you will be so absolutely absorbed within its perfect harmonious blissful joy, you will have no urge whatsoever to conform or convince anyone else about it at all.
Thus saith this Zarathustra, so what say the practitioners of skeptical scientific analysis to that?
Posted by: ashy | March 28, 2009 at 08:55 AM
lol, its still just too inadequate.
one thing i will say is that the 60s must have been some heady days and it sounds like alot of you guys drank the nectar until it ran out, lol.
why not simply take acid or mescalin until the cows come home to experience the nectar?
But this does not make it any more real than not.
If one is after real answers, rather than what the mind creates, there are'nt any answers.
Tho i understand, and appreciate the spiritual experience, as being a personal one, Brian is not claiming he's had one, he's claiming he never had the sort of revelationary nectar experience one would assume to occur.
Posted by: georgey | March 28, 2009 at 09:50 AM
aldous huxleys 'doors to perception' i believe was based on mescalin use, where tho the perceptions were illusory it seems he was of the belief that such chemically-induced forays into expanded states of consciousness possibly also expanded his normal states of creativity as a result of the experiences. this is indeed fascinating.
science has come up with an astonishing variety of modern chemicals for targetting and alleviating various mental states. of course its precursors in shamanism and alchemy also had a long, tho less well understood, history.
There's another site called 'The Hedonistic Imperative' by a british philosopher who reckons the way forward is through such drugs or synthesized compounts to allay suffering and pain, which would seem the draw of many of these eastern religions (buddhism) to those in the west. Its pretty way out stuff.
But if one seeks for the real undistorted reality, warts and all, sure the only way to get closest to that is through the intellect. Through contant questioning and building on our rational thought or sciences to develop models which come closer and closer to modelling, describing and understanding reality.
the universe and human being have been understood in the last few centuries like never before, since the days of the enlightenment, and its accelerating.
What can spirituality or a truly spiritual existence add to this? Can any true spiritual believer say they know any more answers to the big questions than science? why are we here, how did it begin, is there life after death, is there a just fair supernatural being behind it all?
The truly religious person should not fear death, since he should know, not merely believe, that something better awaits him, but this is not the case. They too are besotted with doubt and their belief systems have doctrines, which try to alley this doubt. So to my way thinking they have not expanded their horizons past that of rational thought at all.
Posted by: georgey | March 28, 2009 at 10:27 AM
ashy, as I said to you in an email response, the problem you had in posting comments was indeed technical. At least one other blog visitor has had a similar problem. TypePad staff have asked me to let them know details if this keeps happening. So in that case email me with what web browser is being used, and what happens exactly when a comment can't be posted.
I agree with you that psychedelics and such opened up a lot of minds to alternative ways of looking at reality. They helped me realize that the world can appear very different to different people in different states of consciousness.
And I also agree that ultimate reality, whatever it is, necessarily is ineffable. This is where rationalists and mystics should find common ground. Meaning, the nearer we get to the One (and both mystics and physicists posit oneness as the heart of existence) dualistic words and concepts are going to be less and less effective in expressing what is experienced.
My main disagreement with you lies in whether there is a preferred, or even specifiable, way of reaching the One. Or, nearing it.
Also, I share georgey's stance (which is in tune with how my favorite Greek philosopher, Plotinus, saw things) that reason is our best guide toward finding a jumping off point into ineffability.
That is, we should use reason, logic, argument, discussion, and such to sort out what makes most and least sense so long as we are in the realm of "making sense." This will help guard against premature explanations of what can't be explained, or believing that we've understood something when we really haven't.
Posted by: Brian | March 28, 2009 at 11:33 AM
Huxley also presents imo the strongest argument for mysticism.
Which, in its most basic form, appears to be a so-called perennial philosophy, an ancient set of principles common to most religions and belief systems and indeed to some modern science and psychology.
I think the most practical aspect of this type of mysticism is the concept of knowing oneself (that socrated banged on about too), which is perhaps what sustained skillful meditation can bring about (which i know nothing of and would like to learn and try experience which is why i was interested in Brian's non-experiences).
I don't know how rational or practical it is to supposedly connect with an eternal sound or light or cosmonaut-type asto travel. However, what does seem to be a lofty spiritual goal with practical real benefits is to seek to understand oneself, to find out who we really are.
However, its difficult to see how such meditation can lead to an awakening or enlightenment to all things, since surely this introspective inward eye can only reveal subjective knowledge of onself and nothing else. To understand the world around us, navel-gazing by its nature must have its limits.
Posted by: georgey | March 28, 2009 at 12:15 PM
ashy: (..)If Brian's wife would for a moment become a truly enlightened psychologist herself she would by all accounts be able to see the wood for the trees, and set this wayward child on his straight and narrow journey once again(..)
1) how do you know if she isn't 1 already?
2) which straight & narrow exactly? yours? sorry, which is?
(..)Sorry about the length of this one.(..)
1) Then say it with less words. Verbal diarrhea.
1 More example:"Just like so many of us that came to seeking or experiment via those heady revolutionary days of drugs, sex, rock n roll,(..), the confines of our material existences were challenged and the envelopes stretched, in some cases beyond the limits of their very own elasticity."
Dude! Why not: "People did drugs etc, some of them died." Please, do us all a favor.
This reminds me of a story I've read:
John Coltrane(well known sax player) allegedly once said:"(..)I don't know how to stop." To which Miles Davis(well known trumpet player) allegedly answered:"Try taking the saxophone out of your mouth."
(From Jazz Anecdotes;Bill Crow; pages 324/325.)
Posted by: JJQ | March 29, 2009 at 11:44 AM
well I was going to use John Coltrane and Miles Davis as icons and examples of those heady days of enlightenment back then, but thought it best to just be associated with Timothy Leary, and Jimi Hendrix, as John and Miles were a bit more sophisticated enlightened cats than the razzmatazz bunch of psychedelic hippies that roamed the earth during the revolution of the 60's.
Posted by: ashy | March 29, 2009 at 01:27 PM
"more sophisticated enlightened cats"??? you obviously don't know squat about Dr Leary (or Jimi), which you have so stupidly called a "razzmatazz bunch of psychedelic hippies". what an ignoramus you must be.
Posted by: purple haze | March 29, 2009 at 08:25 PM
Well obviously you failed to see the irony in my tongue in cheek post about those razzmatazz hippies of whom I was one, but then I guess you up tight, holier than thou, super duper highly educated, highly advance, intellectually indoctrinated existentialist Yanks would, now wouldn't you.
Fact is Jimi Hendrix and Timothy Leary were two of my most adored idols back then (along with Bob Dylan, Steven stills and Neil Young), and John Coltrane and Miles Davis were just a little outa my league, being the super sophisticated Jazz maestro's that they were, far too intelligent for the likes of me.
So cut it anyway you like to, us hippies were a pretty razzmatazz bunch of soul searchers any which way you like to scramble the cookie jar.
Posted by: ashy | March 30, 2009 at 11:04 AM
Regarding the projection of faith onto the Master, I would agree...
I am an initiate of Sant Darshan Singh, which began when I was 6 years old. The meditation always interested me, but the emphasis was usually on devotion to the Guru. Sometimes, it was in spite of the Guru himself.
Like he would admonish people for not meditating and keeping up their introspection diaries as they were told. One there was the time they announced that the Master was not a psychiatrist and could not answer questions of that nature. Or another time when they told initiates to quit telling people that Master is God.
If you don't mind, I think I will answer those questions on my own blog and track back to here. Should be interesting. I haven't talked much about Sant Mat.
Cool blog and I appreciate your honesty.
Posted by: Ned | April 03, 2009 at 01:00 PM
Would you be interesting in discussing your meditation experiences? You have a diary, filled with information?
Would be nice if you are open to discussion.
If you have had no sound or visual experiences, that is ok. However, it would be interesting to learn what training (introductory information)you received at the time of initiation, regarding sounds and visuals during meditation.
Thanks and best wishes,
Posted by: Roger | April 04, 2009 at 07:28 AM
“It does still in spite of all of this consternation help for the skeptic and derogatory practitioner who still seeks some form of truth to be brutally honest with himself.
And if he is as bold as that to stare himself square on in the mirror he will blatantly recognize that the flaw or the fallacy, the limitation and the inadequacy, rests purely and solely with himself, no one out there, not the teacher, nor the disciple, nor the follower, nor the unenlightened, but only with himself.”
So then ... in our honest search to discover, that which is behind the veil, do we become the beggar, engulfed in the pain of separation? Do we need to be brought to our knees in utter anguish and intense longing (bireh)?
Then … so be it.
Posted by: zenjen | April 04, 2009 at 04:56 PM
I like this zenjen fellow, few there are who are honestly true to themselves, seems to me he is one of them.
If Thine Eye Be Single
The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.
Jesus the Christ, Matthew 6:22 (KJV)
See also Luke 11:34
(Q)Please explain what was meant by the spiritual eye, or third eye, in relation to psychic development. Should we today seek to develop this particular facility? If so, how?
(A) As has been given, there is ever a channel or manner in which the expressions of a force may manifest in a material world. Hence the term, "Angels took form", that there might be the expression of, or vehicle for, the activity of an individual force manifestation in the MATERIAL plane. In the psychic forces, or spiritual forces (which are psychic forces), there has ever then been a vehicle, or portion of the anatomical forces of the body, through which the expressions come to individual activity, and these may find various forms of manifestations, or MOVEMENTS of - as has been given, that finds its seat in the creative energies and forces of the body. In the eye, "Let thine eye be SINGLE" may be the interpretation of same, or vehicles, or channels, or glands through which man has lost his vision, or the ability of seeing the self-expression in same in the pituitary forces, as in the lyden and the others - we find expressions in various forms of the body. These become, as has been seen or given, in the feminine body more manifested than ordinarily in the male, in man forces, in that called intuition, or that which is active in that portion of the system. These are but one expression of that portion of the body, for these may be added to by the feeding of same, that partake of other forces of the body in such quantities, or such character of development, as to produce other conditions in the body, as the growing of portions of the body that have become lax, or lacking in their activity in the system, but development in the spiritual sense - by meditation, prayer - dependent upon the external forces, or the creative energies, for its food, rather than upon that which is wholly of the material, develops that as may be termed the psychic development of individuals. Well that psychic forces and occult influences be developed in the individuals that so find within their individual selves that which makes for a closer relationship with that they individually worship as their ideal! That does not indicate that every individual should make of themselves a psychic channel that may be used to their own destruction; for, as has been given, there be many things hard to be understood that many wrest with to their own destruction, but that which gives more understanding of the relationships of self with the creative forces of a universal experience, rather than individual, makes for a closer walk with God, that from which the essence of life itself has its emanation. In the body we find that which connects the pineal, the pituitary, the lyden, may be truly called the silver cord, or the golden cup that may be filled with a closer walk with that which is the creative essence in physical, mental and spiritual life; for the destruction wholly of either will make for the disintegration of the soul from its house of clay. To be purely material minded, were an anatomical or pathological study made for a period of seven years (which is a cycle of change in all the body-elements) of one that is acted upon through the third eye alone, we will find one fed upon spiritual things becomes a light that may shine from and in the darkest corner. One fed upon the purely material will become a Frankenstein that is without a concept of any influence other than material or mental.
Through Edgar Cayce (262-20) June 5, 1932
(Q) What is meant by the Hidden Way?
(A) Just as we have been trying to explain to the entity - the finding of the consciousness of self within as related to, as being at-one with or as a part of, or separated from, the whole.
For as was given so oft, this is found within. For thy body is indeed the pattern of the heavenly body, yet it only grows to same, as it grows away from same; though it may be within the three-dimensional realm. This is the Hidden Way. For as the entity uses, never abuses but uses self in service, it finds the Way. For who is the greater among you? "He that is the servant of all." Who would know the Hidden Way? They who seek to do His biddings alone.
(Q) The Holy Breath?
(A) This is the same, only in activity; that is, one may be aware of the at-onement but to see, to feel - There are not words to express, for we are expressing same in material terms or expressions of awarenesses in a consciousness made known as it plays upon the attributes of a physical being. As we say, the All-Seeing Eye of God, the All-Seeing Eye of self can only be attained when in attune to God. And when attuned, He hath breathed the Holy Breath on the activity of the entity.
Spoken through Edgar Cayce (2533-8) May 3, 1944
Posted by: ashy | April 05, 2009 at 12:49 AM
If thine eye be single the whole body will be full of light.
We do not cultivate this single pointed, concentrated mind for the purpose of excellence in art or athletics. We do so for the purpose of bringing about a radical transformation at the core of our beings. We do so to transcend ourselves and experience being at one with all existence and thus getting beyond separation and self-centeredness.
How do we make our eye single? No one can really tell us this. A great action knows no plan. But there is a striking story from the Upanishads that points the way. Once in ancient India there was a tournament held to test marksmanship in archery. A wooden fish was set up on a high pole and the eye of the fish was the target. One by one many valiant princes came and tried their skill, but in vain. Before each one shot his arrow the teacher asked him what he saw, and invariably all replied that they saw a fish on a pole, at a great height with head, eyes etc.; but Arjuna, as he took his aim, said: 'I see the eye of the fish,' and he was the only one who succeeded in hitting the mark. If thine eye be single the whole body will be full of light.
From: The Quarterly Newsletter of The Zen Center of Denver
Lotus in the Flame Temple
Posted by: ashy | April 05, 2009 at 01:24 AM
"My spirit beareth witness with thy spirit." Not only is this applicable in spirit but in mind and in body. For, know, the Lord is one. All that becomes active in the mind is first in spirit. Then in mind does it grow. Then it materiality does it take shape.
Spoken through "the sleeping prophet" (3333-1) October 31, 1943
ALL then in their OWN phase of consciousness may arise to, and arrive at, that awareness within themselves; by the applications of those things which are necessary to do that which was given from the beginning, "SUBDUE the earth!"
That which is, then, is for the glorification of the Creator. And man in his application of nature IS to make SUCH application to the glory of the divine, AS it may express and manifest in the individual experience!
Spoken through "the sleeping prophet" (1546-1) March 8, 1938
And as the choice is made, know WHO and what is the author of thy hopes; and know they must be founded in spiritual things. Not longfacedness, nor that in which one sets self up as a goody-goody individual for the effect or for the fear of this or that, or because of what people will say. But KNOW that the Lord is ONE, and that thy manifestation in the material plane is to be a channel of blessings to others, if ye would attain to the consciousness of peace or harmony within thy inner self in thy associations and dealings with thy fellow man!
Spoken through "the sleeping prophet" (1575-1) April 21, 1938
Posted by: ashy | April 05, 2009 at 01:31 AM
I would like to share comments on this page. I am also an ex satsangi of 51 years. a life time of illusion.
Posted by: june schlebusch | November 19, 2013 at 01:02 AM
My comment on Ashy's extended sermon is that it isn't a "comment" and shouldn't be posted as one. If Ashy's articles of faith deserve a hearing in this blog, they should be the topic of one of Brian's sermons.
Posted by: cc | November 19, 2013 at 08:19 AM
Ashy, if it is the same "Ashy", was a persistent, overbearing and hostile participant on this blog several years ago who commented under a variety of pseudonyms. I think he was eventually blocked by the host, Brian, because his lengthy rants bordered on maniacal, obsessive, fanatical and certainly not constructive or helpful in any way. He was entertaining up to a point as his vocabulary was voluminous and he could string together diatribes of intricate precision describing the foul and lowly nature of his opposition on this blog. He was particularly displeased with tAo, Blogger Brian, me and others for our lack of support regarding his views on Sant Mat. His reactions were volatile and indicative of deep insecurities and psychological instability.
I could be wrong about this current "Ashy" but the signs are there. Brian, please correct me if you have evidence to the contrary, otherwise the "sleeping prophet" may have awakened. You may even deem it wise not to post this comment as it may prove to be incendiary. That's OK, dude.
Posted by: tucson | November 19, 2013 at 11:26 AM
tucson, the Ashy comment was from 2009. You're right, Ashy is no more on this blog.
Posted by: Brian Hines | November 19, 2013 at 11:43 AM
Hi. Hope all is well. I read to the part that sort of alluded to Sants on the physical plane telling those who have not yet reached the sort of Yogi level of seeing the form of the Master within, that they should expect OBEs and achieve astral projection through their meditation practices. I skimmed the rest. I have not seen this claim made in Sant Kirpal Singh, Sant Ajaib Singh, Sant Sawan Singh, or Kabir's discourses. I've studied them a little bit, perhaps not enough in this case. I have, however, seen many many references to such phenomenon being *possible* through meditation.
Let us pretend that meditation is but one gear in what is something like a machine. There are many other "gears" or "cogs" so to speak. If any cog in a "real life" machine for what ever reason are not turning, neither will be the others. There are many instructions as to how we conduct ourselves given during these discourses going back hundreds of years, and I do not doubt for a second you know these discourses better than me. I hope I can follow this path as long as you did. Perhaps just an oversight on the most innocuous thing could cause a gear to malfunction.
Now, I have noticed that many of these instructions, which aren't always stated explicitly, maybe even in passing, if not followed I have a theory that one could be having experiences one day and then none the next. This ceasing of progress could be something like a probation, for all I know it could be permanent. Take for example the instruction that one is to never speak to others of inner experiences. I assume this applies to Neophytes, Yogis, and even Sadhus. But clearly not Sants, since...well...enough said on that. Let's say a person breaks this rule, and suddenly ceases to have experiences. Or maybe secretly pollutes the body and ceases to have experience. I am in no way suggesting that you did a single thing outside of the limits and guidance, I assume you did not and that there is simply no explanation for what you revealed to the world in this great permanent library we call the web.
I am reminded of an anecdote I once heard, comparing initiates in Nepal or Tibet, maybe Bhutan...to initiates in USA. It seems that people in this certain area, when receiving initiation there were many cases where the initiate would immediately be able to see the Master within, or as you say "have an OBE or astral project." However, the majority of USA initiates would only hear some Shabd or see some Surat, but just enough to make them say in their minds...wow, this is for real. Hence we stick with it as we do. Whether this story is true or not, who knows. It's pure hearsay. However, it does kinda make sense to me. My own explanation for this claim is that...you know it compares ourselves...all plugged into computers, owning so many things, constantly thinking of our things and plans to get more things, or do this or that....always so busy with our complex lives. That is common here. But for them...they have no electricity. No TV. None of this garbage distracting them and keeping the monkey mind constantly at play. They are in the perfect state of consciousness to let go of the ties that bind us to this plane of reality, since...what ties do they have? No worrying about protecting belongings from thieves. No worries about their bank account or bills. Just work in field, sleep, children maybe have home made toys or play in the forest and streams, parents find other ways to pass time. It's just a thought. As long as we have breath in our lungs, there is still time.
Posted by: anonymous | March 16, 2017 at 07:19 PM