Why SRF weighs less on me now

SRF Walrus

Mt. Washington, Ca

Open discussions about SRF

SRF Walrus > Non-SRF Teachings and Ideals > Why SRF weighs less on me now
Page 1 2 3 4

Author	Comment
Notice the Noticer Registered User (6/18/03 1:55 pm) Reply	Why SRF weighs less on me now Under Core Issues/What is SRF's Mission, dawnrays writes: Certainly the whole thing is a great idea (that's what kept me around so long) and there aren't a heck alot of alternatives (I have many churches in my town, none do chanting or meditation, let alone Kriya). But I think there will be more in time (alternatives). This is probably somewhat different from what dawnrays was talking about, but I think SRF's own emphasis on "no alternatives" is a core issue at the root of many of its problems. Fundamentalist tendencies are strengthened when the teachings are perceived to be only in particular words, and the words are, for god's sake, OWNED by the religious institution. The resulting hero-worship makes us stay in the abusive environment, eschewing others who might well know Truth (how ridiculous is that?!) sometimes long after we start sensing that there's something rotten in D(en)M(ark). I always felt that my personal relationship with Yogananda could not possibly preclude learning from other saints. In fact, one of the most important things I learned from him was the importance of "keeping the company of the holy." Like the bumper sticker says, "God is too big to be held by any one church." Even after we leave, the depression holds on a lot longer if no alternatives, nay, improvements, present themselves. For me, it lasted almost two decades. I did find alternatives, but they ranged from mildly unsatisfactory to, like SRF, sickeningly fascist (Wat Kow Tahm in Thailand, run by westerners -- BEWARE! once you start getting near the Inner Circle!.) But I feel better nowadays. As it turns out, there are quite a few people who have awakened in the last decade; many of them are accessible in satsang situations. Blessedly, almost all of them have no interest whatsoever in creating organizations -- and the ones who do, I just stay the heck away from. (Though of course there are usually 3-4 people who make tapes, send out announcements of meeting times, rent the space, etc.) Now, I'm not one to claim who's enlightened, so if my statements bother anyone, please feel free to ignore them. Maybe also remember, though, that we come from an atmosphere that pretty much convinces us that normal everyday westerners won't get there -- the only enlightened people are extraordinarily disciplined easterners or direct disciples thereof. And I don't know about anyone else, but I definitely came out of SRF believing that enlightenment was necessarily preceded by yogic attainment. Not so, it turns out. The reason I'M quite convinced of their Awakened status is that, in so many ways, they DON'T act like the sociopaths we're used to. They don't say "believe my words," but rather "investigate what I suggest and see what you find." They don't try to act, dress, or speak in any certain way. They don't shame or blame. Love is always present AND they are not bliss bunnies. When you look in their eyes, you don't see personal reaction, only light and depth. Judgment is simply not present. Which is not to say their personalities don't sometimes manifest emotions, physical discomfort, or whatever. There is not a noticeable difference between the way they act in front of a group while teaching and when you just encounter them on the street. While most of them seem to have a Great Love for whoever helped them in their awakening, the idea that anyone should feel the same way toward them is never sensed. Hero worship of their teachers is never fostered. It's not about how HE was so realized, which I perceive as 95% of SRF's emphasis. It's about how realization is here, now -- for you. These are ruthless truth-tellers, not getting sidetracked into theory, psychological counseling or moral dictate. Most are very kind -- but not all! There is variety. They're not there to fix you. There is no single prescribed course of action, study, or practice. [In fact, I came across Ramana's writings in the late 70's, knew he was telling Truth like no one else I had ever read -- and proceeded to ignore him for 20+ years because I felt I needed a practice! Oy vey.] The vibration in the room is always extraordinary. It is acknowledged as Presence (or some similar term), never as something the person causes or owns and can therefore give you. No one EVER tells you what to read or not read, which practices to do or not do, how to dress, what to eat, with whom to associate... "how to live" (ewww!) Talks are never pre-determined, much less rehearsed. They are multi-faceted and timeless. I have listened to some, on tape, many times. Each time, I hear something I need to right in that moment -- and I'll swear I'd never heard those words before. A $10 - $15 donation is usually suggested for satsang, but with the stipulation that nobody will be turned away for lack of funds. Satsang is nothing like the distorted SRF version, which is nothing more than a minister answering questions about theory and practice. This is true association with Truth. People who sit with these teachers awaken (not everyone, obviously, but it DOES happen, and not all that infrequently! ). How used are we to organizations where thousands of people meditate for many decades, yet you never hear of even a single enlightenment? Apparently, because of the current transitional period between ages, it's time for a greater percentage of people to start waking up. Extraordinarily, it is happening. I've heard people say "they're sprouting like mushrooms." This has been going on since [approx] the early 90's, but I was totally unaware of the phenomenon till late 1999, even though I've always been interested in lots of spiritual teachings and goings-on, and many of these people were teaching publically. I guess things just happen at the right time. I was lucky to find out about them for a practical reason -- It saved me from plans I was making to brave the throngs of millions at the Maha Khumba Mela, just for the sake of hopefully being NEAR some enlightened people... Anyway, just in case anyone else might find support in these "alternatives," here's a link to a reference list of the sites of many of these people: www.satsang.de/English/Reference/body_reference.html The majority, I would say, are in the lineage of Ramana Maharshi, but not all. Eckhart Tolle is one who just woke up, without any spiritual background to speak of. Many of them regularly offer Satsang on the West Coast, particularly in the LA area and the Bay area. Other wonderful teachers I have sat with, who aren't on that list, are ADYASHANTI ! www.zen-satsang.org[he himself says that realization goes "so far beyond Zen"... don't expect Buddhist teachings...] Mokshananda (and wife Marlies): www.freewatersangha.org John Sherman, Amber Terrell: www.riverganga.org David Waldman: www.davidwaldman.org(in my hometown of Portland, OR). As for Andrew Cohen, he's actually the only one I have slight doubts about, though they may be unfounded -- but flippant remarks he's written in his magazine to the tune of "enlightenment is BORING - so let's find interesting things to intellectualize about!" make me wonder if he's going on some detour, at least temporarily. I couldn't say, though. There are also a couple of books out in the last year or so that are great interviews with awakened people from all different traditions. One is The Awakening West. They have a website by that name, I think (no spaces between the words.) On the site are full copies of several fascinating chapters they couldn't include. I found it helpful and SO VERY interesting! For one thing, you really begin to see that it's different for each person who awakens. Some had no spiritual training, others had meditated for years, some are married, others were monks, or swingers!, some are shy, some have quite the boisterous laugh, etc. Some awoke to a state of great bliss, others went through stages, some of which were even terrifying, etc. There simply isn't one single way it happens, much less one single type of person it happens to. Well, my best wishes to you all. In my case, it has taken a really, really long time to get fairly well divested of SRF indoctrination; occasionally I'll still find some "belief" I'm clinging to and realize, it's just part of the old dogma. These ruthless truth-tellers have been crucial aids in rooting out the lies I accepted. May our disILLUSIONment serve us all well! Edited by: Notice the Noticer at: 6/29/03 11:56 am
dawnrays Registered User (6/19/03 12:06 am) Reply	Re: Why SRF weighs less on me now You've got a great head on your shoulders, sweetie. Remember what Master says "intelligence is a sign of God." It also helps to get your mind off it now and then. I recently gave up "church hunting" (one of my former hobbies) in favor of renaissance/medieval reenactment in the sca (society for creative anachronism). Now I can dress up like a french rennaissance lady (back when women were WOMEN, just kidding...) and sing shrilly high tunes in my high soprano.. By the way, the most advanced (spiritualty speaking) person I ever met was my former music teacher. He was (to die for) humble and sweet and I never forgot him. You just never know. It's just a joke sometimes (on us at times). Love, dawnrays
Lobo Registered User (6/20/03 11:27 pm) Reply	Re: Why SRF weighs less on me now Andrew Cohen's mother apparently is not convinced that he's "all that." She's written a book (the title escapes me) that goes into great detail about what she came to see in her son; this after becoming one of his "disciples" and trying in good faith to follow (and believe) him. I've read parts of E. Tolle's book and find it non-religious advaita vedanta. Be Here Now! Never heard of any of the others but look forward to following your links. Thanks. I'm with you in that I've never interpreted PY's teachings as they've come to be presented over the last 25 or so years by SRF with regards to visiting other saints and realized beings. Me, I am drawn to the Vedanta Society, which is very Hindu in practice (they have monks and a head swami). Yet as they say in one of their catalogs, "Our teachings can suit a wide variety of temperaments. Why is that important? Because it is a fact that everyone is different. Therefore, our approach offers a wide spectrum of methods. For example, if you like rituals, that's fine. There are many rituals that we can show you. If you don't like rituals, that's fine too. You can ignore them. With qualified guidance, you can develop in a way that suits your personality. Everyone attains the goal of perfection. Indeed, the great mystery is that perfection is a part of our nature, a part of our being." One of the great downfalls of the way SRF has allowed the PY's teachings to be presented is everyone must adhere to the same method. No variance tolerated. Yet when PY was alive he allowed for the varying temperaments and personalities of his followers. It's very simple: PY, the great bhakta, gained Self-realization at the feet of Sw. Yukteswarji, the great Advaitaist, Wisdom. Too very different paths to God. Yet it happened, and to me is the part of the proof of Yukteswarji's greatness. Lesser gurus try to standarize everyone to their path; great ones bring out the disciple's own.
chela2020 Registered User (6/21/03 2:58 am) Reply	Re: Why SRF weighs less on me now (This message was left blank) Edited by: chela2020 at: 7/1/03 3:51 pm
chela2020 Registered User (6/21/03 3:17 am) Reply	Re: Why SRF weighs less on me now (This message was left blank) Edited by: chela2020 at: 7/1/03 3:55 pm
Notice the Noticer Registered User (6/21/03 8:50 am) Reply	Re: Why SRF weighs less on me now Since the Vedanta Society is very de-centralized, there is much less danger of its degenerating into the tightly-controlled mind-pluck that is SRF. My experience with VS is that if you meet a swami you really relate to, it might be best to keep your relationship at that level and not try to get deeper into the "organization." My own first encounter was with Swami Buddhananda in San Diego, who was indeed extremely openminded toward other mystical traditions, was artistic, innovative, etc. He wasn't perfect, but was definitely a breath of fresh air after the stifling SRF atmosphere. He has since left the Vedanta Society. I made the mistake thinking San Diego was representative, and becoming a Vedanta monastic. While most of the other renunciates were gentle, live-and-let-live types, there were a couple of neurotics who needed to control others' lives. They end up seizing authority because the others don't care to have any control. You're not required to attend meditations, but you are required to attend meals. Huh? Mealtime was defined by constant bickering, over things like which part of the drawer the spoons should be kept in and how often the brass should be polished. These were not discussions, they were heated arguments. I'd joined there because when I visited the other branch, mealtimes were characterized by an ENDLESS stream of intrusive, undignified gossip about devotees, neighbors, and other monastics. Either way is, in my opinion, a godawful way to start the day. This may not happen at every center. I seem to remember hearing that Trabuco was looser and therefore saner. At least in LA, where ritual is paramount, they do a great puja. This, I recommend to anyone who's interested. The vibes at the pujas feel great. There may be too great a price to pay, though, for the authenticity. Swami Prabhavananda, who knew PY and started the LA (Hollywood) center, was one of or maybe the only swami transplanted to the States who was not in the Brahman caste, and therefore couldn't do certain rituals in India. Apparently the other swamis felt that strict adherence to ritual wouldn't go over well in America and recommended ditching that for the purer, original Vedic teachings. But Prabhavananda, finally "allowed" to participate, chose instead to emphasize the fact that ANYONE can do the rituals, even lowly foreigners. In my experience, that became about 85% of the focus. So what you have now is pathological compulsion to adhere to the hundreds of hair-splitting rules of ritual. I saw nuns throw screaming tantrums -- literally -- because, for example, someone came home from the grocery store and put a sack of food on the dining room table for a moment. Food isn't considered pure till it's been prepared and a bit of each dish offered to "God" in a puja. You must NEVER mix pure and impure food, which the sack on the table represented doing. The woman who set the groceries down may as well have killed a kitten. And oh, you must ALWAYS include a dish of salt in the puja offerings, because "God likes salt." Otherwise you've really blown it. It's straight to hell with you, without passing GO or collecting $200. Nevermind that Omnipotence and Omnipresence might be able to procure its own condiments. We're trying to make SURE we lead a spiritual life here, by doing everything right! Once, before a large puja, there were going to be devotees helping in the kitchen. A list of purity rules was compiled for them to be sure and follow. Typewritten, it was THREE PAGES LONG. Don't let this spoon touch that dish. Don't even smell, much less taste, the food before it's been offered in the puja, because then you (you worm) will have "ingested" the meal before God has a chance to. So what I'm saying is, tread carefully and make sure that 2020 vision of yours is at work now as well as in hindsight. It wasn't nearly as bad an experience as SRF, but it was ridiculous. And the people were really convinced that to be graced with enlightenment, you pretty much need to have been born an Indian and have done saddhu-level sadhana. Our lot as hapless westerners is just to trudge along, getting massively sidetracked into rules and what-not. No thanks. One other point: when I first joined, the swami told me that when a monastic left, he stopped loving them. Now, he wasn't a particularly controlling type, so I have no idea why he told me that. But the effect it had on me was definitely not to make me reluctant to leave. It just caused me never to become attached to him as "guru." At least he had the honesty to not claim unconditional love. Why go to an unenlightened teacher, though, when there are now awakened people who are amazingly accessible and who ask nothing of you except a very small suggested donation? No practices, no loyalty except to Truth, and you don't have to give god any salt. Anyone in LA who's interested: Catherine Ingram is currently teaching in Santa Monica. I was recently talking to another awakened teacher, Marlies Cocheret, who said about Catherine, "oh, she's BEAUTIFUL!" C.I. has an advaitist background, Marlies a Zen one. The first time I sat with Catherine I didn't relate at all, but for whatever reasons, the next time, several years later, I was blown away. It's all in the timing, I guess. For that matter, I'm sure it was "right" that I experienced SRF, Vedanta Society, and Wat Kow Tahm. And I do apologize for being so rough on the organization that is providing you with some succor. It's just that, in my personal experience, the actuality is definitely not the way it's presented "in the brochure." Later edit: Re-reading your posts, it's clear that you don't depend on the actual organization. Forgive me for talking as if that might be the case. Edited by: Notice the Noticer at: 6/21/03 11:14 am
chela2020 Registered User (6/21/03 11:29 am) Reply	Re: Why SRF weighs less on me now (This message was left blank) Edited by: chela2020 at: 7/1/03 3:58 pm
Notice the Noticer Registered User (6/21/03 12:21 pm) Reply	Re: Why SRF weighs less on me now Hi, 20/20 I didn't say that the Vedanta swamis aren't enlightened; I was just talking about one. I am reasonably certain that he wasn't; his denial of unconditional love for people would be indicative of that. It can be quite mystifying in certain cases. As someone else on this board said about Daya Ma, a conundrum. When I saw her in about 1983, I was soaring for days. And yet look at all the bizarre and harmful behavior that goes on, presumably with her approval. I just have to reserve judgment and say "I don't know." When the Vedanta swami told me he stopped loving monastics who left, I was under the impression he meant there was some kind of purposeful severance, not just an understandable forgetting. At any rate, his opinion wouldn't represent anyone else's in the organization, so maybe I shouldn't have mentioned it in the first place. If you don't mind, I'd rather not say which convent I lived in because most of the other nuns were quite decent people, and I'd rather not publically trash them by association. Hope that's ok with you. I think there are enough facts in my post, though, to allow you figure it out. It sounds like you are staying wisely on the fringes, if you've never been asked for loyalty or to do certain practices. Most of the donations come from Indian devotees, who don't need to be asked since supporting monks is part of their culture. It's just expected. Edited by: Notice the Noticer at: 6/29/03 10:05 am
chela2020 Registered User (6/21/03 2:01 pm) Reply	Re: Why SRF weighs less on me now (This message was left blank) Edited by: chela2020 at: 7/1/03 4:00 pm
TheHolySinner Registered User (6/23/03 8:47 am) Reply	xxx (This message was left blank) Edited by: TheHolySinner at: 6/25/03 9:14 pm
chela2020 Registered User (6/23/03 9:21 am) Reply	Re: Why SRF weighs less on me now (This message was left blank) Edited by: chela2020 at: 6/25/03 5:51 pm
TheHolySinner Registered User (6/23/03 2:10 pm) Reply	XXX Edited by: TheHolySinner at: 6/25/03 9:11 pm
chela2020 Registered User (6/23/03 3:37 pm) Reply	Re: nuns with bad hair days! (This message was left blank) Edited by: chela2020 at: 6/25/03 5:52 pm
Notice the Noticer Registered User (6/24/03 8:23 pm) Reply	Enlightenment pigeonholed *Quote:* How would a person really know if someone is enlightened or not? William James said that enlightened people (he didn't use that term, though) recognize it in others. I hope I made it clear that I'm not in a position to make claims. You are right that the proof is not in the personality. But, maybe I'm going out on a limb to say this; but it's a pretty sturdy limb: anyone who STOPS LOVING someone who doesn't follow him may well not yet have learned that his True Nature is Love Itself. The following is only for the purposes of conversation, not definition: One thing I've found that's consistent is that when you look in Awakened persons' eyes, you can see that there's no sense of identification with a "me." The other thing I go by is what they say about the nature of reality and/or emptiness. If you've had the experience of Nothingness, you know that if somebody thinks it can be described, they don't know it. Quite simple. No doubt there are many awakened beings who I'd pass right by on the street. The first time I sat with Catherine Ingram, I was thoroughly unimpressed. Come to find out, later, she has awakened to her True Self. Nowadays that's obvious to me, but it just wasn't back then. But if someone puts lots of emphasis on things like gossiping about the other swamis back in India, which was the order of the day when I was in Vedanta Society, then EITHER they're not awakened or I don't care to be around them. The same would go for Daya Ma. I have NO idea what's up with her. Maybe she is, maybe she isn't. So why spend my time there... By the way, I apologize for taking so long to get back to you. For some reason, the email notification for this thread didn't come through. At the time I was in V.S., none of the local swamis was reputed to be enlightened. But like I said, they're apparently "popping up like mushrooms" nowadays; why shouldn't some be Vedantans. I'm glad that you brought this to my attention. When I was there, the emphasis was almost entirely scholarly, in a very wide sense, at least compared to the Advaitists I'm around now. It's good to hear that that might not be the case any more. btw, by "scholarly in a broad sense" I mean they were teaching things they'd learned, not experienced. The advaitists know that the only thing worth teaching can't be taught, and they don't spend a lot of time teaching other things because of the tendency that has to sidetrack people. I don't think I knew of a Sarvadevananda. Just for memory purposes, is he a westerner or Indian? Oh, and thanks for your kindness in wishing me a peaceful place for spiritual practice. It's just that, thanks to the blessed advaitists, I no longer think I need one. But that's a whole other subject. *Quote:* One thing about the guru/disciple relationship is, it cannot be severed. So if a guru says he stops loving someone when he/she leaves, then how can that really be, outside of forgetting him because he is not in his sight? That was my point entirely. How could that be a true guru. Even I'm psychic enough that someone doesn't have to be within sight for me to have a sense of how they're doing, or certainly to "keep loving them." And this swami wasn't someone who had countless and therefore forgettable disciples. I mean, there were only 10 nuns, and 9 of them had received initiation from someone else. Edited by: Notice the Noticer at: 6/29/03 10:12 am
Notice the Noticer Registered User (6/24/03 8:45 pm) Reply	Lol *Quote:* the three women there were so hostile and bitter toward me I instantly assumed they must be nuns Just wanted to say I got a real kick out of that! Some of the nuns at SB were really great, for sure, but your comment was just funny. There's no real way to know if someone's enlightened, but there might be a way to know if they're a nun... [and just in case anyone thinks differently, I'm not claiming to have been the easiest person to be around. I just wasn't one of the crazier ones!] Edited by: Notice the Noticer at: 6/24/03 9:09 pm
chela2020 Registered User (6/25/03 5:41 am) Reply	Re: Enlightenment pigeonholed (This message was left blank) Edited by: chela2020 at: 7/1/03 4:01 pm
Notice the Noticer Registered User (6/25/03 6:26 am) Reply	Re: Enlightenment pigeonholed You're right, there are no male monastics at Santa Barbara. I don't know why you thought I said there might be. And it was an Indian swami I was talking about who seemed to prefer gossip (not malicious, just idle) to being focused on our spiritual endeavours. Uplifting vibes are great. They may or may not be an indication of realization. One teacher I sat with recently described it in terms of a mathematical concept called, I think, asymptotic relationship. It was about a point being approached ever closer, but not quite reached. He said that's when you take on or mirror the symptomatic qualities of that which you're "approaching." Remember, the whole concept of "getting somewhere" is delusional since God is not "somewhere else." That's why the attempt to "get there," the belief that it's NOT HERE, keeps us from ever actually "arriving." And yet, we can begin to embody the wonderful "side effects" of that "toward which" we're striving. Embodying shakti is an example. It's uplifting for the people around you, if they're receptive (or maybe even not). It's just not to be confused with knowing yourSelf to be Source Itself. This information can be valuable because after we've had an experience we often try to regain the EFFECTS (what I've called symptoms above) of the experience, which is a way of being sidetracked. You can actually make an effort to be in a shakti state, and achieve one on a fairly regular basis. Even I can do this now. There may not be a problem per se with doing so. But, to use a negative example because that's how we usually think of symptoms, you don't get the flu because you have symptoms. It's the other way around. You can keep sniffing black pepper and sneezing the rest of your life, but never actually have the flu. So if your teachers are uplifting, that's wonderful. It sure sounds better than teachers who bring DOWN your vibe through shame, blame, guilt, or just sheer meanness. They may be awakened beings. If you feel they are, I am not trying to convince you they're not. Presumably, your SRF experience taught you a degree of caution. By the way, my original point, buried somewhere deep above, was simply that, since Vedanta is decentralized, one can have an exceedingly different experience in one center than in another. Most of the posts on this board are from people who encountered disappointment when they got "closer in" at SRF. I was saying that a similar phenomenon happened to me at Vedanta Society. Oh, one last LITTLE point, about the purity rules. It's not that the food needs to be kept pure before the puja. It's that it's considered completely IMPURE till God has eaten it. He eats it, but it's somehow also still there, so then you take those little bits and add them to the rest of each dish, (because, not having been in the puja, they weren't available to God) thus miraculously causing THEM to become pure. That's why the food that's served on the dining room table is pure, but the sack of unopened groceries is frighteningly contaminated, because OBVIOUSLY God doesn't hang out in Safeway or in the people there who might have touched the food. You're not supposed to smell the food before it's offered. I think it's because that would be rude to God; it might hurt his feelings. He's the Big Guy and needs to have that affirmed by being allowed to eat, and apparently smell, first. We served him tea, I think, but I don't remember ever serving him milk. So if you wanted milk with your meal, maybe that was blessed by implication, since it's also a liquid. However, that makes me think: we also ate breakfast at that table, but the breakfast foods weren't offered in puja. So technically, they weren't pure. Maybe we really blew it big time and that's why we're not enlightened yet. P.S. If Sarvadevananda is Indian, he definitely wasn't in the Southern Calif. Vedanta Society back when I was. Feel better? Edited by: Notice the Noticer at: 6/25/03 8:47 am
chela2020 Registered User (6/25/03 6:50 am) Reply	Re: Enlightenment pigeonholed (This message was left blank) Edited by: chela2020 at: 7/1/03 4:02 pm
Notice the Noticer Registered User (6/25/03 6:54 am) Reply	Re: Enlightenment pigeonholed I wasn't a nun at Santa Barbara! What gave you that idea? I did know and like some of them. By idle gossip, I don't mean put-downs. "This swami is being transferred there." "That swami doesn't want to come to America." "The other swami got upset because..." And on and on. The nuns were "taught" by him one night a week. We either sat and read aloud from the Gospel of Ramakrishna, or listened to swami gossip, mostly the latter if I remember correctly. I just wasn't interested. Yes, he initiated. He initiated me. It was the same gentleman who told me he ceased loving monastics who left. Might that be considered a bit of pressure to be "loyal?" However, he was actually a nice person; just not someone I felt I received a lot of valuable teaching from. At least he didn't cause harm, in my opinion. The only one I feel caused some harm -- he's no longer in Southern California -- was one who considered himself God's gift to devotees, and managed to convince them that this was true. People would adore HIM, feeling very indebted, instead of looking to their own True Nature. He didn't initiate at that time; maybe still doesn't, I wouldn't know. He was a great theoretician, i.e. he had no idea of what the experience of Nothingness was. Spiritual stature was all about how holy you acted, how much you knew, whether you spoke Sanskrit, how disciplined your sadhana was -- and he was one of the best. *Quote:* It is my own feeling, but I don't feel that you can have that much shakti, unless you have reached very high states of consciousness. And anyone who reports negative experiences in the religion you need to think is perfect can't have "high states of consciousness." Oh, lordy... and this, after my whole point was that shakti DOESN'T necessarily imply anything... I will not dignify the implication that I use my third chakra to manipulate people with a response. *Quote:* When they are in a high state, they cannot relate to us. They have to come down from that state. I disagree COMPLETELY. Edited by: Notice the Noticer at: 6/29/03 12:02 pm
chela2020 Registered User (6/25/03 9:21 am) Reply	Re: Enlightenment pigeonholed (This message was left blank) Edited by: chela2020 at: 7/1/03 4:03 pm
Notice the Noticer Registered User (6/25/03 12:03 pm) Reply	Re: Enlightenment pigeonholed Now, do you REALLY hear me as having blamed a swami for not wanting to come to America? How can you have read that into what I said? HOW? *Quote:* The idle talk would not bother me. I expect that of even a guru. Really? You certainly have the right to try and cast Vedanta Society in a positive light. I'm not SURE that's the way to do it though! I can't imagine any of the teachers I mentioned (in the post I started this thread with) wasting precious "teaching" time in idle chatter! And they don't do others the disservice of allowing it. They would consider that a betrayal of Truth. Edited by: Notice the Noticer at: 6/29/03 12:08 pm

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.