Comments on Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributesTypePad2017-05-13T22:41:00ZBrian Hineshttps://hinessight.blogs.com/church_of_the_churchless/tag:typepad.com,2003:https://hinessight.blogs.com/church_of_the_churchless/2017/05/gurinder-singh-the-one-is-the-goal-god-without-attributes/comments/atom.xml/Heloise commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c942b8ba970b2018-01-05T21:11:02Z2018-01-06T02:32:14ZHeloiseHi Jim Love reading your comments. I forgot that we had a shared admin with that group. I only happened...<p>Hi Jim <br />
Love reading your comments. I forgot that we had a shared admin with that group. I only happened to read where MM died as I had stopped reading on Lane's group. I really think he used alter egos to post and raise hell. </p>
<p>No way was he silent but he didn't moderate that's true. I got chased away and I think the vile directed at MM sorta contributed to his early demise. I stopped posting there because the criticism directed at me was over the top and was affecting my health. </p>
<p>Cheers<br />
Netemara </p>Jen commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d2cb5d67970c2017-12-31T06:26:05Z2017-12-31T06:26:05ZJenThanks Spencer for your reply and its okay, we are all different. I'm not into religion and even Sant Mat...<p>Thanks Spencer for your reply and its okay, we are all different. I'm not into religion and even Sant Mat is too religious for my liking.<br />
<br />
I like the mystical path and enjoy reading literature like Dances with Wolves (loved the movie) and Carlos Castaneda books. This is my kind of spirituality, a kind of connectedness with the spirit of mother earth, nature and animals and also the Cosmos. More about energy and feelings than the mind. Life is a dance. Maybe I'm more of a pagan than anything else.</p>
<p> I just looked up pagan and really like and agree with this "Pagans pursue their own vision of the Divine as a direct and personal experience." Also "The Goddess: Pagan religions all recognise the feminine face of divinity".</p>
<p>Maybe I had a previous life as a pagan and was crucified by religious fanatics. Would explain my dislike of Christianity.</p>
<p>Castaneda quote.: “The dying sun will glow on you without burning, as it has done today. The wind will be soft and mellow and your hilltop will tremble. As you reach the end of your dance you will look at the sun, for you will never see it again in waking or in dreaming, and then your death will point to the south. To the vastness.” <br />
</p>Spencer Tepper commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09e4319e970d2017-12-31T02:52:59Z2017-12-31T04:08:24ZSpencer TepperHi Jen You wrote "Sorry guys, (Jim and Spencer) I just switch off when I see Jesus this, Bible that....<p>Hi Jen</p>
<p>You wrote</p>
<p>"Sorry guys, (Jim and Spencer) I just switch off when I see Jesus this, Bible that. I seem to have an aversion to Christianity and I still cannot understand how you both are still stuck in this religious paradigm."</p>
<p>The reason is mystical. Some of the biblical writings and those of the early Church Fathers appeal to me as beautiful references to my own internal experiences. Maharaj said we are all following Christ, and I can see that for myself. I follow Christ. That's really who Maharaji and Baba Ji are. </p>
<p>When I read something I've witnessed, I love that. It's sacred. But obviously this is completely dependent on one's own experience and place of understanding. </p>
<p>For example, song of songs is the allegory of Christ, but in that book Christ is a woman! Yet she and the man come back together marry over and over, raising her beloved time and again into spirit, and he mourning her death over and over, four separate times. Finally, in the last chapter, she returns as a child and calls for her beloved to return home once and for all.</p>
<p>Personal experience reveals a meaning that is right on the written page, but entirely invisible to others with no associations. And it is stunning. </p>
<p>Hopefully this helps answer your question. </p>Jen commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c9410296970b2017-12-30T22:10:20Z2017-12-31T04:08:24ZJenSorry guys, (Jim and Spencer) I just switch off when I see Jesus this, Bible that. I seem to have...<p>Sorry guys, (Jim and Spencer) I just switch off when I see Jesus this, Bible that. I seem to have an aversion to Christianity and I still cannot understand how you both are still stuck in this religious paradigm. You also seem to have a religious attitude towards Sant Mat, which I never had. For me it was a path to follow to discover the truth of who I am, why am I here, what is this weird world because I don’t feel I belong here, and what happens after death. </p>
<p>I’ve released the belief in the necessity of following a guru because like I say, this is giving away one’s personal power to another, and quite frankly I am not impressed by either Charan or Gurinder. </p>
<p>Spencer you say: "Desire to live in greater happiness. When you become aware of it, it is natural to desire it. If you find you came from there, and it's your actual home, then you want to go there. Soul is always in this state. The urge is always there, hidden deep in the subconscious.”</p>
<p>Well brother, this has always been my strongest desire and search since I was young and my soul is always in this state of longing to go home, not only deep in my subconscious but fully in my conscious self awareness. This is my life. The only thing I don’t agree with in your comment is to “live in greater happiness”. Happiness is not my goal. Happiness seems to me to be too superficial and I want more than that. I am aiming high :)</p>
<p>Hi Jim, just wanted to say that I love Robert Monroe’s books and really enjoyed reading about your OBE experiences that you recently posted.</p>Jim Sutherland commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c940f100970b2017-12-30T16:23:31Z2017-12-31T04:08:24ZJim Sutherlandhttp://eternaloasisofsouls.blogspot.comTo Neon,.....maybe your only biased against Sant Mat Philosophy? If you have a preference for Scientific experimentation of life after...<p>To Neon,.....maybe your only biased against Sant Mat Philosophy?</p>
<p>If you have a preference for Scientific experimentation of life after death, or Out of Body Soul Travel, you might take a look at Robert Manroe’s books and research. </p>
<p>Then, if your mind is still closed, than I’ll just write you off as a Troll Skeptic. </p>
<p>Here is a book, ( you might even find it free, as a pdf, if you search ) , written by one of Bob Monroe’s early Consciousness Explorers, that records her actual Scientific Tests during the many times she was taken out of nody in One of Monroe’s Text Chambers using his patented “ Hemi Snync “ Sound Recordings. </p>
<p>Check out the Table of Contents in the Book, and read the Customer Reviews. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00F7SJ3VM/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1#customerReviews" rel="nofollow">https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00F7SJ3VM/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1#customerReviews</a></p>
<p>Jim Sutherland</p>Spencer Tepper commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09e40f8f970d2017-12-30T14:49:23Z2017-12-31T04:08:24ZSpencer TepperHi Neon You wrote "How can you people talk like this is all fact? That you know what happens after...<p>Hi Neon</p>
<p>You wrote<br />
"How can you people talk like this is all fact? That you know what happens after death?"</p>
<p>Actually, reading the comments above you see a range of opinions on this subject. </p>
<p>Anyone who speaks of something as fact can only be speaking of their experience and what they have concluded from that experience. </p>
<p>What happens after death is of interest to many people. That interest takes them into investigation, with varying results. </p>
<p>It comes down to making your own conclusions. But that also depends upon the depth and sincerity of your investigation. </p>
<p>When Brian writes that his experiences over decades of meditation is that nothing he experienced is evidence of the events after death, he is sincere. </p>
<p>When mystics write of their experience of spirit, the creation and God through their work of prayer and meditation, they are sincere. </p>
<p>Then, the matter of what to believe becomes a personal matter. If it's very important to you, you investigate, you test, you try, and like a good scientist, if you believe your hypothesis is correct, you keep testing until you have your proof. Or you conclude nothing is there. </p>
<p>In all cases it becomes a personal statement about who you really are. </p>
<p>In the process you find that out. </p>Neon commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09e40099970d2017-12-30T08:26:20Z2017-12-31T04:08:24ZNeonHow can you people talk like this is all fact? That you know what happens after death?<p>How can you people talk like this is all fact? That you know what happens after death?</p>Spencer Tepper commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09e3f302970d2017-12-30T01:59:49Z2017-12-31T04:08:25ZSpencer TepperHi Jen : Good questions. You wrote "My question is why this urgent quest to find Sach Khand and live...<p>Hi Jen :<br />
Good questions. </p>
<p>You wrote</p>
<p>"My question is why this urgent quest to find Sach Khand and live in a realm governed by Sat Purush, a so called God. I don't particularly want to merge into another God's realm, it may be another trap just like this realm we are in now. Just how many Gods are there!</p>
<p>Also, why are people so willing to hand over their own spiritual power to another.</p>
<p>I came upon this marvellous quote when I looked up Epicurus who was mentioned in another thread.</p>
<p>"It is folly for a man to pray to the gods for that which he has the power to obtain by himself" Epicurus"</p>
<p>Here's my take on your questions. </p>
<p>1. Desire to live in greater happiness. When you become aware of it, it is natural to desire it. If you find you came from there, and it's your actual home, then you want to go there. Soul is always in this state. The urge is always there, hidden deep in the subconscious. Meditation layer by layer exposes what is already there. Including the fact that you are there now and this is just a nightmare... The dream you know you are stuck in because you know you are dreaming. Generally, that is the dream you happy to leave or. But worse still the nightmare you think is real, until it's over. It is natural to leave poverty when you realize you have an amazing inheritance. </p>
<p>2. When you realize you are enslaved by the past and that is your master, naturally you ask the same question, why submit to another authority? Even the authority of blind addiction and conditioning, and all the masters that conditioning forces you to submit to. Then you see that the person liberating you, first by giving you the tools to see your own state, is in fact your liberator. </p>Jim Sutherland commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c940cb3c970b2017-12-29T23:50:25Z2017-12-31T04:08:25ZJim Sutherlandhttp://eternaloasisofsouls.blogspot.comJen writes,...”I don't particularly want to merge into another God's realm,” Me: According to the Bible, Jesus, the Living Master...<p>Jen writes,...”I don't particularly want to merge into another God's realm,”</p>
<p>Me: According to the Bible, Jesus, the Living Master of his time, ( for the Hebrews marked for him ) took human form to initiate those marked souls, then he quickly departed, and according to the Book of Hebrews, he “ sits at the rght hand of the Father, as their High Priest, interceding for those he initiated. ) </p>
<p>So, Jesus, never merged, in to his Father. He intercedes for those he initiated, as all Living Masters do for those they initiate, including Charan for us!</p>
<p>Jesus was the Allegory, that Seekers may take as an example of how ALL Seeker souls, may become liberated SPIRITs, and when they die, leaving their physical bodies, may either stay with The Father, as Spirit, or, voluntarily choose to return as another reincarnated soul, taking on a new human body, to become a Livng Master, to initiate unenlightned, marked souls, still in body prisons and slaves of the lower god of this world, i.e. Jehovah, Brahma, Satan,...etc. </p>
<p>Jesus was just another example of the age old Allegory, as the book “ “ Sixteen Crucified Saviours” explains. Of course, that is only one of thousands of other books in recorded history that tries to record both, Esoteric Allegories, for the Seekers, and the historical stories, to fool and keep the slaves in material creation.</p>
<p>Once a soul is set free, and the SPIRIT rules, than, enlightened humans in bodies, may experience life on earth, ( which is a monsterous hell) , but may enter and leave the material and Spiritual realms thru the resolving door of the Third Eye, or the “ Tenth Gate” , as we are taught by the Master in Sant Mat. ( while we are experiencing thru human bodies )</p>
<p>When we die, and discard these physical bodies, then we may be offered the choice to stay with The Father, or return here to help marked souls escape this hell. </p>
<p>Jim Sutherland</p>Jen commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c940c3d2970b2017-12-29T21:34:59Z2017-12-31T04:08:25ZJenThe four principles of Sant Mat teach us how to live a moral and spiritual life imo. My question is...<p>The four principles of Sant Mat teach us how to live a moral and spiritual life imo. My question is why this urgent quest to find Sach Khand and live in a realm governed by Sat Purush, a so called God. I don't particularly want to merge into another God's realm, it may be another trap just like this realm we are in now. Just how many Gods are there! </p>
<p>Also, why are people so willing to hand over their own spiritual power to another. </p>
<p>I came upon this marvellous quote when I looked up Epicurus who was mentioned in another thread.</p>
<p>"It is folly for a man to pray to the gods for that which he has the power to obtain by himself" Epicurus<br />
</p>Jim Sutherland commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d2caec46970c2017-12-29T13:53:53Z2017-12-31T04:08:25ZJim Sutherlandhttp://eternaloasisofsouls.blogspot.comMaster in disguise? dem·i·urge ˈdemēˌərj/Submit noun a being responsible for the creation of the universe, in particular. (in Platonic philosophy)...<p>Master in disguise?</p>
<p>dem·i·urge<br />
ˈdemēˌərj/Submit<br />
noun<br />
a being responsible for the creation of the universe, in particular.<br />
(in Platonic philosophy) the Maker or Creator of the world.</p>
<p>(in Gnosticism and other theological systems) a heavenly being, subordinate to the Supreme Being, that is considered to be the controller of the material world and antagonistic to all that is purely spiritual.</p>
<p>So,.....WHO is RADHASOAMI,,.....i.e. “Lord of The Soul”?</p>
<p>So, WHO is SAT NAM, the Ruler of Sach Khand?</p>
<p>Only SPIRIT is Eternal, uncreated, Timeless, and Supreme. </p>
<p>Does Gurinder Singh, Ishwar Puri, Rajinder Singh have the Keys to Eternal SPIRIT?</p>
<p>If so, what is the Mantra, or Pass Word to enter the Eternal SPIRIT’s Kingdom Within?</p>
<p>Jim Sutherland</p>Jim Sutherland commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d2cae558970c2017-12-29T11:33:02Z2017-12-31T04:08:25ZJim Sutherlandhttp://eternaloasisofsouls.blogspot.comThe Bible teaches Seekers to “Tithe.” There are 24 hours in each day, so the Tithe is 2.4 hours of...<p>The Bible teaches Seekers to “Tithe.” There are 24 hours in each day, so the Tithe is 2.4 hours of our time, seeking the Lord in Meditation. </p>
<p>The Bible teaches Seekers to “ Test” the Lord, by Tithing, and not to rob him. If we Tithe, He will “ Open The Windows of Heaven. “Malachi 3: 8,9,10</p>
<p>SPIRIT is Anti- Matter,...i.e. dispises all matter, because matter seduces SPIRIT and incarcerates IT in prison bodies.</p>
<p>Soul is Matter, that incarnates SPIRIT, and drags SPIRIT to Charausi, i.e. The Wheel of 84 to be Co-Creators of Maya, , i.e. Creation.</p>
<p>The Key to Open the Prison Gate of Maya to release SPIRIT from the clutches of the Prison Warden, i.e. Soul, is Meditation .</p>
<p>Solving the Mystery is wakng up to find out WHO the Creator is, and if we, as Seekers, wish to remain Co- creators with the Creatoir,....or, </p>
<p>Abandon Creation by Mediation to return to SPIRIT, the Champion of Anti- Matter, i.e. Creation. </p>
<p>Enlightend Sant Matters are actually Gnostics. </p>
<p>Jim Sutherland</p>Karim W. Rahmaan commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09e3b878970d2017-12-29T05:38:50Z2017-12-31T04:08:25ZKarim W. Rahmaan777, I sent you an email. Onward, in respects to the poster of this blog I'll try to stay on...<p>777,</p>
<p>I sent you an email.</p>
<p>Onward, in respects to the poster of this blog I'll try to stay on subject. And to the subject of nirgun:</p>
<p>I make a wish that all satsangis continue with the bare minimum or more than 2 1/2 hours naam meditation to reach the 'goal'. Also, that exers may one day return to naam reaching the same 'goal' and any new sincere seeker ultimately attain this same 'goal'.</p>
<p>Radha Soami</p> 777 commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09e33cf4970d2017-12-27T15:45:03Z2017-12-27T21:40:32Z 777Hi karim First is for sure that I'm a complete zero at the points of obeing and achiving But as...<p>Hi karim</p>
<p>First is for sure that I'm a complete zero at the points of obeing and achiving<br />
But as for experiences: I got them al for free</p>
<p>That combi however makes it possible to tell some of them<br />
which include the nirgun stuff<br />
As for books and the book you mentioned is from Agra , ( i will order ) , Yes I hv them all,<br />
but I'm allways so curious of HOW Mystics explain</p>
<p>My own experience which is a kind of 24/7 state has peaks and valleys<br />
has a solid basement which are the 5 words<br />
The almost first time I did RSSB meditation I entered with the help of the Sound in a fantastic place Charan being my Guide<br />
It's not possible to describe further but it surpassed all literature on this subject </p>
<p>Also Charan was/is not alone <br />
His Master Sawan, Jaimal, , and Jagat too, ( a master that I didn't much appreciated before , -so strict, so above my pay-grade- , Ok many many Masters were/are there, and Seth Shiv, and Tulsi <br />
ALL DIVINE but ALL very their own characters</p>
<p>and the Sound then ( sometimes ) swells to an extatic point , so far that<br />
if Charan didn't temper it , I would really physically die from happiness</p>
<p>So, I don't really need the books, but I search for language that can explain because I cannot</p>
<p>Many many many RSSB Satsangis before all this happens are thrilled by the creations<br />
they come to see at sides and below<br />
but I got my way, my Master, My Sound<br />
and<br />
when it first happened I wrote a recommended letter to Charan<br />
explaining it, with my probably stupid remark<br />
"Now I have YOU, . . I don't need God anymore !"<br />
I asked not to answer me</p>
<p>The great lesson I took is that the individual Soul will never parish</p>
<p>That in the same way we can't understand "no time" and "everlasting"<br />
we just can't grep how ONENESS combines with INDIVIDUALITY</p>
<p>Although I know, I saw/see : books are often interesting and inspiring</p>
<p>Also when the Almighty constantly collects Zillions of such Saints<br />
and disciples<br />
adding to HIS LOVE<br />
How could S/HE be a stable non dynamic thing</p>
<p>No, S/HE is more like a roaring big bang of which his Powers make zillions per second</p>
<p>Great is our Sound>Light processus, one of xillions of of His/Her Methods to accumulate Love<br />
The Adi Granth describes it so very well</p>
<p>777<br />
</p> 777 commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d2ca7a32970c2017-12-27T15:38:14Z2017-12-27T21:40:32Z 777Hi Karim Could u mail me your email address to my 7.77@mail.com just to annoy Brian not to much with...<p>Hi Karim</p>
<p>Could u mail me your email address to my 7.77@mail.com<br />
just to annoy Brian not to much with lots of "@religious@" stuff all here </p>Karim W. Rahmaan commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c94016c5970b2017-12-27T07:10:38Z2017-12-27T21:40:32ZKarim W. Rahmaan:Quoting 777: "I like to order that book" The question I asked Baba Ji was on how one once initiated,...<p>:Quoting 777:</p>
<p>"I like to order that book"</p>
<p>The question I asked Baba Ji was on how one once initiated, would know they've reached, or come closer to nirgun or "the goal".</p>
<p>Soami Ji's Sar Bachan Prose:<br />
<a href="http://www.scienceofthesoul.org/product_p/en-036-0.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.scienceofthesoul.org/product_p/en-036-0.htm</a></p>
<p>It has a chapter on weighing one's inner progress. I can't remember the exact pages, but being a shorter less lengthy book -I can remember that it said we would know we were advancing spiritually by a change in our actions, more tolerance to bad situations, kindness to others beings and creatures in the creation, and among other things; a growing love for our fellow human brethren.</p>
<p>All your posts on this here blog 777, show that you may just be finishing up the nirgun as we speak!</p>Jim Sutherland commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09e31c34970d2017-12-27T00:50:12Z2017-12-27T04:52:33ZJim Sutherlandhttp://eternaloasisofsouls.blogspot.comThis is the Link to the free Soami Bagh Sant Mat Books. It takes a little experimentation maneuvering how to...<p>This is the Link to the free Soami Bagh Sant Mat Books. It takes a little experimentation maneuvering how to down lad the different books, but mst f them are there.</p>
<p> <a href="http://radhasoamifaith.org/EnglishBooks" rel="nofollow">http://radhasoamifaith.org/EnglishBooks</a></p>
<p>Jim Sutherland</p>Jim Sutherland commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c9400a91970b2017-12-27T00:46:18Z2017-12-27T04:52:33ZJim Sutherlandhttp://eternaloasisofsouls.blogspot.com777, have you, in all of your RSSB years of study, every read the Soami Bagh books? If not, any...<p>777, have you, in all of your RSSB years of study, every read the Soami Bagh books? If not, any one neglecting to read these books misses actual history of RSSB, Ruhani, and other Sant Mat splits from the original Agra Parent group. </p>
<p>I have every book published in English, which I bought 25 years ago from India. The best History lessons, at least, how Sant Mat developed in the U.S. is the 5 Volume Set of “ Correspondence With Certain Americans.” Each Volume contains about 500 pages plus, and is actual correspondence between Americans and U.K. Satsangis with Sant Das that converted from RSSB, and Ruhani to Swami Bagh. These books are where Mike awilliams obtained most of his information he has on his site. I read these books several times, and have been reading thru the 5 Volume set again. I am half way thru Vol. 3 again. </p>
<p>Interesting stuff to read, but reading it all again reinforces why I never was drawn to the Agra Parent group, in spite of Sant Mat starting there. </p>
<p>If you have not read the 5 Vol. Set, you should try to do so, before you leave your body this time. The books used to be free in pdfs on line. Not sure if they are still available. they are “Treasures beyond measure”</p>
<p>Other Seekers still on the fence, or hooked to Charan’s Bulldozer Chsin should read these books as well. </p>
<p><br />
Jim Sutherland</p> 777 commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09e31a5c970d2017-12-26T23:58:06Z2017-12-27T04:52:33Z 777About as heavy as the Shri Guru Granth Sahib itself. And the only source I read that made any rational...<p>About as heavy as the Shri Guru Granth Sahib itself. And the only source I read that made any rational sense to me was from a book published by RSSB only.</p>
<p>I like to order that book<br />
I like very much the book from Lekh Puri, . . </p>
<p>7</p>
<p>But to soon probably for me because as opposed to many many<br />
I will be born again </p>Karim W. Rahmaan commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d2ca22b5970c2017-12-25T23:31:04Z2017-12-26T02:26:57ZKarim W. Rahmaan:Quoting 777: "At 81 of course I m going to die soon, but I take my parners with me" This...<p>:Quoting 777:</p>
<p>"At 81 of course I m going to die soon,<br />
but I take my parners with me"</p>
<p>This sargun and nirgun is heavy stuff.</p>
<p>About as heavy as the Shri Guru Granth Sahib itself. And the only source I read that made any rational sense to me was from a book published by RSSB only.</p>
<p>I once asked Baba Ji a question like this sargun/nirgun theorm, and he basically told me something that was said not only by Guru Nanak but also the old Baba Ji (Baba Jaimal Singh Ji). Thus, back to my reading and my studies -bub.</p> 777 commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c93fc67f970b2017-12-25T18:35:05Z2017-12-26T02:26:57Z 777Partners >> nice chance to add a Capital Partners apart from HIM (S) , The Sound, and the Words, are...<p>Partners >> nice chance to add a Capital</p>
<p>Partners apart from HIM (S) , The Sound, and the Words,<br />
are also the Guys and Dolls adventuring the same Joy</p>
<p><br />
Vive RSSB<br />
and its Masters , so delicious for manmuks.</p>
<p>Again : When the Ocean comes to You as a Lover, . . don't hesitate<br />
be Quick, marry Him</p>
<p>No other other experience can be greater than This</p>
<p>The King's Falcon, FOR NO REASON has landed on your shoulder<br />
and became yours</p>
<p>(Rumi)</p>
<p> </p> 777 commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d2ca1a67970c2017-12-25T18:28:02Z2017-12-26T02:26:57Z 777At 81 of course I m going to die soon, but I take my parners with me Strange then to...<p>At 81 of course I m going to die soon,<br />
but I take my parners with me</p>
<p>Strange then to dance the Tango with no body<br />
Must accomodate to that</p>
<p>77</p>
<p>-</p> 777 commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c93fc601970b2017-12-25T18:24:14Z2017-12-26T02:26:57Z 777- - My take on this RSSB Path, Karim is like a beautiful woman you love so much; and She...<p>-</p>
<p>-<br />
My take on this RSSB Path, Karim<br />
is<br />
like a beautiful woman<br />
you love so much;<br />
and She is kissing you the whole day<br />
..... and tomorrow MORE</p>
<p><br />
777</p>
<p>But I must say<br />
it makes me somewhat anti - advaita</p>
<p>Who would desire a changement to my situation ?<br />
I need 2 to dance the Tango !</p>
<p>-</p>
<p></p>
<p><br />
</p>Karim W. Rahmaan commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09e2c8f1970d2017-12-25T04:05:16Z2017-12-25T18:09:21ZKarim W. Rahmaan:Quoting 777: "If we have something to say, we just search for the right associatin chapter" --- Well put 777....<p>:Quoting 777:</p>
<p>"If we have something to say, we just search for the right associatin chapter"</p>
<p>---<br />
Well put 777.</p>
<p>Here in this post specifically, Osho asked one of the RSSB teachers about sargun/nirgun.</p>
<p>And was given the known answer.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Sargun" rel="nofollow">http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Sargun</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Nirgun" rel="nofollow">http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Nirgun</a></p> 777 commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d2c9f206970c2017-12-24T19:18:33Z2017-12-25T01:11:38Z 777Njice, . . Brians rules If we have something to say, we just search for the right associatin chapter<p>Njice, . . Brians rules</p>
<p>If we have something to say, we just search for the right associatin chapter<br />
</p> 777 commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c93f9bb8970b2017-12-24T19:16:01Z2017-12-25T01:11:38Z 777Beautifully explained Sandeep. Wow That way HE lets us dip occasionally of a higher sweetness than where we already are...<p></p>
<p>Beautifully explained Sandeep.<br />
Wow</p>
<p>That way HE lets us dip occasionally<br />
of a higher sweetness than where we already are</p>
<p>Even applies to a manmukh who can profit as well , if just trusting HIM<br />
I will not even say<br />
"If you love HIM" because that is a whole new ballgame</p>
<p>It's really a great Path for spiritual morons who can only repeat, , ... people like me<br />
It's almost automatic</p>
<p>777</p>Spencer Tepper commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d2c9bd36970c2017-12-23T18:05:44Z2017-12-24T01:58:43ZSpencer TepperHi Richard Beautiful sentiments. I am also a Satsangi. However, it seems to me that there is a great truth...<p>Hi Richard</p>
<p>Beautiful sentiments. <br />
I am also a Satsangi. <br />
However, it seems to me that there is a great truth in acknowledging the experience and thinking of some of these folks, even our Atheist brothers and sisters. They are doing their best to reject falsehood. </p>
<p>We are taught many things by our Master and yet, we must turn to Him for guidance throughout the day, and moment by moment right action can take its own turn. </p>
<p>There is no rule by which we can judge anyone else. If I have learned one rule of love from my Master, Maharaj Charan Singh, it is that. </p>
<p>How do we know the script written by God Himself for each of these? Their drama, and our role? </p>
<p>If there are no failures in Sant Mat that must include the difficult days, even the years in darkness. It must include Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Atheism, Sufiism. If it is all our Karma, can we judge anyone else? One light, many windows. </p>
<p>But I take your comments in the sentiment of helpfulness you have provided it. </p>
<p>The path is the same. </p>
<p>The audible Spirit that runs through your veins, surges also through mine, and each of these here. </p>
<p>And we are each trying to honor that Life in us, that binds is together, each at our own level of development. </p>
<p>The Sant Mat book that honors this is worthy of reading. I hope you will write it. I will happily read it. </p>Richard Foulkes Jnr commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09e25672970d2017-12-22T23:07:30Z2017-12-23T01:16:52ZRichard Foulkes JnrRadha Soami ji its always good to read felow initiates,seekers of sound and light,people who have asked for naam. meditation...<p>Radha Soami ji</p>
<p>its always good to read felow initiates,seekers of sound and light,people who have asked for naam.<br />
meditation on shabd is a daily if not 24/7 exercise and is totally personal, between the master and devotee.<br />
Before initiation we are encouraged to make a thorough study of Sant Mat.<br />
There are many books at satsang and many online see www.rssb.org or info@scienceofthesoul.org<br />
Meditation is the supreme moment when we let go of the material world,do our simran,bhajan and allow the shabd within us to permeate.Any problems with our spiritual exercises we are encouraged to write to<br />
Baba ji<br />
RSSB<br />
143204<br />
Punjab<br />
INDIA<br />
For clarification and advice,we shoudnt share our internal experiences, these are for us and we lose the "bliss of the kiss" an intimate time between lover and beloved. If we read the poetry and books written by the saints,Soami Jii,Kabir,Patu,Sarmad or recent books by Sawan Singh,Jagat Singh,Charan Singh.Gurinder Singh we will appreciate the truth, each master had to do the exercises and progress through persona effort and hardwork.<br />
Reading online gripes by former devotees ony reinforces the blind leading the blind mentaiity.<br />
its like a whole lot of people pissed off with the lecturer because they failed a paper,you know blame the coach not the players actions.<br />
reading Seekers Notes published by RSSB 2015 there are 40 pages designed to inform the seeker what they are in for, for life.Charan Singhs initiation notes were about 5 pages long,emphasis on DOING the simran,bhajan,attending to daily meditation for 2 and a half hours meditation a day,reading sant mat books, 100% living the lifestyle,following the four vows implicitly.<br />
It is like going to University of The Soul. Anyone can dropout of a degree course and diss the University, it takes real guts to steer the mind away from negativity,which is its default position.<br />
My advice to anyone on this sant mat path is TO GIVE IT HEAPS sit,sit,sit write to Baba ji ask him for help. Ive been following Charan Singh since a boy and was initiated in 1982,wrote to dera in 1970,am currently working on a Sant mat book Baba ji asked me directy in the Shamiana at dera to write in 2003, on Polynesian Saints and pre European Spirituality in the Pacific. Baba Ji said there have been many masters in this region and will always be,again in 2007 he told us "You are all masters in your own right" In 2011,2016 in the new meeting room in Hostel 6 when asked How long does it take to reach Sach Khand he smiled and clicked his fingers.It is achievable, and we must work hard,have faith i the path,our own efforts and the more we struggle in meditation the more results we get Huzur Maharaj Charan Singh said it takes less than half a second to complete the withdrawal to sach khand.So both Masters have told us the same thing.Al we need to do is DO the work,Just DO IT..sit in meditation with new vigour face the enemy,just repeat the holy names and fight for our sanity.<br />
The very fact this website exists give testimony to the existence of MIND, and how the mind agent of the negative power wil do anything except ,sit quietly in a chair,repeat something and let go.<br />
Professor Bhatnagar used to say ven up to the fourth stage Kal can stil decieve the disciple.Only when we each Maha Sunn and with the utmost faith in the living master who initiated us do we cross to Sach Khand. No meditation is lost,all initiates have the radiant form,the soul within is protected from the negative powers influence provided WE play our part.There is no such thing as FAILURES in Sant Mat says Sawan Singh in Spiritual Gems, failure in bhajan is a sign of success, we know we are missing something, intrinsically beautiful.It is our feeble minds that enable the negatives to win the day.Take it from me Ive been on the pat for 35 years had 3 nerviews with a Param Sant Satguru I have no doubts,about Sant Mat in my 16 trips I KNOW what I love...ps was banned in 2016 hahaha, was coming off lithium and was completely disturbed.Im allowed back in 2018 on new medication now and stable.The re is Love behind the so called punishment from the guru.He only ants us to SIT in THE LAP OF SAT PURUSH, so no wonder there is diffculty in realising the summit,especially when we refuse to climb.So carry on constructively criticising Gurinder Charan they are masters,what are we,students,and will always be students until WE graduate rom the Masters Class.The end to this caravanserai,the awagawan of 8,400,000.00 species ,one of which is human. We initiates have a great wealth awaiting us,something we love someone we want to become,just imagine becoming One with Sawan Singh,Jagat Singh,Charan Singh,Gurinder Singh. what n opportunity realised huh?Radh Soami Ji.the Master is an Ocean of forgiveness,all we have to do is sit the work has already been done, we just sit in a chair,repeat something and Let Go as Baba ji says.<br />
</p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09c7765f970d2017-09-27T01:09:50Z2017-09-27T03:07:15ZOsho RobbinsJim Sutherland Wrote: "After all is said and done, in my opinion, and experience, ......TRUST, FAITH, and SATISFACTION, in the...<p>Jim Sutherland Wrote: </p>
<p>"After all is said and done, in my opinion, and experience, ......TRUST, FAITH, and SATISFACTION, in the Master, how ever understood to be, is the best Path to be in."</p>
<p>Best for who? and how is it best? in what sense?</p>
<p>Trust and faith is not even what sant mat claims is required as it claims that you will experience the truth. Like Kirpal used to say "Seeing is above all"</p>
<p>Although I don't agree with him either.</p>
<p>Seeing is not above all.</p>
<p>These are all beliefs. Sant mat claims that beliefs are not required and you will experience the truth for yourself.</p>
<p>However, when you take a close look at disciples - all you see is a group of people who are lost and looking for answers, hoping their guru will deliver.</p>
<p>Your belief creates your reality, just as in the story I just posted about the prince who did not believe in islands, princesses or God.</p>
<p>Once he saw two of them, he concluded God must also exist.</p>
<p>This is the kind of logic human use and fall in the trap of believing.</p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d29d8195970c2017-08-06T20:07:47Z2017-08-07T03:15:58ZOsho RobbinsI recently came across this when searching for sant mat 2.0 It's a posting by Brian back from Jan 2006...<p>I recently came across this when searching for sant mat 2.0</p>
<p>It's a posting by Brian back from Jan 2006</p>
<p>So 11 years ago, Brian had noticed, from blog comments that something was changing. </p>
<p>this is the posting: </p>
<p><a href="http://hinessight.blogs.com/church_of_the_churchless/2006/01/sant_mat_versio.html" rel="nofollow">http://hinessight.blogs.com/church_of_the_churchless/2006/01/sant_mat_versio.html</a></p>
<p>Brian later posted about 2.0 and 3.0.</p>
<p>The videos I made were much later, and I didn't really distinguish between 2.0 and 3.0</p>
<p>I was just making the distinction that there is an updated version of the Radha Soami Teachings and I called that 2.0 </p>
<p>It's just surprising that so many people can't see that this has happened and secondly they get the idea that I am somehow against all this, when actually I am not. Like Brian, I too see the 2.0 as an improvement and a breath of fresh air.</p>
<p>And just for the record - I did not invent or create the notion of sant mat 2.0.</p>
<p>So no Nobel prizes for me. Brian created the notion a long time ago. My videos were much later (2011).</p>Jim Sutherland commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09aeaf91970d2017-07-13T20:52:48Z2017-07-13T22:23:44ZJim SutherlandAfter all is said and done, in my opinion, and experience, ......TRUST, FAITH, and SATISFACTION, in the Master, how ever...<p>After all is said and done, in my opinion, and experience, ......TRUST, FAITH, and SATISFACTION, in the Master, how ever understood to be, is the best Path to be in.</p>
<p>We can argue who the Master is until Hell freezes over or Heaven is revealed to all, but if we presently are not certain Some ONE or some THING is watching over us, caring for us, protecting us, and that our Fate is not in our own hands, and that any thing we do alone will never satisfy our desires that we know by experience never end, then we will remain unfulfilled,</p>
<p>All of the Scriptures are Tools to aid us in our Journey of the Persuit of happiness as we travel back Home, whether Home be Heaven, Sach Khand, Radhasoami, Animi, One ness, Noneness, or Anyness.</p>
<p>We are here, right now, and the quicker we quit struggling, and just take the Leap of Faith, trusting in a Highter Being than our self to give us exactly what we need, along our Journey, no more, no less, all Grace, then we are Home right now, every moment.</p>
<p>I took that Leap of Faith April 1977, when I asked Christ to take over my life, and I went from Rags to riches since then, and my life has changed so drastically, that it is beyond explanation, as Christ has been revealed in every thing that lives.</p>
<p>" Christ in me, the Hope of Glory" is revealed each and every day. </p>
<p>GSD will be in Fayettville, North Catolina this evening, Thursday July 13th sharing Satsang with his Desciples called to bask in his Glory, to FEEL Aura of Christ in him, the Candle of The Lord , there to ignite the spirit of men, who are called to his presence.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, I am in Branson, Missouri, with a Tour Group, so can not attend, and I am far away. But for certain, every single soul that must be there, WILL be there,....and we other Satsangis will be with them in Spirit. </p>Spencer Tepper commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09ae9987970d2017-07-13T15:38:09Z2017-07-13T22:23:44ZSpencer TepperDear Osho The reason for love may be a reason you do not understand. And there is unconditional love as...<p>Dear Osho</p>
<p>The reason for love may be a reason you do not understand. </p>
<p>And there is unconditional love as well. That simply arises for no provable or obvious reason. Beauty in nature, alleviating the suffering of others, a child's heartfelt embrace. </p>
<p>You are placing negative judgements on the legitimacy of the love people have for their Master. You cited the love people have for Jesus and the Prophet as "all bullshit". </p>
<p>And there are reasons you are doing that. </p>
<p>You may not know what those reasons are. </p>
<p>There are the reasons for passing judgment upon others that one is aware of ; there are those one publicly states as the justification for doing so; and then there are the subconscious issues they may not be aware of which compel them to do so. </p>
<p>To presume to understand and to condemn the actions of others who are simply exercising their own form of happiness without bothering you simply creates hostility which impedes everyone's rights to pursue happiness in their own way, so long as they do not interfere with anyone else. </p>
<p>Judging others, like trying to argue for the existence or non-existant of God is at best a rhetorical exercise since you are dealing with what is going on in someone else's head when we hardly know even a fraction of what is going on in our own. </p>
<p>Avoiding judging others, and staying focused on our own internal exploration is a simple discipline that helps one protect the amount of happiness life allots to them. </p>
<p>And that internal exploration, the path of meditation or devotional practice, pursued with effort, leads to joy, and is healthy, and even amazing. These are very natural treasures awaiting anyone willing to put forth the effort simply to steer their attention away from these outward judgments and into the internal stimuli, the internal experience. </p>
<p>With focused attention that darkness inside begins to have points of light, to illuminate, and to pull the individual up into sheer ecstacy. </p>
<p>It's been reported for thousands of years, investigated scientifically for decades, and has been proven to be of health value, as well as increase one's well being. </p>
<p>All for the small price of losing the dirt and opening one's eyes to the internal sky. </p>
<p>That practice purifies love so that the practitioner no longer wants what others have, no longer needs to take what others want and desire. Because they have found a greater source of happiness within themselves. </p>
<p>That is enlightened selfishness, in a way. But when we discover that this inner happiness, this higher love is conscious and has been pulling us even when we didn't know it then you can't call it selfish since we don't own it. We aren't the active agent. That love owns us, creates us. And we are giving up ourselves, which we realize in relative terms is worthless, to become that Love. But in truth we aren't doing anything. It pulls us up, it sheds these layers of "me" and "my idea" we once clung to and we are happy to let them go. We are trading plastic pearls for real pearls. <br />
</p>One Initiated commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09ae88a1970d2017-07-13T11:11:13Z2017-07-13T22:23:44ZOne Initiatedhttp://profile.typepad.com/oneinitiatedOsho "I am not on that journey at all" Doesn't that sound a lie? What would be the reason fo...<p>Osho</p>
<p>"I am not on that journey at all"</p>
<p>Doesn't that sound a lie?<br />
What would be the reason fo you posting around 100 comments in last few days on the topic if you think you have moved on and not on that journey. Thinking about HIM is enough to be called as journey.<br />
Or are you doing research on human behavior that you want to figure out some facts ?</p>
<p>Why wouldn't the reason exist in a slightest movement of any smallest invisible particle in the universe ?<br />
There is also a great reason why electrons keeps on vibrating on their place as well as revolving around the nucleus, and the great reason is that Universe will cease if the electrons stops vibrating and revolving.<br />
Why would there not be a reason for a disciple to love the Master?</p>
<p>What you are searching in all the disciples or the persons who are on the beginning of their journey of becoming the disciples... is actually everywhere. You need to see it from that perspective.</p>
<p>I should mention that you are being judgmental there.<br />
And as you explained you have not been judgmental about the disciples, might be if you think!<br />
But, you are surely judgmental towards RSSB and the current Master, just like many other critiques.<br />
Osho, you deliberately passed judgements on Spence's life work. Which was indeed not good, ask yourself in silence, you will feel that.</p>
<p>Comparing the current Master with any other living being would not get you the answers you are seeking. Because, trust me if you can, HE is non comparable. And comparing HIM with the other non-masters will not help either.</p>
<p>You asked about myself in one of the last comments and I can only repeat what I repeated in one of my previous comments that I can not share my real experiences, I shared the aftermath of the experiences - like the bodily experiences (which were ridiculed my manjit if you read it).<br />
I have not met my Master and thus I can not share anything without HIS consent if at all ever I be sharing. (being tagged by reet as bullcrap if you read it).<br />
You asked me if I am spiritually advanced to which I would say: No... because as mentioned by The Great Master: "The Spirituality starts from Par Brahm, anything below that is not spirituality" ... so it may be called as being on journey to realize the spirituality.</p>
<p>As you are observing in other disciples,<br />
just like you believe what you are observing in other disciples, is it hard to believe those who are clearly mentioning their inner experience with HIM ? Off course there will be very very less like them who really realize a recognizable inner state - and even lesser of them who comes to online forums/blogs like these - and even least who share it with others. I feel we should be grateful to them who are sharing it.</p>
<p>You gave the example of Thakar Singh and his disciples and the scandal.<br />
I shall mention here again that Babaji's grandeur is incomparable.<br />
I agree, human beings does have a tendency to love a bigger personality than themselves, like a movie star, a singer, a sports person and also, if the person is of spiritual inclination, then their Master... and the reason for that is they are not complete - call it their benefit if you only understand that word then it's ok. What every being is striving for is completeness.<br />
The Electron, having the negative charge, will only be complete and stable with the corresponding positive charge i.e. nucleus and merging in the nucleus is what it always strive for throughout it's lifecycle - that IS LOVE. And the resultant of the Love is silence, electron's life ends when it meets the nucleus. It becomes one with the nucleus.</p>
<p>Human beings express their feelings of loving The One which they are converging on the big personalities or the master, which I think happened in your case as well earlier as you mentioned. That too is not a fake love either, I would say your love which was rushing in your blood and invoking your Surat was not fake, it was surely only for The One. It might be possible that where you are focusing your love was not rightly merged into The One. But even at whatever level the master is, even if he is not the accomplished one, a person is surely going to get attracted with him.<br />
Even if a disciple has advanced to a certain level of consciousness and someone with say solely in physical meets that disciple, is surely going to get attracted with him - because he must be radiating vibrations of much greater frequency.</p>
<p>Even when a person considers the movie star as The One, and he is rushing with the love in his blood stream towards the star, his love is not fake, his love is towards that one special attribute of The One which is not commonly found in the common persons around. his love is not actually for the movie star, his love is actually for that Godly attribute in the movie star which is not common to observe, may be his/her charisma, acting, beauty, singing whatever - not easy to reproduce in a common person, thus he is feeling that outburst of love for him/her - actually loving on The One - but so well attracted towards that one single attribute of The One which was gifted by The One to this movie star or singer.</p>
<p>If you make your stand slightly flexible to understand these directions, you will understand what I mean here. I might not be explaining my expressions correctly, but let me try again:</p>
<p>I would say there is really nothing like conditional or unconditional love, if it is Love it's always be unconditional. It's about becoming that Godly being (concerning that Godly attribute) which we are not or which we do not possess.</p>
<p>A man loves a beautiful woman, and a woman loves a strong man, what does that love mean?<br />
The man loves the beauty, the softness, the grace of the lady which he misses in himself and as he knows he can not have these attributes within himself (that's how the nature has crafted beings where it has divided the certain attributes b/w men and women) ... whereas he still loves his own muscular nature as well, he loves to have the feminine beauty to be his partner for life so he can really enjoy the wholesomeness of the both worlds of men and women.<br />
Similarly a woman at the same time enjoys herself being a woman, loves the man for his physical strength and the muscular nature, she understands that these two vertically opposite attributes are not possible to be present within one body, she is so happy to marry a man and have him as her partner for life.</p>
<p>A sports lover, everyone sitting in the audience, so much loves watching their star player to play an awesome game say of Tennis (are you tracking Wimbledon ;) ?)<br />
Why do they love their player so much, because they really want to become like their fav player and they surely know their bodily capacity and skills are not upto that level of becoming a player like that or being able to play as great as that player, the always love that player thy always want to play like them and they always want to become like them. That is love. And that also is the love for The One because how that Godly playing capability is present in that player is because it was gifted by The One. So, it's just another Godly attribute a normal person is so attracted towards.</p>
<p>Love of the disciples towards Babaji is not actually towards HIS physical body, it's towards only The One - the attribute here is 24x7 radiations of Spiritual Vibrations of Love.<br />
Obviously it's great deal to be in HIS aura and around HIM - everyone gets affected with those vibrations. A disciple doesn't even know what is happening with him and what exactly he is feeling inside - all being done by HIM actually - but what he expresses is that it's Love - which actually it is - but still not capable enough to understand it's entirety.<br />
And the disciples starts to Love HIM back is because every disciple wants to be like HIM, merge in HIM - they ask for HIS grace so that they can progress on their journey - eventually uplift themselves to be just like HIM - that's Love. Completing the incomplete state.</p>
<p>I am not downplaying the importance of being in HIS aura - I do long for that and that's the best thing for me in the world - I am unable to explain the reasons/benefits behind it - for they are countless and inexplicable.<br />
But I surely disagree with your statements about the personal connection with HIM - only then the disciple starts to feel that love. That's ultra wrong and also right in a subtle way. Because that personal connection has already been made by HIM on the subtle level that's why disciple feels the love - because HE wants the disciple to feel it, if it's about True Master. It's wrong to consider the personal connection on the physical level though. I mentioned it from one example from my family as a comment on other post of reet. There are many disciples who have amazing inner connection with HIM without having met HIM personally even once.</p>
<p>There are few extremely important differences when you love a worldly figure as compared to Loving a True Master:</p>
<p><br />
The movie star, the singer, the player can not love you back when you are loving them, but the True Master rightly loves you back every second when you are loving HIM. HE is capable of that.<br />
The love for True Master is actually started by HIM and not the disciple - that's a huge difference. And is the biggest fact which entirely charges the equation.</p>
<p><br />
If we think it deeply we will realize that Love can only be given by The One. What all disciples do is that, by HIS grace, start to feel the incompleteness in themselves and feeling of merging in HIM to become The One.<br />
We will cease to exist when we will become The One when we will merge with HIM. That's Love. That will be Love and we will become capable of doing Love when we will become The One.</p>
<p>If you happen to visit Beas, I would suggest you to meet "Master Ji" if you can and you will get your answers and also amazing insights to your questions.</p>
<p><br />
Lots of love to you brother.</p>
<p><br />
~OI<br />
</p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09ae7b0d970d2017-07-13T05:38:06Z2017-07-13T22:23:44ZOsho RobbinsSpencer writes: Regarding loving people and helping them, that is both career and volunteer work. Both combined, over a lifetime....<p>Spencer writes: <br />
Regarding loving people and helping them, that is both career and volunteer work. Both combined, over a lifetime.<br />
They earn their keep, and also conduct volunteer help as well. And whether paid or unpaid, they always give real service, real care, real therapy that helps others.<br />
And if Master so wishes some are gifted to help others to do so as well: to help the whole clinic, the whole program, the whole hospital, all the homeless shelters in the system, all the hospitals and outpatient centers, all the doctors and nurses, therapists, even the secretaries, the whole system to give better care, eliminate errors, improve well being, even reduce mortality rates.<br />
They cannot afford to judge anyone except to see the perfect light within each one.. The light they were given. And seeing things in this way, there is nothing else for them to do but dedicate themselves to that work.<br />
Anyone who tries to pass judgment on these helpers is really foolish. Their pockets are empty and what little they are given they cast away.</p>
<p>Osho Robbins:</p>
<p>“If master so wishes…. Some are gifted to help others….”<br />
And what if master does not wish?<br />
Then what happens? They are not gifted?<br />
And what if they have no master?<br />
There are plenty of doctors and volunteer workers who have no master as they are not religious / spiritual. </p>
<p>What has this got to do with any master and his wishes?<br />
If you want to volunteer to help people, you simply do it. <br />
Why bring a master into it?<br />
What if you are one of the “bad guys” – suicide bombers etc<br />
Is that also if the master wishes and his gift?<br />
If he is the doer – then that also is his gift.</p>
<p><br />
Next – regarding “helping other” <br />
I don’t have anything against helping others, paid or unpaid. That was not the point I was making. And why would I judge that? <br />
<br />
The topic was about love for the master. I was saying that there is a reason – the benefits.</p>
<p>Sure, doctors, nurses, care workers help others – and get paid for it. If there was no pay – they would not go to work the following day. </p>
<p><br />
Young doctors have even gone on strike protesting about how little they get paid and how many long hours they have to work.</p>
<p>What I am saying is not rocket science – just the simple fact that there is a motivation and a reason for what we do.</p>
<p>And that includes following the path.</p>
<p>We want to reach the goal (Sach Khand, peace of mind, moving up the seva ladder, respect of others, power over others)<br />
There are many diverse reasons why each individual follows his own particular path. I know some sevadars who go to seva simply to get away from the spouse at home. It’s the only time they get a bit of peace and quiet.</p>
<p>Everyone has a reason. If you help others – that too you have a reason for. Maybe you think you will get a reward in heaven. Perhaps you simply enjoy helping. You like the feeling you get when you help. That too is a reason.</p>
<p>Anyone can do any act and say it is done “out of love”<br />
You can just create your own meaning, and that is what each person does. They just say “I am doing this out of love”<br />
The only person they need to convince is themselves – and that is easy. <br />
<br />
I have nothing for or against this – I am simply pointing it out. </p>
<p>You can choose to help others or not help others – both are okay. </p>
<p>Everything we do – we do for a reason. Do you agree with that? </p>
<p>Or do you think you do some acts without a reason?</p>
<p>Seva, meditation, helping others, going to satsang, etc everything we do is for a reason.<br />
You get something out of it. It may just be a feeling. That is your reason.<br />
</p>Spencer Tepper commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d29573a4970c2017-07-12T20:53:54Z2017-07-13T03:28:05ZSpencer TepperHi Osho Regarding loving people and helping them, that is both career and volunteer work. Both combined, over a lifetime....<p>Hi Osho</p>
<p>Regarding loving people and helping them, that is both career and volunteer work. Both combined, over a lifetime. </p>
<p>Someone who wants to help people who are suffering may become a doctor, a nurse, a technologist, an orderly, a researcher, a therapist, a teacher. </p>
<p>They earn their keep, and also conduct volunteer help as well. And whether paid or unpaid, they always give real service, real care, real therapy that helps others. </p>
<p>They devote themselves to doing well, the best, in work and in volunteer activity. </p>
<p>Hospital, clinic and disabled program employees are also their organizations' greatest source of volunteer hours. </p>
<p> They spend most of their time helping. They work hard day and night, weekends, whether paid or unpaid. They bring their kids in to see the miraculous healing works being done. And in time their children choose to volunteer, and in time they become the next generation of leaders. </p>
<p>So there are hospitals, clinics for the poor, homes for the disabled, all of it, with such people focused entirely on helping. </p>
<p>And if Master so wishes some are gifted to help others to do so as well: to help the whole clinic, the whole program, the whole hospital, all the homeless shelters in the system, all the hospitals and outpatient centers, all the doctors and nurses, therapists, even the secretaries, the whole system to give better care, eliminate errors, improve well being, even reduce mortality rates. </p>
<p>They cannot afford to judge anyone except to see the perfect light within each one.. The light they were given. And seeing things in this way, there is nothing else for them to do but dedicate themselves to that work. </p>
<p>Anyone who tries to pass judgment on these helpers is really foolish. Their pockets are empty and what little they are given they cast away. </p>
<p></p>
<p><br />
</p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09ae51ec970d2017-07-12T19:17:47Z2017-07-13T03:28:05ZOsho RobbinsOne Initiated wrote: Your last numerous comments are filled with the phrases like: "Most of them" "Most others" "Almost all...<p>One Initiated wrote:<br />
Your last numerous comments are filled with the phrases like:<br />
"Most of them"<br />
"Most others"<br />
"Almost all disciples"<br />
Have you yourself taken a survey ?</p>
<p>Osho Robbins: </p>
<p>I don’t need to – it is done for me every time people go to the mic and ask for grace, <br />
How many go to the mic to say “Thank you for the amazing journey to Sach Khand. I am fulfilled now and don’t want anything more.”<br />
The evidence is right there at every Q&A</p>
<p>One initiated continues:<br />
Are you complaining that disciples are in such state and why are they such state?<br />
Or you are not complaining at all and asking question ?<br />
Or you are not asking and you are trying informing the world ?</p>
<p>Osho Robbins:</p>
<p>Certainly I am not complaining as I have nothing to complain about.<br />
I am also not asking a question – except where I specifically ask Spencer or yourself.<br />
Am I trying to inform the world?<br />
Hardly. <br />
What I am doing is stating the obvious. Or at least it is obvious to me.<br />
I could of course be mistaken and if I am, please point out the opposite view with some kind of evidence. </p>
<p>This is what I wrote earlier</p>
<p>I am stating quite categorically that you and everyone loves the guru for a reason - and the reason is the benefits.<br />
If you claim to love the guru for no reason at all<br />
(i.e. you are not in it for the benefits)<br />
then how come you don't love other random people you meet on the streets?</p>
<p>It’s a straight forward question which anyone should be able to answer.<br />
You don’t love random people because there is no reason to.<br />
Spence replied that he goes to a hospital to help people with the grace of his master. However he refused to answer if that was his job, which I suspect it was/is.</p>
<p>One initiated goes on:<br />
And you are mentioning the same thing about others over and over again and still maintaining you are not being judgemental. If you are repeating at such an extent then you must be liking or disliking their state. </p>
<p>Osho Robbins:<br />
Why would I like or dislike it? I am calling a spade a spade. I am saying there is no unconditional love here. That is not a good or a bad thing. <br />
It is bad from the disciples point of view if he is convinced and has a lot invested in the view that his love is true. But in reality it is not good or bad.</p>
<p>One-initiated:<br />
I am sure you are not liking what you are observing</p>
<p>Osho Robbins: </p>
<p>Where do you get such an idea from? I am just observing. It makes no difference to me.</p>
<p>One-initated:<br />
so essentially you are disliking it and basically you are just criticising all other disciples.</p>
<p><br />
Osho Robbins:<br />
I am not criticising or being judgmental. <br />
If some people say it is raining and I say it is not raining – I am not criticising the rain or them – just pointing out that it is not raining. <br />
I have nothing invested in whether it is raining or not. <br />
“Raining” or “not raining” are not in a good/bad category.<br />
There is no value attached to the rain / no rain.<br />
It is the same with the statements I am making.</p>
<p>One-initiated: <br />
And what about yourself ? Where do you see yourself ? <br />
Do you find yourself as one of the "most" which you are referring to ?</p>
<p>Osho Robbins:</p>
<p>I am not on that journey at all. That should be obvious. I don’t meditate or have any desire to go to the illusory Sach Khand. </p>
<p>One initiated:</p>
<p>Or you are trying to prove that the ones who have reached the radiant form are very less ?<br />
Off course they are very less. And you think that by mentioning they are very less and informing the world with all this junk you will progress in your path whatsoever ?<br />
Your comments are starting to completely lose their relevance.<br />
What exactly is the point you are trying to make ?</p>
<p>Osho Robbins:<br />
I am not “trying” to prove anything about any radiant forms. <br />
I am not saying anyone is “Less” or “More”<br />
These are all beliefs that exist in your world.</p>
<p>The point I was making was about unconditional love. <br />
That if there is a motive in loving someone (the master) – surely that motive gets in the way. </p>
<p>And the example I gave was the disciples who claimed to love Sant Thakar.<br />
They didn’t love him once the scandal came out. Why not? Where did the love go?</p>
<p>If it was unconditional love, they would still love. <br />
But after the scandal, the motive disappeared and so did the love.</p>
<p>That is the simple point I am making. </p>
<p>It is neither good nor bad. <br />
</p>Spencer Tepper commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09ae4554970d2017-07-12T16:21:35Z2017-07-13T03:28:05ZSpencer TepperHi Osho You mentioned conditional love. And you allude to unconditional love, but don't mention it. Most people experience both...<p>Hi Osho</p>
<p>You mentioned conditional love. <br />
And you allude to unconditional love, but don't mention it. </p>
<p>Most people experience both kinds. Good parents love their kids unconditionally. It's just there. </p>
<p>It's not unusual. And some folks love the Master unconditionally as well. And many understand and witness the Master's unconditional love for them</p>
<p>It's normal to respond in kind. </p>
<p>But it doesn't seem very loving to judge others as being inferior in their love. I think someone who at least admires unconditional love would practice it. <br />
</p>One Initiated commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c90af646970b2017-07-12T13:09:07Z2017-07-13T03:28:05ZOne Initiatedhttp://profile.typepad.com/oneinitiatedSo Osho, You last numerous comments are filled with the phrases like: "Most of them" "Most others" "Almost all disciples"...<p>So Osho,</p>
<p>You last numerous comments are filled with the phrases like:</p>
<p>"Most of them"<br />
"Most others"<br />
"Almost all disciples"</p>
<p>Have you yourself taken a survey ?</p>
<p>Are you complaining that disciples are in such state and why are they such state?<br />
Or you are not complaining at all and asking question ?<br />
Or you are not asking and you are trying informing the world ?</p>
<p>And you are mentioning the same thing about others over and over again and still maintaining you are not being judgemental. If you are repeating at such an extent then you must be liking or disliking their state. I am sure you are not liking what you are observing so essentially you are disliking it and basically you are just criticising all other disciples.</p>
<p>And what about yourself ? Where do you see yourself ? <br />
Do you find yourself as one of the "most" which you are referring to ?<br />
Or you are trying to prove that the ones who have reached the radiant form are very less ?<br />
Off course they are very less. And you think that by mentioning they are very less and informing the world with all this junk you will progress in your path whatsoever ?</p>
<p>Your comments are starting to completely lose their relevance.</p>
<p>What exactly is the point you are trying to make ?</p>
<p>Love to you brother.<br />
</p>Osho robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09ae2f7c970d2017-07-12T12:27:37Z2017-07-13T03:28:05ZOsho robbinsSpencer. Do you or did you work in a hospital. Or did you go there to serve people out of...<p>Spencer. Do you or did you work in a hospital. Or did you go there to serve people out of love. </p>
<p>You asked:<br />
What do you really love? What is worthy of your love? Worthy of a love even greater than the love for yourself</p>
<p>I really love ice cream. </p>
<p>And I love various people in my life including but not limited to my girlfriend. </p>
<p>I don't claim my undying love as disciples do for their guru. It's a work in progress. </p>
<p>Sometimes intense and amazing. Other times questionable. <br />
That's reality. </p>
<p>As for what is worthy of my love. That's an absurd question because if you love you don't evaluate worthiness first. </p>
<p>The very fact that you asked that question shows the reality. </p>
<p>Disciples love their master because he is worthy</p>
<p>What happens when they find out he is not worthy?</p>
<p>Worthy <br />
Is a condition. </p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c90ae53e970b2017-07-12T07:16:52Z2017-07-13T03:28:05ZOsho RobbinsWhen people think they love a guru, it is the same phenomena as when they think they love a movie...<p>When people think they love a guru, it is the same phenomena as when they think they love a movie actor or a performing artist.</p>
<p>It is all in self-created delusion.</p>
<p>How can I make this statement?</p>
<p>Sure, they appear to love. In the case of a movie star, the can feel crazy, at, say, a concert. They can be part of the screaming fans.</p>
<p>But it's not love.</p>
<p>If you have persoanlly met and know the movie star, singer, guru, then there is at least a possibility that it might be love as you have a connection with the actual person, not the concept you created in your mind.</p>
<p>In a spiritual path, it becomes even more convoluted as you might claim an inner vision, and claim to talk to that inner form.</p>
<p>There is a story of Kirpal. He was supposed to give a satsang in Lahore on sunday. On saturday he was passing by the dera and dropped in to see his master. He had a great time and was hoping Sawan would say something about staying, in which case he would hsave sent someone else to do the satsang.</p>
<p>However, Sawan asked him, "aren't you doing a satsang in Lahore tomorrow?"<br />
Kirpal said "Yes" and then left for Lahore, even though he did not want to. He took it as the mauj of the guru.</p>
<p>What I was saying, but you are unable to grasp, is that if you "know" the physical guru, you just have concepts in your head.</p>
<p>Is is similar starting an internet romance. You have just met he person online and spoke to them on the phone,</p>
<p>When you meet them in person - it's going to be different.</p>
<p>They the concepts you created might be blown away. </p>
<p>Then your so-called love disappears.</p>
<p>Of course, in your mind, you can create any delusion you like.</p>
<p>It is the same with the guru.</p>
<p>You say "But the connection is with the inner form"</p>
<p>my reply is, "What inner form?"</p>
<p>Seeing the radiant form is a rarity. Very few ever get there, apart from a glimpse here and there.</p>
<p>You know this is true, because you can just ask yourself if you see the radiant form every day in your meditation.</p>
<p>For most people, the answer is no.</p>
<p>You might think plenty of others do, but it's not true.</p>
<p>Even the teachings say that once you get to the inner form, half the work is done. That is the main job of the disciple.</p>
<p>The truth is hardly anyone ever gets there.</p>
<p>If you doubt this - seriously take a survey of the disciples.</p>
<p>Most have lost hope of ever getting to the radiant form.</p>
<p>It was once a hope, not it's just a dream.</p>
<p>They console themselves with being a secretary, a treasurer or doing some other regular seva.</p>
<p>That is what is actually going on. You might be blind to it - but most the of the followers also know this is true - because it is true for them and for most of the disciples they are friends with.</p>
<p>That is why if they come across someone who claims to have seen the radiant form - they are so happy and will want to meet with him and talk.</p>
<p>All most of the followers have is belief.</p>
<p>And they only go to satsang every sunday out of boredom. Many go to have a nap. You can see them taking a nap, even snoring at times.</p>
<p>I once took a new person to satsang and his question was "Why were so many of them sleeping?"</p>
<p>gives a whole new meaning to the term "wake up" and "awakening"</p>
<p></p>
<p><br />
</p>Spencer Tepper commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c90ad640970b2017-07-12T01:50:26Z2017-07-13T03:28:05ZSpencer TepperOsho, you wrote "Do you work in a hospital, or serve people there for free? I suspect you happen to...<p>Osho, you wrote</p>
<p>"Do you work in a hospital, or serve people there for free?</p>
<p>I suspect you happen to work there just so you can answer that you serve people in hospitals." </p>
<p>Well I did answer your question, but you have not answered mine. </p>
<p>Let me repeat the question. </p>
<p>What do you love more than yourself? <br />
</p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c90accec970b2017-07-11T23:17:31Z2017-07-13T03:28:05ZOsho RobbinsSpencer wrote: yes my life has been spent in group homes, emergency rooms, hospital nursing units. There is no better...<p>Spencer wrote:<br />
yes my life has been spent in group homes, emergency rooms, hospital nursing units. There is no better place to spend one's life. It is a sheer pleasure. But who gave that lifelong pleasure to me? My Master.</p>
<p>You see, I didn't answer your questions the way you wanted. The world isn't really the way you think it is, Osho....</p>
<p>Osho Robbins:</p>
<p>So, you are telling me that you go to hospitals and help people there for free? because of your love for the master? or love for them?</p>
<p>Do you work in a hospital, or serve people there for free?</p>
<p>I suspect you happen to work there just so you can answer that you serve people in hospitals.<br />
</p>Spence Tepper commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09adbcc6970d2017-07-11T01:46:38Z2017-07-13T03:28:05ZSpence TepperHi Osho I was just re-reading what you wrote.... You ask: "I am just asking, where did this love come...<p>Hi Osho<br />
I was just re-reading what you wrote....</p>
<p>You ask:</p>
<p>"I am just asking, where did this love come from?"</p>
<p>Yes. how sad. </p>
<p>You wrote:<br />
"Do you just love random people walking in the street?"</p>
<p>Osho, Love is a very wonderful and strange thing. We don't choose to love. Real love is bigger than we are. Real love creates us, we don't create it.</p>
<p>Look at the Good Samaritan who helped a stranger. His heart was moved by the suffering of another injured man.</p>
<p>It's a great story, because Samaritans at that time were considered worshipers of a false God.</p>
<p>Yet in this story, Jesus raised this certain Samaritan above the priests and rabbis who walked by and didn't help. It was the Samaritan, worshipping something he didn't understand, who was serving God, Osho!</p>
<p>Rather than point out what to you isn't real love, maybe you should try to find real love.</p>
<p>What does that look like?</p>
<p>Yes, people do work in homeless shelters, they give their time and even their life helping to heal the poor and the indigent, the infirm, the injured. And their greatest joy is in watching strangers whom they may never see again healed, restored, both in body and spirit. </p>
<p>Yes, Osho, our world has so many, many people who give to strangers from nothing but the love that wells up in their heart. Who gave them that love?</p>
<p>Your hypocrisy, which is actually tragic, stems from the fact that you call that kind of love "Hypnosis" and "Delusion" even while you ask "Where is real love?" and decry all other love as selfish.</p>
<p>But the selfish love is the only kind you understand. You think therefore it is the only kind that exists.</p>
<p>Truly, heartbreaking.</p>
<p>You wrote:</p>
<p>"Christians claim to love jesus</p>
<p>Muslims believe they love Mohammad.</p>
<p>I am saying - it's all bullshit."</p>
<p>Well, you would be very wrong, there Osho.</p>
<p>People may not fully understand where that love comes from, but it is divine.</p>
<p>Love of Jesus and The Prophet is very sincere in millions upon millions of people. And it's real.</p>
<p>So many obvious examples you call "delusion" and if not delusion, then selfish.</p>
<p>Sad. Truly.</p>
<p>But the best place to find real love, Osho, is within yourself.</p>
<p>What do you really love? What is worthy of your love? Worthy of a love even greater than the love for yourself?</p>
<p>What is worth sacrificing your life for?</p>
<p>Every soldier, every police officer who sacrifices their life to protect others they have never met walks right in the footsteps of Jesus Christ and every Saint who was ever born, right into Salvation.</p>
<p>How sad you don't see it.</p>
<p>Try taking off the dark glasses..</p>Spencer Tepper commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d294d10b970c2017-07-11T00:21:54Z2017-07-13T03:28:05ZSpencer TepperDear Osho You ask very personal questions without really addressing the issue and that is the internal relationship. Nevertheless.... I...<p>Dear Osho</p>
<p>You ask very personal questions without really addressing the issue and that is the internal relationship. </p>
<p>Nevertheless.... </p>
<p>I answered all your questions but you did not see it.... </p>
<p>When two lovers see each other, the connection is there, automatically, without reason. </p>
<p>Happens all the time, Osho. No expectations, just the bliss of good company. </p>
<p>Yes my life has been spent in group homes, emergency rooms, hospital nursing units. There is no better place to spend one's life. It is a sheer pleasure. But who gave that lifelong pleasure to me? My Master. </p>
<p>You see, I didn't answer your questions the way you wanted. The world isn't really the way you think it is, Osho.... </p>
<p>No matter.... As Obama said to Romney 'Proceed forth, Sir!' </p>
<p>Best wishes. </p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c90a7a17970b2017-07-10T22:48:49Z2017-07-13T03:28:06ZOsho RobbinsIf you claim to love the guru for no reason at all (i.e. you are not in it for the...<p>If you claim to love the guru for no reason at all<br />
(i.e. you are not in it for the benefits)</p>
<p>then how come you don't love other random people you meet on the streets?</p>
<p>How come you don't go to a homeless shelter and help those people?</p>
<p>How come you don't go to a hospital and serve people there who needs help?</p>
<p>Isn't that seva? Or is seva just what you do at the RSSB centre?</p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d294cb90970c2017-07-10T22:43:56Z2017-07-13T03:28:06ZOsho RobbinsI am stating quite categorically that you and everyone loves the guru for a reason - and the reason is...<p>I am stating quite categorically that you and everyone loves the guru for a reason - and the reason is the benefits.</p>
<p>If you disagree - then explain how that love came about.</p>
<p>How come you dont love random people you meet in the streets.</p>
<p>I am not being judgemental - as you seem to think. It's nothing personal.</p>
<p>I am just asking, where did this love come from? </p>
<p>Do you just love random people walking in the street?</p>
<p>No.</p>
<p>Do you love Kirpal, Darshan, Rajindar singh (darshan's son)</p>
<p>no.</p>
<p>Christians claim to love jesus</p>
<p>Muslims believe they love Mohammad.</p>
<p>I am saying - it's all bullshit.</p>
<p>Even you will say the christian cannot love jesus because he has never met him,</p>
<p>But someone who has never met the master can love the master, right?</p>
<p>Oh yes - thats because he can see him in the inner planes.</p>
<p>It's all belief and deception.</p>
<p>Today you love - tomorrow you leave</p>
<p>just as happened with Thakar.</p>
<p>That is the evidence right in front of you.</p>
<p>All those who left, once professed undying love.</p>
<p>There is a story I heard in sant mat literature of a nizamadeen Auliah<br />
who was accompanied by a dozen disciples.</p>
<p>He went to visit a prostitute and half the disciples left.</p>
<p>He sent for alcohol and the rest left.</p>
<p>in the morning only one disciple remained.</p>
<p>He asked where they had all gone, and the disciple said they all left one by one. </p>
<p>I can guarantee that if some strong negative story came out about any of the current sant mat masters, most of the disciples would leave</p>
<p>So, how is that love?</p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d294ca40970c2017-07-10T22:19:47Z2017-07-13T03:28:06ZOsho RobbinsSpencer, This is what I wrote earlier. Love? Do you think YOU (or indeed anyone) LOVES the master? Your mind...<p>Spencer,<br />
This is what I wrote earlier.</p>
<p>Love? Do you think YOU (or indeed anyone) LOVES the master? <br />
Your mind measures up the benefits. And it decides it would be GOOD to love the master. Then it convinces itself that it loves the master.<br />
If Gurinder Singh Dhillon was NOT the master and if someone else had been appointed instead, WHO would you love today?<br />
Would everyone be chasing GSD, or the successor? Obviously the successor.<br />
Why? Because of the benefits. </p>
<p><br />
so if Gurinder had not been appointed the successor, would you still love Gurinder? or the successor?</p>
<p>I am assuming your reply is going to be "the successor"</p>
<p>if which case - you will love anyone who is in that position of the guru.</p>
<p>It's not even personal - it could be anyone.</p>
<p>If you agree with this - you will also have to agree that you don't love the master, but what he can do for you.</p>
<p><br />
</p>Jim Sutherland commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c90a7663970b2017-07-10T21:46:40Z2017-07-13T03:28:06ZJim SutherlandI got this email from the " Successor" of D. M. Murdock's Mythicist, who will continue promoting her books, and...<p>I got this email from the " Successor" of D. M. Murdock's Mythicist, who will continue promoting her books, and keeping her mercy alive. </p>
<p>Her it is: </p>
<p>"Hi folks, brace yourself ... here is a pic of Acharya's headstone - notice the personified sun symbol with a face inside it. She passed away on Christmas and her birthday this year just happened to be on Easter - which is fitting for one of the greatest mythicists who ever lived: <a href="https://www.facebook.com/acharyas/posts/10156797087780604" rel="nofollow">https://www.facebook.com/acharyas/posts/10156797087780604</a> Here's an Easter article excerpted from her Moses book: Moses, the Promised Land and Easter <a href="http://stellarhousepublishing.com/moses-easter.html" rel="nofollow">http://stellarhousepublishing.com/moses-easter.html</a> We are still grieving terribly. Our hearts are broken and we will never be the same again. We can only be thankful for the time we shared with her and keep her work available. Please help by donating, which will keep Acharya's websites, books and everything up and running: <a href="http://www.stellarhousepublishing.com/acharyapdfs.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.stellarhousepublishing.com/acharyapdfs.html</a> <a href="http://truthbeknown.com/help.htm" rel="nofollow">http://truthbeknown.com/help.htm</a> I would like to start an annual summer solstice celebration in honor of Acharya to celebrate her life and work in mythology. I am open to suggestions so post your thoughts at the freethought nation forum. I'd like to help inspire future generations of men and especially women to study her work and pursue a degree in mythology and astrotheology. Her work may be utilized to help create a new department of astrotheological and mythological studies. Astrotheology / Case for Mythicism 101 Course <a href="http://freethoughtnation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=4313" rel="nofollow">http://freethoughtnation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=4313</a> Religion and the Ph.D.: A Brief History <a href="http://freethoughtnation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=18805" rel="nofollow">http://freethoughtnation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=18805</a> Please share</p>Jim Sutherland commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d294c7db970c2017-07-10T21:37:21Z2017-07-13T03:28:06ZJim SutherlandTo Osho: D.M. Murdock, was a Writer having many of the same arguments and thoughts you presently have. But she...<p>To Osho: D.M. Murdock, was a Writer having many of the same arguments and thoughts you presently have. But she was not only an Activist promoting much of what you promote, but was a highly published Author of many books, .......which I bought, own, and have read! </p>
<p> <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Acharya-S/e/B001UXZSBM/ref=dp_byline_cont_pop_ebooks_1" rel="nofollow">https://www.amazon.com/Acharya-S/e/B001UXZSBM/ref=dp_byline_cont_pop_ebooks_1</a></p>
<p>I had quite a bit of private email corrsepondence with her, regarding her unmoving belief, that there was never a historic man named Jesus Christ that ever existed, and that the entire Bible is a Myth, as well as most of the Eastern Scriptures. </p>
<p>She was firm, in her beliefs, and had a very large following, parroting her reserach and favorote quotes. </p>
<p>She was non argumentative, and refused to get in to any Internet Forum arguments, but she had ample comments taken from her many books to counter any negative attack against her. </p>
<p>She seemed to like me, ...or at least, toletated my preaching to her about her needing a Living Master to Initiate her in to Inner Regions so she could see for her self what she said didn't exist. </p>
<p>I actually liked her , and she even send me many free pdfs of her books to down load that sold on Amazon in the list above, but they ususally were for a $5.00 "donation" to cover her expenses of continued research.</p>
<p>About several years ago, ( can't remember exactly), she quit answering my emails, and I finally got an email from her, that was a Form letter from her saying she had been just diagnosed with a rare form of Cancer that attacked her internal organs. </p>
<p>But she said she was confident she would beat it, if people sent her money to pay for her special required treatments, what ever they were. </p>
<p>I thought it was a Hoax, and she mght be scamming the public, so ignored her continued requests for money. </p>
<p>But,.......she died 6 months later!! Young! I doubt she was more than 60.</p>
<p>Karma? </p>
<p>Madalyne Murry O'Hara was another extreme ATHEIST, who was widely known among Atheist circles about 25-30 years ago, that I remember reading much of her literature. She dssappeared suddenly .</p>
<p>Paul Kurtz was another. </p>
<p>You are following in their foot steps, Osho. </p>
<p>But, you have time to repent, and if nothing else,at least, quit trying to unload your extreme negative unblief and faithlessness on others. <br />
<br />
You might consider at least keeping your lethel poison to yourself, and immediate family and friends. </p>
<p>Why pollute strangers, if as you claim, it is not your Mission? </p>
<p>😇😍<br />
</p>Spencer Tepper commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09ad5835970d2017-07-09T20:09:34Z2017-07-13T03:28:06ZSpencer TepperOsho, you wrote "Why would there be so many questions on the mic? Why would disciples be ASKING for grace?...<p>Osho, you wrote</p>
<p>"Why would there be so many questions on the mic?</p>
<p>Why would disciples be ASKING for grace?</p>
<p>You only ask for what you don't have.</p>
<p>Only very few get any inner confirmation. If they did the satsang halls would be empty." </p>
<p>Osho, you logic fails completely. Without that inner connection, those halls would be empty. Without having tasted His grace, no one would ask for more. </p>
<p>People ask questions and go to see Him to understand that connection, to deepen it, to expand their own experience of it. The entire Satsang as the Masters teach repeatedly, is to encourage our attending to meditation, the inner connection. </p>
<p>And as the Great Master, Sawan Singh wrote to a disciple, "Come to me in your armchair." </p>
<p>I get this is entirely a mystery to you. </p>
<p>But you have the means to explore your own inner experiences, whatever they may be, and that is a rich place worthy of exploration. </p>
<p>To claim that dark room is empty because you didn't make your eye of inner attention single and focused, and flood that darkness with light is your choice. And it is an unscientific choice to base conclusions on the absence of the experiment itself. </p>
<p>Draw a conclusion when you have conducted your own highly controlled experiments before concluding quantum physics doesn't exist. </p>
<p>Osho, the only wealth any of us truly own is our attention. Wasting it on judging others, calling people delusional, claiming they are all hypnotized, is costly. What we attend to we give away. </p>
<p>Attend to the exploration of your own self, because that investment will return the benefits to you. <br />
</p>Spencer Tepper commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c90a1d84970b2017-07-09T19:20:32Z2017-07-09T19:20:32ZSpencer TepperOsho Robbins: "Not true. They books say you cannot under rate the value of physical company." But you have entirely...<p>Osho Robbins:</p>
<p>"Not true.</p>
<p>They books say you cannot under rate the value of physical company." </p>
<p>But you have entirely dismissed the internal relationship they teach. </p>
<p>And so your entire argument collapses. </p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d2946726970c2017-07-09T19:19:24Z2017-07-09T19:19:24ZOsho RobbinsOne-initiated: Osho would be surprised to know that I have met numerous (and I know some) really spiritually advanced disciples,...<p>One-initiated:<br />
Osho would be surprised to know that I have met numerous (and I know some) really spiritually advanced disciples, deep in their love for the Master, who have not personally met the Master even once, but they are surely attached with the Master inside.</p>
<p>Osho Robbins:<br />
Surely attached? <br />
Really Spiritually advanced?<br />
Deep in their love for master?</p>
<p>HOW do you KNOW any of this is true?<br />
HOW do you decide?<br />
There are people who claim to be Jesus<br />
Who do you believe and why?</p>
<p><br />
What about YOU? Are you spiritually advanced?<br />
You are just convinced about others. What about you?<br />
The point of sant mat is to get there yourself – bot believe others.</p>
<p>It’s all nonsense. I have seen it all, heard it all.<br />
In the 80’s and 90’s there were the handful of people who gave live satsangs and<br />
The whole sangat was 100% convinced that they were all “sants and mahatmas”<br />
So much so that videos were made of their satsangs.<br />
When Maharaj Charan Singh found out he put a stop to it all.</p>
<p>Then slowly it became known that speakers are just ordinary people and not advanced</p>
<p>Now the sangat knows they are just ordinary and not advanced<br />
</p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d2946341970c2017-07-09T18:06:58Z2017-07-09T18:06:58ZOsho RobbinsOne-initiated, are you really saying that you cannot distinguish between a statement I made which is neutral, and a judgemental...<p>One-initiated, are you really saying that you cannot distinguish between a statement I made which is neutral, and a judgemental statement (calling something good/bad)<br />
This is what I wrote:</p>
<p>Let’s examine HOW and WHY disciples claim to love their master.<br />
Here are reasons to love the master<br />
(1) He has great qualities and you look up to him<br />
(2) You admire him and want to be like him<br />
.<br />
.<br />
.<br />
Do you honestly think that is a judgemental statement and that I am judging people I have not met and calling them “bad” in some way?</p>
<p>Go back and read what I have written. I am examining the possibility (or impossibility) of having love for a master when you have so many reasons to delude yourself.<br />
How come you don’t love the beggar on the street?<br />
Because you’re not going to get any benefit.</p>
<p>Can someone love Jesus, or Guru Nanak?<br />
And if they claim to – are they just deluding themselves or do they really love someone they have never met?<br />
When someone loves a master they have never met – at best they can love the concept they have created in their mind. <br />
Besides what is this love? The disciples who claimed to love thakar later did not. What was that? Did the love change? Was it real?<br />
I am saying it’s self-delusion because you want to believe you love. </p>Spencer Tepper commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09ad4dc5970d2017-07-09T16:58:57Z2017-07-09T16:58:57ZSpencer TepperOsho You wrote "The disciples WANTS to love – because otherwise he is doomed." That is far from the teachings...<p>Osho<br />
You wrote<br />
"The disciples WANTS to love – because otherwise he is doomed." </p>
<p>That is far from the teachings of Sant Mat. You didn't read what I wrote. It doesn't depend upon the disciple. The love comes from the Master alone. </p>
<p>You are describing someone who is not very far along as an initiate, possibly yourself. </p>
<p>A better scientist would interview Satsangis and even then, not draw sweeping generalities about the internal motivations of Satsangis, as you are attempting to do. </p>
<p>You wrote<br />
" I am merely examining the possibility of any “love” existing between master and disciple when the deck is stacked." </p>
<p>That is your belief system, Osho. </p>
<p>A foundational principle is that the entire relationship is love from the start. </p>
<p>You wrote</p>
<p>"There is a huge motive in convincing yourself that you love the master.</p>
<p>I am questioning how much of that is delusion." </p>
<p>Osho, since you deny the spiritual nature of the relationship you have already concluded it is all delusion. </p>
<p>Again, your logic is false. </p>
<p>Again, this is just a form of your prejudice. </p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09ad41fc970d2017-07-09T12:56:35Z2017-07-09T12:56:35ZOsho RobbinsSpence: Second, the Masters teach about their love for their disciples as being internal and not limited by physical proximity....<p>Spence: <br />
Second, the Masters teach about their love for their disciples as being internal and not limited by physical proximity. </p>
<p>Osho Robbins:</p>
<p>Not true.</p>
<p>They books say you cannot under rate the value of physical company. </p>
<p>There is even a story of one of the RSSB masters (not sure if it was Sawan Singh) who said that if I would just have a glimpse of my master again - I would give up everything.</p>
<p>A disciple said "but surely you see him every day in your meditation"</p>
<p>and the master said "But it is not the same as the darshan of the physical"<br />
</p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09ad41c8970d2017-07-09T12:52:13Z2017-07-09T12:52:13ZOsho RobbinsSpence: he Masters connect with their disciples internally. That is where the relationship starts, lives, and is consummated. It began...<p>Spence:<br />
he Masters connect with their disciples internally. That is where the relationship starts, lives, and is consummated. It began long before the disciple ever set eyes on their Master. And the Master also provides a means for the disciple to verify the legitimacy of that internal connection.</p>
<p>That cannot be viewed or assessed externally, as you are repeatedly trying to do.</p>
<p>Osho Robbins:</p>
<p>Nice idea - but clearly not true.<br />
Why would there be so many questions on the mic?</p>
<p>Why would disciples be ASKING for grace?</p>
<p>You only ask for what you don't have.</p>
<p>Only very few get any inner confirmation. If they did the satsang halls would be empty. Everyone would be at home, traversing inner regions. Who would want to waste precious time going to pointless satsangs where they repeat the same stuff you have been hearing for the last 20 years.</p>
<p> </p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09ad41a1970d2017-07-09T12:46:20Z2017-07-09T12:46:20ZOsho RobbinsSpence wrote: Do you think someone's love is based on getting sweets from someone? Or healthy food? We are love...<p>Spence wrote:<br />
Do you think someone's love is based on getting sweets from someone? Or healthy food?<br />
We are love Osho. We are all made of love, and no one has any more or less than anyone else.</p>
<p>Osho Robbins:</p>
<p>Have you ever loved anyone who is your enemy and is out to harm you?</p>
<p>No - because that would be lunacy</p>
<p>You can only love someone who you believe is good and beneficial for you.</p>
<p>When someone does you favours and helps you - you begin to like that person.</p>
<p>If they do something that makes no longer trust them - you pull away,</p>
<p>The spiritual journey is no different.</p>
<p>Why did all the people who followed Thakar pull away and leave once the bad publicity came out?</p>
<p>I can pretty much guarantee those same people once professed great love for Thakar Singh.</p>
<p>Where did that love go?</p>
<p>I bet if some bad publicity came out about Gurinder, the majority would leave.</p>
<p>So then where is their love?</p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09ad4153970d2017-07-09T12:38:36Z2017-07-09T12:38:36ZOsho RobbinsSpence wrote: "Let’s examine HOW and WHY disciples claim to love their master." (OR quote) Why do you repeatedly cast...<p>Spence wrote:<br />
"Let’s examine HOW and WHY disciples claim to love their master." (OR quote)<br />
Why do you repeatedly cast negative judgments upon others you do not know and have never met?</p>
<p>Osho Robbins:<br />
Surely you cannot be that deluded.<br />
There is no negative judgement in that statement. I am merely examining the possibility of any “love” existing between master and disciple when the deck is stacked.</p>
<p>The disciples WANTS to love – because otherwise he is doomed.<br />
There is a huge motive in convincing yourself that you love the master.</p>
<p>I am questioning how much of that is delusion. <br />
It is not a personal attack or a criticism.<br />
I am not attaching a value (good/bad) on the love for the master.<br />
It is neutral. But you cannot see it because you are too steeped in the notion that Love for the master is a good thing. </p>
<p>You cannot see that I am not judging any disciple. There is nothing negative in the statement. </p>
<p>It's like saying, "Let's see if this water in this glass is hot or cold"<br />
Hot is not better than cold. </p>
<p>Unless you are making tea and I show that it is cold then you think I am being negative. However, I am still just pointing out that it is cold. No judgement.</p>One Initiated commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09ad3f76970d2017-07-09T11:52:39Z2017-07-11T20:05:35ZOne Initiatedhttp://profile.typepad.com/oneinitiatedSpence Tepper Couldn't agree more with you, Spence. Osho is wholesomely wrong here. And from his last few comments it...<p>Spence Tepper</p>
<p>Couldn't agree more with you, Spence.</p>
<p>Osho is wholesomely wrong here.<br />
And from his last few comments it is evident that whatever he has been judging about others are actually all his feelings and experiences. And how mistakenly he is thinking that same is happening with every other one and everyone is going through the same feelings.</p>
<p>All the Osho's judgements even about himself are completely wrong from head to toe let alone judging (in his words: passing judgement to) others. And all of that was indeed funny, I didn't have a slight idea that Osho is holding such kind of perceptions in the back of his mind, emphasising on the physical proximity with the Master with such paramount of importance. It's off course clear that it's because of Osho's earlier experiences and that he is quite prejudice towards other disciples.</p>
<p>Osho would be surprised to know that I have met numerous (and I know some) really spiritually advanced disciples, deep in their love for the Master, who have not personally met the Master even once, but they are surely attached with the Master inside.<br />
Given the huge number of people in India, even the initiation is done in the significantly huge batches.</p>
<p><br />
Mirabai Ji:</p>
<p>❝ Ghayal ki gat ghayal jane, aur na jane koi. ❞The pain of living with the wound (of Love) is only known to the wounded and not anyone else.</p>Spence Tepper commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c909fc16970b2017-07-09T03:30:20Z2017-07-09T03:30:20ZSpence Tepper Hi Osho You wrote "Everyone wants to love the master because of the benefits. no benefits = no love. Why...<p>Hi Osho </p>
<p>You wrote</p>
<p>"Everyone wants to love the master because of the benefits.</p>
<p>no benefits = no love.</p>
<p>Why do YOU follow the path?</p>
<p>presumably to get the results.</p>
<p>if you don't get them, how long will you continue?</p>
<p>And if the master puts you down and criticises you in public, will you still love him?"</p>
<p>Dear Osho you falsely presume this is the disciple's choice and the disciple's love. </p>
<p>The logic you are using of trying to determine how much love exists between two people based on how much time they spend together physically, or whether they choose to love one another is flawed and indirect. A moment's glance between two lovers changes both, forever, and is irreversible. </p>
<p>And a single night in each other's arms changes this and several other lifetimes, past, present and future. </p>
<p>The Masters connect with their disciples internally. That is where the relationship starts, lives, and is consummated. It began long before the disciple ever set eyes on their Master. And the Master also provides a means for the disciple to verify the legitimacy of that internal connection. </p>
<p>That cannot be viewed or assessed externally, as you are repeatedly trying to do. </p>
<p>Your points are flawed on a number of fronts. </p>
<p>First, you are trying to judge the love between Master and disciple when you have dismissed the spirituality of that relationship as hypnosis. Your presumption is a defacto invalidation of the relationship of the Master to all His disciples, because it is based on spirituality, which you reject. But to accept the legitimacy of that relationship between the Master and even one single disciple makes your arguments to the contrary false. </p>
<p>Second, the Masters teach about their love for their disciples as being internal and not limited by physical proximity. Your case for the Master's love depends upon proximity, therefore within the Master-disciple relationship your argument is false. </p>
<p><br />
Third, you have linked a disciples' progress to their visible love for the master, and linked that to both their physical proximity and their sincerity. If the Master's love is real and unlimited and He has chosen to initiate anyone, the level of love from the disciple is actually not relevant to their progress. They have been handed all His love at the moment He took that responsibility upon Himself. The initiate who has never seen their Master receives as much love as the disciple who appears to be receiving all their attention. And so the progress of the disciple is constant and continuous, unlike their flawed heart and attention, because that progress rests firmly upon the shoulders of the Master. </p>
<p><br />
You are judging things from a social perspective, not a spiritual perspective, and therefore your rules about love and relationship can only apply to the external physical, behavioral and social indeces. </p>
<p>In Spirituality, all of those are considered temporal, false, unreal and unnecessary. They are imaginary. They exist or appear absent only in the mind of the disciple in so far as the disciple remains unaware of the very present and active internal relationship. </p>
<p>Fourth, your arguments about how sincere and close the disciple is or is not to the Master falsely presumes a relationship between two beings. In Spirituality the relationship is always between the soul and its source. They are always one and the same. The electricity at the microwave oven end is the same electricity as at the nuclear power plant end. The journey is merely to witness it through the varies stages of our development. </p>
<p>And from the nuclear power plant end, whether microwave oven or toaster hardly matters. </p>
<p>And when that microwave or toaster complains with "gee it's getting uncomfortably warm" or "how come I'm not on now?" they are actually functioning, finally, in both states, as designed. </p>Jen commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09ad2c9a970d2017-07-08T23:56:42Z2017-07-08T23:56:42ZJen"How can you love someone you have no connection with?" Yes Osho, this is true. We are seeking to fill...<p>"How can you love someone you have no connection with?"</p>
<p>Yes Osho, this is true. We are seeking to fill the emptiness and longing inside. Looking for something more than this world can offer. I never felt a connection and yet some people do fall in love with the Master. Its probably because of recognition, seeing a kind of reflection of who they are. Because that is what true love is, an awakening to who we really are. I'm still searching.</p>Spencer Tepper commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d2943555970c2017-07-08T21:00:15Z2017-07-08T21:00:15ZSpencer TepperOsho Your understanding about Thakir sets up a false dichotomy. Just as Judas is in the lap of Christ today,...<p>Osho</p>
<p>Your understanding about Thakir sets up a false dichotomy. </p>
<p>Just as Judas is in the lap of Christ today, enjoying the Lord's company, so is Thakir and Kirpal with their lovingMaster. </p>Spencer Tepper commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09ad2341970d2017-07-08T20:57:48Z2017-07-08T20:57:48ZSpencer TepperOsho you wrote "So when Gurinder took over - it was different. Now Babani in his mind may have thought...<p>Osho you wrote</p>
<p>"So when Gurinder took over - it was different. Now Babani in his mind may have thought it was the same power and the same love would be there. but no - these were two different people." </p>
<p>Do you think someone's love is based on getting sweets from someone? Or healthy food?</p>
<p>We are love Osho. We are all made of love, and no one has any more or less than anyone else. </p>
<p>But that is a much different perspective than the position you have tied yourself to. </p>Spencer Tepper commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c909ecbd970b2017-07-08T20:49:23Z2017-07-08T20:49:23ZSpencer TepperOsho you wrote "Let’s examine HOW and WHY disciples claim to love their master." Why do you repeatedly cast negative...<p>Osho you wrote</p>
<p>"Let’s examine HOW and WHY disciples claim to love their master." </p>
<p>Why do you repeatedly cast negative judgments upon others you do not know and have never met? </p>
<p>It seems to be an addiction. </p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09ad192d970d2017-07-08T17:19:33Z2017-07-08T17:19:33ZOsho RobbinsLet’s examine HOW and WHY disciples claim to love their master. Here are reasons to love the master (1) He...<p>Let’s examine HOW and WHY disciples claim to love their master.<br />
Here are reasons to love the master<br />
(1) He has great qualities and you look up to him<br />
(2) You admire him and want to be like him<br />
(3) You believe he is flawless<br />
(4) You can only make progress if you love the master<br />
(5) He is the in-guy as he goes to sach khand. <br />
(6) He is all knowing and all powerful – a good guy to have love for</p>
<p>So these are all the benefits of having love for the master.<br />
Basically if you have no love, then you might as well quit the path now<br />
Cause you will not progress.<br />
</p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09ad181e970d2017-07-08T16:59:21Z2017-07-08T16:59:21ZOsho RobbinsSpence, do you love Swami Ji of Agra? or Sawam Singh of beas? or Jaimal singh? if you say you...<p>Spence,<br />
do you love Swami Ji of Agra?<br />
or<br />
Sawam Singh of beas?<br />
or Jaimal singh?</p>
<p>if you say you DO, (assuming you have never met them) then exactly HOW did that love get created, when you have not met them?</p>
<p>Someone might see muy video on youtube<br />
and say they love me or hate me. </p>
<p>Most likely what they are saying is they love of hate what I am saying.</p>
<p>Not me - as they don't know me. </p>
<p>Nobody can love or hate me from the video.</p>
<p>If they do - it is delusional. It is a creation of their own mind.</p>
<p>In the same way, I am saying how can you LOVE the master when you don't even know him?</p>
<p>I know this person who thought he had great love for the master (Gurinder).</p>
<p>I once said something and he said "Don't say anything against my master"</p>
<p>Anyway - he wanted to ask a question on the mic, and I was in the front of the queue and he was way behind me. I give up my position to him and left the queue.</p>
<p>So there he was - asking the master a question. All the while when he was in the queue, he was sitting there looking at the master, hands folded. never looking away for a moment. The very epitome of devotion. </p>
<p>When he asked the question, the master did not respond like he thought. It was a reality check for him. He thought the master would be overjoyed to hear from this great devoted disciple.</p>
<p>This is what I mean - suddenly his love disappeared, because it was not real in the first place. It was created in his head.</p>
<p>What is love? Can you love someone you don't know?</p>
<p>You can THINK you do. but is it real?</p>
<p>If you love someone you have not met or know well, then you are mistaken,</p>
<p>Babani Ji is a classic example. He knew Charan Singh and they were close. So close that Charan Singh authorised just his own and Babani's tapes when he stopped other tapes being sold. </p>
<p>I am not saying it was love - but at least real respect.</p>
<p>So when Gurinder took over - it was different. Now Babani in his mind may have thought it was the same power and the same love would be there. but no - these were two different people.</p>
<p>So let me re-iterate what I am saying.</p>
<p>How can you love someone you have no connection with?</p>
<p>The examples you gave. How is that love? </p>
<p>and don't forget the motive. Everyone wants to love the master because of the benefits.</p>
<p>no benefits = no love.</p>
<p>Why do YOU follow the path? </p>
<p>presumably to get the results.</p>
<p>if you don't get them, how long will you continue?</p>
<p>And if the master puts you down and criticises you in public, will you still love him?</p>
<p>The chances are - no you won't.</p>
<p>You only love that which benefits you.</p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d2942895970c2017-07-08T16:33:51Z2017-07-08T16:33:51ZOsho RobbinsSpence, You don't understand the difference between BEING JUDGEMENTAL and making a judgement. I can say that I think my...<p>Spence,<br />
You don't understand the difference between <br />
BEING JUDGEMENTAL <br />
and <br />
making a judgement.</p>
<p>I can say that I think my car is 2.5 metres long. That is a judgement.<br />
It does not have a GOOD/BAD value element to it.</p>
<p>Being JUDGEMENTAL means to place a GOOD/BAD value on something.</p>
<p>E.g. Fred is stupid, is judgemental (assuming "stupid" is a bad thing)</p>
<p>Spence wrote:<br />
Osho, I see you trying to reach a place above judgement, but to do that you must give up that discrimination which you excercise, but which requires judging other people.</p>
<p>Osho Robbins:<br />
I am not trying to reach anywhere. And giving up discrimination would be absurd. Discrimination does not require any judgement of people.</p>
<p>Nothing in my posting was judgemental.</p>
<p>I didn't call it a "Bad" thing to have or not have love.</p>
<p>I am merely examining the possibility of having love for someone you have no external connection with<br />
</p>Spence Tepper commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d293dafe970c2017-07-07T14:08:00Z2017-07-08T02:58:27ZSpence TepperOsho You wrote: "If you have a lot of personal contact with the master, then a close bond can be...<p>Osho<br />
You wrote:<br />
"If you have a lot of personal contact with the master, then a close bond can be created, but if you hardly ever see him, and even when you do – it’s from a distance, and there is no personal connection, it is unlikely that any real connection or love can be created."</p>
<p>Once again, it is really a mistake to try to form a judgement of anyone else.<br />
Emily Dickenson lived alone, yet her connection, her insight, and her love of Spirit shine through.</p>
<p>I think the folks who love the Master sincerely may include those you never see at Satsang.</p>
<p>We are not all social or sociable beings. Yet to make a judgement of what is in one's heart on the basis of sociability may be mistaken.</p>
<p>Osho, I see you trying to reach a place above judgement, but to do that you must give up that discrimination which you excercise, but which requires judging other people. </p>
<p>What is right discrimination, then? Only what we apply to the guy in the mirror. That is the only utility for it.</p>
<p>Apply it to the man in the mirror day and night, and you may find your way out of the ditch.</p>
<p></p>
<p><br />
</p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c9097bf9970b2017-07-07T05:54:35Z2017-07-08T02:58:27ZOsho RobbinsOne Initiated wrote: It’s ok that you think you have that sort of understanding and that sort of Love for...<p>One Initiated wrote: <br />
It’s ok that you think you have that sort of understanding and that sort of Love for the Master that for you these targets matter no more. But judging others’ ?<br />
No Osho No, this was ultra wrong way of observing and being judgemental to the fellow beings.</p>
<p>Osho Robbins:<br />
This is what I wrote – where you think I am being judgemental:</p>
<p>Love? Do you think YOU (or indeed anyone) LOVES the master? <br />
Your mind measures up the benefits. And it decides it would be GOOD to love the master. Then it convinces itself that it loves the master.<br />
If Gurinder Singh Dhillon was NOT the master and if someone else had been appointed instead, WHO would you love today?<br />
Would everyone be chasing GSD, or the successor? Obviously the successor.<br />
Why? Because of the benefits. </p>
<p>One Initiated, I am not being judgemental here. I am not saying it is a BAD thing. I am not being critical, or disapproving of anyone. I am not putting anyone down.</p>
<p>I am making a statement that we have a mind and the function of the mind is to look after us and do what is in our best interests. The mind COUNTS and MEASURES then acts accordingly. The sant mat books say that you cannot succeed without having great love for the master. So you create love for the master. <br />
Only thing is: if there is a motive – then it is not love.<br />
If I love a woman who is a millionaire, I love her for her money, not for her.<br />
It becomes even clearer if I leave her the moment she loses her millions.</p>
<p>That is the case with the master. And he is no idiot – he also knows it.</p>
<p>I have heard Him saying it very clearly, that “You are only saying that you love me because I am on this gaddi. If I wasn’t nobody would care”</p>
<p>I understand that the disciples WANT to love the master, and they convince themselves that they have that love. But the reality is: is cannot happen.</p>
<p>When I was following Darshan Singh – I was 100% convinced that I had great love for him. I would even cry, and miss him, after the visits to Kirpal Ashram. I would remember all the amazing times I had in his company. I used to read my poetry to him and he would listen. I remember when he would leave the people he was talking to, just to come over to me and talk to me. <br />
So many experiences I had with him will convince me I had great love for him. But the truth is : I had a motive: that he would help me on the spiritual path. </p>
<p>I am sure just about everyone THINKS they love the master. I am just questioning whether it is real or delusional. </p>
<p>If you have a lot of personal contact with the master, then a close bond can be created, but if you hardly ever see him, and even when you do – it’s from a distance, and there is no personal connection, it is unlikely that any real connection or love can be created. </p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d293b8b6970c2017-07-07T02:05:17Z2017-07-08T02:58:27ZOsho RobbinsThere is a story of a certain Bhai Nand Lal Goya, and his first meeting with Guru Gobind Singh in...<p>There is a story of a certain Bhai Nand Lal Goya, and his first meeting with Guru Gobind Singh in Anandpur.<br />
He comes with flowers and shouts “Hearts for sale”<br />
Guru Gobind hears him and asks his disciples who the man is.<br />
They say “He is a Mastana” (a crazy man)<br />
Gobind says “I am looking for such people – please invite him here”<br />
Bhai Nand Lal comes. <br />
“What are you selling?” asks Guru Gobind.<br />
Nand Lal hands him a flower and says “I am selling my heart”<br />
Gobind examines the flower and says it is beautiful – but what is the price?<br />
“Ek Meher Bhari Nazar” replies Nand Lal (One glance of grace)<br />
Gobind hands it back “It is too expensive”<br />
Nand Lal realizes his mistake and hands it again to Gobind, saying<br />
“It is FREE – there is no price”<br />
Gobind then accepts it.<br />
The point of the story is that if you have love, you don’t ask for anything, you are a giver.</p>
<p>Many years later, Gobind calls the same Nand Lal and says<br />
“I am pleased with your seva, ask for anything and I shall grant it”<br />
Nand Lal says “When I came to you – I was full of desires: mukti, grace….. etc”<br />
But keeping your company, al my desires have vanished… Now I cannot ask for anything”</p>
<p>This is the point I am making.</p>
<p>This is called love. A state in which you no longer want anything. <br />
Hence you cannot ask for anything. No more desires. Nothing to seek.<br />
How many disciples do you see in that state?</p>
<p>I am sure that if the master comes up to any disciple and says what Guru Gobind said,<br />
That disciples would give him a very long list.</p>
<p>Would you agree? Or do you think I am mistaken?</p>
<p></p>
<p>Every time the master invites questions – most of the questions are not even questions – they are ASKING for something. “Give me Grace” or “Help me meditate” or “come at my death” or “My father is ill – please heal him” or “take me to Sach Khand”</p>
<p>This shows that the disciples are only with him for the benefits.</p>
<p>Let me put in another way. If tomorrow the Master announced in Satsang “I am not coming at your death – nor are any of the previous masters coming.” <br />
And also said.<br />
“I am stating categorically that there is ZERO benefit for doing seva. You will not be rewarded in any way whatsoever. I guarantee it”<br />
Furthermore – if he added<br />
“If you do your meditation, that is great – but you will not get any benefit from the<br />
Meditation. You will not get any inner progress and no reward”</p>
<p>Would anyone still do seva and meditate? </p>
<p>If not, then they are in it for the benefits – not love. <br />
Your primary reason to go to work is the money you get paid – the reward.<br />
It is a separate matter that you might enjoy the work. <br />
But if there was no pay – you most likely would not go to work again.<br />
With the spiritual path – the pay is just something different.</p>
<p>Take an example on here.<br />
Appreciative Reader was asking me one specific question.<br />
“What is the benefit?”<br />
Because he wants to know<br />
“WHY should I spend my time chasing this enlightenment?<br />
If there is no clear benefit to ME”</p>
<p>However there is no benefit to the ego (the ME)<br />
</p>Spencer Tepper commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c9096e47970b2017-07-07T01:26:40Z2017-07-08T02:58:27ZSpencer TepperHi Jen Satsangis are a diverse group. As for those who want to be "saved" in any belief system, even...<p>Hi Jen<br />
Satsangis are a diverse group. </p>
<p>As for those who want to be "saved" in any belief system, even as an Atheist through the creation of some semi-immortal worldly achievement, the desire for help and escape depends largely upon the quality of one's own life. </p>
<p>Some people have had a very hard time. It would be presumptuous to judge their life and their choices by ones own particular situation or the particulate lessons one person takes as wisdom from their own limited experience. </p>
<p>We are all, at base, connected. We come from the same core gene pool, we are all generated by the same process of life, and our future prospects, for every one of us, aren't encouraging. </p>
<p>To adopt an attitude of power, authority or meaning is largely a construction. There is no greater reality in it. So to seek something else beyond our limitations is entirely understandable. </p>
<p>And there is more to discover both within and without. Hence people engage in their own explorations, and adopt a system of belief, which is really a hypotheses. And engaging in the practices of that belief they see for themselves what comes of "following the path". Some leave, some stay. </p>
<p>Nothing complicated. </p>
<p>Why other people do things is an unsolvable mystery. Why we do what we do might be solvable. There's more practical value in that pursuit. </p>
<p>"Who sums their fellows up at sight,<br />
Brings wonder to their eyes. <br />
But one who sums themself aright, <br />
Alone is truly wise." <br />
-Tao</p>Jen commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c9096632970b2017-07-06T22:44:30Z2017-07-08T02:58:27ZJenWhy is it such a big deal for satsangis who want to be saved and ultimately merge into some region...<p>Why is it such a big deal for satsangis who want to be saved and ultimately merge into some region called Sach Khand? Isn't life an adventure, having different experiences in different realms, continuing to learn and evolve?</p>
<p><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/shahram-shiva/are-we-all-one_b_7615562.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/shahram-shiva/are-we-all-one_b_7615562.html</a></p>
<p><br />
"Are we really all one, as we are being reminded seemingly on daily basis? The short answer is yes and no.<br />
...<br />
At our core, we are beings of diverse, varied and unique heritage, stemming from all parts of our galaxy and even other dimensions who have made a choice to be here and occupy these biological shells, but this doesn’t make us all one. Sharing the same shells even though our souls are magnificently diverse doesn’t make us the same.<br />
...<br />
We are unique, diverse, singularly talented spirits with distinct destinies.<br />
...<br />
We are one, yes but only with those who manifest at a similar vibration level as we do."</p>Spencer Tepper commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c9093b0d970b2017-07-06T11:53:23Z2017-07-08T02:58:27ZSpencer TepperStilling the mind to some degree has been medically and scientifically proven to be a fact, a true result of...<p>Stilling the mind to some degree has been medically and scientifically proven to be a fact, a true result of meditation practice. Meditation improves the functioning of the brain. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/inspired-life/wp/2015/05/26/harvard-neuroscientist-meditation-not-only-reduces-stress-it-literally-changes-your-brain/" rel="nofollow">https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/inspired-life/wp/2015/05/26/harvard-neuroscientist-meditation-not-only-reduces-stress-it-literally-changes-your-brain/</a></p>
<p>A variety of forms of meditation, most based in repetition and intense focus, improves brain health, increases grey matter, as well as improved attention and focus. </p>
<p><a href="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_on_meditation" rel="nofollow">https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_on_meditation</a></p>
<p>Devotional practice is just one very long standing and well researched method proven to be highly effective</p>
<p><a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-12661646" rel="nofollow">http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-12661646</a></p>
<p>In exact contrast to the arguments presented in this discussion, <br />
Meditation practice improves mental functioning. </p>
<p>Everyone should find something worthy of their devotion and focus and spend time focused on that. </p>
<p>It is a much better use of time. </p>
<p>The person in the dark would do best to raise themselves out of the ditch they are in, rather than to claim all those walking about above them in the daylight are hypnotized, and that daylight doesn't actually exist.</p>One Initiated commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09ac68ac970d2017-07-06T11:23:22Z2017-07-08T02:58:27ZOne Initiatedhttp://profile.typepad.com/oneinitiatedOsho In the final analysis – nobody cares about any master. They care only about what will happen to their...<p><br />
Osho</p>
<p>In the final analysis – nobody cares about any master. They care only about what will happen to their soul after death. They care about Him coming at death to take care of the soul.<br />
This is conditional love – and that is not love at all.<br />
The only exception to this may be people like Bhai Shaadi who didn’t care about himself.</p>
<p><br />
No no no, Osho, you are gross wrong here in understanding the bigger picture. It’s ok in the first place for a disciple - in the process of becoming a disciple to have a target in the front - call the target as Sach Khand, Par Brahm, Master’s Radiant Form. And in fact who has mentioned about these targets really? The Master HIMSELF. HE has given the sewa to every single disciple. Not mere the sewadars in the Satsang Centre are only the sewadars but every single person attending the Master is sewadar - it depends how good is he is indulging himself in the sewa.</p>
<p>For truly understanding the term sewadar is we need to really see what is sewa - As repeated by the Master in nearly every Satsang: the sewa with utmost importance is of Bhajan & Simran and progress in the meditation.</p>
<p><br />
Such good name you included here of Bhai Shaadi.<br />
Every single disciple has to eventually become like Bhai Shaadi to realise the Sach Khand.<br />
But it’s a process, it’s not something which can be given by the Master right at the time of the initiation or in Satsangs. It’s not the state that every disciple starts their Journey with, but it’s surely the unsaid aim - for only this is the way to realise.</p>
<p>That happens eventually with every disciple ! Every single one who reach to a certain recognisable level of consciousness; the disciple rightly gets merged in the Master and himself becomes that Love and no longer have the so called targets, these targets works at the very beginning of the journey and as explained by Soami Ji Maharaj: anyone who has reached Sach Khand; has only reached by merging in the Master - and this merger can not happen without the Love, that is the Love in fact… and exactly every disciple will lead to that path and that way of thinking eventually - by the mix of their efforts and HIS grace.</p>
<p>Until then, to be able to motivated, what would a beginner think if the Master is asking to withdraw the focus from all worldly stuff, what’s the disciple is getting in the return ? … they can not really feel that deeper love rightly in the beginning (off course there are exceptions based on past karmas) - but in generality there has to be a grand deal for leaving (at least relinquishing the interest and putting a bar if not fully leaving) all the maya stuff.</p>
<p><br />
For a small example:</p>
<p>Just like the parents set a prize of a certain gift item or a toy or a thing in front of the child, that if the child clears the exams with such and such results, he will be granted with that gift.<br />
The aim of the parents is not actually to give that gift to the child, but the aim of the parents is really to invoke to spark that love for the studies in the heart of the child. And the setting of target of the gift really only works for some years - i.e. the beginning of the journey.<br />
Eventually when the child finds the love for the choice of his field and matures up, he doesn’t need the parents to tell him about the gift or he himself even not looking up to what gifts he could be earning. he has found the love in his heart to study/work on something which itself is biggest gift for him.</p>
<p>Similarly loving and merging in the master is actually what’s going to happen eventually with every disciple. And no one can expect the same state of each and every disciple exactly at the same time - how can this even be thought of ?<br />
It’s a life long (multiple lives long) journey for every single soul, where no one knows the state of, let alone any other being, not even his own state, then how can we be so judgemental about what others’ are doing or how the other disciples/sewadars are behaving.</p>
<p>It’s ok that you think you have that sort of understanding and that sort of Love for the Master that for you these targets matter no more. But judging others’ ?<br />
No Osho No, this was ultra wrong way of observing and being judgemental to the fellow beings. </p>
<p>It’s It’s like embarrassing and taunting a little child on the gifts/targets for which he is trying to put the hard work from his capacity. This is totally uncalled.</p>
<p><br />
Love to you brother.</p>
<p><br />
~OI<br />
</p>Spencer Tepper commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c9090a20970b2017-07-05T19:31:00Z2017-07-08T02:58:27ZSpencer TepperOsho Robbins: "No amount of meditation has yet stilled the mind" Only someone omnipresent and omnipotent can accurately state what...<p>Osho Robbins:</p>
<p>"No amount of meditation has yet stilled the mind" </p>
<p>Only someone omnipresent and omnipotent can accurately state what is found inside the minds of others one has never met, never known. </p>
<p> Such statements are pure conjecture, and fall into the category of prejudice. </p>
<p></p>
<p><br />
</p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d2934fff970c2017-07-05T18:51:25Z2017-07-08T02:58:27ZOsho RobbinsSpencer Tepper: Osho Shouting at the darkness hasn't yet lit a single candle. Osho Robbins: No amount of meditation has...<p>Spencer Tepper: <br />
Osho<br />
Shouting at the darkness hasn't yet lit a single candle.</p>
<p>Osho Robbins: </p>
<p>No amount of meditation has yet stilled the mind<br />
</p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c9090703970b2017-07-05T18:46:29Z2017-07-08T02:58:27ZOsho RobbinsOne Initiated: But calling it hypnosis is weird and doesn't make sense at all. It's simply like even if the...<p>One Initiated: </p>
<p>But calling it hypnosis is weird and doesn't make sense at all.<br />
It's simply like even if the President is not there at president's house or if the session is not running in parliament and is actually vacant, will the gatekeeper allow you to go inside ? No. Are all the gatekeepers called hypnotised ? No. They are just following the order and it's their job.</p>
<p>Osho Robbins:<br />
The difference between the examples you give is this:<br />
I was not going on stage! Or entering the master’s house.<br />
I was walking on a piece of land that there was no reason to defend. <br />
In your example it’s like the president is going to walk on a certain street. So for security, the area is a no-go area and security protect it.<br />
But once the president has gone, why would they STILL protect it?<br />
Well, of course, they don’t, but sevadars DO!<br />
And when openly asked WHY – there is no answer other than “Just following orders”<br />
WHOSE orders? And WHY?<br />
The guru did not directly give those orders, as He says he doesn’t get involved in details.<br />
So it’s the orders of the committee, and the WHY is non-existent.<br />
So now, let me ask YOU a question. <br />
And think carefully before you answer.</p>
<p>What is a Gurmukh? You said a Gurmukh follows their Guru (and his orders)<br />
Does he follow the committee? Are all the sevadars Gurmukhs?<br />
The Guru is asking you to spend your time in meditation. That is considered the highest form of Seva, according to sant mat. <br />
Doing physical seva is not essential, in sant mat. <br />
So how come those sevadars don’t just quit the seva and meditate?</p>
<p>Because the meditation is hard work – or because they get no results from meditation.<br />
If the meditation was full of bliss and an amazing experience, I can guarantee we would have no sevadars. Who would leave a state of bliss to boss people around?<br />
The truth is – they get no results (or very little) results in meditation, so the fall-back position is to do seva.</p>
<p>One-Initiated: <br />
And the gatekeepers are not allowed to take decision on their own, otherwise there will be too many decisions and no one will know what's going on.</p>
<p>Osho Robbins:<br />
Well explain this then:<br />
I was at Haynes Park at a main annual satsang when the master comes. A lady was standing there passed the area where you are supposed to hand in your mobile phone,. <br />
She looked distraught. <br />
She was coming up to people and asking if she can borrow their mobile phone because she has lost her daughter. <br />
Most people ignored her. They didn’t care – just as long as they can get to their satsang on time. Anyways – I was just walking up to her to tell her to go to the mobile phone stand and ask someone there to help her.<br />
But before I got there, one person stopped to help her. He handed her his mobile phone and said she could call her daughter from there.<br />
She immediately grabbed his mobile phone and said “Why have you got this?” and she led him to the mobile phone check-in to hand the phone in.<br />
It was all an elaborate trick. I am sure Gurinder did not sanction this.<br />
Someone else did – or did she do it on her own back.<br />
I am just saying – maybe people are making their own decisions, and as long as it gets the results they want – it is acceptable.</p>
<p>One-Initiated:</p>
<p>Your definition of hypnosis was indeed funny. Following orders is not hypnosis, it's really just following orders for the respect and love towards the Master and what's been told to follow. </p>
<p>Osho Robbins:<br />
Hypnosis: the induction of a state of consciousness in which a person apparently loses the power of voluntary action and is highly responsive to suggestion or direction.</p>
<p>That is exactly what cults and religions use. The followers are all hypnotized. When an Islamic extremist kills people he is under a state of hypnosis. Why? Because if he was not, he would not do those actions. He is CONVINCED (the result of hypnosis) that the action of killing is beneficial to him (in heaven).<br />
Just as a Jehovah’s Witness goes knocking on doors. Why would someone do that? Unless you could CONVINCE them it was beneficial for them.<br />
WHY would anyone do seva? Unless you could CONVINCE them it will be extremely beneficial for their future. <br />
In the enlightenment path – it is harder to hypnotize someone (but not impossible) because you are not offering them anything. There are no benefits; no heaven; no reward.<br />
Just following orders IS hypnosis.<br />
Obviously not if you are in a JOB, and are getting paid – hecause now you have a reason and a motive to follow those orders. You are getting paid in money.<br />
And you are not following orders indiscriminately. You have a reason.</p>
<p>Following orders, just because you are told to – and not to question them – is hypnosis. Or you can call it conditioning. </p>
<p>Or example a soldier is conditioned to OBEY without question. He cannot afford to have a conscience. If he still has a conscience – the conditioning process has failed.</p>
<p>When he is told to shoot – even if it is women and children he is killing – he has to follow orders. He is not allowed to think.</p>
<p>Anyone who is conditioned is not allowed to question why.<br />
His function is to do or die (i.e. obey)</p>
<p>One-Initiated: </p>
<p>Following Master's orders with Love in the heart, say just filling the glass of water and serving it with Love in the heart will surely fill the disciple's treasure with Naam.<br />
If every sewadar is given the freedom to decide the rules/unrules based on if the Master has gone, it will really be chaos, it will not be an organised place anymore. And there is no mention of spirituality in it, it's just how an organisation work.<br />
I think you are mixing up so many things without having an appropriate explanation to it.<br />
In hypnosis, the follower doesn’t have any feeling towards the one who is hypnotising, he just follows the order without knowing anything about the love or the hatred.</p>
<p>Osho Robbins: </p>
<p>Love? Do you think YOU (or indeed anyone) LOVES the master? <br />
Your mind measures up the benefits. And it decides it would be GOOD to love the master. Then it convinces itself that it loves the master.<br />
If Gurinder Singh Dhillon was NOT the master and if someone else had been appointed instead, WHO would you love today?</p>
<p>Would everyone be chasing GSD, or the successor? Obviously the successor.<br />
Why? Because of the benefits. <br />
Truthfully – nobody cares about Gurinder, Charan, Sawan or any of them.<br />
Of course they PRETEND they do – and they put on a convincing act. <br />
They are even fully convinced that they love the master.</p>
<p>However, there are firmly turned to the world’s most popular radio station.<br />
WIIFM<br />
What’s In It For Me.</p>
<p>In the final analysis – nobody cares about any master. They care only about what will happen to their soul after death. They care about Him coming at death to take care of the soul.<br />
This is conditional love – and that is not love at all.<br />
The only exception to this may be people like Bhai Shaadi who didn’t care about himself.</p>
<p>One Initiated: </p>
<p>I understand not all sewadars are doing the sewa with love, but many of them really do it with love and it’s visible in their eyes. But possibly you and the other critiques are mainly pointing out the ones who are doing it superficially </p>
<p>Osho Robbins:</p>
<p>Everyone has a motive. The motive in sant mat is that you want to get to Sach Khand and since the Master is the key – you must love him. But is it really love when there is an ulterior motive?</p>
<p>One Initiated:</p>
<p>So if you go with your own theory, that clearly means you are also hypnotised by your mind, since you are following the orders of your mind. Correct ?</p>
<p>Osho Robbins: <br />
Not quite. To follow your own mind means that YOU are deciding – not someone else.</p>
<p>One Initiated<br />
"When I challenged them"<br />
So, who has given you the authority to challenge them ? Correct. Your mind has. So basically even while challenging them, you, your conscience is basically behaving just like a puppet and following the orders of your Mind.<br />
Really Osho, you are as much hypnotised as the sewadars. There is really no difference.</p>
<p>Osho Robbins: <br />
There is a huge difference. When a person follows a religion, a cult, he is conditioned and hypnotized by those beliefs. They control his actions – and he is unaware because he thinks it is the truth.<br />
When a person follows his own mind – he is making his own decisions – however, as you correctly pointed out – those too are not free because of the past programming. So the response to stimuli is conditioned. <br />
One example: a certain door would not open. All the people in to room pulled and pushed the handle to no avail. They tried everything but the door would not pen – so they gave up.<br />
A little child of three came along and pushed – and the door opened.<br />
How come the child could open what all the others could not?<br />
What did the child do differently? The clue is – he was not conditioned.<br />
</p>777 commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c908e34f970b2017-07-05T11:15:28Z2017-07-08T02:58:27Z777WOW for Spencer's : Osho Shouting at the darkness hasn't yet lit a single candle. Posted by: Spencer Tepper |...<p>WOW for Spencer's :<br />
Osho<br />
Shouting at the darkness hasn't yet lit a single candle.<br />
Posted by: Spencer Tepper | July 04, 2017 at 04:03 AM</p>
<p>May I add :<br />
"Only Being God is to Know Him"</p>
<p>777</p>
<p>Stop thinking guys & dolls, . . . BE the Music of Love</p>
<p>-</p>
<p><br />
-</p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09ac0f31970d2017-07-05T08:10:33Z2017-07-08T02:58:27ZOsho RobbinsJohn, Not sure what you are getting at. I clearly asked them a question. You can call it a question...<p>John, Not sure what you are getting at.<br />
I clearly asked them a question. You can call it a question or a challenge. It makes no difference : it's semantics.<br />
</p>John commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d2931de8970c2017-07-05T05:50:58Z2017-07-08T02:58:27ZJohnOsho: When I challenged them John: previously you said you did not challenge anybody<p>Osho:<br />
When I challenged them</p>
<p>John: previously you said you did not challenge anybody</p>One Initiated commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09ac0821970d2017-07-05T04:30:08Z2017-07-06T11:23:29ZOne Initiatedhttp://profile.typepad.com/oneinitiatedOsho I see what you mean by observing the following of order at some odd situations. But calling it hypnosis...<p>Osho</p>
<p>I see what you mean by observing the following of order at some odd situations. But calling it hypnosis is weird and doesn't make sense at all.</p>
<p>It's simply like even if the President is not there at president's house or if the session is not running in parliament and is actually vacant, will the gatekeeper allow you to go inside ? No. Are all the gatekeepers called hypnotised ? No. They are just following the order and it's their job.<br />
And the gatekeepers are not allowed to take decision on their own, otherwise there will be too many decisions and no one will no what's going on.</p>
<p>Your definition of hypnosis was indeed funny. Following orders is not hypnosis, it's really just following orders for the respect and love towards the Master and what's been told to follow. <br />
I agree it's not something very important which could give someone a treasure of Naam, but following Master's orders with Love in the heart, any order, really any order, say just filling the glass of water and serving it with Love in the heart will surely fill the disciple's treasure with Naam.</p>
<p>If every sewadar is given the freedom to decide the rules/unrules based on if the Master has gone, it will really be chaos, it will not be an organised place anymore. And there is no mention of spirituality in it, it's just how an organisation work.</p>
<p>I think you are mixing up so many things without having an appropriate explanation to it.</p>
<p>In hypnosis, the follower doesn’t have any feeling towards the one who is hypnotising, he just follows the order without knowing anything about the love or the hatred.</p>
<p><br />
I understand not all sewadars are doing the sewa with love, but many of them really do it with love and it’s visible in their eyes. But possibly you and the other critiques are mainly pointing out the the ones who are doing it superficially and specially for going up on the ladder but ignoring all those who are doing it with and for the Love.<br />
And really where these sewadars come from ? Do they come from Master’s house ? Do they personally belong to the Masters or RSSB ? No, Sir.<br />
They are amongst us, we are the ones who don’t know yet to do the sewa with Love and do it superficially. HE is the one who still showers the Amazing Grace on us - the Grace of Naam.</p>
<p><br />
So if you go with your own theory, that clearly means you are also hypnotised by your mind, since you are following the orders of your mind. Correct ?</p>
<p>"When I challenged them" </p>
<p>So, who has given you the authority to challenge them ? Correct. Your mind has. So basically even while challenging them, you, your conscience is basically behaving just like a puppet and following the orders of your Mind.</p>
<p>Really Osho, you are as much hypnotised as the sewadars. There is really no difference.</p>
<p>And if you extrapolate your theory you will know not a single person in the world is there who is not hypnotised or not following any orders, unless the one has reached the state of Par Brahm, where he can really receive the orders of the Soul which is not hypnotism.<br />
Some are following the orders of the Master (with the Love in their hearts), some are following the orders of their Mind (with logical thinking and some even without the logical thinking and more absurdity).</p>
<p>Guru Nanak Dev Ji Mahraj rightly declared the two categories - Manmukh and Gurumukh.<br />
Manmukh who follows their mann/mind, Gurumukh who follows their Guru.<br />
A little explanation here is that the disciple who has not yet reached the Par Brahm is also Manmukh but that he has orient his mind/mann towards the master; he is progressing to become the Gurumukh.</p>
<p><br />
~OI</p>Spencer Tepper commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d293166d970c2017-07-05T02:39:16Z2017-07-08T02:58:27ZSpencer TepperOsho, you are neither psychologist nor clairvoyant, so why make such conjectures about what is going on in the heads...<p>Osho, you are neither psychologist nor clairvoyant, so why make such conjectures about what is going on in the heads of so many hundreds of thousands and millions of people you have never met? </p>
<p>To understand spiritual experiences you must have them. Repeatedly. Under your control. Then you can determine for yourself what they are. </p>
<p>And even then, at best, that truth is only good for you alone. </p>
<p>Enlightenment starts with the experience of being enlightened. And, since it isn't transferable, pretty much ends there. </p>
<p>All this conjecture about hypnosis is really in the absence of any personal or scientific experience. </p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09abeb51970d2017-07-04T19:02:57Z2017-07-04T20:13:29ZOsho Robbinshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gflElH6PMY watch this video at exactly 6 mins a hypnotist makes a suggestion, saying "as soon as I snap my...<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gflElH6PMY" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gflElH6PMY</a></p>
<p>watch this video at exactly 6 mins </p>
<p>a hypnotist makes a suggestion, saying "as soon as I snap my fingers..."<br />
and it works like magic. </p>
<p>So when a follower of RSSB (or any religion) has been listening to suggestions from multiple sources (weekly satsangs, books, the guru, fellow satsangis) for MANY YEARS, and what is more he BELIEVES and TRUSTS the sources and has a LOT INVESTED in those beliefs being the truth, then it would be impossible for him NOT to be hypnotised.</p>
<p>And what will the result of that hypnosis be? Will he walk around like a zombie? and will be feel he is in a trance?</p>
<p>No - because neither does the hypnotized subject. The subject feels he is fully awake - but just finds himself following suggestions.</p>
<p>The RSSB (I am just using RSSB as an example - I would equally say Jehovah's Witnesses, mormons, muslims, even advaita disciples) follower DOES exactly what a hypnotized person does.</p>
<p>He follows the suggestions he has been given. So he will do some of the following:-</p>
<p>Follow the dietary rules; attend satsang; do seva; meditate (or try at least)<br />
want to get to Sach Khand; </p>
<p>constant suggestions over a long period definitely have an effect. </p>
<p>He may see visions in his meditation. He desperately wants to believe since he has invested so much of his life in this endeavour. </p>
<p>He wants a return on investment.</p>
<p>If he gets nothing else - he may become a sevadar.</p>
<p>From my observation there is a HUGE payoff in becoming a sevadar.</p>
<p>Firstly you become part of the in-crowd.</p>
<p>Secondly - ambition may set in - and you want to move higher up. </p>
<p>If you please the correct people they will move you up and you can become one of the people who walk around with a walkie talkie.</p>
<p>Of course those sevadars have a sense of importance - and it shows. They feel they are doing an important job. </p>
<p>But they are not - just hypnotized. </p>
<p>And that word - just means that they are CONVINCED that what they are doing is important. </p>
<p>That is all hypnosis is- to obey without the normal discriminatory mind interfering. </p>
<p>Isn't that what everyone who follows is doing? </p>
<p>They are following the suggestions they have been given.</p>
<p>Why? because they feel the suggestions are true.</p>
<p>You will always act according to what you think is true. </p>
<p>It doesn't make it true - but it does APPEAR to be true to you.</p>
<p>And you live your life accordingly.</p>
<p>One example.</p>
<p>The post here entitled "sevadars egos gone wild at haynes" or something like that. Those sevadars who came up to me felt they were doing a really important job.</p>
<p>However - what were they actually doing? Protecting a pathway behind the tent - when the reason for protecting had already gone. </p>
<p>This is hypnosis. There is no logic. They are following orders - exactly like the hypnotized subject follows.</p>
<p>The Guru had already left. He was the reason why that was a no-go zone.</p>
<p>Once He had left, there was no reason left to stop anyone going there.</p>
<p>Why could they not see that?</p>
<p>Simple. Because they were following orders.</p>
<p>When I challenged them - nobody - not a single one of them could give me a valid answer. </p>
<p>I am sorry if it appears I am picking on RSSB - I am not - This applies equally to any religion.</p>
<p>Jehovah's Witnesses go knocking on doors. Why? It's the same - they have a payoff, and will get their reward in heaven.</p>
<p>They cannot see - that they are just recruiters for the organisation.</p>Spencer Tepper commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09abcb02970d2017-07-04T11:03:55Z2017-07-04T20:13:29ZSpencer TepperOsho Shouting at the darkness hasn't yet lit a single candle.<p>Osho<br />
Shouting at the darkness hasn't yet lit a single candle. </p>777 commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09ab5c0a970d2017-07-03T03:17:00Z2017-07-04T20:13:30Z777Osh : """" Otherwise it would be called MANY-NESS. ONENESS means there is ONLY ONE and that the many is...<p>Osh :<br />
"""" Otherwise it would be called MANY-NESS.</p>
<p>ONENESS means there is ONLY ONE and that the many is an illusion. """""</p>
<p></p>
<p><br />
Like there is 3 dimensional chess, there is 777 dimensional math !</p>
<p><br />
7</p>
<p><br />
-</p>Osho robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d2923ea4970c2017-07-02T10:11:10Z2017-07-04T20:13:30ZOsho robbinsBelief. You are told something and consider it to be TRUE. No matter how unlikely. As far as you are...<p>Belief.</p>
<p>You are told something and consider it to be TRUE. </p>
<p>No matter how unlikely. As far as you are concerned, it IS true. Period. </p>
<p>In other words you are hypnotized. </p>
<p>That is what hypnosis is. </p>
<p>Even if you get proof it will be subjective proof. </p>
<p>And since you are hypnotized you will make it fit.</p>
<p>Someone sent me this today. </p>
<p>He is a Christian </p>
<p>To him, this really is the truth. </p>
<p>To you and me it is ridiculous. </p>
<p>Wonderful God</p>
<p>A Muslim man in Egypt killed his wife because she was reading the Bible and then buried her with their infant baby and an 8 year old daughter. </p>
<p>حيث ان الفتيات دفنوا و هم أحياء ! و قام بتبليغ الشرطة بالحادثة متهما العم بجريمته . و بعد 15 يوما يموت أحد أفراد العائلة . و عندما أرادوا دفنه , وجدوا تحت الرمل الفتاتان الصغيرتان على قيد الحياة . </p>
<p>The girls were buried alive! then He reported to the police that an uncle killed the kids. 15 days later, another family member died. When they went to bury him, they found the 2 little girls under the sand - ALIVE! <br />
هذه الحادثة أغضبت الناس و حكم على الرجل بالإعدام</p>
<p>The country is outraged over the incident, and the man will be executed. <br />
وقد سؤلت الفتات الكبرى عن كيفيت بقائها على قيد الحياة , فقالت : ' كان يجيء إلينا كل يوم رجل , كان هذا الرجل يلبس ثياب مشعّة و كان له جروح نازفة في يديه , كان يأتي و يطعمنا . و قد أيقظ أمي و بتالي فقد أستطاعت أن ترضع أختي . ' <br />
قالت الفتات هذا الكلام في مقابلة على التلفزيون المصرية الوطنية , و أفادة امراة مسلمة عبرأخبار مؤكدة. قالت فيها على التلفزيون الشعبي : ' كان هذا بلا شك السيد المسيح , لأن لا أحد غيره يستطيع فعل مثل هكذا أشياء! ' </p>
<p>The older girl was asked how she had survived and she says 'A man wearing shiny clothes, with bleeding wounds in his hands, came every day to feed us. He woke up my mom so she could nurse my sister,' she said. </p>
<p>She was interviewed on Egyptian National TV, by availed Muslim woman news anchor. She said on public TV, 'This was none other than JESUS, because nobody else does things like this!' </p>
<p>المسلمون يؤمنون بأن السيد المسيح يستطيع فعل هذا , ولكن الجراح تشير إلى أن السيد المسح حقا قد صلب , وأيضا من الواضح أنه على قيد الحياة ! , وأيضا من الواضح أن الطفلة لا تستطيع أن تخترع قصة مثل تلك , و أساس فإن من المستحيل بقاء الطفلتان على قيد الحياة بدون معجزة حقيقية , </p>
<p>Muslims believe Isa (JESUS) would do this, but the wounds mean He really was crucified, and it's clear also that He is alive! But, it's also clear that the child could not make up a story like this, and there is no way these children could have survived without a true miracle. Muslim leaders are going to have a hard time to figure out what to do with this, and the popularity of the Passion movie doesn't help! With Egypt at the centre of the media and education in the Middle East , you can be sure this story will spread. </p>
<p>السيد المس يح ما زال يقلب العالم رأسا على عقب! رجاء دع هذه القصة تنتشر بين الناس. يقول الله : 'أنا سأبارك الشخص الذي يضع ثقته فيّ.' أرميا 17.</p>
<p>Christ is still turning the world upside down! Please let this story be shared. The Lord says, 'I will bless the person who puts his trust in me.' Jeremiah 17.. <br />
رجاء أرسل هذه الرسالة إلى كل قائمتك والله سيكافئك بوفرة! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! </p>
<p>Please forward these to all on your list and GOD will reward you abundantly!!!!!!!!!!!<br />
Please finish reading before you do anything else right now.<br />
Read this to the end. My name is God. I know you will give your time for me. I love you and always bless you. I am always with you. I need you to spend 30 minutes of your time with me today. Don't pray. Just praise. Today I want this message across the world before midnight. Will you help? Please do not cut it and I'll help you with something that you are in need of. A blessing is coming your way. Please drop everything & pass it on. Tomorrow will be the Best Day of your Life. Send this to friends Trust God.<br />
</p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d291cccf970c2017-06-30T18:54:46Z2017-07-02T02:57:23ZOsho RobbinsDear Appreciative Reader, I would like to make a specific point, if I may, about you. You are very accurate...<p>Dear Appreciative Reader,<br />
I would like to make a specific point, if I may, about you.<br />
You are very accurate and clear in your position. Very different from the way most people think.<br />
You want answers and you pick up on anything that appears to be nonsense.<br />
I thoroughly enjoyed the process of communicating with you.<br />
Unfortunately I don’t consider that the medium of communicating via a blog<br />
Or even any written form would be sufficient to handle the issues you have raised.<br />
Why?<br />
Because the matters you are valid and require an in-depth response.<br />
And to some parts of what you are asking I have no response.<br />
A face to face conversation would have been interesting.<br />
One particular point is the one you raised about “Knowing”<br />
If truth be told – it cannot be “Known” at all in the sense in which we use the word.<br />
For obvious reasons.<br />
I am saying that this is beyond the mind. <br />
If it is beyond the mind – then how so “I” even know that it is true and I am not simply deluded.<br />
Since, as you correctly pointed out, the mind can create all kinds of delusions.<br />
There is a person right now (google him) who claims to be Jesus reborn today.<br />
And there was another who has died now who said he was “Jesus the Man” (Miranda)<br />
Here’s a video of him. He fully believes it. At 2 mins into the video – listen to what he says<br />
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErI-_hYv7as" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErI-_hYv7as</a></p>
<p> I do have a sense of knowing – but I cannot explain it. Which by definition means that it is subjective.<br />
However, I still maintain that “Ultimate Reality” is not a belief because I have coined the term specifically in response to questions on here.<br />
I was using the word “REAL” to mean something more than “what I experience now”<br />
So I coined the two terms to create a specific and exact distinction between<br />
(1) What we normally call real, and (2) what I call REAL.<br />
The former I called “Relative Reality” and the latter “Ultimate Reality”<br />
I have no other way of expressing the distinction between the two, without running into problems about redefining the meaning of reality.<br />
I am, of course, redefining the meaning of reality.<br />
Reality is that which is beyond Time and Space, by my definition. <br />
I cannot show it, describe it, or prove anything about it.<br />
I also do not claim that you have to work hard to get there.<br />
As there is no “there” – it is here. <br />
What I write, is, I fully concede, full of contradictions.<br />
And logically I cannot justify the existence of what I call “Ultimate Reality”<br />
But that also makes perfect sense – because it does not exist at all <br />
In the way we think of things as existing. <br />
It would be accurate to say – it is nothing. <br />
But if it is nothing, how can anyone claim to know it.<br />
How can “nothing” be “Known”?<br />
It cannot. <br />
Because all “Knowing” is with the mind as we relate to “knowing”<br />
The very idea and concept of “knowing” requires a mind.<br />
Anyway – thank you for your interaction here – it was refreshing to discuss with you.<br />
I know we had that little mis-understanding – but I took no offence to that.<br />
Let me say in conclusion that I have tremendous respect for you.<br />
I wish you all the best,<br />
Osho Robbins<br />
</p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d291c7b7970c2017-06-30T18:09:09Z2017-07-02T02:57:23ZOsho RobbinsJim: I never heard of an Advaitist who wasn't an Agent of Kal, because, Kal = Time, and all Advaita...<p>Jim: <br />
I never heard of an Advaitist who wasn't an Agent of Kal, because, Kal = Time, and all Advaita Teachers operate in Time . ( including you )</p>
<p>Osho R:<br />
What kind of logic is that?<br />
You also operate in time - so does every other person on the planet, so according to you - they are all agents of Kal.<br />
If anything - Advaita says time is an illusion. SO how then can they be agents of time (kal).<br />
No logic at all.</p>
<p>Jim:<br />
According to Sant Mat, Kal is Universal Mind. All Advaitists operate thru their minds, so again, they are Agents of Kal.<br />
Its all a play on words, like a game of Ping Pong.</p>
<p>Osho R:<br />
What? Advaita operates thru the mind? and you do not?</p>
<p>Advaita is about going beyond the mind.</p>
<p>Do you have a logical answer?</p>
<p><br />
</p>Appreciative Reader commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d291bec3970c2017-06-30T16:09:21Z2017-07-02T02:57:23ZAppreciative ReaderTo : JIM SUTHERLAND Dear Jim, You did take offense, then, after all. I was hoping you wouldn’t, that you...<p>To : JIM SUTHERLAND</p>
<p></p>
<p>Dear Jim,</p>
<p>You did take offense, then, after all. </p>
<p>I was hoping you wouldn’t, that you would look instead at and appreciate the actual content of what I’d said in my comment, that you would focus on the reason and the discussion basis which I said what I did. Evidently not. </p>
<p>I fail to see why you’re so very outraged at my sandbagging reference, Jim. After all it was you yourself who started with the references, more than once, to your KO punch between the eyes, wasn’t it? Is using a cosh or a sandbag to hit someone so very different from using your fists?</p>
<p>Besides, it sounds distinctly incongruous to me, for you to go around gleefully handing out (virtual) punches on the one hand, and on the other hand acting so ultra-sensitive when you yourself face comments critical about your own words. Especially given that the words that you found offensive were no more than a direct reflection / re-statement of the very words you yourself had used (punching vis-à-vis sandbagging)! What kind of playing field do you expect, after all, Jim? What kind of ground rules would keep you happy? One where you are free to punch other people, while other people are to tiptoe carefully around you while you sit there nursing your knuckles, not even daring to talk about your pugilistic feats other than admiringly, so that your sensitive soul isn’t hurt by legitimate criticism?</p>
<p>Further : You cherry-pick and part-quote the part where I say, in my comment to you, that I don’t generally poke my nose into other people’s affairs. But you leave out what I said right after that! I very clearly explicated there exactly why I was making an exception this time, and why I was going out of my way to comment on what you said. Did you not read that, and were you not able to understand what I’d said?</p>
<p>And finally, Jim, here’s the thing : nowhere did I call you a thug or a sandbagger, at all. I think that was a wonderful article you’d posted there, extremely apt given the context of the discussion, and I loved reading it myself, and said as much to you ; and indeed in my initial comment about this tried to discuss that article with you, wondering how you thought the content of that article linked to Osho Robbins. When I found out from your subsequent comment that, far from having made a considered nuanced comment about what you thought was Osho Robbins’s spiritual state, all you’d done was the equivalent of brandishing that thoughtful article around like a trophy and a put-down to Osho Robbins, that was when I then compared the crudity of your using those nuanced spiritual comments not so much for furthering one’s understanding but as KO punch in a petty argument (and thus, at the same time, reducing this discussion itself from an exchange of ideas to a petty personal dispute). That’s like picking up a beautiful picture, and then using it to clean your backside! It is the crudity of that action that I likened to the crudity of thuggery and sandbagging. There’s a huge difference between that and calling you, personally, a sandbagger. Are you not able to comprehend that difference?</p>
<p>Nevertheless, Jim, it was never my intention to hurt anyone’s feelings here, neither yours nor Osho Robbins’s. Since I seem to have done just that, you have my apologies.</p>
<p>I visit this site primarily because I enjoy reading Brian’s rather unique take on spirituality, and also to learn from it. Not just Brian’s articles, but also some of the comments on here. Your comments also, Jim. [Some of them, not all! :-) ] Generally both those purposes (enjoying the articles and comments, and learning from them) are very well served without commenting myself. But there are times, like in this thread, where to get answers to the specific questions that arise in my mind (and which have not been already addressed thus far), it becomes necessary to comment myself. When I do that, as here, I enjoy that as well, because it is generally a pleasure to interact with the people here (all of whom come here drawn by the same general interest in spirituality). However, I may well have crossed the threshold point here now, the point beyond which further commenting will now provide neither enjoyment nor learning, and so I think I’ll take a break now from commenting here.</p>
<p>Despite that unpleasantness at the end, it was otherwise a real pleasure interacting with you, Jim. I’ll take your leave now, if I may, after addressing, below, two more specific issues that you raise in your comments. While I won’t be commenting here now, not for some time at least, nevertheless if you have anything to say in response to what I’m saying here, then I’ve bookmarked this thread and I’ll be sure to read your further comments.</p>
<p>My best wishes, and Cheers!<br />
- - Appreciative Reader.</p>
<p><br />
.</p>
<p><br />
Responses to a couple more specific issues you brought out in your two comments addressed to me :</p>
<p>.</p>
<p> FIRST : ABOUT COMMENTING ANONYMOUSLY : </p>
<p><br />
That is a personal choice, and hardly needs defending! I don’t know how aware you are, Jim, about norms of behavior when people interact in online forums -- you do say that you contribute regularly to the RSS forums, at any rate -- but often (not invariably, but often) people prefer to mask their personal identity and use, instead, a pseudonym and/or avatar. That is no nefarious oddity, rife with sinister implications, as you seem to imagine, Jim, but perfectly acceptable -- and universally accepted -- online practice.</p>
<p>You don’t simply have to take my word when I say this, Jim. Ask your friends who spend time online, or else go around yourself and visit different online forums, and see for yourself. In most forums, you’ll find that large numbers of posters (perhaps as many as 75% of the numbers there or more) would generally be posting anonymously, while some few (perhaps 25% or fewer) will publically announce their names etc.</p>
<p>The reasons for adopting such anonymity are many : First of all, a matter of general precaution, since everything we say here stays visible to all random visitors. Second of all, specific reasons specific to the topic of discussion. For instance, I myself prefer not to broadcast to all and sundry my religious beliefs or lack of them, not unless there is some express reason to do so. I prefer to keep my private thoughts private, and indeed would not have spoken half as freely about these things had I not been posting anonymously. And there is a third reason why anonymous posting is encouraged online : the fact is that anonymous posting facilitates impersonal communication, and allows people to concentrate on the ideas and issues being discussed, without getting distracted by personalities and personal situations.</p>
<p>Sure, there are potential negatives as well to commenting online. There are those who abuse this anonymity to, well, literally abuse other posters, and generally behave in obnoxious ways that they wouldn’t adopt in real life. Besides, this anonymity lets some posters go around making all manner of dishonest statements which they know they won’t he held to account for. Absolutely, you need to beware such abuse of anonymity.</p>
<p>It must be said here that such abuse is not restricted to overtly anonymous posters alone. There are those who, despite announcing their names, nevertheless indulge in abusive behavior. Besides, even if one does announce some name and announce some identity, who is to say that is who they really are? And finally, even if someone really posts in their own actual name, even then, how do you know they are telling the truth? When people talk about their inner experiences on here, for instance, how can one know that they’re not simply lying? Indeed, even if this little group of ours were to meet face to face IRL (in real life), and over tea and coffee and beer, we were to recount to one another our innermost experiences : how would we then know that all this is actually the truth? Ultimately, whether online or in real life, you need to use your judgment to decide, subjectively, whom you can trust and whom not. As you had yourself very aptly said here earlier, in this very thread : caveat emptor, every time!</p>
<p>I believe my anonymous comments here do NOT, in any way, show me as abusive or dishonest, not even remotely so. And nor do I believe I have taken undue advantage of my anonymity here in any way. Had I announced my name here, or even if I had been having this conversation in real time with you, face to face, even then I am very sure, that I would not have acted or spoken differently. But of course, if you yourself think otherwise, that is your privilege. </p>
<p>For now, I have to say, all this is moot, because like I said I don’t think I’ll be commenting any more on here, for the time being, so you won’t have the option of interacting with me even if you want to, not for some time at least. But no doubt we’ll meet again and no doubt both of us will comment again, in future, here at Brian’s site ; and, at such times, if and when our paths cross again, by all means make your own considered judgment about whether you wish to continue interacting with me further (because I have every intention of continuing to stay unapologetically anonymous).</p>
<p>Let me point out one final aspect about online etiquette to you, Jim : consensuality. Consensuality is everything. Not degree but consesuality. I may be as physically intimate as I like with my girlfriend as long as that intimacy is consensual, and you may be as intimate with your wife as long as that is consensual, but far less intimacy can be considered criminally punishable if it hasn’t been done consensually. I bring this up, because you yourself breached an important line here in your recent comment. Osho Robbins is, for reasons of his own, commenting here using a pseudonym. What you do in your recent comment here is, to go out of your way to announce to the world personal things about him that he has himself chosen not to divulge here in this forum. That, sir, is so not done! There is actually a word for this sort of behavior, and it is ‘Doxing’. Look it up, if you aren’t aware of the term and the concept. This sort of thing is considered very poor form, wholly reprehensible. Please try not to do this sort of thing again. (Brian’s moderation of comments on here tends to be pretty laissez faire, but there are forums where you can get banned, or at least suspended, for doxing.) Whatever Osho Robbins’s reasons for anonymity might be, it is for us to respect those reasons (just as it is incumbent on us to unquestioningly respect the wishes of a girl who refuses physical intimacy with us, no matter what her reasons, and irrespective of whether we like those reasons or agree with them). If Osho Robbins himself chooses, now or later on, to tell us more about himself, sure, that’s his call, he may well publish his entire book-length autobiography here if he wishes : but to egregiously publish information about him that he has himself not volunteered on this forum, without first seeking his permission -- that’s creepy, and so not done!</p>
<p>.</p>
<p> AND SECONDLY : ABOUT MY VERIFYING YOUR PERSONAL CREDENTIALS : </p>
<p><br />
Jim, you’ve offered, in your comment to me, to validate to me your credentials by sharing your personal photos etc. If you choose to publically share such information, I should be most interested in them Jim, but please, I neither demand nor need any kind of verification qua verification from you. I have no problems trusting what you say here even without such verification.</p>
<p>I am perfectly happy to take your personal statements, all of them, wholly on trust and at face value, why in the world wouldn’t I? Besides, suppose you were actually a homeless recluse, as Mike Williams apparently believes, well then so what? What difference could that possibly make to how I see you and how I interact with you? You, or Osho Robbins, or One Initiated, or 777, or Manjit, or Mike Williams, or even Brian himself for that matter : it would make not one whit of difference to how I myself interact with anyone here, no matter if you/they were fabulously wealthy, or if you/they were materially impoverished.</p>
<p><br />
</p>Appreciative Reader commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d291ba6a970c2017-06-30T15:23:09Z2017-07-02T02:57:23ZAppreciative ReaderTo : OSHO ROBBINS Dear Osho Robbins, Thank you for not taking umbrage at my pointing out the flaws, as...<p></p>
<p> To : OSHO ROBBINS </p>
<p></p>
<p>Dear Osho Robbins,</p>
<p>Thank you for not taking umbrage at my pointing out the flaws, as they appeared to me, in your position. No meaningful discussion can ever come about if we’re always tiptoeing around each other’s sensibilities, and constantly worrying about not stepping on each other’s toes.</p>
<p>All of these discussions (about the subjective nature of your belief system) are secondary and unimportant to me. What takes primacy (with me) is the ability to swim (to use your analogy, in your responses to me). You yourself are able to swim -- or at least, while I’m not sure you actually can swim, there’s no doubt that you yourself believe you can, and there also seems little doubt that you have greater first-person familiarity with swimming pools than the rest of us here, including me. That is the important thing, to me.</p>
<p>Hopefully I too will discover someday that swimming is fact not fiction. Hopefully I might learn to float myself someday, or even to actually swim. They say such things generally happen with the help of someone who’s already proficient in swimming, so perhaps it might even be you, some day, who might show me how. (Or, WTF, not. It could well be that swimming is merely a myth. I keep that brutal possibility open before me all the time.)</p>
<p>I don’t think I’ll be commenting again here for some time now. The only reason I come to this site is to see if I can’t learn from it, and I don’t see that purpose being furthered by carrying on commenting here ad infinitum. It was a pleasure corresponding with you, Osho Robbins, and no doubt we’ll catch up again in future as well.</p>
<p>I’m leaving some responses below to your two posts. I’ll keep visiting this blog for Brian’s unique perspective on things spiritual, as well as some of the fascinating comments here (without necessarily adding to those comments), so if and as and when you post any responses to what I’ve already said and what I’m further going to say now, I’ll be very interested to check that out as well.</p>
<p>My best wishes to you,<br />
Appreciative Reader.</p>
<p><br />
.</p>
<p><br />
Quote : "Ultimate Reality is a term I have coined. … No belief is required – because it is nothing. It is the absence of everything. … Ultimate Reality can also be called NOTHING. … TIME / SPACE is an illusion. … This is NOT a belief. I have already defined “illusion” or MAYA as anything which changes. … This is my definition. It is not a belief.</p>
<p>You are saying it is a belief. Please explain how this is the case." </p>
<p><br />
First : I find your practice of redefining everyday concepts quite unsettling, as well as wholly unnecessary. It’s like starting a religious movement saying “Jesus is our only ultimate savior,” and then explicating this by defining the term ‘Jesus’ as ‘the big bang theory’ and the term ‘savior’ as ‘the beginning that we know of thus far’, so that the statement “Jesus is our savior” actually means nothing more remarkable than “The big bang theory is the only ultimate beginning that we know of thus far”.</p>
<p>Do you see what I mean to convey by that admittedly exaggerated analogy? You seem to be confounding simple issues by trading simple statements for apparently complicated/paradoxical formulations, by using your own made-up terms for concepts that our language already has perfectly serviceable words and terms for. I see no purpose to that, other than an attempt at make-believe profundity.</p>
<p>Also : the make-believe terms that you coin are very heavily loaded, with religious connotations already attached to them. That further exacerbates the obfuscation and confusion caused by what you’re saying.</p>
<p><br />
If you tried speaking without the jargon, in simple everyday English, then you might find that you are able to convey your content much more effectively. Although that might end up making your message less profound than you might want it, perhaps, to sound.</p>
<p>Besides : Although you’re using your made-up terms, you’re still using these new words in ways that still carry some sense of their old, everyday meanings, as well. For instance, you often use “Ultimate Reality”, in your discourses, in ways that literally mean ‘ultimate’, “ultimate” in the everyday sense of the word. I won’t be returning with comments here after today, but you can check this for yourself if you wish, by simply going through every comment of yours in this thread, and seeing how you actually use the term “Ultimate Reality”. You will find that you often use that term in ways that actually mean “ultimate” in the everyday sense, in the sense of “final”, “actual”, etc.</p>
<p>To the extent that you believe your nothingness is ultimate (“ultimate” in the everyday sense, that is, more real than our everyday reality), to that extent certainly it is a belief. You say that your “Oneness” and “Ultimate Reality” are merely made-up terms which stand for “nothingness”, and mean nothing more than “nothingness”. Firstly, I can show you otherwise, that you do use “Oneness” to mean a great deal more than simply nothingness, using your own comments here. (Since I won’t be commenting here now for the time being, I won’t actually be doing that for you, but you can easily do it for yourself if you want, by mining your own comments here to see the exact sense in which you use the words “Ultimate Reality” and “Oneness”.) And secondly, even if I were to grant you that, it is still a huge claim to say that nothingness is more real than somethingness. Who is to say that somethingness did not exist for ever? Or : Who is to say that we haven’t had an eternal (and never-ending) see-saw between Somethingness and Nothingness? The truly base-case answer here, the only reasonable answer, is to say : “We don’t know, not prior to the Big Bang”, and not “Nothingness”. To posit even literally Nothingness as something absolute (in the everyday sense of “absolute”) is a huge huge claim in itself! Remember : every claim needs validation, even non-theistic claims. Unless you want to pass them off like religious pronouncements from a prophet, like some Zarathustra coming down the hill laden with sonorous pronouncements.</p>
<p>I’ve already stated the principle behind my objection, but let me repeat it with reference to the second part of what you say as well. You define “illusion” as “that which changes”. I know that’s how Advaita defines ‘Maya’, but why do *you* want to define the word “illusion” in that confusing manner? The word “illusion” carries a certain clearly-established and clearly-understood meaning in everyday language, and that meaning is most emphatically NOT “that which changes”. So when you mean “that which changes”, why not simply say “that which changes”, or use equivalent words like “temporary” or “transient” or “ephemeral”? Why go out of your way to choose a word like “illusion” that already carries a distinct (and very different) meaning?</p>
<p>If you MUST use a made-up word, despite the availability of plenty of perfectly serviceable words and phrases in everyday language, then perhaps a wholly made-up word (like “bicklechocky”, or whatever, for your Oneness) might work better! At least it will cause less unnecessary confusion.</p>
<p>Else you might as well go the whole hog and use the word ‘God’ for ‘nothingness’ and the term ‘Jesus’ for ‘transient’, and come out with even more profound-sounding biblical-ish pronouncements, like so : “The lovely flower blooming in the field is Jesus, and the beautiful mother with the infant suckling at her breast is Jesus, and all the world is Jesus, and the suns and the stars are Jesus, and the very cosmos is Jesus ; but before the world began, was God.”</p>
<p></p>
<p>The reason why I say I’m no longer very enthused by your pronouncements (unlike when I first heard you here and tried to question you further) is because I’m beginning to think that perhaps your profound statements are no more than obfuscation, and that they actually carry very trivial meanings, and that your actual realization may be no deeper than my own growing conviction that all beliefs are ultimately empty. (Although I find myself wishing I were wrong, and hoping that someday you could actually show me what you claim you yourself see.)</p>
<p><br />
.</p>
<p><br />
Quote : "Rebirth – is indeed a belief. … However, it is not required. I can take it or leave it. … I do not teach reincarnation. … However, I am talking here to people who believe in it – so I explain using reincarnation.”</p>
<p><br />
Huh? Osho Robbins, that smacks of dishonesty! If you take that line, then you can say anything at all, any damn thing that comes into your head, and then defend yourself by saying that you said it only because that is what the person you were speaking with themselves believed! If “I say whatever I want” or “I say whatever happens to be expedient” is your defense, then why are we even discussing anything that you’ve said here? Each and every thing you have said here could then be lies, including your Oneness Realization itself, as well as the events that you say led to it!</p>
<p>If you don’t actually believe reincarnation/rebirth is real (real even in the limited sense that our transient world is real, and you and I are real), then why would you pretend otherwise when speaking with people who do believe it to be real? That points at a decidedly unbecoming desperation to somehow, at any cost, grab hold of students and get your teaching across, not minding what you say as long as you, somehow, anyhow, got the students! Not unlike grossly exaggerated (and even downright untrue) advertisements aimed at selling commercial products.</p>
<p>Also : Remember, this reincarnation business came up here because you were trying, for the umpteenth time, to explain to me the “use” or “utility” of Oneness-Realization. I had asked you, Why should I spend even a minute in trying for this Realization of yours, and Why would you want to spend even a minute to guide me towards your Realization, why, for what reason? You had tried to explain this to me many times, but every time you came up short. Finally the one explanation you gave that made some kind of sense (some kind of grammatical sense, I mean) was that this Oneness-Nothingness-Realization is the antidote to Reincarnation. So if you take even that away as Not-Your-Belief, then what exactly were you explaining to me there, and why?</p>
<p><br />
.</p>
<p><br />
Quote : “The Shift” has to happen to realize the ONE. … This is not a belief … It is like saying: “You cannot swim unless you enter the swimming pool”</p>
<p><br />
Yes, I understand.</p>
<p>Although I listed that under your beliefs, I did make it clear there what I meant : that this position of yours is exactly similar to that of other religions in as much as RSSB, for instance, claims that you cannot validate its core claims by argument and logic alone, but only by actual application and experience. Which is exactly what you are saying regarding Oneness. In fact I remember hearing (or perhaps reading) that exact swimming-pool analogy of yours in connection with some other religion, I can’t place my finger on which (perhaps RSSB, perhaps tantra, I don’t recall). </p>
<p>So yes, this isn’t a belief per se, but it nevertheless is a claim as regards the means of reaching a certain conclusion. To that extent it is exactly similar to what many other religions say.</p>
<p><br />
But I’ll keep hoping, Osho Robbins -- not necessarily expecting, but hoping -- that despite my current contrary conclusion, swimming really is a thing, and that you do know this swimming thing after all, and that, someday, God willing, you (or someone like you) might show me how to swim.</p>
<p><br />
</p>Jim Sutherland commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09aa6bea970d2017-06-30T01:45:26Z2017-06-30T03:39:55ZJim SutherlandOsho, I never heard of an Advaitist who wasn't an Agent of Kal, because, Kal = Time, and all Advaita...<p>Osho, I never heard of an Advaitist who wasn't an Agent of Kal, because, Kal = Time, and all Advaita Teachers operate in Time . ( including you ) </p>
<p>According to Sant Mat, Kal is Universal Mind. All Advaitists operate thru their minds, so again, they are Agents of Kal. </p>
<p>Its all a play on words, like a game of Ping Pong. </p>
<p>I am traveling for the next two weeks, so won't be spending time arguing, debating, dodging, preaching, encouraging, hiding, crying, insulting, questioning, accusing, teaching, learning, asking, telling, listening, reading, helping, acting, auditioning, ......., so please carry on with out me. </p>
<p>Cheers,<br />
Jim<br />
</p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09aa6649970d2017-06-29T23:50:01Z2017-06-30T03:39:55ZOsho RobbinsJim, Some of what you wrote about me is incorrect: "he says he has been an RSSB International Speaker" "and...<p>Jim,<br />
Some of what you wrote about me is incorrect:<br />
"he says he has been an RSSB International Speaker"<br />
"and has attended the Haynes Park Satsangs, to try to embarrass Gurinder"</p>
<p>I was not an international speaker. I was a UK national speaker.</p>
<p>I have never tried to embarrass GSD. I have no reason to.<br />
I asked a question when questions were invited. I have asked many questions before also - but never to embarrass or "test" him.</p>
<p>This question was also not to embarrass him or a test. </p>
<p>It was a straight forward question about Sargun and Nirgun. <br />
In fact I was rather surprised that he asked me if I was trying to test him.</p>
<p>Also - on a separate note - you say that advaita teachers are agents of Kal.<br />
and don't want people to be happy.</p>
<p>May I ask where you get your information from. Is it direct from Sat Purush or Anami? Or is there a book you red this in?</p>
<p>Or have you just made it up?</p>
<p></p>
<p>, </p>Niel commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d29177a7970c2017-06-29T20:43:04Z2017-06-30T03:39:55ZNielSunil gurinder does not have 10m followers<p>Sunil gurinder does not have 10m followers</p>Jim Sutherland commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09aa548d970d2017-06-29T19:39:43Z2017-06-30T03:39:56ZJim SutherlandTo sunil : Numbers are not a problem, if "Oneness" is only ONE. Osho will sort that out for you....<p>To sunil : Numbers are not a problem, if "Oneness" is only ONE. Osho will sort that out for you. Gurinder can multiply himself in the Astral Plane, and appear in his Radiant Form to every one of his followers,....IF,.........any of them know how to access him at their Third Eye. ( Sant Mat 101 ) </p>
<p>To Neil: I know Osho is not his real name, but his real face is on Youtube, touting his Sant Mat 102 and 103 that he is very proud of, so unlike Appreciative Reader, at least, I know he is a real person, a 50ish East Indian Male, who has shared a lot of his life experinces with us, and he says he has been an RSSB International Speaker, and a Charan Initiate,....and has attended the Hanes Park Satsangs, to try to embaress Gurinder, so we know he lives in the U.K. That's enough to make me feel reasonably comfortable enough to converse with. </p>
<p>What do we know about most of the others, who post here, and hide behind pseudo Avatars as A.R. does? They can post any old crap they want to, and insult othets, as they please, while hiding behind their Moniters, and they will never have to account for any thing they say about others. They can throw shit bombs all day long,...as long as they suck up enough to Brian to let the Bombs hit the target. Good thing Brian is a decent Moderator, unlike Lane was, before he retired to his Bunker. To me, at least, I have been trashed by enough of those types on Lanes RSS site over the years. </p>
<p>We know more about Brian Hines and David Lane than their wives do! </p>
<p>777 has shared a lot of personal stories and experiences, and he said he is from France. </p>
<p>Just calling a Spade a Spade. </p>
<p>Cheers,<br />
Jim</p>sunil kashyap commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d291645a970c2017-06-29T16:03:13Z2017-06-30T03:39:56Zsunil kashyapGurinder singh has 10 million followers. How do you expect 1 person to contribute to betterment of 10 million people...<p>Gurinder singh has 10 million followers. How do you expect 1 person to contribute to betterment of 10 million people if he does not even remember them ? Jesus had 12 disciples and other saints had reasonable number of followers whom they could benefit. How does 1 person contribute to uplift of 10 million people without knowing them ?</p>Niel commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c906ed97970b2017-06-29T07:30:46Z2017-06-30T03:39:56ZNielJim Osho Robbins is not real name.....a clue: Osho rajneesh+ Anthony Robbins.....<p>Jim Osho Robbins is not real name.....a clue: Osho rajneesh+ Anthony Robbins.....</p>Jim Sutherland commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d2912bbb970c2017-06-29T01:11:34Z2017-06-29T03:09:11ZJim SutherlandAP, you may PM me at isydopen@yahoo.com with your real identity, confidentially, and I will be happy to answer any...<p>AP, you may PM me at isydopen@yahoo.com with your real identity, confidentially, and I will be happy to answer any question you have, as best I can, as long as you don't try to water board me. As I said, I have limited patience of conversing with ficticious entities who hide behind Pseudo Avatars. I have conversed with MANY Sant Mat Initiates, of various Lineages, as well as seekers exploring Sant Mat, yet, suspicious of being duped by self proclaimed masters seeking desciples, of which, I plainly am not one looking for Disciples. I also invited Osho to friend me on his Facebook site, ( which he has yet to accept) , and you are also welcome to do so. I do not duscuss religeon or politics on my FB site, but I mostly share my Travel Photos, which will take any suspicions away from any one wondering if I am living under a bridge as a homeless recluse, as Mike Williams, i.e. ZAKK has said he does. <br />
Cheers,<br />
Jim </p>Jim Sutherland commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201b8d29118a7970c2017-06-28T19:55:14Z2017-06-29T03:09:11ZJim SutherlandTo AP: OK, here goes: you ask so many questions, and make so many comments, that you incite either emotions,...<p>To AP: OK, here goes: you ask so many questions, and make so many comments, that you incite either emotions, or challenges to a Duel, or at least, it certainly appears far beyond just curiosity to some one claiming they are not intersted enough in Sant Mat, to already be seeking initiation, by any of the Lineages. </p>
<p>Since you have now labeled me as a Sand Bagging THUG, and on one hand, say you don't want to stick your nose in to my comments to OSHO AND VICE VERSA, .....well, that is exactly what you seem to be doing. Now if I knew just WHO you really are, or why you are so wordy, playing GOOD Cop, than BAD Cop, with first a compliment, followed by a bash, then more compliments, followed by more bashes, ......well, my curiosity is, having read enough of you past posts here to wonder if you are one of David Lanes Philosophy Students, or Professor Wife, or one of his Sons, ....or even possibly one of the disgruntled Exers who have used various Avatars to post insults, than they change to another, to incite riots among the other posters. I have always used my real Name as my Identity, when conversing with any one I respect enough to share ANY of my life experinces with. Examples I HAVE CONVERSED WITH, EITHER PUBLICALLY ON FORUMS LIKE THIS, that use their REAL NAMES! LIKE Osho Robbins, David Lane, Brian Hines, and others, who dont hide behind imaginary Monikers. Even MANJIT HAS A REAL NAME, of which he shared with me, confidentially, which I have honored, along with others. So AP, why should I AGREE TO BE INTERREGATED by some fictitious character like you, who appears out of Cyber Space acting like a Supreme Court Judge, but is too embarressed to not even use a real name, but wont even share your Gender, Country, Religeon or no religeon, or much of any thing about your self! Why should you expect me, to continue entertaining your personal questions? You did Osho ask if he wanted you to continue grilling him, but for all I know, you and he could even by the same poster, posting against each other. I am suspicious, because I AM a THUG. Charan Singh said all the family and friends of Satsangis are THUGS. </p>
<p>So, taking your position,.....I really appreciate all of your positive comments, and interesting questions,...but, why do you think you are such the Authority about Sant Mat, considering you have never been inintiated, so certainly are not in any position to know why I preach to RSSBers, or other Sant Matters? I may be compelled to do what I do, of reasons you know nothing about considering I have been posting on RSS since it started, and know most of the Core posters, who are also here. </p>
<p>If you come out of hiding, out of the closet, and at least, admit what you are hiding,or what your motive of posting here is, ...than I am not motivated to answer any of your personal questions, unless they are questions about Sant Mat Theology that you are interested in, and don,t understand, and would rather get an answer from a Believer than a non beliver.</p>
<p>Cheers,<br />
Sand Bagging Thug Jim </p>
<p><br />
, </p>Osho Robbins commented on 'Gurinder Singh: the One is the goal, God without attributes'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb09a9f59f970d2017-06-28T18:51:03Z2017-06-29T03:09:11ZOsho RobbinsAppreciative Reader writes: “All else, no matter how convincing, is, by definition, subjective,” you say there. Well, then, “convincing” to...<p>Appreciative Reader writes:<br />
“All else, no matter how convincing, is, by definition, subjective,” you say there. Well, then, “convincing” to whom? Whom other than your own self? And further : are you so sure it is really as convincing as you think it is after all, even to yourself? You know about how our brains work, and about neurons firing and all that. Are you truly convinced that what you’ve thought and felt and perceived and “known” actually has some kind of reality beyond neurons firing? Are you truly convinced that what you’ve perceived actually has some kind of reality outside of your head, outside of your brain, and that this corresponds to the actual reality “out there”, outside of your head and brains and neurons? [You may really be convinced, I don’t know, I’m merely showing how these questions can assume a whole different dimension once you realize the full implications of subjectivity.]<br />
Osho Robbins:<br />
The point you make is valid. I am not sure at all. I am sure it has “no reality”.<br />
You and I are questioning the very fabric of what we call “reality”<br />
And what I call “Real” is not real by the normal standards we judge by.<br />
It does not correspond to “reality out there”<br />
You are right – these questions assume a whole different dimension.<br />
I cannot “KNOW” in any normal sense of the word.<br />
Could I be deluded? Absolutely unequivocal yes.<br />
How and who do I say that?<br />
Because the instrument I use to evaluate (the mind), does not function in that domain. <br />
That is why it cannot be “known”<br />
Which is the same as saying it is unknowable.<br />
Most people don’t delve too deeply into the implications of these statements.<br />
</p>