As noted in a post three weeks ago, I've gotten God's Whisper, Creation's Thunder back in print, even though I no longer believe in much of the mystical/spiritual aspect of the book.
Spencer Tepper, a frequent commenter on this blog, bought a copy of the book, which I appreciate. I also appreciate a comment he left where he critiqued some of what I said in the first part of God's Whisper, Creation's Thunder.
It's a bit strange that I feel the need to defend a book that I don't totally believe in, but Tepper focused on a topic that I do consider to be absolutely true: that materiality is different from spirituality -- at least as spirituality is viewed through the lens of Radha Soami Satsang Beas (RSSB) or Sant Mat, which was the perspective from which I wrote the book back in the 1990s.
So it's sort of weird that Tepper is criticizing part of a book that was welcomed by the current RSSB guru, who arranged for several thousand copies of my book to be bought by RSSB, which greased the wheels for its initial publication by Threshold Books.
I say this because Tepper is an RSSB devotee, albeit seemingly not a standard one, since his views differ from the RSSB teachings in certain important respects. Anyway, here's Tepper's comment, and my responses in blue.
Hi Brian I'm working my way through your book and it did strike me in a completely different way today. It is elegant in its prose. But it's logic, at least in the first few pages, seems hopelessly flawed. You wrote "Materiality can be observed and measured with the physical senses of sight. hearing, touch, small, and taste. This distinction is important because it separates material science from spiritual science."
Yes, I consider this to be true. If something is material, meaning part of the physical universe, it isn't "spiritual" in the sense I'm using that term. The mystic philosophy of Sant Mat (which, again, is what I based the spiritual aspect of my book on) teaches that there are five regions of reality beyond the physical. The goal of Sant Mat meditation is to raise one's soul consciousness to those regions, aided and guided by spiritual light and sound.
This may be a case of reductum ad absurdum. The "material sciences" measure many things well beyond the range of the physical senses. From the distant cosmos to subatomic waves of pure energy, to brain waves and the firing of dendritic interlaces, science extends our vision and understanding. And in distinction to your claims, it often does so measuring indirectly.
When Tepper reads more of my book, he'll see that I note that science uses instruments to aid the human senses. Telescopes aid the eye, for example. And other instruments allow humans to detect electromagnetic frequencies beyond the range of the senses. But the measurements Tepper refers to all have to be cognized by one or more of the physical senses. How else would scientists know about the results of their experiments and observations? I talk a lot about quantum theory in my book, and this area of science deals almost entirely with indirect measurements, since there isn't agreement about the nature of the quantum realm.
We learn about gravity from objects that fall or move in space, not a direct measurement of gravity waves. When you wrote this you faulted, I believe falsely, the physical sciences for being unable to measure spiritual events because they have no apparent measurement in physical reality. Today you fault spirituality for exactly the same reason. Despite your development, your reasoning remains based in the same argumentation.
I don't understand what's being said in the comment above. Gravity waves are a physical phenomenon. Human senses interpret the observations made by highly sensitive machines that are able to detect gravity waves emanating from deep space. Given my definition of spiritual events, which is that used by Sant Mat, it isn't possible for a physical entity to detect a non-physical entity, such as the shabd or sound current posited by the RSSB teachings.
These days I regularly point out on this blog that there is no demonstrable evidence of a spiritual reality. This is consistent with what I said in my book, because physical reality is distinct from any spiritual reality that might exist. Thus any spiritual reality can only be known by an experiencer of it, since as I say in my book, that reality would be non-symbolic -- incapable of being described in words, symbols, images, numbers, or such.
Earlier you constrained science to what could be measured at the time. Today you constrain spirituality because of those same constraints. But in both cases the argument is premature. Your argument extends well beyond your evidence. Even thoughts are correlated to biochemical events. What happens to us is connected to this world.
I totally agree, given my current materialist perspective. However, mysticism as taught by the RSSB gurus has a different perspective: that soul consciousness is separable from the human brain, and it is possible to be aware of spiritual realms of reality that have no connection with this physical universe.
Spirituality and all the classic experiences noted repeatedly in mystic literature and mythic symbols throughout recorded history must at some point find measurable correlates. You quote Max Planck "Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature. And that is because, in the last analysis, we ourselves are part of nature and, therefore, part of the mystery we are trying to solve."
Tepper is wrong on this point. Most mystical literature teaches that God, and associated"heavens," are incapable of being described symbolically. They must be experienced, not talked about. The Planck quote cited above supports this notion. Spiritual mystery can be comprehended only by becoming it, or at least grasping it in a non-conceptual fashion. So it is entirely wrong to claim that mysticism seeks "measurable correlates" of mystical experience.
This echoes the same argument for analogous reasoning made by Thomas Aquinas, when he wrote that God cannot be understood by deduction, since God is not a reducable element that can be manipulated, but is in fact greater than this creation. And this echoes Kant's argument that reason cannot accurately extend too far beyond its premeses of common experience to explain metasphysic experience.
Agreed, in the sense that I noted above: mysticism teaches that reasoning can't reach into spiritual realms of existence, a point I stress repeatedly in my book.
But as the tools of science are honed in studying mystic experience we certainly can and will gain greater insights into it. All the modern research into meditation and its physiological effects are evidence, hard evidence of this. I think the same flaw in reasoning from your book pervades your current thinking. You once dismissed scientific inquiry as too limited to capture the full range of reality. Your argument then seemed to be 'If science can't test it today, science must be too constrained to witness true mystic experience' . You now dismiss mystic experience for the same reason.
I disagree, given the RSSB/Sant Mat form of mysticism I based my book on. Again, the RSSB teachings aim at merging the drop of the soul with the ocean of shabd, the sound current that is believed to be the source from which lower levels of creation spring. This is very different from meditation approaches that aim at making the mind (which is the physical brain in action) more relaxed, concentrated, and such. Tepper's definition of "mystic experience" isn't the one I use in my book, which is the same as that taught by the RSSB gurus.
You seem to now be saying 'If mystic experience can't be tested it must be false, non-existent.' Brian, I hope you can see both of these are unscientific and fallacious claims, based as they area on a single false premise: Your arguments are too final for either science or statements of divinity, based as they are on flawed human limitations, either in meditation or science. But in both cases development invalidates that argument.
Tepper clearly hasn't finished reading my book. What he says above is the exact opposite of what I say in the book. God's Whisper, Creation's Thunder is founded on the premise that there are objective, yet non-symbolic, realms of reality that lie beyond the bounds of material science. So I say over and over in the book that it isn't possible for material science to find signs of a spiritual reality.
You site [sic ] Joe Rosen's definition of science based in the study of what is reproducible and predictable (reliable). All meditation practice and specifically the internal experiences that accrue must at some point meet these same criteria in order for the practitioner to conclude they are witnessing truth. Your approach to criticizing science as a means of creating a space to defend meditation is based on a flaw that had to crumble at some point.
Yes, I correctly describe what material science is all about. Spiritual science is not material science. As I say in my book, if there are spiritual realms of reality that are non-physical, a physical science can't be aware of them. This is why I say that non-symbolic contemplative meditation is the only way of (possibly) contacting a spiritual reality. The fact that there is no agreement among the world's religions and mystical teachings about what a spiritual reality is like now leads me to believe that no such reality exists.
I wonder why you would choose to write this book without first having a thorough grounding of spiritual experience that met the conditions for reliability and repetitive reproducibility at your volition, so that you could test it, and get beyond imagination and subjective experience.
Well, I spent 35 years meditating every day for several hours, as instructed by Charan Singh, the guru who initiated me in 1971. I consider that a "thorough grounding" in the Sant Mat mystical teachings. I conducted the experiment of contemplative meditation with fortitude, diligence, and attention to detail. Tepper is free to engage in judgmentalism, and he appears to consider himself superior in spiritual wisdom. Maybe he is. But there is no way to know, because I continue to believe that genuine spirituality isn't capable of being communicated in words or any other symbols.
I'll end by noting to Tepper that this book was reviewed and read by numerous "higher-ups" in the Radha Soami Satsang Beas organization, and was approved by the guru Gurinder Singh himself. So even though Tepper believes that my book doesn't accurately reflect the mystical teachings of Sant Mat, the guru and other leaders of Radha Soami Satsang Beas considered that it did.
First off, I am humbled by the time and consideration you have taken with my remarks.
Your book is a rich source of common thinking about spirituality vs science, and worthy of discussion. I hope other regulars will buy it and join in this discussion.
What is interesting is the common thread in your thinking both then and now, though you have changed sides.
My point is that the sides are arbitrary and don't actually exist as you have defined them. Modern science does not make the distinctions between objective and subjective or objective and spiritual that your book makes.
I'm not in a position to comment about Sant Mat. I don't represent that organization, though I am a devout Satsangi. Each of us has a different level of understand. That doesn't make one right or wrong. The world looks different from different places but it's the same world.
But of course each of us may be making some assumptions which the other can clarify.
I think I can clear up a couple of things in my own statements that you have attempted to address.
The issue of inner regions can quickly be addressed as experienced. The fact that such regions ("I was taken up to the third region" St Paul) and the aspect of divine sound find common documentation throughout spiritual literature forms a large body of evidence that the experience is similar, and therefore something objective (however our brain filters it) is there.
But I would be in no condition to comment or defend the above had I not replicated that experience.
And that was simply following the instructions, after several years of trial and error, noting small gains and various setbacks.
But I cannot conclude these things precisely, only that they are in the realm of witness under some control and testability to some degree.
I had experiences of being pulled up into intense light and sound as a child.
I was frightened. My parents were frightened for me.
No one could explain it except Sant Mat. And Sant Mat provided the means for me to go back to those places, not as a child being thrown across the stars, then through vast curving regions of darkness in terror, to be showered in light and sound so intense they hurt. But to go at my pace, under my control with my best friend.
If you had followed the instructions and had arrived at this same level, you would say as I do, "I don't understand all of it, but it is happening exactly as taught." Then you could go further to conjecture and test just what all that incredible music is, or those glowing swans or that shower of multicolored lights, or those gas clouds of stars. You could note the regular and repeated access, as accessible as looking through a telescope.
And in my case they must be something objective, even if that something is entirely in this brain. If that is so this is hard wired into our genetics. And equally worthy of investigation. For these places, if they are built into is, are amazing places.
My testimony is only that it's true, from the experience of sight and sound, these places and the Master's protection and guidance. But is that some place in another dimension? Or in the human mind?
I just wanted to know if you had gotten that far.
Because at least that much is absolutely right.
To claim it is another realm, even so, it must be connected to this physical reality in some way. What can be witnessed can be tested.
But if you did not get this far, you can't claim it doesn't exist. All you can claim is you didn't get that far.
If there is one creation, all of this has to be part of it, and even the dichotomy of spiritual vs physical must be a conceptual distinction only.
I certainly do not see two different things at all.
Spirituality as I've witnessed it is absolutely within the realm of objective and testable experience, therefore calling it something else, calling it spiritual, is just a label, and I wouldn't believe it if it could not be tested as reality as any other sensory reality testing. It's just at a different level.
Posted by: Spencer Tepper | June 25, 2018 at 11:12 PM
I had already posted the comments below to your older post announcing the newest publication of your book, so pasting them here in the current thread on this subject...They are less personal than the above, but I think you can see reading both where and why I'm coming from.
Reading further, the schema you create for objective vs subjective reality is out of date. The two are no longer seen as distinct. You try to define subjective as ephemeral and capricious, and objective as more permanent and causal. But in the details of your definition lay a bias for the physical sciences alone as objective, and the cognitive sciences as merely subjective.
Our capacity to measure one thing and not another (so far) does not make something objective or subjective. All of it is objective, but most of it is not yet within the realm of objective measurement.
Did the subatomic world become objective with measurement? Was it subjective before that? No. It was just as objective as before, merely unknown. Unknown, but objective reality.
Indeed the act of measurement, whether that is by instrumentation or just using our own senses, involves constraining and filtering a holographic reality of immense data through a single pointed lens down to a two dimensional focused image. That isn't real. It's just the best image we can comprehend. And it doesn't look at all like unfiltered reality.
Reality is an immense and out of focus blur of non linear multi dimensional information, not the quantified objectified, two dimensional picture we filter and focus down to. That process isn't reality. And our capacity to do that doesn't define objective or subjective.
Indeed the distinction of internal reality and external reality is just a convenient concept, not an actual physical distinction.
This is the logical flaw that underlies your schema.
A cognitive scientist sees the products of imagination as direct and predictable outcomes of events, conditioning and biochemistry as objective as rain falling from a cloud. Your suggestion that these things belong in a different, less "physical" category that somehow is free of the laws of reality or cause and effect is not defensible. The symbols of the mind follow their own laws, but those laws are as immutable and amenable to objective study as the laws of physics and no different qualitatively than the different laws governing different aspects of the biochemical realm, or the nuclear realm, or the astrophysical realm.
Posted by: Spencer Tepper | June 25, 2018 at 11:39 PM
Hi Spence,....Real nice sharing of your inner travels. I also, have traveled a lot, traveled far and deep within, over my 30 years of using Sant Mat Techique, but I have never kept a written Journal, of either my Meditation Journeys, or my Dreams. I never needed to, because I always remember, the Peak experiences, or those that I am suppossed to remember.
But, I believe, as we continue to grow or progress in Knowledge, either because of reading books we had never read before, or even by comparing experiences like we do here, or by more time put in meditation, more hours, different Seasons, more experimenting with different Techniques to compare with Sant Mat, as I look back and recall my past peak experiences, I may interpret them differently than I did before, because of either new knowledge, or by growing in Wisdom. Age and experience DOES educate us in Wisdom.
Also, I have really learned a lot by listening to Ishwar Puri’s Youtube talks, in spite of coming to different conclusions than even he does about many things, such as his position on “ We never left Sach Khand, wre are all still there.” I disagree with that, but that in itself could be another unending Debate as the debate of, are those Brain only experiences, or OBEs?
I lean the most, on Theosophy, and Kurt KeLand’s Teachings about the Inner Planes, and separation of them. Kurt has some interesting, ( but pricey ) Books, but he also has a Web site where he shares quite a bit of free stuff, in addition to his Yoyutube Talks, he shares while on his Theosophy speaking Lectures. But, I will say, ALL of Theosophy Teachings are Journeys BELOW the Third Eye, but truthfully, very, very, few Sat Mat Meditaters ever advance even to the top of Theosophy Teachings, let alone Sant Mat’s Sach Khand.
As for my present conclusions, I think there are both, Brain farts, and real Out of Body Travel. Also, I believe, we some times open Portols or open the Star Gate to Outer Cosmic Space, that allows other disincarnated entities to penetrate our Inner Space, and visit us, instaead of us leaving our bodies to visit them.
Examples for me, are, Charan manifesting, as clear as day. Was he with me, in my brain, or was I with him in the Astral? If I was where he was, it had to be the Astral, because all earth body forms are left in tne Astral and do not form in the Causal, than, there was the Alien, with flashing eyes. Was I where he was, or did it penetrate my inner space in my brain? I don’t know. Then there was the 2 headed deformed Gladiator I was fighting with. Clear as day, but Where? So, Theosophy and and Ishwar Puri explanations have a clearer handle on what is happening than RSSB for sure. With Gurinfer, for us Westeners, we are SOL, because we have just about ZERO explanations in English.
Then, my early projection to outer soace, was certainly an Out of Body projection, becsuse it came unexpectedly, while in deep meditation, with out knowing which Plane I projected from. But it was far, far out, from planet earth, because when I looked back, Earth wss a tiny planet with its blue water as seen by tne Astronauts in outer space. Also, the Blue Sky was bluer than any I have ever seen on earth. But we know, that once we leave the Statisphere, its all Black, not Blue. And I spend a lot of time in the Black Space, so I know I am out of body.
Then, there were my low Astral OOB travels, penetrating thru walls, flying over buildings in the neighborhoods, flying like Superman, in the same position, seeing my hands out in front of me, while steering my self like I was flying a Glider, or sitting on a Flying Carpet, and flying and steering by leaning right, left, forward, or backwards. And landing gently with out crashing by using my open hands as reverse thrusters to soften the landing. Then I would fly over water, in a standing position, just skimming the water, using my open hands again, like a reverse Thuster to keep me in the air off the water. Could that have been how Jesus was seen walking on water?
The list could go on, for pages, and I add to them every time Ii sit in meditation.
So, the moral of my story is, the end of each story ends, when we quit meditating, or decide its all in the brain, which will all will leave here, when we die. That is not my story. I believe my Story has only began.
Posted by: Jim Sutherland | June 26, 2018 at 03:36 AM
Subtle material energy can only be ascertained by instruments is bogus argument. You don't need any instrument to perceive gravity, see the effects of gravity, validate gravity by naked eyes. If you can ascertain gravity by naked eyes, there is probability that you can ascertain shabd energy with naked eyes. For a primitive man living in African forests gravity does not exist even when he sees objects falling. Why ? Because he is illiterate regarding gravity but he maybe literate regarding those things which cunning educated men cannot even dream about e.g. living without food, surviving without food, flourishing without food. If gurudom gurus or bloggers are half baked in physics, audience must not suffer due to that. The biggest foolishness is to think that fancy English will compensate for half-baked Physics.
To think that shabda/ sant mat is not evolving with every day is even bigger foolishness. Time may come when average educated man will have much higher understanding of Physics and Sant-mat than gurudom gurus and their cronies.
Posted by: vinny | June 26, 2018 at 04:27 AM
I note in your book the comments you provide from others as well as your own, on Ultimate Reality and the Theory of Everything.
Here again I see a similar black and white construct and dichotomy both of science and religion which I think is merely a construct and not reality based. Indeed all the evidence points in the opposite direction you seem to want to take.
You write that the objective of science and the promise of religion is knowledge of ultimate reality and in this science and religion have failed.
But an honest review of science and religion reveal the opposite.
The more science learns about this creation, through hard work and testing, the more areas of deeper investigation it uncovers. Science, rather than approaching a saturation point where reality is understood as a complete whole, is expanding. We have more questions now than ever before. As our knowledge grows, so does the vista of science into greater depths of the unknown. If the universe is expanding, science even more so. Occam was disproven long ago.
A handful of atomic particles are now understood to actually be well over 200 elementary and composite particles, and new particles, forces and waves identified every decade.
A few thousand species on earth are now seen to be in the millions. And new species are still being identified.
Science, by learning more, is moving in the opposite direction. As we learn more we appreciate there is more to learn still, and as we master some things we realize how little we know, from what we can see now, from our more enlightened position.
Did new things appear that weren't there before?
No. They were always there. We are just seeing them now because we are actually observing under the required conditions. Finally.
No. We are simply learning how to see in more focused ways, and how to learn from that. We are learning not to dismiss what one we dismissed as unimportant. The dark room was never empty.
Even one "region" encompasses much more than all known and forecasted physical reality.
This isn't a flaw. This is a natural progression, development. If there is a flaw, it is only the naivete we had thinking there was some point of completion.
You attribute the same fault to religion and then offer mysticism as the answer to both.
But mysticism is active investigation. Its truths are learned that way, and like any human endeavor there may not be a point of knowing it all. That isn't the point actually. Learning truth and progress is the evidence justifying entirely the point.
And then you see that each religion's view of God is a symbolic representation of a different aspect of the same truth for a different people and time, yet reflecting similar deeper themes.
'God' can be infinitely varied for different peoples and times. It is naive and irrational to presume this is evidence that one God doesn't exist.
Indeed the fact so many hold a view of divinity which they in part attribute to faith (remember faith is actually, in biblical usage, active prayer and its experience) this is evidence that something is there. But what is there may be a different experience of this creation, and just as variegated, rich and complex.
We can experience divinity as one, as the whole. But in our individual tiny situation, God can be just as different as our specific circumstances. Each drop of rain, each grain of sand has its unique and individual properties.
To witness the whole, we go beyond this tiny situation, first in our heart, then in our efforts, and then in our experience.
But is that "all" or simply the incredible experience of a sense of completeness in a joy, an ecstacy the likes of which we had never known before? Forgive the mystic for calling it "all".
Childten think in absolute terms. But adults naturally leave that behind at they begin to experience the richness of creation, whether by a walk in the woods or in prayer and meditation.
Posted by: Spencer G Tepper | June 26, 2018 at 07:28 AM
I disagree, given the RSSB/Sant Mat form of mysticism I based my book on. Again, the RSSB teachings aim at merging the drop of the soul with the ocean of shabd, the sound current that is believed to be the source from which lower levels of creation spring. This is very different from meditation approaches that aim at making the mind (which is the physical brain in action) more relaxed, concentrated, and such. Tepper's definition of "mystic experience" isn't the one I use in my book, which is the same as that taught by the RSSB gurus.
As Ishwar Puri points out, "soul drop" is a misleading metaphor.
Consciousness is not separable from its source. It doesn't merge
in the ocean, it's already there. Feeling it's a drop is only a
contraction of awareness of who it is (an awareness "lobotomy").
The drop clings to a notional sense of being a separated, distinct
entity when in fact it's already merged in the ocean and never
That ocean, call it God or "Totality of Consciousness", is the
genesis of all creation. That includes the "mind-brain". How
could any of the ocean's waves not have have correlates in the
physical universe. In that respect, there's no dichotomy between
a mindfullness practice for mere relaxation and one that raises
a deeper awareness of self
Posted by: Dungeness | June 26, 2018 at 07:37 AM
Objectively speaking breath control yoga is the highest form of mysticism, it can give those results in self-control in one year which may not be possible by practicing 100 yrs of sant-mat. It can lead to a collapse of Radha swami methods.
Posted by: vinny | June 26, 2018 at 11:16 AM
"Well, I spent 35 years meditating every day for several hours, as instructed by Charan Singh, the guru who initiated me in 1971. I consider that a "thorough grounding" in the Sant Mat mystical teachings. I conducted the experiment of contemplative meditation with fortitude, diligence, and attention to detail. Tepper is free to engage in judgmentalism, and he appears to consider himself superior in spiritual wisdom"
No, I do not judge. I'm not actually judging your knowledge of the published Sant Mat teachings or of that organization.
I'm trying to ascertain why you didn't get valuable, demonstrable, beneficial, testable and repeatable results you could question, evaluate and manipulate by refining your approach, until you acquired experience that was new and different, reflecting something deeper: Insight into your own body / brain and its processes that brought all the pieces of Brian together a little better, in a conscious way you could experience. I'm not interested in whether you got from meditation what you expected, or felt you were led to expect before you started your practice and could then form your own expectations.
Rather, I admire what you've accomplished. But as one devoted to the tenets of the scientific method, and always interested to learn more about the practice and experience of meditation I ask,
1. What specific method did you employ?
2. What were your initial results?
3. How did you refine your method?
4. How did these changes alter your results?
5. When you ran into difficulties making further progress what assistance from other practitioners did you seek / receive?
6. Where is your practice today, in terms of method, requirements and results?
You see, it's not about meeting a definition of psychology, spirituality or religion. It's just about the development of beneficial internal experiences and the method used to generate them reliably.
Posted by: Spencer G Tepper | June 26, 2018 at 11:32 AM
@ Brain - what made you write this book in the first place?
Posted by: Arjuna | June 26, 2018 at 12:58 PM
Spencer, you claim to know about "divine" realms of reality. This claim is made by many, many people. Their descriptions of those realms differ a lot. Numerous Christians have claimed to had a vision of heaven, of Jesus, of God, of Angels, and so on.
So what are we to make of all these claims? Your claim to supernatural knowledge is, again, one of many that can't be verified. Words are cheap. Verifiable truth is expensive.
No one can know whether your experiences of sound and light reflected a reality outside of your own brain/mind. You even can't know this. So the premise of my book is sound, in my view: if realms of reality exist beyond the physical, there is no demonstrable proof of them.
Nor, likely, can there be. So we're left with unverifiable claims of "divine" regions that no one can demonstrate to be true, and which are at odds with other descriptions of heavenly realms. Spiritual skepticism is justified, for sure.
Regarding how I meditated for 35 years, I followed the instructions of my guru. You must know what those instructions were, since you are an initiate.
Otherwise, I'll be pleased to answer your six questions above in more detail when you provide answers to those questions yourself. As I've noted before, you appear to claim special knowledge of supernatural realms. I don't claim that sort of knowledge.
So the burden rests on you to provide an explanation of why you believe to know about realms of reality beyond the physical, and how you can be sure that this knowledge isn't an emanation of your own mind/brain, rather than being based in an objective "spiritual" reality.
Posted by: Brian Hines | June 26, 2018 at 01:14 PM
Arjuna, I've always been interested in science. Long ago I completed the course requirements for a Ph.D. in Systems Science, which is sort of a field that aims at a "science of sciences."
Anyway, I had the idea of writing God's Whisper, Creation's Thunder after Charan Singh died, when I was an ardent RSSB devotee. I contacted the folks at the Dera who dealt with English-language books, and they were very supportive of the idea I had for the book. That's why the Acknowledgements section of my book says:
"To Gurinder Singh, for supporting me and the first edition of this book from start to finish."
I was able to meet and talk with the RSSB guru when he came to this country on speaking tours. Well, also to British Columbia. So it was written in the spirit of seva, volunteer service. I had to read and take notes on a lot of books dealing with the new physics, including quantum physics.
I also went through every RSSB book published in English at the time and took notes on quotes that related to the nature of reality, both physical and supernatural. It was a labor of love for several years. The Rumi quotes in the book were a selection from many books I read about Rumi's writings.
Posted by: Brian Hines | June 26, 2018 at 01:42 PM
Spencer, you do understand that at the time of initiation, RSSB devotees are instructed to not talk about their meditation experiences, right? During my 35 years in RSSB I gave many talks where, frequently, I would say that this was the easiest vow to maintain, since nobody was having any profound experiences.
That always got a laugh. After the talk, often people would come up to me and say, "Thanks for being so honest." I never had anyone say, "Hey, I've had experiences of inner realms." No one. Not once. So you really should be asking the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of RSSB initiates why they never had any profound experiences. Or at least, why they don't talk about them.
And perhaps you should ask yourself what your motivation is in, basically, bragging about the experiences you claim to have had. This simply seems at odds with what spirituality is all about, in my view: developing a sense of humility, diminishing the sense of ego, realizing that we are nothing special.
Posted by: Brian Hines | June 26, 2018 at 02:02 PM
"Spencer, you claim to know about "divine" realms of reality. This claim is made by many, many people. Their descriptions of those realms differ a lot. Numerous Christians have claimed to had a vision of heaven, of Jesus, of God, of Angels, and so on."
No Brian. I obviously haven't communicated correctly. I'm not claiming that my experiences were supernatural, only that this is what I've witnessed as experiences in meditation. The fact that these matched my own experiences prior to knowing anything of Sant Mat is what hooked me to the path. The path gave me help and took something fearful though awesome, and helped remove the fearful part, replacing it with love.
If no one had these experiences then certainly, why would anyone stay on the path?
Yes privately I shared my own struggles with other Satsang is. We all did. And along the way we helped each other as best we could, encouraging submission to Master, and providing whatever practical help. I've had a few big brothers along the way who helped me at every step, not just Mastery. And I've done some exceptionally stupid and hurtful things.
I'm not attacking you Brian. However your position that no one except a victim of hallucination ever makes internal, visible progress certainly has not been my experience with fellow Satsangis. It's not an issue of ego. It's an issue of helping each other overcome difficulties so that progress can be made. And that progress isn't about accepting dreams as reality. It's the opposite, waking up more fully to what is actually going on.
Your reluctance to discuss the kinds of things I have already shared is curious, in light of your attitude about superstition.
Scientists don't harbor such attitudes. Their interest is in progress and communicating responsibly their results.
That is the spirit of my queries.
Brian, ego is a disease that plagues all of us and we should always be in our guard.
But experience in meditation, experience of bliss, joy, insight, and yes light and sound are very common. Very very common. In the Sangat I was a member of it was spoken of a lot. I've had a few truly older brothers.
"I just couldn't get moving Saturday. The Shabd was so strong."
"How do I go back to work tomorrow with all this Shabd and light? How do I make this all work?"
These comments abound among friends in the sangat. We are all struggling with how to handle the grace, and then the dry periods, how to survive those too while caring for parents and children, holding down a job, etc.
Perhaps you were too high up in the organization to spend much time with other Satsangis?
But what you claim is an exception I found to be the rule.
Posted by: Spencer G Tepper | June 26, 2018 at 02:45 PM
Brian says, "RSSB devotees are instructed to not talk about their meditation experiences"
So true. It makes me wonder about the comments made by people who still follow Sant Mat and have no problem in talking about their experiences. For some satsangis who have questions and are not totally committed to the path, it seems okay if they talk about their inner experiences because they are not saying 'this is the truth'. Others talking about and revealing their inner experiences are going against their Master's orders.
It is obvious who has the bigger ego - the ones who constantly talk about it and project 'ego' onto others.
Posted by: Jen | June 26, 2018 at 03:55 PM
Whatever helps you maintain a compassionate attitude, an open attitude, a forgiving attitude, that's all that matters.
The evaluation of Sant Mat is not actually my interest. It's already provrn itself for me.
And that's not a personal thing. It's the path itself.
Take yourself out of it. What's left? Bliss.
So we should each follow our bliss.
I was reading Brian's book, which is very well written, and I saw some things that didn't seem right, too strident, too black and white. In a very foundational way Brian is fundamentally wedded to the same perspective as when he wrote this book so many years ago.
Brian is a powerful intellect, but this house of cards however defended had to fall apart at some point.
So I'm sharing my opinion.
But when asked about my experiences I'm happy to report them. Because my Master is also your Master, and Brian's Master.
At best in the realms of spirit I'm just the cooky cousin living out back.
But you and Brian are as close to Master as anyone. You just have to ask, sincerely.
Really, isn't meditation about happiness and oneness?
I wouldn't want the oddities of my condition to separate me from anyone.
But I honor what I've been given.. Yes I use my voice in that regard.
Is that ego?
Is it ego to judge others?
I think I would rather beg about blessings available to anyone than try to shut someone down making personal remarks.
The topic is meditation, and the contrasts and similarities Brian draws between science, religion and meditation practice.
That's worthy of comment. What are your thoughts on the topic?
Posted by: Spencer Tepper | June 26, 2018 at 04:28 PM
Spencer, in the "Burner on" thread, you say to me:
"Because most people cannot pay the cost of giving up the ego to a greater purpose."
"Because most people want to defend staying where they are, unwilling to sacrifice the ego, the old self, to that higher purpose."
Well, I guess that says it all. I don't have a burning desire to find a 'higher, greater, purpose'. I was initiated 50 years ago and to me its no big deal. All that constantly striving to be perfect and searching for my higher self. I am already my higher self in human form.
Just being who I am, living in the now and will take whatever happens day by day. Much nicer and easier than pretending to be spiritual and humble and devoted to some guru.
I don't see a need to sacrifice myself. You may see ego in me, but who cares.
I am going to embrace my ego! lol
Posted by: Jen | June 26, 2018 at 05:26 PM
I apologize. I never meant to offend you or anyone.
It does happen.
And I think it happens when we share our opinions about things near and dear to others.
Will we ever get over ego?
To some extent we need it to survive.
As Joseph Campbell said so often "follow your bliss".
So for some that is Sant Mat. For others that is Atheism.
It isn't necessary to tear down one in order to justify another. They aren't mutually exclusive.
You have picked your path. If that's where your bliss is, then that's sacred. That's your version of God, of perfection, however you choose to phrase it.
I honor it.
Posted by: Spencer Tepper | June 26, 2018 at 06:03 PM
... RSSB devotees are instructed to not talk about their meditation experiences, right?
That's true, but, the successful mystic knows when it's ok to thumb
one's nose at rules. With internal validation, any RSSB rule can be
In fact, initiation itself breaks the inexorable rules of karma forever.
Mystic literature is replete with stories of miraculous interventions for
disciples in time of danger too. That's also a karmic "no-no".
Posted by: Dungeness | June 26, 2018 at 06:13 PM
Its okay, I'm not really offended, just explaining myself as per usual :) Thank you for your kind comment.
I agree that ego is needed sometimes. It is our identity although I have read that awareness is our real identity. If we are very present in the moment. Self aware is being aware of awareness. Kinda cool like Zen.
Posted by: Jen | June 26, 2018 at 06:54 PM
"It is our identity although I have read that awareness is our real identity"
Posted by: Spencer Tepper | June 26, 2018 at 07:32 PM
@ Brian thank you clarifying.
@ Spencer - before you and anyone has a go - no master or mystic encourages his disciples to talk about their experiences for the simple reason that you take the dross of the person to whom you tell the experiences. Huzar Maharaj was dead against it.
Anyone who does go down that route is one the road not to help but to challenge a master for his position. Trust me you do not want the dross if thousands of souls on you. We do not have the power of lifting ourselves let alone others. By all means encourage and inspire others by talk about what’s inside no.
I’m not here to lecture but be very careful I have seen 2 people do this and it did not end too well for them.
If you were initiated by Huzar Maharaj Charan - this is even more concerning.
You might as well leave your bank card details on the dark web - so that they may be stolen. Talking about your inside experiences you are going back not forward or if you have been sent by the negative power you may have special permission to do so.
I am very concerned about all this talking about inner experiences and beside when you start talking He shuts you out. You could debate this until the cows come home.
Brian does have a point in what he says about internal experiences and talking about them and ego. I agree with him totally on that one. Sorry
Have a great day
Posted by: Arjuna | June 26, 2018 at 10:53 PM
Anyone who says he is abiding in light and sound and has not perfected celibacy/control over sense organs is a liar. Many gurus in lynch and rape third world countries are liars. I'm again revealing the core concept of Mysticism, hardships make the Ruh/essence stronger than Nafs/Carnal mind, when this happens thinking mind stops/state of frozen mind. Anything below this level is illusion created by propaganda infused gullible and weak mind of people. Saint Kirpal Singh used to say, guru who is liar/blind himself how he can guide the disciples beyond mind.
Matthew 19.24 : Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.
Posted by: vinny | June 27, 2018 at 04:43 AM
"Anyone who says he is abiding in light and sound and has not perfected celibacy/control over sense organs is a liar."
But you could have said it with less emotion.
Inner progress and sense pleasure at some point become opposites. Then we make our own choice which path to take.
And time and failure and moments of success become our teachers, encouraging us to try again.
But it isn't just sense pleasure that keeps us from our own balance and happiness. Any distractions that create emotion, that cause ripples in the pond of our well being can do this. That includes anger. And that is why we should always try to be gentle.
Posted by: Spencer Tepper | June 27, 2018 at 04:52 AM
"no master or mystic encourages his disciples to talk about their experiences for the simple reason that you take the dross of the person to whom you tell the experiences."
Occasionally they do.
I'm actually absolutely free to say as I please.
Arjuna, you have now become a devoted disciple following the vows? Now you are teaching Sant Mat?
It seems to me we have a few mini-gurus here.
I don't represent Sant Mat. That's also a guideline of the Masters. If someone wants to meditate I encourage going there and learning from the official Sant Mat sources, and in particular the Master.
Do you do the same, Arjuna?
Sant Mat recognizes the science of the soul, and science requires review of results, not censorship.
Personal remarks take us no where especially when they are used to promote censorship and give false statements an unchallenged stage.
That also burdens the world.
But if you wish to comment on the subject of what Brian wrote, of science,
Meditation and ultimate truth, that is a subject worthy of discussion and I am just happy to read your thoughts on the matter. The book is $3.99 on Kindle. There is a lot of truth in it.... I just picked it things I didn't agree with. But every strudent of religion, science and spiriuality would benefit reading it. But not just reading it. Discussing and debating it as well.
It is the free and unincumbered dialogue, free of fear and superstition, where real learning can take place.
Posted by: Spencer Tepper | June 27, 2018 at 05:27 AM
@ Spencer - you have no experience you have just confirmed it.
No I try my best but don’t brag about what I see.
Empty vessel rattles harder buddy.
Bloody fakes everywhere - in my personal life and on here!!!
Have a good day
Posted by: Arjuna | June 27, 2018 at 05:57 AM
@ Spencer - and I no I don’t call my self a mini master.
Far from it - I only asked you to keep your treasures to yourself but I knew you had none - I would not have bothered.
I am with Brian - your experiences are projections of your own mind!
Have a pint tonight and smoke a joint - it may chill you out.
It fucks me right off when people turn the table on me!!! All I fucking asked you was to keep whatever the lord gives you to yourself!!!! Did that hit you ego that much.
Well so much for your gentleness - you have fucking managed to anger me so much!
Posted by: Arjuna | June 27, 2018 at 06:02 AM
I’ve enjoyed going through this thread.
Now I’ve not myself read Brian’s book, and so cannot directly speak of it. But this thread itself, starting from Brian’s opening post, I found utterly fascinating, both in terms of the content being discussed, as well as the dynamics of the discussion.
And by “dynamics”, this is what I mean : sometimes -- not necessarily, not always, but sometimes -- two (or more) heads are indeed better than one. A dialog is able, sometimes, to capture perspectives that a monologue, no matter how well considered, is simply not able to. We all have blind spots, each and every one of us, and, while sincere introspection can sometimes expose these to us, an external nudge sometimes is a quicker way to uncover these.
This thread, I’m willing to wager, is, as it stands now, far richer than if Brian himself had chosen to speak about all of this alone, or Spencer alone. Thanks very much to both of you for your comments here! And to you, Brian, for highlighting this discussion by writing a new post and starting a new thread around it!
There are some strands I see within this conversation that I’d like to highlight, if I may, and request feedback and comment from the respective posters/commenters. As far as I can see they’re blind spots that have not yet been brought to light -- unless, that is, it is I who am mistaken in seeing them as such -- and perhaps we may all benefit from a discussion around these small yet not wholly insignificant points.
Let’s start with Spencer :
Quote Spencer : "Occam was disproven long ago."
Spencer, we’ve had occasion to discussion Occam’s Razor before this, in another thread. I’m afraid you were mistaken about this heuristic then, and you’re mistaken about it now.
I’m afraid your comment indicates that you don’t really have a very clear idea about what Occam’s Razor actually is. We’ll get to your actual error -- which we’ve already discussed earlier, but still -- but I raise this point to raise a larger issue.
Thing is, Occam’s Razor is a basic, foundational matter within the scientific process. Given that you don’t seem to grasp this very simple concept, I’d suggest that perhaps, just perhaps, your grasp on the essence of what science is may itself not be quite as cement-concrete as you imagine it is, your background in healthcare delivery notwithstanding.
I haven’t read Brian’s book, so I cannot speak to it directly, or even speak to your specific critique of it. But given that your critique is based, in principle, on your understanding of what is “scientific” -- and how Brian’s own conception differs from that and is, therefore, in your view, mistaken -- might it be that your own less than perfect understanding of the basics of the scientific process might have influenced that critique?
Without going into specifics -- which I’m not equipped to do, not having read Brian’s book -- I'd like to simply hold this thought up for your consideration, that’s all.
Oh, and re. your specific error -- unless of course it is I who am mistaken in so seeing it -- about how you seem to see Occam’s Razor : Occam's heuristic is not a proposition at all, not a claim per se. As such, it isn’t something that can be either “proven” or “disproven”. Yes, its effectivity as a heuristic can be evaluated, but I don’t think any one has seriously suggested, ever, that this Razor has turned rusty and that it might be time to bin it.
When you have a certain set of observations, then the simplest explanation, the explanation involving the least number of variables and assumption, the simplest explanation that adequately explains all of these observations, that one considers, well, adequate. That's my understanding of Occam's Razor. And actually, that’s plain common sense. One does not make things more complex than they need to be. In both life generally and in “science”, I’d say this heuristic, this rule of thumb, would hold good.
Does that mean one necessarily favors a simple explanation over a complex one? Absolutely not! If the more complex explanation does a better job at explaining our observations, then sure, we prefer the more complex explanation. I don’t think anyone’s ever suggested otherwise! But we do reject the more complex explanation if the latter turns out to be no better at explaining what we want to explain than the former ; and most assuredly so when the latter turns out to do a worse job, and comes with unexplained questions of its own.
So yes, when new observations are brought to bear, then sometimes older explanations are overturned in favor of newer, more complex explanations. That’s how science works. That’s what the scientific method is, and that’s what routinely happens in science.
That’s no failure of Occam’s Razor! Occam’s Razor has never been “disproven”.
And now if I may turn to some things Brian has said here, that I find difficult to agree with :
Quote Brian :
"After the talk, often people would come up to me and say, "Thanks for being so honest." I never had anyone say, "Hey, I've had experiences of inner realms." No one. Not once. So you really should be asking the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of RSSB initiates why they never had any profound experiences. Or at least, why they don't talk about them. "
"perhaps you should ask yourself what your motivation is in, basically, bragging about the experiences you claim to have had. This simply seems at odds with what spirituality is all about, in my view: developing a sense of humility, diminishing the sense of ego, realizing that we are nothing special."
Brian, while I agree with the sentiment conveyed in each of these paragraph, when taken individually -- and what is more, as you know, I’m no RSSB follower myself, and nor do I myself favor a world-view that’s blinkered with blind faith – nevertheless, it does appear to me that these two things you say, which reflect your overall approach to the subject of mystical experience, appear a bit contradictory.
You’ve said, both here and elsewhere, that you’ve found concrete mystical experiences wanting, both in yourself and in those you’ve spoken to, and so you’ve rejected the hypothesis that involves mystical experiences. And that’s fair.
But now, when concrete mystical experiences are actually being spoken of, and are being offered to you, in fact thrust at you as it were, then you simply reject them out of hand. This looks to me to be a case of “damned if you do, and damned if you don’t!”
Here on your website, there are plenty of RSSB followers who speak of their first-hand experiences. Among the commenters who’s spoken on this thread itself, there’s Spencer, and there’s Jim Sutherland as well, who discuss their experiences. Then there is 777, there’s One Initiated, and many others, who’ve spoken out in other threads. All of these -- Spencer's, Jim Sutherland’s, 777’s, One Initiated’s, these are all accounts of experiences had in the course of specifically RSSB-mandated meditation. Then there are non-RSSB commenters (and/or ex-RSSB commenters) like Manjit and Osho Robbins and Tucson and others who’ve spoken about their (non-RSSB-centered) mystical experiences as well. And these are not vague second- or third-hand accounts of things experienced by someone else, somewhere else, sometime else ; no, these are all specific (claims of ) FIRST-HAND, direct, personal experience.
Might it be that they’re mistaken, each and every one of them? Sure, could be! Might they be simply deluded? Sure, could be! Might they actually be lying here, for whatever reasons? (Let’s be frank here. What they’re describing is either literally true, or not. If not, then either they’re deluded, or else they’re lying.) So, might they be lying? Sure, that is possible too! But we cannot directly assume this, we cannot directly assume delusion or dishonesty, not without examining what they’re saying in detail.
My point is this : If we’re saying that the reason (or at least, one of the reasons) why we’ve given up on the possibility (or at least, the plausibility) of mystical experiences is because we’ve not encountered them, neither in ourselves nor in others’ accounts ; if we’re claiming that our rejection of things mystical is predicated on the absence of such mystical experience within ourselves and within those we’ve interacted with ; well then, we cannot, in that case, turn around and simply reject out of hand others’ accounts of exactly this kind of mystical experience when they’re offered to us for consideration, can we?
Like I said, this is exactly a case of “doomed if you do, and doomed if you don’t”! Sure, we are personally free to simply reject these claims without giving them a moment’s thought (for instance by holding the view that all of this is subjective, and that we choose not to engage with others' subjective experiences -- which is a valid POV, certainly) : but if we do that, then we cannot then claim that our rejection of things mystical is based (even if in part) on the fact that we haven’t found any concrete instance of such experiences. Not if we care about being consistent.
Posted by: Appreciative Reader | June 27, 2018 at 06:21 AM
Luke 6:20 Looking at his disciples, he said: Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. Jesus knew about the realm of light and sound/ realms of trance/ samadhi.
By adopting poverty, Ruh/Essence becomes stronger than Nafs/Carnal mind and first experience of trance is acquired. Jesus knew the importance of poverty/hardships to attain trance.
Baba Faqir Chand,voluntarily adopted hardships of life to reach that level.Guru who is blind himself what he can teach others - Blindness.
Posted by: vinny | June 27, 2018 at 08:12 AM
Appreciate your comments.
RE Occam's razor, yes I have used some hyperbole to make a point.
The truth of Occam's take, as you have pointed out before, is that the simplest explanation for a specific event is most likely the most accurate. Why propose 2 forces if one force will explain the data perfectly? It's almost circular in its irrefutability.
But applied to all of science it makes little sense. The three particles of Proton Neutron and Electron are now 200+.
Science isn't actually moving toward a theory of everything at all. It's moving towards more theories. But each represents new knowledge. The cost of truth is simplicity, from that perspective.
And so the notion that science will lead to an ultimate truth of all truths while quaint, doesn't track with the development of science. Science justifies itself with every finding, even conflicting ones.
My point to Brian was that this also applies to spiritual development. The fact there are many versions of God, and many internal experiences of God doesn't make those invalid. They actually may confirm more truths about the thousand faces of God.. Just as we see tech from our personal perspective.
Posted by: Spencer G Tepper | June 27, 2018 at 08:18 AM
Please accept my apology.
I see your intention was pure and helpful.
No one should discuss personal inner spiritual experiences.
However, I also belive we must hold scientific truth highest of all, and than includes open disclose and scrutiny.
I fully expect you and everyone here, as full throated sceptics of spirituality, to apply withering criticisms of anyone's self disclosure or their own inner experiences.
It's all good, and part of the thinking person's process.
It may do me no good to admit of these experiences.
But it does you no good to discuss them without a first hand witness to evaluate.
If Brian had replicated these experiences perfectly and found them to be entirely illusory or factual it would be unnecessary for me to serve the role of lab animal, submitted for your dissection, or in this case vivisection.
But, Arjuns, for whatever reason, no harm has come to me.
Yes there is a person who clsims they went there. You will have to deal your harshest blows. Still, here I am.
Posted by: Spencer G Tepper | June 27, 2018 at 08:26 AM
@ Spencer I lost my cool as if you knew my story all my family have died and I am alone in this world.
I just want hope - I can’t break down as the training I went through has touched me up and made me more machine like and yes I can take a good punch .
I did not mean to debase you I really hope you have found something
Posted by: Arjuna | June 27, 2018 at 09:54 AM
"Spencer, you do understand that at the time of initiation, RSSB devotees are instructed to not talk about their meditation experiences, right? During my 35 years in RSSB I gave many talks where, frequently, I would say that this was the easiest vow to maintain, since nobody was having any profound experiences.
Brian, it isn't a vow.
Posted by: Spencer G Tepper | June 27, 2018 at 11:45 AM
Spencer, not talking about meditation experiences isn't a formal vow, it is an informal one based on the advice of the RSSB gurus. Like I said, I used the phrase "This is the easiest vow to maintain..." many, many times in talks I gave at RSSB gatherings, including meetings with RSSB representatives in the audience. You are the first person to ever correct me and say, "It isn't a vow."
You have your own view of the RSSB teachings, which is fine. You and others who read your comments on this blog just should be aware that you are a "heretic" in some regards, since you have cobbled together your own interpretation of Sant Mat and the RSSB teachings. Agains, that's fine. I admire your free thinking. We just need to be clear that when you talk about your inner experiences, you are going against a long-term RSSB admonition against doing so.
Posted by: Brian Hines | June 27, 2018 at 12:09 PM
While science will never develop the instruments you talk about, . . .
from all of the higher more subtle regions are send to us
'miracles' which are flabbergasting to humanity
It is even so that "scientist" in the second region (heaven) have no means
of studying the third region and they receive if necessary their own miracles
And so on higher up
Inhabitants of 6th are flabbergasted about The Seventh Heaven
Now, . . Brian has the habit of being numb to everything mystical
and proved it from the day I became member here
and told him about a serendipity that contained at least 5 non-possible events
so called impossibilities but that happened anyway
I can not proof that that minute their was no wind
and the journal flew to me anyway
Even the 100% controllable material proof I still possess,
a newspaper "The Nice-Matin" a local journal in France ( city of Nice )
which I offered to send to him
During my membership, I guess when free will etc was discussed
he maintained his spiritual but foremost material deafness
So I have send copies of that journal only to blog members
here who asked me
I have also send a copy to Gurinder who was recognizing
in an answer, with a beautiful material signature :-)
He was one year appointed or less and I thought with my ego . The Love of this happening would help him
Info : google this htlm +777+vivaldi
what you say above is not true , to use a nice word
honest sex addict & true manmukh but blessed with serendipities each day
Posted by: 777 | June 27, 2018 at 12:31 PM
William Buhlman's book Adventures beyond the body and Ishwar Puri's Institute for study of human awareness are scientific approaches to the same concept of shabd energy in universe.
My original ideas in Sant-mat advocate : If you love cricket, mental impression of even Brett Lee bowling to Sachin Tendulkar can block unwanted ideas/impressions in mind and lead to higher realms within short span of time. Even Jesus Christ didn't reveal this that love for cricket can propel a person to heavenly realms of light and sound.
Posted by: vinny | June 27, 2018 at 01:01 PM
Whether your view of RSSB teachings or mine are "cobbled together" is a question that won't be answered here since neither you nor I are representatives of that organization.
Likely they are both so.
I don't think it's a good idea to assume that official role, Brian.
I've made a point repeatedly only to represent my personal perspective.
In fact I would suggest we are all cobbled together. And like the cobblestones of a fine road after a rain, each reflecting the sun in different ways.
But as for the readers, they should not take your reading of Sant Mat teachings as anything but your own views, especially since you no longer believe in them. I can attest they are not accurate.
And the fact that I do believe in them also does not de facto make me an authority. I'm not.
But I honour what I have been given.
Posted by: Spencer G Tepper | June 27, 2018 at 01:15 PM
Brian says: "After the talk, often people would come up to me and say, "Thanks for being so honest." I never had anyone say, "Hey, I've had experiences of inner realms." No one. Not once. So you really should be asking the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of RSSB initiates why they never had any profound experiences. Or at least, why they don't talk about them."
I agree, my understanding of this Rule of the Masters not to talk about inner experiences is probably because of the very fact that most initiates do not have any inner experiences. If some satsangis do have inner realm experiences they sound similar to the kind of out-of-body experiences 'Astral travelling' which other people have written books about and those authors are non-satsangis. So, we satsangis are nothing special.
Posted by: Jen | June 27, 2018 at 03:26 PM
This is about internet sex
Looking to such sites :
Generally this happens by what is called "Open Channel"
Like seeing movies on youtube
but with 2 directions
It means that any hacker can enter your computer
and while you look to the girl can copy all he wants
Next they start blackmailing
For those in high level places in politics or church life
this can destroy their career
It is worse when one ever showed manipulations of
his/her genitals because
the hackers threaten with publication to your friends on social
and other networks
Many advertisings are on facebook inviting members to go to their sites
Billions are collected by blackmail worldwide
and specially arab countries are targetted because of the total shame
Next to all this are all shows are captured and publicized
in yes . . . in images.Google°com easy to find
You can type the pseudo of a girl
and they offer you all she ever exposed
for very cheap prices, subscriptions
But always to pay by credit card
if you try bitcoin they don t follow up
After collecting your name and addresses
the same begins now from the other side of the spectrum
One marrocan hacker said : They try to find the clergy
"They always pay"
Further to know that girls are 95% victims
and a clever system with cocaine exist to keep them enslaved
As a satsangi, we have to be careful for accumulating karma
This is all for today
I have 2tiny goals :
To end hypocrisy here
To tell that manmuks are also welcome in the different Heavens
and to better myself
Posted by: 777 | June 27, 2018 at 03:32 PM
I have 2tiny goals :
To end hypocrisy here
To tell that manmuks are also welcome in the different Heavens
and to better myself
You will probably better yourself if you stopped being a dirty old man and stopped thinking/talking about sex.
Posted by: Jen | June 27, 2018 at 04:59 PM
Why 777 do you only speak of nonsense and the opposite of spiritual ideals, especially when you seem to think you are a perfect example of a true satsangi?
I have a great deal of respect for Sawan Singh. I would have loved to be in his presence (maybe I was) who knows?!
Excerpt of how the effect of a PLM has a positive and inspirational effect on people:
“I vividly recall Hazur Maharaj Ji's satsangs. For four decades, they were looked up to as nothing else had been by tens of thousands of people. Every word and every syllable that He uttered became the very life of His disciples. The satsangs thrilled. They inspired. They enthralled the mind and heart of men. They answered all their questions. They resolved all their pressing problems. They met all their needs. Every word was a healing balm that soothed their anguished hearts. Every word was an ambrosial drop that quenched their thirsty souls. It was a memorable sight to watch the vast multitudes listening with rapt attention; men, women and children sitting in pin-drop silence; their faces lit with light, love and peace.The deep and melodious voice of the Master created a musical effect that completely magnetised the audience. Everybody was edified beyond measure and inwardly refreshed.”
Posted by: Jen | June 27, 2018 at 05:42 PM
So this blog is all about grandpas and grannies fighting each other. Lol
(I thought of coming back because I am on leave upto 30th)
Posted by: Account Deleted | June 27, 2018 at 08:35 PM
Now respect your elders. ;)
Posted by: Spencer Tepper | June 27, 2018 at 08:40 PM
To make sure to others that I am not a fraud see this- https://plus.google.com/103195644069578355614
Posted by: Account Deleted | June 27, 2018 at 08:43 PM
I am 26.
Posted by: Account Deleted | June 27, 2018 at 08:44 PM
Ya Hi Mr Spencer. I will respect.
Posted by: Account Deleted | June 27, 2018 at 08:45 PM
I earlier told some things to Mrs. 777 because I sensed negative powers from her.
Posted by: Account Deleted | June 27, 2018 at 08:48 PM
Can I get a link of 777 's journal? I think she is doing Kundalini Yoga.
Posted by: Account Deleted | June 27, 2018 at 09:06 PM
"I earlier told some things to Mrs. 777 because I sensed negative powers from her."
Uh oh, if you think 777 is a woman, you are doing females an injustice.
He is a nasty old man with negatives powers and I am a really nice old woman heh heh
Posted by: Jen | June 27, 2018 at 09:17 PM
Just noticed you look just like Gurinder. Now, I wonder who the real fraud is!
Posted by: Jen | June 27, 2018 at 09:23 PM
In your book you wrote
"God and Spirit, the highest truths, are far beyond the domains of mind and matter".
Our Master claimed God is closer than hands and feet.
You quote Rumi
"He is the first, last, the outward and the inward. I know none other than He, and He Who Is"
Do you not believe Rumi or our Master? Is this outside your experience?
You quote Rumi again
"I've dispensed with duality and seen the two worlds as one."
Yet you follow the habit of dichotomies... Inward vs outward, Physical vs spiritual, subjective vs objective.
Those are mental inventions. Spiritual, physical, inner and outward are mental concepts, and unreal. Certainly this is not Sant Mat.
Follow Rumi's lead: the spirit in the physical, the physical is inside the spirit. The outward is inside the inward. The inside is within the outer.
God is in the symbol, the symbol is God.
You wrote in your book
"For example, since mysticism assets that the all - pervading conscious energy of spirit cannot be perceived by the physical senses or understood through mental reasoning, any evidence that could be provided of its existence through those avenues would refute that assertion."
Mysticism asserts no such thing, Brian. See the Rumi quotes above. The entire creation is God's expression.
You are making God as distant and arcane as any midieval bishop.
You are pushing God so far away no evidence nor any experience could be accepted.
This argument is not new. Inquisition priests used it to discount the sincere testimony of their victims and proceed with their torture.
Posted by: Spencer Tepper | June 27, 2018 at 09:26 PM
Just noticed that Brian has 'Account Deleted' for Saurabh Sawan's previous comments on another thread. Wish I hadn't replied to his recent remarks. Obviously Brian knows something about him that I don't. My mistake.
Posted by: Jen | June 27, 2018 at 10:05 PM
You have your own view of the RSSB teachings, which is fine. You and others who read your comments on this blog just should be aware that you are a "heretic" in some regards, since you have cobbled together your own interpretation of Sant Mat and the RSSB teaching.
RSSB masters lapse into "heresy" too. They can advise
disciples to put aside meditation and concentrate on
studies or jobs or families temporarily. They or their
advanced disciples may perform physical miracles. They
may grant permission, inside or out, for others to relate
inner experiences too.
At least one case -that of Bibi Rakhi- is cited in "Call
of the Great Master". She talks of what she's experienced
within. Her "sightseeing in hell" tour is related in one of
the "With the Three Masters" volumes as well. Ishwar
Puri relates a couple of Bibi Rakhi stories on his YouTube
No, there is no rigidity about "rules" or "vows". It's not
"heresy". You can't codify spirituality into a set of rules.
Those actions, if sanctioned within, are tailored for the
individual and his advancement on the path.
Posted by: Dungeness | June 27, 2018 at 10:13 PM
Oh my God.
Dear Mrs. Jen,
If you will click on my profile pic on google+ then you will see a man with a black coat. That is me. I just kept Baba Gurinder Singh's photo as a background. Lol. And that typepad account was deleted by me myself because I wrote that I will be departing from here in my last comment. Only the operator or the Typepad company can delete a person's account on Typepad. I don't know how should I tell you but something is seriously wrong with Mr. 777 or Mrs. , whatever.
Posted by: Account Deleted | June 27, 2018 at 10:43 PM
1) I am sorry to say but I find no one here who has really concluded his/her course of Simran. Without completing the course of SImran the soul cannot leave the body and reach the Moon to explode it.
2) Sant Mat experiences and description of inner realms can be found out from Sant Mat books. So one cannot know whether somebody is telling truth or is lying.
2)Many of the satsangi's(Sant Mat followers) who buy Mr. Brian's books don't know that Mr.Brian has actually left the path.
3) Pranayam(breath control) and Kundalini Yoga will prove utterly futile at the time of death. This is because with Kundalini and pranayam one can reach only upto Chidakash(Heart Chakra) or maximum upto the region between Chidakash or Shakti(Throat Chakra). The 6 chakras of human body doesn't contain the Shabad(Sound current). The Shabad is found in the 800 petalled lotus falling directly at the feet of the True Master from up.The result is that one gets the pain of 100,000 scorpions at the time of death because all the 6 chakras will get dissolved at the time of death in the Buddhi(mind). Only the Shabad can pull the soul upwards. If the soul is not pulled by the Shabad then it will be pulled by Satan, who is sitting on the left side of the 800 petalled lotus. The pain of 100,000 scorpions will be caused by Satan pulling the soul inside his mouth.Only the Shabad can help the soul to escape the pain at the time of death. This Shabad is present in the 800 petalled lotus beyond the Moon region in the midway falling down from Anami. It is correct that Pranayam and Kundalini provides a person with supernatural powers and that too quicker than Surat Shabad Yoga but it is of no use at the time of death. The real game here is to find a method to escape the pain at the time of death. The Shabad will provide armour to the soul in the battlefield.
True Master's always have warned the people about this.
Guru Nanak says-
I have looked at spiritual practices,
Trying and testing them all;
Nam(Shabad) is without compare.
- Adi Granth, pg 62
Guru Arjan Dev says-
Countless religions and practices
Performed in endless ways,
All these will be of no avail;
Whatever you may do
Will drag you deeper
Into the net of Karma.
Seed sown at the wrong season
Will not bear any fruit,
But will die out and cause the farmer
To lose even his capital.
In this Iron Age,
Listening to the celestial music
Is the highest form of worship;
Through the Gurumukh
One meditates on it,
In contemplation within.
He himself attains salvation
And helps his family do the same;
To the domain of the Lord within
He goes with honour,
Made worthy through the practice of Nam.
- Adi Granth, pg. 1075
Sahajo Bai, great woman saint, says:
The rich are happy
The pooer are very picture of misery;
The saint alone, O Sahajo,
Enjoys true happiness-
To him is revealed a wondrous mystery.
Guru Nanak warns-
He who ignores the path of Nam
And goes some other way
Will bitterly repent his choice
When the hour of death arrives.
-Adi Granth, pg 1153
Soami Ji prays to the soul-
In no uncertain words
The Master urges you, O brother,
To attach yourself to the unstruck melody,
For there is no way other than that of Shabad;
Without the Shabad there is no liberation
From the vessel of the body.
-Sar Bachan poetry, pg 20:10
Kabir Sahib warns-
The man who prides himself on his fine clothes
And wastes his time in frivolous enjoyments
Is bound most surely, O Kabir,
For the land of messengers of death.
-Kabir Sakhi Sangrah, pg 62
Guru Amrdas warns-
Unfortuanete are those
Who do not meet a Satguru;
They are under the sway of Kal.
They have to take birth again and again
In the round of transmigration;
They are born as miserable worms,
Living in excrement.
-Adi Granth- pg 40
Posted by: Account Deleted | June 27, 2018 at 10:50 PM
I did see the little photo of yourself and the large photo of Gurinder. Sorry, I have to explain myself because you obviously see me as a doddery old woman. I was joking and my comment was kind of sarcastic. You have heard of sarcasm? This seems to be a little exercise in trying to figure out what kind of person you are?! You all of a sudden appeared on this blog and it takes a while to discover if you are sincere or not. If you want to converse with 'grandpas and grannies' how about telling us a bit about yourself and why you are here?
Posted by: Jen | June 27, 2018 at 10:57 PM
Dear Mrs Jen,
I am Baba Gurinder Singh's initiate. Just found this blog day before yesterday because I got the time to come online as I am on leave upto 30th. I don't usually get time to come on the Internet due to my busy work schedule.
Posted by: Account Deleted | June 27, 2018 at 11:00 PM
Are your family members also satsangis and do you live near the Dera? Its nice to be speaking to someone from India. I visited the Dera once a long time ago, it was a wonderful trip and I thoroughly enjoyed it.
Posted by: Jen | June 27, 2018 at 11:33 PM
Dear Mrs. Jen,
Yes my whole family is satsangi and follow Baba Gurinder Singh. I live in Hyderabad, Telangana,India. My father(55) was initiated by Maharaj Charan Singh. Earlier during Maharj Charan SIngh's time there were very less facilities in the dera. But right now the dera has become very advanced and developed with all the facilities.
Posted by: Account Deleted | June 27, 2018 at 11:44 PM
Dear Mr. Saurabh,
From all your above comments,
It appears that you have already reached great heights in your meditation.
Should this be concluded that your third eye is opened ?
And you have exploded the Moon and gone beyond it ?
Have you also met your Master inside ?
If yes, what was the Master's appearance ?
If you can answer these questions,
it can be very helpful for a lot of readers of this blog.
Posted by: Rahul Dev | June 28, 2018 at 02:04 AM
I'm sorry I was so suspicious at first, today's world is very much different to the one I grew up in.
I just had a look on Google maps to see where you live. Its quite a long way from the Punjab. I am a Charan initiate and visited the Dera only once in 1998 so it must be very different now.
I'm very interested to know how you sensed negative powers from the man calling himself 777 and you also thought he is doing Kundalini Yoga? Also, you say "I don't know how should I tell you but something is seriously wrong with Mr. 777"
Thank you for your patience. When I had my trip to India I found the people to be very polite and kind. I had a strong belief in those days that I was being looked after and I was.
Posted by: Jen | June 28, 2018 at 02:05 AM
Welcome again, brother!
Nice to have you join us Saurabh!
The writings of the Saints are beautiful.
And the teachings of Nam easily verified with a little practice.
A couple of things here to note.
Here ideas are offered among those who believe and those who do not. Ideas are debated, questioned, refuted.
While all your family may be in accord about the Path, here you will find folks who question the veracity of spiritual writings, and even your own experience.
And some of those folks, like Brian and Jen, had been Satsangis, also disciples of Maharaj Charan Singh with decades of their own experience.
So the issue of Grannies and Grandpas disagreeing is actually part of the uncensored, open forum here.
I don't take it as weakness but strength.
Because underneath the strongly held views is a powerful platform of respect for fact and truth.
Therefore book knowledge, while beautiful, can and is questioned, whether that is a text of the saints of something written by the members here.
Conflict of ideas can help us sharpen our perspective.
I am a devout Satsangi, and while I disagree with others here who are no longer so, I've learned to honor their views, in particular Atheism, which actually has a very deep founding in the love of Truth.
So, please proceed. I suggest an open mind, but feel free to enter a debate and as well to respond to others comments as best you can.
Posted by: Spencer Tepper | June 28, 2018 at 04:37 AM
"HE has thousand fingers on His Trigger"
Thanks for your support
All this, the hate here and there is a little hilarious o, a anti Sant Mat, Anti God forum . . . and Jim didn't even join what I praise
Yes Saur : read some here
Posted by: 777 | June 28, 2018 at 04:41 AM
People who say sound current is only behind eyes not in lower chakras are be fooling others, sound current enters from head and vibrates in all chakras, to have experience of any chakra is not a small thing, it requires higher morality than sant mat.
Posted by: vinny | June 28, 2018 at 08:49 AM
These are the vibrations of the Rishis and Yogis
after many ascetic lives
In Sant Mat even the tny tiny emanations at the start are
NOT BEHIND THE EYES
but one inch above the eyes
Culmination at best is at the Crown and the whole chakra system
doesn t exist anymore
No thought arise
You are not only one with the Creator
You are The Creator
It's really ultra orgasmic at the Crown only
It's the reason of our existence
It is Beauty,Itself to the power of thousands
See the Indian Flag
This the Truth
Posted by: 777 | June 28, 2018 at 09:07 AM
A lot of discrepancy between myself
My Master siued my geografic situation
qince 40 years i the middle of 4 nudist beaches
at the french Rivièra
to accustom somewhat
as opposed to North American under the table practices
Gurinder showed you via Jim not to be so depressed
Charan did so by photographing the tantra sculptures
but at that time there was no Jim
Other Saints visited a Brothel the whole night
and lost 19 of his 20 disciples
( btw : what a turmoil must that have been )
Tulsi Sahib embraced a passing prostitute
Jesus did the same
It s a terrific Path of Sound and Light at our Crown
If Brian had your opinion
he would never ban me because of the whole purpose of this blog. !
The blog would then be supported ny what I write
It' s indeed honorable he allows my criticism of his slowly evoluing° theories
introducing "Existence" as the new word for God
Happy You came along from Hyderabad
Posted by: 777 | June 28, 2018 at 09:29 AM
I am the creator saying this after listening to lectures of Ishwar Puri is like a beggar saying he is the richest person on earth. All the chakra energies have been confirmed by instruments, they are real energies .
Posted by: vinny | June 28, 2018 at 11:34 AM
Dear Saurabh Sawan - welcome! I'm enjoying your exuberance! :)
You are a 26 year old new initiate come to teach the oldies a thing or two, ey? I like it brother!!
I wonder what you will be sharing in 5, 10, 20+ years from now in public spaces, and how it will accord to what you write now?! You should be careful posting with such certainty on public spaces, it can rapidly become a humbling experience....
I'm going to share a couple of things with you, I wonder how you will take it?
First of all, I want to clarify for you - You wrote, rather atrociously imo: "I am able to sense a very negative energy from you(similar to Lucifer). Your Kundalini yoga has made you a mentally retarded person."
Please be clear here - and this is a potential lesson for you - that what you are "sensing" is actually a devoted Charan initiate who practices panch naam simran as taught by RSSB.
As in most of the "sensing" that is done by most online "mystics" and followers of organised religious pseudo-spiritual groups, what you are actually "sensing" is the contents of your own unexamined mind. Factually so, in this case.
That is one of the major drawbacks of the RS "spiritual" system - there is absolutely no understanding & attention of the mind and how it works, or even basic psychology, but rather an engagement with the mayaic creations of that mind. The only test, rather laughably and demonstrably false, is the "5 word test" of the "authenticity" of inner vision. Of course, even a little bit of insight should demonstrate this is a ridiculous and "magical thinking" safeguard.....and the explains the proliferation of one true RS "Satgurus", now numbering in the hundreds probably, all of whom use the magical "5 word test" to judge the authenticity of their supreme (read egotistical) perfection and godlinesss and capability to lead the chosen 0.00000000000001% of souls to the "real purpose" of all creation & existence (ahhh, haha, the magnificent egotism and solipsism of it all!).
This magical "5 word test" is why "Perfect Living Masters" like Thakar Singh can put their penis into unsuspecting initiates mouths during the very act of passing this magical mantra on. Unbroken transference from Sawan to Kirpal to Thakar - all using the 5 word mantra to test the authenticity of their "inner visions". What went wrong there?
To further this issue of an outdated and outmoded system of belief like that in the "Perfect Living Master", and how incomplete the system is on so many levels, I recently read a very fascinating quote. But first, from Charan Singh:
""In “Quest for Light,” a book containing extracts from letters written by an Indian guru, Charan Singh, the guru said:
"Please remember that anything that is against Nature is always improper and inadvisable. Nature has created the two sexes for the continuation of the species and for the satisfaction of the sex instinct within proper limits. If we go against it, it means we are doing something unnatural of which the laws of Nature do not approve. Homosexuality is contrary to all laws of Nature and no decent society approves it. The act is humiliating and degenerating not only in the eyes of others, but also in the eyes of those who are involved…There are no habits which we cannot break if we have the will and determination to do so.""
Last week, I read this quote from the wonderful (and essential - there's a maturity in his books that I think would profoundly benefit RS followers!) Jack Kornfield in his book "A Path with Heart" in a chapter about the dangers of gurus and systems that are not fully rounded & grounded:
"Another student followed a charismatic Indian guru whose powerful love and teachings brought great joy and peace into his life. The student was a gay man who had lived in a caring and committed relationship for more than 10 years, and when the guru later stated that all homosexuality was a terrible sin that leads to hell, the student's life was destroyed. His relationship torn apart, and the secret guilt and self-loathing that had plagued the man......returned. Finally, with outside help, that whilst his guru might bring him visions and wonderful meditation teachings, he was really quite ignorant about homosexuality. Only when he realised this, was he able to hold both the teachings he so valued and his own life with equal loving-kindness".
Anyway, I digress! More interestingly, you wrote:
"3) Pranayam(breath control) and Kundalini Yoga will prove utterly futile at the time of death. This is because with Kundalini and pranayam one can reach only upto Chidakash(Heart Chakra) or maximum upto the region between Chidakash or Shakti(Throat Chakra). The 6 chakras of human body doesn't contain the Shabad(Sound current). "
And then follow this up with some non-sequitur quotes from the Granth Sahib. Great!
What you do not seem to be aware of, is, that none of the gurus from 300+ years ago - and that included every single mystic in the Guru Granth Sahib - which I have read in it's entirity - followed the current RS meditation practice and cosmology.
You do not seem to be aware of the cultural context of the time those gurus were in, that shabd yoga is actually a PART of the neologism labelled "kundalini yoga" (incidentally, "Sant Mat" is also a neologism that simply does not exist in any form pre-1700s, ie all the Granth Sahib mystics) as CLEARLY and explicitly described in tantric texts such as Hathayogapradipika. There was no "kundalini yoga" back then, but this is clearly a text about kundalini itself, of which the sound of shabd is simply ONE manifestation.
This really is indisputable fact.
You also do not seem to be aware that, despite their COUNTLESS uses in the Granth Sahib itself, that the cosmology of the Guru Granth Sahib Gurus would be of "kal" according - explicitly - to their own definition.
There literally is no end to the verses which proclaim Nirankaar and Onkar as the SUPREME lord "himself". No hint that these are merely "lower level, kal" type rulers of maya's regions.
And if THAT isn't a clear enough dissonance (any doubters of this obvious fact, simply google granth Sahib online Nirankaar & Onkar and read every single quote to see if ANY of them accord with their place in RS comsology? You will probably be there for a long time, there must be hundreds of quotes. Let me know what you find :) - here's the killer blow for Kabir, Nanak et al - they simply couldn't have reached the spiritual heights of today's "real" RS satgurus - they CLEARLY describe BREATH CONTROL and kundalini as a vital and causal part of listening to the sound current!
And what could possibly make you think otherwise, we know this, historically, factually speaking - shabd yoga was part of the tantric/kundalini system of practice for centuries, and there is not a hint, not a whiff of TODAY'S RS cosmology to be found anywhere!
Enjoy brother! actually, searching for these quotes I'd personally found & posted on RSS forum, I have found several others I'd typed up but from a more historic, tantric perspective on "shabd yoga". Scroll through of no interest, the Guru Granth quotes, with page references, are provided further down I think. Copy & paste:
"He from whose navel steadfastly proceedeth in it's upward course the Om, and naught but it,
And for whom the kumbakha exercise formeth a bridge to the Brahma-randhra,
He beareth in his mind the one and only mystic spell"
Kashmiri poetess, Lalla, verse 34
"I locked the doors and windows of my body.
I seized the thief of my vital airs, and controlled my breath.
I bound him tightly in the closet of my heart,
And with the whip of pranava (cosmic sound) did I flay him"
Lalla, verse 101
"The ever unobstructed sound, the principle of absolute vacuity, whose abode is the void,
Which hath no name, nor colour, nor lineage, nor form,
Which they declare to be the Sound (Nada) and the Dot (Bindu) by it'sown reflection on itself-
That alone is the God that will mount upon him"
Lalla, verse 15
"He who hath recognised the Brahma-randhra as the shrine of the Self-God,
He who hath known the Unobstructed Sound borne upon the breath that riseth from the heart unto the nose,
His vain imaginings of themselves have fled far away,
And he himself recognises himself as the God. To whom, therefore, should he offer worship?"
Lalla, verse 33
"Along the central channel, this path extends up to the braincase...
....Inside the rajadanta there is but one orifice, the mouth of sankhini, known as the tenth door.
From the circle of the root portion whence the kundalini energy flows out spring up the moon conduit from the left portion, and the sun conduit from the right portion......
....From the root bulb arises breath, arises thought, arises the sun, arises life, arise sound and matrkaksara"
Goraknatha's Amaraugasasanam, page 10
"The energy made of unstruck sound stands in the middle, in the wheel of the bulb, looking like a straight line with serpentine undulations at both ends, above and below.
Between those 2 that are sun & moon, the kala is indeed resplendent with a brilliance equal to that of a thousand suns.
This energy can be ascertained by slightly restraining the breath. That is what is referred to as 'symptom'.
And now, the supreme ascent:......"
Somananda's Saktavijnana, verses 9-11
"Known as nadavedha is the piercing brought about by the upward rush of the resonance according to the process of creation; through this spontaneous resonance, let the master enter the disciple's consciousness"
Abhinavagupta, Tantraloka, chapter 9 (where he discusses all the various types of initiation possible - after going through all the various types of initiation that we still see today, including shaktipat, pranahuti etc, he goes on to state the initiation through 'silence' is the 'highest' possible.....Ramana Maharshi?)
"The nature of such a consciousness is its capacity for self-referal, and because of that, there always arises a spontaneous sound which is termed the supreme, the great Heart....
......For that vibration, which is a slight motion of a special kind, a unique vibrating light, is the wave of the ocean of consciousness, without which there is no consciousness at all...."
Abhinavagupta, Tantraloka chapter 4
"It is the Heart whose nature is vibration which constitutes the supreme method for achieving the highest non-duality which consists of universal grace. For the nature of the self-referential character of the consciousness which composes the awakening of the Heart is that it is an astonishment brought about by the total fullness of consciousness"
Abhinavagupta, Malini-vijaya-vartika, page 105
"There on the level of the highest kundalini there is the Emissional Power which is beautiful because it contains within itself the vibration, there the yogin should repose devoted to the condition of the belly of the fish"
Abhinavagupta, Tantraloka, chapter 5
Tulsi Sahib -
> "The luminous feet lie at the junction of black & white."
> Ratan Sagar, pp 8 & 9
> "The path of the Beloved lies through the Royal Vein (Shah Rug).
> Seek the perfect Master with love patience, dear;
> He, indeed, will give thee light to find the Shah Rug clear.
> The practice of a few days will open the inner ear."
> Sant Bani, page 44
> "That the soul resides in the body is known only to the one who has
> experienced it within.
> Who has adorned the chamber of Sukhmana and fixed his attention on
> the Sunn......."
> Shabdavali, Pt 1, Kakahra 22, page 25
> "The path leading to the shores of Mansarovar was revealed unto me.
> In the Sukhmana I went into a trance and then crossed to the other
> Shabdavli, Pt 1, Kundli 16, Page 38
> "He alone sees the Beloved with his own eyes, O friend,
> Who brings his soul to the banks of the Sukhman."
> Shabdavli, Pt 1, Rekhta 2, Page 6
> "Reach the house of Sukhman and await there the arrival of the Lord"
> Shabdavli, Pt 1, Mangal 2, page 87
> "The snake-like coil is now pierced through & through and I have
> dauntlessly met my Lord, the King...
> .....Merged in the Full-pervading Lord when I locked the breath
> within, *then* (my emphasis, manjit) the celestial strain
> spontaneously began to resound."
> Kabir, page 972 SGGS
> "If her mind pearl, like an ornament, be weaved into the thread of
> breath, and the bride puts on the decoration of compassion on her
> person, then the Beloved enjoys his sweetheart"
> Guru Nanak, page 359 SGGS
> "The right & left nostrils are the guards of this body lyre
> (harp...manjit), and this lyre synchronises a wonderful melody"
> Guru Nanak, page 907 SGGS
> "Put thou thy life-breath in the right channel and establish good
> relation with thy Lord
> In this way thy fish-like mind shall be held and thy soul-swan shall
> fly not away from the Lord and thy body-wall shall not perish in
> Guru Nanak, page 991 SGGS
> "Says Nanak, if in the heart of his heart man contemplates his Lord,
> then with every breath of his, he quaffs nectar"
> Guru Nanak, page 992 SGGS
> "He then mounts his breath to the 16 petalled sky and there flutters
> his wings in glee.
> In the prrofound trance a tree of God becomes manifest and it dries
> up the water of desire from the body-ground"
> Kabir, page 970 SGGS
> "The left wind-pipe, the right wind-pipe and the central one, these
> 3 abide in one place"
> Sant Beni, page 974 SGGS
> "The breath is drawn in by the left nostril, it is retained within
> Sukhmana & is breathed out by thhe right nostril, uttering 16 times
> the Lord's name"
> Jaidev, page 1106 SGGS
> "I have obtained the 10th gate as a distilling fire and the channels
> of the Ida and Pingala (the left & right breath channnels according
> to tantra....manjit) are the funnels to suck in and spit out, and
> mind as a golden vat.
> In that vat, the extremely pure stream of Name Nectar trickles.
> Like this I have distilled the essence of essences.
> An incomparable thing has happened, my breath I have made the wine-
> Kabir, page 92 SGGS
> "By turning my breath inwards, I have pierced the six body chakras
> and my mind (surat) got enamoured of the Lord."
> Kabir, page 333 SGGS
> "O brute of brawling and uncultured intellect, reversing thy breath
> from the world, turn it thou towards thy God.
> Intoxicate thou thy mind with the ambrosial stream that trickles
> from the furnace of the 10th gate"
> Kabir, page 1123 SGGS
> "Associated with the saints, their kundalini is opened and
> through the supreme Guru, they enjoy the Lord of supreme bliss."
> Guru Ram Das, Granth Sahib, page 1402 (the only time I am aware of in
> the Granth Sahib the work 'kundalini' is explicitly mentioned in
> Hatha Yoga Pradipika
> "64. I will describe now the practice of anahata nada, as propounded
> by Goraksa Natha, for the benefit of those who are unable to
> understand the principles of knowledge -- a method, which is liked by
> the ignorant also.
> 65. Adinatha propounded 1 1/4 crore methods of trance, and they are
> all extant. Of these, the hearing of the anahata nada is the only
> one, the chief, in my opinion.
> 66. Sitting with Mukta âsana and with the Sambhavi Mudra, the Yogi
> should hear the sound inside his right ear, with collected mind.
> 67. The ears, the eyes, the nose, and the mouth should be closed and
> then the clear sound is heard in the passage of the Susumna which has
> been cleansed of all its impurities.
> 68. In all the Yogas, there are four states: (1) arambha or the
> preliminary, (2) Ghata, or the state of a jar, (3) Parichaya (known),
> (4) nispatti (consummate).
> Arambha Avastha.
> 69. When the Brahma granthi (in the heart) is pierced through by
> Pranayama, then a sort of happiness is experienced in the vacuum of
> the heart, and the anahat sounds, like various tinkling sounds of
> ornaments, are heard in the body.
> 70. In the arambha, a Yogi's body becomes divine, glowing, healthy,
> and emits a divine smell. The whole of his heart becomes void.
> The Ghata Avastha.
> 71. In the second stage, the airs are united into one and begun
> moving in the middle channel. The Yogi's posture becomes firm, and he
> becomes wise like a god.
> 72. By this means the Visnu knot (in the throat) is pierced which is
> indicated by highest pleasure experienced, and then the Bheri sound
> (like the beating of a kettle drum) is evolved in the vacuum in the
> The Parichaya Avastha.
> 73. In the third stage, the sound of a drum is known to arise in the
> Sunya between the eyebrows, and then the Vayu goes to the Mahasunya,
> which is the home of all the siddhis.
> 74. Conquering, then, the pleasures of the mind, ecstasy is
> spontaneously produced which is devoid of evils, pains, old age,
> disease, hunger and sleep.
> 75. When the Rudra granthi is pierced, and the air enters the seat of
> the Lord (the space between the eyebrows), then the perfect sound
> like that of a flute is produced.
> 76. The union of the mind and the sound is called the Raja-Yoga. The
> (real) Yogi becomes the creator and destroyer of the universe, like
> 77. Perpetual Happiness is achieved by this; I do not care if the
> mukti be not attained. This happiness, resulting from absorption (in
> Brama), is obtained by means of Raja-Yoga.
> 78. Those who are ignorant of the Raja-Yoga and practice only the
> Hatha-Yoga, will, in my opinion, waste their energy fruitlessly.
> 79. Contemplation on the space between the eyebrows is, in my
> opinion, best for accomplishing soon the Unmani state. For people of
> small intellect, it is a very easy method for obtaining perfection in
> the Raja-Yoga. The Laya produced by nada, at once gives experience
> (of spiritual powers).
> 80. The happiness which increases in the hearts of Yogiswaras, who
> have gained success in Samadhi by means of attention to the nada, is
> beyond description, and is known to Sri Guru Natha alone.
> 81. The sound which a muni hears by closing his ears with his
> fingers, should be heard attentively, till the mind becomes steady in
> 82. By practicing with this nada, all other external sounds are
> stopped. The Yogi becomes happy by overcoming all distractions within
> 15 days.
> 83. In the beginning, the sounds heard are of great variety and very
> loud; but, as the practice increases, they become more and more
> 84. In the first stage, the sounds are surging, thundering like the
> beating of kettle drums and jingling ones. In the intermediate stage,
> they are like those produced by conch, Mridanga, bells, &c.
> 85. In the last stage, the sounds resemble those from tinklets,
> flute, Vina, bee, &c. These various kinds of sounds are heard as
> being produced in the body.
> 86. Though hearing loud sounds like those of thunder, kettle drums,
> &c., one should practice with the subtle sounds also.
> 87. Leaving the loudest, taking up the subtle one, and leaving the
> subtle one, taking up the loudest, thus practicing, the distracted
> mind does not wander elsewhere.
> 88. Wherever the mind attaches itself first, it becomes steady there;
> and when it becomes absorbed in it.
> 89. Just as a bee, drinking sweet juice, does not care for the smell
> of the flower; so the mind, absorbed in the nada, does not desire the
> objects of enjoyment.
> 90. The mind, like an elephant habituated to wander in the garden of
> enjoyments, is capable of being controlled by the sharp goad of
> anahata nada.
> 91. The mind, captivated in the snare of nada, gives up all its
> activity; and, like a bird with clipped wings, becomes calm at once.
> 92. Those desirous of the kingdom of Yoga, should take up the
> practice of hearing the anahata nada, with mind collected and free
> from all cares.
> 93. Nada is the snare for catching the mind; and, when it is caught
> like a deer, it can be killed also like it.
> 94. Nada is the bolt of the stable door for the horse (the minds of
> the Yogis). A Yogi should determine to practice constantly in the
> hearing of the nada sounds.
> 95. Mind gets the properties of calcined mercury. When deprived of
> its unsteadiness it is calcined, combined with the sulphur of nada,
> and then it roams like it in the supportless akasa or Brahma.
> 96. The mind is like a serpent, forgetting all its unsteadiness by
> hearing the nada, it does not run away anywhere.
> 97. The fire, catching firewood, is extinguished along with it (after
> burning it up); and so the mind also, working with the nada, becomes
> latent along with it.
> 98. The antahkarana (mind), like a deer, becomes absorbed and
> motionless on hearing the sound of bells, etc.; and then it is very
> easy for an expert archer to kill it.
> 99. The knowable interpenetrates the anahata sound when it is heard,
> and the mind interpenetrates the knowable. The mind becomes absorbed
> there, which is the seat of the all-pervading, almighty Lord.
> 100. So long as the sounds continue, there is the idea of akasa. When
> they disappear, then it is called Para Brahma, Paramatmana.
> 101. Whatever is heard in the form of nada, is the sakti (power).
> That which is formless, the final state of the Tatwas, is the
> 102. All the methods of Hatha are meant for gaining success in Raja-
> Yoga; for, the man, who is well-established in the Raja-Yoga,
> overcomes death.
> 103. Tatwa is the seed, Hatha the field; and Indifference (Vairagya)
> the water. By the action of these three, the creeper Unmani thrives
> very rapidly.
> 104. All the accumulations of sins are destroyed by practicing always
> with the nada; and the mind and the airs do certainly become latent
> in the colorless (Paramatmana).
> 105. Such a one does not hear the noise of the conch and Dundubhi.
> Being in the Unmani avastha, his body becomes like a piece of wood.
> 106. There is no doubt, such a Yogi becomes free from all states,
> from all cares, and remains like one dead.
> 107. He is not devoured by death, is not bound by his actions. The
> Yogi who is engaged in Samadhi is overpowered by none.
> 108. The Yogi, engaged in Samadhi, feels neither smell, taste, color,
> touch, sound, nor is conscious of his own self.
> 109. He whose mind is neither sleeping, waking, remembering,
> destitute of memory, disappearing nor appearing, is liberated.
> 110. He feels neither heat, cold, pain, pleasure, respect nor
> disrespect. Such a Yogi is absorbed in Samadhi.
> 111. He who, though awake, appears like one sleeping, and is without
> inspiration and expiration, is certainly free.
> 112. The Yogi, engaged in Samadhi, cannot be killed by any
> instrument, and is beyond the controlling powers of beings. He is
> beyond the reach of incantations and charms.
> 113. As long as the Prana does not enter and flow in the middle
> channel and the vindu does not become firm by the control of the
> movements of the Prana; as long as the mind does not assume the form
> of Brahma without any effort in contemplation, so long all the talk
> of knowledge and wisdom is merely the nonsensical babbling of a mad
Posted by: manjit | June 28, 2018 at 11:36 AM
PS - I meant Niranjan & Onkar uses in the Granth Sahib, not Nirankaar.
Posted by: manjit | June 28, 2018 at 11:49 AM
""" > mukti be not attained. This happiness, resulting from absorption (in
> Brama), is obtained by means of Raja-Yoga."""
I read most if Vivekananda' book for Yogis before Charan's initiation
Als the "Gospel of Ramakrishna"
I finished halfway, reading he was beating an outcast woman
because she had touched his shirt in his absence,
meaning death for such a lady at that time
In theory these ancient ways work definitely
after many lives of honest ascese to unify with Brahman
Next the Jeeva being unified must wait until Lord Brahman makes his spiritual
exercises to unify with Para Brahm, Lord of the second 2/7 spiritual regions
taking many big_bang time equivalents
I use the word region here which means time_space_consciusness situation
of a Jeeva - There are seven
Next you wait with Para Brahm for his unifying
with the Lord of the third region
Better than all this
it to meet a Saint already ONE with the Almighty Creator
and Love Him
He will give you the ultimate Sound of the 7th region
and you can unify because of its sweetness
One hasn't to us IQ at all - Just Love
Thanks a lot for reminding me all these ancient methods from Silver, Copper Yugas
Only in Kali Yuga we have the possibility to be adopted by such a Saint for going the High Way
Before initiation, never heard of RSSB, I practiced this
and experienced horrible results which I cannot describe
more or less like drowning in black glue and you cannot move
going lower and lower
If not Charan had sent me a giant serendipity happening
i would never have done any meditation further in my life
I told about it in former comments
Posted by: 777 | June 28, 2018 at 01:44 PM
As you can see these are a few street vendors on this corner of town peddling their wares and running down what they see as their competition.
It's fair to say you are getting the best they can offer. And it's a service that they have boiled their advice down.
But my thesis is this..
Love accomplishes more in an instant than all the efforts of the ages.
Follow your bliss. If you feel in love with Gurindar, as I did, you are in the lap of God.
If not, then find your bliss.
Love is a force that is conscious. You don't need to manipulate what power is inside you with any exercises. Because Love is far more powerful. Love made and runs the creation.
Keep love for your Master in your heart, do your best to live in His (at least honor the vows you took). And He will do the rest.
Anyway, that's my belief system.
This thread is actually about Brian's book comparing science, spirituality and religion. $3.99 on Kindle... Just like the pricing of Sant Mat books... A labor of love, beatifully written, even if imperfect.
Having read Manjit's post I now have a new appreciation when Brian writes that God and Spirituality must be beyond these little things.
Yes, I think I have a new appreciation for that.
Posted by: Spencer Tepper | June 28, 2018 at 02:05 PM
Thanks for the lovely response. A lot of very nice association of linguistic concepts with your own inner experiences. Nothing I haven't read, heard or experienced before - ie. fully understand where you're coming from, but thanks for sharing.
You write: "Thanks a lot for reminding me all these ancient methods from Silver, Copper Yugas
Only in Kali Yuga we have the possibility to be adopted by such a Saint for going the High Way"
Errrm, but you don't seem to have understood not a single ONE of those quotes was from any other MYTHIC era than the "kali yuga" you talk about? Further, you do not seem to be aware that many of the mystics quoted THEMSELVES say this is the only efficacious method in the "kali yuga", and this is where RS's CURRENT claim to the same originated from? Lets not even go into the fact mystics from completely metaphysical and cosmological systems ALSO make the identical claim (far further back than anything remotely resembling the RS doctrine & cosmology was around)!
Even further, you do not seem to be aware that many of the clear, indisputable & referenced quotes about the causal relationship between kundalini, breath control & listening to the inner sound come from Kabir, Nanak and several other gurus from the Sri Guru Granth Sahib, the gurus of which are the PROTOTYPE and ideal of today's RS gurus? This is called dissonance. How will you cognize it?
I understand what you are saying and why you are saying it, you have read these concepts in RS books, and your subsequent experiences confirm your conceptual beliefs. Kundalini is bad, breath control is bad, all lower region stuff blah blah blah. You are entitled to your beliefs.
But that simply doesn't explain away or alter the reality there is a profound dissonance between what RS claims, and the undisputed words in the Granth Sahib (in RS terminology, of "Sant Mat Satgurus") which clearly explain the practices of these gurus in their own words. In context of what we know about the history and practice of shabd yoga, tantra etc, the argument is not persuasive, it is more or less simply a fact. Rationalise that away however you wish, I can assure you not only have I heard every single ridiculous argument to "explain away" the quotes I've provided - and here's the real rub - I've thought about them, tried to rationalise them away, myself, obsessively, years before I ever posted in a public forum.
You write: "If not Charan had sent me a giant serendipity happening
i would never have done any meditation further in my life
I told about it in former comments"
Ahh, yes, indeed. I've heard your recollection of amazing synchronicities - aren't they wonderful, awe-inspiring? Jim, also, has an amazing one involving Charan, and he also has proof (if I recall correctly?) in a signed legal document insuring his life signed by a law-person Charan Singh, just whilst he was about to get initiated (check out his blog for the full story, it's rather lovely!).
Hey, my opinion is, until you've had enough mind-blowing synchronicities, numerous times a day, involving multiple strands of co-incidence, what I call synchronicity-clusters, with plenty, plenty of "physical proof" that is simply beyond any "coincidence", and so much so that you really couldn't care less about them anymore, because you simply realise this is the nature of reality - a projection of your mind. Ahh, the stories I can tell (but won't :), 777! When I was following Gurinder - wow, I understand we're you're coming from with your synchronicities! When I left - silence, which is what wow to the power of infinity leaves you in. So, we each have our own, unique paths, no outer guru, religion or organisation has ever been able to contain it, yet it can possess them ALL, from criminal charlatan to genuine mystic who has transcended the individual ego.
Anyway, the point being, you seem to think this experience of "serendipity", synchronicity, and the "proof" you have of it should somehow convince Brian and everyone else of the objective reality and validity around your claims about the current and past RSSB gurus (exclusively, I notice - no love for Kirpal? Chand? Rai Saligram? Any of the other thousand shabd and nad yoga gurus in the world?), and the theology and cosmology of the RSSB path?
But, what YOU do not seem to understand - and I have pointed this indisputable fact out before to you - is that these synchronicities - and believe me brother, far, far more astonishing ones with far more persuasive "evidence" - occur to people of all sorts and varieties of faith, practice, gurus, religions, in secular contexts etc. Trust me, as a connoisseur of these EXPERIENCES myself, these are profoundly common phenomena.
So what are they telling us?
Are they "proving" Charan or Gurinder are magical Godmen whose elitist comsology is the literal and objective truth about the ultimate purpose of the entire creation? But what those Sai Baba, Kirpal, The Pope, Atheist experiences which are no less remarkable than your experience?
Or are they really pointing to a far, far more profounder reality, one where our mind and our environment is inextricably connected, influence each other, and reinforce any and all manner of delusional beliefs. Actually, isn't this the RS (or, more correctly, ancient Indian, eastern & gnostic) theology too, that our minds create our reality in this realm of maya or illusion? So why couldn't your experience, and your consequential interpretation of it, also simply be mayaic illusion? Because it "relates" to a "pooran sant satguru"? But what difference is that to the claim of the Kirpal initiate, Sai Baba devotee, Thakar initiate, Ramakrishna, Vivekananda devotee etc? Do you really believe you're the only one who's experienced these astonishing, mind-bending synchronicities? :-o
Here's a challenge - for anyone who wishes to genuinely engage with what I'm saying here - Read this book I have already recommended in context of your recollections. After reading it, then tell me just how special and indicative of the ultimate nature of reality your experience is, in an evidentiary sense?
Honestly, I like some of your posts.....but I'm not sure you really comprehend just how much conceptual structures define your reality and your experiences.......
Posted by: manjit | June 28, 2018 at 02:37 PM
Spencer: "As you can see these are a few street vendors on this corner of town peddling their wares and running down what they see as their competition."
You are so priceless...and somewhat clueless, but never mind.
Please, go check "inside" with Charan Singh if I am to be your "teacher" AGAIN today?
Posted by: manjit | June 28, 2018 at 02:39 PM
And Spencer, if at any point you wish to discuss any of the numerous, referenced points I brought up, about the actual subject of Saurabh's comment (if not Brian's blog post - nice appeal though! Of course, it is I disrupting the forum with my 5 posts every two months! :), please do let me know.
If not, I'll leave you to your transparently emotive, substance-less, un-examined, ego-bruised, passive-defensive, irrelevant, off-topic, judgemental, ad hominem attacks.
Cheers & good night brother!
Posted by: manjit | June 28, 2018 at 02:43 PM
Manjit, did you have a chance to download Brian's book?
Let's discuss philosophy, rather than cast judgements on one another.
That will be much me fun.
Posted by: Spencer Tepper | June 28, 2018 at 03:00 PM
Wow, what a read. Thanks to Brian and others posting here on this blog, without this I would never have been exposed to so many different ideas and beliefs and understandings...
Reading, listening, watching, feelings, emotions... and then *sigh*... emptiness :)
"Who is that seer which is aware but also detached from those emotions? Can itself be seen?"
Posted by: Jen | June 28, 2018 at 03:33 PM
"Spencer: "As you can see these are a few street vendors on this corner of town peddling their wares and running down what they see as their competition."
Ahh, Spencer, you are a beautiful being. You have inspired me to write another post! Thank you! :)
Yes, Spence, I am indeed a "street vendor"! But aren't we all?
What exactly are we selling, is the real question?
Brian is selling a book - $3.99 for a kindle version! Now, I have an innate aversion to playing up to the teacher, parent, boss etc, as are the games some people play, so I am cautious to say this, but WOW $3.99 for God's Whisper, Creation's Thunder? Is that right (I must be honest, I haven't even read the original post & thread, oops :)? Absolute bloody bargain and I would recommend anybody who doesn't have it, buy one - that is a labour worth far more than $3.99, with plenty of useful and interesting information and speculation. It's an absolute bloody bargain.......if I didn't keep my printed copy from 20+ years ago - one of the few RS related books I still have - I would buy it myself. I wouldn't even mention this, but I was struck with how low a price it was, definitely worth it.....
So what are you selling here, Spence? Are you selling the idea that some obscenely rich businessman chosen to be the successor of his uncle, at the head of a vast, organised religious organisation with numerous "questionable" activities to their name, with no notable or obvious knowledge or proficiency, or life history of mystical pursuits (as almost every single "historical" and most current "mystics" tend to), is a "Perfect Living Master", and the singular chance of "liberation" out of a vast, infinite ocean of souls suffering in eternal transmigration, and that every single other guru, RS or otherwise, path, religion, individual pursuit, spontaneous experiences, NDEs, psychedelic experiences etc etc are all following incomplete, delusional paths of "kal", and that only the chosen elect of the specific lineage of RSSB experience & observe the true, ultimate "spiritual reality", whilst even all the other hundreds of RS & shabd yoga gurus are delusional, what to say of advaitists, kundalini yogis, christians, muslims, tibetan buddhists, lucid dreamers, ayahuasca experiencers etc etc etc?! Love is great and the essence of the path, just make sure it is channeled and projected onto the body of this man we really know nothing about?
Does that, without the self-censorship, sum up what you're "peddling"? :)
Well, you are indeed right about one thing - I am also "peddling my wares"! Though, to be honest, and I can totally appreciate you may not understand this, at ALL, but "running down" the "competition" are not concepts that resonate or make any sense to me, personally, though I can understand they do to others. To "feel" this way would imply motives which are so alien to me, it simply further amplifies what I consider to the very delusional world many satsangis inhabit, and how absurd and profoundly ego-centred the whole "spiritual" pursuit CAN BECOME when there is not enough clarity about our mental contents.......(with these concepts being so alien to me and my true inner motivations, this suggests psychological projection or transference, else where else did these concepts and ideas arise? :)
But pay close attention to what I'm peddling, and in which ways I can benefit from what I'm saying. Pay very close attention.
I am saying that there are no limits to "God", the "Divine", the "Self", "Absolute", "Suchness", "Reality", "Conscoiusness", "Oneness" etc etc That there are no limits, restrictions, rules, or barriers to "realisation" of this aside from our desire for illusory individuality. We are all precisely where we're meant to be, there is nothing to worry about, there is no punishment of eternal transmigration just because you didn't have the good fortune to pick the right guru, path, practice etc. That the "Divine" can be realised anywhere, by anyone, and there are no rules for how that may occur, and that this "Divine" is no more or less "holy" than the "Divine" experienced by anybody else, because ALL is "Divine" and ONLY ego decides and divides between what is and isn't "holy", creates narratives of heavens and hells, souls and transmigration....a dualistic journey imagined by a dualistic mind, a mind divorced from "Reality" itself, living instead within a cocoon of conceptual beliefs filled out by a whole variety of illusory visionary experiences and worldly synchronicity and other "paranormal" phenomena besides.
Guru Arjan Dev, the 5th Sikh Guru, told the tale of Dhanna Bhagat - who says he is a "Saint" who realised "God" by his profound, sincere, deep love & devotion towards a pebble. To summarise, he was a simple fellow who asked some pandit how to realise God. The pandit, annoyed and wanting to get rid of him, said "go worship a stone, you idiot" (or something, this is from memory - the story is easily available online). So, that's what he did.....but with a pure, loving, sincere heart.....and "realised" this "God" and became a certified "Saint" according to both Guru Arjan Dev & popular punjabi belief. Dhanna means "pebble" and "Bhagat" saint in punjabi language. There is no hint of gatekeepers, laws, rules, objective paths to be traversed etc in this man's path, or that of countless thousands of others through time.
So why do I criticise RS? What am I peddling, how does it benefit me? I have spent 20 odd years posting on this and the RSS forum, have been praised to high heaven & contacted by private email (often by people I have no idea who they are and have never posted on these forums) many, many times over those years, with all manner of claims & requests (honestly, I will not even begin to discuss the many, many experiences in my private, personal life as this is clouded enough as it is) - I openly request if during that time there has ever been any hint of my gaining ANYTHING on a personal level, from ANY of those people, be it emotional, physical, monetary or any other way, then please come here and openly state it, and I will publicly acknowledge and apologise if I have ever acted in such a way. I constantly try to maintain vigilance of my behaviour according to my OWN standards of decency, and I would like to know if anyone, ever, who has contacted me privately, has ever felt I have tried to "peddle" something to them?
I bow at their feet and beg their forgiveness if I have. I am a fool and an idiot. I am empty handed, because I neither have anything to give, or take anything from anyone else.
All I have is my consciousness.
Do I care about Gurinder and RS/SB? No, not at all, I do not have the slightest feeling or emotion towards them specifically at all nowadays.
So why am I "peddling" criticism of RS here? Because, my consciousness as a seeker and follower of Gurinder 22 years ago, is calling out to me now. Just as my head was "cracked open" by reading David Lane's website and the Radhasoamistudies forum years before I ever posted there, with many fascinating and interesting posters, who led me down so many avenues of investigation (NEVER take ANYTHING anyone says on places like these for granted, do your OWN research, come to your OWN conclusions, be genuine, sincere and truthful to your own self......there is absolutely nothing to be gained from these intellectual ego games found here, don't lose sight of what our original purpose or intention was when we became interested in "spirituality". Clarify and ponder over that intention. Clarity may be key!).
Those posts and posters, critical of RS, helped propel me to my own "realisations" "beyond compare" to what came before. My consciousness now is in profound ecstatic devotion and enthral to that "younger" self who was a "seeker". This isn't about individualities, egos, but consciousness communicating with consciousness in the eternal now.
Thank Sat Purush that Dave's RSS forum and this blog exists - the ONLY 2 places, worldwide, where people may have their "reality broken" by engaging with alternative views and perspectives, which can potentially lead to it being rebuilt in unutterably divine ways. There are thousands of "spaces" to reinforce one's beliefs, or learn about the RS teachings & gurus...I do not go there, or care about there...but only 2 precious islands where these things can be questioned, challenged....and lead to a shattering of "reality" (or, as I now understood, illusion :). There is a reason why people come to check out these places, out of choice, when mindless belief re-enforcement is so easy to come by......
Personally, I find all this very boring.....both (most) of the subject matter, and the entire "ego-games" dynamic that underlies most discussions here......but I so love my younger self, and I know just what he needs to hear....I wonder if my posts will ripple back in time?
Goodnight brother, and peace to you. I beg of you, please ask Charan for a little forgiveness for me, he knows my errant ways. Or, perhaps not so errant....
Posted by: manjit | June 28, 2018 at 04:12 PM
I also said in the comment you are referring to that each vendor provides a service by boiling down their view.
There are as different views of God as there are people.
In Brian's book he criticizes those who accept completely different views about God, especially views that appear to contradict each other. He calls this the liberal tradition.
But count me in with them. There are as many different views of God as there are people, because each of us had a different background, conditioning, education, culture and circumstance.
One light, many windows.
You are one post helping hold up the building.
"The opposite of one truth may not be false. It may be another truth."
Posted by: Spencer Tepper | June 28, 2018 at 06:29 PM
Dear Mr. Rahul Dev,
Whatever I wrote in my previous comment can be found out in the book titled ' With the three Masters- by Rai Sahib Munshi Ram' and in the literature written by Baba Sawan SIngh. So it was nothing new that I wrote. I just copy pasted from that book. As far as my level is concerned God only knows.
Posted by: Account Deleted | June 28, 2018 at 09:42 PM
Spencer, you do understand that I didn't write God's Whisper, Creation's Thunder on my own, right? It was a seva (volunteer service) project under the auspices of Radha Soami Satsang Beas. Drafts were read and reviewed by Faith Singh, the RSSB English books coordinator at the time (maybe she still is). My book wouldn't have been purchased by RSSB for resale to the sangat if it didn't comport with the Sant Mat teachings.
So you should be criticizing Gurinder Singh, and his sevadar Faith Singh, plus the other satsangis who read and commented on drafts of my book if you don't believe that what I wrote is an accurate portrayal of Sant Mat mysticism. It is, as evidenced by the many quotes I include in the book from the RSSB literature. As I've noted before, you have your own personal view of what mysticism is all about. The view I conveyed in my book is that of Radha Soami Satsang Beas, as taught by the gurus in that lineage.
Posted by: Brian Hines | June 28, 2018 at 09:44 PM
50 years from now RSSB Gurus will do nothing anymore
They will give Darshan via Holograpic 32K TV
The Love will be so visible that all churches will convert
Also the vows will not be needed anymore because it will
But first the anti Christ will do some dirty cleaning very effectively
and has his 666 sign already planted high in NY NY already
without any opposition
Beware Americans, Beware not to become associated
as many are now
accepting now what their fathers would have destroyed
at a glance 50 years ago when the land of Dreams existed
So say the Masters
Posted by: 777 | June 28, 2018 at 09:55 PM
Dear Mrs. 777,
The side effects of the Kundalini that you did before still remains with you. I would recommend you to concentrate more on your Simran. I earlier sensed this thug-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huitzilopochtli
Posted by: Account Deleted | June 28, 2018 at 10:07 PM
To 777, your Prophecy for America is contradicted by Ishwar Puri, who says Sawan Singh told him that the Shift in access to Spirituality will move its Headquarters from East to West, and Ishwar believes he is making that happen by his Preaching and Youtube Talks, and he is building ( or soliciting Seva and $$$$ ) for the new Dera that will replace the old Dera in India. The new Dera is being built in Bruce, Wisconson, U.S.A. where the POTUS is laboring, for free, to,..”.Make America Great Again.”
Should readers here believe you, who are an admitted sex addict, and Porn Can Voyeur, Adept in all the tricks how open channels and Black Mailing of Clergy and Politicians are caught in the trap by planting Trojan Horses on the Victim’s Computers , or should they believe Ishwar Puri, who says Sawan sits beside him and rides in his car with him, and whispers in his ear who to accept for Initiation as he gives each Seeker their two minute Interviews at his Work Shops. .
Seems you are listening to the wrong TV Channels.
Posted by: Jim Sutherland | June 28, 2018 at 10:19 PM
Dear Mrs. 777,
Can you please give the link of your journal?
Posted by: Account Deleted | June 28, 2018 at 10:39 PM
big mouth diaper wetter gurumukhs,
even Lucifer laughs on these mo(r)on exploder visionaries.
Posted by: One Initiated | June 29, 2018 at 02:37 AM
"As I've noted before, you have your own personal view of what mysticism is all about. The view I conveyed in my book is that of Radha Soami Satsang Beas, as taught by the gurus in that lineage."
When the Master's repeatedly tell us God is closer than hands and feet, but your writing in that book emphasizes how far God is from this reality, that's a conflict, a duality, a contradiction that comes right to the surface.
When you cite so many beautiful quotes from Rumi, who sees God everywhere, and then you begin systematically to marginalize spiritual experience to something so arcane only very advanced practitioners can witness it, then Rumi's words of love have completely passed over your head. As well as Sawsn Singh's in The Classic treatise on love, Philosophy of The Master's, Volume II.
I appreciate your efforts to use arguments of authority, but for a person who claims to honor rationale thought, and not rhetoric, I would expect you to address the substance of my argument, not who else liked your book.
I don't think you should place yourself in the role of RSSB representative, neither in your book nor today.
But I'm happy to discuss our different views of what spirituality is.
No doubt, Brian, it is different for different people. Even for different Satsangis. I don't say you are wrong in the points of truth you make. I say that it's far too narrow. And by pushing spirituality, literally into a corner (or quadrant in your book), it's not a far step to eliminating it from your life and experience.
Yes, at one point spirituality may seem very distant.
But at another, it is all there is.
For you to place legitimacy only in your very narrow point of truth alone, and not to acknowledge the whole spectrum of experience, that really is all Brian. Just own it.
Posted by: Spencer Tepper | June 29, 2018 at 08:33 PM
Spencer, I'll repeat what I said before. My book, God's Whisper, Creation's Thunder, was read and reviewed (meaning, commented on) by many people within and without the Radha Soami Satsang Beas organization before it was published. Usually, but not always, many minds come to a more accurate conclusion about a subject than a single mind. That's why drafts of the three books I've written were sent to many people for comments, suggestions, critiques.
You may have a mind that works wonderfully well, but it is only your mind, a single mind. You discount the many minds that went into the writing of my book, while accepting the conclusions of your own mind. Maybe you're justified in doing this. Maybe you aren't. I'm just suggesting that when a book is the product of many minds, generally that leads to a better result than when a writing is the result of a single mind.
That's something for the minds who read this comment to think about, at least.
Lastly, how can you say that I shouldn't put myself in the role of a RSSB representative when my book was approved for sale to the RSSB sangat? Obviously my book represented the teachings of Radha Soami Satsang Beas, or the guru, Gurinder Singh Dhillon, wouldn't have authorized thousands of copies to be bought for resale to the sangat.
Posted by: Brian Hines | June 29, 2018 at 08:55 PM
That powerful mind of yours, for all its strength, has not addressed the actual points I made.
You have missed a great deal about the immediacy and intimacy of the Path of spirituality and one's personal relationship to God by making God so perfect, different and distant that He has no demonstrable presence here.
It really is turning Him into a straw man.
I'm surprised no one pointed this out to you. But then maybe they did. I wasn't there. What are we to make of your statements?.
Douglas Addams famously and humorously used that argument in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. How curious to find it delivered with dead seriousness in your book.
The Final Proof of the non-Existence of God was proved by a Babel Fish.
Now, it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mind-bogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some have chosen to see it as the final proof of the NON-existence of God. The argument goes something like this:
"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."
"But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves that You exist, and so therefore, by Your own arguments, You don't. QED"
"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.
"Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing."
- Douglas Adam's. The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Universe
You use a corollary of this argument today to deny God's existence.
Do you really think RSSB believes God can only be found in the highest regions of Meditation?
And not even in the smile of a begger when you empty your pockets into their hands?
I tell you Brian, that smile is the Master's Dhayan.
Try it. Witness a miracle.
Posted by: Spencer Tepper | June 29, 2018 at 09:38 PM
In your fine book you share an opinion
"In my opinion, the logic of this argument is clear, but many physicists and other material scientists are unrelenting in their demands for concrete proof of God or Spirit. Since the divine essence of ultimate reality only can be known on a higher plane of consciousness, such proof is an impossibility".
Yet in a following passage you cite Rumi, who disproves your intractable dichotomous thinking, though you do not see it yet.
In your book you cite this beautiful passage by Rumi
"His rules are manifest in all creation, because all things are the shadow of God, and the Sandie is like the person
If the five fingers are spread out, the shadow too is spread out.; if the body bows, the shadow also bows; of it stretches out, the shadow also stretches out... But this awareness of ours in relation to God's knowledge is in the predicament of unawareness. Not evening that is in the person shows in the shadow, only certain things. So not all the attributes of God show in this shadow, only some of them show, for 'You have been given of knowledge nothing except a little. "
The physical Master is a shadow of the real Master, and all rules in this physical creation are shadows of God, but not the fullness of God, just as a shadow doesn't contain the details of the complete person.
Therefore we can make the opposite argument: indirect evidence for the eternal and Supreme can be found in this physical region, in every corner of existence, just as a person's shadow is evidence on the wall, the floor, the hills and the streams, wherever that shadow is cast. And as it moves when the person moves, it is evidence of that person's existence. However, to conclude this you must see both.
Then you see God everywhere. And the person and the shadow are the same ultimate divinity.
Posted by: Spencer Tepper | July 01, 2018 at 01:34 PM
Autospell error fixed... "all things are the shadow of God. And the shadow is like the person...."
Posted by: Spencer Tepper | July 01, 2018 at 01:37 PM
"The Final Proof of the non-Existence of God was proved by a Babel Fish."
I have asked insurance scientists.
For my 5 serendipities in 8 minutes,
described 2 times here :
The probability of each singe one of them
can be calculated
by putting a quantum computer
on each electron in the universe
next let them work during the timespan of this universe
Next they will tell you:
there are not enough zeros to find nor Teras, to write
In my eyes : "is impossible"
Multiply that by 5
The same solispismics can be applied to Brians chance/possibility to exist
The possibility is ZERO
Posted by: 777 | July 02, 2018 at 07:22 AM
"I have asked insurance scientists.
For my 5 serendipities in 8 minutes,
described 2 times here :
The probability of each singe one of them
can be calculated
by putting a quantum computer
on each electron in the universe
next let them work during the timespan of this universe
Next they will tell you:
there are not enough zeros to find nor Teras, to write
In my eyes : "is impossible"
Multiply that by 5"
I think it computers all agreed on 42.
42 is the ultimate answer.
Posted by: Spencer Tepper | July 02, 2018 at 11:21 AM
Quote Spencer Tepper : applied to all of science it (Occam’s Razor) makes little sense
I apologize for this very long gap between your comment and this response. I happen to have logged on here after a long time due to distractions and commitments IRL.
If you’ll permit me to take up again, after all this while, that discussion we’d left off mid-way last time :
I don’t think Occam’s Razor is meant to apply to “all of science”. It is merely a heuristic that helps you explain specific observations.
“All of science” is merely an organized aggregate of all of our observations, and all of our explanations, as well as a meta-arrangement, across levels, of all of our explanations. I don’t see why that basic principle wouldn’t apply even here. So no, I don’t see why you say that “when applied to all of science it makes little sense”.
Quote : The three particles of Proton Neutron and Electron are now 200+.
And that is merely because we’ve been presented a whole host of observations that had not been available earlier, and because we now have access to mathematical techniques that we did not have back then. This is straightforward scientific advance. I don’t see that this speaks to Occam’s Razor at all, and certainly not to refute it in any manner.
Quote: The cost of truth is simplicity
That’s a nice poetic way to look at it! :-)
I agree, of course. Except it’s not perhaps not so much “truth” per se as our increasing breadth of knowledge that’s adding to our complexity of how that knowledge is organized. Which is tautological in a way, because how else, after all, could it ever be?
Quote : the notion that science will lead to an ultimate truth of all truths while quaint, doesn't track with the development of science.
But whose notion is this? This sounds suspiciously like a straw man to me.
(Unless Brian explicitly mentions something like this in his book, which after all I haven’t read. If he does, then sure, your criticism is justified, and something I agree with.)
Perhaps you’d best explain clearly now whose notion it is that science will “lead to an ultimate truth of all truths”?
I personally very much doubt there is any such “ultimate truth” at all, and think that looking to science to uncover something like this would be to unnecessarily glamorize a down-to-earth work-a-day tool, which is all “science” actually is.
Quote Spencer : My point to Brian was that this also applies to spiritual development. The fact there are many versions of God, and many internal experiences of God doesn't make those invalid. They actually may confirm more truths about the thousand faces of God..
That’s a fascinating insight, Spencer! That so resonates with me! Thank you for mentioning this here! Lovely way of looking at things!
I agree : it is a double standard, to allow “science” to limit itself to mere explanations, as opposed to some central, fundamental, ultimate truth ; while at the same time demanding such of “spirituality”.
In fact -- and I’ve voiced this view before here, and discussed this view with you too if I remember right, a long time back -- I don’t see any opposition of science with spirituality. I don’t see why the scientific method cannot be applied to spirituality as well. I’d say spiritual experiences -- always assuming there are indeed and in fact such things as bona fide spiritual experiences (I know you experience these first-hand, but you’ll excuse me, I hope, if I insist on retaining my own skepticism about this until such time that I experience these myself) -- are no different from anything else, and there is no reason why they should not come under the broad purview of “science”.
And yes, if we insist on seeking, within spirituality, some unified fundamental common whole, some ultimate truth, then that speaks to the fault in our own seeking, and not to spirituality per se. Spirituality shows to us what there is to see (always assuming there is anything at all to see there!) That what is uncovered may not comport with our expectations merely indicates that our expectations were misplaced, that’s all.
However : Is this just a general observation of yours? If that is the case, if a context-free observation is all this is, then I agree cent per cent with you.
Or is it that you’re saying that Brian is advocating the opposite, that he is advocating that spirituality in general must necessarily lead to some unitary “truth”, and that it is wanting, perhaps even counterfeit, if it does not do that? Are you, and is he?
And -- to extend this discussion somewhat beyond its original scope -- how does RSSB theology square with all of this? You’ve had some experiences, as you say, both before your initiation and, more intensely, after : and RSSB theology gives you a framework to base all of those experiences on, the only one that you’ve found so far. So far so good.
But what about other, non-RSSB-ish experiences? The sort that Osho Robbins speaks about, and that Manjit speaks about (to take two examples from within our regular commenters here)? How does RSSB theology account for all of these diverse experiences that do not comport with the sort of experiences that RSSB speaks of within its own meditation system? Where might these come from, per RSSB theology?
And also : You seem to advocating, here, a non-unitary basis to such experiences, a non-unitary basis to spiritual experiences in general, right? Much like everyday knowledge and science? But how does that square with RSSB theology, which you do believe in, and which does posit a unitary framework for ‘everything’, which does posit an “ultimate truth”? Wouldn’t that ironbound theology fly in the face of what you’ve been saying here just now?
Posted by: Appreciative Reader | July 13, 2018 at 07:24 AM