Trackbacks

• Trackbacks are closed for this post.

Comments

• 1/25/2010 9:20 PM Mar' wrote:
  
  The taoists always said, "Find essence on your own, then seek a teacher."
  
  

  Our own true teacher is our essential nature.  Our tangible affinity with awareness itself is immediate— that much shouldn't be a mystery, yet somehow it is.

  
  

  Non-psychological awareness is empty;  So to honor our teacher we must be empty too.  Perception arriving at openness is spiritual;  Openness is submission to our own sincerity.

  
  

  This is our responsibility to reality.  As we experience immediate reality, any attachment to now is simply habit that only stultifies the wholeness of being.

  
  

  Sincerity isn't a moral imperative; it's the intent of human being, which has no form or location.  So, like our teacher, sincerity has no motive.  This is not a person.  This is light.  If you don't let go now, then when do you?

  
  
  
  Reply to this
• 1/30/2010 6:35 AM Jijo wrote:
  Hello!
  
  Great excerpt. I feel it ties in very well with last weeks podcast...
  
  Two points:
  
  1. What ring in my head is what Tom read in last week about what J.K. said about being careful of the student teacher division. It was also addressed in the podcast, the false self creates a seperate entity that is going to "get it". The Truth is best sumed up the the esoteric meaning of what Jesus said, "Be one as I am my Father are one".
  
  2. Tom said (also J.k. and Fred) how the Truth is always changing. What may have rang true then my be different now. So it is a matter of following you heart. Just to sum up about the Truth though, I am reminded about the saying "The more it changes the more it stays the same". Really hard explain, all I can say is I am grateful for the Truth.
  
  Looking forward to the next class! Anyone who is reading this these classes are so unique and very special. If you are serious about these Truths it is a precious resource.
  
  Jijo
  Reply to this
• 11/6/2011 2:55 PM TimP wrote:
  Insight and Question from Tim:  In a different recording, Jijo noted that Vernon Howard sometimes came across - on tapes - as being almost vicious. Those who studied with him (like Tom) explained that this was just an attempt to break through students' shells, and that VH was very kind. No matter how rough the talk, it always ended on an encouraging note.
  
  Now as this podcast noted, "rough tactics" (insult, shock treatment, denigration, abuse ...) are common cult indoctrination techniques.
  
  How does one tell the difference? It can be a puzzling question. Approaching the truth requires facing some exceedingly "non-flattering" facts about the old nature.
  
  Decades ago, I became very wary of VH the first time I heard one of his fiery talks on tape. The tone was nothing like his books - it _seemed_ a classic case of "bait & switch", an iron fist in a velvet glove.
  
  In the end, I expect it boils down to this: to recognize truth, you must first become at least a little sensitive to it yourself. I kept coming back to VH because the ring of truth was so ... true. LOL! Words are indeed inadequate :-)
  
  
  *******
  

  
  

  Tom's Response: 

  Hi Tim,

  It is a huge question you pose.
  VH lived a very aware and wise life. He was kind. But the group dynamics still produced Group think. It wasn’t all positive. Some things you can only see when “looking back” and with a little more light.

  There is only so much any teacher, even a Christ or Buddha, can do. The nature of human beings includes the tendency to put others on pedestals. It limits what we could learn. Some say this is necessary for “beginners” but I now question this.

  If you have the time and/or inclination, here is an advanced study of the subject. The author has his cultural lense, but the insights he conveys are truly precious.

  http://www.amazon.com/Sufi-Lighthouse-Illuminating-Spiritual-Abuse/dp/1442102624/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1320629521&sr=8-1

  Tom Russell 

  *********************8

  Tim responds (Tom's comments preceded by >):

   > VH lived a very aware life. He was kind. But the group still produced

  > Group think. It wasn’t all positive. Some things you can only see when

  > “looking back” and with a little more light.

  Tim: I believe you.  While I never had direct contact with Mr. Howard, I corresponded several times with J____  I'm not sure what her position was, but I liked her.  She seemed to like me because I came across as sincere to her, and she did grouse some about the group.  Insincere students, manipulative students, and so on.

  Since the inner _does_ determine the outer, I expect any group of humans to display some pathological group dynamics.

  So it goes - just more to be aware of and learn from, I guess.  Still, it must have been a wonderful experience to be there :-)

   > There is only so much any teacher, even a Christ or Buddha, can do.

  > The nature of human beings includes the tendency to put others on pedestals.

  > It limits what we could learn. Some say this is necessary for “beginners”

  > but I now question this.

   Tim: "If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him." Seriously, of all the authors I've read, I think Krishnamurti wrote most clearly on this particular topic.  Paraphrasing, yes, a true teacher can point the way, and if you do your part by following instructions, as best you can, great.  But to go on to praise the teacher as the greatest of men (etc) is plainly foolish.  Love the destination, not the map.

  But I don't know.  I have yet to meet anyone in person with real interest in these matters, and my few attempts to get others interested bore no fruit (except to teach me, the hard way, that nothing useful can come of it unless _they_ express real interest first).

  So I have no direct experience of relationships between true spiritual teachers and students.  I don't see any use for putting anyone else on pedestal - except, perhaps, to the extent that it may be a step in the direction of acknowledging that _something_ far higher than my present nature exists, and is _possible_ for a human to experience.  But even then not a step _purely_ in the right direction.  A step at an angle to the goal, moving closer in one dimension but farther away in another.  Surely it would be better to move directly toward the goal?

   >If you have the time and/or inclination, here is an advanced study of the subject. The author has his cultural lense, but the insights he conveys are truly precious. Amazon.com:  Sufi Lighthouse - Illuminating Spiritual Abuse. (See link above)

  Tim: Thank you for the link!  I always had a fascination with televangelists, and think I developed a keen sense for snake oil hucksters at a young age - LOL ;-)  Reading that book will be right up an old alley for me.

  Please let me close by thanking you for all the resources you make available at the SuperWisdom sites!  They've been a true joy and inspiration to me.  I wandered off the path for many years, and it's so refreshing to hear you and Fred discuss these matters freely and informally.  It rekindled a spark in me I feared may have died.  Of course that's priceless.

  Best wishes,

  Tim

  
  Reply to this

Leave a comment