Alan Watts on finding the balance between gooey and prickly worldviews

Here's another compilation of notes I'm taking from audio recordings of Alan Watts that Sam Harris has shared on his Waking Up app. This talk is called Seeing Through the Net. It's 47 minutes long, but you can get the gist of what Watts said by reading my summary in a much shorter time.

"Who guards the gods?"

In modern times many have the goal of rational control of everything inside and outside us. But things have gotten so complex, nobody knows what to do. If you try to run a hospital, or a business, there's so much red tape.

You don't understand the basic assumptions of your own culture if that's the only culture you know. What do you mean by the good life, rationality, and so on? So find complex cultures different from your own, such as Chinese or Indian.

Triangulation often is better than a single line of sight. What are you going to do if you're a god with technological powers? Most people don't know what they want. 

What if you could control your dream and experience 75 years in one night? Are you wise enough to play at being God?

The Western model of the universe is political, engineering. No Chinese child would ask, "How was I made?" However, Western thought has a creator. The world is a construct. We look at things as bits of information.

But the physical universe is wiggles. Clouds, mountains -- no sharp edges. Some fishermen held up a net and looked at things through it. Likewise, we break up the world into measurable units. We come to think that this is the way the world really is. Discrete, made up of points.

Prickly people want precision. Gooey people say, you don't understand. Actually, the universe is both. Look close, prickly. Broader view, gooey. 

The capacity to look via scanning is like a spotlight. A floodlight has less intensity, but you see more all at once. A spotlight notices those things for which we have notation. A thing is a unit of thought. To talk about the universe you have to reduce it to things

As one understands a machine, we have reduced the cosmos to bits. This is very fruitful in being able to control the world via technology. 

We reduce the infinite wiggleness of the world to grasp it in thought. In medicine, you get a specialist who looks at a patient as a gall bladder. But there are fundamental differences between a mechanism and an organism. 

Trying to control the world only through scanning, bit by bit, things will look overly complex. We face an information explosion. Even computers won't help much.

What if we went from from spotlight to floodlight? What if we could grasp a situation instantly, intuitively? With pattern recognition, humans can recognize an object instantly. Humans have no problem with this, while computers do.

Brain: you yourself are this thing you can't figure out. You are the most complex thing that has been encountered in the cosmos. What you want is surprise. When you've figured everything out, you'll be bored.

Ideally, a person trusts his own brain. He makes his best discoveries without thinking.

But others only will believe you if you explain in a bit by bit fashion. This takes time. Most decisions in life can't wait. I'm not against technology. But new respect for organic organization is needed. We've got to let back some goo in the system, not just prickle.

The brain can solve problems without us knowing how. 

Practical issue: if technology relies exclusively on linear thinking, it will destroy its environment, because everything becomes too complex.

Are we going to foul things up by insisting on using linear input/analysis, without trust in multiple inputs that we can't pin down because it is you? In Chinese culture, man's essential nature is good, unlike the Christian notion of sin.

Native Americans have a saying, "Paleface doesn't know he is hungry until he looks at his watch." We've confused the menu with the dinner, and we're starving. Symbols are not reality.

Comments

[Tendzin]

Gurinder very bad, but Alan Watts very good?

There are facts about Alan Watts being an alcoholic, a cheater on his wives and generally that he talked good and inspiring about ideas – but didn’t walk the talk or let his own talk make him better. He even said in one of his lectures that he was an entertainer of ideas and it pays well.

Did Gurinder cheat on his wife? Does Gurinder get drunk? No evidence of either exists.

Does Gurinder smoke cigs? Nope. But Watts did, and that and alcohol abuse are likely responsible for his untimely demise in his 50s.

What is this love affair with flowery words by Gurus who can't walk the walk they preach?

A gazillion copies of The Prophet by Kahil Gibran were sold back in the day. What an illumined soul! How many know that Gibran drank himself to death? He did in his 40s of cirrhosis of the liver. Maezumi Roshi died of drink as well. And so did Chogyam Trungpa. All of them had much to say and sell about transcending mind and body -- and claiming they had achieved it, so please give them your money -- but they couldn't put down the drink.

And yet these Rummies are still touted as role models, and still lauded for their "wisdom."

I can see the many ways that gurus like Charan or Gurinder are ripe for criticism. But seriously, Alan Watts? A womanizing, chain smoking drunk who had a way with words? That's a better guru substitute than Charan or Gurinder, or re Sam Harris, anything Christianity has to offer?

There are just so many strange double-standards in the New Atheist movement. Totally dump on organized religion, but cheer for upstart Gurus who lived like libertines and abused their followers?

[um]

@Tendzin

In older days it was common where i was born that ALL men would smoke at a given age and if you didn't and draw attention to it you were easily seen as "strange".

In those days many a parent would say to a child not to smoke, or not deep over the lungs, while at the same time they would have a cigarette in their hands.

The did not gave a good example but was tthere something wrong with what they said?

Later in life just to give an example, there were people advocating polarity therapy and stressing not to eat chocolate ... how many times did i not found them eating chocolate when the were on their selves?? The same holds for the use of sugar by macrobiotic people. Is their not strictly adhering to their own teachings telling that their teachings were wrong

Later I cooked myself large amounts for a very high ranking Tibetan Rinpoche. Did his meat eating make his teachings in general and those of compassion etc less valuable?

I went to many school in life to learn certain things and not to copy the teacher. Most of them I even do not remember.

I am grateful for having learned from them many a thing that is of use to me even today ... why should they excel in anything, be "perfect" ?

If I ask a drunk or a beggar or whatever the way where to go in a given city what matters if he is able to do so and if he does, I am grateful and will thank him.

So if some one finds pleasure and teaching, guidance in life etc in the words of Watts, what does it matter that whatts was a drunk??

[Spence Tepper]

Gooey vs prickly
Intuitive vs reductive
Subjective vs objective
Linear vs multivariate
Responsive vs reactive

Enough of these mental distractions from reality.

Enough of these conceptual games, and the mind gamers promoting them.

There is no wisdom in them.

[Spence Tepper]

Wisdom is in practice.
Wisdom is in actual work.
Wisdom is in personal responsibility.

Not these mental conceptualizations that are just ways of avoiding reality, ways of denying reality, avoiding and denying our responsibility...

[Brian Hines]

Spence, I heartily disagree with your comments. You just used concepts to criticize Watts for using concepts. What kind of life would it be for us humans without mental conceptualizations? No language. No books. No ability to communicate with others. Other animals likely conceptualize, though not in languages we're familiar with. So we'd be even less than animal in our ability to experience reality.

You've written countless (almost) comments with complex concepts. Do you now disavow those lofty sentiments? Are you really saying that mental conceptualizations are ways of denying reality, or do you just disagree with Watts' conceptualizations? I suspect the latter. So if that's the case, the question becomes, "Do you really believe that your worldview is so correct, being exposed to other worldviews is meaningless?"

I like how Watts said that if we're only familiar with one worldview, our viewpoint is limited. He invites us to explore other worldviews, Chinese/Daoist being his favorite. No creator. No transcendent reality. No difference between the natural world and ultimate truth. This also happens to be the scientific worldview, by and large. So Watts isn't saying anything crazy. He's reflecting the worldview of billions of people. Not yours, it appears, but you don't have a monopoly on truth.

You have a right to believe your own definition of wisdom. But those words you spoke in your comments are mental conceptualizations. So you undermine your own argument by using those words.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Brian ji
You wrote
"You just used concepts to criticize Watts for using concepts."

The mind should follow evidence and experience, not lead them.

There is a place for concepts, in the service of reality. Not concepts spun off other concepts, derivative and inventive, but disconnected from reality and self - serving.

Watts will be forgotten soon enough, abstract, derivative of ancient writings without grounding in reality, imitative, not experiential, worse than imitation, spewing words not grounded in experience, ultimately groundless and inconsequential.

You wrote
"I like how Watts said that if we're only familiar with one worldview, our viewpoint is limited. He invites us to explore other worldviews, Chinese/Daoist being his favorite. No creator. No transcendent reality."

The logic of this statement collapses when you criticize a single world view then promote Atheism as your single world view.

Reality is much more holographic, Brian Ji. Atheism is a reality, as is our divine Creator. And we reach have our own constructed reality, personal to our position in space and time and entirely worthy of respect.

Shabd is real. The force of life underpinning all life is real, and the opportunity to connect to it exists, not in concept, but physically, because et are all connected to life every instant of every second of every day. We exist because of our, not separate from it. The separation is the illusion. Promoting opposites as conflicting is part of the illusion.
But only experience can show how our is all One.

If Watts had only experienced some of the things he alludes to he would be much more cautious about proposing the world as opposites. It isn't.

Only practice, grounded in Responsibility, work, duty and bound by time and our own limitations can give us the natural experiences that teach us our limitations..

. And the potential for transcendent experience that opens our thinking to new vistas. But actually taking us there.

Usually that comes from a lot of failure and persistance. Every good scientist understands this.

"The opposite of one truth may not be false. It may just be another truth."
Niels Bohr

[Spence Tepper]

Watts himself cited the problem he himself is prey to in Zen Flesh / Zen Bones in translating a Zen story of two monks who approach their Master with an argument.

One monk said "We are having an argument, Master. He says it is the flag that moves, but I say it is the wind. Who is right?"

The Master answers "You have wasted time away from your practice. You are both wrong. It is the mind that is moving."

[um]

@ Spence

Duke Hwan of Khi, First Minister in his dynasty, sat under his canopy reading his philosophy; And Phien the wheelwright was out in the yard making a wheel.

Phien laid aside his Hammer and chisel, climbed the steps, and said to Duke Hwan: “May I ask you, Lord, What is this you are Reading?”

The Duke said: “The experts. The authorities.” And Phien asked: “Alive or dead?” “Dead a long time.” “Then,” said the wheelwright, “You are reading only The dirt they left behind.”

Then the Duke replied: “What do you know about it? You are only a wheelwright. You had better give me a good explanation or else you must die.”

The wheelwright said: “Let us look at the affair from my point of view. When I make wheels, if I go easy, they fall apart, If I am too rough, they do not fit. If I am neither too easy nor too violent – they come out right. The work is what I want it to be. You cannot put this into words: You just have to know how it is. I cannot even tell my own son exactly how it is done, and my own son cannot learn it from me.

So here I am, seventy years old, still making wheels! The men of old took all they really knew with them to the grave. And so, Lord, what you are reading there is only the dirt they left behind them.”

Spence, being a wheel maker of sorts, you try to make the Duke understand how to make weels .... hahahaha.

Lao Zi, Wittgenstein and many others said ... do not speak about things that cannot be spoken of.

Strange they, the great ones say do not do it, it cannot be done , and you go on and on.

From my dad I learned many things in order to know in the kitchen when things are done. It were mostly things that are related to the senses. One cannot learn them out of a book, by description ... it is a practice and one that has mastered the trade must be around to draw your attention at the right moment.

Your words, in the ears of those that have no experience at all from themselves, are as valuable as the words they use .. I just do not get it why you write here.

The only thing the man that initiate you had to say of himself was .... Please do your meditation.

The rest what he had to say were all nothing but dealing with family problems or problems people had with practicing that way of life.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
You wrote
"Your words, in the ears of those that have no experience at all from themselves, are as valuable as the words they use .. I just do not get it why you write here."

They have experience. They have known death and rebirth and the journey up. They have just forgotten.

So it is natural for anyone to speak to their own experience, and it will all take shape in time. Some seeds need to be planted, others are nearly fully grown and just need some watering. Then there are those bearing fruit. The fruit belongs to their Master, and when they bear fruit the Master takes over directly from there.

But the entire creation points there, so every bird in the forest that sings is just doing what it loves, and its job. It doesn't care who is listening. God is listening.

[um]

@ Spence

>> They have experience. They have known death and rebirth and the journey up. They have just forgotten. video from => video to audio tape => from auto tape to transcript => from transcript in one laguage translate into another, ... something is lost and will it be impossible to know the reality it was born from.

Although true your words are useless and meaningless ... reason why your own guru NEVER spoke up the way you do and he refrained silent .. the only thing he ever said was,.. please do your meditation..

People will argue and come with all sorts of examples that he said this or that, but at closer observation it was as how he would say now and than how parents deal with questions the children cannot understand .

[um]

@ Spence

>> So it is natural for anyone to speak to their own experience, and it will all take shape in time. Some seeds need to be planted, others are nearly fully grown and just need some watering. Then there are those bearing fruit. The fruit belongs to their Master, and when they bear fruit the Master takes over directly from there.<<

That .is to say that whatever you say is not your responsibility anymore but your masters, and that he makes you sing as you do.

As said before. There have been several satsangis with inner experiences that opened their own shop and started initiating based upon what they experienced as the commands of their inner master. When suggested they would talk it over with their own outer master they always refused it based upon the dogma that the real master is the master inside. However when the master in Beas was asked he would say that he was not sitting there for nothing.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
"something is lost and will it be impossible to know the reality it was born from."
No, the knowledge is there. The sleeper merely sleeps.

Maharaji said that we have impressions but they may be unconscious. Still, they can have their effect. In the right environment, in an encouraging environment,, we move forward. Even unconscious of the reality, we resonate to it. The soul is forever longing for it. People misinterpret that longing because they have no other avenue to consider.

So it is important to discuss, and if that comes naturally, it is good. That isn't necessarily about personal experience. It is about the fact of what is inside you, as you strive to uncover and discover it.

Your criticism of my writing seems curiously out of place. Maharaji never said we should do what you are doing, to make personal criticisms public.

My comments refer to what Alan Watts wrote.

Your comments refer to me personally.

I'm sorry but the Maharaji you claim to know to support your remarks is distinct from the Maharaji you can read for yourself in the books.

We've discussed this before and I provided actual quotes of Maharahi 's writings to show you where you were mistaken.

You are most welcome to do the same, in the context of Alan Watts' writings and statements, which is the subject of this blog post.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
You have cited in the past your recollection of Maharaji's statements to specifically support your personal criticism of my comments.

First, your recollection is in error. I've cited quotes directly in the past where his words contradicted yours.

Secondly, when you make personal criticisms of others on a public forum using Maharaji as your excuse you are standing outside what both Maharaji and Babaji have asked.

Let me suggest that you take sole responsibility for your statements, and do not claim you are in any way representing Sant Mat. Leave Maharaji's name out of it if you are going to make public criticism of any private citizen. If you wish to refer to Maharaji in discussing philosophy, please offer quotes and sources.

I would never make such a claim as you are doing. I'm a student but I can speak to my experience as can anyone. Only appointed representatives can claim they represent Maharaji as you are doing.

Re your statement
"That .is to say that whatever you say is not your responsibility anymore but your masters, and that he makes you sing as you do."

I suggest the opposite, taking responsibility for your statements. See comments above.

As for your statement
"from transcript in one laguage translate into another, ... something is lost and will it be impossible to know the reality it was born from."

No, this is mistaken. We carry impressions from the past, and that includes all of our experiences, distilled. So that would include our prior experience before coming here, experience of death, rebirth, and moments of transcendence. This is all inside each of us. Our soul longs for union all the time, but we mistake that longing for things, power and people. We long to return to our place, but cannot find that place.

Any discussion of transcendent experience, including what Alan Watts refers to, even second hand, resonates to some extent with the subconscious impressions within is.

In the right environment, encouraged to pursue spirituality, an affirmative environment of discovery, effort, learning, and personal development, we make progress directly and faster, since we are just uncovering what is already within us.

Therefore it is entirely appropriate to share those views of reality, transcendence and philosophy.

And entirely mistaken to censure them.

I do not agree entirely with Alan Watts, but I fully acknowledge the basis of his words is reality.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um

Re your statement
"That .is to say that whatever you say is not your responsibility anymore but your masters, and that he makes you sing as you do."

No, we are all responsible for what we write. Using the name of any Saint does not raise our thinking. We are still the authors of our own words.

As for your statement
"from transcript in one laguage translate into another, ... something is lost and will it be impossible to know the reality it was born from."

I do not agree. I believe we carry impressions from the past, and that includes all of our experiences, distilled. So that would include our prior experience before coming here, experiences of death, rebirth, and moments of transcendence. This is all inside each of us. Our soul longs for union all the time, but we mistake that longing for things, power and people. We long to return to our place, but cannot find that place.

Any discussion of transcendent experience, including what Alan Watts refers to, even second hand, resonates to some extent with the subconscious impressions within is.

In the right environment, encouraged to pursue spirituality, an affirmative environment of discovery, effort, learning, and personal development, we make progress directly and faster, since we are just uncovering what is already within us.

Therefore it is entirely appropriate to share those views of reality, transcendence and philosophy.

And entirely mistaken to censure them.

I do not agree entirely with Alan Watts, but I fully acknowledge the basis of his words is reality.

[um]

@ Spence

You wrote that .. at that moment he, the master takes over. This are your own words not mine. If somebody takes over the reigns he becomes responsible. and you are just an witness an hollow tube. They call that surrender.

And as far as the rest is concerned. That is a viewpoint that belongs to a script and those who adhere to it have to accept it as it offers them their view.

[Spence Tepper]

I'm sorry Um but you misunderstood what I wrote.

I wrote
"So it is natural for anyone to speak to their own experience, and it will all take shape in time. Some seeds need to be planted, others are nearly fully grown and just need some watering. Then there are those bearing fruit. The fruit belongs to their Master, and when they bear fruit the Master takes over directly from there."

The Master takes on that disciple directly at that point. Until then, the influences from their environment help them, refine them, being them closer to spirituality. That environment includes the advice of good friends, the experiences and philosophy that others share which encourages their friend to continue their own efforts. Their advice is theirs and cannot be blamed on anyone else.

[um]

@ Spence

It is natural for you to write these words based upon your inner experience other wise it is just parroting.

And the last paragraph makes me smile and laugh. Each creature processes the influences of the environment according how he is made to do so. No outwards source can make it process otherwise.

Nobody is needed nor of help ... fortunately ... hahahaha ... a crow does not need to go to the eagle to ask him what it is to be a crow ... hahaha

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
You wrote
"a crow does not need to go to the eagle to ask him what it is to be a crow"

Crows may not know enough to ask. Human beings do. That is the greatest gift, however painful.

When you awake you ask "what? Why? How?" these are great questions, and reflect the greatest gift given to human beings.

When one is still asleep they don't ask. They are asleep. They don't want to be awaken, happy in their slumber. Let them sleep.

But if they are angered by the discussion of others about other lands, other places, it can't be helped.

A pearl comes into being because of a little irritation. The smallest grain of sand. The clam says, "Go away! You don't belong here!"

Hahaha.

[um]

@ Spence

It is my understanding, looking at crows, that in nature everything is made perfect, in the sense that it is equiped with everything it needs, to be born as it is, to live as it is and to die as it is.... you name it an from everything that exists can be said ... it is good as it is.

None of these enties does need the help from others to be what and who they are and they are all placed in surroundings were they can live ... there is no exception

Humans are no exeption to the rule but their degree of freedom to move is greater than from other creatures, in that he can re-create hir original habitat. For that he is equiped with a greater brain.

Culture and religion being part of it are developed in that process of adaptation to changinging environments.

People with so called inner experiences, came with answers for problems in nature that they could not handle. Just read the first sentence of great Masters' "MY submission Part 1"

I have tried, in vain, to explain that religion is an kind of projection. What is needed for crows., ALL crows have it at their disposition, but these so called inner experiences did and do occur always in singular human beings, are never repeated. These messages are then given to the masses and have to be believe as hearsay.

Due to the globalisation of information we now come to know of highly evolved spiritual systems at other places as there are for example the Kogi Indians. The point I want to make is, that irrespective of the quality of that system, the revelation of their mystics are always local.

So these many mystics if one reads what their messages are come with solutions of problems in that particular time and era ... spirituality, religion are just tools human have created to survive here.

Naturaly, there is no reason, purpose, goal, meaning, to be found in whatever exists.
It exists and that is all there is. There is no question, there is no answer.

And ... of course there are people like you with inner experiences, That is their fate and they have to deal with it like others have to deal with their poverty, missery, wealth etc and they all do it with the ideological tools that their culture offers them.

Their inner experiences are only meaningfull to them and are of no use for others.

Thinking for a moment ...the story of the lady that told me her story of life, appears again before me. When finished I said to her that she whatever she had done and could have done was wrong but ...I would have done the same being in her shoes.
I could have reacted in many other ways offering help, answers, solutions. Probably that would have been the "normal" reaction. That is what mystics also do.when they leave their own house and go into the world.

There are however those that do not do that, they just happen to live their own life just as other human beings, nobody will ever know.

[um]

@ Spence

To illustrate what I want to say think of a plant. In nature it lives in harmony with its surroundings and does not stand in help of any body to live its life.

Bring the plant indoors, and that harmony is destroyed and the plant is no longer able to survive and you, that brought the plant indoors have brought it onto yourself to keep the plant alive. In order to keep the plant alive you must RE-CREATE its original habitat where the plant flourished before.

Its is obvious to me that you as a human being will not be able to re-create that original habitat. What you create is an artificial habitat that resembles the original natural habitat

In order to make that possible a comple industrie has developed, and the scientists that made it possible ... a walk through your local garden centre will make to clear what I mean or a visit to you agricultural universities etc

Just a sip of tea or coffee will be enough to transfer the process to human affairs

Reason for him to say .. live a natural life in a natural way

In order to live such a live we need not to know anything.

Eating from the tree of knowledge .....is needed with all its consequences when you bring even a plant indoors.....

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
You wrote
" And ... of course there are people like you with inner experiences,"

I think it would be more accurate to say people have different experiences from our own. The dichotomy of inner vs outer is artificial.

Now, the question is, I what extent we can honor any experience that is different from one's own. We are different, and we share some similarities.

To accept anyone's different experience is a challenge to our very core, our character.

[um]

@ Spence

Sometimes I doubt if I realy grasp what is written to the lack of full command of english. This is one of those.

Let me react to the last setence.

As far as I understand, I have always accepted what people told be about their own experiences in the way they put it before me on the table. And I do it for a simple reason, when a person informs me about something that made them happy, their faces radiate joy.

Some people in my own family are very sensitive, empatic people although reserved. They only open up their treasure box of [spiritual] wealth whenever they deem fit. By the mere sound of their voices something inside jumps from pleasure..

In a sese I recognize what they experience but I have never had those experiences myself.

So .. i suppose that I can say that I have no problem with the experiences of other people and it is and has never been a challenge to my very core or character.

The same holds for you.

That said there comes another step, after sharing one's experience with me and that step does not always bring a smile on the face, to say it simple.

From what I have several times written about "the evil of wealth" also spiritual wealth one could easily understand that such a wealth can be dealt with in a positive way but also in a negative way towards other people.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
You wrote
"From what I have several times written about "the evil of wealth" also spiritual wealth one could easily understand that such a wealth can be dealt with in a positive way but also in a negative way towards other people."

The evil you speak of may just be our own individual negative reaction.
For that there is meditation, practice.

There is no evil if someone says within each of us is joy, and we can find it searching within, listening, finding inspiration.

If someone gets upset with that, I'm not sure what to say.

You have claimed your relatives have spiritual wealth. You have claimed a personal relationship to Maharaji yourself. If these are your treasures, then why should that cause anyone else grief?

How can those things make anyone upset at another's joy, especially when that is available to anyone?

Instead it makes us happy. It reminds us what is within ourselves.

I think we like to think that our gifts are different from others. We are all different, but it is precisely because this wealth I speak of is available to anyone and everyone that I'm comfortable speaking of it.

That may take different forms in different people. It doesn't have to look the same. But that joy is built into everyone. And ultimately, we are all responsible to follow and find that bliss in ourselves.

[um]

@ Spence
What and how to say?

The evil of wealth in this case is the suggestion that what was received as a gift is communicated as something that can be had.

Those in my family that are gifted, now and then open the taps of their wealth and when they do there is that joy to take part in it but none of them have done anything for it, it just enfolded itself over the years in a natural way. Yes, there have been and still are, no doubt about it, circumstances that contribute to that growth. After all "plants" need the right light, soil, water etc .. The plant by itself is not doing a thing. Being what he is was and is not in his hands nor the circumstances that make him grow and flourish. Suggesting to the world that he can do something or say to the world you can have it to is strange to say te least.

And I Spence I have no problem whatsoever that some people have this gift as it has always been a pleasure to be around these people.

Let us say as a matter of joke, there must be empty bucket if you want to share something. Without that emptiness no good can be poured in ...

I am glad that my cups are empty, so that i can fill them with tea.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
You write
"Suggesting to the world that he can do something or say to the world you can have it to is strange to say te least."

Maharaji often said, as did Kabir, that this wealth can be found in everyone. It is odd you would see this as exclusive to special people. It is special, but we are just people.

" The God flowing in me is the God flowing in you. "
Kabir

It's very human to think this is something exclusive. It isn't.

It's in all of us.

It wouldn't be God if it wasn't flowing freely in all life, and all matter

But not everyone is aware of it. Many, however, are. Just as Gurinder taught on many occasions, one light, many windows.

Now, you can discuss progress on the Path and what that entails. At some point the way becomes narrow and to make progress requires a relationship with your teacher. But that is a particular step. Anyone can experience the joy of spirit with just a little effort. If they wish to make that their life, then other requirements come into play.

That would be, at some point, discipleship. But not everyone is ready to take full advantage of that. Anyone can be thankful to God, and all that is quite sincere.

Years ago a Satsangi shared her distress with me when she heard Gurindar remark that RSSB isn't the only path.

She had been a nun for many years and was distressed to think that a devout nun could have what she now had as a Satsangi devoted to Baba Ji....

[Spencer Tepper]

Hi Um
The gift you speak of is within everyone and available.

"The God that flows in you flows in me."

That devotion, love and worship for Jesus, Mohammed, Moses, even the awe and gratitude for this physical creation, is the same. That love is never misplaced. It is all in each person's account. The account name is divine love. Love, God's Love, the Word, Nam, Holy Spirit is love, and that is the gift, as we experience it, each in our own way and time.

Alan Watts experiences it in his way, Brian Ji in his, you and I in ours.

It makes no sense to point to anyone else and claim they can't have that. How do you know what they are or aren't having? It makes no sense to discuss anyone else. Find your own bliss, follow that. There is your purpose.

Your own path will be very highly conditioned to you personally.

When Baba Ji taught "One Light, Many Windows" I think this is what he was talking about.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
The gift you speak of is within everyone and available.

"The God that flows in you flows in me."
Kabir

It makes no sense to point to anyone else and claim they can't have that. How do you know what they are or aren't having? It makes no sense to discuss anyone else. Find your own bliss, follow that. There is your purpose.

Your own path will be very highly conditioned to you personally.

When Baba Ji taught "One Light, Many Windows" I think this is what he was talking about.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
You wrote
"Let us say as a matter of joke, there must be empty bucket if you want to share something. Without that emptiness no good can be poured in ..."

The point of an empty bucket isn't to stay empty. If emptiness is the goal, there is no need of any bucket. A full bucket overflows. It can't be helped.

[um]

@ Spence

You know that what you write is not the point.

The point is that the bucket has not the power to fill itself.

In order to eat he said, two conditions are to be fulfilled [1] there has to be food on the plate and [2] there has to be hunger ...silence ...and both are GIVEN.

Thew pull [hunger] he made his secretary say, must come from inside [given] and if it is not there there is nothing [effort] you can do. [let alone somebody else].

Against this background it is not overly kind to say, suggest or make people believe that they can do something to change the situation.

A walk in nature makes one understand, that all what is alive, has received what it is, how it appears on earth, how it functions and in what environments it has to survive.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
You wrote
"Against this background it is not overly kind to say, suggest or make people believe that they can do something to change the situation."

Um, the situation is changing all around us. We are all progressing forward. Even the cycle is really a spiral.

If this message resonates with you, then it serves one purpose. If it resonates with the speaker, it also serves a purpose.

If it doesn't resonate you won't hear it. But then it wasn't meant for you.

Or it was.. Like the grain of Sand in the clam. That irritant is absolutely necessary for the pearl to come into being, though neither the sand nor the clam understands how.

Certainly you can say the grain of sand doesn't make the pearl.

But without it, no pearl ever came.

[um]

@ Spence

The clam his form and all its functions are gift as is also its environment. The clam had no say in it.
Nor had the clam a say in the sand and the grain of it entering its shell
Nor dit it have a say in how it would or had to react when that grain would enter its shell

So the clam cannot say I made the pearl nor can he say to others as how they have to make pearls.

Against this background it is not overly kind to say or suggest that they can do anything to change.

He used to say and write to me time and again, " It is all inhis hands". That doesn't mean that it is in his hands or that he knows in whose hands it is, but it certainly makes clear that it is not in the power of anybody to pull him self out of the swamp by pulling his own boots
These things happen.

The occurrence of pearls in a clam is as the occurrence of inner experiences, they just do happen, that is all.

Just have a look in your own world of family, friends etc, all people that are in close contact with you, who benefited from your WORDS, in the sense that they gor enterance to the same sort of experiences ad you have. They might like you for what you do for them, your kindness etc but your words certainly were of no help.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
You wrote
"He used to say and write to me time and again, " It is all inhis hands". That doesn't mean that it is in his hands or that he knows in whose hands it is, but it certainly makes clear that it is not in the power of anybody to pull him self out of the swamp by pulling his own boots
These things happen."

He also said time and again that we should not make any excuses for doing our best. He said time and again we have our own duty and not to justify our weaknesses by claiming it isn't in our hands.

He also said time and again that the environment and our conditioning in it influences our progress. Good company definitely has a good influence

What you have taken from your exposure to Maharaji is only half the story. He taught so much more than that.

If all that influence leads you to more determined effort at meditation and being a good human being it is a good thing. Maharahi was talking about each of us, Um, not "other people", just ourselves.

So it is mistaken to take all that encouragement and translate that into a judgement of the inability of others to make progress.

They are as capable as you and I. And no one dare try to make claim on what is happening within them that you or I may not see.

As Great Master taught, the divine truth is the birthright of every human being, so we should pursue it with encouragement, hope, and effort.

[um]

@ Spence,

Again, what and how to say,

Do you think that I do not know all these things?!
I do.

Let me give it an other try. Yes, he stressed again and again thathe things you wrote about effort, compagny etc but Spence he also said that this effort was not going to make us progress.

Be sure I have gone through this process time an again with him in private interviews, through letters and listening to his Q&A for months at a stretch.

He time and again spoke about grace, grace of having heard of the path, being accepted, living in conductive circumstances, putting in the requested effort and above all do evrything witk love and devotion. It was al in his hands. Whoever thet "his" mighjt be it is certainly nor "me"

It is not my invention to write the plot of this game. this path but theirs .. describing humans as puppets at a string.

After all these years and after leaving it behind, I finally came to understand what the script was all about ... he was right in what he said. If there is no love, no devotion you can simply forget about it. And these days I have no problem looking into that mirror and admit that these atributes, those "sine qua none" have never been there from the very outset.

What remains as a puzzle, is what christ said so eloquently, many are called few are chosen.

Most people that flok to their doors have as they say no interest in the divine whatsoever, they just go their for their own selfish, material, mental and even spiritual reasons ... they, and i love to put it here ...they all give a sxxxt about the divine, god, masters or whatever And Spence I accept to be one of them.

And YOU, You spence you are spiritual like a son born in a wealthy family.

The last sentence reminds me about what he said to me, wealth is a matter of heredity, gift or toiled for and the last is very, very difficult .

No need to say, that I have no problem seeing the sun shining in the pont. It was all given to you for free. ...now please do accept that fate as yours as I do mine ..but please do not suggest others that they can have the same if the only would ....

Enjoy that gift but do not use it to teach people.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um:
You wrote:
"..but please do not suggest others that they can have the same if the only would ...."

Yes, I'm suggesting that there is a mystery inside each of us, a wonderful mystery to unfold, a mystery that unfolds daily, with careful observation. For some, it is experienced intuitively, as love.

For others, as an actual witnessed event. That treasure comes in many forms, and it all comes from within.

So, yes I guess I am stating as a fact that I believe, that this love, grace, spirit, is in everyone, though hidden to one degree or another. And it can be unhidden to one degree or another, depending upon what we attend to, and practice attending to.

And, as Sawan Singh pointed out, which I fully believe, this is the birthright of every human being.

Maharaji also taught you that you would not have been initiated if you could not achieve your goal in this life.

Why believe otherwise?

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um:
You wrote:
"..but please do not suggest others that they can have the same if the only would ...."

Yes, I'm suggesting that there is a mystery inside each of us, a wonderful mystery to unfold, a mystery that unfolds daily, with careful observation. For some, it is experienced intuitively, as love.

For others, as an actual witnessed event. That treasure comes in many forms, and it all comes from within.

And, as Sawan Singh pointed out, which I fully believe, this is the birthright of every human being.

[um]

@ Spence

Yes it might be there, yes it is there, no matter who says it or whether it is true or not.
Yes there have people and there are people that say they have experienced it

but

They all received it as a gift. Gift in the sense that it was not and never the outcome of their will and/or effort.

So as said before and I say it again ... I do not have any problem people speaking of its existence but with their suggestion that being there in everyone it can also be forward by them if the only invest the right effort.

You too you received it and I am sure that you were not able to bring it forward not even to those that are dear and near to you.

[umami]

Spence,

I just have to ask whether you remember past lives. Were you in the situation of following the prescribed course to achieve inner transport without manifest result? What happened between those lives and this one that made the difference?

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
You wrote
"So as said before and I say it again ... I do not have any problem people speaking of its existence but with their suggestion that being there in everyone it can also be forward by them if the only invest the right effort."

Effort on our part is definitely required, no excuses.

And as Sawan Singh wrote, it is our birthright. Every human being's birthright.

You are suggesting that someone can understand and have faith, do the work, and achieve nothing.

In every endeavor towards excellence, whether spiritual, scientific, athletic or in business, that is the rule. Fail forward to success.

Understanding this is key to the necessary efforts and adjustments.

You have it within you to make progress. The rest is in His hands. But progress is definitely on you.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Umami
When a young bee hovers over a flower it has to do some adjustments to nail the landing.

Once you begin practice, the intervening years are just that... Getting the landing right, getting the target in focus. Know the destination intuitively, through Faith. Then careful observation will begin to unfold the next point of focus and movement. It's a multi - lifetime thing.

All you will need is provided. That and infinite patience and persistence.

If you can be that patient, forgiving and persistent with your own progress, you will be infinitely more helpful, also, to those around you.

Since all the parts are built into you, you cannot take credit for any of that. But once you accept your journey, mine that faith that brought you there again and again, because you will need it to deal with the constant set backs.

Your careful observation will unveil your progress. Then you cling to that, however incremental.

Progress could just be that you are more tolerant, patient and persistent. But these are treasures.

[um]

@ Spence

We have different understandings as far as effort is concerned.

They want their followers to put effort into the tasks their followers are requested to do.
They also make it clear that mechanical repetition, however long, does not bring around a thing. The work the effort has, as they say again and again to be done with love and devotion. Love and devotion cannot be generated at will and by effort. Reason for them to say taht every step one takes is a matter of grace.

But these are not my main concerns in answering you.

The main thing I have been trying to bring on the table is the fact that all, and there are no exceptions, that have inner experiences did have these experience without their will and effort. To suggest to others that it is otherwise is, to say it simple, not kind.

Whatever I have read in my life about prophets, saints, mystics of whatever branch in the world, all tell the same tale ... they all had an experience without their will and efford.

Even those that deny the existence of gods had these influxes of understanding without their will and efford.

Just name me one mystic that is known in the world that had his revelation, his inner experience due to his effort and effort alone.

[manjit]

"Just name me one mystic that is known in the world that had his revelation, his inner experience due to his effort and effort alone."

Buddha.

[um]

One day, seated beneath the Bodhi tree (the tree of awakening) Siddhartha became deeply absorbed in meditation, and reflected on his experience of life, determined to penetrate its truth.

He finally achieved Enlightenment and became the Buddha. The Mahabodhi Temple at the site of Buddha's enlightenment, is now a pilgrimage site.

Buddhist legend tells that at first the Buddha was happy to dwell within this state, but Brahma, king of the gods, asked, on behalf of the whole world, that he should share his understanding with others.<<

All these people faced problems around themselves, mostly of their tribe for which a "natural" solution had not be found over prolonged periods of time.

All these reve;ations, enlightenments were unique, in the sense that this or that particular revelation etc was not repeated again.

So all that use them speak of HEARSAY.

But the same powers that are seen as causal to the content never communicate with the rest of the world not about what was revealed nor that they had to heed these commands, insights etc given to these persons having these unique experiences.

But Yes these experiences are often of an form that they are experience as a command of an exteriior power and that command often is to share this or that with the world.

Again no power has ever said to me listen to this or that mystic and heeds his words or what was written by this or that mystic was said by me and it is correct

Yes there are so called inner experiences as there are dreams and all receive its contents

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
Yes our understanding is a little different.

The effort you make is the result of Grace, but effort is required.

If you desire God, it's up to Him to do the rest.

All you need is desire and effort. It's His job to do the rest.

Maharaji often gave the example of the loving parent who did not bother their sleeping child, but who ran immediately to their crying child.

If you want God, yes you can say that came from God, even your effort came from God, those in your environment who encourage you also do so at God's word alone.

If anyone suspects there is an inner world, a better place, a mystic source of Love, and wants to go there, they have already enlisted God's help whether they know it or not, and God has already enlisted theirs by planting that notion in their heart.

So your concept that someone could make effort without God's help is nonexistent.

And your notion that encouragement is bad ignores the fact that such encouragement comes from Him. Without His support no one could even conceptualize the existence of God.

Therefore to suggest someone could sincerely wish to meet God, sincerely enough to make prolonged effort, and yet make zero progress is simply impossible. They may not see it, but putting aside doubt, there it is!

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
The argument you make is an interesting one but flawed.

You propose that encouragement to spiritual practice is wrong because no one can do this on their own.

But encouragement and effort all come from Him.

Try it. Or try again. Double down on your practice. Enjoy the futility of it. Very good for the mind. And the doorway to the soul.

Therefore encouragement is also a gift.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
You wrote
"They want their followers to put effort into the tasks their followers are requested to do."

When has any Saint said sincere effort doesn't matter?

Cite the writings of any Saint who said sincere effort, which is submission, means nothing?

You've simply made something exclusive that isn't.

Perhaps your association with the caste system makes this seem inevitable that there will be those in wealth and those in poverty.

And so, perhaps this is why you see through that filter.

But in spirit, there are no such distinctions. The more progress you make the more you realize how inconsequential wealth and poverty are to the soul.

All love, all spiritual wealth is from the infinite Word of God. Have and have not don't exist there.

The Master and a beggar are both souls there. When you take away the coverings, there are no impressions there, no distinctions. Not male, nor female nor any variation. No Brahamans, no outcasts.

[um]

@ Spence

Hahaha how you always are able to twist my words.

You see spence, huzur never said to anyone that they should not put effort in their meditation. He said they should put in effort, more and more effort. Do you relay thing I do not know it hahahaha ... but ... he said that it should be done with love and devotion and ... surprise surprise , these were things that were in nobodies hands.

Again there are those that have inner experiences, they all received it. To say to others and suggest they can have it also, if they only would put in the effort is ... to say it friendly ... not kind.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
You misunderstood.
You wrote
"but ... he said that it should be done with love and devotion and ... surprise surprise , these were things that were in nobodies hands"

Any effort is sincere. Even dry meditation, even failed effort. He said it is all from Him. It is absolutely in your hands to put forth effort. Give Him your failures.

If it is in His hands then that includes your desire and effort.

No one should take away or suggest taking away your personal responsibly.

I guess in a caste system this happens all the time.

Some people feel special, without any personal responsibility, and they feel the poor and those in need are also not their responsibility. And they presume somehow this translates to their spirituality.

But the ocean of wealth is inside everyone.

The caste system doesn't apply in spiritual matters. The poorest of the poor can be the wealthiest in spirit. The beggar on the corner, the old homeless woman with the shopping cart of belongings can be God.

Too bad some can't see it. Anyone else can see the barrier they are creating for their own progress right their... A poor attitude.

[Spence Tepper]

One more point Um, which you may have missed.

The human form, the Master's teach, is uniquely suited for Spiritual progress. The doorway to Love and the realms of spirit lies within the human form.

In the right environment, every human being can return. Every single one.

So we should all be living in that environment, working as best we can, with Love as our guide, to build that atmosphere where others also can see and understand that opportunity. Then they can move forward on their own journey of inner discovery.

Everyone has a role to play to create that atmosphere and to be welcoming of others who are seeking directing and advice.

To them I echo the words of Joseph Campbell by saying find and follow your bliss.

[um]

@ Spence

What ever I had to say I did say, To continue makes no sense to me.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Um
You wrote
"What ever I had to say I did say, To continue makes no sense to me."

A stone in cold water can be warmed in the hands of the beloved.

It is still a stone, but benefits greatly by the company.

[um]

@ Spence

[Appreciative Reader]

"@ Spence"

Posted by: um | January 21, 2022 at 02:12 AM

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

So which of you two is holding up the lotus flower and which looking on and smiling gently and wisely?

[um]

@ AR

Hahahaha ...I better gave some coffee now ... hahaha

[Spence Tepper]

Hi AR:
You ask:
"So which of you two is holding up the lotus flower and which looking on and smiling gently and wisely?"

The Lotus Flower blossoms all on its own, shining into the sun, roots in the mud.
Now if you attend only to the mud you might think nothing can bloom from that. You might claim, rightly, that mud is also there. Mud is truth. But it would be false to claim that nothing can grow there.

The lotus flower does bloom.

And that bloom is your proof.

Deny that evidence, and you live half a life.

Acknowledge that evidence, and that can become a bit of an inconvenient truth. Because it eggs you on to bloom also.

So you can say it was inevitable. The lotus flower was designed for it. Just as every human being has a remarkable potential in them, something unexpected, and possibly unbelievable.

They just need to seek it, to submit to it, to follow it with discipline and effort, as these are natural attributes for human beings.

Find and follow your bliss, and learn and grow along the way.

[Appreciative Reader]

Hey, Spence.

I'd have been happy with just a chuckle, but hey, bliss is fine, bliss is great. :---)

(Just [an attempt at] a joke, off of the Flower/Lotus Sutra, and no words spoken.)

[um]

@ Ar

It was as an tasty cookie with the coffee .... :-))