Open Thread 4

Here's another Open Thread (previous OTs are still open, of course). Leave a comment about anything you want to talk about. From now on comments on other posts need to be related to the subject of the post, or they will be candidates for deletion. So an Open Thread is the place for miscellany and whatever. Feel free.

Comments

[Jim]

Seems strange, this is an open thread, but is moderated?
What kind of open is this?

[Blogger Brian]

Jim, an Open Thread means that you can say whatever you want, within the bounds of this blog's free speech policies.

Meaning, no outrageous personal attacks, no ranting about how useless and misguided this blog (or the blogger) is, no commercial or religious spam (advertising or preaching).

It's the place to discuss subjects other than what I write posts about. But not for disrupting this blog. If people don't like this blog, they should head elsewhere. The Internet is a big place, with something for everybody.

I've had to go to comment moderation on my entire blog from time to time because some troll-types have been trying to disrupt things -- playing identity theft and other sorts of ridiculous games.

I get tired of deleting their repetitive ridiculousness, so turn on comment moderation when the trolls start stirring in their cowardly Internet caves. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)

Trolls have to be controlled, because as this guy says, they are parasites on thoughtful people: "There's a sort of Gresham's Law of trolls: trolls are willing to use a forum with a lot of thoughtful people in it, but thoughtful people aren't willing to use a forum with a lot of trolls in it."
http://www.paulgraham.com/trolls.html

So I keep them in their place. Don't fear: thoughtful, respectful, and substantive Open Thread comments will be published. But troll comments won't.

[Jim]

Thanks for explanation Brian

[Prakash]

Greetings
I am speaking about my inner experiences, and though I supposed not to, I want to share what I have experienced since being on RSSB path.
Does anyone want me to write about what I have seen and heard with my own inner eyes?

[Blogger Brian]

Prakash, sure, share away. One comment before you do: lots of people claim to have had profound inner experiences. The more detail you provide the better. And if there is demonstrable outside evidence for your experience, that would be even more persuasive.

[Prajash]

Brian, thank you, I very much want to tell people on this blog that only little effort and we can all see evidence. Like looking though telescope, others must look through lens to see, otherwise they are free to say they do not believe, but what they really are saying is that they do not want to look.
So I will speak only true experiences

[tAo]

Prajash (or Prakash?), you have said:

"I very much want to tell people on this blog that only little effort and we can all see evidence."

-- Thats fine, but simply 'seeing' is not the same as evidence. Many people (myself included) have seen various things in meditation, but that is not "evidence"... it is merely subjective sensory perceptions. Alos, each p;erson has different experiences, so just because you "see" or experience something in mediation, does not mean that others "see" or experience the same thing. And no matter what you may "see" or experience sbjectively, that is not the kind of objective evidence which can be presented as proof. Are you aware of this difference?

"others must look through lens to see, otherwise they are free to say they do not believe, but what they really are saying is that they do not want to look."

-- Now that is definitely not correct. Some people do not believe, but that does not mean that "they do not want to look". They have looked. If what you mean by "look" is to meditate... well then many people have 'looked' quite a lot. So right off the bat, you have made an unfounded assertion where you say that other people - people who "do not believe" - that "they do not want to look". And that is simply not true. Many people who "do not believe" have most assuredly done a lot of meditation... so they have'looked'. For you to claim that they "do not want to look", is clearly wrong. So do you understand that your assumption is incorrect?

As far as sharing and telling about your experiences, as Brian said, please feel free to share anything you like.

[Prakash]

Sorry for typing mistake, I am not working with computer for too long. I have not even written anything except my desire to write and already I am wrong, sorry tAo, but I want to tell everyone about my inner experiences.
tAo, I do not know what kind of proof you are seeking, because I did not offer to give you proof. I think your mind is closed before you even hear what it is I am saying.
How do you see your house, your family, your friends? Do you see them with your eyes? When you see them, and you see them every day, do you demand proof they exist, or is it enough that you have the experience of seeing them? Is it enough that they seem real to you, so you believe them to exist? Or do you ask for proof that they are real each time you see them?
You can see them when you want, just like you can go to your city and see that whenever you want, you believe it is real, but do you ask for proof that it is real.
If I was to tell you about Bombay, and you had never been to Bombay, would you start asking me for proof of my experience even before I started to tell you about Bombay?
I have always been able to see things inside, but by see, I mean the full experience of reality. I can repeat the experience and I have made some experiments to find out if this is good dreams or some other realm.

there is big difference between trying to look and looking, it is all about wanting to see, really wanting to see. tAo gives good example, he says many people have done a lot of meditation so they have looked. It is like saying many people have bought telescopes but they have not seen anything. buying telescope is not exploring night sky, but very few really want to see, want to see enough to keep looking into night sky with true desire, true longing. You see tAo, your mind is closed even before you even think about looking, even before I have said anything about what I wanted to say, you are calling me wrong, you are saying my experience must have proof, so with this closed mind attitude, you will always have blindness.

[Blogger Brian]

Prakash, I think you're being excessively defensive. And you misread what tAo (and I) are saying.

Neither of us questioned that you have had inner experiences. We all have had inner experiences. What is consciousness, or awareness, but "inner"? I mean, what would an "outer experience" be? Something outside of our brain?

However, some experiences are of a reality that can be demonstrated to others. If you say that you have seen Bombay, I can ask you about what you've seen -- and then compare this with photos of the city from other sources. Or I can visit the city myself and see if what you described matches up with what I perceive.

With mystical experiences, though, we have to take the word of the experiencer. That's all tAo and I were saying, really (I can say that for sure about myself; tAo would have to speak for himself).

I've read quite a few books about Christian mysticism. Believers in Jesus, not surprisingly, experience Jesus "inside." Believers in a guru, not surprisingly, experience the guru. And so on. Very rarely, if ever, does a follower of one religion have a mystical experience that supports the belief system of another religion.

So what's going on? Either we have to assume that there are different objective spiritual realities for different religions, or people are experiencing what they want to experience, or expect to experience.

Nobody is calling you wrong. As I often say, if I tell you that I like the taste of strawberries, you can't call me wrong. Only I know what I experience subjectively. You can't be wrong about that, Prakash. Even if you're only dreaming, that is your dream, and it is truly a part of your experience.

But you seem to be saying that what you experienced "inside" is more than just your subjective experience -- that it is something objectively real that other people also could experience if they only looked in the right direction, had enough faith, worked hard enough, or whatever.

This assertion, assuming you're making it, deserves to be questioned. For people to believe that, you'd need to provide some demonstrable evidence.

Anyway, why don't you go ahead and describe your experiences, as you planned to do? Visitors to this blog then can ask you questions about what you experienced, and we can understand each other better.

[Prakash]

thank you Brian for very nice written reply, I do understand what you are saying to me. If I say there is wonderful remote village deep in Himalayas and I give you directions, but you get distracted every time you try to visit because you get hungry and stop in villages or perhaps part of you wants to prove to yourself that village does not exist, so you always are distracted even though another part of you convinces yourself that you do want to find this place. You see you will never find like this.
Experience inside is more than just one person experience, but it is less than all persons experience. Like you say, if you want to know Bombay exists, you can go there, so can anyone else in the world. So what do you say about inner experience if you find only one percent of population have experienced and all have same experience, maybe talk about and share their experiences, but you cannot seem to get there, so what do you do Mr. Brian, do you convince yourself that the place does not exist and so stop even trying to visit, or do you believe that this one percent are all having an illusion or perhaps all trying to be out to get you and telling lies about their experience?
Or do you say that one percent is not enough proof, that you would want 50% or 100% before you believe.
If only one person from all population of world have experience perhaps is difficult to believe, but what if 100 people all have same experience, or perhaps 1000 people have experience, and it is repeatable because all these 100 or 1000 people have to do to have experience is follow same instruction with pure intention but not to prove to themselves, but to be in awe of the experience for sake of experience.
For you Brian, is it only that everyone else in the world can see something then you believe it to be true, because I am sure that there are experiences that you have had in your life that others may not have had, maybe close experiences with death or intimate experiences with another person, but do you only believe these experiences after proof, when you talk to other people and you have many other reports and you can repeat it again and again?
You are using one set of rules for one set of experiences and another set of rules for your other experiences.

[Blogger Brian]

Prakash, you're wrong. I'm not using one set of rules for me, and one set for other people. What I'm saying, and will continue to say, is that some experiences can be demonstrated to be objectively true, while other experiences can't.

I can prove that Bombay exists. I can't prove that I like the taste of strawberries.

So what is the repeatable mystical experience that you are speaking of? You still haven't described it.

Like I said, I've read about many Christian mystic experiences. They don't have much in common with Hindu mystic experiences. Thus I don't understand your seeming assertion that "inner" experiences are the same for everybody. Or at least, for many people.

If you described your own inner experiences, maybe things would be clearer to me and other readers of this blog.

[tAo]

Prakash,

You are mistaken and you are also being extremely defensive for no reason. I did not ask you for any proof. I simply tried to make you aware of the difference between inner experiences which are subjective, and external perceptions of the outer world which are objective.

You said that my mind is closed. That is not correct. My mind is not closed at all. I very clearly asked you and I welcomed you to share your experiences.

You said that I have called you "wrong". That too is incorrect. I never said that you were wrong. You are being defensive here for no reason.

You also claimed that I said that your "experience must have proof". That is incorrect as well. Because that is not what I said at all. I did not say that you "must have proof". Previously you had claimed to have evidence. So I simply explained to you that real evidence is something that can be corroborated objectively, and not just inner subjective experiences. And I asked you if you were aware of the difference.

I never questioned or denied your inner experiences. In fact, I actually encouraged you to tell us about them. That was not any kind of "closed mind attitude" on my part at all.

Also you basically don't know anything about me, so how can you be so bold as to say to me: "you will always have blindness"?? That is extremely judgemental and negative on your part.

So Prakash, it is pretty obvious that you have jumped to some false conclusions and you have taken a defensive attitude. You are already on the defensive before anyone has even read what you have to say.

And not I, nor anyone else has doubted you or criticised you. You are unnecessarily over-reacting. If you want other people to be open-minded towards you, then you should not jump to such mistaken conclusions about them.

Therefore, simply relax and go on ahead and share whatever it is that you wish to share about your inner experiences (in meditation I presume). No one is asking you for any "proof" at this point. We already know that inner experiences can never be proven anyway. But that doesn't mean that they are invalid, or that they not meaningfull to you.

If you would like to tell about your experiences, then as Brian and I have both said, we welcome you to do so. This is Brian's site, and I am just one out of many people who post comments here. And I am open to reading whatever you have to say, and I am sure other people are too.

I hope this gives you a better understanding of what I was trying to say in my previous comment to you.

[George]

Prakash

I would ask you to please post a description of your inner experience.

I've never had an inner experience. No lights, no sounds, no voices, no visions and no astral travel. So for me this is all new and it would be most interesting to hear details of your experience regardless of whether there is proof or not.

[Manjit]

[Manjit, I've deleted the irrelevant personal attacks where you criticized the messenger(s) rather than the message --Blogger Brian.]

Brian, somebody recently mentioned the inanity of dismissing the reality of inner experience with the RS method just because YOU guys haven't had any. No, no, no - there's no deflecting this by raising the subjective/objective dualism - you all actually dismiss the reality of anybody within the organisation having these experiences. Why do you constantly confuse your own ignorance and lack of experience, with the total potential of the system itself? Foolishness.

To the many, myself included, who HAVE experienced these things, such dismissal just seems silly, ignorant and arrogant. You don't know what you're talking about, you don't understand it, you haven't experienced it, but apparently you are able to comment on it, and dismiss it's value? Strange, that.

And, now, you are with the air of a wise man, making statements like this:

"Like I said, I've read about many Christian mystic experiences. They don't have much in common with Hindu mystic experiences. Thus I don't understand your seeming assertion that "inner" experiences are the same for everybody. Or at least, for many people."

What are you talking about? References please? Within what kind of paradigm are you thinking there's not much in common?

I'm sorry, I have to say this Brian - I'm really beginning to think you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about - published author or not.

It's not a case of 'similarities' between the Christian & Eastern mystics - it's about there being absolutely no difference whatsoever - the same biology, the same neurology - how can there be any differences? What ARE you talking about?

Do you mean the CONTENT is different? Well, in very, very rare cases imo. But, regardless, in what kind of naive model does that make them totally different? If in one experience somebody speaks to them in Hindi, and in another Latin, does that mean the mystical experiences don't have much in common? You're not making any sense to me whatsoever.

The truely fascinating thing is just how similar the varieties of mystical experience are - truely awe-inspiring imo. But one needs a deep knowledge of the various stages of meditative experience, and in different schools - and an ability to find the commonalities. I'm assuming, Brian, that you don't really have much knowledge of kundalini, tantra, Buddhism & Taoist meditation stages at all? *Certainely* not experience of them.

The below Christian mystic recollections are precisely referring to those known as a preliminary stage in tantra/taoism - the inner hear or tummo stage - a universal stage for all those who meditate enough:

Richard Rolle:
"It was real warmth, too, and it felt as if it were actually on fire. I was astonished at the way the heat surged up, and how this new sensation brought great and unexpected comfort. I had to keep feeling my breast to make sure there was no physical reason for it! But once I realized that it came entirely from within, that this fire of love had no cause, material or sinful, but was the gift of my Maker, I was absolutely delighted, and wanted my love to be even greater. ? If we put our finger near a fire we feel the heat; in much the same way a soul on fire with love feels, I say, a genuine warmth."

Sister Maria Faustina:
"I was all afire, but without burning up ? I felt some kind of fire in my heart ? I was so enveloped in the great interior fire of God's love ? I feel I am all aflame. ? Today, a living flame of divine love entered my soul."

Philip Neri:
"(I)t sometimes extended over his whole body, and for all his age, thinness and spare diet, in the coldest days of winter it was necessary, even in the midst of the night, to open the windows, to cool the bed, to fan him while in bed, and in various ways to moderate the great heat. Sometimes it burned his throat, and in all his medicines something cooling was generally mixed to relieve him. Cardinal Crescenzi said that sometimes when he touched his hand, it burned as if the saint was suffering from a raging fever. ? Even in winter he almost always had his clothes open from the girdle upwards, and sometimes when they told him to fasten them lest he should do himself some injury, he used to say he really could not because of the excessive heat he felt. One day, at Rome, when a great quantity of snow had fallen, he was walking in the streets with his cassock unbuttoned; and when some of his penitents who were with him were hardly able to endure the cold, he laughed at them and said it was a shame for young men to feel cold when old men did not."

Abbess Hildegard of Bingen:
""When I was forty-two years and seven months old, Heaven was opened and a fiery light of exceeding brilliance came and permeated my whole brain, and inflamed my whole heart and whole breast, not like a burning but like a warming flame, as the sun warms everything with its rays touch. And immediately I knew the meaning of the exposition of the Scriptures ? though I did not have the interpretation of the words or their texts or the division of syllables or the knowledge of cases or tenses."

Aside from these, there are numerous, countless expositions of the union mystica amongst the Christian mystics which are entirely undistinguishable from Hindu/Eastern philosophies such as advaita:

Saint Teresa:
"In the orison of union, the soul is fully awake as regards God ,,but wholly asleep as regards things of this world and in respect of herself. During the short time the union lasts she is as it were deprived of every feeling, and even if she would, she could not think of any single thing. Thus she needs to employ no artifice to arrest the use of her understanding: it remains so stricken with inactivity that she neither knows what she loves, nor in what manner she loves, nor what she wills. In short, she is utterly dead to the things of the world and lives solely in God. ? I do not even know whether in this state she has enough life left to breathe. It seems to me she has not; or at least if she does breathe, she is unaware of it. Her intellect would fain understand something of what is going on within her, but it has so little force now that it can act in no way whatsoever." (you will notice the ref to breath cessation, another typical stage in meditation in Hindu practices)

Dionysius the Areopagite:
"Exercise yourself unceasingly in mystical contemplation; abandon feelings; renounce intellectual activities; reject all that belongs to the perceptible and the intelligible; strip yourself totally of non-being and being and lift yourself as far as you are able to the point of being united in unknowing with him who is beyond all being and all knowledge. For it is by passing beyond everything, yourself included, irresistibly and completely, that you will be exalted in pure ecstasy right up to the dark splendour of the divine Superessence, after having abandoned all, and stripped yourself of everything."

Eckhart:
"If you wish to know God in a divine manner, then your knowing must become a pure unknowing, a forgetting of yourself and of all creatures. … You are never better placed than when you are in complete darkness and unknowing. "

"The soul of prayer is attention. As a body without a soul is dead, so is prayer without attention. Prayer said without attention is vain speech. He who prays in this way calls on God in vain. The mind during prayer must be carefully kept formless, ejecting all imagination, because God is formless and cannot be pictured in any form. Images, if the mind admits them, become a curtain and a wall which separate the soul from God. Those who see nothing during their prayer see God, according to St. Meletius the Confessor." [Russian Mystics, Sergius Bolshakoff, Cisterian Publications, 1976, pp. 150-151]

So Brian, are you still sure that there's not much in common between Christian & Hindu mysticism?

[Blogger Brian]

Manjit, I don't want to get into a quote war, because there are both similarities and differences between mystics of any tradition. As I wrote recently in a post about Forman's book about mysticism and consciousness, this scholar of religious experience noted that there two basic varieties: one where visions and locutions (sights and sounds) abound, and one where conscious activity stops, leading to formless silence.

Naturally the latter kind of mystic experience, which can reasonably be called a lack of experience (because there is no content in consciousness) is going to be quite similar among traditions. Forman shows, for example, how Meister Eckhart and a Buddhist teacher (can't remember name) say much the same thing.

But when it comes to sights and sounds, differences are the rule. Here's a quote from McGinn's book, "The Growth of Mysticism" that points to this:

"For example, a number of medieval visionaries report contact with saints, angels,and especially the Blessed Virgin, but make little or no mention of 'seeing' Christ or God. Others do talk about seeing God, either in his spiritual or incarnate form, but in a manner that does not seem to center on some form of immediate contact with God understood as having a transformative effect on the seer and, at least potentially, on others through the seer's teaching."

I think we can be sure that the "incarnate form" these medieval Christian mystics saw wasn't a Hindu deity or guru.

[shin]

Prakash,

Everything you have said so far has been directly taken from Satsangs and written literature...
All very insightful but we have all heard this and before you say it, yes many of us have 'bought the ticket' and have indeed 'gone to the Airport and travelled on the journey'......but these are all words and nothing more.....
Now explain what you have seen and experienced. Otherwise this becomes pointless.

[Prakash]

Sorry everyone, but I am reading all your comments, especially from Manjit who has very good observations. .I make mistake, this is not open place to talk about my experiences, I was thinking it would be helpful to people, but I see Master is right, it makes things worse, it is like fuel to the fire, it is like those with eyes closed is because they do not want to see, and more, they want to convince those who can see that what they see is not real.
So, I now see that this is not open place to discuss if true or not true, this is place to pretend is open to talk, but is really place of religion of Brian. Religion of Brian is fundamentalism, it is opposite of belief, but is also belief, because is like belief there is no light, which is correct conclusion for blind people, but is not reality

[Blogger Brian]

Prakash, you're not the first person who claimed to have had profound mystic experiences as a result of Sant Mat meditation, then decided not to talk about them.

I respect your decision. But isn't it sort of strange that you criticize me and others for not having enough light, enough reality -- and then you decide that you don't want to shed light at what really happens in meditation.

You are most welcome to share your experiences. I said this before, and I'm saying it again.

My only caution then, as now, is that you have to expect that some people will be skeptical if you don't provide sufficient detail and, ideally, some demonstrable evidence that your "inner" experiences relate to some sort of objective reality, not just your imagination.

[Prakash]

Brian, you are very good at making invitations, but your invitation is not what it seems. I am not surprised, this is typical of real world. Perhaps you are genuine, you believe your blog is open place to talk, but if you believe this then you have to also believe that those who write of their negative experiences are crazy people, liars, and cheats and are so not telling you truth. This way, you can keep believing your own stories.
My personal experience in writing here is that even before I say anything about what I want to talk about, I am told I am wrong, I am not correct, and I am made to feel unwelcome, like this is closed group, you and a few others. You can tell me I am wrong, but this is my experience of short time writing here.
I do not know how to prove this to you, but it is how I feel. When I try to explain, you say it is all my fault, that I am being defensive, no, sorry, you say, I am being extremely defensive, which is not true.
Like taste of strawberries, you cannot prove to others what you like, but you have proven for yourself. I think this is good example, and thank you for this example, because, I am sure you do not care if anyone else on this site cares if you like strawberries or not, I am sure you dont care if they believe you or not, it doesnt change anything, except you, yes YOU, have evidence that the person who does not believe you like strawberries, is believing a lie, and that is their mistake

So, after thinking about this, and also seeing that you and others only reply to the parts that support your arguments (for example, you did not reply to most of Manjits writing, I do not care what you and others on here believe or think, it is your own loss, not mine, not anyone elses, its just changes the way I now see you all, not really interested to explore, only interested in making your prison walls more strong.

[Blogger Brian]

Prakash, like i said, it's your decision. I wanted to learn about your experiences. I simply told you the truth: that I, and others, almost certainly would have questions about them, if you claimed that they were something more than your subjective imagination.

Now you choose not to share your experiences. Fine. I hope you understand that this makes me even more skeptical that you have experienced anything genuine. Truth can stand up to skeptical questioning. It isn't so flimsy as to be demolished by me, or anyone else who visits this blog.

You don't seem to have much confidence in your truth, if you fear that it will crumble if inspected closely.

[Prakash]

Truth may not stand up to skeptical questioning, I have read of one skeptic who said they would not believe something even if it was true.
But Brian, you prove something when you say that you become more skeptical if I dont write about my experiences. Why would your belief become stronger because of someone choosing not to write what they know?
What if I write down my experiences but you dont read them? of perhaps you dont understand my writing, will this be evidence that makes your belief stronger?
If there is a mystery, then if someone knows the solution but does not say, that does not make mystery a lie.
I see you very closed in your thinking, I think you have stopped your own search that you started once a long time ago, and because you did not find what you were looking for, even though you feel you gave much effort and time, you now are waiting for someone to come along and convince you, prove it to you. Brian, this will never happen, never.
So, if you are searching for something, it is YOU that has to search, you will not find it in words of others, either in books, nor what words others may write here on your site.
If you are seeking justification for your giving up the search, then you will find plenty of others who have done same thing, and your site here will be very good for you, it will make you feel better.

I wanted very much to write some things about my inner experiences, but I now see this is waste of time, it will not help me, and it certainly will not help you or anyone else on here. These are just words, these are just dots on your computer screen, their power is very limited. If this is what makes you content, then you are perhaps much more lucky than me, I am still working towards what I know will make me content.
I wish you very good luck and happiness Brian

[tucson]

Prakash,

No one has come to this forum who was willing to share their personal spiritual experiences from Sant Mat meditation. You offered to do this and we are interested in what you have to say. I am speaking of your actual personal experiences and not the RS teachings in general which anyone can read and which have been gone over on this blog many times. But your personal visions and insights, your description of inner regions, of the master's radiant form and what you have learned from this would be appreciated. If you like, go ahead. Please.

[tAo]

Prakash, you said:

"this is not open place to talk about my experiences"

-- That is not true. You have been welcomed several times to share your experiences.

"it is like those with eyes closed is because they do not want to see, and more, they want to convince those who can see that what they see is not real."

-- That is also not true. You have yet to share anything other than criticism. This comment of yours is an example.

"I now see that this is not open place to discuss if true or not true, this is place to pretend is open to talk, but is really place of religion of Brian."

-- No, there is no such religion here. This is an open comment forum. And you still have not said what it is that you wanted to share.

"Religion of Brian is fundamentalism"

-- That is absurd. There is no such "fundamentalism" here. But you are sounding more and more like a troll. And you still have not said what it is that you wanted to share.

"Brian, [...] your invitation is not what it seems."

-- No, you have been made welcome to share. But you still have not shared what it is that you said that you wanted to share.

"you believe your blog is open place to talk, but if you believe this then you have to also believe that those who write of their negative experiences are crazy people, liars, and cheats and are so not telling you truth."

-- That doesn't make any sense. What are you trying to say? Please explain.

"This way, you can keep believing your own stories."

-- There are no such "stories" to believe. What are you talking about?

"My personal experience in writing here is that even before I say anything about what I want to talk about, I am told I am wrong, I am not correct, and I am made to feel unwelcome"

-- That is absoultely not true. No one has made you feel unwelcome. Quite the opposite. Brian, George, and I have all welcomed you and asked you to go ahead and share your experiences. But again, you still have not shared what it is that you said that you wanted to share.

"You can tell me I am wrong, but this is my experience of short time writing here. [...] it is how I feel."

-- That is not true, because no one has told you that you are unwelcome or that you are wrong or that we are not interested in your experiences. Everyone that has responded to you, including Brian and myself, has bent over backwards to meke you feel welcome to share your experiences. But no matter how much we have welcomed you, you still haven't shared anything at all - nothing - and now you give us the phony excuse that people have not made you feel welcome here. So it now obvious that you are playing a game. The more we say to you "go ahead and tell your experiences", the more you say that we are not open. Frankly, that is absolute bullshit. No one has criticised you or doubted you. You have simply refused to come forth with what you originally offered to share... regardless of how many times Brian, and George, and myself, and others have asked you and welcomed you and encouraged you to share what you said that you wanted to share. So either say what you wanted to say, or don't... but don't play games by falsely claiming that you are being made to feel unwelcome. Because that is definitely not the case here.

"When I try to explain, you say it is all my fault, that I am being defensive"

-- No, you have not tried to "explain" anything yet. You have not shared one iota of your experiences, even though many people have really encouraged and welcomed you to do so. All you have done is to be defensive. So simply stop playing defensive and tell us what you want to share. Everyone is waiting for YOU to open up and share your experiences. But you keep coming up with more and more ridiculous excuses. Just go ahead and tell us what you wish to share. No one is stopping you.

"you say, I am being extremely defensive, which is not true."

-- Yes you are being defensive, and this latest comment of yours is further proof of that. You are going in circles. Just go ahead and say whaterver it is that you want to say.

"seeing that you and others only reply to the parts that support your arguments (for example, you did not reply to most of Manjits writing"

-- That is also not true (that "you and others only reply to the parts that support your arguments"). And fyi, Manjit's comments were posted as deliberate personal attacks and ridicule. That kind of derogatory commenting and personal ridicule is no longer accepted here.

"I do not care what you and others on here believe or think"

-- Then why are you here? If you do not wish to partipate and share in open discussion, and you are simply here to criticise Brian and play evasive games, then that sort of thing is not welcome. But if you wish to share your experiences, as you had originally offered, then that is welcome. So you make your own choice.

"it just changes the way I now see you all, not really interested to explore, only interested in making your prison walls more strong."

-- You see, that is the kind of antagonistic bullshit that is not welcome here. So YOU are the one who is "not really interested to explore". You said you wanted to share your experiences, but when you were encouraged to do so, you now avoid doing so. Thats a game. So apparently you really aren't here to share, you are only here to play games and criticise this blog.

And if that is not true, then you would simply go ahead and share your experiences. So whats it going to be Prakash? Its up to you. Its your move.

Are you going to join in and share your story and your experiences? Or are you going to go the way of all the other deliberate trolls?

You are free and welcome to share whatever you like. But attacking and demeaning this blog is not welcome. Its up to you.

[tAo]

Prakash said:

"Why would your belief become stronger because of someone choosing not to write what they know? What if I write down my experiences but you dont read them?"

"I wanted very much to write some things about my inner experiences, but I now see this is waste of time, it will not help me, and it certainly will not help you or anyone else on here."

-- Well unfortunately Prakash, I NOW SEE that YOU ARE playing a rather stupid little game. You have yet to say anything whatsoever about your supposed experiences, even though many people have sincerely welcomed and even asked you to do so. So it appears now that you never had any intention of sharing. You are here only to criticise Brian and this blog. Either put-up or shut-up Prakash. No one here is intersted in your evasive little game. You had your chances, and you had quite a few chances... but still nothing from your side. So the more you avoid and make bogus excuses, eventually no one believes you anymore. Thats just the way life is. You had as much opportunity as anyone. I hope you will have learned your lesson. Because we, well we are just not as stupid as you seem to think.

[shin]

Prakash,

If you truly saw and truly experienced you would not be here!
There is no need to associate yourself with the dealings of the world when you have truly experienced. The Master say's, you become so detached and understand the workings of the divine and see with the inner eye. Whoever has supposedly seen & experienced would never criticise or question anything in this 'Perfect' world! If you did you would be questioning your own Master!!!

Unfortunately you are only here to criticise!! Like so many who are in truth insecure with their own belief.

Recently, not more than 3-4 weeks ago in a local satgsang it was requested by the secretary, that people defer / avoid going on the internet and visiting sites such as these who 'question & debate’ the RS Faith. I feel this announcement will only fuel more curiosity and may indeed 'open' the minds of a few more.

[Roger]

"Unfortunately you are only here to criticise!! Like so many who are in truth insecure with their own belief."

---What would One get if they were truly "secure" in their own belief? Could someone explain what security, there is, in one's own secured belief system?

[shin]

"What would One get if they were truly "secure" in their own belief? Could someone explain what security, there is, in one's own secured belief system?"

It's one’s own interpretation...I could be secure in my job {because of money & longevity}, my family {because my wife & kids love me}, my social standing {because I am respected} etc etc. To others this is no sign of security......for me it is purely how I feel with my surroundings, physical and mental, which includes my belief. I think it comes back to the satisfaction of an intellect a god given intellect. An intellect which we are not allowed to use....discussed here on many occasions.

But the problem with Religions, Cults and so on, they are based on Faith.

As an example:
I can go and start a religion in India today, with a little effort.
About 6 months ago there was a television programme about a well known comedian based in the UK who went around India experiencing different facets of India and life therein. On one of the shows he went to a village with a local Magician, who told the presenter ‘these people are so desperate to believe in a saviour anyone can start a religion’.
To prove this point he gathered a crowd of 10-15 people and entertained them with a couple of slight of hand 'Magic' tricks.......they were in Awe to say the least and suddenly the world becomes your oyster.
They are so desperate to follow {due to their plight in this world!}, you will soon become a saint.
Throw in a few wise words coupled with knowledge of the Ancient wisdom of Egypt, South America, China and of course India {Vedas etc} and hey presto you are a saint!

The RS Masters have always said 'the simple hill people of India 'go in' easily as they do not question!! In truth it is easy to Manipulate and use such Innocence.

They feel truly secure, not because they are but because they are told they are........

[Roger]

Sounds like One could actually have more security, if they are mentally "insecure" with their belief system. So which is better: Secure or insecure.

[shin]

Not me to answer.....as I said it is your own interpretation.

They may feel secure in an insecure reality....but that's all it is.
To coin a phrase from the RS teachings: 'building on a foundation on Sand' and therefore one of impermanence.

This world is designed by those who require control and all these 'faiths and institutions’; including governments fulfil their very real agenda that being one of control.

I truly believe in this control agenda and until the 'sheep' realise this the status quo will remain and these chains will not be broken.

Why after years of struggle to find the truth would you take off your old shackles only for them to be replaced by shiny new ones!

[Prakash]

As you say, Shin, I should not be here. A friend asked me to come and tell everyone about my experiences, as I cannot easily not talk about them, i want to tell everyone, its like you experience something wonderful and first you are amazed that others are not seeing, then you want to tell everyone, so my friend suggested I come here. But, I now do not want to tell anyone, I want to keep the secret to myself, I dont care what you call me, what names you say I am , if you think me a fake, I do not care, I have my inner world, that is all that matters, and being sad about others who are blind is like someone hitting you when you offer to help because of compassion.
Bye blog

[tAo]

Prakash,
You have no business saying that others are "blind", and no one is in need of your "help" or "compassion". You are the one who came on your own and said that you wanted to share your experiences. No one here made you do that. Eveyone welcomed you to share your experiences. But now you play the game of saying that now you don't want to share anymore because other people are "blind". But no one here is blind. Because you now turn around and refuse to share your experiences, it is clear that you were playing a 'bait & switch' game all along. The phony bait & switch game is a common and typical one used by internet trolls. If you had been sincere, you would have gone ahead and shared your experiences. But instead, your offer to share your experiences was merely the 'bait', and now you 'switch' to refusing, claiming it is because you don't feel welcome... which eveyone knows is totally untrue.

So apparenty you assumed (quite wrongly) that playing a phony 'bait & switch' game was going to get you somewhere and make the skeptics or the exsatsangis look bad. But actually, unfortunately all you have done here is to show us again how disingenuous some satsangis like you really are.

It all boils down to sincerity and honesty. And in the end, you have shown no evidence of either sisncerity or honesty. You came here only to attempt to make this blog look bad. But you have failed. The only way to redeem yourself at this point, is for you to do what you said you came here to do: which is to stop being evasive and playing 'bait & switch', and simply share your own mystical experiences.

[shin]

Prakash,

Firstly I have not called you any names...read the above

Secondly, your opportunity was there and you decided not to take it.

Thirdly, so many come here to criticise and vent their latent feelings.
If you have a problem seek the answer within.....is that not what your Master wants.

Finally no-one is Blind in this world as it is how the Creator wants it. We are the Puppets and he is the Puppeteer....Is this not what the Master says and asks you...To LIVE in his WILL........

Well do it and practice what so many of you preach!......ALAS this seems to be the enduring problem

Good Luck...

I hope your path brings you peace.

[Prakash]

Why accuse me of playing games? tAo, scroll up to my first time I write on here, I am saying I want to write about my experiences and Brian welcomes me very nicely, I thank him and then I read your first message, I read your message just when I am about to write down my experiences. What is it you say to me in your very first writing to me? tAo, you say my experiences are not evidence, and you indicate people want evidence, want proof not someones experiences as lots of people have given their experiences, even you have your experiences, so you warn me that anything I write about my experiences is subjective and not proof.
tAo, this is your first message to me, which is NOT welcoming at all, it is quite the opposite. Scroll up and read your own message, then read mine just before, I had thanked Brian for his nice welcome, and then your message comes, like a bull in a china shop.

So now, because I do not want to write anymore about my experiences after your first message tAo, so now you have made me feel like not writing anymore, now I am being called names and made to be the bad one.

You did not like my analogy of a lens, so you say I am wrong, then later, you say you did not call me wrong, but you can see your own words by looking back on this list.

So, I ask myself, are these the kind of people I want to write about my inner experiences

Surely, you are not surprised that I have now changed my mind.

If anyone is interested, just go and read the first messages I wrote on here, and then the replies of Brian who was welcoming and tAo who was not

[Prakash]

When I first write here, I offer my experiences and Brian welcomes me, but first message from tAo was to tell me lots of people have experiences, he has experiences and whatever I write about my experiences would not be proof.
He also immediately told me I was WRONG about using lens as analogy, but later he said he did not say I was wrong. tAo, just read your own messages.

Brian, I am sorry if I have caused problems, I did not offer any proof, I did not offer any evidence, I simply offered to give my experiences.
tAo told me in his first message to me that this blog wanted proof and evidence, so now, I am not writing, suddenly everyone calls me fraud and s on. Shin tells me to practice what I preach, but I am not preaching, I have no intention to preach, I have too many faults to preach, I simply offered some experiences to write here, and tAo told me I should write proof and evidence.
Then starts another discussion and now I am bad person in everyone eyes.
I do not like this kind of intelligent open talks, I prefer to talk with my friends, who are more simple type of persons

[Robert Paul Howard]

To all:

The individual who calls himself Manjit has provided a very nice set of citations from people (from the Christian tradition) who have shared their inner experiences of mystical content (cf. the August 27, 2009, 3:53 AM comment made above). The individual calling himself Prakash, who "wanted very much to write some things about...[his] inner experiences," has supplied nothing.

I have thus received no information from him.

Robert Paul Howard

[Robert Paul Howard]

To all:

The one who hides behind the phony name "tAo" has stated: "...Manjit's comments were posted as deliberate personal attacks and ridicule. That kind of derogatory commenting and personal ridicule is no longer accepted here" (as on August 27 at 11:22 PM, as cited from above).

This remark amuses me.

While I hope that it is now true, certainly "derogatory commenting and personal ridicule" has for years been a distinguishing mark of this guy's style of responding to others. (Check [what remains of] the history still preserved in the "archive.")

I hope such will, in fact, "no longer [be] accepted here." But the very fact that it was accepted and tolerated by Brian for so long certainly had an influence on many people being very "defensive" in/on their commenting on/at this blog.

Robert Paul Howard

[Roger]

"Why after years of struggle to find the truth would you take off your old shackles only for them to be replaced by shiny new ones!"

---Nothing wrong with something that is shiny and new. However, why the need to struggle, for years, searching for the truth? So, who have found this truth, through many years of struggling? Could I just live and experience life simply, and keep all those shiny new things too?

[Blogger Brian]

Robert, you're probably right -- about people being defensive about commenting because of the "flame wars" that would erupt on this blog of the "you're one!" "no, YOU"RE one!" mindless variety.

So I've become much less accepting of that sort of stuff. I've evolved.

I haven't become prudish about commenting. And I'd like to stop the "comment moderation" requirement. If the trolls and spammers lay off, I will give open commenting a try again.

Strong language is fine. It just needs to be directed at making a point, not at a person.

[tucson]

Prakash,

Please don't worry about tAo's style. That's just his way. Don't be offended. I'm sure he would be interested in hearing about your spiritual experiences. He has said so. I know many of us here would be interested. However, please keep in mind that you will probably get a lot of questions and some criticism as that is the nature of blogs. You don't need to take it personally. Just write what you feel and don't let scepticism and criticism trouble you. As long as you are honest and sincere about what you write, who cares what others think? Some may even appreciate it and your efforts will be worthwhile. Give it a shot.

Warning and suggestion: Avoid Sant Mat dogma and teachings. Just write what you have personally experienced first hand.

[tAo]

HERE IS THE RECORD OF THE INITIAL TWO COMMENTS POSTED BY PRAKASH:

The following comment was...
Posted by: Prakash | August 26, 2009 at 12:40 PM

Greetings
I am speaking about my inner experiences, and though I supposed not to, I want to share what I have experienced since being on RSSB path.
Does anyone want me to write about what I have seen and heard with my own inner eyes?

--AND--

The following comment was...
Posted by: Prajash | August 26, 2009 at 12:58 PM :

Brian, thank you, I very much want to tell people on this blog that only little effort and we can all see evidence. Like looking though telescope, others must look through lens to see, otherwise they are free to say they do not believe, but what they really are saying is that they do not want to look.
So I will speak only true experiences

--------------------------------------------

AND HERE (see below) IS THE RECORD OF tAo's VERY FIRST COMMENT IN RESPONSE TO PRAKASH:

Please Note: There is nothing in my initial comment to Prakash (see below) that shows any indication that I was "NOT welcoming at all". [Please pay special attention to where I ended my initial comment to Prakash by clearly extending a welcome to him. I said, quote: "As far as sharing and telling about your experiences, as Brian said, please feel free to share anything you like."]

The following comment was...
Posted by: tAo | August 26, 2009 at 04:18 PM

Prajash (or Prakash?), you have said:

"I very much want to tell people on this blog that only little effort and we can all see evidence."

-- Thats fine, but simply 'seeing' is not the same as evidence. Many people (myself included) have seen various things in meditation, but that is not [actual substantial] "evidence"... it is merely [and only] subjective sensory perceptions. Also, each person has different experiences, so just because you "see" or experience something in meditation, does not mean that others "see" or experience the same thing. And no matter what you may "see" or experience subjectively, that is not the kind of objective evidence which can be presented as proof. Are you aware of this difference?

"others must look through lens to see, otherwise they are free to say they do not believe, but what they really are saying is that they do not want to look."

-- Now that is definitely not correct. Some people do not believe, but that does not mean that "they do not want to look". They have looked [meditated]. If what you mean by "look" is to meditate... well then many people have [actually] 'looked' quite a lot. So right off the bat, you have made an unfounded assertion where you say that other people - people who "do not believe" -[you say] that "they do not want to look". And that is simply not true. Many people who "do not believe" have most assuredly done a lot of meditation [they have wanted to look]... so they have 'looked'. For you to claim that they "do not want to look", is clearly wrong.

So do you understand that your assumption [that other people "do not want to look"] is incorrect?

As far as sharing and telling about your experiences, as Brian said, please feel free to share anything you like.

Posted by: tAo | August 26, 2009 at 04:18 PM

SO THEREFORE, THE RECORD CLEARLY SHOWS NO SUCH EVIDENCE OF ANY (SUPPOSED) UN-WELCOMING ATTITUDE ON MY PART, IN MY INITIAL COMMENT TO PRAKASH.

[shin]

Roger,

Old Shackles = chains
New Shackles = chains

If you still want to be tied to a Chain, shiny or not,feel free!

Prakash,

Why are you so concerned about what tAo or others say?
You claim you travel within.....therefore these words should not affect you in the slightest....'sticks & stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me'!
Either you have gone in or it's just an elaborate ruse.
If you have something REAL to tell us, then feel free....and no Sant Mat Dogma or Teachings, as tusocn has stated, as we will always see through these.
Otherwise please stop with your attempted mind games as this has dragged on long enough.

[Roger]

"If you still want to be tied to a Chain, shiny or not,feel free!"

---How does One get tied to a Chain? I may need training on being tied to a chain. Could someone help me with this?

In the mean time, I still like those new shiney things.

[tAo]

Roger, in your case, since your in Texas, I think you may need to be ROPED rather than chained.

[Roger]

Tao,

Thanks for the clarification. However, this shackling with ropes or chains needs to be properly planted in my Mind. How could I suffer in the correct amount, in the absense of training or orientation?

With that said, I still like those new and shiney things. Please send some, asap.