Wear your identity lightly if you value truth

This morning I finished reading Julia Galef's The Scout Mindset: Why Some People See Things Clearly and Others Don't, the subject of three previous posts (here, here, and here).

Her final chapters were great. Two had to do with how we sometimes hold on to beliefs so tightly, they become part of our identity. This is especially true of religious and political beliefs. Here's an excerpt  from the "How Beliefs Become Identities" chapter.

The problem with our tendency to turn beliefs into identities isn't that it pits us against each other. At least, that's not the problem I'm concerned with here. (Getting along with each other is important, too -- it's just outside the scope of this book.)

The problem with identity is that it wrecks your ability to think clearly. Identifying with a belief makes you feel like you have to be ready to defend it, which motivates you to focus your attention on collecting evidence in its favor. Identity makes you reflexively reject arguments that feel like attacks on you or the status of your group.

So the best thing to do is to hold our identity lightly.

Holding an identity lightly means thinking of it in a matter-of-fact way, rather than as a central source of pride and meaning in your life. It's a description, not a flag to be waved proudly.

...Holding an identity lightly means treating that identity as contingent, saying to yourself, "I'm a liberal, for as long as it continues to seem to me that liberalism is just." Or "I'm a feminist, but I would abandon the movement if for some reason I came to believe it was causing net harm."

It means maintaining a sense of your own beliefs and values, independent of the tribe's beliefs and values, and acknowledging -- at least in the privacy of your own head -- the places where those two things diverge.

Nicely said. 

But it can be difficult to let go of a religious or political identity that's been an important part of our life. I experienced this when, after 35 years of being an active member of an India-based religious organization, Radha Soami Satsang Beas (RSSB), I realized that the RSSB teachings no longer made sense to me.

That realization wasn't a big blow to my identity because I valued truth more than my connections to RSSB. Thus I felt good about myself because I knew that the reason I left RSSB was that the teachings I'd followed for so long didn't strike me as being true any more.

This commitment to truth is the key to embracing a scout mindset aimed at knowing reality as it is rather than as we'd like it to be -- which leads to a soldier mindset aimed at defending our beliefs at all costs. Here's how Galef ends her "A Scout Identity" chapter.

I found the concluding anecdote very appealing.

Personally, I find all those facets of scout mindset inspiring -- the willingness to prioritize impact over identity; the confidence to be unconfident; the courage to face reality. 

But if I were to name one single facet I find most inspiring, it's the idea of being intellectually honorable: wanting the truth to win out, and putting that principle above your own ego.

The example of intellectual honor I find myself thinking about most often is a story related by Richard Dawkins from his years as a student in the geology department at Oxford. At the time, there was a major controversy in biology over a cellular structure called the Golgi apparatus -- was it real or an illusion created by our observational methods?

One day, a young visiting scholar from the United States came to the department and gave a talk in which he presented new and compelling evidence that the Golgi apparatus was, in fact, real. 

Sitting in the audience of that talk was one of Oxford's most respected zoologists, an elderly professor who was known for his position that the Golgi apparatus was illusory. So of course, throughout the talk, everyone was stealing glances at the professor, wondering: How's he taking this? What's he going to say?

At the end of the talk, the elderly Oxford professor rose from his seat, walked up to the front of the lecture hall, and reached out to shake hands with the visiting scholar, saying, "My dear fellow, I wish to thank you. I have been wrong these fifteen years."

The lecture hall burst into applause.

Dawkins says, "The memory of this incident still brings a lump to my throat." It brings a lump to my throat, too, every time I retell that story. That's the kind of person I want to be -- and that's often enough to inspire me to choose scout mindset, even when the temptations of solider mindset are strong.

Comments

[Appreciative Reader]

Very inspiring.

What is a pity, though, is that this kind of thing is, in fact, the exception -- that brings lumps to throats -- rather than the rule.

One would have thought this kind of thing would be spontaneous, the default mode for all reasonable people. Clearly it isn't. Clearly the world isn't entirely, or even primarily, a reasonable place.

More power to JG, for writing this, and to you, Brian, for highlighting this. And to everyone who's working to bring us closer to that rationality, that freedom from superstition and irrationality that is the birthright of every human being that's born blest with the capacity for reason.

[Osho Robbins]

Very interesting article.
Applying this to RSSB and Sant mat in general, shows us just how strong our identity is.
When Thakar Singh admitted he had sexual desires and this went directly against the teachings, how many people decided they were wrong? The German rep, who had confronted him directly, told him straight out that he cannot accept him as a perfect master.
Rare courage.
Most followers just ignored it.

The same with RSSB. When the news came out about the fraud, most followers simply pretended it wasn’t happening. When I recounted my experience at the hands of the RSSB sevadars, again denial was the response of the majority.
My brother even asked GSD directly about the incident and the gurus response was “I will always stand by my sevadars”
Nobody dared to ask, “even in the face of violence? So you support unprovoked violence by your sevadars?”

I suspect I know the reason for this.
The followers think their future salvation lies in the hands of the guru. The guru is going to come at death to meet their soul. This belief is so strong, it continues even when the guru denies it.

One can only be loyal to the truth if one is not addicted to the lie. When your whole future depends on it - it’s too risky to turn against the lie. Instead we bury our heads in the sand and just hope we are right, despite the evidence.

It takes great courage and radical honesty to turn against the beliefs of a lifetime.

“I love Socrates, but I love truth more than Socrates ”
But it’s not how most disciples think

[Spence Tepper]

Having a strong sense that you are right and an equally strong sense that someone else is wrong is the problem the author attempts to address. Of course every one believes they are right, and intelligent people have intelligent reasons marshalled to bolster their beliefs. And behind that sense of rightness, and self - righteousness, is the emotional attachment to that view, they identify with that view, whether Satangi or Atheist.and they defend that view with their selection of facts.

The story in the blog about the professor. Is an excellent one. They were willing to alter a view they had reached, held and defended for decades. All based on hearing one single speaker present evidence in a compelling way.

I give credit to the speaker as well as to the professor. Without that speaker, and the professor's willingness to really hear and consider the information as if it might be true, there would be no progress.

He now had to put all the facts he knew were facts into a different, updated context.

What condition of mind was the speaker in to present such information so objectively?

What condition of mind was the professor in that, after all these years, he could now hear that perspective as it is, without twisting it to fit his system of belief? And further, what condition of mind allowed him to view the same facts he had used to bolster his conclusion in a completely different way?

It is good to admire Truth, however we define it. But better still to be in that condition to receive it, and to understand that while facts may not change much, the conclusions we draw from them can change dramatically, if we are open minded.

It is the hallmark of an adult to give up a favored joining when facts prove otherwise. Why is it so difficult? Because people cling to their conclusions as if they were at the level of the facts they use to defend them. They identify with them "Satsangi", "Atheist" and they learn to take pride in them, as if these were dearly beloved friends. And they are reluctant to give up their friendships with these internal companions living in their own minds. Equally, they learn to hate the enemy living within them, the opposing view.

What opinions are we clinging to today, defended with what we believe are clear facts? What views do we identify with? Satsangi? Atheist? Or...?

I suggest that no position is the truth, and every position contains elements of truth.

[Spence Tepper]

Oops.. Should read "It is the hallmark of every adult to give up a favored opinion when facts prove otherwise."

[S]

Great post and thought provoking comments.

Affiliation is survival of the identity. Deep, deep, deep down we fear loosing our associates, friends, possibly even family if we stop affiliating with the same groups as they do.

I guess fear takes over when one’s identity or core belief system is threatened because it has the potential to “upheave” (I don’t think that’s a word but I like it) one’s life.

Fiercely defending one’s thought system in the face of 100 sound reasons against that particular way of thinking, isn’t just pride. It’s physical survival as well, when you think about it on a very basic level. Some groups and certain faiths excommunicate/disfellowship/ostracize members who don’t conform. That can have serious emotional and financial consequences. So, I think fear is a big factor when it comes to defending erroneous beliefs in the face of strong evidence stating otherwise.

You have to remember that some people have A LOT to lose by changing their beliefs… even if they wanted to.

[S]

Ignoring inconvenient truths was practically built into our DNA for survival of the species. It’s very tribal. But tribes have always been key to survival. Sad but true.

[June Schlebuschj]

HI BRIAN PLEASE MAY I REJOIN THE GROUP MANY THANKS JUNE.

[Dungeness]

@ My brother even asked GSD directly about the incident and the gurus response was “I will always stand
@ by sevadars” Nobody dared to ask, “even in the face of violence? So you support unprovoked violence
@ by your sevadars?”

Did eyewitness testimony corroborate your complaint? Surely, without that, Dera
couldn't be expected to pursue the matter. Nor would the police. Or, even in its
absence, do you feel GSD should have apologized on behalf of the sevadars
for any potential maltreatment? If so, that's understandable. On the other hand
could you expect GSD, despite the scant facts surrounding the incident, to fill in
the blanks in favor of one party's account and direct an investigation without any
supporting proof. Should he have immediately trusted the authenticity of your
statements and discounted those of the sevadars? Your case surely isn't helped
by willfully breaking the rules though.

@ The followers think their future salvation lies in the hands of the guru. The guru is
@ going to come at death to meet their soul. This belief is so strong, it continues even
@ when the guru denies it.

Perhaps yes for some. For others, the evidence doesn't warrant certainty
about really occurred.

[Osho Robbins]

@dungeness
There were witnesses. Many.
For starters many people saw me standing there with the sevadars holding my arms. Then lots of people saw me being taken away to a quiet spot by force.
One sevadar who was on duty saw it clearly because I said to him “this is seva!”
The head of Haynes park was also there and spoke to me, obviously in on it.
Clearly there is corruption, which is inevitable when the guru always says “I don’t get involved, talk to the management”
Also the day before lots of sevadars were witnesses plus thousands of people saw me standing there waiting for the return of my phone. So lots of evidence. More than enough to take action.
Such violence should never happen at all in a spiritual centre that teaches non-violence.
It’s not a matter of producing proof. The very fact that I have a detailed report on churchless and also filed a detailed report with the police is proof that it happened.
Why else would I waste my time and energy and lie to the police?
The point is that it wasn’t looked into because it is well known among the sevadars that these things happen and they are accepted. It’s no secret.
The question is why do they happen in a spiritual centre?
Clearly seva as a method of preparing the disciple is clearly not working, as there should not even be the possibility of such actions. Perhaps you might also explain to me how such “seva” creates humility? One person says “do you know who I am?” The other says “all the centres belong to me personally”

Is this the fruit of seva?
A tree is known by the fruit it bears.
These are the top sevadars - and this is the result of decades of seva.
Why do such seva? Alarm bells would be ringing for any true seeker.

Wear your beliefs lightly and drop them when evidence suggests they are wrong.

[Osho Robbins]

Last question on this video
“Seva creates humility”
https://youtu.be/4vCna-_nQRc
Clearly not working at least not for the head sevadars

[Dungeness]

@ These are the top sevadars - and this is the result of decades of seva.
@ Why do such seva? Alarm bells would be ringing for any true seeker.

I'm truly sorry this happened to you. Your report of these events
sounds credible to me and registering a complaint with the police
totally warranted.

The only phrase I'd demur to is "top sevadars". More apt would
be "top sevadars in name only" if they've been at it for decades.
Of course, many of us can relate to these kind of lapses after
witnessing it in our own behaviour over decades. You feel you've
reached a measure of sensibility and decorum appropriate for a
spiritual seeker and the very next instant you're angry and out of
control. Sigh.

Yet, the authentic "scout" doesn't filter out his own lapses and
ascribe them to a flawed practice or path. If there's compelling
evidence of untruth or intractable corruption, that's one thing.
But to discard and categorize a method as failed because of its
followers' weaknesses is a descent into a "soldier" mindset.

I haven't observed the excesses you saw though I don't doubt
they occurred. For the most part, I think sevadars are working
to be helpful while struggling with their own flaws. They are
evolving to become less "soldierly". It may, and often does,
take decades, say the mystics.

[Osho Robbins]

“ If there's compelling
evidence of untruth or intractable corruption, that's one thing.
But to discard and categorize a method as failed because of its
followers' weaknesses is a descent into a "soldier" mindset.”. - Dungeness

There is compelling evidence. The sevadars know all about it - but when the guru chooses to support it - they back down. They cannot take a view against the guru.

The method is flawed. Here are a few reasons why.
1. Janak got enlightenment in a matter of hours, certainly not more than a day. Which is evidence that it should not be taking decades.
2. The Granth sahib says, and bulleh shah and many others say that it happens instantly because it is already the case and it’s only a realisation of what already is. It’s not an attainment; not something to be achieved or attained. There is no Sach khand to reach. All that is needed is a change in perception to realise there is only the one. That requires the disciple to drop the duality beliefs. Realisation is easy once you drop the false beliefs.
3. The q&a confirms this because it shows so many struggling to attain. Despite lots of meditation, they are still not there and are asking for grace.

What none of them realise is that enlightenment is instant. You are already one with the god you seek.
The delusion is that you think he is far away.
“Jo Thakar sad sada hazura, than ko andha jaanat doora”
“The god that is ever present, the blind man considers to be far away”
This is from the ninth guru.

The function of the guru is to remove your delusion, not to engage you in a practice that strengthens your ego.

[um]

@ Osho

It is my understanding that all mystics "received" their enlightenment without any method or effort on their part.

Having had that experience they found ways for themselves to repeat that first experience.

Having found that method, they shared it with others.

That method does work. If it works for one it works for others being the same cq human.

The effectiveness of the method is not dependent on the method itself but on the people that use it .... they do not all have the same talent for it.

I am convinced that if neuro scientists and behavior scientist would do a proper investigation they would find that a certain predisposition in the brain and certain personality characteristics makes it easier to use these techniques and be successful

After all these experiences are the outcome of the manipulation of the /brain/body. It occurs spontaneous in some and can be aroused artificial by others..

Look at the faces of those who call them selves skeptics and are member of an organisation promoting skepticism ... and you will understand that they are at the other side of the curve ... they will never have an experience because the ... can not due to their mental an physical make up ... hahahaha ... do not take it too serious.

[um]

And Osho ...

It is spring the time of hay fever, people being allergic for pollen in the air.
Some pollen prove an more serious effect than others and not all people are as sensitive as others and those not always.

There exists also something that i would call "emotional and/or intellectual allergy"

Some people easily provoke reactions in others and others are easily provoked and sometimes these things are to be found in one and the same person.

Again do not take it seriuos.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Osho
Who can disagree that you were treated badly?
We must accept for ourselves on the basis of our own experience the RSSB method, as with other methods of prayer, of entering within and worshipping the Lord within, has proven effective for many. But we must also accept the fact that human beings have human limitations. We do react to things. And we may regret words and actions from the past.

So it is a lifetime struggle. For all of us. Your experience demonstrates this.

The fellow who brought me to the path made it clear that satsangis are going through their own issues. Tommy said to me even before initiation, in the early seventies, "Spence, there are Satsangis in jail. Some may try to swindle you. And the Master has sevadars who carry guns in the Dera. Don't assume they are special. We are all working through our issues."

So no surprises there, from that perspective.

But other people were never the point. My own practice is the only point.

That practice gives me strength, and happiness. But like any practice, it is also work. But good work.

Forget notions of God, good guys and bad guys and don't let them distract from the one thing that can bring you happiness that belongs to you, that you carry with you wherever you go. Your own chosen practice of Internal concentration on that symbol of purity and Truth within you, that in time like a flower, opens up to ecstacy. What brings you bliss, worship that, care for that lovingly. Protect and nurture that. That is your Truth.

The world is the world. Our happiness is found within. And we are grateful to all those other fellow human beings that lent us a hand, we are thankful for the hand up. And we are thankful for the slap, because it reminds us to turn within. The slap is also our teacher.

[Spence Tepper]

Two more points Osho.
First, when you brought the issue to the attention of the authorities you did your job as far as the world is concerned. You raised the issue, made it transparent. That job is done. How others will digest, respond and carry forth their own responsibility is no longer your concern. You are free to return to your practice without distraction.

Second, if you are having trouble with that practice, bring that issue to its source, your own mind and you inner Master, in your practice. In your meditation. Lay this at His feet. Be as vocal as you like, but keep it within.

If your own inner intelligence cannot find a way to digest and transform this into peace, your work isn't done yet. Keep going.

Bring your visibility on that issue to them alone. Hone your practice that is with your partnerships within.. With your mind and with that deeper Truth.

[Spence Tepper]

If you are going to wear your identity lightly, then let these things, praise and insult, fair and unfair treatment just evaporate from you consideration. Don't have an identify to bruise in the first place. Withdraw from that.

[Osho Robbins]

Hi Spence
Good advice. Thank you.

I have no issue with the incident. On the contrary, it showed me the truth of RSSB.

Whether others believe is not my business. I was there and witnessed everything, so I know the truth.
What also became clear is that the corruption goes deep and even the sevadars seek to be part of it. The sevadar who was forced to lie, did so reluctantly but deep down he wants to get to the top and the only way was to lie and go against his own conscience.
This is why very few will succeed. They have no truth, no standards.
If I was a sevadar and I was asked to lie, I would have handed in my badge and left the seva, keeping my integrity.

Those who are corrupt have no hope of success.

[Appreciative Reader]

Osho Robbins:

"https://youtu.be/4vCna-_nQRc"

Watched and listened to the first 20 minutes or so. Much to my surprise, given my general impression of GSD, I found the man's approach fairly reasonable, and his presence oddly (and unexpectedly) soothing.

Incidentally, I was impressed with how open GSD was to ‘alien’—in this case, first Buddhistic, and afterwards, Christian—practices taken up by initiates. Also, I was struck with how patiently and how …lovingly, I have to say, lovingly, the man seemed to be answering his followers’ questions. (Of course, that’s what he was there for, and this apparent kindness may have been no more than carefully calculated performance. Still, that also did strike me favorably.)

Of course, the Q&A business is clearly predicated on unquestioning faith, more akin to children (and unbelievably naive children at that) asking questions of a trusted adult. But given that lopsided relationship as the necessary starting point for this kind of thing, like I said, I found how GSD was conducting the Q&A unexpectedly reasonable and dignified and oddly soothing. At least for the first 15 minutes or so; I don't know if the general tone changes afterwards.

-------

"here is compelling evidence. The sevadars know all about it - but when the guru chooses to support it - they back down. They cannot take a view against the guru."

Actually, that evidence is compelling only if one takes what you said here at face value.

Don't get me wrong, I personally believe your account. But that is because my instinct leads me to trust you in this. If someone else's instinct (say a believer's instinct, given that they are predisposed to look upon GSD-related stuff, including the Sevadars' carrying out of their duties, as infallible—"soldier" stuff, to use Julia Galef’s analogy, and to tie this comment, admittedly very tenuously, to the subject matter of this thread) leads them to discount that, then that POV is not necessarily any less reasonable than mine in trusting you.

But absolutely: Any competent and honest administrator, when presented with a case like this, would have instituted an inquiry. Not necessarily trusted your account implicitly, not that, but set rolling a free and fair and unbiased investigation, on which to base their conclusion. To directly declare his support for the Sevadars, no matter what, like GSD has done, seems entirely unconscionable, and not something any reasonable and honest and fair person would do.

-------

"1. Janak got enlightenment in a matter of hours, certainly not more than a day. Which is evidence that it should not be taking decades."

Not really.

First, who knows if those myths are even true? To think of them as "evidence" is to sorely misjudge the nature of valid objective evidence.

Besides, even if Janak's instant enlightenment were true—that's the Ashtavakra story, right?—even then, who is to say that is the only way to go about it? It might well be that enlightenment—whatever it might be!—can in some instances happen instantaneously, and in other instances incrementally over a long period of application.

-------

"The Granth sahib says, and bulleh shah and many others say that it happens instantly because it is already the case and it’s only a realisation of what already is. It’s not an attainment; not something to be achieved or attained. There is no Sach khand to reach. All that is needed is a change in perception to realise there is only the one. That requires the disciple to drop the duality beliefs. Realisation is easy once you drop the false beliefs."

As above.

First, referencing Granth Sahib and Bulleh Shah is a fallacious appeal to authority. What they say has relevance only to those that already revere and trust them. Seen objectively, what is written in the Sikh holy book, or pronounced by some Sufi mystic, carries zero weight.

I know, you've already clarified this, that you think they're right because their accounts happen to tally with your personal perception. But in that case: firstly, trotting out those references as some kind of authority is fallacious at best and may, if one is uncharitable, be thought of as disingenuous (no offense intended, Osho Robbins, by that reference to disingenuity, all I'm laying out is my [hopefully] objective, unbiased reaction); and, secondly, to use your own idiosyncratic perception as basis for argument is equally fallacious, because it lays on your audience the demand that they must trust your counter-intuitive intuition over their own. That is not a reasonable expectation, and no reasonable person would accede to such an implied demand. To do that one would need to, a, replicate your perception, and, b, establish the veracity of that perception. And we're miles, no, light-years, away from having done anything of the sort.

-------

“Jo Thakar sad sada hazura, than ko andha jaanat doora”
“The god that is ever present, the blind man considers to be far away”
This is from the ninth guru."

Yet more fallacious appeals to authority.

And one of those authorities seems to be Thakar, no less! That's the penis man, isn't it? (In an exchange with manjit some months back, he'd described how this man would initiate attractive women by putting his schlong in their hand or their mouth, or something bizarre like that. That kind of thing is probably an exaggeration, but there was some controversy of a sexual nature around that man. Hardly trust-making, that kind of thing. And in any case, even if the man were chaste and blameless, the appeal to his authority, as well as to the ninth Sikh Guru's authority, remains fallacious as ever.)

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

Sorry to have to contradict you so squarely on so many points, Osho Robbins. Thing is, I find it curious, how people are sometimes very rational in rejecting certain claims (in this case, the GSD/RSSB claims), while entirely cavalier in how they accept others and, what is more, seem to expect that others will follow suit.

In any case, even if we forget the soapbox thing, forget the fact that you're seeking to convince others of this. Let's say the principle of caveat emptor operates, as far as that. But even in terms of accepting these things yourself, and for that matter trusting your core perception, counter-intuitive as it is, over objective evidence that does not quite bear it out, I'm curious how you might go around defending that.

(I don't mean for this to be an extended discussion, unlike our last set of exchanges some months back, never fear! :---) Just curious what kinds of arguments you might present in response to the points I've raised here. I'm out of here with that post—in terms of actually posting further on this subject, I mean, naturally I'll read any response you might want to make with the greatest interest.)

[Appreciative Reader]

"If you are going to wear your identity lightly, then let these things, praise and insult, fair and unfair treatment just evaporate from you consideration. Don't have an identify to bruise in the first place. Withdraw from that."

I don't think that's what Julia Galef is saying there, at all. What you're describing here is the "spiritual" approach to detachment from ego. JG's point was entirely different, that one wears one's opinions and beliefs lightly, that we take care not to incorporate these inextricably with one's identity, so that one retains the fluidity to change one's opinion and beliefs as and when fresh evidence so warrants. Which is very different than the spiritual approach to detaching from one's "ego", that you're talking about here.

And as for Osho Robbins, how he chooses to react to this, that is his call. But, while sure, it is good to not get too tied up over anything, no matter how egregious, no matter how provocative, nevertheless, I have to say, if a gang of goons set on him and beat him up, then to let that "evaporate from one's consideration" does not seem very reasonable, or for that matter even very sane, to me. That kind of thing is outrageous, and outrage is a very justified reaction to something like that, I should think.

[S]

You cannot justify the unjustifiable.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Osho
You did your duty reporting them and Publicizing the event. No one can argue that it wasn't wrong. Wrong stuff happens. We do our part to bring forth the problem, and then we forget it altogether.. It shouldn't take up two seconds of your attention... Unless someone else wants a full report and then you give that.

I don't think you will be returning to any big Satsangi events soon. Really, what value is there in it for you? Life gave you a lesson."Osho, this isn't a good use of your time." God

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Appreciative
You wrote
"don't think that's what Julia Galef is saying there, at all. What you're describing here is the "spiritual" approach to detachment from ego. JG's point was entirely different, that one wears one's opinions and beliefs lightly, that we take care not to incorporate these inextricably with one's identity, so that one retains the fluidity to change one's opinion and beliefs as and when fresh evidence so warrants. Which is very different than the spiritual approach to detaching from one's "ego", that you're talking about here."

They are the same. If you have no identity to defend then you accept things as they are. You can't really hold an opinion if you are just an observer. It's the scientific ideal... To observe without corrupting or biasing what you are observing. As that is nearly impossible, hence the observer effect. If you want to understand something as it is, or someone as they are, take yourself out of the equation, Ieave yourself out of it. Just observe.

[Osho Robbins]

“Any competent and honest administrator, when presented with a case like this, would have instituted an inquiry. “ - Appreciative Reader

That is my point. There was more than enough evidence, and any inquiry would have found that the sevadars acted inappropriately. However the guru already knows this. The people concerned are known ex-gangsters. It’s no secret. Hence there was no need for an inquiry. The truth is already known.

[Osho Robbins]

@appreciative reader
I referred to the janak story not as an appeal to authority because I don’t care if it’s true or not. My reference is to state that according to the story, enlightenment can happen quickly. Which may question why it takes RSSB and others a lifetime.

My point is this: it’s a realisation of what already is. That only takes an instant

[Osho Robbins]

@appreciative Reader
I make no appeal to authority as you suggest.

An appeal to authority is when you recite an authority and take that to be proof or evidence.

You said I did they with regard to Thakar Singh. I Don’t even follow him so how can I appeal to authority using him?

When I recite Granth sahib, I am only doing it because the people who follow RSSB already consider the Granth sahib as an authority. So I reference it for them.

Personally I don’t follow any path. But I’d something matches my experience, I may quote it. Not as proof, because the only proof is one’s own realisation and that is subjective not objective proof. There is no objective proof of enlightenment

[Dungeness]

@ The Granth sahib says, and bulleh shah and many others say that it happens instantly because it is
@ already the case and it’s only a realisation of what already is. It’s not an attainment; not something to be
@ achieved or attained. There is no Sach khand to reach. All that is needed is a change in perception to
@ realise there is only the one. That requires the disciple to drop the duality beliefs. Realisation is easy
@ once you drop the false beliefs.

Ah, "dropping" is the rub though. False beliefs fall away instantaneously only
when their stranglehold is broken. But, that doesn't happen without a journey
inside to apprehend their presence within, consciously examine their dynamic,
and, in so doing, dissolve their power over you.

That escape will never happen by a wishful incantation such as "I will now
change my perception to drop the notion of duality. Very easy... and quick."
No matter what the mantra or devotional practice, there must be preparation
and an accompanying course of sustained effort within for any hope of
hitting its mark.

The real magic occurs only with a hyper devotion to freeing oneself and
taking that requisite journey. That's the real magic of consciousness.
Mystics say it will unquestionaly take that journey however. Slipping and
falling. Practicing stillness. Resisting an unseen enemy day and night.
A formidable enemy within. One that can not be taken away from its iron
grip on consciousness easily, despite the best efforts of hours, days, even
a lifetime.

"We have met the enemy and he is us" --Walt Kelley

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Dungeness
I like what you wrote.
Attention is an incredible thing. You can be thinking about something and that is where your mind goes. Right there.

But if you don't have the idea, the solution, the formula, the equation, the recipe, where will your mind go? It can't help you reach a destination it can't see or hear. Everyone was yakking about electric cars for decades. But the engineering hadn't been done until recent years. Now everyone is retro-engineering Teslas over night and starting up their own car companies or electric car and truck lines.

What is a Tesla? It's just using the same laws of physics that have been around for all time. It's nothing more. Nothing in a Tesla didn't exist before. Metal, chemicals, magnetic forces. Nothing new there. Not a single new law of physics. Every material fundamentally is made up of atoms that were always here.

Once the solution is there, anyone can follow it and build their own now. Immediately. But for all time, for millions and billions of years up until now, that was impossible.

So the issue has to do with awareness of the object of your attention, and that can take a lifetime or longer. You still have to build it, though. But without the blue prints, and pulling the raw materials and parts together, you dont get an electric car. You get an empty garage. You can understand what an electric car looks like... But it's not the same thing as having the actual plans, seeing the plans, having access to the parts, having the tools and assistance, and building it as per instructions.

You could say it already exists. So do the stars. So do the other planets. But getting there is a journey.

An athlete's body is their vehicle. But how they prepare, how they organize their time, exercise, analyze their progress, make course corrections, all determines their success.

In meditation, progress absolutely depends upon a full throated engineering approach. That's looking, realizing what your are seeing, and adjusting, submitting, adjusting. You are in the bench testing lab. Once you relax and become a little more aware, your obligation to look carefully, with wrapt attention, only increases. Understanding the mechanism of how the mind moves on its own groove. It requires full attention. Your controls are limited. You are flying on a razor's edge. And the more you stay in that one point, the further and faster you go. When you fall, and you will fall a lot, you get right back up. Because you rode that edge for an instant, for a moment. And now you are hooked.

Without that experience, what do you have to focus on? In the dark, without a lit exit sign to guide you, how can you get out?

You can say sign was there. But you had to turn around to see it. That's a practice. And then seeing it is just the beginning, because in meditation, the degree of attention and focus determines the speed and distance from your object of focus. So more focus, greater intimacy.

But there must be an object and an objective for the attention.

[Spence Tepper]

One more point.
In meditation you really do see huge distances. In absolute darkness you might think "nothing there." But in meditation, the spans of distance between you and what you are looking at get larger and larger. At first, when the mind is calm and the flashes of light become a flood of light, your realize your are in an immense space. Huge, grand. You approach one object, your Master, and you are taken into outer space to view the earth and the moon and sun, and then the stars. You look at the brightest star and you are pulled through a huge curving tunnel that dwarfs the galaxy! It's a paradox. The more you become one with the object of your focus, the Master, the greater the distances, the faster the speed of your transport to the ever refined object of your attention. You would think that in meditation with the smallest amount of focus you would become One. But actually the journey to the One unfolds into unfathomably large distances. Thankfully, the larger they become, the faster you are moving.

Awareness of these distances is actually progress towards real intimacy.

[S]

Hmm 🤔 I don’t know. Didn’t Great Master and Charan say that some people get initiated and go inside immediately because they’re very simple. Not unintelligent, just simple… humble.

One thing about these “levels” is it seems to bolster the ego. There are all sorts of levels and degrees of holiness in Surat Shabd Yoga. I guess if it makes you feel better to think you’re earning merit badges and could possibly become an Eagle Scout, more power to you. Tom Cruise was an Eagle Scout. So, there’s that…

[S]

And quite honestly, nobody knows where a satsangi goes when he goes inside. That journey is like near death experiences. Everyone that’s had an NDE has a few similar experiences but their experiences are very unique to the individual. Same with Surat Shabd Yoga. No one gets the same guided tour. It’s always unique.

[No surprise]

It’s not surprising that teachings focused on different degrees of holiness grew from a culture so steeped in the caste system. They simply didn’t know how to view things any other way.

[S]

There are only two things in spirituality—what’s true and what’s not true. You can’t have degrees of truth.

[Dungeness]

@ You look at the brightest star and you are pulled through a huge curving tunnel that dwarfs
@ the galaxy! It's a paradox.

Thanks, Spence, for sharing your experience. You've developed
an enviable case of "tunnel vision".

P.S.
Forgive any topic lapse. My lips are now sealed.

[Osho Robbins]

@Dungeness
Dropping beliefs happens in the company of a realiser. Hence the Granth sahib and gurus focussed on the company of the saint.
“Satgur hath kunji, hor sion dar khuli nahin”
“The satguru has the key and nobody else can open the door”
Meaning that you will not be able to do this through your efforts simply because you and your mind and your beliefs are the barrier.

[dragonslayor]

LIES are most valued by RSSB and GSD. Every aspect of this cult leader and the satanic cult is built on plagerism of other religions and acceptance of all to maximize its net of potential followers, and built on a foundation of lies and deception. The guru who portrays a perfect enlightenment person, is a total HYPOCRITE and doesn't look like he has done a days MEDITATION, given he has over 16 shell companies where he has hand picked head hunted sevadars to run and manage. GSD is far too busy in fraudulent activity and hiding this from the public. His answers to Q and A fall very short of the mark in every single way - it is way better to ask siri or Alexa, or even your cat. These people are desperate for answers and not to be mocked or laughed at amongst the sangat. So you can see TRUTH is where GSD and RssB are NOT.

[Dungeness]

@ Dropping beliefs happens in the company of a realiser. Hence the Granth sahib and gurus focussed on
@ the company of the saint

That's true and the mystic says that the realizer is within us. The
individual's consciousness is God or "totality of consciousness"
as some describe it. The unrealized individual has severed his
awareness of this fact however and is immersed in duality. It's
all for the sake of a game. A child loves to play. What's better
than the sensation of a roller coast ride. But a game can get
tiresome so he's kept an SOS signal button hidden in his own
consciousness.

This is the amazing part. The individual who's had his fun
and grown weary presses the button to call in the cavalry to
rescue him at the ordained moment. That rescuer/stage
actor/hero is the perfect master within. Why does he need to
appear outside in mystic garb often on a stage? Because,
well, remember the individual is still lost in his little game
and looks outward for a rescuer to save him. So the
rescuer has to play his role in this little stage play too. He
gives our lost, befuddled waif some words to repeat and
a few outward chores to do until his memory is restored
and he finds his way back home. The curtain closes.

[S]

@ A formidable enemy within. One that can not be taken away from its iron
@grip on consciousness easily, despite the best efforts of hours, days, even
@a lifetime.

What is this enemy? How can you fight an illusion? It’s not possible to resist or fight something that doesn’t exist. Charging at windmills?

[Dungeness]

@ What is this enemy? How can you fight an illusion? It’s not possible to resist
@ or fight something that doesn’t exist. Charging at windmills?

"Monkey mind" is an illusionist who fills our days and nights with
an endless stream of thoughts and imagery. A useless, scattered,
relentless, sanity-threatening tsunami that pulls down and easily
drowns the strongest of swimmers.

Mind under control is invaluable. If not, it's our worst enemy.
A practice of mindfulness is the most effective antidote.

[Emerson]

"He who has a thousand friends has not a friend to spare, and he who has one enemy will meet him everywhere."

[Osho Robbins]

I spent four days on an intensive with a realised person.
Those four days changed my whole life.

There was no meditation or sitting there with eyes closed.

It was quite the opposite. It was confrontational.

[S]

@Osho

What do you mean by confrontational? I am interested in hearing more about your experience.

[Osho Robbins]

@S
The process was about being REAL and dealing with all the layers of lies and and pretence and hypocrisy we have built around us.
That is the real culprit and it’s what keeps ego alive.
The “I am a good person and I am right in my beliefs” is the barrier that stops us being real and “being who I am”
As children we were who we were. No pretence. No hypocrisy. That’s why children are inherently happy, and seek nothing to make them happy. They don’t need money, heaven or some abstract goal. When they wake up they live their life and have fun. Life has no other purpose for them.

As we grow up, we create an ego which demands many things. When we start a spiritual journey, we demand enlightenment

[Osho Robbins]

@S
The confrontation was the process.

So rules were: be yourself. Drop all pretence. When a thought comes: act. Don’t just sit there. Express your truth.
Also: no physical violence. You cannot physically hurt anyone.

So I felt like sitting in the gurus chair after lunch while we were waiting for him.
So I got up and sat on his chair.
I closed my eyes and opened them a minute later. All eyes were on me.
One lady asked “what do think you are doing?”
“Nothing” I replied. “ Just bring me. I had a thought to sit here so I sat, exactly as instructed”
She was upset. She came up to me to remove me from the chair but stopped.
“I am not allowed to use violence” she said.
Just then the guru arrived
“Now I am in trouble” I said loudly.
The guru said “ I have been waiting for the day when someone, anyone, would take the step of moving from there to here”
And the process began.....
too long to go into here

[Manoj]

Wear your identity lightly if you value truth

With the likes of Deceptive GSD its a good train of thought to have.

The innocent being taken for a ride as to say is something the rs cults thrives on.
Waiting for the simple individual who's trying to find his way through life, gets preyed upon by the deceptive predator Baba GSD.

Lie after Lie shoveling more Lies is a moral standard that GSD so lives by, without a ounce of shame.

Its all about the Love for money and power, not to forget about his favourite pastime hobbies, criminal and oh so frivolously fraudulent.

GSD so enjoys Living the Perfect Lie.

[umami]

O-Rob,

I can't recall whether you consider Baba Ji realised. Please discuss.

[Osho Robbins]

Enlightenment is full of apparent contradictions.
Like the notion that “I” want to get enlightened.
Yet enlightenment is precisely the end of the “I”, so the “I” doesn’t get enlightened; instead it disappears.
This disappearance is not a conscious act; YOU cannot engineer it or make it happen. If you do, then you are deluded because the “I” is still alive.
As long as you desire enlightenment and as long as you “try” to get it, you are standing in the way.
If you are meditating, then you are standing in the way.
When you step aside, it happens by itself because it was already the case.
It was the “I” that was stopping it from being perceived, because the “I” wants to claim and take the credit. The “I” wants a pat on the back. The “I” wants to say
“I did it - I succeeded - I am enlightened now; it was hard work, but after decades of intense meditation - I finally made it”
This is pseudo enlightenment because the “I” is still there to make the claim.
The ego thinks it is an attainment. It wants to claim Enlightenment just like it claims so many other thinks. It thinks that it is an achievement - something that requires great effort.
However enlightenment doesn’t require any effort at all. All effort comes from the ego.
Enlightenment only happens when effort ends.

[Dungeness]

@ If you are meditating, then you are standing in the way.
@ When you step aside, it happens by itself because it was already the case.

You're right. the meditation itself doesn't itself but I think the mystic would
say there's a bit more to it. Repetition of a physical sound or a mantra isn't
magical but it reconnects you with the power which is: consciousness itself.
It's the meditation (or mindfulness) and its devotional intensity that sets the
stage for that magic to occur. That's only my simplistic, incomplete, and very
likely flawed view of it however. It can be expressed more or less religiously
or even non-religiously. They're all heading in the best direction if it's inward.

We're steeped in illusion but, however difficult, I think there's still a path to
enlightenment. But the key thing is a willingness and a strong belief to look
for answers within... in consciousness itself and not outside. Any kind of
transcendence will be found there rather than outside however wonderful the
discoveries we make "out there" are. Both pursuits benefit from scientific
methodology and a "scout" (rather than a "soldier") mindset too.

@ However enlightenment doesn’t require any effort at all. All effort comes
@ from the ego. Enlightenment only happens when effort ends.

If I remember correctly, Ishwar Puri told of a friend who excitedly told him
"I've discovered effort leads nowhere in spirituality so now I'm trying very
hard to adopt the way of non-effort"

[um]

>>Enlightenment only happens when effort ends.<<

There must be something else to it .... as most people on the surface of this earth, have no idea what you are writing about, so that they "spontaneous" do what you point at and yet they are not labeled as being enlightened.

And the other way around ... think of the thousands that spend their days and lifes in monasteries in the west and the east. Those who practice Zazen or other Buddhist techniques. None of them would ever have the pleasure of enlightenment.

Yes the happening itself cannot but be as you describe ... after all nobody can "will" to sleep and putting effort..... people FALL in sleep .... but ... only after having gone through a certain practice, daily routine. We all know that one cannot force falling a sleep but we certainly can create the conditions for it.

So their must be "conditions" that make enlightenment possible and occur.

[um]

And ...
having fullfilled the "conditions" not all people fall asleep, all the time and some have even to "struggle".

The "conditions" probably being in one's hands the factual cause certainly not.

What is that cause?

[Spence Tepper]

I think of enlightenment as education. It's its own death. The old view dies when we learn something new.

We are limited beings. Bags of chemicals connected in ways we don't understand because these connections are subtle and largely unconscious. Meditation is a practice that gives us a platform to learn more about what and who is inside us. They carry us, or we carry them, but we are not alone. We may be unconscious of those things. You could call that ignorant. And as we become more aware you could call that enlightened. But at any point we are ignorant of some things and enlightened about others. Which means, that while we may be enlightened about something, we ourselves are largely ignorant. So if we can be enlightened about some limited things, let's prioritize and stay focused on using our time to the best of our capacity to learn and grow from where we are, in what ways we actually can.

This eastern notion that enlightenment is all or nothing, you have it or you don't makes no sense to me. It seems simplistic and dualistic. We are all becoming more enlightened every day. Just turn on the news, or take a look around, or within, or in the mirror. But most definitely what you see and hear changes you.

[Osho Robbins]

The Buddha spent many years seeking and only got enlightened when he finally gave up.
In the giving up, a let go happens that allows us to perceive what was always present but our effort stopped us perceiving it because we were too busy trying to attain.
Osho did the same. He used to have great discipline: exerciser very day; meditate, etc.
Then one day, he never exercised and didn’t meditate and everyone thought there must be something wrong.
That was when he had the realisation

[Osho Robbins]

“ This eastern notion that enlightenment is all or nothing, you have it or you don't makes no sense to me. It seems simplistic and dualistic. We are all becoming more enlightened every day. Just turn on the news, or take a look around, or within, or in the mirror. But most definitely what you see and hear changes you.” - Spence

Enlightenment in the spiritual sense is a clear yes/no state.
You have either realised the truth or not.
You either live in duality or realise the oneness is the only truth which means there is no separate “you”

[Appreciative Reader]

"Enlightenment is full of apparent contradictions.
Like the notion that “I” want to get enlightened.
Yet enlightenment is precisely the end of the “I”, so the “I” doesn’t get enlightened; instead it disappears.
This disappearance is not a conscious act; YOU cannot engineer it or make it happen. If you do, then you are deluded because the “I” is still alive.
As long as you desire enlightenment and as long as you “try” to get it, you are standing in the way.
If you are meditating, then you are standing in the way.
When you step aside, it happens by itself because it was already the case.
It was the “I” that was stopping it from being perceived, because the “I” wants to claim and take the credit. The “I” wants a pat on the back. The “I” wants to say
“I did it - I succeeded - I am enlightened now; it was hard work, but after decades of intense meditation - I finally made it”
This is pseudo enlightenment because the “I” is still there to make the claim.
The ego thinks it is an attainment. It wants to claim Enlightenment just like it claims so many other thinks. It thinks that it is an achievement - something that requires great effort.
However enlightenment doesn’t require any effort at all. All effort comes from the ego.
Enlightenment only happens when effort ends."

Posted by: Osho Robbins | May 28, 2021 at 09:46 PM

-------

I've posted all of what you've said there, Osho Robbins, something I rarely do, even at risk of unnecessarily clogging up server space, because it was a beautiful comment.

As you know I'm skeptical of many of the things you say, and indeed your central Oneness understanding, and more so of late than previously. Nevertheless that comment of yours gave me pause, and forced me to think, and to re-read your words a few times. That's a comment worth bookmarking.

In fact in a later comment you speak of the Buddha, and that is one of the things that stops me from dismissing the Oneness business out of hand as unevidenced and fanciful. Because the Buddha, back in those ancient times when people knew nothing at all of what science is now telling us, was yet able to clearly formulate his entirely counter-intuitive realization of Anatta, and formulate it not just as random speculation but clearly structured teachings. Which makes one wonder if that realization itself might not have been bona fide, because how else would he have known what he knew?

-------

I understand, and indeed "realize", intellectually that is, that one's self is a chimerical construct of the processes that make up the human body (including the whole myriads of external organisms that populate our bodies). But a direct realization of the fact that we don't have a self, which is what I'm assuming you're talking about here when you refer to enlightenment -- and that we've discussed more than once in the past -- that is a fascinating thing to contemplate.

We've done this in the past, and every time had to stop at an impasse, a dead end; and I realize that it can be long and very involved process; but I'd like to probe this a bit further with you, if you're willing.

Of course, it would be off-topic here. I don't know, perhaps Brian would be agreeable to starting and keeping aside a thread for you to discuss your ideas about Oneness in? Or we could simply take this to the Open Thread. Given that it could be an involved and lengthy discussion, we could just bookmark the thread with our ongoing discussion, and keep returning to it as and when we can. If you're willing to, that is.

[Dungeness]

@ If you are meditating, then you are standing in the way.
@ When you step aside, it happens by itself because it was already the case.
@ It was the “I” that was stopping it from being perceived, because the “I” wants to claim and take the credit.

I think the mystic would agree partly. It is "already the case" that
we're enlightened. The putative "unenlightened soul" is already
god ("totality of consciousness") and simply isn't aware of it on
an external, illusory level.

But meditating isn't what stands in the way of realization. Nor
wanting to take credit. It's the blockage of awareness of his
true state. Only when innate awareness is restored is there
enlightenment. But a simple incantation, eg, "letting go" or
"stepping aside" won't in itself work. When you're dreaming,
telling yourself, "This is all a dream." doesn't wake you up.
You actually have to awaken.

But, arguably certain practices hone your awareness and
incrementally facilitate that quantum leap of realization
sometimes called "direct perception". Whether it's simple
mindfulness or an intense devotional worship of a stage
actor, it draws you inward via an enhanced awareness
that results from a focused consciousness. That's when
the magic of effortlessness happens and you awaken
from the slumber of "I".

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Osho
You wrote
"Enlightenment in the spiritual sense is a clear yes/no state.
" You have either realised the truth or not.
"You either live in duality or realise the oneness is the only truth which means there is no separate “you”

Every moment of learning is like that. You didn't know, and now you do. Having an opinion that all is one is one thing. Witnessing it is a continuing journey.

But there is more than one such moment in the life of a lover of truth. An endless number of such moments.

That process of continuing discovery is also based upon an endless ignorance. An ignorance that becomes less and less and more and more. As we discover, we realize a little more about what else we don't know.

What a surprise to find that we tiny limited beings are all connected, but also, all in motion. All moving. And every move forward introduces us to a larger space we now realize we know nothing about. Yet. And that compels is to struggle forward.

We had no idea how ignorant we were.
Now we have a little better idea. That's real enlightenment!

This idea that we didn't need to do anything actually makes all learning wrong. The idea that we don't have anything else to learn is an old culture and religous bound way of thinking. All of science proves we have more to learn. And not knowing, however we justify it, is justifying ignorance, not Enlightenment. And ignorant, harm to others happens.

We don't have to force ourselves to move, to struggle, to learn, to grow. It's already there. We are moving. We are responding to each other. That's very good. If we feel compelled to struggle, then we are compelled. It's not in our hands. We weren't moving because we were ignorant or wasting our time. It was never in our hands.

We remain static and unmoving out of ignorance.

No one likes change, except an enlightened person who embraces it as part of growth.

Everyone proud of their thinking thinks they are enlightened and need do nothing more. They defend the status quo.

But there is no wasted effort. All effort is perfect in its own relative sphere. Change isn't treason. Change isn't ignorance. Change is growth, and life.

If Osho Rajneesh thought he was wasting his time, then he still is in his current position also. Who would claim to be beyond that?

'I'm enlightened, I don't need to do anything. ' Sounds lazy.

Enlightenment isn't static, lifeless. That isn't Enlightenment. It's a rigid caste system using religion to enforce no change, no progress.

[Spence Tepper]

In summary, there aren't two classes of people, ignorant and enlightened. We are all One class... Guess which one. :)

[Spence Tepper]

Conspicuously, and suspiciously, the only one who doesn't need to struggle, who claims they are selfless is generally the oppressor.

The rest of us must chop wood, make fire, cook our meals, serve our children.

The slave owner does none of that. But I don't envy their mounting debts. There is no wisdom in using others. Just a mounting debt to them.

[S]

Just had an ah ha moment! All roads lead to Rome. Some are easier than others. Some more scenic,

Vey insightful comments, but (and I never thought I would ever say this) all this intellectualizing gets a bit tiresome at times.

Sometimes it’s nice to not think so much. It’s nice to just sit in the garden and appreciate the beauty.

[Osho Robbins]

“ But a simple incantation, eg, "letting go" or
"stepping aside" won't in itself work. When you're dreaming,
telling yourself, "This is all a dream." doesn't wake you up.
You actually have to awaken.” - Dungeness

That is correct. However I am not advocating an incantation or a mantra or repetition of certain words.
That becomes ritualistic and counterproductive.
Buddha did not sit below the now famous banya tree and recite “let go” or “stop seeking” He simply stopped seeking. He gave up. He let go. Not in order to realise. He gave up because he finally accepted failure. And in that moment of no more effort - what was always there suddenly became clear. The seeking was the barrier because seeking presupposes that the thing one is seeking is far away and needs to be found.
Buddha never found anything, but instead realised in a single moment that seeking was futile because there was nothing to find. Nothing was lost or missing. The god he was seeking just like the god I was seeking was fictional.
In my case, I was seeking Sat Purush, who I believed lived in Sach Khand. All my life I thought it was a non-material spiritual region that my soul would go to after it left the body. So I was trying to actually achieve something specific in my meditation. I wanted to leave my body, meet the radiant form of my guru, and he would take me from there to the higher regions and eventually to Sach Khand.

Dropping that notion was no small feat. Almost impossible in fact because I had spent my whole life believing it to be true.

So when someone first told me that there are no regions and no sat purush, I just thought he was ignorant. It took a while for me to see that I was holding onto a false belief. Eventually I let the false belief go. That is letting go. Only after letting the false go, was the space created to allow the truth to enter. Truth cannot enter if there is no space.

[Osho Robbins]

“ Enlightenment isn't static, lifeless. That isn't Enlightenment.” - Spence

You are correct - enlightenment is not static. After enlightenment there are no claims and enlightenment itself is not a claim. After enlightenment there is only mystery and a constant and ongoing unfolding of layers and layers of further realisation. It is endless.
However what I label as enlightenment is the moment of realising that there is nothing to seek because the ONE is all there is. That is a specific realisation in which the seeker disappears and the seeking journey is over. No more struggle.
Unfolding and further realisation continues, but no struggle because nothing is missing. It is not lifeless. Life opens up now because there are no more false beliefs, no gods, no heaven or hell and no “you” to be saved. Hence no more struggle to be saved and no salvation to seek. No guru is needed anymore and you yourself are not a guru either. You are life itself. You seek nothing to make you complete. A guru needs disciples to feed his ego and is as trapped as the seeker

[Osho Robbins]

“ This idea that we didn't need to do anything actually makes all learning wrong.” - Spence

Context: “didn’t need to do anything”. means it (truth) was already there. I didn’t create it or even reach it. There was something to do: drop and let go of the false beliefs that created the prison I was in.
One example to make this clear:
The RSSB follower believes (falsely) that he is a soul and trapped by karma. Karma becomes his prison. He wants to reach Sach khand for which he needs to meditate. The trap is set. There is no escape. The more he meditates, the stronger the trap becomes. It is impossible to escape, because the trap is not real: it is created by the concepts he has accepted as true: that he is a drop of the ocean of sat purush and has become separate and needs to unite.
No amount of meditation will free him.
Why? Because there is no trap in the first place. His belief is the trap.
The beliefs keep the trap in place. Drop the belief and the truth begins to dawn: that he is not a separate soul at all.
How can there be a separate soul, if only the ONE exists? ONE means there is no other, no separate soul can possibly exist. Once this becomes your reality, the trap magically vanishes in an instant, just like the wizard in the wizard of OZ.

[Osho Robbins]

“ But a direct realization of the fact that we don't have a self, which is what I'm assuming you're talking about here when you refer to enlightenment -- and that we've discussed more than once in the past -- that is a fascinating thing to contemplate.” - Appreciative Reader

It’s simple.
“There is only ONE - there is no other”
Fully accept that statement. Notice what happens next.
To help you fully accept - let’s do a ritual or a meditation. Not something I am a great fan of, but we’ll make an exception here because we have a specific reason for it.
So, repeat the above statement 20 times with your eyes closed and repeat it slowly, letting the meaning and implications in.
“There is only ONE, there is no OTHER”
Now think about this:
1. Can there be a separate soul?
2. Can there be a you and a me?
3. Can there be a separate god?
4. Can there be karma?
5. Can “YOU” be separate from the “ONE”?
6. So then what is this apparent “ME” that I experience?
7 how do “I” get realised, when there is no “I”

[S]

I guess the only true realization is that you are not a body. Bodies serve to limit love and separate.

[S]

@Manoj,

GSD is a person just like the rest of us. No one has power over you unless you give it to them.

[S]

Manoj,

When you feel hatred towards someone, you are giving them power over you that they aren’t even aware of. It’s all in your mind.

Why not dwell on the people and things you love and as that love grows it will extend to others and eventually to everyone because you will see them as they truly are. We all carry light.

[um]

@ Osho
>>Buddha did not sit below the now famous banya tree and recite “let go” or “stop seeking” He simply stopped seeking. He gave up. He let go. Not in order to realise. He gave up because he finally accepted failure. And in that moment of no more effort - what was always there suddenly became clear.<<

What have his followers done ever since and still do today??

What did Milarepa for example?

They all, great and smal, .... MEDITATE!

Obvious or maybe, the practice itself is not a problem but how it is done.

In RSSB, as far as I remember, it is stated over and over again, that by ones effort the access is not granted and also that mechanical meditation does not work; they stress that it should be done with heart ... with love and devotion.

If that inner pull is not there, that inner longing, nothing will work.

Maybe there are higher levels of intellectual understanding that ends up with non dual understanding as you write of.
Maybe there are higher levels of emotion, devotion, love that makes the universe seen in "another light"
One cold as the moon and the other hot as the sun

Who knows .....

One can try to find what others say they know or have found ... and today, due to globalization of information, there is no end to people that come to the market to present their ware and do their utmost to sell it to the public affraid of going home empty handed.
or ...
One can live one's own life and have peace therein .... people are not born to stroll the markets of the world to find ever new variations of the same..... but if it is their pleasure ... let them have it.

[Osho Robbins]

“I guess the only true realization is that you are not a body. Bodies serve to limit love and separate.” -S

How do you know that you are not a body? Is it a belief or a realisation?

A belief is something that you acquire.
A realisation acquires you.

A realisation is a truth that dawns on you. It is not just a feeling or a belief.
It is an absolute knowing.

It’s like when you solve a puzzle. Suddenly it’s all clear.

That is why zen masters gave the disciples a zen koan to solve.
It appears impossible to solve and illogical - until you suddenly understand and then you too cannot explain it.

Example: what is the sound of one hand clapping?
Logical objection: one hand cannot clap
So now the disciple meditates and from that gets a deeper insight into ONE. He gets many insights. The deeper meaning of ONE. Can ONE clap? Can ONE do any act? The deeper insight cannot be told or spoken.

That is exactly the nature of realisation. To you it is absolutely clear. To another it appears to be nonsense.

[um]

The first mystic of any path was never famous. They were people seeking their own students to whom they coulf pass their knowlege and experience.

They kept mum, they did not go to the market.
Why?
Because giving something of value to one that has no understanding of that value, is a sin and can be detrimental to the welfare of that person.
Why/
Because of the "evil of wealth"
What is that evil?
That evil is the suggestion that their is something to be had, without which human life becomes worthless.
No evolved soul with any dignity would present that knowledge bepore a person that was not capable of receiving that gift ... so they stay mum.

One should not speak of things that should stay untold. .... things that are a gift and no offered as a bait for a trap.

[Osho Robbins]

“ What have his followers done ever since and still do today??

What did Milarepa for example?

They all, great and smal, .... MEDITATE!

Obvious or maybe, the practice itself is not a problem but how it is done.

In RSSB, as far as I remember, it is stated over and over again, that by ones effort the access is not granted and also that mechanical meditation does not work; they stress that it should be done with heart ... with love and devotion.”
- um

The disciple was meditating. The master made noise by rubbing a stone. The disciple got irritated. “what are you doing, master?” He asks.
“I am rubbing the stone in order to make it a mirror”
“No amount of rubbing will make the stone into a mirror” responds the disciple.
“And no amount of meditation will lead you to enlightenment” says the master.

People follow blindly.
Just look at the quality of the questions on the GSD series. The disciples hardly even listen to the answer. They just quickly move on to “please shower your grace on me”.
What was the point of asking? If you are not even interested in the answer.
First he says “meditate”
Those who say they have done it, he tells them, not to seek results.
But that is impossible.
They entire motivation for meditation was to get the result
You go to work to get paid. If you don’t get paid, how long will you continue to go to work?
The disciple sees it as a deal “I will meditate and you give me the light, sound and inner regions in exchange”
He says “meditate just because your master asks you and seek no result”
It is impossible to do.
The disciple came to the master for a reason: to get enlightened. He didn’t come for endless meditation.
So now the disciple becomes inauthentic because he is deeply dissatisfied but pretends to be devoted

[Osho Robbins]

@Appreciative Reader
On my previous post to you, I started with “There is only ONE and no other”
From there it’s simple because if there is only ONE, there cannot be individual souls and selves. There can only be the illusion of many.

So this is how we get to oneness.
1. Everything you see around you appears to be real. But it is only for a certain time. It is within time. Everything within time ends and dies eventually. Hence we could define this as temporary or unreal. Do you agree?
It’s a definition, not an opinion. I am creating the definition that real = that which remains forever. Unreal = that which ends.

So then everything here is maya, illusion and unreal. It is here for the moment but not forever. It is as real as a dream while the dream is happening. I am not denying that this is the only reality we know. I am accepting that but defining it as unreal.
To move forward you have to choose to accept my definition.

So, from here, the next step is to go into what real means. So real means eternal, forever, unchanging. Outside of time.

Within time = unreal
Outside time = real

Within time there is no ONENESS. There is many. We perceive ourselves as separate. We also have the concept of a separate soul. We believe we need to unite with the separate god. We believe it will take time and effort and it’s a journey from separation to unity. This is the trap. We are stuck in concepts and cannot see outside the trap because of the beliefs and because we think this is real.
So ONENESS seems to be bulkshit from this viewpoint. And actually I agree - it is bullshit - because there is no ONENESS here. To just say “we are all one” is nonsense because clearly we are not one.

So now examine “outside of time”

By the way at this point - it’s all conceptual - that is all it can be. But this leads to realisation only once you examine these concepts and get clear.

Outside of time means: no change (because change only happens in time).
Outside of time means no separation, hence only one thing everywhere that encompasses all time and all space. It cannot be otherwise. Two cannot exist outside of time and space.
So this means there is only ONE and no other.

So this is where you arrive:
There are two states:
1. Maya
2. ONENESS

The first is what you see with your eyes.

Hence scriptures say “what you see - it is not. What IT is - we cannot say”
It’s referring to the ONENESS. You cannot meet it. You cannot experience it. You cannot see it. You cannot know it.

Why?
Because it’s not an “it”. It’s not a thing. It’s not perceivable.
Why? Because to perceive, TWO are needed. And there is only ONE.

So what happens is a deep insight that suddenly dawns on you. It’s can’t be called an experience.
That is the realisation.

Once it happens you cannot explain it to anyone. What I have done is the best that can be done. I have described “about it”

Once you allow these ideas in - you get first a vague idea of what ONENESS might be. Then it grows and eventually becomes clear.
Now you can see that the two things co-exist.
The maya is like the dream state
and the ONENESS is the real state.
So your true form is the ONENESS.

But also that can be misunderstood so easily because I am not referring to the self that you consider to be “you” - that is illusory. I am referring to the ONENESS in which there are no individual souls.

[um]

@ Osho

>>People follow blindly.>Just look at the quality of the questions on the GSD series. The disciples hardly even listen to the answer. They just quickly move on to “please shower your grace on me”. What was the point of asking? If you are not even interested in the answer.>First he says “meditate” Those who say they have done it, he tells them, not to seek results. But that is impossible. They entire motivation for meditation was to get the result You go to work to get paid. If you don’t get paid, how long will you continue to go to work?

That is how one can look upon it but there are other motivations too .... just to please a person or just take it as an advise of how it can be done.

>>The disciple sees it as a deal “I will meditate and you give me the light, sound and inner regions in exchange”>He says “meditate just because your master asks you and seek no result”
It is impossible to do.>The disciple came to the master for a reason: to get enlightened. He didn’t come for endless meditation.>So now the disciple becomes inauthentic because he is deeply dissatisfied but pretends to be devoted<<

Yes, that is how it can work ... but ... if he goes on and on, sooner or later he will discover what he is doing and how he is doing it, then he will run away or he will change his ways.

And ... I am convinced that you KNOW all these things if you stop looking at others, included the teacher and his teachings .... it all depends on YOU and me ofcourse hahahaha

It was a pleasure reading your observations, they are all correct, but do not include everything that can be observed in this matter.

[Appreciative Reader]

It’s simple.
“There is only ONE - there is no other”
Fully accept that statement. Notice what happens next.
To help you fully accept - let’s do a ritual or a meditation. Not something I am a great fan of, but we’ll make an exception here because we have a specific reason for it.
So, repeat the above statement 20 times with your eyes closed and repeat it slowly, letting the meaning and implications in.
“There is only ONE, there is no OTHER”
Now think about this:
1. Can there be a separate soul?
2. Can there be a you and a me?
3. Can there be a separate god?
4. Can there be karma?
5. Can “YOU” be separate from the “ONE”?
6. So then what is this apparent “ME” that I experience?
7 how do “I” get realised, when there is no “I”

Posted by: Osho Robbins | May 29, 2021 at 10:11 PM

-------

Osho Robbins, interesting though this is, let’s not keep on violating Brian’s rule for on-topic comments. I’m taking this to the current Open Thread, okay? Easy enough to get to it directly, but still, here’s the link: https://hinessight.blogs.com/church_of_the_churchless/2021/05/open-thread-38-free-speech-for-comments.html?cid=6a00d83451c0aa69e20282e1055d9a200b#comment-6a00d83451c0aa69e20282e1055d9a200b

And I'll address your subsequent comment also in that thread.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Osho
You wrote
"Context: “didn’t need to do anything”. means it (truth) was already there. I didn’t create it or even reach it. There was something to do: drop and let go of the false beliefs that created the prison I was in.
One example to make this clear:
" The RSSB follower believes (falsely) that he is a soul and trapped by karma. Karma becomes his prison. He wants to reach Sach khand for which he needs to meditate. The trap is set. There is no escape. The more he meditates, the stronger the trap becomes. It is impossible to escape, because the trap is not real: it is created by the concepts he has accepted as true: that he is a drop of the ocean of sat purush and has become separate and needs to unite.
No amount of meditation will free him."

Actually this isn't exactly so. Many Satsangis have no idea whether the above is true or not. I knew engineers, physicians and mathematicians who didn't or a lot of attention on the explanations. They took them as just explanations to support the practice. They are there for the pleasure of the Master's company, the loving atmosphere in the Satsang and in their meditation. They are only struggling in Meditation to put aside the day's distractions, worries and pleasures in order to have that special experience again and again. And to deepen that experience.

Notions of karma, the Master as some divinity Sent by God, these are all culture bound explanations for two facts that most Satsangis would agree upon.

1. They really are limited. Limited by the body's limits, limited by their own intelligence, limited by their personality. They must live with the burden of life and their own limitations. That has nothing to do with any explanations, supernatural or otherwise, but explanations help satisfy the mind enough to sit for the meditation. The actual experience in meditation, bliss, joy, peace and deeper understanding, however we may struggle to sit for it, is the only real benefit. That is just as much a physical and Neurological reality as the burdens of our life and this body.

2. And that leads to the second reality. Sitting in meditation, a variety of mindfulness methods, is very healthy for most people. Meditation has been shown to slow down the aging of the brain by decades, and repairs your own DNA strands, which trend to break over the years.

So, yes, some struggling is just part of the practice.

You can put all supernatural explanations aside and end up with a practice that is, for most people, extremely healthy for both minds and body.... If you accept the challenge and the work involved.

Those very people you claim are ignorant and superstitious meanwhile manage to put in their time and reap the pleasures and benefits of practice, undistracted, taking a swim in a warm ocean of light and love every single day. And they carry that sea of love with them wherever they go, whatever comes at them, through the simple conditioned act of remembering their Master. And that conditioned response helps them stay cool and calm, and respond with what science has demonstrated is higher cognitive functioning.

So who is really the smart one? Frankly, they are the ones who don't care at all about future or past, just the work and pleasure of their meditation. And if a simple fable satisfies the mind so they can enjoy that ocean of light in tomorrow morning's meditation, it is all good.

[S @Manoj]

@Manoj,

I apologize. Upon further reflection I realize it wasn’t my place to comment on your personal experiences with GSD. Honestly, I was just trying to help. But we are all go through different stages of grief. I hope that one day you will feel at peace and that whatever you have been through will be healed.

All the best,
S

[S]

Manoj,

The Holy Spirit must have deep empathy for what you’ve been through because I felt an intense sadness that I couldn’t identify until I prayed for understanding about the source of the sadness. That’s when it was made apparent to me that I didn’t understand what you have been through.

Sometimes in our attempts to help others we come across as holier than thou and that certainly isn’t helpful and won’t bring peace to anyone.

So, again we all must go through the different stages of grief until we get to a place of healing.

[Osho Robbins]

“ Actually this isn't exactly so. Many Satsangis have no idea whether the above is true or not. I knew engineers, physicians and mathematicians who didn't or a lot of attention on the explanations. They took them as just explanations to support the practice. They are there for the pleasure of the Master's company, the loving atmosphere in the Satsang and in their meditation. ”
- Spence

That may be the case - but they know enough to be trapped. Nobody just randomly comes up to a master and says “Hey, I love your company and would like to struggle in meditation just for the sheer hell of it. I seek nothing. Just want to please you for no reason. Perhaps because I just love you.”

“ but explanations help satisfy the mind enough to sit for the meditation. The actual experience in meditation, bliss, joy, peace and deeper understanding, however we may struggle to sit for it, is the only real benefit. ” -Spence

Benefit? Go listen to the Q&A - how many strike you as loving the meditation process? The only reason they meditate is so they get the results. They want the results not the “pleasure” of meditation.
The meditation is a struggle

The only reason that the disciples meditate (the few that actually do - many just do seva as it’s easier and a lot more pleasant to boss the sangat about and tell them they can’t sit where they want to sit) is because they want to reunite their soul with god and don’t want to be reborn as a friggin dog even though it’s god spelt backwards

[Dungeness]

@ The only reason that the disciples meditate (the few that actually do - many just do seva as it’s easier and
@ a lot more pleasant to boss the sangat about and tell them they can’t sit where they want to sit) is because
@ they want to reunite their soul with god and don’t want to be reborn as a friggin dog even though it’s god
@ spelt backwards

Ouch! Honesty can be so doggone cruel at times. You have to admit
though it'd be tempting for a friggin dog to come back as a Seva boss
and growl: "No, you can't sit here! Don't make my mistake."

PS
Forgive me for jumping in on your response to Spence but I can't resist.

PSS
For those who haven't hear the original joke. What does a dyslexic
atheist write back to a holy roller urging him to believe in god?
answer: "No, there is no dog, there is no dog, I tell you."

[umami]

Godley Creme
https://youtu.be/DPUC8pMPRX4

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Osho
You wrote
"The only reason that the disciples meditate (the few that actually do - many just do seva as it’s easier and a lot more pleasant to boss the sangat about and tell them they can’t sit where they want to sit) is because they want to reunite their soul with god and don’t want to be reborn as a friggin dog even though it’s god spelt backwards".

No, Osho, you've confused a nice but distant, mythic goal, with the pleasure and personal health benefits of meditation. What hooks people is the positive results. The supernatural story doesn't even get many Satsangis into meditation, and it doesn't keep anyone in meditation. They hear it but don't claim to actually believe it. They say "one day I'll know, but for now I'm enjoying my meditation." They are not concerned with the veracity of the supernatural and culture bound explanations. They are gaining the healthy benefits of meditation. It is part of what helps ground them every day, and gives them balance.

Really, you should try to separate these things rather than rolling them up into one bundle because that leads to a false conclusion. Very few people claim to know even about the regions. They are just enjoying the company of their Master on stage and within themselves in their practice. That keeps them going, the Presence they witness, the happiness. They want more of that. That's also a big part of the Q and A.

Why would any one hold to a single negative view of an entire population? What purpose does it serve? It's only true for some in every group.

By why focus on them? You do not need to denigrate every Satsangi to feel good, right? You feel good based on your own self, right?

And the self we have is our only true home. What are we placing in it? Hence the utility of meditation.

People, inside RSSB and in many other practices meditate and pray using their chosen methods for the sheer pleasure of it, the sense of love and peace. They don't care where they came from or where they are going. They know these things can't be answered or understood by their tiny brain They want to live right, be helpful, and enjoy natural pleasures that harm no one and being insight, and inspiration into their lives.

Until you find your own best source of that, why denigrate the method of others? They have found what you claim to already have. So then isn't that more important than judging other people?

All these people in different philosophies and parts of the world share one common understanding: Whatever they might do to make progress and find peace will require their own effort. Assistance, finding a teacher or Master or a great book of teachings is only to gain the best advice and support in that personal effort. Religion is just a culture bound context for that work.

[Spence Tepper]

And Osho, as for struggling, no one struggles who has not found treasure, whether they see or or not.

But for those who have tasted treasure, they are really struggling. Even blind, their subconscious knows and drives them onward to greater acts of public humiliation and failure. They see it, vaguely, even at a distance, and they want it.

People who don't struggle do not see the wealth they are missing out on.

People who struggle, who make sloppy and hasty efforts, uneven, sporadic, poorly done, blind, missing the mark again and again, but driven to keep going, they keep trying to do it better. Everyone around says they are foolish, and to stop wasting their time, but they are on to something. It's the ones who aren't there, reaching, stretching, working so hard and getting nothing, getting bruised, blamed and ashamed for being stupid and ignorant, but something inside drives them on, a dream. I love those people. The struggling failures are the cream of humanity.

The ones stirring on the sidelines, sittiing on their butts laughing at the wasted efforts, the repeated failures of others, really, those inactive folks looking but not doing, talking but not struggling, that's the land of desolation. Zero.

[Regina Gurley]

"Never surrender your hopes and dreams to the fateful limitations others have placed on their own lives. The vision of your true destiny does not reside within the blinkered outlook of the naysayers and the doom prophets. Judge not by their words, but accept advice based on the evidence of actual results. Do not be surprised should you find a complete absence of anything mystical or miraculous in the manifested reality of those who are so eager to advise you. Friends and family who suffer the lack of abundance, joy, love, fulfillment and prosperity in their own lives really have no business imposing their self-limiting beliefs on your reality experience.”
Check the link here: https://bit.ly/3hXeu3i