Know that you know a lot less than you think you know

I subscribe to The Atlantic, so I'm going to take the liberty of copying in a great piece from the online The Atlantic, "How to Know That You Know Nothing." 

(Maybe it's available to non-subscribers, but not knowing for sure that it is, I thought I'd take the advice put forth in the piece and realize that since I'm not confident that I know, I might as well share it this way.)

This shows that Harvard psychology professors can sound a lot like Zen masters. Which isn't really all that surprising, since Zen possesses a lot of psychological wisdom.

Enjoy.

If there’s one thing we might regret at the end of life, it’s that we missed out on moments that mattered—not because we weren’t physically there, but because our mind wandered off to some unknown place.

In this episode of How to Build a Happy Life, we explore why it’s uniquely challenging to “live in the moment,” how we limit our own curiosity by assuming that we know best, and why the illusion of stability pulls us from living every day fully, and in the moment. A conversation with the Harvard University psychology professor Dr. Ellen Langer helps us think through a daily struggle: How do I stay present?

Arthur C. Brooks: A big part of happiness is learning to live in the moment. What does that actually mean? And more importantly, how do we do it? It turns out that living in the moment, or at least being fully alive right now has two components: mindfulness and curiosity.

You need to figure out a way to focus on the present, to be really experiencing your current time frame, as opposed to thinking about the past or thinking about the future. Now, there’s a reason that that’s hard to do. The human brain makes it possible for us to be in other time periods than in the current moment. I can imagine that I’m in the future, practicing future scenarios in my life. That’s called prospection. That’s about living in the future.

Other people tend to think about the past a lot, and one of the things that we know from research on the elderly is they tend to be kind of retrospective, thinking about the past. The problem is, if you’re excessively prospective and/or retrospective, it can crowd out your ability to be alive right now.

Dr. Ellen Langer: Lots of people confuse what I do with meditation, but meditation is a practice; mindfulness is the result of that practice. The mindfulness that we study is immediate. It’s simply noticing new things. And in the process of noticing new things, that puts you in the moment. You have all these people who say “be in the present,” and that’s great, but it’s an empty suggestion. And even simpler than this, if one deeply appreciates uncertainty—recognizing everything is always changing, everything looks different from different perspectives, so you can’t know. And when you recognize that you can’t know or you don’t know, you tune in. When you think you do know, you don’t pay any attention.

Brooks: The big theme that I really want to talk about here is how to enjoy our lives more. One of the things that you emphasize in your work a lot is that we don’t enjoy our lives enough, because we’re not actually there. What does that mean?

Dr. Langer: Over these 40-some-odd years, we find that mindlessness is pervasive. Most of us are not there, and they are not there to know they’re not there. You know, the only way some people realize they experience this is imagine you’re driving and you want to get off at exit 28, and all of a sudden, you see you’re at exit 36. So then you say, Wow, where was I? What I mean by “you’re not there” is that you are more or less behaving like a robot. Everybody has had that experience.

You know, you are miserable, and somebody says, “Hi, how are you?” And you say, “Fine, thank you.” And you’re not aware of it, and you’re not trying to hide it. Most of what we do is done on, as it’s called, automatic pilot, but the mindlessness goes far beyond that.

I wanted to write a book a long time ago, Arthur—I never wrote this one—that was called Is There Life Before Death?, because I found, you know, all these people worrying about life after death. Many people come alive, sadly, after they get some terrible diagnosis or they have a stroke or they find out they have cancer. When I speak to people who are miserable or whatever, I simply tell them that all you need to do is take care of the moment, just right this second. And if you keep doing that, then over the course of the day, you know, you’ve had a fine time.

Brooks: Why is it that we’re so distracted from the present? What is distracting us from actually noticing things around us?

Dr. Langer: Well, we have an illusion of stability. We think things are staying still. So if you’ve seen it once, you’ve seen it; you don’t need to keep paying attention to it. But there’s something I think that needs to be added, which will explain why people keep doing this. Many people pretend because they think they should know. They think, You know, so therefore, I don’t want you to know that I don’t know. And here’s the big secret for everybody: Nobody knows. You change from making a personal attribution for not knowing—I don’t know, but it’s knowable. Therefore, I’ll pretend; I’ll feel stupid, insecure—to a universal attribution: I don’t know. You don’t know. Nobody knows. Okay, so now let’s find out together and explore together. If you think you know something, there’s no reason to pay attention.

Anything can be made exciting; anything can be made boring. I picked up these kids—this is back years ago, when it was okay to pick up hitchhikers. And I was in Italy, and they were wearing nyc T-shirts, so you knew they weren’t from New York.

And so I picked them up, and I asked them, “How did you like New York?” And one of them answered right away and said, you know, he didn’t like it at all. It was boring. There was nothing to do. There are few places, to my mind, that are more exciting. And if you took me and you put me in the middle of a wheat field, I probably would look at it like, Well, it’s all the same, but not to a farmer.

Brooks: Let’s go to the future. So, you know, one of the things that I talk an awful lot about with Marty Seligman is prospection, and Marty believes that we shouldn’t be called Homo sapiens. We should be called Homo prospectus.

One point, he had this dispute with His Holiness the Dalai Lama, where the Dalai Lama was talking about mindfulness, and he said, No, Your Holiness, it’s natural that we live in the future, especially people who are ambitious and go-getters. And it’s actually important because we have to practice future scenarios, et cetera. How can we live enough in the future to be successful but, at the same time, enjoy our lives? How do we get that balance right?

Dr. Langer: I think that everything that you’re doing because of the future is based on a mistaken notion about predictability. Prediction is an illusion. Now, I know Marty doesn’t believe that. Let me convince your audience just quickly. I do this with my advanced decision-making class, and I say to them, “I’ve been teaching a version of this class for the last 40 years. I’ve never missed a class. What is the likelihood I’m going to be here next week?”

It’s a small class; we go around the room. These are Harvard kids, so they don’t say 100 percent. They say ridiculous things like 97 percent, as if there’s some calculation, but essentially they’re all saying I’ll be there. Now I say, “Okay, I want each of you to give me a good reason why I won’t be there.” The first one always says, “Well, you’ve been doing it for 40 years; you’ve been there. You deserve the time off.” The next one says, “Your dog has to go to the vet.” The next one says, “You’ve got a flat tire.” And they easily come up with things.

Then I say to them, “Okay, what is the likelihood I’m going to be here next week?” And it drops to 50 percent. And when you fully realize that we don’t know, that you can plan all you want for some future event and then something else will happen that pulls you away. But if the planning for the future is giving you a happy present, that’s fine; there’s nothing lost by it. When you stick to your predictions, you’re limiting yourself rather than expanding your universe of possibilities.

Brooks: From your perspective, goal setting is valuable to the extent that it enhances the quality of your life right now.

Dr. Langer: At the moment, yes. And I think that what we want to do, and the way I describe being mindful, is to be rule, routine, and goal guided. Most of us are mindless, so we’re rule, routine, and goal governed. You don’t want to have a rule that says you do something at time one—that’s when you’re committing to that rule—when at time two, it’s totally irrelevant. Recognize that outcomes are in our heads. They’re not in events.

A simple example, you know, if you and I go to lunch and the food is good, that’s great. You and I go to lunch and the food is awful. That’s great. Presumably, I’ll eat less, and that’ll be better for my waistline. If I take the view that the event is good or bad, then I’m in this position where I do everything I can to get the good, and I run away as fast as I can from anything bad. And once I recognize that the good/bad is in my head, I can be still and just enjoy whatever happens.

Brooks: So you and I are going back to the classroom in person for the first time in a super long time, and let’s say that your fall class, weirdly unexpectedly, goes really, really poorly. What’s your strategy then, because you’re not going to get stressed?

Dr. Langer: I have a one-liner that friends of mine put on their refrigerators, which is “Ask yourself, is it a tragedy or an inconvenience?” Too often we respond to things. You know, if the class didn’t go well, Oh my God, my life’s going to be—no, of course not. Let’s say you and I are going out and we have a bad conversation and it’s Oh my God, that’s going to destroy the relationship! No. No relationship is going to be made or fall apart based on one situation. No life is going to depend on failing one test or giving one bad class.

Brooks: Ellen Langer. What a joy. What a gift that you’ve given to our audience today, and what a gift that you’ve given me. So thank you very much.

Dr. Langer: It’s my pleasure, Arthur. Stay well.

Comments

[um]

Strange ...we are always in the moment whether we want it or not.
Than why trying to be artificial in the present moment?

The whole article is based on presumptions on "how life has to be" and "how it has to be lived" and handling these presumptions as sort of mathematical axioms.

It starts out with the question:
"how to build a happy life"

The whole sentence, every word in it screams of, change, chance for the better, without defining why life should be happy, what happiness is and the [evil] suggestion that the writer "knows" and that the reader can have it "IF ONLY"

Propaganda, advertising etc .... is the art of making people believe thei do need something, what they not have, without which an decent human life cannot be lived.

There are levels of "evil" to this practice, one is "evil" discrimination"....I, we have it and you will never have it. It being what is suggested as a sine qua non of an decent human life .. wealth ... wealth in all its appearances, physical, mental, intellectual and even spiritual.

The other form of "evil" is ... "evil promise" ... the suggestion that the wealth can be had, shared ... after ....after investing in effort for the "giver", the one that promises.

This evil is used for centuries to make people ...work and toil for others. That is how the rich became wealthy, cathedrals and castles were build and the modern variants the headquarters of corporations, the state buildings etc and not to forget the luxurious interiors of these buildings and work places .... it all is worked for and toiled for by the workers, that live in miserable circumstances so that the happy few can live in their modern cathedrals and castles"

The sellers of "false promises", come in many shapes, physical intelectual, emotional ...andddd ... spiritual ...even the traditional organized crime, uses this strategy when the sell and promiss "protection".

Others sell, eternal life, freedom from karma, and others sell "eternal" happiness in this life.

In nature there is not a thing to be found by the name of ...happiness.

[Manoj]

Know that you know a lot less than you think you know...

Trying to explain that to Gurinder Singh Dhillion would be a lost cause in itself. As hes the only one who says in so many words, I know all there is to know.

And thats the Ego Spreading its wings to an Egotistical Flight to hell.

If the riches are the Devils gifts to his followers now you can understand why Gurinder Singh Dhillion lives such a lavish lifestyle.
Doesn't add up does it when all the saints in history removed these very riches out from there lifes. Before even searching for the All Mighty.
Gurinder Singh Dhillion is Exposed so silly its blindly stupid.
False promises from a Fake baba cuts at the very root of spirituality. Spreading false doctrines to the masses giving them a false sense of hope based on nothing is the very essence of the so many faces of satans religious leaders created for his own selfish means to devour souls.

In the end we waste the most precious thing we had, on a fool who made us out to be fools

Dont be fooled and Live your Life your Way

[Uchit]

Jesus turned all the riches in the world offered to him by satan, buddha gave up all riches to find enlightenment, yet gurinder singh dhillon is not satisfied being a billionaire baba and just wants more and more. Wake up people. Listen to your intuition, Google gurinder singh dhillon news and you will see this truth of the fraudster.

Ps there are many fake spirituality people that are disguised Lucifer agents that operate on this site. You can smell them from their long winded pointless discussions on here, and their distraction tactics. Beware RSSB tenticals penetrate deep.

[Tendzin]

The paradox of Zen (one anyway) is that sitting practice is required to build the ability to live in the moment.

Or maybe that's not true of all people. DT Suzuki wasn't too fond of zazen.

Zazen is kind of a bitch compared to Sant mat meditation. Doing simran usually brings on a pleasant soporific sensation, while zazen is more like work, at first anyway. But the longer term effects of zazen seem to be more psychologically integrating than sant mat practice. That's been my experience anyway. And the zazen tends to carry on into the day, giving me greater ability to do daily tasks in that grounded space.

[Vinny]

Christian jokers know everything except the fact that English is false language and a trap of unconscious mind ,full of words to push mankind in darkness of unconscious mind.

[Ron E.]

I think that's true Tendzin about carrying on into the day, although my practice began in this vein many decades ago. As Dr. Langer mentions about being on auto pilot, when driving home one day l realized l was not with what was happening in the moment, so the enquiry began - eventually leading to Chan ( Chinese Zen).

[Spence Tepper]

Given how little we know it's surprising how opinionated we are.

The mind thinks it knows, but that is an illusion. The illusion of knowledge.

[um]

@ Spence

The use of the pronoun "we" here ...

It is like a person that is playing football and ad the same time standing on the stand watching the game.

So you too are opinionated, you know it and because you know you do it willingly

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
You wrote
"So you too are opinionated, you know it and because you know you do it willingly"

Whether someone speaks truth or opinion, how can we know?

We can know for ourselves. What others write may resonate with our experience.

Then we can feel encouraged. But encouraged in what direction? To look down upon others, or to dig in to our own efforts, look up, not down upon each other.

If you took vows I can only encourage you to deepen your commitment to them, to focusing on your own experience, not for the purpose to compare to what others are doing and judge them always negatively, but to discover your own truths in your practice.

Each must find their own truth. All discussion here is only a means for meditation on these different views.

[um]

@ Spence

There are many reasons why people develop that mindset of being "Good", "kind" etc beyond the natural appearance of these attitudes, traits. These reasons are often found in deep personal pain, as it is to be found with clowns and stand up comedians.

Pain, mental and emotional pain is a great motivator ... some people cannot bear and/or accept the ugly sides of life, the character of themselves and others.

Those that have trained themselves to compensate their own inner pain, that way, make great managers, i came to understand over the years, as they are able to present the most miserable messages to others in such a way that these people even thank them on the way out ...only later waking up outside that they were fired.

They value their weight in gold.

On thing remains ... having reached sach khand as you stated and being at par for that reason with the one that initiated you, you certainly do not communicate with people as he did. Although in the role of "teacher" , he was not in the habit of lecturing, teaching people, showing that he knew it all and managed in his words, to prevent any mental, emotional or intellectual, pressure on others.

Life is relative ... in the close vicinity of those that want to be "good" others have to be "bad" ....it needs probably a real master, kind at heart, to curb that tendency and be natural and neutral, in relation to others, so that the natural kindness can be experienced.

Whether the man that initiated you had reached this or that inner realm, was a saint or even enlightened, I do not know. I have never heard him say something in that direction. What I do know, based on personal experience that he was a kind human being without pretense and without hiding what he had at the same time.

You might be inwardly at his level but outwardly certainly not, Spence. ... and that is the only level I know of.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
You wrote
"that reason with the one that initiated you, you certainly do not communicate with people as he did. Although in the role of "teacher" , he was not in the habit of lecturing, teaching people, showing that he knew it all and managed in his words, to prevent any mental, emotional or intellectual, pressure on others."

I can't begin to comprehend why you would compare Maharaji with me or any other student. A student can be shown many things. That does not make them a Master.

I don't suggest you use His words to defend your personal attacks.

If that is what you took from His company, you need to spend more time with Him.

[um]

@ Spence

Did I invent that you wrote about having reached sach khand and that you daily concerse with him?
Is not a person that has reached Sach Khand at par with others that have done so?

Again you have taken the liberty to expand the teachings here in t he way you are doing and you do this in a way that is normally found with, teachers, parents, counselors etc.

That my words do not please you or whatever, is not to be attributed to me and should in no way be use to suggest negative intentions on my part.

In the last sentence, advice etc. you suggest that I could have done something "better" and that "better" is just your imagination.

To tell unasked for to others that you are a "sinner" is something different than be pointed out as a "sinner" ... the first is just another feather in the hat that is already full of feathers.

You are not used to this commentary, because you are blinding those around you with your "goodness" ... my "sunglasses" are strong enough Spence to withstand the glare.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
You wrote
"Is not a person that has reached Sach Khand at par with others that have done so?"

No. I'll repeat. A student is shown many things, is brought to work on many things. A son is brought into his father's workshop. But the son is a student.

It's paradoxical that you claim to understand Sant Mat unerringly on a basis, as you claim, of no experience, but my claim that I know little yet have seen much, that seems to throw you for a curve.

I'll share this much with you, Um. The more one sees, the more clearly and expansively one's own ignorance is revealed to be.

To reach these regions is nothing to an honest observer. But it is nearly impossible for a teacher like yourself, and only teachable by a Master.

All that is left for you and I to discuss with any credibility is our honest experience. Then each person must choose for themselves what testimony resonates within them.

[um]

@ Spence

>> To reach these regions is nothing to an honest observer. But it is nearly impossible for a teacher like yourself, and only teachable by a Master.<<

Teacher?
I cannot remember to gave advise, counsel, to you or others as you do constantly the same as I am not here to defend any teacher or his teaching.

As said often ... my going to the restraints of life is solely based on what i consider as good for myself and i have also stressed time and again that my consideration to go, to stay or whatever cannot and never was an evaluation of something outside myself.

I do not believe in change for the better, so it is impossible for me to advise people in that direction.

You spence however, are a strong believer of it and so you counsel each and every moment you open your mouth. ... you are not even aware of it. because most people are blinded by you and do not dear to speak up.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
You write
"I do not believe in change for the better, so it is impossible for me to advise people in that direction."

I understand. Yes we have different opinions there. I'm sorry you take umbrage with it.

I don't think your complaint is really with me at all, since we hardly know each other.

But your complaint that self - improvement and personal progress is a bad thing, that certainly you have made quite clear.

I would only caution that the personal shortcomings of anyone advocating progress are little connected to the actual potential for progress.

Galileo 's bad habits have little to do with the very real placement of the stars, the sun and the earth, to which he referred.

[um]

@ Spence

Umbrage is a new word ... how the statement that the rose has thorns that hurt can be seen as an umbrage, is an puzzle for me.

I need not to see you, I read your words and your words are statements about how you deal with the world and the people in it.

There is no need to warn me Spence, as I have nothing to say about progress. Trees and every little thing on this world is born, grows and finally dies.

If plants are taken out of their natural habitat and are cultured, the process of attending, influencing, and making them better starts.

Those that are intended to do "good", do create, if they do good, also the opposite. That is the law of this world. In nature where there is no intention to do "good", there is no bad to be found. In culture on the other hand whenever some one wants to create good, also its counterpart is born.

That is why mystics never admonish their disciples etc to do "good" but show them the road to the creator and the creator is neither good or bad.... they teach meditation as a practice and learn that golden chains are binding in the same way as iron ones.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
All Saints teach compassion by their words and their example. To love one another as we love ourselves. Helping one another is no different than helping ourselves, our mother and father, our own child. It is our true nature.

This is a universal teaching of all true Saints, including Maharaji, who quoted Jesus several times when Christ was asked and replied...

"36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’
38 This is the first and greatest commandment.
39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’
40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
Matthew 26:37-40

That you would pit one commandant against the other is wrong, and no Saint has ever said such a thing as you claim.

[Dungeness]

@ um : [ That is why mystics never admonish their disciples etc to do "good" but show them the road to the creator and the creator is neither good or bad.... they teach meditation as a practice and learn that golden chains are binding in the same way as iron ones. ]

Agreed but compassion is karma-less, isn't it... particularly if it's
just from an overflowing cup with no mental calculation mixed in.
Neither guilt for instance, nor hope of winning the lotto, or even
angling for praise/blessing. If free of these, nothing gets written
in an account ledger per mysticism. Karma only traffics in reward
and punishment on the mental plane. Love breaks all the rules.

[umami]

Spence,

I get what you're saying, but you preach to put the cart before the horse. These words from Sawan Singh give support to um:

"^-Healing, Social Service, etc. We do not inculcate isolationism or selfishness, but advocate the highest ideal of Service....The highest service to yourself, to others and to the Master is going inside....There is another point, too. Your power of good now is very limited. It is not bad to send good thoughts but these thoughts bind you to lower planes. Golden fetters are also fetters...Doing good will certainly bring its reward, but it will not bring about the Release from birth and death." (Spiritual Gems, Letter 103)

[um]

@ Spence

The verse 26:39 can be read in different ways ... as an stand alone, as practiced by the worldly congregations of the Christian churches, that go into the world, practice care and service for those that need it and ad the same time to spread the word of Christianity., the target group of islam is different and in other religions it is almost absent. The RC has almost stopped all these activities. What remains are the practices of the protestant churches.

If however verse 39 is seen in relation to the other command given in verse 37 then the picture is different. Than it is an advice given to seekers of god and not to the benefactors of the world.

Then we see those who practice this path, withdraw themselves in the desserts, and develop themselves as the patriarch of christian mysticism, the dessert-fathers and later the offshoots , on mnt. Sinai, and Mnt Athos in Greece and the many monasteries of the Russian ortodoxy, hidden deep in the forests. Not to forget the monastic orders as there are the Carmelites, the Trappists etc etc. If you knock at their door and seek their help they tend to give it wholeheartedly .... but .... they do not go into the world to cater for the welfare of humanity. [Karma Yoga]

It is up to you to sit in judgement of those that are living in separation of the world do not understand what the words of Christ mean.

When younger I have read the complete works of St. John of the Cross, the one that is considered as the founding father of [modern] Christian mysticism. With no word he mentions or suggest that those that seek the lord should go out into the world the create better circumstances for their fellow human beings.

The same is found in all other mystic school of other religions.

And even those that preach Compassion in the name of their preceptor, the Buddha, do so in prayer and do not practice it in welfare.

But it is up to you to see all these people as hertics, who have no clue about what mystisism is all about.

[um]

@ Dungeness

There are certain words I was not raised with and that never even pop up in my mind or heart, if I have one. .... let alone that these words come out of my mouth.

Compassion is one of those words, like love.

As far as I know myself I have never had the inner urge to do good, bad not either, or to love or to be compassionate ... but ... whatever I did and said etc in live was certainly seen by others and appreciated in one way or another by others, sometimes as good sometimes as bad.

And never having had an ecstatic experience, artificial or natural, I have no idea what an overflowing heart is.

So how karma works I would not know. What i came to understand is that whatever one does, thinks and feels, be it good or bad, has consequences.

[um]

@ Spence

To be kind, compassionate if one likes, lovable, humble, meek in the encounter with other living creatures, is one thing but to go and search for opportunities to be that way, is another thing.

Mystics advise the first and not the second.

They do so according their insides of karma and for a good reason. If good is done, so that the right hands knows of the left, it easily becomes an action that deserves a reaction and as such an golden chain is created, a chain that binds as much as and iron one

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
You wrote
"To be kind, compassionate if one likes, lovable, humble, meek in the encounter with other living creatures, is one thing but to go and search for opportunities to be that way, is another thing."

Clearly you are writing to someone else. I've written time and again that our first priority is to our own inner progress.

But that can be done treating everyone with love and kindness.

You don't need to go out of your way. Opportunity is all around you. Actually you must ignore the suffering of others in order to avoid treating those around you as you treat yourself.

But on this front Christ gives another example. The Good Samaritan.

" On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”(B)

26 “What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”

27 He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’[a];(C) and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[b]”(D)

28 “You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”(E)

29 But he wanted to justify himself,(F) so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”

30 In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. 31 A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side.(G) 32 So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan,(H) as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. 34 He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 The next day he took out two denarii[c] and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’

36 “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”

37 The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”

Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”
Luke 10:25-37

Note two things. First, Samaritans practiced a different religion. Made no difference to Christ.

Second. Maharaji referred with high praise to this very parable repeatedly.

[um]

@ Spence

Only Christians and among them mostly the protestants are in this vein of thinking to underline the need to be ones brother keeper. It is not found in any other mystical tradition and those that are, let us say, are seeking the lord "professionally", spend their whole life and day 24/7 in worshipping and seeking the lord hide from the world in caves and desserts of northern Africa, in remote places in the woods.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desert_Fathers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgoheqxXRuc&t=4s

Just to give you an idea of what Christian mystics look like watch that video and see if he, or any other like him speaks about mysticism as you do. The same can be repeated for any othe mainstream spiritual tradition.

They never speak about neigbours. ... they even might have forgotten what the concept is all about.

You are driven by personal needs to write this topic as you do, it has nothing to do with what the practice of mysticism is all about but with personal, psychological needs on your part.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
You wrote
"The same can be repeated for any othe mainstream spiritual tradition.

" They never speak about neigbours. ... they even might have forgotten what the concept is all about."

But your own Master has written something quite different...

"The greatest reward in Seva is the contentment and happiness that you feel within, that you get an opportunity to serve someone. That is the greatest happiness one can ever get, to make someone happy.... Seva for any institution, Seva for any individual, Seva for the masses - in other words, a charitable attitude of helping other people - that is Seva. We do Seva with our body, with our mind, with our money. The base of Seva is love and devotion for the Father..... When we serve the masses, serve the people, then automatically we become humble.... At some point we all become one, and that fills us with humility. "
Spiritual Perspectives, Maharaj Charan Singh, volume III, pages 144-145.

[um]

@ Spence

It all depends how one reads these things.

If he meant that seva was a means to an end, part of the practice as you go on to suggest, it would have been included in the initiation. there is no word to be found about doing seva.

If so, he would have ordered charitative help to the needy all over the world but the opposite is true whatever initiatives there have been in Europe and the USA in that direction were never ,,,NEVER ... approved of. Spence.

As it drives us to far I do not like to write to much about it, but what type of seva one is forced to do in life, based upon the law of karma, is related to previous birth. Not all are asked or even allowed to do all sorts ove seva.

Let me make it clear for good order, that I am not defending any teaching, what I write has nothing to do with my personal life, it is just recapitulation ... i do not want to provoke the wrath of the ex-RSSBers ... hahahaha

It is about you presenting mysticism as different from practice by mystics, irrespective the tradition. You are promoting Christianity as professed by protestants.

[um]

and .... Spence

As lay people do not live in the enclosure of an ashram or monastery, all teachers have to answer questions related to how to live life in such an way that there are no obstacles created for the practice of that particular tradition.

In Rome we do what the roman do.
We do not want to become romans,
but living in rome ,
we want to be free to live our own life.

We do not want Rome to be a better place.
Living in Rome is not our goal and purpose of life.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
You wrote
"It all depends how one reads these things.

" If he meant that seva was a means to an end, part of the practice as you go on to suggest... "

Each of us may understand Maharaji differently, Um. That is also natural.

It isn't a matter of this not that. It is this and that, each in its own time.

If it is your fate to help others nothing can stop you and you should proceed with God's blessing. If it is your fate to live remote from others deep in your practice, that is also God's blessing.

Which is right for you? That is your personal truth. And it may be a matter of where you are on the path.

To deny the second commandment Jesus gave, and which Maharaji has often supported, is wrong. Both are truth. It is the second commandment, not the first. But both are commandments. If you can accomplish the first, the second will proceed automatically. It won't be two separate things at all.

[Spence Tepper]

Finally, Um,
Maharaji never suggested we should not help one another. He said the opposite: we are here, in part, to help one another.

It is part of living to the highest moral standards, and yes that is one of the four vows. If you took that vow, as I did, you carry a life long obligation to right action, including helping whomever, wherever and whenever you are asked, within your capability to do so.

We are called upon to live according to Ahimsa, doing the smallest harm possible. So as we live churning out poisons in the atmosphere, economically entangled in economic slavery and human trafficking, doing some small good isn't actually incurring good karma at all. It is reducing the harm we are already doing all the time.

If someone has no interest in reducing the harm and pain they directly indirectly cause others, falsely thinking meditation will erase that or Master will shoulder that, how can they hope to make any spiritual progress?

Even the smallest connection with others is dangerous to such a person because that connection of compassion is a connection to Shabd, and Shabd makes passively witnessing harm to others not only intolerable, but impossible.

[Spence Tepper]

Finally, Um,
Maharaji never suggested we should not help one another. He said the opposite: we are here, in part, to help one another.

It is part of living to the highest moral standards, and yes that is one of the four vows. If you took that vow, as I did, you carry a life long obligation to right action, including helping whomever, wherever and whenever you are asked, within your capability to do so.

We are called upon to live according to Ahimsa, doing the smallest harm possible. So as we live churning out poisons in the atmosphere, economically entangled in economic slavery and human trafficking, doing some small good isn't actually incurring good karma at all. It is reducing the harm we are already doing all the time.

If someone has no interest in reducing the harm and pain they directly or indirectly cause others, falsely thinking meditation will erase that or Master will shoulder that, how can they hope to make any spiritual progress?

Even the smallest connection with others is dangerous to such a person because that connection of compassion is a connection to Shabd, and Shabd makes passively witnessing harm to others not only intolerable, but impossible.

[um]

@ Spence

What you do and think is your bussiness ... what matters here is trying to Christianize mystic pactice and make is seen as an protestant religious practice.

Protestants hate mysticism ... they serve god by serving the world

What you are at has led to turn theosophy into anthroposopfy, mystisism into religion

As always ...there is more light in the streets of the world.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
Finally, Um,
Maharaji never suggested we should not help one another. He said the opposite: we are here, in part, to help one another. That isn't Christianizing anything. The two commandments Christ have are also what Maharaji taught. And they are indeed part of Initiation.

It is part of living to the highest moral standards, and yes that is one of the four vows. If you took that vow, as I did, you carry a life long obligation to right action, including helping whomever, wherever and whenever you are asked, within your capability to do so.

We are called upon to live according to Ahimsa, doing the smallest harm possible. So as we live churning out poisons in the atmosphere, economically entangled in economic slavery and human trafficking, doing some small good isn't actually incurring good karma at all. It is reducing the harm we are already doing all the time.

If someone has no interest in reducing the harm and pain they directly indirectly cause others, falsely thinking meditation will erase that or Master will shoulder that, how can they hope to make any spiritual progress?

Even the smallest connection with others is dangerous to such a person because that connection of compassion is a connection to Shabd, and Shabd makes passively witnessing harm to others not only intolerable, but impossible.

[Pundit Umami]

"A: Sister, the question is, what is seva. Seva is of four types: with the body, with the mind, with wealth, and with the soul. They are all seva. The first three sevas are the means to the real seva, which is seva of the soul, or connecting your soul with the Sound within...Any seva that anyone can do is most welcome, but the real seva is to attend to meditation, to connect your soul with the Sound. The three sevas of wealth and mind and body are means to that end. If you forget the end, the means will only clean the vessel but will not fill it."
--Maharaj Charan Singh (Die to Live, Q 68)

[Dungeness]

@ um : [ So how karma works I would not know. What i came to understand is that whatever one does, thinks and feels, be it good or bad, has consequences. ]

But, action, thought, weighing consequences are the mental plane. So is
deliberating what balance to keep between sevas. Of course, we want to
put more emphasis on meditation as mystics encourage.

The balance has to be inclusive enough to let intuition, heart, compassion
in as well though. We can't rely on intellect to always inform us. It does a
lousy job too often. Mindfulness has to be attuned to the inner voice... that
"overflowing cup" which was mentioned. Then we can hope to make the
right decision.

P.S. This is getting very off-topic and should likely go to an open thread.