Is ZEN Superior to Yoga? - www.ezboard.com

SRF Walrus

Mt. Washington, Ca

Open discussions about SRF

SRF Walrus > Non-SRF Teachings and Ideals > Is ZEN Superior to Yoga?
Page 1 2 3 4	<< Prev Topic \| Next Topic >>

Author	Comment
chuckle chela Registered User (6/12/02 11:09 pm) Reply	Re: Surrender in the Lessons I was surprised by Should Free's remark that "surrender" is not in the Lessons. From my perspective, the Lessons are filled with remarks on surrender, although I will grant that in a quick perusal of the first two steps, I didn't find the word "surrender" itself. But the following Lessons in steps one and two contain what I believe are comments on, ideas about, suggestions for, and descriptions of surrender: Lessons 1, 3, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 20, 21, 29, 36, 37, 40, 44, 51 (I am considering the front page of prose/poetry to be a part of the Lesson). (I haven't had time to examine the rest of the Lessons, but I'm confident I'll find several more Lessons that touch on surrender, although I won't be surprised if I don't find the word itself; I wonder if there may be historical reasons for that). Parenthetically, I will suggest that Master's three volumes of talks are also filled with references to surrender, as are (in extremis) his Gita interpretations and the Autobiography. Let me hasten to add that I think the subject of surrender is an incredibly vast one, and I can't begin to claim any substantial knowledge on the subject; my suspicion is that surrender is probably one of the most profound spiritual concepts and actions. As far as I can tell, it has many related themes: devotion, nonattachment, receptivity, faith, and (that awful word to some) renunciation. Motlom's and chela 2020 latest posts, as well as a number of the previous posts, give ample illustrations of the many permutations and the vastness of the concept of surrender. Moreover, my own experience tells me that understanding in and of surrender develops over time, and its expressions take many forms. What may appear as surrender to one person may perhaps not appear the same to another. The last thing I can think of adding is that thinking about, meditating on, and possibly trying to practice surrender are probably very good things.
Should Free Registered User (6/12/02 11:56 pm) Reply ezSupporter	Re: Is Zen superior to Yoga? Wow! where do I begin. Such good posting guys! Motlin, you explain here so perfectly the issue. Worth to read it again. My experience was EXACTLY the same. <<<My own experience with the SRF teachings is like yours, Should Free. Under the guise of "going within", I learned to do everything but go within. I wasn't supposed to get angry, so when anger came up, I looked the other way. I wasn't supposed to be jealous, greedy, fearful, proud, lustful, lazy, etc., as these things were not "spiritual"; so when they came up, I fought them, resisted them. To resist something in me is to create a conflict, a battle, a division in myself. Therefore, the path as I was on it could never hope to bring about integration or wholeness. This is astounding when one considers that "yoga" is supposed to mean "union" - not just the superficial and childish meaning of union with some "other", but rather a basic union and integration among the "parts" of my self. If I'm am not integrated within myself, can I hope for any kind of union with what I call God, Spirit, or whatever? If I develop the habit of looking away from myself, then obviously I'm not "going within". I will never actually encounter myself this way. It amazes me how so many paths claim to take one within oneself, yet end up training one to do just the opposite. After my whole life came crashing down (and I mean that literally and figuratively), I finally had to look within myself, to encounter myself. I'm still having to do it. I "outgrew" the SRF teachings, at least the way they were presented to me in the Lessons (I'm not saying this with any pride)>>>>> Comment: Just this issue alone, just this lack of common sense in how to teach yoga, deserves a law suit. It is criminal to teach yoga in this way! How much pain it brought to your life Motlin? Or to mine? How many thousands have had, or will have eventually the same experience? Motlin, <<<What I object to is when the notion of "surrender" is used to coerce people into "obeying" some higher authority, because someone claimed that to do that is what's best for them. Surrender only has meaning if I am surrendering to something - this is true - but if that something is an organization (such as SRF), or whatever, then I feel it is counterproductive. >>>> You are absolutely right! I mentioned the word surrender because Brother Bhaktananda uses that word. In Christian terms surrender is what comes closest to the concept of acceptance in Zen. But, I do not like the word surrender either because churches have abuse it. They degenerated the concept of spiritual surrender into obedience; even blind obedience to the institution. Disgusting! However, this is churchology degeneration. The concept of "spiritual surrender" is a pointer , which is "pointing" towards something very sublime -- which is beyond concepts, it is an experience. It is God himself as Motlin says later Motling, you say... <<<<Therefore, the attempt to cultivate surrender is to keep fighting. Obviously, the cultivation of "surrender" can never bring about real surrender.>>> What you are saying here is a CRUCIAL issue in Zen. And your own answer to the issue later is precise and to the point: <<<<To see all this within myself, without any judgment, is the thing. That's Zen. As someone said, "the seeing is the freeing." Another Zen saying: "The whole notion of Zen can be summed up in the verb 'seeing'". If I see that, from moment to moment, I'm resisting, fighting, striving to reach a goal, etc., if I see all this clearly, then perhaps the fighting can cease. Then there can be surrender. But this surrender is not a means to an end; it is the end and the means. "The first step is the last step." The end is the means. So for me, to say that one needs to surrender in order to find God is not quite right. To surrender is to find God. That's better.>>>> I can't add anything -- brilliant! In my own practice, (you may have experienced this too), I found myself often FORGETTING everything altogether. No awareness, just unconsciousnes. When I realized that I have not been aware at all, the challenge is to completely forgive myself at that very moment -- to completely forgive the past as soon as I realize that was NOT exactly in the present but with your mind all over dreamland. And that process itself leads to the present moment or to awareness. So, I begin by accepting the past; my unconsciousness. Very tricky! This "movement" also shows how subtle the automatic "shoulds" can be, and how crucial it is to get rid of them, even before they are born. So, how is possible that the lessons are a bazooka full of shoulds? Dear Soul Circle, you say.. <<<<Maybe, I'll look again, maybe for an hour or two....I went to them thinking, I will find surrender in the lessons, and 30 minutes later, I sit here, is Should Free right?>>>> You can stop searching, you will not find anything!. But, even worse, you will not find also any equivalent!!!! I challenge you to find the word "acceptance" in the lessons -- you will not. Because the lessons are all about RESISTING. And I capitalize the word not for fun, but because the lessons are essentially that -- teachings on RESISTANCE. The message is RESIST, RESIST, RESIST, over and over and over. So, when I say that this are HORRIBLE TEACHINGS I'm not trying to impress anyone. Unfortunately, it is the truth. The teachings the nuns have handed to us are so imbalance towards RESISTING that they are a crime towards humanity. They have the potential to do big harm to thousands of people, as Motlin was hurt or I wss hurt. The nuns have been EXTREMELY irresponsible. Give to the world such monastic, fragmenting, imbalance teachings is spiritual irresponsibility. And I'm absolutely SURE that those lessons and such imbalance teachings have the days counted in this earth. There is NO way that the bullet proof truths we are presenting to the devotees in this thread will be discounted indefinitely. SRF will have to listen and change the teachings, and create a set of lessons that will present a balance path -- spiritual surrender (or acceptance) and resistance in a balance way. Dear Chela2020 <<<<The moment my guru ever tells me to do something that I don't want to do, if it ever comes to his ever telling me what to do, I will find that I am not good at surrendering, if that is what it means.>>>> True spiritual surrender does not have anything to do with surrendering to an external authority -- that is, as I just mentioned -- churchology (another crime to humanity). Chela 2020, in order to really understand the problem you have to learn from those who know about it. In SRF no one knows really about surrender and those monastic who know do not have the communication skills to communicate it. Others do know however, but they stay quiet, because this issue is HOT and they know it. If a monk like Devananda or Satyananda etc. talk about true spiritual surrender or acceptance they would soon be in DEEP troubles. But, they do practice these things, because they know already that by resisting only they will never make it. Dear Chuckle Chela You say.... <<<<But the following Lessons in steps one and two contain what I believe are comments on, ideas about, suggestions for, and descriptions of surrender: Lessons 1, 3, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 20, 21, 29, 36, 37, 40, 44, 51 (I am considering the front page of prose/poetry to be a part of the Lesson).>>>> Could you quote those lessons? I have found lessons on visions, business, marriage, all type of sublime states of consciousness, and oh yes, I do not forget, stage freight. However, there is not one lesson that really focus into the most important spiritual practice of all -- surrender (let us not forget that Brother Baktananda says that "the only way to know God is to completely surrender to Him). It is true that specially in the poems Master talks poetically about surrender, but that is absolutely insufficient to compensate for the strong emphasis on will power, shoulds and the resist, resist message Should free Edited by: Should Free at: 6/13/02 2:57:29 am
soulcircle Registered User (6/13/02 2:36 am) Reply	Lessons and Surrender chuckle chela, You say.... *Quote:* But the following Lessons in steps one and two contain what I believe are comments on, ideas about, suggestions for, and descriptions of surrender: Lessons 1, 3, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 20, 21, 29, 36, 37, 40, 44, 51 (I am considering the front page of prose/poetry to be a part of the Lesson). Would it be possible to look at Lesson 1 and see lines of introduction, opening page/s, and what paragraphs of Lesson One have comments, ideas, suggestions and description directly to do with surrender? soulcircle
motlom Registered User (6/13/02 6:51 am) Reply	Re: Is Zen superior to Yoga? Should Free writes: *Quote:* "In my own practice, (you may have experienced this too), I found myself often FORGETTING everything altogether. No awareness, just unconsciousnes. When I realized that I have not been aware at all, the challenge is to completely forgive myself at that very moment -- to completely forgive the past as soon as I realize that was NOT exactly in the present but with your mind all over dreamland. And that process itself leads to the present moment or to awareness. So, I begin by accepting the past; my unconsciousness. Very tricky" Right! I've read where several authors suggest that the realization that I haven't been aware, is Awareness. This path is simultaeneously the most difficult and the easiest, IMO. Difficult because on-going awareness is arduous (try going through your day, being aware of everything that happens inside you and outside, every thought, every breath, every sound, sight, etc., with no judgment, no condemnation, but with the intent only to observe, the way a scientist would observe a colony of ants); Easy, because no effort is required to change. Change happens automatically through Awareness. It just comes. That's the beauty of it. Chela2020 writes, on surrender: *Quote:* "I would have to completely trust and love them, and I would have to build trust in someone." Excellent point. But speaking for myself, I ran into a brick wall with this. If I can only surrender to a person if I trust them (and/or love them), what happens when (on any given day) my trust wanes, or is broken? Hear what I'm saying: "If I can trust and love this [person, principle, guru, etc.], then I can surrender..." Is my surrender therefore conditional? (anytime I'm using if/then sentences, I'm speaking conditionally). Moreover: Is it surrender if it is conditional? So, I say, I need to get unconditional love; if I get that, then I will have unconditional surrender. But unconditional love is not something I can get, and I'm still speaking in if/then sentences. What do I need to get unconditional love? What conditions must be met before I can love unconditionally? See how crazy it all gets? I'm only speaking for myself now. I finally realized that I've never trusted anyone. Hear me out! I'm not being negative. I've never trusted anyone. What I trusted was an image, a prejudiced and hopeful idea of that person, whether it was a friend, lover, teacher, guru, or what have you. I have an image in my head of how someone is, or how they should be, and that's what I trust. This is very sobering to admit. It cuts through a lot of delusional thinking, for me anyway. It means that when anyone "breaks" my trust (another impossibility), I can't blame them. I can't blame myself, either. My judgment was lousy, that's all. Not very flattering to admit. But it's the truth. I'm not kicking myself. I'm not being hard on myself. I'm stating a fact. My judgment was lousy, period. It wasn't their fault. They're just busy being exactly who they are: human. Human beings are selfish and self-centered, exactly like me. It was me who chose to paint an image of them in glowing colors, and then to "trust" that image. As long as I refuse to see this, I go around trusting images, loving images, surrendering to images, blaming images, worshipping images (idolatry in the truest sense), etc. But these images are all in my head. They are "me". Zen says, once I see this, it stops. No more images. So you see, this isn't negative at all. It's potentially the most positive thing there is. Vernon Howard, in Secrets for Higher Success, puts it beautifully: *Quote:* "The only trust is self-trust. Even when you inquire of an authentic teacher it is your own understanding which responds to the knowledge he offers. Someone may ask, 'But how can I trust myself when I realize my confusion?' Your realization of confusion is the beginning of genuine self-trust, for you are abandoning false self-trust, which consists of reliance upon illusory strength. A deep realization of self-confusion produces a miracle of insight in which you see that trust in yourself and trust in the truth are one and the same." So for Zen, or Awareness, or Self-Observation, or Self-Remembering, or Mindfulness, or Attentiveness, or being Awake, etc., etc., etc., - it's not a question of surrendering, or trusting, or submitting. It's a question of seeing. Edited by: motlom at: 6/13/02 7:08:24 am
chrisparis Registered User (6/13/02 8:17 am) Reply	Re: Is Zen superior to Yoga? Edited by: chrisparis at: 11/22/02 7:32:54 am
motlom Registered User (6/13/02 10:47 am) Reply	Re: Is Zen superior to Yoga? chrisparis writes: *Quote:* "Although it is hardly fair, I can't help wondering if the SRF kriya technique isn't in part responsible for this. I spent hours a day "going in" tuning out the outer events. I wonder if I have so habituated myself to tuning out the outer world that I can no longer stop doing it. " This has been my experience. It's not fair or unfair, it just is. I spent years learning how to "shut down" or "tune out" the senses, etc. The problem with this, as I now see it, is twofold: First, although yoga claims to take one to a place beyond duality, in actuality it is often presented in a way that creates and/or strengthens dualistic thinking. This is a point Kramer and Alstad harp on repeatedly in their writings. For example: Let's say I'm going to tune out "outer" events so I can go "within". Fine. But as long as I do that, I never see that there are no outer events. I create a battle, a conflict (violence) within myself between the "inner" and the "outer", both of which are concepts in thought that have no basis in Reality. Without even realizing it (by a "sleight of mind") I have adopted a dualistic framework of thinking, and each time I meditate, I further cement that paradigm. Can separating the "inner" and the "outer" violently in this way ever create the gentle, sweetly delicate understanding that there is no inner or outer, but only inner/outer? Second: as I get more proficient at tuning out the "outer" world, I must also, ipso facto, get more proficient at tuning out the "inner" world (remember, these are not two different things). The experience of many people who have posted on these pages says, resoundingly, "Yes! This is what happened to me! I learned to 'tune out' my doubts, my anger, my fear, my greed, my jealousy, my lust. I filtered them, concentrated them right out of consciouness!" This filtering process makes it possible for me to tell myself (for a time) that I am progressing spiritually, because I am able to deny/suppress/repress traits in me that I see as being "unspiritual". Making these traits less conscious doesn't mean they aren't there ("a stone underneath the ground is just as heavy as one on the surface" - Meister Eckhardt. I would add, "and harder to deal with, because eventually you have to dig it up!") What I can't see is that, the more unconscious or hidden I make these traits, the more insidiously dangerous and corrupting they become. Eventually, I either implode (if those around me are lucky), or I explode (corrupt and/or destroy not only my life but the lives of untold numbers around me) as we see so many false "gurus" do. Zen and the Awareness traditions say something different. Awareness is not "inner" or "outer". If you want to learn to shut down the senses, tune out the "outer" world, fine. But it's a little like lighting a lamp and then hiding it under a bushel. No one does that. You have this glorious lamp already lit within you - why not let it shine before men? Turn the light of Awareness on your angers, your fears, your jealousy, greed, doubt, lust, low self-esteem - whatever it is, make it more conscious rather than less conscious. Bring it to light, all of it! Then it will change. Zen says, make no mistake: if it isn't somehow brought into the light, it won't change. Of what merit is it that I can go into a trance, if I don't know how to just Live, moment by moment, with a loving acceptance of everything that happens? Edited by: motlom at: 6/13/02 11:01:26 am
LotusLeaf Registered User (6/13/02 1:57 pm) Reply	Re: Surrender in the Lessons I have a copy of the "SRF Lesson Index, 1956 Edition" which, when I got it years ago, I believe was used by the monks, especially those who gave services. There is no entry for "Surrender" so apparently, as a stand-alone topic, it is not in the lessons. I think everyone struggles with issues of surrender (and control). I just looked up several quotes on this subject that I tend to collect: "The only time we suffer is when we believe a thought that argues with 'what is.'" "Peace is the cessation of againstness." "What is, simply is. Accept it and be happy." "There is a time to accept and there is a time to resist. Peace and happiness comes when knowning which is needed at any given time." This thread has helped me to understand a recent situation. A close relative comes to visit me once a year. Although I want to be with him/her, after awhile s/he can start to "get on my nerves" with contant talking and questioning everything I do, even in a nice way. This last time was very different. I gave my full attention, laughed a lot, diverted his/her attention, asked a lot more questions--instead of my usual progressively more withdrawn behavior. I marveled how "in the present moment" and relaxed I had been for several days that we were together. I knew it was something to do with the "present moment awareness" but how did I maintain that? I now realize it was due to my surrendering to "what is" without any resistance. When s/he "talked on" I just smiled, listened and chatted along too, without wishing we'd just be quiet for awhile, wishing I were somewhere else, or wishing s/he were different. Funny thing, s/he was different! And so was I! Thanks for all the great posts on this thread.
chuckle chela Registered User (6/13/02 9:48 pm) Reply	Reply to soulcircle and Should Free Glad to oblige, soulcircle. Let me mention again that just because one doesn't see the word "surrender" doesn't mean the subject isn't covered. If one is merely looking for a word, you're going to be disappointed. It doesn't surprise me that the word "surrender" doesn't appear on a Lessons index. You also won't find it in the index of the Autobiography--but it is discussed in several occasions in the book--nor will you find it in the index of God Talks with Arjuna, but to say that the Gita or Yogananda's commentaries don't discuss surrender would be absurd; it could be argued that the entire Gita is about surrender. I think it's kinda like the oil in the olive: it's there, but you ain't gonna see it by just looking at an olive. Back to Lesson 1: on page 5 of the first Lesson, the first two paragraphs contain the following statements: "But the Lord may not respond right away. Only when He is convinced that you seek Him not for the satisfaction of temporal desires or for spiritual glamour and glory-but simply to be His, unconditionally, forever-will He open the door�. "God does not always appear before us just because we have meditated deeply for several years�. But to those who make no demand, who just keep on striving, saying, 'Lord, I will wait for you, no matter how long it takes,' He will come." So, right in the first Lesson, you come up against the idea that you may not run the show after all, that you're not going to get to determine how it all shakes out, that your desires and actions, even noble ones, aren't necessarily going to bring you realization. This, to me, is a fairly profound concept, and I remember being struck by these words when I first received the Lesson many years ago. Moreoever, we encounter this idea of unconditional love. The offering of such unconditional love, it seems to me, can only be a gift from the heart surrendered to Something far beyond the ego. The concept of surrender reappears in the Lesson on meditation (#3). First, the visualization technique has one consider that one is not the body, not the ego, but much more than this, and the body and ego may be little more than illusions; so, a surrender of the tiny ego is implied. At the end of the Lesson, one is reminded, "In His own time He will bestow the supreme gift of Himself"; once again, the idea that one doesn't run the show is made evident, and that if one is seeking God's presence, an unconditional offering/effort is perhaps what will be required. It's worth noting, too, that both the Hong Sau and Om techniques require one to surrender (to the uncontrolled flow of the breath or to a sound) in order to be effective. Hope this helps, soulcircle. Should Free-it's interesting to see how you and I have such different perspectives on the Lessons! I honor your perceptions, although it would seem that you and I have different perspectives on the Lessons. The notion of RESIST, RESIST, RESIST has never been apparent for me as it has for you. I'm glad you're finally finding an approach that works for you, and it's unfortunate you had to spend years in a seemingly unfulfilled quest. Let me mention that although I have been saying the Lessons contain plenty of information about surrender, I'm not arguing that they don't need to be overhauled. I agree with those who feel they do need to be reworked in a number of ways. Please also understand that I don't intend to provoke any debate about whether the subject of surrender appears in the Lessons. If you or anyone else doesn't feel the subject is covered adequately in the Lessons, fine. For myself, I've found plenty of material that works for me (I could go on for pages citing the material in the Lessons on surrender, as I did for Lesson 1, but I won't unless you really want me to). You mention that none of the SRF ministers mention surrender. You might wish to have a listen to Bro. Anandamoy's tape on devotion; the subject of surrender is discussed at length (I realize that it may take an act of surrender to get you to listen to it, however!). One of the prominent themes of this entire thread seems to be discovering what works for one personally in one's efforts to be fully aware/manifest the Light, etc. To that, I can only say "Amen!"
soulcircle Registered User (6/13/02 10:31 pm) Reply	Conversation and discussion chuckle chela and all here, *Quote:* "But the Lord may not respond right away. Only when He is convinced that you seek Him not for the satisfaction of temporal desires or for spiritual glamour and glory-but simply to be His, unconditionally, forever-will He open the door�. chuckle chela, i am wondering if others see surrender only indirectly in your first quote from lesson one....hmm i am wondering if others see direct reference to patience in the first part and motivation in the latter part...hmm Sure we can all have our own take on things, our own experience, yet for the sake of converstaion and discussion, i find continued research and analysis helpful. those that don't can accept/let others continue this research. When I read this part of lesson one i didn't find the subject to be surrender. I still am intrigued by Should Free's comment... *Quote:* Well, has anyone ever read anything in the lessons in regard to surrender. Check it out, you will find NOTHING!!!! It helps me to discuss "possible" lesson quotes in regard to surrender, because in my half hour spent searching, that i mentioned above, there was no direct mention of surrender, by the word or otherwise.....i find that devotion is directly about devotion, forgiveness directly about forgiveness and so on... it has been mentioned that maybe there was a historical lack of use of the word surrender......well war and surrender is in every decade of history and the lessons contain the use of several tools of will, concentration, overcoming, and so on..... so we can discuss chuckle chela's first quote more and/or move on to the second, i ask others when they have time, where is surrender in the lessons? my personal life has been shaped to the very core by practicing surrender in its place ______________ the lessons clearly tell the story of the LION who thought he was a LAMB there are several if not many others like this _____________ I look for something along the lines of the lamb who thought she was a lioness, the dove who thought she was a hawk/eagle.....the butterfly who thought she was an owl or do i look in 1200 pages for what isn't there? soulcircle lol, the square who thought she was a circle Edited by: soulcircle at: 6/13/02 10:35:52 pm
Should Free Registered User (6/14/02 3:09 am) Reply ezSupporter	Lack of precision in the language Dear Chuckle Chela I appreciate your efforts to perceive the teachings of surrender/acceptance embedded somehow in the Lessons. It is interesting that you have been able to see it beyond the vail of limited words. However, most people need precision in communication. Poems and prayers are great, but we do not present a scientific paper in poetic terms or prayers. We do not teach science in poems. And most important, we do not communicate the most crucial, fundamental spiritual subject of all, in poems and prayers alone and using words that are not even synonyms -- like devotion -- to signify surrender. I suggest that you read "The Power of Now" by "Eckhart Tolle." It deals extensively with the surrender/acceptance issue. And please look most especially at the language used -- it is extremely precise! There are two powerful reasons for this -- acceptance/surrender is NOT an easy subject to grasp and second, it is a fundamental one. So, yes, the lessons do talk about surrender in an indirect way, through poems, prayers and devotional invocations, and obscure language, never even uttering the word itself. But, I failed to grasp that, and still I can't. I need precision when it comes to communication. Why the lessons are so precise and clear about will power, determination, changing your habits, changing yourself, changing your thoughts, renouncing your desires, meditating morning and night and practicing the presence of God all day long. Do we see all this been communicated in a soft, poetic language, or with metaphoric words that are a pale reflection of what they really want to convey? I tell you the language they use -- I like this -- �you must do, you should be, you have to do, you must do, you are to do, you have to be, you ought to, etc. etc. etc. Sounds poetic? It is beginnig to sound poetic to me lately.... Another issue: The examples you are presenting are also very interesting from a different perspective Let me copy them here... <<<<"But the Lord may not respond right away. Only when He is convinced that you seek Him not for the satisfaction of temporal desires or for spiritual glamour and glory-but simply to be His, unconditionally, forever-will He open the door�.>>>> In this sentence I feel immediately shutting off! You know why? The God presented here looks to me like a capricious girl that needs to pleased by owning me. What a stupid concept of God! This is the tremendous limitation of presenting the surrender issue in devotional/personal terms alone. A stupid God that needs to be pleased! A God that DEMANDS COMPLETE SURRENDER to Him. <<<<<"God does not always appear before us just because we have meditated deeply for several years�. But to those who make no demand, who just keep on striving, saying, 'Lord, I will wait for you, no matter how long it takes,' He will come.>>>>> In this case I also find myself shutting off. This presents an extremely demanding God, who is NOT willing to please you no matter how hard you work. But he may please you when he wishes, provided you work like a slave -- working for nothing in return; that is exactly what slavery is. What a God man!!!! I do not want such a God. He can go to hell with that attitude! I do not think that the Lord, the One, is pleased by people who present him as a slave master or a capricious adolescent. The beautiful, subtle, and not obvious at all, spiritual law of surrender/acceptance needs to be presented in a coherent, clear, precise language, otherwise, most people will either shut off, or not understand what surrender is about. I grant however, that few can escape this and perhaps because of past lives training �can see the oil inside the olive,� and you may be that blessed one -- congratulations! I am definitely not that clever, I need a precise language. You also mentioned Brother Egomoy's tape called "Devotion." When that tape came out, I heard it -- not exaggerating -- at least 30 times! I was thirsty to learn about surrender. I knew there was a great truth there, and the key to the healing I was looking for. However, please listen to that tape again. The language is so judgmental! And, despite all my efforts I could not crack the language and see the essence of practicing surrender. Again, the judgementality, and the abusive God pictured, made it impossible for me. I really worked VERY hard at understanding it, but it didn't work. And I know I'm not alone. I doubt very much that this is MY problem (SRF always blames the devotee, because they are the perfect teachers). What has been said in this thread is the REAL cause -- imbalance teachings, Kali Yuga Christian jargon and poor communication skills.
soulcircle Registered User (6/14/02 7:22 am) Reply	No Expectations and Patience Equal a Heart Surrendered chuckle chela, Looking at the second quote, *Quote:* "God does not always appear before us just because we have meditated deeply for several years…. But to those who make no demand, who just keep on striving, saying, 'Lord, I will wait for you, no matter how long it takes,' He will come." Yes, a + b = c patience plus no expectation "comes close" to surrender So it's semantics to say whether this quote is surrender or something indirect. Should Free has written... *Quote:* Well, has anyone ever read anything in the lessons in regard to surrender. Check it out, you will find NOTHING!!!! I feel you have found a reference to surrender. So others may or may not comment on this quote, but to me, clearly, here in lesson one, the subject is surrender. So Should Free, chuckle chela has found surrender discussed, and in lesson one. in my first reading of this i thought, no surrender is not the kernel in chuckle chela's quote...but more truly i hear surrender to Divine Mother, surrender to the practice itself, while only long enough to merge into the never-ending prayer of compassion/Divine Mother's heart.... and having done that, all practices are moot, for now the life and compassion is lived, alive within the chela's heart, with vim and vigor, embracing the good bad and ugly, even those in dire straights and those in obscene wealth. And yes, poetry is spiritual science, at time poetry is the sweetest, both most direct and sublime at once, and will do for you what your left brain is totally impaired in, so...... right brain .....where is thou sweet refrain right brain .....where is thou art, music and thundering dance ..to insane....................loving all yes right brain in chuckle chela's quote practicing sadhana, without need for gain we have crossed the barrier and moat Should Free, chuckle chela, every friend in this board and me, in every life traumatized, violated, in every hour paid ..by the fear farm and getting laid, in slavery for the religion of the new age Should free and all, we heal, recovery, we engage in endless helpful therapy and fall at the end of it all yes, once tall, and others around also so tall proud kriyabans, fathomless avatars one and all tall or small we "fall in" grace, as couples "fall in" love at the end of it all our friendships comfort without wall at the end of it all the only real torment and squall is not the mind, finding meaning in it all but just as the newborn swaddled baby toes and all into this veil of tears lets its vulnerable innocence fall just as this pure messenger for Divine Mother's heart a young family to start just as this sweet love of a baby's first soft gazes, bless we and i, surrender to goodness and the whole mess we and i, no longer unrealized and without compassion ~~~~~~~~~measureless~~~~~~~~~ Divine Mother's... in union and oneness the nut of surrender cracked open and laced with unconditional forgiveness ~~~timeless, "Flawless Mirror," perhaps like me Kamala inspired!!!!!! _____________________ hopefully your friend chuckle chela, Should Free and all, soulcircle Edited by: soulcircle at: 6/15/02 5:38:33 pm
gardendiva Registered User (6/14/02 8:18 am) Reply	Surrender vs. Letting Be I'd like to introduce the thought that "letting be" in Zen or Buddhist teaching (which I'm not totally well versed in, so forgive me if my ideas are off the mark) is different from my, and I think many others, interpretation of "surrender" as it might be gleaned from the SRF lessons. My understanding of "letting be" or of developing "awareness" is that one is accepting of all circumstances, inner and outer, without judgment and becomes aware of what is going on. Little by little, day by day, not being attached to the idea of results. One is "there," in the moment, with full attention. Now, what I personally have interpreted by the concept of surrender, coming from the SRF lessons, is this idea of relinquishing control or power of one's own. And from this relinquishing of personal control and power and letting God take over, one is supposed to be "in tune" with God and somehow, one day, have the result of "knowing God." I have seen other devotees flounder in real life situations because of this interpretation. They lose jobs, places to live, all the while anguishing over what "God" or "guru" wants them to do, totally incapable of taking any action for fear that it's not God's will. They are totally "unaware." I don't think that this is what Yogananda meant, but in his style of teaching or what has been passed down, giving up everything for God is so strongly advocated, it's understandable that people lose sight of a bigger picture. They lose touch with who they are, or perhaps never even learn that. It's not looking at one's life in a wholistic way. I mean, isn't God part of everything? Whereas the idea of becoming aware and being in the present moment, doesn't require the loss of personal control and power. If anything, it's a much more active path to follow, in that one is fully engaged with life. To me, it's much more wholistic and natural. At the same time, it's not about controlling circumstances and understands that there is a flow to the Universe and one's place within that Universe (and that each and every individual is the center of their own Universe...at least that's what my Sensei says in Aikido!). Also, the thought that something other than this moment, where we are, who we are, is the goal. How is one actually surrendering if there is a goal in mind? Yes, SRF gives this idea of surrendering to God, but it isn't just to "be" as one is right now. It's so that one has an experience, a feeling different from "now," or that one can be rid once and for all of all that this life entails. So, maybe I'm asking what, exactly, IS surrender? I think it's open to interpretation, but the way it's presented in the lessons, for me, has been less than ideal. Edited by: gardendiva at: 6/14/02 10:06:07 am
chrisparis Registered User (6/14/02 9:40 am) Reply	Re: Is ZEN Superior to Yoga? (This message was left blank) Edited by: chrisparis at: 11/22/02 7:37:25 am
motlom Registered User (6/14/02 11:27 am) Reply	re: Zen vs. Yoga *Quote:* "But the Lord may not respond right away. Only when He is convinced that you seek Him not for the satisfaction of temporal desires or for spiritual glamour and glory-but simply to be His, unconditionally, forever-will He open the door�." I don't see that this is about surrender at all. First, anytime one uses an if/then or only/then or only/when or only/if kind of sentence, one has introduced the conditional. It is truly amazing to me that many writers on the subject of "spirituality", will write about the conditional but disguise it in unconditional terms. But this disguising is necessary in any metacommunication; otherwise, people would know it is metacommunication and it would cease to be that (metacommunication is metacommunication only if one is not aware of it). And whenever metacommunication (mixed messages) is employed, as it certainly is here, people are going to hear all kinds of "shoulds", "oughts", etc. The trick in the above quote is to lay down some conditions, some requirements that the devotee should meet, but disguise the fact that one is doing so by using the word "unconditionally" in the same sentence. By using the word "unconditionally", the conditional nature of the message goes undetected. In the above example, the Lord's love for me isn't unconditional at all; I must meet certain conditions or "requirements" before he will "open the door". If the door is not opened (whatever that means, and you can bet I will be told what it means), it's because I haven't met those requirements - i.e. I'm not "good enough." The implication is clear in the words "...you seek Him not for the satisfaction of temporal desires or for spiritual glamour and glory-but simply to be His, unconditionally..." In other words, any ulterior motive would make me unworthy of God's response. My motives must be perfect (consciously and subconsciously) before I can get a response from God. My love for God must be unconditional first; then (conditional, and in time) God will respond. Or how about this: On the condition that my love is unconditional, God will respond! Crazy, isn't it?! One may argue, "perhaps they are just using paradox here. It's paradoxical that unconditional and conditional go together". A paradox is a seeming contradiction that, upon examination, is found to relay a truth, often a profound one. The above paragraph is certainly contradictory but hardly paradoxical. There is no profound truth about the relationship between "conditional" and "unconditional" being pointed out. More importantly, the underlying message, from my experience and the experience of many, is untrue. "Only when He is convinced..." Does God need convincing? Can He be converted, persuaded? Do I need to prove a point to Him? Not to mention that this puts God (the Timeless) in time (first there is a time when He is not convinced, and then there is a time when He is). By couching it in passive language ("when He is convinced"), it escapes the reader that it is the reader himself that must do the convincing (convincing = active, and he'd better do it perfectly!). The contradiction is this: if I'm working to convince God of something, can my motives be said to be pure, perfect? All of this is preluded with the subtle warning, "But the Lord may not respond right away..." Here is an attempt to make the Unpredictable predictable. What is never mentioned is that the Lord may very well respond right away; it is just as likely that He will. Who can say? Is there a law about this? What ever happened to the saying "the Lord works in mysterious ways"? The saddest thing about this paragraph, the one that brings tears to my eyes, is not in what the reader is told, but what he is not told: namely, that God's door is always open - right here, right now. I don't have to be "good enough". I don't have to meet any conditions or requirements. God constantly responds and constantly appears, to those who have ears to hear and eyes to see. *Quote:* "God does not always appear before us just because we have meditated deeply for several years�. But to those who make no demand, who just keep on striving, saying, 'Lord, I will wait for you, no matter how long it takes,' He will come." This paragraph is about control. What I hear is that if I want this path, the fact that I will meditate deeply for several years is a given, and that even that will not be enough (notice how the word "just" is used. Imagine if the word "just" wasn't there. Then the sentence would read: "God does not always appear before us because we have meditated for several years..." This has a completely different meaning, and is filled with Good News: sometimes God appears to people who don't meditate deeply for years! Why? Because His love is unconditional. Imagine that!). How can I strive and make no demand? Striving has no meaning unless I'm striving for something. We're told that we should not want something from God, but that we should strive for something (from God) at the same time. This can only bring about inner conflict and confusion for the reader. One does not reach a state of 'no-striving' through striving, or through being told that one should or must reach such a state. The underlying message (as in the first paragraph) is, no matter how much effort I make, it will not be enough. What, on God's earth, has any of this got to do with surrender?
username Registered User (6/14/02 5:57 pm) Reply	Re: Surrender vs. Letting Be "change me not my circumstances" Is this surrender? or should you determine if there is a way to change your circumstances? Do you accept your spouse dying of some disease, or do you take the spouse to the doctor?
Should Free Registered User (6/14/02 11:59 pm) Reply ezSupporter	how to become "should free" Such great, great postings. Congratulations to you all! Even if you disagree with me I love this discussion. This is spiritual excitement. And the best posting again is Motlins'. I like the way you carefully study the semantics, logic and contradictions in the SRF jargon. And I FULLY agree with your analysis. Those sentences do not communicate surrender, they are about control, making you feel NOT good enough and about "shoulding" you -- which as we will see here it is exactly the opposite of surrender. They also DECREASE your faith that one day you will make it and that you are worthy of it. That is something very serious because to make it we need to believe that it is possible. We need to believe that God can come to us any moment, for no reason whatsoever, besides perhaps his unconditional love -- "like a thief in the night" The issue may become even more clear this way. God is not making any demands, because his love -- as he has said it again and again in the scriptures -- is unconditional. So, He surrendered Himself to us already -- there are no demands. SRF's language is creating distance between He and us. And as Motlin proved they are false statements. They are pseudo spirituality -- human conceptions of a demanding, tyrant God. I want to add something here which may also help to understand the issue deeper. I hope to prove how deceptive SRF statements about surrender are. They are should statements (as Motlin already demonstrated, demands) and therefore they cannot be teaching real surrender. In cognitive therapy the should statements are a big enemy to our mental health -- a powerful cause for depression and anxiety. This has been proven scientifically at the University of Pennsylvania with depressed and anxious patients. These patients often suffer from countless should statements and inner resistance. The mind has many layers of awareness, and most of our "shoulds" are in the background of the mind -- they are silent or automatic says Cognitive Therapy. At any given time, if we introspect deep enough, we will see that we are having some silent shoulds in the background of the mind. If we remove them, even if we succeed at removing just one of them, by affirming acceptance, we experience the laughter Zen talks about; and peace. But we can also do an "Aikido move" -- we can accept the resistance, the should. It works because the spiritual law is that ANYTHING WE ACCEPT INTERNALLY LEADS TO PEACE. So, if we become "should free" (and I'm not talking about becoming "me" of course, my narcissism is good but not that good), we become free. Unfortunately, few therapists understand the depth of Cognitive Therapy, but in its deepest form it is pure Zen. Because the goal of Zen is to become "should free," the goal of Zen is to attain complete acceptance, complete surrender, total absence of INNER resistance, freedom from any conscious or subconscious idea containing a "should statement". And I capitalized INNER because externally you can be fighting like a Samurai. Zen is not about being a softy. So, another way to practice Zen, is to introspect often. As Master said in the Autobiography "Introspection can pulverize the strongest ego" (something like this). And what do we look for within? We try to understand what is it that we are resisting at that moment. Then, by affirming acceptance or accepting the resistance (whatever works best in the moment) we move towards surrender. We are constantly resisting many things, therefore by accepting even just one of them we move towards peace immediately. Sometimes I have difficulties to find an inner resistance (seldom unfortunately), when I feel very happy for example. But, if I introspect deeper I always find some form of resistance, some silent should. Only in samadhi we become completely "should free," free of inner resistance. So, becoming "should free" is the Goal. I was trained in cognitive therapy many years ago. You may understand my dismay when I realized that the SRF lessons -- the very core of the teachings -- were FULL OF SHOULDS. And now we all can see clearly by Motlin's analysis, that it is not only the "shoulds" that are stated openly. There are other type of �shoulds,� overwhelming demands, �shoulds� beyond human strengths, which have been disguised as �teachings on surrender.� Those sentences cannot teach surrender to anyone, they are in violation with the very foundation of the practice of surrender -- they are "should statements!!!!" Dear Soul Circle. Like you I believe in the great value of poetry, but I continue to believe that the lessons do not teach surrender at all. They teach resistance. Also, God is in both parts of the brain, and we need both. Many today think that there is a half part of the brain that is intellectual and egoitic. I respect that, but I do not think it is true. In my experience, both parts play a significant role in the spiritual life. Intellectual understanding and objective introspection can help tremendously. Finally, let as make it simpler. Let us see if the essential part of my accusation in regard to the lessons is true or not. Let us look at the index. We have there 180 lessons. Do you see any of those lessons teaching (giving a lesson) on how to surrender? Let me copy some of the titles so you can see how obvious this can become: -- Influence of diet upon disposition -- How to avoid bigotry in religion (the nuns SHOULD read this lesson) -- Does evil exist? -- Acquiring prosperity and success -- How to rejuvenate yourself (I need to check this one) In 180 lessons there is not one lesson devoted to the most fundamental spiritual subject -- surrender, acceptance!!!!! But if you go to Brother egomoy with this complain I tell you what he will say to you. �Oh, you can make it very complicated.... You are thinking too much..... � However, as we are finding out, here in this thread, in this brain storming, to surrender is not a trivial matter. We need to understand certain things in order to do it successfully. If it were that easy, if surrender were an easy thing to practice, this earth would be full of saints -- and it is not. Furthermore, we all therapist would be out of business -- but we are very busy, helping people to accept and especially to accept themselves (this is another aspect of the lessons that could be worthwhile to discuss here; the failure of the lessons to promote a healthy relationship with oneself by promoting dangerous levels of resistance). So, how is it that SRF who claims having the most advanced teachings ever, has failed at such fundamental level? And what has been the impact of their failure in the spiritual life of us devotees? Spiritual failure, plus physical and mental inharmonies. Were we bad devotees? No, we just had the worst teachers. I insist, such a huge, senseless, mistake can only be explained by something senseless too, like �the nuns who wrote those lessons were drank that day.� I just hope they had a good time!!! Besides the lessons, did you ever went to a convocation and listened to a talk devoted exclusively to surrender? I have gone to twenty convocations. In each convocation I attended so many talks. Never heard anything substantial about surrender and acceptance. Little things here and there perhaps, but a solid lesson on the matter NEVER. Edited by: Should Free at: 6/15/02 3:05:43 am
soulcircle Registered User (6/15/02 6:02 pm) Reply	toss it all friends ***and we still wonder*** the pain, the betrayal the horrible lessons the absence of surrender toss it all the thinking, the awareness the personal experiences. years of therapy, sadness and tears a world with three billion with less that $2 a day income the dahli lama and the Tibetans homeless too like the 1 to 2 million in the richest land as Donovan sang to us in the 60's histories of ages past unenlightened shadows cast, down through all eternity the crying of humanity just then when the hurdy gurdy woman comes singing songs of love ________ so as a thousand or more come limping from srf finding in these threads that others too are broken as postings are followed by our hearts and eyes the surprise is that we are friends and embryonic communities merging and diverse, sharing and caring a big event is two weeks away the open coming together Sept 29th see Meeting Place the surprise is the love you see in my eyes the hand to hold and heart to understand in this post when I say at my own surprise thank God for srf, as Dylan says there is no success like failure thank God that i read the AY 35 years ago and lived here at Richmond Temple and will continue to go to Richmond Temple and will continue to go to the convocations sobered, without expectations and cautious my soul is woven in the hearts of three groups my wife and all srf'ers who find deep needs more than met those who will never again donate to/attend srf, noble/free the six billion, the larger world of sisters and brothers laughing and crying David Dunlop has no lessons that people may subscribe to nor do i have much of value to anyone should you need a hand to hold, mine is yours as yours ... has been mine As Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. says somewhere Thank God, Thank God Almighty as yours....has been mine to hold dave dunlop soulcircle wondering at it all Edited by: soulcircle at: 6/16/02 2:51:10 am
Should Free Registered User (6/16/02 12:05 am) Reply ezSupporter	Wonder wanders of the right brain! A Beautiful Poem! Congratulations Soul Circle.
soulcircle Registered User (6/16/02 2:47 am) Reply	Should Free Should Free, Thanks a million. You are a noble individual and a true friend! soulcircle
Should Free Registered User (6/17/02 12:48 am) Reply ezSupporter	Another way Perhaps another way to practice Zen is to often remind ourselves that in the ultimate, NOTHING IS IMPORTANT. This becomes clear when we see -- or visualize -- how small our earth is, in a galaxy with 100 billions of stars, in a Universe with 100 billion of galaxies! Then that Zen laughter comes naturally, as things can be accepted as they are. I wrote this poem some years ago. I share it with you Soul Circle and all of you... Nothing of This Is Important Abundant health steadily flowing, or disease striking suddenly. Exuberant life rushing through me, or death banging at my door, Whether dead or alive, Nothing of this is important. Blessings of opulence every day, or poverty striking furiously for a time. But, whether rich or poor, Nothing of this is important. My enemies mortally wounded, laying humbly at my feet, or myself in agony, dishonored, supplicating mercy. Whether victorious or defeated, Nothing of this is important Consumed in anxiety, or bathed in peace. Shuttered in sorrow, or beaming with joy. Whether I am happy or suffering, Nothing of this is important. Fleeting thoughts, passing feelings, obscure for a moment the Truth. But no storm is forever, no cloud fails to pass, In due time Samadhi is bound to come, illuminating the ultimate Truth: Nothing is important.

Page 1 2 3 4

<< Prev Topic | Next Topic >>

Email This To a Friend
Topic Control Image

Topic Commands

Click to receive email notification of replies

Click to stop receiving email notification of replies

jump to:

- SRF Walrus - Non-SRF Teachings and Ideals -

Powered By ezboard� Ver. 7.32
Copyright �1999-2005 ezboard, Inc.