Comments on A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"TypePad2009-05-08T01:21:08ZBrian Hineshttps://hinessight.blogs.com/church_of_the_churchless/tag:typepad.com,2003:https://hinessight.blogs.com/church_of_the_churchless/2009/05/a-sant-mat-guru-answers-a-question-with-dont-question/comments/atom.xml/Adi commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2012876d57642970c2010-01-14T16:13:53Z2010-01-14T16:13:53ZAdiBrother Chin! I hear you and I believe that you are on the right path to question. Maharaj Ji used...<p>Brother Chin!</p>
<p>I hear you and I believe that you are on the right path to question. Maharaj Ji used to quote Lord Buddha and say "Do no believe even my words, but see for yourself because seeing is believing".</p>
<p>I believe that you are on the right path - you ask questions because you CARE. because you want to KNOW, and understand the true meaning. These are all very noble aspirations. There is nothing wrong in what you say. Truth and right understanding will come when you think and ponder on these questions only.</p>
<p>I believe that you need to develop your own tests to provide you faith. Meditate. Sit quietly and pray that your questions get answered.</p>
<p>If your faith is shaken and you cannot pray to a God, then don't! But don't give up being honest!</p>
<p>Meditate in solitude, and the answer will emerge from within.</p>tAo commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e20120a53e574f970b2009-09-01T22:22:15Z2009-09-01T22:22:15ZtAoPrtateek, It doesn't really matter to me what your "Baba Ji wanted to say'. Also, you may feel an "absence...<p>Prtateek,</p>
<p>It doesn't really matter to me what your "Baba Ji wanted to say'.</p>
<p>Also, you may feel an "absence of Divine Love" and a sense of "unsatisfaction" and thatr you are "imperfect", but I do not. So you shouldn't assume that others feel the same way, or lack that you do.</p>
<p>You said: "starting step is faith if you do not have faith in God then its not Love"</p>
<p>-- I don't agree with you. I need no such "faith", nor do I need to love some God. And if God does exist and God is love, then that love is within everyone, and faith is irrelevant.</p>
<p>"Love is not a deal"</p>
<p>-- No one said that it is.</p>
<p><br />
</p>prateek commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e20120a53e1929970b2009-09-01T20:47:19Z2009-09-01T20:47:19ZprateekI have gone through the major part of the blog I think my mind is too small and weak to...<p>I have gone through the major part of the blog I think my mind is too small and weak to imagine something some power which can't be imagined. There is no Proof of God, but my friends if imperfection exists so exists the perfection...and that is the sea of LOVE. We are droplets of that sea who are imperfect. I am not anxious about questions neither I am interested in secrets but my interest is Love whose absence every one feels in his or her life....when you fall in Love then questions fade away....GOD is Love and thats what Baba Ji wanted to say...He said to use your intellect your intellect should be strong enough to know the absence of Divine Love your unsatisfaction and imperfection ...once you fall in Love questions become less important to you ...and you rather flow in Love of God...and Love's starting step is faith if you donot have faith in God then its not Love,,,as one of my friends asked what is the surety God exists that perfect world exists....if you are asking surety then my dear friend leave the hopes of surety because Love is not a deal...first be an intellect and try to reach that level that you feel absence of God...you will see all the truths....</p>Jayme commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fd58d78970c2009-06-06T16:47:19Z2009-06-06T16:47:19ZJaymeRoger, I disagree.<p>Roger,</p>
<p>I disagree.</p>Roger commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fd56a40970c2009-06-06T15:27:48Z2009-06-06T15:27:49ZRogerJen, You are OK. Don't think you are confused or frustrated. Keep writing comments as you choose. I would like...<p>Jen,</p>
<p>You are OK. Don't think you are confused or frustrated. Keep writing comments as you choose. I would like another comment from you, regarding the "science" of the soul. We might agree that this "science" doesn't encorporate the Scientific Method.<br />
This is ok. However, could you, based on your understanding, discuss any type of prosess or method, this "science" follows?<br />
If there is no method or process, then ok again. Hopefully, you have some explanation of how this "science" works or functions.</p>
<p>Thanks again,<br />
Roger</p>Roger commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fd55e31970c2009-06-06T14:57:47Z2009-06-06T14:57:47ZRogerJayme, Thanks again for your reply, You stated, "Evidently the post was more confusing that I intended." ---Your statement wasn't...<p>Jayme,</p>
<p>Thanks again for your reply,</p>
<p>You stated,</p>
<p>"Evidently the post was more confusing that I intended."</p>
<p>---Your statement wasn't confusing, and I don't think you intended any type of confusion.<br />
---However, you have some unintended need to gab and gab. It's a gift for some people. You are not a bad person, you are OK. <br />
---A simple, "I don't know" was the answer. Instead, you in an unconfusing manner, respond with the gift of endless gabbing. <br />
---Any supposed spiritual issue; you have a natural (within yourself) need to attach your self contained gab. Someone, a supposed beginning initiate, could be misguided into thinking there is a Scientific Method attached to SantMat or the Soul. </p>
<p><br />
" I do not agree with your other comments but I'll leave them unaddressed.”</p>
<p>---Most “gabbers” don’t want to address the “gabbing” issue. Their role in any group is probably founded on this gift of gabbing. This gabbing foundation is their reason for being. Really, one that is such is not bad. Hopefully, you can understand the potential harm to others, not to yourself. Think, a little, about the other supposedly gullible satsangi, that you come in contact with.</p>
<p>Best wishes to you,<br />
Roger<br />
</p>Jen commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fd39546970c2009-06-06T09:25:41Z2009-06-06T09:25:41ZJenHi Obed, No not really into footy, but hey thanks for the support :) Cheers Mate<p>Hi Obed,</p>
<p>No not really into footy, but hey thanks for the support :)</p>
<p>Cheers Mate</p>Jen commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570c86687970b2009-06-06T09:19:17Z2009-06-06T09:19:17ZJenBrian, I don't mind your advice at all. I just don't think I have ever mentioned feeling frustrated so thats...<p>Brian, I don't mind your advice at all. I just don't think I have ever mentioned feeling frustrated so thats what I am saying, not "frustrated". Having a bit of a battle sometimes, in other words feeling like coming up against a brick wall, wondering why I am bothering, but hey its no big deal, this is my first ever attempt at blogging so I'm new to this game. I also get annoyed at times but I realize I am probably just as annoying!</p>Brian commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fd2f9d5970c2009-06-06T06:52:28Z2009-06-06T06:52:28ZBrianhttp://www.churchofthechurchless.comJen, I wish you'd be more honest. You say "I'm not frustrated." Yet this is what you said in another...<p>Jen, I wish you'd be more honest. You say "I'm not frustrated." Yet this is what you said in another comment recently:<br />
---------------------</p>
<p>"Brian,</p>
<p>You must realize that on this blog there are people with very definite views and unfortunately some are totally against Sant Mat and they will attack anyone who does not agree with their views. So, because I basically do not like to argue but at the same time like the freedom to be able to express my own views and do enjoy an objective debate, perhaps I feel quite threatened by others here who I have observed to be very cutting, harsh, aggressive, downright rude and nasty and so I avoid talking directly to such people if I can.</p>
<p>That’s why I have changed back and forth because at times I really feel I shouldn’t be here on this blog and then at other times I think it is good for me because I need to become stronger and have more faith in myself and my own particular perceptions which I have built up over many, many years of being on a path of self discovery. At times it is a bit overwhelming and I don’t particularly like feeling that I am under attack from certain quarters.</p>
<p>I tend to see things differently from others and I feel it might actually be important for others to see things from another perspective, but then it is necessary for all parties to be coming from a more open minded perspective, that is what a debate is all about. The very skeptical, atheistic, scientific kind of mind can be extremely arrogant in its opinions and not open at all to any kind of metaphysical phenomena, so I feel I am doing battle here entirely on my own, except for a few people who are usually neither satsangis nor ex-satsangis, so have a more objective and open understanding."<br />
-----------------------</p>
<p>Your feeling that you are "doing battle" perhaps explains your dissatisfaction with this blog. If you are defending a belief system, naturally you are going to feel like you're being attacked when others question your beliefs.</p>
<p>Like I've been saying, I think your expectations of a "churchless" blog are a bit unreasonable. Also, my sense is that you are trying to come across in a certain way that doesn't match with what you are genuinely feeling or experiencing. </p>
<p>If you're frustrated, that's fine. It's just confusing when you say you're doing battle with the faithless science-loving infidels one day, then the next, you've got no problems at all. Honesty is better than appearing "spiritual," Jen. That's my main piece of advice for you, which I understand may not be welcome.</p>Jen commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fd26815970c2009-06-06T05:08:29Z2009-06-06T05:08:30ZJenI'm not frustrated Brian, feeling like I have said all I have wished to say now, so no probs at...<p>I'm not frustrated Brian, feeling like I have said all I have wished to say now, so no probs at all.</p>
<p>Cheers</p>Obed commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570c741e5970b2009-06-06T05:04:12Z2009-06-06T05:04:12ZObedDear Jen, You are doing great.We all love you. Are you an All Black fan?. All the best Obed<p>Dear Jen,<br />
You are doing great.We all love you.<br />
Are you an All Black fan?.<br />
All the best<br />
Obed</p>Jayme commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fd24d1b970c2009-06-06T04:43:21Z2009-06-06T04:43:21ZJaymeHi Jen, lol. :) ===== Roger, Evidently the post was more confusing that I intended. I think that's why I...<p>Hi Jen,</p>
<p>lol. :)</p>
<p>=====</p>
<p>Roger,</p>
<p>Evidently the post was more confusing that I intended. I think that's why I cut it out originally.</p>
<p>Perhaps this is a clearer answer to your repeated question about my statement below Posted by: Roger | June 05, 2009 at 07:59 AM:</p>
<p>[J] - attributed to Jayme<br />
[R] - attributed to Roger</p>
<p>[J]"Questioning implies un-knowing and certainty implies knowing. Perhaps when the RS Master says "don't question", one is best to look at it as a state "beyond knowing" rather than a state of being forbidden. Being responsible to those energies in which we find ourselves is being in a state beyond knowing - we just do."</p>
<p>[R] Again, the above statement is your statement. Nothing wrong with a gift of electromagnetic gab. Are you afraid to say you "don't know" what you were stating? Again, barking out a technical abstraction is ok. However, when asked to be specific, you seem trapped into replying with more electromagnetic abstractions.</p>
<p>[J] No, not afraid of stating I don't know. I am having a difficult time understanding what you don't understand about this statement. All words are abstractions. It is important to establish a common consensus on vocabulary for communications to occur. It is clear, I don't do a very good job at defining my terms.</p>
<p>[J] I'll try to answer your question more carefully as follows:</p>
<p>[J] Questioning (inquiry) comes from a curiosity for knowing something. This means one doesn't know it and so the beginning of the first statement "Questioning implies un-knowing."</p>
<p>[J] Certainty means faith or belief (a conviction). The knowledge that a person has and is certain is true, may be false, but it is still a form of knowing. Hence the portion of the statement "certainty implies knowing."</p>
<p>[J] As for knowing what the RS master means - I don't know and so I started the second sentence off with "perhaps" and so the sentence is my interpretation (or imo). I use this interpretation because it so closely fits what the RS masters have said numerous times about it being essential to sit down and quiet the body and mind (i.e. "don't question") which has also been stated in answer to numerous questions by satsangis about why God put us here - to which the RS master replies that "only He knows" and that the disciple should "ask the Lord Himself"(i.e., sit down, shut up and meditate - as I interpret this). To look at the "don't question" issue, I am claiming that in the most peaceful "state" or condition that one achieves in the RS practice ("beyond" the Sat Lok or imperishable region) is this "beyond knowing." The sixth region in the RS practice is the invisible region (Alakh Lok) and the seventh is the inaccessible region (Agam Lok) and the eight region is the Nameless region (Anami Lok). It is claimed that the RS masters only take their disciples to the fifth region of imperishability (read the books). However, these distinctions are almost arbitrary in that there are subtleties that may or may not be noteworthy, depending on the teaching. RS masters break the regions up according to their own method. It doesn't necessarily appeal to everyone. However, I tried to use a physical analog (the potential field analogy) to "describe" this "level" beyond knowing which I mean to imply is the eighth region (Anami Lok) which cannot be explained with any abstraction of knowing and unknowing - hence, I adopted the term "beyond knowing" without concern. This then is what I mean by the middle of the sentence "one is best to look at it as a state "beyond knowing"." The dogmatic condition is to interpret the expression "don't question" as a statement forbidding (or preventing) the inquiry as a dictum (or command) that has the force of manmade laws (i.e. contrived). So, I am proposing that we look upon this as an unquestioning condition "beyond knowing" (or unknowable) and which is not forbidden in the sense of the artificially abstracted knowledge identified in the literal words "don't question".<br />
In this "condition" of "beyond knowing," nothing has changed. The world is as it is but we are no longer looking from "inside the fishbowl," so to speak, scattered in time and space, reacting to the world as if it is somewhere and some-when else (disconnecting us from here and now). In this condition of being through which we become transparent to the Nameless One, we are fully sympathetic and responsible for our physical and mental actions. I see this as being mindful according to the teachings of Thich Nhat Hanh. I'm sure he didn't invent the term. I think he uses an invented term we "inter-are" but again, I do not know that this is exactly what he means. In any case, this is what I mean by the last sentence of the statement. A fully responsible person does what is mindful, regardless of the act. By saying "we just do," I mean that every action we do, we are and are fully self aware of the action that is done within the capability of the being that is acting.</p>
<p>[J] I wish I could explain it more simply but I would have a difficult time doing this.</p>
<p>[J] I do not agree with your other comments but I'll leave them unaddressed.</p>
<p><br />
[J] Regards,</p>Brian commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570c705a2970b2009-06-06T04:00:53Z2009-06-06T04:00:54ZBrianhttp://www.churchofthechurchless.comJen, a better question is, "If this is a churchless blog (which it is), why do churched people preach their...<p>Jen, a better question is, "If this is a churchless blog (which it is), why do churched people preach their belief system here?" As I've noted before, this is like a vegetarian going on the Cattlemen's Association web site and urging meatlessness.</p>
<p>I hope you'll read, and consider, the post I'm writing now -- and will publish tonight. You have a wrong view of "dogma," a word you used in your comment above.</p>
<p>Dogma is a positive belief. Questioning dogma isn't dogmatic. It is an exercise in reason, the scientific method, open-mindedness. </p>
<p>To say, "There is no evidence for X" isn't dogmatic. It's truthful, if there really is no evidence for X.</p>
<p>You seem frustrated because you've been challenged after making statements about your mystical experiences and spiritual beliefs. Well, provide evidence to support those statements, or expect to continue to be challenged.</p>Jen commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570c6f6e4970b2009-06-06T03:49:32Z2009-06-06T03:49:32ZJentAo, I'm not looking for support or sympathy. I'm pretty much churchless myself, never liked organized religion, just doing my...<p>tAo, </p>
<p>I'm not looking for support or sympathy. I'm pretty much churchless myself, never liked organized religion, just doing my own thing in my own way and sometimes defending when I see an injustice or unfairness. </p>
<p>So, if this is truly a churchless blog why do ex-satsangis post their anti Sant Mat dogma here? Why don't they go to the ex-satsangi websites?</p>tAo commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fd21215970c2009-06-06T03:34:00Z2009-06-06T03:34:00ZtAoJen says: "watch when all the satsangis stop visiting this blog, it will just totally dry up, fizzle out… there...<p>Jen says:</p>
<p>"watch when all the satsangis stop visiting this blog, it will just totally dry up, fizzle out… there will be no stimulus for discussion… it will become very boring"</p>
<p>-- Thats an awfully lame conjecture if you ask me. I seriously doubt that a bunch of satsangi nincompoops are the life and soul of this blog, or that it will somehow just "dry up" and "fizzle out" without an annoying bunch of dogmatic believers (who resent the fact that some Churchless folks don't find RS dogma so sacred or convincing) hanging around. And as a matter of fact, it would become quite open and refreshing if they would all just go away like you say they will.</p>
<p>"everyone knows which path he [Brian] has followed and probably which “guru” he is referring to and then you complain because you don’t want Sant Mat discussed on this forum?"</p>
<p>-- There is a very big difference between the Churchless issues and points that Brian raises relative to the RSSB... and the excessive and repeated preachings of Santmat dogma by RS cult believers whose only agenda is to post excessive and repeated preachings of Santmat dogma. And I am not the only one here that does not care to see more of that.</p>
<p>So... I think I am now going to refrain from making any further comments or responses to people (like yourself and others) whose intent is to try to keep the Santmat/RS dogma going around here as long as possible. I am simply not going to give it any more energy. Ignoring it will be my vote against it.</p>
<p>I am tired of all this Santmat occupying the focus, and I know that some others are too. So I will just let Brian delete the Santmat preaching comments, if and as he chooses. And I really think he would rather discuss a lot of other things (besides Santmat) as well.</p>
<p>My question to you Jen is... if you are so much into Santmat, then what are you doing here? But then I guess I already answered that above. If you really want or need sympathy and support for your Santmat trip, then just go attend a satsang.</p>Jen commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fd1e03a970c2009-06-06T02:24:38Z2009-06-06T02:24:38ZJentAo, Okay, watch when all the satsangis stop visiting this blog, it will just totally dry up, fizzle out… there...<p>tAo, </p>
<p>Okay, watch when all the satsangis stop visiting this blog, it will just totally dry up, fizzle out… there will be no stimulus for discussion… it will become very boring and then Brian will post some contentious issue and give it a challenging title as in <br />
“April 27, 2006<br />
God-man or Asshole? The guru conundrum.”<br />
to provoke a response because everyone knows which path he has followed and probably which “guru” he is referring to and then you complain because you don’t want Sant Mat discussed on this forum?!<br />
</p>tAo commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fd19a56970c2009-06-06T01:08:07Z2009-06-06T01:08:08ZtAo"The astral reality is another reality just like dreams is another reality. No less no higher just different. Laws that...<p>"The astral reality is another reality just like dreams is another reality. No less no higher just different. Laws that exist in this dimension do not apply to laws applied in the astral dimension."</p>
<p>"In Sant Mat, it said that, no in absolute way, that at this level, in order to understand and connect some lines and dots, that we are our focus of attention. We are always soul etc. but within this context we are our focus of attention. If all day long we question,,,we are the questioning. Knowing is not question."</p>
<p>"The guru saying not to question, I take it to imply two things: One, stop questioning, so your mind mantra can shift focus and understand/listen to the answer. And that state is achieved if you 'do not question' anymore."</p>
<p>-- The above three quotations by "A" amount to nothing more than more preaching of Santmat dogma. But this is not the place for more preaching of Santmat. Preach that stuff to the satsangi believers, not to the Churchless. You satsangis seem to be constantly trying to hi-jack this blog's commentary in order to preach more of your Santmat rhetoric and dogma.</p>
<p>I myself am not "against" Santmat, but I am very much against and rather tried of having Santmat dogma repeatedly posted and preached on this site by satsangi believers who are only interested in posting Santmat dogma to the exclusion of all else.</p>
<p><br />
Next, Jen says:</p>
<p>"I probably do question too much"</p>
<p>-- On the contrary.</p>
<p>"having faith in one’s own ability and knowingness"</p>
<p>-- A "knowingness" of what??</p>
<p>"the soul is the direct observer and it really is not involved with the dualist concepts of the mind"</p>
<p>-- And what is this supposed "soul" the "direct observer" of??</p>
<p>"on this blog there are people with very definite views and unfortunately some are totally against Sant Mat"</p>
<p>-- Who exactly are these people who are "totally against Sant Mat"?? And what exactly are their "views"??</p>
<p>"the soul is the direct observer and it really is not involved with the dualist concepts of the mind"</p>
<p>-- And what is this "soul" observing, if not the "the mind??</p>
<p><br />
"I basically do not like to argue" <br />
"I feel quite threatened by others here" <br />
"so I avoid talking directly to such people if I can." <br />
"at times I really feel I shouldn’t be here on this blog" <br />
"I need to become stronger and have more faith in myself and my own particular perceptions which I have built up over many, many years of being on a path of..."</p>
<p>-- A path of Santmat.</p>
<p>"I don’t particularly like feeling that I am under attack"</p>
<p>-- Then don't feel that way.</p>
<p>"I feel it might actually be important for others to see things from another perspective" </p>
<p>-- Perhaps they do, and you just don't see that.</p>
<p>"it is necessary for all parties to be coming from a more open minded perspective"</p>
<p>-- Practice what you preach.</p>
<p>"skeptical, atheistic, scientific kind of mind can be extremely arrogant in its opinions and not open at all to any kind of metaphysical phenomena"</p>
<p>-- "metaphysical phenomena" means: supernaturalism.</p>
<p>"a few people who are usually neither satsangis nor ex-satsangis, so have a more objective and open understanding"</p>
<p>-- You are basically looking for people who are or tend to be sympathetic (like you are) to Santmat. But the Churchless is not the best place to find those kind of people. </p>
<p>"Its just too difficult when it becomes an argument with someone with a totally opposing attitude to mine especially when I know it will never resolve and it just seems pointless."</p>
<p>-- Thats mostly because you do not wish to look at your own unexamined assumptions and beliefs. It is your own recoil to anyone (like myself) who challenges your cherished assumptions and beliefs. But its not others (like myself) who are your enemies. Its your own attachment to your opinions, assumptions, beliefs, "knowingness", and so on that is causing you to feel distress.</p>
<p><br />
</p>Jen commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fd15954970c2009-06-05T23:42:19Z2009-06-05T23:42:19ZJenA, I really enjoyed your comment, thank you, and I agree with what you say: “The astral reality is another...<p>A,</p>
<p>I really enjoyed your comment, thank you, and I agree with what you say:</p>
<p>“The astral reality is another reality just like dreams is another reality. No less no higher just different. Laws that exist in this dimension do not apply to laws applied in the astral dimension.”</p>
<p>Also, when you say:</p>
<p>“In Sant Mat, it said that, no in absolute way, that at this level, in order to understand and connect some lines and dots, that we are our focus of attention. We are always soul etc. but within this context we are our focus of attention. If all day long we question,,,we are the questioning. Knowing is not question. _The gure sayin not to question, I take it to imply two things: One, stop questioning, so your mind mantra can shift focus and undeerstand/listen to the answer. And that the state achieved is that by you 'do not question' anymore.”</p>
<p>I am starting to realize this more and more now because I probably do question too much and there is a fine balance between being discerning and at the same time having faith in one’s own ability and knowingness, especially when it comes to the inner spirit or soul being.</p>
<p>Roger,</p>
<p>You ask: “the Soul is the Scientist, and there is no brain activity, for the Soul to engage in dualist concepts and mental activity. Is this your understanding?”</p>
<p>I agree yes, the soul is the direct observer and it really is not involved with the dualist concepts of the mind - thanks Rog.</p>
<p><br />
Brian,</p>
<p>You must realize that on this blog there are people with very definite views and unfortunately some are totally against Sant Mat and they will attack anyone who does not agree with their views. So, because I basically do not like to argue but at the same time like the freedom to be able to express my own views and do enjoy an objective debate, perhaps I feel quite threatened by others here who I have observed to be very cutting, harsh, aggressive, downright rude and nasty and so I avoid talking directly to such people if I can. </p>
<p>That’s why I have changed back and forth because at times I really feel I shouldn’t be here on this blog and then at other times I think it is good for me because I need to become stronger and have more faith in myself and my own particular perceptions which I have built up over many, many years of being on a path of self discovery. At times it is a bit overwhelming and I don’t particularly like feeling that I am under attack from certain quarters. </p>
<p>I tend to see things differently from others and I feel it might actually be important for others to see things from another perspective, but then it is necessary for all parties to be coming from a more open minded perspective, that is what a debate is all about. The very skeptical, atheistic, scientific kind of mind can be extremely arrogant in its opinions and not open at all to any kind of metaphysical phenomena, so I feel I am doing battle here entirely on my own, except for a few people who are usually neither satsangis nor ex-satsangis, so have a more objective and open understanding.</p>
<p>tucson,</p>
<p>You ask: “Your response to tAo appears evasive. Do you have any response to the issues he raised?”</p>
<p>Its just too difficult when it becomes an argument with someone with a totally opposing attitude to mine especially when I know it will never resolve and it just seems pointless. I’m not here to argue, I do listen and learn in a debate but don’t want to go round and round in circles with no objective end in view.</p>
<p>tAo,</p>
<p>You will see my comments to Brian and tucson above.</p>
<p>Cheers</p>tAo commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fce0bc3970c2009-06-05T21:31:47Z2009-06-05T21:31:47ZtAoJen says: "tAo, You are welcome to your opinion just as I am to mine and there is no point...<p>Jen says:</p>
<p>"tAo, You are welcome to your opinion just as I am to mine and there is no point in arguing or debating the point because I am entitled to voice my point of view just as much as you are entitled to voice your entirely opposing point of view and btw I addressed my comments to Roger and Brian and not to you."</p>
<p>Jen, </p>
<p>Brian has already expressed virtually the same thing that I would have said in my reply to your comment to me: </p>
<p>Brian said: "If you go on a blog and post a comment, expressing your view about something or other, you are inviting further comments -- including criticism, questioning, debate, skepticism, affirmation, whatever." ...and... "you said there is no point in arguing or debating some points you brought up. Well, if you brought them up, you have to expect that someone might challenge them. If you don't want to be challenged, you shouldn't post public comments on the Internet. There also isn't any such thing as directing comments to certain people. Comments are visible to everybody who visits this blog, and anyone is welcome to respond to a comment."</p>
<p>I also would like to reiterate what Tuson asked of you:</p>
<p>"Your response to tAo appears evasive. Do you have any response to the issues he raised?"</p>
<p><br />
</p>tucson commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570c224ad970b2009-06-05T16:36:50Z2009-06-05T16:36:51ZtucsonJen, You wrote: "...there is no point in arguing or debating the point because I am entitled to voice my...<p>Jen,</p>
<p>You wrote: "...there is no point in arguing or debating the point because I am entitled to voice my point of view just as much as you are entitled to voice your entirely opposing point of view..."</p>
<p>--I don't think the issue is whether you and tAo are entitled to your opinions. I think this goes without saying. Also, you don't need to argue if you don't want to, but if you make statements here others may question them. Your response to tAo appears evasive. Do you have any response to the issues he raised? </p>Brian commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570c22412970b2009-06-05T16:35:27Z2009-06-05T16:35:28ZBrianhttp://www.churchofthechurchless.comJen, a process note... If you go on a blog and post a comment, expressing your view about something or...<p>Jen, a process note...</p>
<p>If you go on a blog and post a comment, expressing your view about something or other, you are inviting further comments -- including criticism, questioning, debate, skepticism, affirmation, whatever.</p>
<p>I'm sure you realize this. I just found it interesting that you said there is no point in arguing or debating some points you brought up. </p>
<p>Well, if you brought them up, you have to expect that someone might challenge them. If you don't want to be challenged, you shouldn't post public comments on the Internet.</p>
<p>There also isn't any such thing as directing comments to certain people. Comments are visible to everybody who visits this blog, and anyone is welcome to respond to a comment.</p>Roger commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570c2014c970b2009-06-05T15:35:14Z2009-06-05T15:35:15ZRogerJen, Thanks for your reply too. You stated, "I am also finding myself more in the mode of feeling that...<p>Jen,</p>
<p>Thanks for your reply too.</p>
<p>You stated,</p>
<p>"I am also finding myself more in the mode of feeling that now I need to take more of a “leap of faith”, in other words if I am to do this experiment within myself, as well as following the precepts of Sant Mat to the best of my ability, I have to let go and plunge in wholeheartedly with no expectations and just experience whatever happens. Then to confirm those experiences there will have to be reproducibility and proof (for me)."</p>
<p>---This is OK. I liked the, "let go and plunge in wholeheartedly with no expectations and just experience whatever happens" part.</p>
<p>In addition, </p>
<p>I liked, your statement, "the soul is the direct observer" this is closer to what you say: could possibly be a non-conceptual non-mental activity, where science is "not" needed.</p>
<p>---So within SantMat, the Soul is the direct observer, and engages in no conceptual-mental activity. In a way, the Soul is the Scientist, and there is no brain activity, for the Soul to engage in dualist concepts and mental activity. Is this your understanding? If so, thats OK.<br />
If not, please write more on the role of the Soul in such astral travels and radiant form observations.</p>
<p>Best wishes to you,<br />
Roger</p>Roger commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fccbd18970c2009-06-05T14:59:50Z2009-06-05T14:59:50ZRogerJayme, Thanks again for your reply. Again, I was hoping to get a clarification of what you meant in your...<p>Jayme,</p>
<p>Thanks again for your reply.</p>
<p>Again, I was hoping to get a clarification of what you meant in your statement,</p>
<p>"Questioning implies un-knowing and certainty implies knowing. Perhaps when the RS Master says "don't question", one is best to look at it as a state "beyond knowing" rather than a state of being forbidden. Being responsible to those energies in which we find ourselves is being in a state beyond knowing - we just do."</p>
<p>---Again, the above statement is your statement. Nothing wrong with a gift of electromagnetic gab. Are you afraid to say you "don't know" what you were stating? Again, barking out a technical abstraction is ok. However, when asked to be specific, you seem trapped into replying with more electromagnetic abstractions.<br />
---My concern, if someone(an inititate), who honestly needs help, and the RS master says, "don't question," they might seek you out for advise and guidance. With your "gift of electromagnetic gab" the initiate could be mislead into thinking there is a "Science" in SantMat. When in actuality, you really know very little, regarding the spiritual needs of such.<br />
---Again, nothing wrong with you, however, be careful in any communications with other initiates, in need of some honest help and guidance. You might unknowingly be doing some indirect damage.</p>
<p>Best wishes,<br />
Roger </p>A commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fcc348a970c2009-06-05T12:48:06Z2009-06-05T12:48:06ZAThe astral reality is another reality just like dreams is another reality. No less no higher just different. Laws that...<p>The astral reality is another reality just like dreams is another reality. No less no higher just different. Laws that exist in this dimension do not apply to laws applied in the astral dimension. That does not mean that there is a discontinuity between them as each dimensions exists within and around the other. Like dreams whereby you use your dream body, the physical world whereaby you use your physical body, and even imagination/thought whereaby you use your thought, for the sake of better word, body. <br />
If you see the astral body of the master, you must also have an astral body. To see his causal, you must have causal body. Remember these are just words that describe relationships more than states.<br />
In Sant Mat, it said that, no in absolute way, that at this level, in order to understand and connect some lines and dots, that we are our focus of attention. We are always soul etc. but within this context we are our focus of attention. If all day long we question,,,we are the questioning. Knowing is not question. <br />
The gure sayin not to question, I take it to imply two things: One, stop questioning, so your mind mantra can shift focus and undeerstand/listen to the answer. And that the state achieved is that by you 'do not question' anymore. </p>
<p>The evolution of science has been dramatic the last forty/40 years. If knowing the truth ONLY via science, it excludes probably a trillion of humans that lived before the scientific revolution. I am of the opinnion, that science can help this understanding and is not the only and central conduit to it. You can still understand thus the ultimate truth and still somehow hold that the earth is flat. You may realise is not flat anymore, after you realise the truth. But a-priori knowledge that the earth is flat and that universe does not run on epicycle, is not so important. This is because the search is inwards...or at least begins as such. And inward search is something that all people in all ages have the capacity for...from the caveman to the astronaut.<br />
Parallel this arguement with the fact that science itself does not know the answers...that it deals itself mostly with exoteric physical laws...(that have come full circle back to subjectivity via strings and quantum physics). The branch of science that deals with inner phenomenan is psychatry and psychology...and thanks but not thanks...I prefer and I am inclined in reading schools of thought who have dealt with this issues for thousands of years,,not a modernity branch of science not older than 100 years old. That does not mean i reject psychiatry,,,we can learn much from it,</p>
<p>But the truth,,,or the search for the truth should be available to all peeple...in all ages,,,that have any time of knowledge,,,any type of cultures (bones in their lips,,,,nike on their feet....etc). From caveman to astronat,,,you cannot reduce truth to a western scientific discource that has been refomulating itself since thet day of aristotle. </p>Jen commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570c10c3f970b2009-06-05T09:47:50Z2009-06-05T09:47:50ZJentAo, You are welcome to your opinion just as I am to mine and there is no point in arguing...<p>tAo,</p>
<p>You are welcome to your opinion just as I am to mine and there is no point in arguing or debating the point because I am entitled to voice my point of view just as much as you are entitled to voice your entirely opposing point of view and btw I addressed my comments to Roger and Brian and not to you.</p>tAo commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570c0d39b970b2009-06-05T06:53:28Z2009-06-05T06:53:28ZtAoJen, You stated: "When the Master said to someone “don’t question” this was a personal answer directed to that person...<p>Jen,</p>
<p>You stated:</p>
<p>"When the Master said to someone “don’t question” this was a personal answer directed to that person and only that person will know or should know what he meant by this." </p>
<p>-- How could you know this to be so?? Were you there at the time? How do you know this was "a personal answer directed to that person and only that person"??</p>
<p>You also stated: "The Masters speak very directly to whomsoever they are speaking to at the time."</p>
<p>-- That may or may not be true depending on the circumstance. The admonition of "don't question" could be to one individual or as a general statement to many. The real issue surrounding such an admonition is, why would someone (especially a spiritual teacher) tell anyone not to question? To attempt to suppress and inhibit an individual's natural inclination to question 9especially in matters of spirituality), is both controlling and evasive. Are you perhaps defending that?</p>
<p>"My personal belief is that it is very important to connect with the inner Shabd Master.</p>
<p>-- That is your belief. But... what is this "inner Shabd Master"? Where is the evidence that any such thing or entity exists? From seeing visions in meditation? From hearing voices in meditation? How do <br />
you actually know there is any such thing as an "inner Shabd Master"? From thoughts in your mind? From RS literature or lectures? How do you know this to be true?</p>
<p>"the soul is the direct observer"</p>
<p>-- What is this "the soul"?? How do you know there is such a thing?? Is "soul" just merely another fancy name for a living individual? And how do you know that this "soul" is "the direct observer"?? </p>
<p>"people believe they have direct communication with Jesus or God. The difference is how do they know it is really Jesus or God that they are communicating with?"</p>
<p>-- They don't know.</p>
<p>"an astral form, which they might believe to be an angel or some other higher being, can visit people which they then personalize according to their own beliefs or perceptions. The mind can project all sorts of images and we have to be very discerning."</p>
<p>-- The same applies to visions and supposed communications etc with "inner shabd masters", "radiant forms", and the like.</p>
<p>"I have seen my Master when he was in a physical body and because of this I can recognize his inner form projected through the Shabd."</p>
<p>-- That is merely what RS teachings and dogma preach. But how do YOU know that is the case? You seem to be making alot of abstract assumptions... but based upon what? Upon your own experience? How do you know if any of that is true, or just a projection of your mind? </p>
<p>"This is the main difference between Sant Mat and organized religions."</p>
<p>-- I beg to differ. There is NO difference at all. Organized religion believes in similar things. Why is Santmat any different? Your example (above) shows no such difference. It is just another belief in the supernatural. Just because you saw some guru in person (or via photo), does not prevent you from projecting an illusory vision of the same in meditation. So Santmat is not exempt from this happening either. Jen, your reasoning here is totally faulty. Just because you know what someone looks like in real life, does not prevent you from imagining the same image in your meditation.</p>
<p>So your position boils down to a matter mere faith and belief alone. frankly, that's all you have presented here.</p>
<p></p>
<p><br />
</p>Jen commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fcb8ce9970c2009-06-05T05:45:12Z2009-06-05T05:45:12ZJenBrian, I totally agree that I might have created something that I dearly would love to see, but hey, every...<p>Brian, I totally agree that I might have created something that I dearly would love to see, but hey, every little bit helps. Sorry I’m not that advanced to actually be chatting away to him somewhere up in Trikuti, but I’ll let you know if I do manage to find out any exciting predictions… sorry I’m being flippant again… not much help I’m afraid with any details.</p>
<p>Cheers<br />
</p>Brian commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fcb7c87970c2009-06-05T04:52:02Z2009-06-05T04:52:03ZBrianhttp://www.churchofthechurchless.comJen, only you knows the reality of your contact with the guru's "radiant form." A few thoughts come to mind,...<p>Jen, only you knows the reality of your contact with the guru's "radiant form." A few thoughts come to mind, though.</p>
<p>Why would a vision be more reliable if you have seen the person physically who now appears metaphysically? Seems like the mind would be even more prone to imagining or projecting a person's form if he or she had seen them in person. I have dreams of people I've known. The dreams look like the person, not surprisingly.</p>
<p>As noted before, one confirmation that you are communicating with someone other than yourself would be if that entity told you, or other people, things that you couldn't know on your own. Or even better, that no human being could know.</p>
<p>So could you share some of that knowledge with us, in the spirit of a "science of the soul"? If you aren't willing to share specifics, I'd be interested in generalities with some amount of detail. </p>
<p>What are you told by the radiant form? What do you say to the radiant form? Is there anything you've learned that wasn't part of your knowledge base, or that of other people? (Like a specific prediction of a future event.)</p>Jen commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570c066ef970b2009-06-05T01:58:10Z2009-06-05T01:58:10ZJenWow, Jayme dear... clear as mud, lol... think I'll stick with Duhism :)<p>Wow, Jayme dear... clear as mud, lol... think I'll stick with Duhism :)</p>Jayme commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fcb22dc970c2009-06-05T01:31:42Z2009-06-05T01:31:42ZJaymeHi Roger, In reference to your June 03, 2009 at 07:44 AM entry: Please know that categorization of knowledge doesn't...<p>Hi Roger,</p>
<p>In reference to your June 03, 2009 at 07:44 AM entry:</p>
<p>Please know that categorization of knowledge doesn't stop until the mind stops, imo. Knowledge can never be completed and the known and unknown are endless in the wheel of time. I expect that even "truth" within this definition of mental knowledge is ever changing.</p>
<p>I haven't gone back through to edit my initial response but here is the removed content:</p>
<p>begin<br />
{<br />
"Forbidden" is a term that is used in different ways. Consider two examples: semiconductor device physics, and societial taboos. In physics, for a given set of conditions, these forbidden states which describe gaps between electron energy levels simply do not exist and are unknowable. In social forms, taboos are broken all the time and so being forbidden is a delusional state of being - imo. For example, it is forbidden for a christian to marry a muslim; you must always drive on the left side of the road and stop at red lights; or you must have a living master on the path. So from the perspective of social law, the master forbids questioning by saying "don't question," but in fact, when one truely reaches a physical state of not questioning, the difference is one more of the physics based forbidden state rather than the social form - imo. The RS master(s) has indicated that the question should be asked of the lord (an alternate form of "don't question") and in fact what happens, in my experience, is that the question simply goes away (becomes unimportant) when sitting very quietly in body and mind. However, one never reaches "beyond knowing" or the forbidden state of the unknowable since it is only an ideal which is a fictitious goal spun out of a belief dynamic.</p>
<p>The so called "state beyond knowing" is not a real energy state in the sense of being knowable. The notion of a creative potential field is still a concept within the fishbowl and one cannot actually approach an unknowable state ... it is simply a non sequitur.</p>
<p>Speaking from inside the fishbowl. I have too many ideas about fields, virtual particles, and quantons. In electromagnetics, there are potential and dynamic fields. Potential fields don't propagate or have an independent existence beyond the source from which they emanate and dynamic fields do (at least within some subset of the universe). I was envisioning the "unknowable" state as being something like an emptiness out of which the creative potential coalesces into ordered dynamical energies. I think virtual particles don't exist in present conceptual understanding and are inferred through measurements of momentum, and energy preservation by employing these concrete particles in particle physics. Anyway, these concepts distort the particles' reality through projection into object space.</p>
<p>I was thinking in terms of highest "state" of the unknown as being like an infinite static potential whose source is the unknowable as it has no condition under which energy exchange can occur to give it definition. As one moves "down" through the static condition, there are evanescent fields which fluctuate but do not propagate and from this quanton field there is concretization and physical universe formation. So the energies (states) I was thinking of are these fields of potential whose source is asymptotically the unknowable - which as I pointed out is not logical.</p>
<p>I think that M theory proposes vibrating "strings" and that the initial formation of the universe may be explainable as a collision between the bulk media of two branes (multidimentional forms of strings). The point of collision creates a universe and all the consequent macroscopic and quantum field dynamics begin differentiating shortly after this event until we reach our present energy states within this complex of mind, body, being. I haven't been convinced yet that there is an Omega point as mentioned by Teilhard de Chardin in "The Phenomenon of Man" to which we are moving, as this would imply teleology (a dirty word in science). The idea of teleology implies and ultimate cause (God) and purpose.</p>
<p>As for quanton energy (and proto-matter). Below the Planck scale energy is very much only describable in a probablistic emergence out of the quantum background fluctuations. Matter and energy are "quantum foam" formed of quanton order that exist on a deep sea of zero point energy which I think can somehow be defined by the initial creation parameters of this universe. (There may be infinite many universes - each with their own parameters.) Simply put energy = "a force." But energy is not simple. For example, what is the energy of an idea? Without exaggeration - a few neurotransmitters 10s of nanometers across and a few trillionths of a watt of acoustic power applied in just the right circumstance can catalize the transformation of the entire world! A kind of "butterfly effect" in complex dynamic systems. The physical energy has much simpler laws by which thermodynamics, electrodynamics, and field theory are pretty good at describing.<br />
}<br />
end</p>
<p>I hope this didn't just muddy it all up again.</p>
<p>Respects,</p>Jen commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570c04a88970b2009-06-05T00:55:34Z2009-06-05T00:55:34ZJenRoger, Within the Scientific Method, ---Questioning in a particular field of science is very important. Any data, I have generated,...<p>Roger,</p>
<p>Within the Scientific Method, <br />
---Questioning in a particular field of science is very important. Any data, I have generated, I would welcome inquiry.<br />
---There is a need for direct communication, this is very important. Direct observations is a type of direct communication.<br />
---Explanations are required, this is part of reproduciblity, falsifiablity, etc.<br />
Throw in a word like, proveablity, too.</p>
<p>With regard to questioning, I find it very helpful to question my own beliefs, concepts, and opinions in that I ask myself “am I right?” In other words being aware of what my mind is thinking. I am also finding myself more in the mode of feeling that now I need to take more of a “leap of faith”, in other words if I am to do this experiment within myself, as well as following the precepts of Sant Mat to the best of my ability, I have to let go and plunge in wholeheartedly with no expectations and just experience whatever happens. Then to confirm those experiences there will have to be reproducibility and proof (for me).</p>
<p>When the Master said to someone “don’t question” this was a personal answer directed to that person and only that person will know or should know what he meant by this. The Masters speak very directly to whomsoever they are speaking to at the time. My personal belief is that it is very important to connect with the inner Shabd Master. </p>
<p>Then, maybe because the soul is the direct observer this is closer to what you say:<br />
---So, this direct communication, with spirit, could possibly be a non-conceptual non-mental activity, where science is "not" needed.</p>
<p>Brian,</p>
<p>I understand what you mean when you say people believe they have direct communication with Jesus or God. The difference is how do they know it is really Jesus or God that they are communicating with? And yes, an astral form, which they might believe to be an angel or some other higher being, can visit people which they then personalize according to their own beliefs or perceptions. The mind can project all sorts of images and we have to be very discerning.</p>
<p>I have seen my Master when he was in a physical body and because of this I can recognize his inner form projected through the Shabd. This is the main difference between Sant Mat and organized religions.</p>Roger commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fca21a3970c2009-06-04T18:08:55Z2009-06-04T18:08:55ZRoger"A possible way out of this would be if people who claim to talk with God, or another divinity, presented...<p>"A possible way out of this would be if people who claim to talk with God, or another divinity, presented evidence that they learn things not accessible to normal human consciousness."</p>
<p>---Yes, not accessible to normal human consciousness.</p>
<p><br />
"..........but then something absolutely beautiful happens and we are drawn back, not into the organization, just a beautiful direct communication with spirit, with the Shabd Master."</p>
<p>---So, this direct communication, with spirit, could possibly be a non-conceptual non-mental activity, where science is "not" needed. <br />
---Hopefully, Jen can clarify. <br />
</p>Brian commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570befe52970b2009-06-04T15:22:13Z2009-06-04T15:22:13ZBrianhttp://www.churchofthechurchless.comRoger, good points. Jen, I respect your subjective personal beliefs. But what you said is just how many, if not...<p>Roger, good points. Jen, I respect your subjective personal beliefs. But what you said is just how many, if not most, Christians speak. They feel a direct communication with Jesus or God. They get messages from Jesus/God. They talk to Jesus/God. </p>
<p>Ditto with many other sorts of divinities. So are all of these people, including you, to be believed? Are some deluding themselves and us? If so, which are telling the truth? </p>
<p>SInce these questions can't be answered, Roger is correct in asking whether a "science of the soul" exists. If all we have are competing metaphysical claims, this is religion, not science. </p>
<p>A possible way out of this would be if people who claim to talk with God, or another divinity, presented evidence that they learn things not accessible to normal human consciousness. Yet to my knowledge this doesn't happen. People are left outwardly unchanged, which is why I like to say that "god is good for nothing."</p>
<p>Nothing that makes any difference in the world. All that is evident are only subjective feelings about god.</p>Roger commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fc9afb0970c2009-06-04T14:43:26Z2009-06-04T14:43:27ZRogerJen, Thanks for your reply. Again, you are a good person. You stated, "No need to question really, direct communication,...<p>Jen,</p>
<p>Thanks for your reply. Again, you are a good person.</p>
<p>You stated,</p>
<p>"No need to question really, direct communication, cannot be explained, cannot be proven to anyone else, nothing better than this."</p>
<p>---Nothing wrong with this statement. However, does that statement align with a "Science" of the Soul? If there is a science of the soul, does the Scientific Method become the foundation of this "Science" of the Soul? </p>
<p>Within the Scientific Method, <br />
---Questioning in a particular field of science is very important. Any data, I have generated, I would welcome inquiry.<br />
---There is a need for direct communication, this is very important. Direct observations is a type of direct communication.<br />
---Explanations are required, this is part of reproduciblity, falsifiablity, etc.<br />
Throw in a word like, proveablity, too.</p>
<p>One thing, Jen, you could help me with, that is, is there such thing as a Science of the Soul? Does this Science use the Scientific Method as it's core foundation?</p>
<p>If it doesn't, that's OK. The Scientific Method doesn't have to be everywhere and anywhere. </p>
<p>Finally, I'm not finding fault with you.</p>
<p>Best wishes,<br />
Roger</p>
<p>p.s. cann't.....should be can't</p>Jen commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570be8eba970b2009-06-04T12:14:58Z2009-06-04T12:14:58ZJen---So what's the big deal with this guru or master, if One can not communicate or transverse, or receive guidance?...<p>---So what's the big deal with this guru or master, if One can not communicate or transverse, or receive guidance?</p>
<p>We do Roger, we do communicate, and we do receive guidance, inner guidance and direct communication. You see all we need to do is surrender our ego (no small task, takes a long, long time). Some people become so intoxicated with the mind and their own cleverness and it takes over so it’s a battle with this mind which is in control… this is why people give up and stop trying because its not easy… its much easier to say, oh I don’t have to do anything, I don’t have to try, there’s nowhere to go, I am one with everything, there is nothing more than this… this is the cop out. It’s so easy to be misled, misguided and taken off the track for a while but then something absolutely beautiful happens and we are drawn back, not into the organization, just a beautiful direct communication with spirit, with the Shabd Master. And even when we have sometimes been a little lost we actually learn so much more and move on stronger in self, always trying to be absolutely honest and true to oneself. </p>
<p>No need to question really, direct communication, cannot be explained, cannot be proven to anyone else, nothing better than this.</p>Roger commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570bbc7c4970b2009-06-03T15:45:35Z2009-06-03T15:45:35ZRogerIf the RS Master is a supposed GIHF, then being a human, I would hope to communicate with that particular...<p>If the RS Master is a supposed GIHF, then being a human, I would hope to communicate with that particular RS Master. This would simply be from one human to another. As a human, I might need some clarification or advice on a particular subject or object. An example, the David person, with his fear of death. So, if the RS Master replies, "Don't question!!! or It's unknowable!!!!," then what am I to think? I simply need some simple help. How would the RS Master give me some guidance?</p>
<p>Likewise, as an initiate, I've been told, the RS Master(GIHF) shall guide me thru the different astral planes to the Sach Kand realm. However, out of hundreds of thousands of initiates, through the history of gurus and masters, very few if any have actually engaged in this journey. So the guru or master isn't much of an astral guide.</p>
<p>---So what's the big deal with this guru or master, if One can not communicate or transverse, or receive guidance?</p>Roger commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570bb97f7970b2009-06-03T14:44:40Z2009-06-03T14:44:40ZRogerJayme, Thanks again for your reply. I was hoping to get a clarification of what you meant in your statement,...<p>Jayme,</p>
<p>Thanks again for your reply.</p>
<p>I was hoping to get a clarification of what you meant in your statement,</p>
<p>"Questioning implies un-knowing and certainty implies knowing. Perhaps when the RS Master says "don't question", one is best to look at it as a state "beyond knowing" rather than a state of being forbidden. Being responsible to those energies in which we find ourselves is being in a state beyond knowing - we just do."</p>
<p>---The above statement is your statement.<br />
---I was hoping for a clarification of what you meant by states of "beyond" knowing and being forbidden, in relation to when the RS Master says, "don't question."<br />
---Your clarification would bring me from an "unknown" understanding to a "known" understanding. <br />
---This is a dualistic blog, so any knowns and unknowns shall fall with the realm of dualism. Thats OK. No big deal.<br />
---Why create an unknowable out of what you stated?</p>
<p>Best wishes to you,<br />
Roger</p>Jayme commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570b9d079970b2009-06-03T00:41:59Z2009-06-03T00:41:59ZJaymeHi Roger, tAo pretty much identified flaw in the convoluted "reasoning." Essentially, beyond knowing = unknowable and is ... not...<p>Hi Roger,</p>
<p>tAo pretty much identified flaw in the convoluted "reasoning." Essentially, beyond knowing = unknowable and is ... not knowable.</p>
<p>Though I have concepts, I am not very qualified without a great deal more research to talk on these issues beyond the most elementary phenomena from classical electromagetics. The ideas get very flakey very fast without supporting evidence. Perhaps you may find reading about the "quanton" interesting.</p>
<p>(I've cut out the details.)</p>
<p>Anyway, please read tAo's comments, "the 'unknowable' is that which can never be known."</p>
<p>Respects,</p>Roger commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570b3ee2d970b2009-05-31T19:59:46Z2009-05-31T19:59:46ZRogerJayme, Thanks for your replies. You initially mentioned, "Questioning implies un-knowing and certainty implies knowing. Perhaps when the RS Master...<p>Jayme,</p>
<p>Thanks for your replies.</p>
<p>You initially mentioned,</p>
<p>"Questioning implies un-knowing and certainty implies knowing. Perhaps when the RS Master says "don't question", one is best to look at it as a state "beyond knowing" rather than a state of being forbidden. Being responsible to those energies in which we find ourselves is being in a state beyond knowing - we just do."</p>
<p>---Explain again, the difference between the states of "beyond knowing" and "being forbidden" in relation to the RS Master saying "don't" question. Please reply specifically to what is being asked of you.<br />
---Give specific examples of these "energies" you mentioned, that we find ourselves, as associated within a particular state beyond knowing.</p>
<p>Your information on this topic sounds very interesting.</p>
<p>Best wishes,<br />
Roger</p>OshoRobbins commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570b3410a970b2009-05-31T11:03:49Z2009-05-31T11:03:49ZOshoRobbinshttp://www.OshoRobbins.comAshtana, Just read your comment. Thank you for pointing out that I ain't no Buddha. Who wants to be Buddha?...<p>Ashtana,</p>
<p>Just read your comment.</p>
<p>Thank you for pointing out that I ain't no Buddha.</p>
<p>Who wants to be Buddha?</p>
<p>I have no desire to be a Buddha. I am simply ME - and that is enough.</p>
<p>I have no set standard to live up to. No moral code - no 'set of rules'<br />
that prove 'enlightenment'. </p>
<p>You call me "this OshoRobbins fool". You are absolutely correct.</p>
<p>I am a fool and I enjoy being a fool. Maybe you could come to<br />
the 'fool party' and hang out with all the fools.</p>
<p>It is fun being a fool. Because you can simply be yourself and break all<br />
the so-called rules of the intelligent people. After all - you are a fool!</p>
<p><br />
Let me quote from the posting that caused your reaction:</p>
<p>P3 is an ordinary person - and does not need to claim anything<br />
as there is nothing to claim.</p>
<p>Like I said - I am just having a cup of tea and enjoying the scene<br />
around me. </p>
<p>I have no churchless cult followers. I don't need 'followers'</p>
<p>Ashtana,</p>
<p>In response to your latest message:</p>
<p>If in your opinion - all of us here are <br />
deluded<br />
fraud ass<br />
self-righteous<br />
godforsaken<br />
self-indoctrinated<br />
delinquent<br />
arrogant<br />
punk ass pricks<br />
and self-satisfied fraudulent prats</p>
<p>then what are you doing here?</p>
<p>Why would you listen to such people?</p>
<p>You must obviously enjoy our company.</p>
<p>I suggest you go back to the Holy Satsang of your RS guru<br />
where they have only the truth and they are all fully<br />
enlightened and reside in Sach Khand.</p>
<p>Why bother with us fools?</p>
<p>Maybe this is really what you are feeling about RS but do not have<br />
the courage to say it - so you project it onto the churchless.</p>
<p>You are obviously deeply unhappy and angry about something.</p>
<p>Examine yourself, my friend. Find out why a few people having an<br />
ordinary discussion on this forum would cause such a strong reaction<br />
in you. </p>
<p>If you are strong in your faith or whatever you believe - then please <br />
continue on your path. Who rattled your cage anyway?</p>
<p>Nobody cares if you think we are fools.</p>
<p>Perhaps we are. Let us be. Enjoy the show. Follow your own path.</p>
<p>And good luck in arriving in Sach Khand.</p>
<p>I'll see you there - if you ever arrive.</p>
<p>And if you do - I'll kick your ass - just for a laugh</p>
<p>and then have a cup of tea!</p>
<p>Oh - I forgot - do they have asses in Sach Khand? </p>
<p>And cups of tea?</p>
<p>By the way - who told you I am "enlightened" - I don't even know what<br />
it means!<br />
</p>Jayme commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570b31bd2970b2009-05-31T07:50:00Z2009-05-31T07:50:01ZJaymetAo, Yes - lol.<p>tAo,</p>
<p>Yes - lol.</p>tAo commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570b2fd39970b2009-05-31T05:17:34Z2009-05-31T05:17:35ZtAoJayme, You said: "I didn't realize you were quoting OshoRobbins and I mis-understood the reference. My appologies." -- Sure, no...<p>Jayme,</p>
<p>You said:</p>
<p>"I didn't realize you were quoting OshoRobbins and I mis-understood the reference. My appologies."</p>
<p>-- Sure, no problem.</p>
<p>"Beyond knowing" [...] I am thinking of it as the "boundary" for all that is or is not known. [...] I think this "boundary" is the ineffable field of creative potential which the present is. It contains and is contained by all that is known and unknown, all that exists and is nonexistent, all that is and is not."</p>
<p>-- I don't agree with that elaboration. You seem like you are talking about the "unknown". The "unknown" is whatever is not presently known, but which could or may (or may not) become known at some future date. On the other hand, the "unknowable" can never be known. So there is absolutely NOTHING you can say or know about the "unknowable". Yet you have speculated some things here. So you are necessarily talking about the "unknown", not the "unknowable". So again, there is not anything that can be said (or speculated) about the "unknowable"... because it is UNKNOWABLE. Do you see the difference? So that's why I say that whatever you may be speculating about, is only about the present "unknown" (which could someday become a known), and not the "unknowable". The unknowable is that which is forever out of reach of knowing... so nothing, absolutely nothing can be said (or known)about it. Whatever it is, it is unknowable (not just unknown).</p>
<p>"The "state" that I claim it is, is all states of knowing and unknowing and the emptiness that is their form which is unknowable."</p>
<p>-- Again, you can't say ANYTHING about the unknowable. You can only speculate about the unknown. Whatever is now unknown, could become known at some later date.</p>
<p>"So the uknowable state, is what is ( I am that I am )."</p>
<p>-- No, if you say "unknowable", then there is nothing you can say about it.</p>
<p>"Being present is, in my opinion, experiencing the ineffable from within this skin bag of being but in this experience is the emptiness around which the experience is enfolded."</p>
<p>-- That may be, but what you describe is either the known or what is currently unknown, but not the unknowable.</p>
<p>"I can't get outside the fishbowl with these thoughts."</p>
<p>-- That's because you are attempting to define the unknowable, which is impossible... because, 'the unknowable' is simply unknowable. Forget about the unknowable. Just concern yourself with whatever is known and whatever is (currently) "unknown".</p>
<p>"I suppose, after all this floundering, I'm just agreeing that as you said, "the 'unknowable' is that which can never be known."</p>
<p>-- Yes, thats the point... so now you see.</p>Jayme commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570b2cc72970b2009-05-31T02:27:02Z2009-05-31T02:27:02ZJaymeThanks for correcting me tAo. You are right, I'm trying to play catch up reading through all the words, which...<p>Thanks for correcting me tAo.</p>
<p>You are right, I'm trying to play catch up reading through all the words, which is difficult for me. I didn't realize you were quoting OshoRobbins and I mis-understood the reference. My appologies.</p>
<p>Yes: "beyond knowing" = "unknowable".</p>
<p>"Beyond knowing" is the containing set (or possibly a superset: how to know?) to the known and unknown. I am thinking of it as the "boundary" for all that is or is not known. However, I think this "boundary" is the ineffable field of creative potential which the present is. It contains and is contained by all that is known and unknown, all that exists and is nonexistent, all that is and is not. The "state" that I claim it is, is all states of knowing and unknowing and the emptiness that is their form which is unknowable. I appologize, the words and thoughts disappear... I just don't know.</p>
<p>So the uknowable state, is what is ( I am that I am ). Being present is, in my opinion, experiencing the ineffable from within this skin bag of being but in this experience is the emptiness around which the experience is enfolded. I can't get outside the fishbowl with these thoughts. I suppose, after all this floundering, I'm just agreeing that as you said, "the 'unknowable' is that which can never be known."</p>tAo commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570b283a4970b2009-05-30T22:29:54Z2009-05-30T22:29:54ZtAoJayme, you said: "I do think there is an additional state as tAo points out. tAo calls it "beyond knowing."...<p>Jayme, you said: "I do think there is an additional state as tAo points out. tAo calls it "beyond knowing."</p>
<p>-- I did'nt say that "there is an additional state". As least I don't recollect ever saying that... and also I don't know what you mean by "an additional state", and also I don't see what is meant by "beyond knowing". I think it was OshoRobbins who had said or indicated something like that.</p>
<p>The phrase "beyond knowing" doesn't make sense to me. Unless your use of "beyond knowing" is meant as the 'unknowable'.</p>
<p>So there seems to be some confusion here. And I believe it was OshoRobbins who mentioned that, not I.</p>
<p>I myself just don't see any "state" of so-called "beyond knowing". Imo, there are only these: the known, the unknown, and the unknowable. So when you say "beyond knowing" do you mean the 'unknowable'? It isn't a "state"... and unlike the 'unknown' (which could become known), the 'unknowable' is that which can never be known. So in this case, its important to define or clarify what it is that you are referring to when you say "beyond knowing".</p>Jayme commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fbd2156970c2009-05-30T21:14:08Z2009-05-30T21:14:08ZJaymeRoger asked: ---So, which RS Master interprets "don't question" as presented above? Where can One find his exact written interpretation?...<p>Roger asked:</p>
<p>---So, which RS Master interprets "don't question" as presented above? Where can One find his exact written interpretation?</p>
<p>The master(s) essentially say sit down, still the mind, and meditate. All other questions simply produce discursive exposition by the master(s). Only the master can elucidate if he/she means what is implied by "don't question." If one wishes evidence for a subjective unquestioning state of mind which the master is purported to have, then as best as I know, there is none.</p>
<p>---What are these energies, that One is supposedly required to be responsible for?</p>
<p>The energies are any energy that one is familiar with, heat, light, sound, etc., as well as those which are more subjective such as those which exist within the archetypes or more fundamentally, the quantum states of matter. When the inner states of mind are in accordance with the present state of your being in the world, this is being responsible. It is not a requirement that we be in this condition. In fact, most of the time I find myself more reactive which is a state of stress and discomfort which is a state of struggling against the world rather than flowing with it.</p>
<p>---What if One is being responsible, and One doesn't find this state of "beyond" knowing? Is One kinda screwed?</p>
<p>No, this is a different kind of responsibility. For example, we can do good deeds (perform service), which is certainly a socially responsible thing to do, but if as a consequence we are somehow displeased and unhappy that we are not being recognized or rewarded for our action, then we are not truely being responsible. To be "responsible" coincides with the state of "beyond knowing." As for being screwed, it is really a state of mind reacting to the situation in which it finds itself and perhaps the body. I think this is consistent with karmaless action. Essentially, all the energy states of the mind and body that drive us to being and action work "transparently" to the energies in the world. At least this is how I interpret "enlightenment." It is simply "be here now." To be screwed is to hold on to some idea of self and that this self can somehow be screwed. So no, one is not screwed when one is being responsively open to new experience and change and eventually dissolution. I mean, if you think about it, we're all screwed in the reactionary sense for just having been borne. But if one can turn the idea around and ride the wave, peace fills the body and mind and the world isn't a hostile place to be at all. At least this is how my small little bouts of experience are indicating this "spiritual" thing works when working correctly. The world really is sublimely beautiful (or horribly ugly) within this bounded awareness. The experiences eventually will dissolve but if one can disolve one's mental image of the self along with the body's decay, the beauty is there and enjoyable.</p>
<p>---Nothing wrong with someone interpreting a state of mind that is beyond unknowing. This would make interesting conversation. If it comes from a RS master, or a girl chopping wood, its OK.</p>
<p>Well, beyond knowing is beyond knowing and though conversation can be held about it from the periphery within states of knowing and unknowing, the conversation is, and will always be, a peripheral epiphenomena (i.e. secondary in nature).</p>
<p>Respects,</p>Brian commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570b214ba970b2009-05-30T17:39:41Z2009-05-30T17:39:41ZBrianhttp://www.churchofthechurchless.comtAo, you're correct about why Ashy's comments get left up for a while. I've got a friend who used to...<p>tAo, you're correct about why Ashy's comments get left up for a while. I've got a friend who used to like to say, "Nobody's life is ever completely wasted; they can always serve as a horrible example for others."</p>
<p>Such is Ashy's purpose on this blog. He is a marvelous recruitment tool for churchlessness, showing as he does the vacuity of fundamentalism -- whether East or West. Like you said, he repeats the same meaninglessness, because there is no substance behind him.</p>
<p>I enjoy leaving a few of his comments up, and deleting the rant'iest of them. A couple of examples of non-sensical fundamentalism are fine, but not more than that.</p>Roger commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fbca5b3970c2009-05-30T15:55:46Z2009-05-30T15:55:47ZRoger"Perhaps when the RS Master says "don't question", one is best to look at it as a state "beyond knowing"...<p>"Perhaps when the RS Master says "don't question", one is best to look at it as a state "beyond knowing" rather than a state of being forbidden. Being responsible to those energies in which we find ourselves is being in a state beyond knowing - we just do."</p>
<p>---So, which RS Master interprets "don't question" as presented above? Where can One find his exact written interpretation?<br />
---What are these energies, that One is supposedly required to be responsible for?<br />
---What if One is being responsible, and One doesn't find this state of "beyond" knowing? Is One kinda screwed? <br />
---Nothing wrong with someone interpreting a state of mind that is beyond unknowing. This would make interesting conversation. If it comes from a RS master, or a girl chopping wood, its OK.</p>God commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fbca14a970c2009-05-30T15:43:26Z2009-05-30T15:43:26ZGodAshy, Your demeanor is deplorable and frankly you are undeserving of my help, but if you will look at the...<p>Ashy,</p>
<p>Your demeanor is deplorable and frankly you are undeserving of my help, but if you will look at the book page more closely you will find a link to used copies of the book. In my omniscience I was able to find a source for the book that saves you money.</p>
<p>Your loving pal,<br />
God</p>Roger commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fbc8b98970c2009-05-30T14:50:20Z2009-05-30T14:50:20ZRogerOsho, I enjoyed your above comment too. Something tells me that P3, thinks that P is just a letter, and...<p>Osho,</p>
<p>I enjoyed your above comment too. </p>
<p>Something tells me that P3, thinks that P is just a letter, and 3 is just a number. </p>
<p>Roger</p>Jayme commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fbc1b44970c2009-05-30T06:52:34Z2009-05-30T06:52:34ZJaymeOsho, Wonderful example. I do think there is an additional state as tAo points out. (There are 4 regions for...<p>Osho,</p>
<p>Wonderful example.</p>
<p>I do think there is an additional state as tAo points out. (There are 4 regions for a two set overlapping Venn diagram.) I would add one additional person (P4) or category (A4) which would correspond to transcendence of any hierarchy, mystical tradition, or assertion of individuated self. tAo calls it "beyond knowing."</p>
<p>Questioning implies un-knowing and certainty implies knowing. Perhaps when the RS Master says "don't question", one is best to look at it as a state "beyond knowing" rather than a state of being forbidden. Being responsible to those energies in which we find ourselves is being in a state beyond knowing - we just do. If a baby is hungry, feed it. If the dishes are dirty, clean them. No thought beyond the action and the form. Being worried about starving babies in Africa is reactionary not responsible. Knowing there are starving babies and being in a position to do something about it and doing it is responsible and comes from genuine compassion for "the other." There is no longer separation between you (me) when we are in union with both knowing and unknowing. We each act according to our position in this life stream. It is so very easy to look at "don't question" as forbidding an action when it may best be interpreted as a description of the state of mind beyond knowing.</p>
<p>Respects,</p>tAo commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fbc17fc970c2009-05-30T06:37:50Z2009-05-30T06:37:50ZtAoOshoRobbins, Your comment was again quite well said, with poignant simplicity and clarity. So right on. Ashtana, Its getting time...<p>OshoRobbins,</p>
<p>Your comment was again quite well said, with poignant simplicity and clarity. So right on.</p>
<p><br />
Ashtana,</p>
<p>Its getting time for you to go bye-bye.</p>
<p>Your attitude totally sucks.<br />
You make personally derogatory remarks.<br />
And your reasoning... well, there is none. </p>
<p>The only thing that allows you to stay here at all is because everything you say reveals just how incredibly twisted and crazed religious cultists like you really are. I have never seen anyone say so much that says so little.</p>
<p>I mean, do you actually enjoy playing the part of the village idiot here? It sure doesn't speak and reflect very well for the teachings of Santmat and RS either.</p>
<p><br />
</p>God commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fbc08ed970c2009-05-30T05:30:21Z2009-05-30T05:30:22ZGodAshtana, You have a homework assignment. Read this book: http://www.amazon.com/Having-No-Head-Rediscovery-Obvious/dp/1878019198/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1243660554&sr=8-1# I'm tired of your punk-ass attitude. You think you know...<p>Ashtana,</p>
<p>You have a homework assignment.</p>
<p>Read this book:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Having-No-Head-Rediscovery-Obvious/dp/1878019198/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1243660554&sr=8-1#" rel="nofollow">http://www.amazon.com/Having-No-Head-Rediscovery-Obvious/dp/1878019198/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1243660554&sr=8-1#</a></p>
<p>I'm tired of your punk-ass attitude. You think you know what I'm all about. Well you're clueless. Don't come back to this blog until you have completed your assignment. </p>
<p>Love,<br />
God</p>
<p>That's right. It's me, the Great Almighty, and don't doubt it for a minute or I'll smite your sorry punk ass. Is it worth the chance? Huh punk?</p>Ashtana commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570b127d9970b2009-05-30T02:45:47Z2009-05-30T02:45:47ZAshtanaOshoRobbins aint no Buddha Nor has he 'given up' anything He is so fast attached to his own idea of...<p>OshoRobbins aint no Buddha</p>
<p>Nor has he 'given up' anything</p>
<p>He is so fast attached to his own idea of enlightenment, he is hardly 'enlightened' at all, nullifying nonentity as if he knows one P from the next.</p>
<p>Easy to say a whole bunch of clever P brained Buddha like stuff without an ounce of experience or understanding</p>
<p>P1, P2, P3, P0</p>
<p>P's without pods, P's in a pool of self denied delirium </p>
<p>Don't have a clue this OshoRobbins fool</p>
<p>just like his churchified churchless cult followers he chooses to chide and caress with his chaste choosiness</p>
<p>Be the nothing first, then sprout all your highly evolved nothingness, you don't fool no one with such self aggrandized non nullified nonentity</p>
<p>such clever dicks these yankee doodle daydream dandy self evolved guru's, sprouting like pansies how prolifically perfect they are.</p>OshoRobbins commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570b12093970b2009-05-30T02:26:52Z2009-05-30T02:26:52ZOshoRobbinshttp://profile.typepad.com/6p0115709cd8fc970bP3 - how does he get his insight? Well - he doesn't. Just as the Buddha did not DO anything...<p><br />
P3 - how does he get his insight?</p>
<p>Well - he doesn't.</p>
<p>Just as the Buddha did not DO anything to get his.</p>
<p>The Buddha GAVE UP.</p>
<p>But a REAL giving up - not a fake one.</p>
<p>When you give up - something happens - of its own accord.</p>
<p>What happens is - insight comes. </p>
<p>You do not bring it - there is no effort - no path - no method.</p>
<p>I am simply saying - no effort is required.</p>
<p><br />
If you follow any method that requires you to MEDITATE or PRAY<br />
or RECITE or CHANT - or DO ANYTHING at all. The method will keep <br />
you trapped in SEEKING THE GOAL.</p>
<p>That very seeking - will keep you in duality.</p>
<p>The harder you try - the further you get.</p>
<p>Why is this?</p>
<p>Because effort IS THE EGO - nothing else. </p>
<p>Effort comes from YOU and YOU are the BARRIER.</p>
<p>If YOU STOP the effort - the trying - the meditation - then</p>
<p>YOU will disappear. In the same moment - truth will dawn.</p>
<p>You can call this truth by many names. It is your choice.</p>
<p>Words, names - these are all the play of the mind.</p>
<p>You can call it God, Enlightenment, Nirvana, Truth, Oneness....</p>
<p>I may call it Enlightenment - I may say I am enlightened.</p>
<p>But in the next breath I may say there is no such thing as 'enlightenment'</p>
<p>because - it is not an achievement and there is nobody to get enlightened.</p>
<p>Is it really so difficult to understand?</p>
<p>ANYTHING that YOU achieve will be within DUALITY simply because there was<br />
a YOU who achieved it.</p>
<p>As for me - let me make it clear.</p>
<p>I have achieved NOTHING - hence I expended no effort in getting to 'nothing'.</p>
<p>Your problem is that you think nothing is 'something'. </p>
<p>Hence you want it - the desire is created and you run after it.</p>
<p>I am saying do not run. Just relax. Have a cup of tea.</p>
<p><br />
The entire TRAP is created in the mind and by the mind.</p>
<p>It's really simple.</p>
<p>There is NO SACH KHAND. There is NO SAT PURUSH. There are<br />
NO REGIONS. There are NO 'LORDS oF EACH REGION.'</p>
<p>You do not need to recite five words - which represent the NAMES<br />
of the FIVE LORDS - as a sort of password to get to the next region.</p>
<p>Can't you see - this is a fairy tale - a cosmic joke.</p>
<p>ANYONE who tells you any form of fairy tale is deluded.</p>
<p>If you follow them - you will remain in duality. </p>
<p>RS is such a fairy tale.</p>
<p>Just because a lot of people believe the fairy tale - does not make it true.</p>
<p>A lot of children believe in Santa Claus - but that does not make him real.</p>
<p>How is P3 different from P1?</p>
<p>It is simple.</p>
<p>P1 has not even begun the journey - but is trying.</p>
<p>P3 knows there is no journey and no 'person' to walk it.</p>
<p>P3 is an ordinary person - and does not need to claim anything as there is<br />
nothing to claim.</p>
<p>P3 is just having a cup of tea - enjoying the scenery around him.</p>
<p>P1 is very serious and wants to 'get there fast' and 'please his Guru...<br />
by doing lots of meditaiton and seva.'<br />
</p>George commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fb12fc1970c2009-05-26T08:32:12Z2009-05-26T08:32:12ZGeorgetAo, Well answered, but I still do wonder how P3 gets equipped with this 'direct insight'. For example, is such...<p>tAo, </p>
<p>Well answered, but I still do wonder how P3 gets equipped with this 'direct insight'.</p>
<p>For example, is such a P3 person alleged to be:<br />
a) born with 'direct insight', <br />
b) develop it over time by following some path, or <br />
c) gain it in an instant through some experience? </p>
<p>I must also say that i think there are some very fine linguistic distinctions being made between concepts like 'monism' and 'non-duality', and also 'enlightenment' and 'direct insight (recognition)'. However, I do take your point that there are subtle, but very real, differences that need to be appreciated. I will need to read up a bit more and will check out U.G. Krishnamurti. </p>tAo commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570a63a2f970b2009-05-26T03:56:47Z2009-05-26T03:56:47ZtAoA, You responded with: "SO you analysed my post What is your point exactly?" -- My point is this... That...<p>A,</p>
<p>You responded with: "SO you analysed my post<br />
What is your point exactly?"</p>
<p>-- My point is this... That perhaps you might try to articulate and explain YOUR points and YOUR meanings a little better.</p>
<p>Because, you seem a bit confused, and its difficult to tell what YOUR point really is, and what it is over-all that YOU are trying to say in your previous comments.</p>
<p>So again, you had said the following:</p>
<p>"I still have issues,<br />
What does sach khand mean<br />
what does meditation mean"</p>
<p>-- Its not quite clear what you are getting at. Do you mean to say, what is the definition of these ("sach khand" and "meditation")?? If you are asking for a simple definition/meaning of those terms, then you can find that elsewhere and in the Santmat & RS literature. If you are aiming at something else, then please DO clarify what that might be.</p>
<p>"I feel that what you have described for P3, his (P3's) meditation is this exact thing [...] This thus is P3's dialogismos/meditation. Do you see?"</p>
<p>-- No, I do not see what your point is at all. And that's probably because (imo) P3 has NO such "meditation"... not as you have stated and are trying to propose.</p>
<p>"And what is P3's 'sachkhand'?"</p>
<p>-- There is none. As far as I can see in OshoRobbins example, P3 has no "sach khand", nor does P3 believe in the existance of any "sach khand". </p>
<p>" This: P3 realises that there is no Sach Khand because [sach khand] is just a CONCEPT. Hence [in reality] there is no PLACE to get to. Since there is no place - there is [also] no [need for a] path and no [need for any] meditation."</p>
<p>-- Yes, and that is exactly what I indicated just above.</p>
<p>"And at the end [...] the totally 'un-scientific argument' (what is scientific anyway?), the same argument that you many of you accuse the guru's comes:" </p>
<p>"P3 speaks - [but] you [may] not understand [if] you [remain in the duality] of knowing/unknowing and belief/non-belief. [If you] live in the mind [then you cannot recognise] that which is beyond mind."</p>
<p>-- Well, fyi, that is NOT at all what the gurus are accused of. The gurus (not all gurus mind you) are accused of exhibiting and promoting dogma and methods and effort and a goal, based upon a dualistic belief system, not upon direct recognition of inherent and effortless non-duality. And if you don't understand what "scientific" is, then you ought to go educate yourself, before making comments that have no bearing on the issue.</p>
<p>"Oh WebGuru OshoRobbins,,,and your webdisciples."</p>
<p>-- Cheap sarcasm and ridicule will get you nowhere.</p>
<p>"How on earth do you know what the buddha realised 2,500 years ago?"</p>
<p>-- It is not directly known. But much can be understood, ascertained, and attributed to him by the extant records of what he said and taught. That generally indicates what he had realised.</p>
<p>"You think he realised the one? That was His teachings? Are you sure that was his methods?"</p>
<p>-- Again... much can indeed be understood, ascertained, and attributed to Gautama, Sakyamuni Buddha by the extant records of what he said and taught. That generally indicates what he had realised.</p>
<p>"And then you cite Faqir Chand who wrote books exclusvily on the 'inner' dimensions."</p>
<p>-- So what? Faqir Chand dismissed much of the RS dogma as myths, as well.</p>
<p>Ok..I will accept it. [...] It appears you solved the riddle. In this non-duality 30,000 children in Africa dont really, realy die every day,,its our dual mind that perceives them as such."</p>
<p>-- That is NOT what is said, inferred, or implied by non-duality. Go study advaita before trying to link non-duality with dying children in Africa. There is no connection. </p>
<p>The starvation and dying in Africa is a human tradgedy of great proportion... of which no doubt all of us here have great compassion towards. So for you to attempt to imply that non-duality equals no compassion is a totally flawed and twisted and bogus interpretation and insinuation. AND... you apparently do NOT understand non-duality.</p>
<p>"it seems your are a webbudda a webosho a webtao and beyond A cyberspace webenlightment."</p>
<p>-- Sarcasm and ridicule will get you nowhere.... it just shows your antagonism and what you are really up to here. </p>
<p>"I dont know the truth...all I know is that these are all just words that appear in front of a screen,,,which you are reading and they in turn may or may not have a mental reaction from the readers part, which may or may not lead to physical action..can you avoid non-duality in pursuit of something you love?"</p>
<p>I have no idea what you are trying to say. But you seem rather confused and somewhat irrational. Perhaps you should try to articulate your point and meaning better.</p>A commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fb0c6c1970c2009-05-26T02:51:52Z2009-05-26T02:51:52ZAtAo You really do not make any sense. SO you analysed my post What is your point exactly?<p>tAo</p>
<p>You really do not make any sense. SO you analysed my post<br />
What is your point exactly?<br />
</p>tAo commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fb0bb4d970c2009-05-26T02:25:56Z2009-05-26T02:25:56ZtAoA, You said: "I still have issues, What does sach khand mean what does meditation mean" -- Its not quite...<p>A,</p>
<p>You said:</p>
<p>"I still have issues,<br />
What does sach khand mean<br />
what does meditation mean"</p>
<p>-- Its not quite clear what you are getting at. Do mean to say, what is the definition of these ("sach khand" and "meditation")?? If you are asking for a simple definition/meaning, then you can find that elsewhere and in the Santmat & RS literature. If you are aiming at something else, then please clarify what that might be.</p>
<p>"I feel that what you have described for P3, his (P3's) meditation is this exact thing [...] This thus is P3's dialogismos/meditation. Do you see?"</p>
<p>-- No, do not see what your point is at all. Thats probably because (imo) P3 has NO such "meditation"... not as you have stated and are trying to present.</p>
<p>"And what is P3's 'sachkhand'?"</p>
<p>-- There is none. As far as I can see in OshoRobbins example, P3 has no "sach khand", nor does P3 believe in the existance of any "sach khand". <br />
<br />
" This: P3 realises that there is no Sach Khand because [sach khand] is just a CONCEPT. Hence [in reality] there is no PLACE to get to. Since there is no place - there is [also] no [need for a] path and no [need for any] meditation."</p>
<p>-- Yes, that is exactly what I indicated just above.</p>
<p>"And at the end [...] the totally 'un-scientific argument' (what is scientific anyway?), the same argument that you many of you accuse the guru's comes:" </p>
<p>"P3 speaks - [but] you [may] not understand [if] you [remain in the duality] of knowing/unknowing and belief/non-belief. [If you] live in the mind [then you cannot recognise] that which is beyond mind."</p>
<p>-- Well, fyi, that is NOT at all what the gurus are accused of. The gurus (not all gurus mind you) are accused of exhibiting and promoting dogma and methods and effort and a goal, based upon a dualistic belief system, not upon direct recognition of inherent and effortless non-duality. And if you don't understand what "scientific" is, then you ought to go educate yourself, before making comments that have no bearing on the issue.</p>
<p>"Oh WebGuru OshoRobbins,,,and your webdisciples."</p>
<p>-- Cheap sarcasm and ridicule will get you nowhere.</p>
<p>"How on earth do you know what the buddha realised 2,500 years ago?"</p>
<p>-- It is not directly known. But much can be understood, ascertained, and attributed to him by the extant records of what he said and taught. That generally indicates what he had realised.</p>
<p>"You think he realised the one? That was His teachings? Are you sure that was his methods?"</p>
<p>-- Again... much can indeed be understood, ascertained, and attributed to Gautama, Sakyamuni Buddha by the extant records of what he said and taught. That generally indicates what he had realised.</p>
<p>"And then you cite Faqir Chand who wrote books exclusvily on the 'inner' dimensions."</p>
<p>-- So what? Faqir Chand dismissed much of the RS dogma as myths, as well.</p>
<p>Ok..I will accept it. [...] It appears you solved the riddle. In this non-duality 30,000 children in Africa dont really, realy die every day,,its our dual mind that perceives them as such."</p>
<p>-- That is NOT what is said, inferred, or implied by non-duality. Go study advaita before trying to link non-duality with dying children in Africa. There is no connection. </p>
<p>The starvation and dying in Africa is a human tradgedy of great proportion... of which no doubt all of us here have great compassion towards. So for you to attempt to imply that non-duality equals no compassion is a totally flawed and twisted and bogus interpretation and insinuation. AND... you apparently do NOT understand non-duality.</p>
<p>"it seems your are a webbudda a webosho a webtao and beyond A cyberspace webenlightment."</p>
<p>-- Sarcasm and ridicule will get you nowhere.... it just shows your antagonism and what you are really up to here. </p>
<p>"I dont know the truth...all I know is that these are all just words that appear in front of a screen,,,which you are reading and they in turn may or may not have a mental reaction from the readers part, which may or may not lead to physical action..can you avoid non-duality in pursuit of something you love?"</p>
<p>I have no idea what you are trying to say. But you seem rather confused and somewhat irrational. Perhaps you should try to articulate your point and meaning better.</p>
<p></p>
<p><br />
</p>tAo commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fb0a382970c2009-05-26T01:31:48Z2009-05-26T01:31:48ZtAoDear George, You said/asked: "Just a few issues that are unclear to me." "1) I understand that each satsangi will...<p>Dear George,</p>
<p>You said/asked: </p>
<p>"Just a few issues that are unclear to me."</p>
<p>"1) I understand that each satsangi will have a unique and subjective experience (some having none). Thus, it would seem quite possible that the P1 person could have a P3 experience."</p>
<p>-- I suppose that is possible, but, I'm not sure that (in OshoRobbins example) the P3 has any specfic "experience". Its more along the lines of an insight, than an actual "experience". He simply recognises the inhrent fallacy of the suppositions/beliefs, and thus the efforts, of the P1 person.</p>
<p>"In fact, how has P3 achieved at his state of enlightenment?"</p>
<p>-- I don't know that he actually has any so-called "enlightenment". For whats its worth, I myself do not subscribe to a supposed "enlightenment", of which I consider to be merely a myth. To delve more and deeper into that issue, I would highly recommend and suggest checking into what U.G. Krishnamurti had to say about it, most of which I generally agree with.</p>
<p>"On the RS path, on another path or on no path?"</p>
<p>-- I cannot really say, as that was Osho's example, and not mine. However, I very much doubt it would be from the RS path. It could be a result of another path, but more likely it would be from direct insight alone.</p>
<p>"And what evidence is there to support P3's enlightenment as compared to P1's?"</p>
<p>-- As I indicated above, my own view and feeling is that P3 is not really having any, or claiming any, so-called "enlightenment". I don't even think that he (OshoRobbins) mentioned the word. </p>
<p>Also, more importantly, There is no indication that P1 has any so-called "enlightenemt" at all. P1 is merely a believer, a follower of the path and its dogma, guru, etc. Where was it mentioned that P1 has any sort of actual "enlightenment"?</p>
<p>"2) I understand the P3's enlightenment is basically a monistic recognition, i.e. oneness."</p>
<p>-- Again, I would not call it an "enlightenment". And yes, I would think of it more an insight or a recognition, but of the fact that the entire premise of the path is faulty. The "ONE" or "oneness" refers more to advaita (non-duality) than monism. Monism and non-duality appear to be similar, but are very different in approach. But yes, as you say, it is simply a "recognition" or deep direct insight... not the traditional so-called "enlightenment"</p>
<p>"But is this monism not precisely the goal of RS and most other mystic traditions, which is to unite with the One?"</p>
<p>-- Well I suppose that is true, in a sense. But in RS etc, it is a "goal" that is the object of seeking and belief and effort and method, rather than simply the instantaneous recognition/insight that all such "seeking and belief and effort and method" etc, is fruitless and unnecessary and misleading.... which was OshoRobbins point.</p>
<p>"I see alot of overlap, rather than difference."</p>
<p>-- I understand that, from some individual's points of view that may seem to be true, but I think its not accurate. There is (imo) no similarity at all between the premise, method, beliefs, dogma, effort, and goal of the RS path... as compared to that which OshoRobbins is pointing towards.</p>
<p>I hope my comments and opinions help and shed some light on this matter for you George. Your questions and points are always good.</p>A commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570a4a2d6970b2009-05-25T13:06:05Z2009-05-25T13:06:06ZAWell, what osho Robbins just described,,, I still have issues, (since the church of the churchless seems to swimming in...<p>Well,</p>
<p>what osho Robbins just described,,,</p>
<p>I still have issues, (since the church of the churchless seems to swimming in the waters of deconstruction).</p>
<p>What does sach khand mean<br />
what does meditation mean</p>
<p>I feel that what you have described for P3, his (P3's) meditation is this exact thing i.e:</p>
<p>"... P3 neither believes - nor dis-believes. He is aware that:<br />
(1) There is no Sach Khand<br />
(2) Hence no meditation is required<br />
(3) Since there is no Sach Khand there is nowhere to 'get to'..." <br />
This thus is P3's dialogismos/meditation. Do you see?</p>
<p>And what is P3's 'sachkhand'? <br />
This:<br />
" P3 realises that there is no Sach Khand because [sach khand] is just a CONCEPT. Hence [in reality] there is no PLACE to get to. Since there is no place - there is [also] no [need for a] path and no [need for any] meditation.</p>
<p>There is no HERE and THERE - these are both concepts within time and space.</p>
<p>He is discovering [what] is beyond time and space - beyond mind - beyond 'understanding'."</p>
<p>And at the end,,,the cherry on top,,,the totally 'un-scientific argument' (what is scientific anyway?),,,the same argument that you many of you accuse the guru's comes:</p>
<p> "P3 speaks - [but] you [may] not understand [if] you [remain in the duality] of knowing/unknowing and belief/non-belief. [If you] live in the mind [then you cannot recognise] that which is beyond mind."</p>
<p>Oh WebGuru OshoRobbins,,,and your webdisciples. Tell me more,,,</p>
<p>"He [the Buddha] realised that he [cannot be anything other than] the ONE - [and that] there is nothing else."</p>
<p>How on earth do you know what the buddha realised 2,500 years ago? Through the hundreds of thousand of secondary/third/fourth/fifth/sixth/seventh/twentieth etc. texts?<br />
Did you talk to him?<br />
You think the realised the one? That was His teachings? Are you sure that was his methods and you cite him? And then you cite Faqir Chand who wrote books exclusvily on the 'inner' dimensions. I wont bother to find them for you. A man who revered sawan, who had a guru, who meditate with a specific way most of his life, who talked abou the shabd. You take one line and place it in your text..Ok..I will accept it. It seems you know what you are talking about. It seems you are certain. It appears you solved the riddle. In this non-duality 30,000 children in Africa dont really, realy die every day,,its our dual mind that perceives them as such. Between Osho and Tom Robbins it seems that you have grasped something. So it seems your are a webbudda a webosho a webtao and beyond,,,</p>
<p>A cyberspace webenlightment. </p>
<p>I dont know the truth...all I know is that these are all just words that appear in front of a screen,,,which you are reading and they in turn may or may not have a mental reaction from the readers part, which may or may not lead to physical action..<br />
can you avoid non-duality in pursuit of something you love?</p>
<p>Thats all from me regarding this issue.</p>
<p>(Dont take what I wrote as accusing anyone of anything,,take it as feedback).</p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p><br />
</p>George commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570a46a94970b2009-05-25T09:37:03Z2009-05-25T09:37:03ZGeorgetAo, Thanks for the input. Just a few issues that are unclear to me. 1) I understand that each satsangi...<p>tAo,</p>
<p>Thanks for the input.</p>
<p>Just a few issues that are unclear to me.</p>
<p>1) I understand that each satsangi will have a unique and subjective experience (some having none). </p>
<p>Thus, it would seem quite possible that the P1 person could have a P3 experience.</p>
<p>In fact, how has P3 achieved at his state of enlightenment? On the RS path, on another path or on no path? And what evidence is there to support P3's enlightenment as compared to P1's?</p>
<p>2) I understand the P3's enlightenment is basically a monistic recognition, i.e. oneness. </p>
<p>But is this monism not precisely the goal of RS and most other mystic traditions, which is to unite with the One? </p>
<p>I see alot of overlap, rather than difference.</p>
<p><br />
</p>tAo commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570a38b03970b2009-05-24T21:57:28Z2009-05-24T21:57:28ZtAoDear George, and Brian, and any other interested readers: As I indicated above, I thought OshoRobbin's comments were rather right...<p>Dear George, and Brian, and any other interested readers:</p>
<p>As I indicated above, I thought OshoRobbin's comments were rather right on the mark.</p>
<p>But thats probably because I have previously (entirely on my own) come to a more or less identical conclusion, or a kind of recognition or a so-called 'realization', about the nature and failing of RS method, just as OshoRobbins has.</p>
<p>But I also see that OshoRobbin's explanation about that could be interpreted slightly differently, depending on the angle from which one views Santmat & RS (RS and RS believers being the specific model and example that Osho was using as the basis and substance of his critique).</p>
<p>So in order to better clarify OshoRobbin's position, I will list (with some editing and my own inserts) what I feel are his more significant and applicable statements (imo) again here:</p>
<p><br />
"Knowing, not knowing.</p>
<p>There is [also] a third state. <br />
...call it BEYOND KNOWING.</p>
<p>A - The only way to get to Sach Khand is to meditate.<br />
B - In order to meditate you need a Master who will initiate you.<br />
C - In order to progress you need to believe in A and B</p>
<p><br />
P1 is a BELIEVER and believes in A B and C.<br />
He is a follower and has FAITH.</p>
<p>His so-called 'knowing' is of a theory based on A B and C. He may even give talks and satsangs on the theory of A B and C.</p>
<p>[However} When challenged - he will say he is just giving out the teachinigs.</p>
<p>He has not reached Sach Khand but... P1 lives in the eternal hope of getting to [sach khand]. However, [that day] never arrives... never comes.</p>
<p>[Yet] P1 is a good satsangi - a believer.</p>
<p>Then there is [also] P2. P2 has something called DOUBT. This means he is a non-believer... a skeptic. He asks for proof before he believes. However there is no proof. </p>
<p>P1 tells him [P2] that he has to meditate - and for a while he does - but [still] does not get his proof. Disgusted - he gives up. [Thus] He remains a non-believer.</p>
<p>So now enter P3. P3 neither believes - nor dis-believes. He is aware that:<br />
(1) There is no Sach Khand<br />
(2) Hence no meditation is required<br />
(3) Since there is no Sach Khand there is nowhere to 'get to'. </p>
<p>P3 does not BELIEVE. He also does not DOUBT. He simply sees beyond </p>
<p>P3 realises that there is no Sach Khand because [sach khand] is just a CONCEPT. Hence [in reality] there is no PLACE to get to. Since there is no place - there is [also] no [need for a] path and no [need for any] meditation.</p>
<p>There is no HERE and THERE - these are both concepts within time and space. </p>
<p>He is discovering [what] is beyond time and space - beyond mind - beyond 'understanding'.</p>
<p>P3 speaks - [but] you [may] not understand [if] you [remain in the duality] of knowing/unknowing and belief/non-belief. [If you] live in the mind [then you cannot recognise] that which is beyond mind.</p>
<p>P1 is trying to get P2 and P3 to BELIEVE.</p>
<p>[However] P3 [has no need to believe]. To P3 it is just [all concepts]. </p>
<p>[About P2]:</p>
<p>P2 is in the middle ground - not sure - not understanding - confused.</p>
<p>Manish - [is a] P1.</p>
<p>[Some] of the people here are not P2s. They are P3s. </p>
<p>it is [actually] a [kind of] joke that the P1 is trying to convince the P3.</p>
<p>[But] it is impossible because P3 has transcended [any] need to [believe]. </p>
<p>P3 is aware that [beliefs and concepts are irrelevant] and [so] you can never convince him [to believe].</p>
<p>P3 does not lack faith. He does not require [saving]. P3 [recognioses that] Sach Khand [can only be here and now, or not at all]. Except he does not call it Sach Khand.</p>
<p>P3 has recognised] the ONE. ONE means there is no other. No SOUL that has to MERGE. These are all [mere] CONCEPTS created within the mind. </p>
<p>They are [mere] MAPS of reality and a MAP is [only a concept, not reality] - just a representation that [can very well be] confusing.</p>
<p>P3 [is not trying to achieve anything via] the mind. Hence he [has no need to] BELIEVE and [also] does not [feel] DOUBT.</p>
<p>The Buddha FAILED to FIND what he was looking for. [Because] in that [very] FAILURE he [understood] the truth [of the matter]: that what [he thought that] he was looking for [was only an idea in the mind, a form of duality, and so the search was in fact entirely unnecessary]. </p>
<p>He [the Buddha] realised that he [cannot be anything other than] the ONE - [and that] there is nothing else.</p>
<p>This is not an ATTAINMENT or an ACHIEVEMENT. It is [simply] the [instantaneous and effortless] dropping [away] of ALL DESIRE to attain. There is nothing to attain, because attainment happens only in duality.</p>
<p>P1 is trying to attain [something that he believes is yet to be attained].</p>
<p>P2 is [not sure yet about what is true, or what is not true].</p>
<p>P3 is not even trying - not because he has failed - but because he has realised [recognised] that those statements A, B, and C, are [irrelevant]. [To P3 the ideas of] A B and C are [all totally unnecessary assumptions... they are] fictions.</p>
<p>P3 does not doubt them. [As there is no need to doubt them.] He simply sees through them and [so he sees the ultimate irrelevancy of them].</p>
<p>Manish cannot understand P3. It is beyond [him]. [Manish is] stuck [firmly and willingly] in the state of a P1.</p>
<p>[Until Manish can let gop of his need to BELIEVE [he cannot] escape the trap of duality. But [he] cannot, because BELIEF is all he knows. It is [bound up with his very identity].</p>
<p>And those who believe will always remain blind because the belief will keep them blind.</p>
<p>They cannot find truth, because they are not [truly] seeking [the real truth]. {rather] they want the truth to fit into THEIR BELIEFS. [But actual truth (whatever it may be) can never conform to mere beliefs.]</p>
<p>P1 will create his own experiences and that will become his [supposed] proof. The experiences are [in a sense] DELUSION. </p>
<p>[See] Faqir Chand [says in the book] The Unknowing Gage.</p>
<p>Truth [itself] is BEYOND [mere] experience. Experience requires TWO. [In truth] there is only ONE.</p>
<p>You can [not ever entirely] "experience" the ONE [because the ONE is absolute totality, absolute non-duality, and so there is no 'other' to be able to "experience" it.]"</p>
<p><br />
</p>Roger commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570a3687c970b2009-05-24T20:43:41Z2009-05-24T20:43:41ZRoger"P3 almost appears to be instantly blessed with an enlightened awakening, from which he can see all and judge 'nonsense'...<p>"P3 almost appears to be instantly blessed with an enlightened awakening, from which he can see all and judge 'nonsense' or not." </p>
<p>"P3 does not BELIEVE. He also does not DOUBT. He simply sees beyond it. Then something happens to P3. The ONE DAY happens. He has an AWAKENING (I have to call it something!). The awakening gives him GLIMPSES of truth."</p>
<p>---I can see some dualism in the "instantly blessed with an enlightened awakening" statement. <br />
---Same for, "the awakening gives him GLIMPSES of truth" ..........<br />
---Nothing wrong with P3 coming to a dualist blog and commenting dualisticly.<br />
---dualisticly...hmmm....did I spell that right?</p>
<p><br />
</p>George commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570a32fd3970b2009-05-24T17:41:46Z2009-05-24T17:41:46ZGeorgeYes Brian, and to take it further i suspect P1's appreciation of the truth is supported by some sort of...<p>Yes Brian, and to take it further i suspect P1's appreciation of the truth is supported by some sort of direct mystical experience or intuition.</p>
<p>Perhaps an alternative categorisation system:<br />
A1 is believer without evidence (faith)<br />
A2 is believer with subjective evidence (mystic)<br />
A3 is believe with objective evidence (science)</p>
<p>Seems P1 and P3 are both variants of A2.</p>
<p>From an RS viewpoint, it seems there are certain satsangis and ex-satangis who fall into category A1, while others fall into A2. A1 would seem more of religious type belief with scripture, teachings and guru interprerations. A2 would seem more of a mystical type who use RS but believe there are other valid paths too.<br />
</p>Brian commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570a324c0970b2009-05-24T17:07:01Z2009-05-24T17:07:01ZBrianhttp://www.churchofthechurchless.comWell, George, I suspect it is supported in the same fashion as my semi-frequent insights into the nature of it...<p>Well, George, I suspect it is supported in the same fashion as my semi-frequent insights into the nature of it all. Intuition. A feeling of rightness. An "aha!" or "yes!" sensation.</p>
<p>Nothing wrong with that. It certainly is a valid feeling, just as my feeling "Yum, I love strawberries" is valid. But only for me. Not as a statement about the nature of the cosmos.</p>George commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570a32269970b2009-05-24T16:59:31Z2009-05-24T16:59:31ZGeorgeyes precisely Brian, the logic seems slightly circular. If P3 claims knowledge, even if it is knowledge of nothing, what...<p>yes precisely Brian, the logic seems slightly circular.</p>
<p>If P3 claims knowledge, even if it is knowledge of nothing, what supports this belief?</p>Brian commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fadc09f970c2009-05-24T16:34:47Z2009-05-24T16:34:47ZBrianhttp://www.churchofthechurchless.comGeorge, I liked Osho's comment. I also like yours. You raise some good points about the difference, if any, between...<p>George, I liked Osho's comment. I also like yours. You raise some good points about the difference, if any, between P1 and P3. I agree that there doesn't seem to be any objective way of telling the difference between them.</p>
<p>Philosophically, I think the root nature of the universe/cosmos is more likely to be beyond our human ability to comprehend it, than to be within the neat and tidy confines of a P1 understanding. So in this sense I liked the P3 "none of the above" attitude.</p>
<p>However, like you said, claiming an awakening seemingly makes a P3 guy into a knower. He knows that there is nothing to know, supposedly, but this is still a knowing, isn't it?</p>George commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fadb365970c2009-05-24T15:53:48Z2009-05-24T15:53:48ZGeorgeOsho, Your P1-P3 analogy is useful shorthand, but I question the way P3 is presented. P1 seems to be a...<p>Osho,</p>
<p>Your P1-P3 analogy is useful shorthand, but I question the way P3 is presented.</p>
<p>P1 seems to be a believer, P2 a skeptic and P3 an enlightened sort.</p>
<p>To me though, P3 is in perilous danger of the self-delusion attributed to P1, namely claiming the truth without objective evidence.</p>
<p>You say "P3 neither believes - nor dis-believes. Why? because he is aware that the whole thing is nonsense."<br />
-- How is he 'aware'? Since there is no objective explanation for this awareness, what is different from this and the subjective experience of P1? </p>
<p>P3 almost appears to be instantly blessed with an enlightened awakening, from which he can see all and judge 'nonsense' or not. </p>
<p>I don't believe anyone knows the Truth and if such a person professes to do so then he must provide objective evidence for this, otherwise P3 is no different to P1 in claiming the Truth in an unsopported subjective manner.</p>
<p>"P3 does not BELIEVE. He also does not DOUBT. He simply sees beyond it. Then something happens to P3. The ONE DAY happens. He has an AWAKENING (I have to call it something!). The awakening gives him GLIMPSES of truth."<br />
-- Again, this seems a subjective experience; how does it differ from the validity of P1's subjective experience?</p>tAo commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570a276e9970b2009-05-24T07:37:52Z2009-05-24T07:37:52ZtAoOshoRobbins, Beautifully said. You totally nailed it in your two posts above. You put it all in perspective so well....<p>OshoRobbins,</p>
<p>Beautifully said. You totally nailed it in your two posts above. You put it all in perspective so well. You have explained this pivotal issue so much simpler, better, and more concisely than I. Thanks. It was a real pleasure to read your comments, and the clarity they contain and express. Well done my friend.</p>Brian commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570a26885970b2009-05-24T06:45:41Z2009-05-24T06:45:41ZBrianhttp://www.churchofthechurchless.comOshoRobbins, nice analysis. I like how you described P1, P2, and P3. Yes, going beyond knowing and not-knowing, finding the...<p>OshoRobbins, nice analysis. I like how you described P1, P2, and P3. Yes, going beyond knowing and not-knowing, finding the common ground between them -- that seems like a good place to be.</p>OshoRobbins commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570a23b69970b2009-05-24T03:57:53Z2009-05-24T03:57:53ZOshoRobbinshttp://profile.typepad.com/6p0115709cd8fc970bA, Knowing, not knowing. There is a third state. Let me call it BEYOND KNOWING. A person who lives only...<p>A,<br />
Knowing, not knowing.<br />
There is a third state. <br />
Let me call it BEYOND KNOWING.</p>
<p>A person who lives only in knowing/unknowing will not understand.</p>
<p>Someone makes a statement - lets call it statement A.</p>
<p>A - The only way to get to Sach Khand is to meditate.</p>
<p>Then there is a statement B.</p>
<p>B - In order to meditate you need a Master who will initiate you.</p>
<p>Finally a statement C.</p>
<p>C - In order to progress you need to believe in A and B</p>
<p>Lets say there are three people in our universe called P1 P2 and P3.</p>
<p>P1 is a BELIEVER and believes in A B and C.<br />
He is a follower and has FAITH. He thinks he KNOWS there is a Sach Khand and a Master and a Path and he is ON IT.</p>
<p>He appears to be ALL WISE - but in fact is knows nothing. His so-called 'knowing' is of a theory based on A B and C.</p>
<p>He may even give talks and satsangs on the theory of A B and C. When challenged - he will say he is just giving out the teachinigs.</p>
<p>He has not reached Sach Khand but he is an Eternal Hopeful - and HOPEFULLY - there will come a day when he will reach. That day is called ONE DAY. P1 lives in the eternal hope of getting to ONE DAY. However, ONE DAY never arrives. Lots of days keep going by, but the ONE DAY he seeks never comes.</p>
<p>P1 is a good satsangi - a believer.</p>
<p>Then there is P2.</p>
<p>P2 has something called DOUBT. This means he is a non-believer.</p>
<p>He is a skeptic. He asks for proof before he believes.</p>
<p>However there is no proof. </p>
<p>P1 tells him he has to meditate - and for a while he does - but does not get his proof.</p>
<p>Disgusted - he gives up. He remains a non-believer.</p>
<p>So now enter P3.</p>
<p>P3 neither believes - nor dis-believes.</p>
<p>Why? because he is aware that the whole thing is nonsense.</p>
<p>(1) There is no Sach Khand<br />
(2) Hence no meditation is required<br />
(3) Since there is no Sach Khand there is nowhere to 'get to'. </p>
<p>P3 does not BELIEVE. He also does not DOUBT. He simply sees beyond it. </p>
<p>Then something happens to P3. The ONE DAY happens.</p>
<p>He has an AWAKENING (I have to call it something!). The awakening gives him GLIMPSES of truth. Lets just call it ONENESS. He realises that there is no Sach Khand because that is just a CONCEPT. Hence there is no PLACE to get to.</p>
<p>Since there is no place - there is no path and no secret technique (meditation).</p>
<p>Why because there is no HERE and THERE - these are both concepts within time and space. </p>
<p>The TRUTH he is discovering is beyond time and space - beyond mind - beyond 'understanding'. For simplicity lets call it NOTHING. </p>
<p>If P3 speaks - you will not understand because you are in a world of knowing/unknowing and belief/non-belief.</p>
<p>You live in the mind and he speaks of that which is beyond mind.</p>
<p>=====================<br />
Here is the problem.</p>
<p>P1 is trying to get P2 and P3 to BELIEVE.</p>
<p>P3 just laughs at the idea.</p>
<p>To P3 it is just a joke. </p>
<p>P2 is in the middle ground - not sure - not understanding - and yes - confused.</p>
<p>manish - you are a P1.</p>
<p>Many of the people here are not P2s.</p>
<p>They are P3s. </p>
<p>That is why it is such a joke that the P1 is trying to convince the P3.</p>
<p>It is impossible because P3 has transcended the need to 'know' </p>
<p>P3 is aware that it is nonsense and you can never convince him.</p>
<p>Let's see why.</p>
<p>P3 does not lack faith.</p>
<p>It is not that he has FALLEN!!!</p>
<p>He does not require picking up.</p>
<p>Something else has happened, Manish, something else.</p>
<p>Something that you cannot even imagine.</p>
<p>P3 has arrived at the place you call Sach Khand.</p>
<p>Except he does not call it Sach Khand.</p>
<p>P3 has MET God. Except he does not call her God. He might call it the ONE.</p>
<p>ONE means there is no other. No YOU and no ME. No SOUL that has to MERGE. These are all CONCEPTS created within the mind. </p>
<p>They are MAPS of reality and a MAP is NEVER reality - just a representation that is confusing the hell out of people.</p>
<p>A Map is flat - and has a scale. It has nothing to do with the actual territory. It just represents it. It is not similar to it.</p>
<p>You cannot get an idea of the mountains by looking at a map of the mountains.</p>
<p>P3 has dropped the mind. Hence he does not BELIEVE and does not DOUBT. Neither.</p>
<p>The Buddha FAILED to FIND what he was looking for. In that FAILURE he realised the truth: that was he was looking for does not exist. A great peace came over him. He realised that he is the ONE - there is nothing else.</p>
<p>This is not an ATTAINMENT or an ACHIEVEMENT. It is the dropping of ALL DESIRE to attain. There is nothing to attain, because attainment happens only in duality.</p>
<p>P1 is trying to attain. P2 is has given up.</p>
<p>P3 is not even trying - not because he has failed - but because he has realised that the statements A B and C are simply not true.</p>
<p>A B and C are works of fiction. P3 does not doubt them = he simply sees through them and has a good laugh.</p>
<p>Manish - you cannot understand P3. It is beyond you. You are stuck in the state of a P1. You needs to STOP BELIEVING if you ever want to escape the trap. But you cannot because BELIEF is all you know. It is your life.</p>
<p>And those who believe will always remain blind because the belief will keep them blind. They cannot find truth because they are not seeking it - they want the truth to fit into their belief! This will never happen.</p>
<p>P1 will create his own experiences and that will become his proof. The experiences are DELUSION. Please read Faqir Chand - the unknowing sage.</p>
<p>Truth is BEYOND experience. Experience requires TWO. There is only ONE. You can never experience the ONE or say anything about it. <br />
</p>A commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fabfb80970c2009-05-23T17:42:40Z2009-05-23T17:42:40ZAno brian i do not know the truth. Do you? and there is a difference between criticizing and slundering.Actually i...<p>no brian i do not know the truth. Do you?<br />
and there is a difference between criticizing and slundering.Actually i did not even bother with you, and if i did it was definetely not personal/ you are the websmaster after all. </p>
<p>"If ultimate truth can be known, then those who claim to know it should be able to produce some evidence of knowing."</p>
<p>Evidence of knowing....evidence of knowing...you want a little piece of consiousness to be presented in an open palm?<br />
I just leave the opening that someone may know more than me. Not just one person,,,many people may know more things than me in regards to many issues. ,,,</p>Brian commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570a1174d970b2009-05-23T15:22:44Z2009-05-23T15:22:44ZBrianhttp://www.churchofthechurchless.coma, are you sure you yourself know the truth? I have to assume so, since you feel free to critique...<p>a, are you sure you yourself know the truth? I have to assume so, since you feel free to critique others. Namely, the author of this post.</p>
<p>So, what is the truth? Please expound it. I don't claim to know ultimate truth. But I sure do feel entitled to critique others who do make such a claim, if they aren't able to back that claim up with evidence.</p>
<p>If ultimate truth is mystery, or ineffable, then no claims to knowing it should be made. If ultimate truth can be known, then those who claim to know it should be able to produce some evidence of knowing.</p>a commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e2011570a0ebd4970b2009-05-23T14:15:51Z2009-05-23T14:15:51ZaSince you dont leave any openings, and I am kindoff done with this specific post I will make my point...<p>Since you dont leave any openings, and I am kindoff done with this specific post I will make my point (which is that a) A Sant Guru's answers will always appear quasi-mystical b) Before critiquing others you should you should be certain if you yourself know the truth)...</p>
<p>..in cubes and squares.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnURElCzGc0" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnURElCzGc0</a> </p>OshoRobbins commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fab3afe970c2009-05-23T08:36:44Z2009-05-23T08:36:44ZOshoRobbinshttp://profile.typepad.com/6p0115709cd8fc970bHi People, WOW - that was funny. I just made a few passing remarks - and opened up a whole...<p>Hi People,</p>
<p>WOW - that was funny.</p>
<p>I just made a few passing remarks - and opened up a whole can of worms.</p>
<p>MANISH - let me first address your responses.</p>
<p>Too long to go into all of them - but I will summarise beiefly.</p>
<p>(1) Please read that Tao has written in response to you - just above this response.</p>
<p>Manish - calm down - relax. Take it easy. Have a cup of tea.</p>
<p>Please understand - I have not left sant mat because I have failed to achieve anything.</p>
<p>On the contrary - I realized the truth and then saw how crazy the sant mat concepts are!</p>
<p>Anyway - forget me - even your own leader - Maharaj Guringer Singh Ji says the same thing.</p>
<p>I have heard it in person. "If any of you think you understand sant mat - you are mistaken.<br />
All you have is CONCEPTS - and they are ALL INCORRECT"</p>
<p>This much is true - all you have is concepts.</p>
<p>Listen Manish - sant mat is a BELIEF system. ALL BELIEF SYSTEMS - all paths - all religions<br />
not just sant mat - ALL of them are a TRAP.</p>
<p>Why? because the poor seeker is LOST and becomes EVEN more lost.</p>
<p>A TRUE MASTER (and yes - I do consider that someone who is 'enlightened' can help <br />
others - and I choose to call that person a Master - or a 'teacher or truth')<br />
will be able to HELP you to AWAKEN to truth.</p>
<p>Of course you first need to be OPEN and RECEPTIVE. This is what the past masters and gurus did.</p>
<p>They DID NOT prescribe MEDITATION as the panacea for all ills. </p>
<p>In fact if you read Ashthvakra - he is telling Janak that ALL SADHAHA (incl Meditation) is the<br />
BARRIER to truth. He tells him that the DOER must disappear and cannot happen while he is DOING.</p>
<p>Sant mat - takes examples from past masters and USES them for it's own benefits.</p>
<p>The listeners to a satsang ASSUME it MUST be the truth and that's it. Game over. They are caught<br />
in the trap.</p>
<p>They think they understand - they think they have the 'right path'.</p>
<p>When all they have is CONCEPTS.</p>
<p>Listen - what is SHABD? or NAAM? I mean really - what is this mystical shabd?</p>
<p>I put it to you - that it is just a concept!!!!</p>
<p>I used to do satsangs for RSSB. I was eventually banned. But I enjoyed the ride.</p>
<p>It was fun. And I learned so much about people and how they get trapped.</p>
<p>I only did it for entertainment. I sometimes go to the mic and have a discussion with<br />
Maharaj Gurinder Singh Ji. All for entertainment. </p>
<p>What else is there? It is all a cosmic game. That is why I say - relax and have a cup of tea.</p>
<p>So let me make it clear.</p>
<p>I have not failed in sant mat. I meditated and followed it for 30 years. I met no less than<br />
six sant mat masters personally and had long discussions with them. I followed some of them.</p>
<p>My conclusion - many are sincere - but are deluded.</p>
<p>Sant mat will not lead to truth - I am making this as an absolute statement.</p>
<p>I challenge you to show me a single person who has arrived by following sant mat.</p>
<p>My friend, such a person does not exist.</p>
<p>I have even heard Gurinder saying it openly in santsang.</p>
<p>Wake up - will you? Everyone in sant mat - thinks the next person has attained.</p>
<p>Many used to think that the 'speakers' had attained. Then you realise they are no</p>
<p>than puppets. They read the recite. They have no experience of the truth.</p>
<p>Manish, Grab a brain, will ya? </p>
<p>Go to the Brain shop (not Brian shop - as you seemed to get Brain and Brian mixed up a lot).</p>
<p>Bulleh Shah says - "The rest is all talk - The ONE is the truth. The speakers (those who do satsang)<br />
are making a lot of noise. The papers (scriptures) have confused everyone."</p>
<p>RSSB is come a LONG WAY from the initial days. Even 40 years ago - ONLY THE MASTER did satsang.</p>
<p>I remember when it was first suggested that another person give satsang. It was a shock.</p>
<p>Now everyone and his mother appears to be qualified to give a talk.</p>
<p>Anyone like me who is a little more outspoken is banned - it is all politics.</p>
<p>I gave a RSSB talk in one of the centres. Of the 50 people attending - about 30 came to<br />
talk to me.</p>
<p>Why? Because what I say awakens them - does not send them to sleep.</p>
<p>Sleep means to be comfortable in your beliefs. Truth only dawns once you drop all beliefs.</p>
<p>Manish - in conclusion - you have NO HOPE.</p>
<p>You said earlier that you had changed - and was open to these discussions.</p>
<p>Manish - you are a BRAIN washed follower. You cannot understand what TAO and others are saying.</p>
<p>Why? Because you cannot listen. You have no ears. That is why I say - the best thing is a cup of tea.</p>
<p>Manish - I have found the truth - so has Tao - we are not seeking anything.</p>
<p>There is nothing to seek - There is no GOD - No Sat Purush livig in Sach Khand. It was all a nice story</p>
<p>made up so you could follow. I tried to get to Sach Khand. Then one day I realised there is no such place.</p>
<p>And also no GOD - as a separate being. There is only the ONE. Nothing else.</p>
<p>Realise the ONE and it is over. </p>
<p>Try to get to Sach Khand and you will remain trapped forever in a world of concepts.</p>
<p>ALXS:</p>
<p>In response to what you have written.</p>
<p>I know what Manish is seeking because it shows in his writing.</p>
<p>He is a follower of his own version of sant mat.</p>
<p>He is clearly not realised and he is seeking to get to the goal of sant mat.</p>
<p>You don't have to be a genius to figure this out.</p>
<p>Am I acting like a master by making these comments?</p>
<p>So anyone who makes a deduction is now a master? </p>
<p>I am not leaving an opening because we are not face to face. If we were - it would be<br />
a very different discussion.</p>tAo commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156fab2152970c2009-05-23T06:24:07Z2009-05-23T06:24:07ZtAoManish, You again continue to make the same old mistake here. You continue to presume that the rest of us...<p>Manish,</p>
<p>You again continue to make the same old mistake here. You continue to presume that the rest of us here don't "understand" the path, and that we have simply given up too soon, before reaching its goal. But you are so wrong, so incorrect. You are the one who does not understand us. And now, you go running to ask your uncle, who clearly does not understand the extent of matter either.</p>
<p>Its rather tiresome to see how you keep foisting your dogma as if its truth, and then you assume that others have failed because you think and believe that we "lack" or don't live up to it, or don't trust in your dogma. This is just so stupid of you Manish, but you just can't see that.</p>
<p>Here's some of what you said:</p>
<p>"when i saw and read these blogs abt RSSB [...] i just discussed abt this blog to my uncle."</p>
<p>-- Why? Your uncle knows nothing about us, or where we are at, or where we are coming from. He has no clue what the issues are.</p>
<p>"i was relaxed , and happy....because i found all my answers in it."</p>
<p>-- You merely THINK that you found the "answers". But thats only because you are confused and involved in searching, in seeking answers. I need no such answers. And your so-called answers, well they just do not apply to me. These "answers" are all about YOUR beliefs, about YOUR personal story, not me or mine, or Brians, or anyone elses.</p>
<p>"i was so happy and relaxed and felt pity on tao and brian..that they really wasnt able to understand this path at all."</p>
<p>-- This is exactly what I indicated above... you still assume that we do not "understand". But it is YOU who does not understand US. I understand far more about Santmat and many other paths, than you can even imagine.</p>
<p>"i invite you both for a discussion live..wheneveer poss fly to india."</p>
<p>-- No offense, but to be quite honest, thats absurd. I need to have no such "discussion", nor would I come to India for that reason. I have already spent years in India, and I have gained my own insight and wisdom. I have no interest whatsoever in discussing Santmat with RS cult believers like you or your uncle. Your uncle simply does not have any idea where I am at spiritually, nor do you.</p>
<p>"when i asked uncle why people inspite of being inititated and following the path at last come out of it."</p>
<p>-- You uncle knows nothing about other people, or why they do what they do.</p>
<p>"HE SAID... LOOK ITS NATURAL BECAUSE THEY DO NOT FOLLOW THE WAY THEY HAVE TO."</p>
<p>-- There is no such "THEY HAVE TO". Your uncle sounds like an authoritarian religious fundamentalist. </p>
<p>"SANTMAT IS VERY SIMPLE AND ITS EASY TO ACHIEVE THE STATE OF GOD REALISATION BUT TO FOLLOW IT IS THE MOST CHALLENGING TASK,<br />
BECAUSE OF THIS MATERALISTIC WORLD, AND MIND TRAPS AND BECAUSE OF NOT FOLLOWING IT COMPLETELY."</p>
<p>-- Your uncle does not know anything about other people, or their sadhana.</p>
<p>"THATS THE WAY IN SANTMAT. IF AT ALL YOU ARE NOT ABLE TO COMPLETELY 100% FOLLOW IT, YOU CANT ACHIEVE YOUR AIM. IN SANTMAT THAT IS GOD REALISATION."</p>
<p>-- That is nothing but pure dogma.</p>
<p>"LACK OF FAITH AND THE WAVES AND VIBES FROM YOUR NEARBY SURRONDINGS WHICH ARE QUITE NEGATIVE."</p>
<p>-- I have no need for his so-called "FAITH", and my surroundings are not at all "NEGATIVE". </p>
<p>"THESE DAYS ONES MIND TENDS TO SEEK THE TRUTH ELSEWHERE, WHICH HE WILL NEVER FIND BECAUSE THE TRUTH IS WITHIN."</p>
<p>-- That is merely his own very limited idea of truth. He does not know anything about other people.</p>
<p>"SAME WITH THIS PATH..THERE WILL BE NO EFFECT IF SOME PEOPLE STARTS COMING OUT OF THIS PATH."</p>
<p>-- There is also no "EFFECT" if they stay in it.</p>
<p>"FEW ARE LEAVING BECAUSE OF LACK OF THEIR ABILITIES TO FOLLOW AND MORE MORE N MORE AND MANY MORE ARE JOINING...AS THEYRE ABLE TO SEE TRUTH AND FAITH IN THE PATH."</p>
<p>-- Wrong. There is no "LACK" in our "ABILITIES". And I do not need to "FOLLOW" anything. Also, followers and joiners are not "ABLE TO SEE TRUTH". If the did, they would not be following.</p>
<p><br />
</p>Robert Paul Howard commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e20115709f9e5c970b2009-05-22T21:45:10Z2009-05-22T21:45:10ZRobert Paul HowardTo all, An older man told of how much of an influence his father was on him: When he was...<p>To all,</p>
<p>An older man told of how much of an influence his father was on him:</p>
<p>When he was a small boy during the Great Depression (the 1930's, in the USA), his father had stood him upon a table, stepped back, held out his arms to/for his boy, and indicated that the boy should jump into his arms.</p>
<p>The boy took some short, quick steps and did so ... as his father stepped aside and let him fall on the floor.</p>
<p>Although crying in pain, he still could yet see the tears in his father's eyes as he got off the floor. With great sorrow, his dad told him: "Son, never trust anybody."</p>
<p>Robert Paul Howard</p>Manish arora commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e20115709f91fe970b2009-05-22T21:11:51Z2009-05-22T21:11:51ZManish arorahttp://profile.typepad.com/6p010536d4726f970cdear osho u said..... "RSSB is an organisation that has become a cult. It can no longer help someone to...<p>dear osho<br />
u said.....<br />
"RSSB is an organisation that has become a cult. It can no longer help someone to find truth because it has become the problem not the solution. Nothing personal - it happens to all organisations."</p>
<p>well we everyday live in kind of organisation,so we need not require 2 think a lot about it.<br />
everything we gain is from some sort of organisation<br />
even our parents are part of <br />
family organisation<br />
our school and college is a part of college organisation..<br />
what ever we do proffessionally or personaly is a part of organisation,hence dont pay attention that rssb is an organisation..<br />
It has no longer help to find truth for ""someone"" nope your completely wrong<br />
it might havent helped you or few,but you cant talk abt all,<br />
like i said everyone cant go to biggest schools everyone cant gain A grade..everyone cant taste success....<br />
every child in womb doesnt born...there are chances of abortion...</p>
<p>so dear this is entirely ur personal opinion or may be result of few people who werent able to follow it..</p>
<p>and it has not become any problme..<br />
people involve in it creates problem,<br />
i really feel pity on you guys who are not able to understand the simple thoery of santmat and because of ur limited thinking ability or so called minds..you r misjudging and mispresenting abt the path which is and is and will be most successful for many...i do not know abt all and others bt i m sure about me and many..whom i know,personally.</p>
<p>and it happens to all just not because of organisation or the master..<br />
but the reasons are its followers..<br />
but again its very natural and it happens..<br />
sometime ur own child becomes ur enemies..</p>
<p><br />
""Truth is what you are seeking. But you cannot find it by following.""<br />
who said ...its again ur personal opinion which is incorrect..<br />
"A True Master will throw you back on yourself."<br />
great atleast you understand the concept that there are true masters.<br />
" There is no teaching - no path and no answer."<br />
well there is no meaning and you werent able to find the answers..its all ur fault</p>
<p>"" Spirituality is a journey you undertake the destination of which is the discovery that there was no journey and no person to take the journey.""</p>
<p>again osho ur personal view,<br />
you tried something else<br />
you reached somewhere else<br />
you understood something else<br />
and you felt and experience something else..<br />
thats why ur thouhts are nothing but something else..out of santmat or spirituality..<br />
your journey may be a failed venture..you cant say anything abt others.journey.</p>
<p></p>
<p>No Master gives you answers.<br />
masters are not here for q and answers.<br />
there here for a purpose which is very well presented and made understood but due to lack of inability in following it people like you get confused..and search for answers...</p>
<p><br />
""All questions come from the mind."" <br />
yes ur rite..but now it depends on ur mind how u uses it.</p>
<p><br />
"The purpose of a spiriual master is to take you to a place of no-mind. I don't mean to stop questioning or stop thinking - both of which are impossibnle anwyay - the most you can do is suppress the questions and the mind."</p>
<p><br />
both are impossible i agree but thats what you have to make possible..<br />
while at anyone death bed and death no mind will help u or guide u ..<br />
remember that..<br />
there is no suppressing at all..its all ur personal view..<br />
which is comeplete incorrect..</p>
<p>"That is what followers of RSSB have done. They pretend - they reach a pseudo state of peace. Actually they are just following blindly."</p>
<p>well do u find ur self eligible or qualified in saying the above statement,</p>
<p><br />
TRUST SHUD BE LIKE THE FEELING THAT A ONE YEAR OLD BABY HAS,WHEN YOU THREW HIM IN AIR,HE LAUGHS,COZ HE KNOWS YOU WILL CATCH HIM.</p>
<p>well theres nothing called blind..but yeah some people who follow RSSB often go BLIND..<br />
because they wanted something else..<br />
and where there is WANT.that means,it shows you h avent understood santmat at all.</p>
<p>and if trusting someone you called blind following then i agree with you and appreciate all who are blindly following it.Including me.</p>
<p>""""""Meditation is not required to find truth. No amount of meditation will ever take you to truth - becuuse YOU will always remain - the meditator - and YOU are the barrier to truth.</p>
<p>So wat is 'Truth'? Truth is to simply BE. Not be 'anything'. Let life be life and do not try to be 'holy' or 'unholy'</p>
<p>Zen amsters would call each other 'old bags of snad' to make sure they never fell into this trap of 'respect.</p>
<p>You are trying to get free - but taking the concepts of sant mat with you. Drop them - they are all nonsense - they are all lies.""""""</p>
<p><br />
this above matter what ever you h ave mentioned shows ur inefficiency in understanding a path and following it..<br />
if at all ur RS follower or else may b ur any other jealous rs critic..</p>
<p>its onething very strange,if we all trace history what RSSB is facing is nothing new at all,it has been happening from the day of existence of earth and its creatures called human beings..</p>
<p>and we always trying to think ourself as superiors and always busy in questioning and analysing which perhaps will never end..<br />
till the death..</p>
<p>because no one has able to satisfy mind..<br />
and how are all trapped in mind game has never achieved any results..</p>
<p> <br />
there are plently of inventions and wonders invented by humans...<br />
so its very obivious we are also invented by some Power SOME creator...</p>
<p>and he exist..and because he exist we exist..</p>
<p>GOD is there...and i m really amazed to see people relating science with god..<br />
oh my god!!!!!!!</p>
<p>they are in search of the power which created us..</p>
<p>perhaps we all have the ability to reach to god..<br />
but one should know the way..</p>
<p>and people without being committed and determined to follow the way they have been taught from various different paths..they come and form groups</p>
<p>i remember a wise man sayings<br />
that a commuinity is a gathering of more then one person where single cant decide anything but altogether can decide that nothing can be done..</p>
<p><br />
Now my question TO ALL</p>
<p>you people are chanting the name of MIND MIND MIND and MIND</p>
<p>now i ask WHO MIND<br />
whats MIND</p>
<p>when there are so many doubts and questionining<br />
who will decide whose mind is correct and whos not..</p>
<p>now its like a man bought merc from the showroom and when because he doesnt knows to drive well he is a rash driver because of him lack of expertise he hasnt able to drive well and bump into any wall and says...who the hell merc created ..its all the owners fault this is not a good car..<br />
now how can this silly guy blame the ownwer of the maker who is not at all responsible for..</p>
<p><br />
when i saw and read these blogs abt RSSB<br />
i m in delhi these days and going beas soon,<br />
i just discussed abt this blog to my uncle..</p>
<p>and the way he replied me <br />
wow..wow just wow<br />
i was so happy and relaxed and felt pity on tao and brian..<br />
that they really wasnt able to understand this path at all..</p>
<p>if you guys are fluent in hindi i invite you both for a discussion live..wheneveer poss fly to india...</p>
<p>because what all he said was just fantastic i was relaxed , and happy....because i found all my answers in it..</p>
<p>but i will just pen down a single example of his..</p>
<p>when i asked uncle why people inspite of being inititated and following the path at last come out of it..</p>
<p><br />
HE SAID..LOOK ITS NATURAL..BECAUSE THEY DO NOT FOLLOW T HE WAY THE HAVE TO..<br />
BECAUSE SANTMAT IS VERY SIMPLE AND ITS EASY TO ACHIEVE THE STATE OF GOD REALISATION BUT TO FOLLOW IT IS THE MOST CHALLENGING TASK,<br />
BECAUSE OF THIS MATERALISTIC WORLD,AND MIND TRAPS AND BECAUSE OF NOT FOLLOWING IT COMPLETELY ONES GET PISSED OF AND FINALLY GIVE UP AND COME OUT OF THE PATH..<br />
AND ITS HAPPENING FROM THE SO LONG TIME..</p>
<p>AND HE SAID LOOK SON..</p>
<p>IN A CAR EVEN IF A SMALL PART ISNT WORKING YOU CANNOT DRIVE A CAR..<br />
UNLESS UNTILL ALL PARTS ARE INTACT AND THE CAR IS IN MINT CONDITION YOU CANT DRIVE IT</p>
<p>THATS THE WAY IN SANTMAT IF AT ALL YOU ARE NOT ABLE TO COMPLETELY ,100%, FOLLOW IT YOU CANT ACHIEVE YOUR AIM..IN SANTMAT THAT IS GOD REALISATION.<br />
EVEN 99.99% WUDNT WORK<br />
YOU HAVE TO ACHIEVE 100%<br />
AND IN THESE AGE OF TECHNOLOGY,ANALYSING,LACK OF FAITH AND THE WAVES AND VIBES FROM YOUR N EAR BY SURRONDINGS WHICH ARE QUITE NEGATIVE THESE DAYS ONE MINDS TEND TO CHANGE AND SEEK THE TRUTH ELSE WHERE<br />
WHICH HE WILL NEVER FIND BECAUSE THE TRUTH IS WITH IN.</p>
<p><br />
THANKS EVERYONE<br />
AND THANKS OSHO..</p>
<p>BUT OSHO YOU COMMENT AND MOST OF THE COMMENTS HERE SOMETIMES SOUNDS LIKE ALLEGATIONS..</p>
<p>AND ONETHING DEAR ONE MORE LAST EXAMPLE</p>
<p>ITS FOR PEOPLE WHO DRINK ALCOHOL<br />
SOMETIMES WRONG INGREDIENTS MAY RESULT IN THE DEATH OF THE DRINKER...</p>
<p>BUT CHILL WHO CARES..DO ANYONE STOP DRINKING ALCOHOL ...NO..<br />
SAME WITH THIS PATH..THERE WILL BE NO EFFECT IF SOME PEOPLE STARTS COMING OUT OF THIS PATH...</p>
<p>BECAUSE I HAVE SEEN AND RESEARCHED FEW ARE LEAVING BECAUSE OF LACK ..OF THEIR ABILITIES TO FOLLOW</p>
<p>AND MORE MORE N MORE AND MANY MORE ARE JOINING...AS THEIR ABLE TO SEE TRUTH AND FAITH IN THE PATH..</p>
<p><br />
THANKS ONE AGAIN.</p>
<p>WUD BE EAGERLY WAITING FOR TAO AND BRIANS REPLY TO T HIS POST.. </p>Alxs commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e20115709f751b970b2009-05-22T20:20:17Z2009-05-22T20:20:17ZAlxsOshoRobbins, I have some questions/comments for you: You said: "RSSB is an organisation that has become a cult." What is...<p>OshoRobbins, I have some questions/comments for you:<br />
You said:</p>
<p>"RSSB is an organisation that has become a cult."<br />
What is an organisation and what is cult? </p>
<p>"Truth is what you are seeking. But you cannot find it by following. A True Master will throw you back on yourself."</p>
<p>How do you now what manish is seeking. How do you know he is seeking? What is seeking? And the tell me what this thing called truth is.</p>
<p>Are you not acting like a master yourself by this sentence? You, actually go a step beyond, since you do not leave an opening for the other to tell what he desired.You state to him what he is desiring and then offer a solution. If that is you understand of a master, then, you are a cult guru. If you got what I just told you, go back and rewrite your answer to the previous question.</p>
<p>This because you then go on to tell us in two paragraphs the meaning of life. And within this absolute Dasein, RSSB is cult. </p>
<p>"You are trying to get free - but taking the concepts of sant mat with you. Drop them - they are all nonsense - they are all lies. " Now we talk about freedom...'from what and for what?' <br />
sant mat concepts...are lies...that is perfect..cause if I refer to brians recent post on science,,,,we can know what truth is...through deduction. So if santmat says this,,,it must be the other way...as if we are in treasure hunt..<br />
These concepts of sant mat which are lies,,,let me ask you, are they, tricksters - its important to know - or are they,,,well in fact...tell me what is a lie.</p>
<p>Its must be interesting to call sant mat a cult full of lies and then expound your own discourse on life. You have with roger your first supporter as well.</p>
<p>I made some comments further up the texts, that i wont really repeat because what i write to you is both personal to you and a continuation of comments that i made before.<br />
Its a comment on my comments if you may. I am sorry for the confused language,, but i took the liberty to since i assumed that a woman who reads tom robbins must like some confusion wordplay.<br />
</p>Roger commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e20115709ee729970b2009-05-22T15:34:09Z2009-05-22T15:34:10ZRogerOsho, Nice comment, as usual. Roger<p>Osho,</p>
<p>Nice comment, as usual.</p>
<p>Roger</p>OshoRobbins commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e20115709cd978970b2009-05-21T19:17:24Z2009-05-21T19:17:24ZOshoRobbinshttp://profile.typepad.com/6p0115709cd8fc970bManish, A number of points that you might find helpful (or might not!) RSSB is an organisation that has become...<p>Manish,</p>
<p>A number of points that you might find helpful (or might not!)</p>
<p>RSSB is an organisation that has become a cult. It can no longer help someone to find truth because it has become the problem not the solution. Nothing personal - it happens to all organisations.</p>
<p>Truth is what you are seeking. But you cannot find it by following. A True Master will throw you back on yourself. There is no teaching - no path and no answer. Spirituality is a journey you undertake the destination of which is the discovery that there was no journey and no person to take the journey.</p>
<p>No Master gives you answers. All questions come from the mind. The purpose of a spiriual master is to take you to a place of no-mind. I don't mean to stop questioning or stop thinking - both of which are impossibnle anwyay - the most you can do is suppress the questions and the mind.</p>
<p>That is what followers of RSSB have done. They pretend - they reach a pseudo state of peace. Actually they are just following blindly.</p>
<p>The process of getting to 'truth' is the opposite - to fully express yourself. To BE yourself - without trying to be a 'good' person. To go beyond all the conditioning of your parents, teachers and society and be yourself. RSSB cannot help you because they have a set of rules.</p>
<p>Meditation is not required to find truth. No amount of meditation will ever take you to truth - becuuse YOU will always remain - the meditator - and YOU are the barrier to truth. </p>
<p>So wat is 'Truth'? Truth is to simply BE. Not be 'anything'. Let life be life and do not try to be 'holy' or 'unholy' </p>
<p>Zen amsters would call each other 'old bags of snad' to make sure they never fell into this trap of 'respect. </p>
<p>You are trying to get free - but taking the concepts of sant mat with you. Drop them - they are all nonsense - they are all lies. </p>tAo commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156f9a5bdb970c2009-05-18T05:20:44Z2009-05-18T05:20:44ZtAoI would like to say something to ALL commenters and readers. This occured to me the other day, and now...<p>I would like to say something to ALL commenters and readers. This occured to me the other day, and now seems a good time an place to post it. This is only my own opinion and does not necessarily relect Brian's feelings.</p>
<p>As of late I have noticed that many commenters ahve been posting quite a lot of comments and assorted material and info, explations etc. about facets of the Santmat teachings, the shabd meditation, the cosmology of inner planes, the GIHF idea, the master, and so on and so forth. I would like to say that all of that sort of stuff is not realy what this blog is about or concerned with. I kind of feel like this subject matter (and some posters) has hi-jacked this comment forum as a place to discuss Santmat. But Santmat and endless discussion of the Santmat teaching and path is not really what Church of the Churchless is all about. There are many other more interesting subjects that have been pushed into the background. Brian has written and posted so many articles about so many other things. He has occasionaly mentioned RSSB and RS issues. but Santmat and RS is not his main concern here. But it seems that some folks here assume and feel that this is a venue and fourm that is devoted soley to Santmat and RSSB. I for one, do not feel that it is appropriate that Santmat become the main foucus of this site and this forum. There is another Yahoo forum that is devoted to that sort of thing, and people who wish to discuss Santmat teachings and the RS master and the RSSB should take their discussions over there.</p>
<p>I feel that some commenters here are, or have become obsessed with the subject of Santmat & RSSB, to the exclusion of all else. But I don't think that is appropriate here. Sant mat is merely ONE subject among many others... that are actually much more interesting imo.</p>
<p>Anyway, as I said, this is all just my own opinion. And my conclusion is that I would hope that the discussions here can shift into other subjects besides Santmat and RSSB. And I think Brian would prefer that as well. Enough has been said about Santmat. People like Manish and Ashy can go to other sites like " radhasoamistudies " over at Yahoo Groups, if they wish to discuss about Santmat and RS.</p>
<p>Just my thoughts.</p>tAo commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156f9a50f9970c2009-05-18T04:49:47Z2009-05-18T04:49:47ZtAoTo Manish, and also to George (George please scroll down): Manish, I appreciate your concerns. However, I simply do not...<p>To Manish, and also to George (George please scroll down):</p>
<p><br />
Manish,</p>
<p>I appreciate your concerns. However, I simply do not have the time this week to respond to all of your comments that you directed at me. I have some other very important business going on in my life at this time.</p>
<p>However, I will definitely try and help you to better understand my position, views, etc etc if you are interested, and most importantly IF you will listen and receive what I have to say without over-laying it with all of your presumptions about me as well as your RS 'baggage'. In other words, you must become open and RECEPTIVE to what I have to say and tell you about myself, without twisting it or interpreting it to fit your own mindset and agenda. If you can not do that, then you will never understand me... no matter what I say to you. </p>
<p>Also, I will not discuss any of this further on this site, Brian's blog. I will only do so via private e-mail. So, if you wish to hear what I have to say, and you are willing to really listen, then send a private e-mail to Brian, who will forward it on to me. Then I will contact you back directly.</p>
<p>I will not give you my e-mail address here, nor will Brian give it to you. You must send a message to Brians Churchless e-mail contact, from your own e-mail address, and then Brian will forward it on to me. Neither Brian nor I wish to continue this particular debate here on his Churchless site. So, send a short e-mail to Brian, and then I will get back to you in approximately a week or so.</p>
<p>This site here is not the place to carry on in the way you have been doing. So these are my conditions if you wish to talk to me privately and hear (and hopefully understand) what I have to offer.</p>
<p>And in any case, I still wish you the best. If you value the RS path, then keep with it. But don't try to bring others "back" to it. Radha Soami Mat (and the RS master) does NOT OWN people's souls, regardless of whether you think it does or not. So if YOU wish to understand where I am at, then contact me via e-mail OUTSIDE of this blog.</p>
<p>--------------------------------------------</p>
<p>George,</p>
<p>Thanks so much for your inquiry, and I will be glad to try to answer your questions and explain or discuss where I am at regarding those issues that you mentioned.</p>
<p>However, I cannot take the time to do that during the next week to ten days. So like I advised Manish, and like I suggested to you before, if you would please simply send a brief e-mail message to Brian's e-mail address (with your questions), I trust that Brian will not mind to forward that e-mail on to me (on a one-time basis).</p>
<p>I will then contact you and establish private e-mail correspondence with you directly. Simply send an e-mail to Brian from whatever address that you wish me to use to send a reply message back to you. We can then go from there. But please bear in mind that you probably won't hear from me for at least a week.</p>
<p>Also, thanks again for being such a good fellow, and I give my best wishes to you as well. I am so glad that we have come to a mutual resolution of those past petty differences. Pretty damn stupid of us I guess. Perhaps we may even meet up someday and have a drink together... and a jolly good laugh. Take care my friend... and I hope to hear from you.</p>flakey kook commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156f9a447d970c2009-05-18T04:10:50Z2009-05-18T04:10:50Zflakey kookRoger, as a follow on to the above comment, we need to have met the physical form of the Master...<p>Roger, as a follow on to the above comment, we need to have met the physical form of the Master to enable us to recognize the inner form which is projected through the Shabd. Only what I have learned not yet experienced :)<br />
</p>flakey kook commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156f9a3f7e970c2009-05-18T03:58:50Z2009-05-18T03:58:50Zflakey kookRoger, Thanks for your questions. ---Does your belief system come from Santmat teachings? I have been very much influenced by...<p>Roger,</p>
<p>Thanks for your questions. </p>
<p>---Does your belief system come from Santmat teachings?</p>
<p>I have been very much influenced by Sant Mat but also at the same time been interested in and influenced by esoteric traditions, mythology, mysticism, psychic perception and ancient tribal traditions - to name a few.</p>
<p>---Have you communicated with pure spirit or energy? This communication seems, from your statement, to be very important.</p>
<p>I am drawn to mysticism, which I perceive as a conscious direct experience with spirit and/or the energy of the cosmos and have had some interesting other worldly experiences, still I take into account the mind can play many tricks.</p>
<p>---Could you write a comment, explaining how the Master helps with this communication process? Is this a mental activity, or some sort of non-mental communication?</p>
<p>I can’t really comment on this... though I have read that when during meditation the mind catches sight of the inner Master it becomes intoxicated and no longer has any desire for worldly things.<br />
</p>Smack commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e20115708fec04970b2009-05-18T03:09:39Z2009-05-18T03:09:39ZSmack Juan, Charan Singh's son Rana is a manmukh? Now THAT is interesting. Imagine if Charan Singh had named Rana as...<p>Juan,</p>
<p>Charan Singh's son Rana is a manmukh? Now THAT is interesting.</p>
<p>Imagine if Charan Singh had named Rana as his successor? He would likely be the current Beas master. Yet it seems he has left the path. </p>
<p>A potential Sant Mat master leaving the path...</p>
<p>He is someone I would love to meet. </p>
<p>Anyone have his contact details?<br />
</p>Juan commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e20115708f6d70970b2009-05-17T21:30:11Z2009-05-17T21:30:12ZJuanDear Manish, Radhasoami, You seem to be very much concerned about your master, you are really one of the very...<p>Dear Manish,</p>
<p>Radhasoami,</p>
<p>You seem to be very much concerned about your master, you are really one of the very few Gurmukhs.Keep it up, and in one of your comments you mentioned you will be going to Sirsa, if you happen to be there please see if Maharaj Charan Singh's son (Rana) is still there and try to guide him, I have heard that he has been Manmukh.</p>
<p>Further you mentioned every father teaches his son the same way, you are right, Master Gurinder Singh is also doing that, teaching his son.</p>
<p>Thanks</p>
<p><br />
</p>George commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156f9990b6970c2009-05-17T21:04:35Z2009-05-17T21:04:35ZGeorgetAo, I have a few questions for you. They're quite personal so feel free not to answer. However, you seem...<p>tAo, </p>
<p>I have a few questions for you. They're quite personal so feel free not to answer. However, you seem to place alot on rational thought along with your extensive spiritual knowledge. </p>
<p>I was interested to read the other day that you've had some mystical experiences and would like you to expand a bit on these? </p>
<p>You seem against the guru concept, which also sits at odds with me, but I noticed you still respect the wisdom of various prophets through the ages as perhaps revealing something constant? </p>
<p>I understand your views of reality overlap alot with Tucson (and Brian). A oneness or formless ultimate reality which pervades all. No 'thing' exists, no subject, object, I or self; rather these are abstractified forms or manifestations of this formless oneness percieved by our limited means of perception. Tucson's analogy was of bubbles in a flowing stream - some percieving themselves as bubbles, others as part of this oneness. </p>
<p>Some talk of oneness as being some sort of cosmic or collective consciousness. Others try marry this collective consciousness with scientific uniform field theory (vibrating wave functions).</p>
<p>Dzogchen, as i understand, is a natural state or primardial awareness of all things. I would be grateful to recieve your beliefs of reality? </p>
<p>I also wonder if you meditate? If so, the technique you use and what you are hoping to achieve through meditation? </p>
<p>Thanks for any response if you around.<br />
George<br />
</p>Roger commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e20115708f435c970b2009-05-17T19:51:19Z2009-05-17T19:51:19ZRogerflakey, Thanks for your reply, You stated, "I believe the creator to be pure energy, the life force so to...<p>flakey,</p>
<p>Thanks for your reply,</p>
<p>You stated,</p>
<p>"I believe the creator to be pure energy, the life force so to speak, and the Masters are those who have traveled the inner regions with the help of their Master (who is their teacher and inner guide) and they have then merged their souls (energy/life force) back into this original ocean of energy/creative force. So we need a spiritual guide who is in a human form otherwise how can we communicate with pure spirit or energy?"</p>
<p>---Does your belief system come from Santmat teachings?<br />
---Have you communicated with pure spirit or energy? This communication seems, from your statement, to be very important.<br />
---Could you write a comment, explaining how the Master helps with this communication process? Is this a mental activity, or some sort of non-mental communication?</p>
<p>Thanks for your continued replies,<br />
Roger</p>
<p><br />
</p>Manish arora commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e20115708f3345970b2009-05-17T19:07:33Z2009-05-17T19:07:34ZManish arorahttp://profile.typepad.com/6p010536d4726f970cwell said tucson i really liked the way you said interesting people like you force me to stay connected in...<p>well said tucson<br />
i really liked the way you said<br />
interesting people like you force me to stay connected in this blog..<br />
but once again i have come to know that you people really sometimes misunderstand me..</p>
<p>i m not at all insecure<br />
and yes your rite in saying it shud not be my concern to take care of this blog...<br />
i agree...</p>
<p><br />
and brain i m not at all here to convert any one into RSSB come on thats not my point ...</p>
<p>and why shud i try converting u ..<br />
ur already an rssb initiate..<br />
if ur off from rssb doesnt means ur gone..<br />
it means ur just away<br />
and one day will be back..</p>
<p>now as tucson said i will leave it to him<br />
he very well explained me in a very respectful and true manner<br />
this is the called of a true initiated satsangi<br />
i m proud of tucson to be an rssb initiate.</p>
<p><br />
and i will try to follow it..</p>
<p>but brian and tucson and tao will u do a favour for me..<br />
its a request <br />
wud u like to share ur experience personally with me?</p>
<p>thru emails? not in blogs i dont want this blog goal shud be effected?</p>
<p>can we share thru emails?<br />
can i have emails of u 3 people?</p>tucson commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156f995210970c2009-05-17T18:50:03Z2009-05-17T18:50:04ZtucsonManish, you wrote: "and i have connection to this blog only for the reason that its connected to my master...<p>Manish, you wrote:</p>
<p>"and i have connection to this blog only for the reason that its connected to my master and my master being mispresentated here..so to saveguard the truth and show everyone the real true side of rssb rather than the mispresented or misunderstood side of rssb.."</p>
<p>--Don't you think your master can take care of himself and call those into his fold who are destined for it? Why do you think it is your duty to defend his teachings? There are always critics in the world for any prominent figure or belief system. That is the way of things. That is why Gurinder Singh has recommended that satsangis avoid arguments and controversy on the internet and elsewhere. There is no end to it. </p>
<p>If you really understand and respect your masters teachings you will attend to your own duty of simran and bhajan and let others attend to whatever affairs they think are important, which are not of your concern from the Sant Mat point of view. </p>
<p>It is not your job to change the world or people's minds on this blog. Sant Mat teaches that this world is in Kals hands and he is managing it his way. Your responsibility, according to Sant Mat, is to rise above this plane of illusion and not to immerse yourself unnecessarily in worldly affairs. This is Kals world and not your true home. Why concern yourself with the thoughts of manmukhs? Surround yourself with gurmukhs and attend to your meditation.</p>
<p>I was initiated in 1970 by Charan Singh in person. I have attended countless satsangs, bhandaras, etc. I have been to Dera twice for one month each time. I have read most of the books, some several times. I did many hours of simran and bhajan and remained within the four vows. I have seen light and heard sound upon occasion in meditation. </p>
<p>Nevertheless, the time came over fifteen years ago when Sant Mat no longer was relevant for me. Perspectives and insights changed. The chameleon changed its colors and shed its skin. Sant Mat is a memory, a conceptual framework that no longer applies for me, a bubble construct that popped.</p>
<p>I think it is much the same for many of the ex-satsangis here. They understand the path, maybe much better than you do, but they have changed and moved on. I don't think there is anything you can say to change this. Much of what you will hear on this blog are remarks that will challenge your faith and cause you to react defensively. It is time to face this fact. It is unlikely you will change any minds here. What you are really doing is defending your own insecurity and by participating here this problem will only be increased along with your frustration. In essence, you are talking to yourself.</p>
<p>Your comments are taking up far too much space in the "Recent Comments" column and new comments by others that may be of interest to readers here are being lost much too quickly. Please be considerate and try to condense your remarks to a single post rather than making numerous entries. Do you think it is polite for you to dominate this forum in this way? Is your self-importance this far out of control?</p>
<p>I wish you well. Please follow your spiritual path with vigor and enthusiasm, but don't expect others to share your beliefs or to see things the way you do. Leave it up to Him. <br />
</p>Brian commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e20115708f21e8970b2009-05-17T18:17:15Z2009-05-17T18:17:16ZBrianhttp://www.churchofthechurchless.comManish, this is exactly my point: your goal is to convert people such as me to how you believe. That...<p>Manish, this is exactly my point: your goal is to convert people such as me to how you believe. That isn't the purpose of this blog. It is to discuss, converse, share ideas, support each other in churchlessness.</p>
<p>My experience is my experience. I'm not interested in having you explain to me why my experience is wrong. That's impossible. What I've experienced is what I've experienced. I'm the only person who knows what I know -- you sure don't. </p>
<p>So if you want to respond to blog posts here with your own experiences or ideas, great. But your motivation shouldn't be to change particular people. That's why you come across as sounding preachy. You are.</p>
<p>Again, I've warned you several times about making my blog a forum for preaching the glory of Sant Mat and RSSB. If you keep on doing that, I'll have to delete your comments as dogma spam.</p>Manish arora commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e20115708f15c9970b2009-05-17T17:45:15Z2009-05-17T17:45:15ZManish arorahttp://profile.typepad.com/6p010536d4726f970cand i have connection to this blog only for the reason that its connected to my master and my master...<p>and i have connection to this blog only for the reason that its connected to my master<br />
and my master being mispresentated here..</p>
<p>so to saveguard the truth and show everyone the real true side of rssb rather than the mispresented or misunderstood side of rssb..</p>
<p>thats it<br />
i m here for that simple reasons..</p>
<p>and abt the note i posted which u termed as to be preaching just read it brian it was just for u and tao<br />
the answer for ur failure in santmat..and unable to understand it completly..</p>Manish arora commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156f9938b5970c2009-05-17T17:38:33Z2009-05-17T17:38:34ZManish arorahttp://profile.typepad.com/6p010536d4726f970ci m on my way to that task brian i need time.. i already have planned to start a blog...<p>i m on my way to that task brian i need time..<br />
i already have planned to start a blog which will be kind of urs..in which we will recommend all the satsangis..initititated n non initiated..to visit churchless and go through the complete rssb critics column...<br />
and brian i also many times said i do not want to preach and i dont preach..<br />
and i m here for not that i have become churchless<br />
for god sake i have not..</p>
<p>i m here for u for tao<br />
and you know why?<br />
well will repeat again<br />
you all are initiated RSSB santsagis<br />
who after being in it for so many years left..<br />
so i m merely here for u ppl sake..<br />
not to convince you at all<br />
but try to believe you people that what you all are mentioning here abt santmat faiths are not purely true at all..</p>
<p>thats the only reason me being here<br />
if not i would never ever wud have been here to waste my time..</p>
<p>like i said..i have been to many such blogs<br />
but never involved there more than a day..because they werent deserve enuff<br />
but when i see satsangis like u who have lost faith in the path which u have all followed..that really is the USP of this blog and i m here for that reason<br />
because if ur dumb immature or silly persons<br />
i wud have left this blog long time<br />
but u r very smart enuff ,mature and have lot of knowledge abt spirituality as its obvious being with rssb for 30 years ..u wud have def have come to know more abt spirituality <br />
infact<br />
its the RSSB path which lead you 2 open this blog..</p>
<p>but you have different point of view regarding the path<br />
you think it as dogma..and ritual like..<br />
but the fact is it might seems like that but its is not at all like that under any way..</p>
<p>repeation of truth doesnt says that its dogma..</p>
<p>every father teaches his son the same way<br />
and its been happening since ages..<br />
now that doesnt mean its dogma..</p>
<p>one thing i m sure about it will take time..though but one day we will have mutual statment towards the path..</p>
<p>uptil what all i have been thru this blog and read statement abt rssb..<br />
soon you will find clone like blog like urs<br />
and everyone will find each and every answer for it..</p>
<p>but those were just true genuine answers some with proofs some without..<br />
now it will be upto you guys whether to believe or not to believe.</p>Brian commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e20115708f0736970b2009-05-17T17:03:25Z2009-05-17T17:03:25ZBrianhttp://www.churchofthechurchless.comManish, I delete your preachy posts. Not long ago you said that you'd become all churchless and weren't sure what...<p>Manish, I delete your preachy posts. Not long ago you said that you'd become all churchless and weren't sure what was true, and wanted another chance at being allowed to post comments here.</p>
<p>You have six of the last ten comments on this blog. I deleted a few that were solely preaching the Sant Mat/RSSB teachings, just like I do with people who post quotes from the Bible or whatever. This is a place to discuss, not to preach.</p>
<p>You should feel good that I've left up most of your recent comments. You've reverted to your preachiness, which you said you had left behind. </p>
<p>It's simple, Manish: this blog is called Church of the Churchless. It is for people who don't believe in any particular religion and are open to discussing evidence about what faiths are true, if any.</p>
<p>You're not that sort of person. So I, along with others, keep wondering why you're here. If it is to preach to the churchless, that isn't appropriate. You should start your own blog if you merely want to keep repeating dogma, or challenge why this blog exists.</p>Manish arora commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156f99235d970c2009-05-17T16:43:46Z2009-05-17T16:43:46ZManish arorahttp://profile.typepad.com/6p010536d4726f970cbrain ur smart u always delete all my valuable posts so no one can see and read them but why...<p>brain ur smart u always delete all my valuable posts<br />
so no one can see and read them<br />
but why do u do it?</p>Manish arora commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156f98dd2e970c2009-05-17T13:29:30Z2009-05-17T13:29:31ZManish arorahttp://profile.typepad.com/6p010536d4726f970cthanks obed and same 2 you<p>thanks obed and same 2 you</p>Obed commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201156f98ca4f970c2009-05-17T12:29:30Z2009-05-17T12:29:30ZObedDear Manish, No need to say sorry.There is only love and acceptance. Love Obed<p>Dear Manish,<br />
No need to say sorry.There is only love and acceptance.<br />
Love<br />
Obed<br />
</p>Manish arora commented on 'A Sant Mat guru answers a question with: "Don't question"'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e20115708ea64a970b2009-05-17T12:16:03Z2009-05-17T12:16:03ZManish arorahttp://profile.typepad.com/6p010536d4726f970cwell sorry obed it was just sharing of few sayings but not at all preaching..i dont want to preach, i...<p>well sorry obed it was just sharing of few sayings<br />
but not at all preaching..i dont want to preach,<br />
i m no one to preach<br />
and i dont even like to preach<br />
i m just expressing my experience and reasons..<br />
and few sayings..<br />
you just read it ..<br />
if u think u like it its ok or leave it<br />
its as simple as it is..</p>