Warwick/Adiji/ Rabi'a Basri - the Mystic - a sufi saint !

[Guest guest]

, "Warwick Wakefield"

<formandsubstance@t...> wrote:

 

Very nicely stated Sri Warwick Ji.

 

It is rare to find insight and experience coupled with the ability

to write so well. Nothing that you wrote is obscure or ambiguous.

The sequence of the thoughts is well matched to the length and

complexity each idea, that is, the cadence is persuasive.

 

You probably have a lot more sense of enlightenment than you let on,

even to yourself. Ramana was quick to tell people that they just had

to get rid of the thought, "I am not realized!"

 

But then he also said a particular devotee would never become

realized because he thought too much of "others".

 

At any rate I enjoyed your reply.

Love

Bobby G.

 

 

> Hi Lynne,

>

> Yes, I met both of these guys.

> I met Rajneesh somewhere around 1971 or 72. It was just after he

left Bombay and moved to Poona, up in the hills.

> I spent maybe two years in Poona, as a disciple, and I spent maybe

twelve or thirteen years altogether as a disciple.

>

> When I left the fold it was with no hard feelings and I still

considered that he was probably the Satguru that he claimed to be;

(What did I know? I was no spiritual adept-- That was the way that

we Sannyasins used to think and talk.) It was only later that the

pennies dropped and it became clear what a fraud he was.

>

> I met Barry Long at his first series of meetings in Sydney.

Somewhere around the late eighties.He advertised them with half-page

advertisements in the local broadsheet and a few hundred people

attended. He was a smooth talker. I expect he had had some kind of

awakening experience, and he made a nice little earner out of it.

>

> And I met him again in the mid-nineties, this time when I was a

member of the Cohen cult, and when I met him this time, the second

time, it was after Cohen had endorsed him as the genuine article.

>

> Now Lynne, I could tell you hundreds of stories about Rajneesh. But

what would be a really relevant story?

> The way I see it, a really relevant story would be either

>

> 1) A story that illustrated his authentic understanding of what is

our real essence, and his ability to teach that to others. (And I

know; there are no "others", but the statement that there are

no "others" only has relevance in a certain context, a context of

much deeper understanding than we are operating in at the moment.)

>

> 2) A story that illustrated that he really lacked this

understanding, and behaved in such a way that it was obvious that he

didn't at all know who he was.

>

> The way I see it, stories of "going into rapture" in his presence

are not relevant. That happens at pop concerts. It was very common at

Hitler's rallies. There can be dozens of causes, ranging from having

one's pre-conceived ideas confirmed in an especially vigorous way to

having one's emotional susceptibilities manipulated.

>

> It can happen in the presence of a Master also, but I think that

the most interesting story I've ever heard in relation to rapture in

the presence of a Master was the account of one seeker who visited

Ramana. He used to fall into bliss during satsang, but something

about it made him uneasy. After much reflection, he understood that

while the bliss was wonderful, after the bliss had passed he was in

much the same condition of ignorance as before. So, at the next

Satsang, when he felt the onset of bliss, instead of just giving

himself over to it he struggled to maintain his awareness of "who he

was" and what was the relevance of the presence (or Presence) of the

Master in relation to that question of all questions, "Who am I?"

>

> I forget all the details now, but I remember that he did receive an

answer to that question, and that answer stayed with him after the

satsang was finished. In other words, his ignorance was, at least to

some extent, destroyed.

>

> Now Lynne, I am going to put my cards on the table. There are great

revelations, there are intuitions and inklings, there are

intellectual understandings and there are understandings that affect

not only the intellect but have a transformative effect on the fibres

of the body, the structure of the emotions and one's moment to moment

experience.

>

> During my adolescence and young manhood I had many inklings of a

spiritual presence. Inklings and intuitions that were relevant and

good, but left me in as much ignorance as ever.

>

> When I was about twenty one I began reading a book about Buddhism.

The book gave an historical and cultural outline; it mentioned

Buddhism's arising, its rapid spread, the societies that grew up

around it and the magnificent artworks, temples, statuary, paintings,

song and suchlike that were rooted in, and expressions of, Buddhism.

>

> Then it dropped the bombshell -- it said that the Buddhists

themselves regarded all of this magnificence, at the level of

society, at the level of the world, at the level of culture and art,

as unreal, as no more than a dream, an illusion.

>

> I threw the book away. No point reading junk like that.

>

> But five or six years later I had an experience which had no

relation to anything I could understand, and it occurred to me, with

total certainty, "My God, those crazy Buddhists were right; the whole

world was a dream, Warwick was a dream, the only reality

is....whatever this non-thing is."

>

> But the person of Warwick came back, and the world came back, and I

began the spiritual search.

>

> I was a Rajneeshee, an encounter grouper, and a member of the Cohen

Cult. All to no effect.

>

> But over the last three or four years I have been given glimpses of

my true nature.....which is also your true nature.

>

> I have seen, with great clarity, who, or what, I really am --- what

is my essence.

>

> It has not been accompanied by the tremendous bliss that

accompanied my realization, when I was a young man, that the world

and the persons in it, and he whom I had believed myself to be, were

dream.

>

> But it is much more valuable. It is what various Advaitists call

knowing, not the knowing of an object but a knowing that is totally

subjective, the knowing of the knower. And this knowing is available

more or less whenever I look for it.

>

> And the implication of this knowing is that we are not flesh and

blood bodies, and we are not thinking and feeling beings, we are

spiritual being. Not beings --- being.

>

> And we do not live in a material world, the world is also

spiritual -- forms within consciousness.

>

> Consciousness is, in fact, that within which every happening

occurs. And the happenings are not what is important --- what is

important is that within which the happenings take place,

consciousness, the Self.

>

> Now Lynne, before I tell you about Rajneesh, the relevant things

about Rajneesh, and before I tell you about Long, I want you to tell

me about you.

>

> What type of spiritual search, or practice, are you involved in?

>

> What has been your real experience?

>

> How significant is it all, not theoretically but in terms of actual

experience?

>

> I have no intention of making any judgment, but I want to talk to

you, not some vague entity.

>

> Much love

>

> Warwick

>

>

>

> -

> Lynne

>

> Saturday, April 24, 2004 2:59 PM

> Re: Warwick/Adiji/ Re: Rabi'a Basri -

the Mystic - a sufi saint !

>

>

> Hi Warwick,

> Did you ever meet this guy Bazza? It strikes me that you may

have a

> concept about the meaning of his statement "I am enlightened as

any

> buddha". I don't know. Never met him. Don't know the context

within

> which the comment was made.

>

> The Osho guy also? Meet him? I've heard lot's of stories about

him

> (never heard of bazza). Some people had fabulous tales to tell

(type)

> of their experience of him, with him, after him etc. Some

heavenly,

> some hellish. All interesting.

>

> An english composition teacher once said "write what you know".

> Authentic voice "sounds" different from opinion to me. Tell us

some of

> your stories? Drop a story line?

>

> Lynne

>

>

>

>

>

> /join

>

>

>

>

>

> "Love itself is the actual form of God."

>

> Sri Ramana

>

> In "Letters from Sri Ramanasramam" by Suri Nagamma

>

>

>

> --

----------

> Links

>

>

> /

>

> b..

>

>

> c.. Terms of

Service.

[Guest guest]

Dear Warwick:

Thanks for sharing.

In Jainism, there is a notion of Anekantavada (By the way, Rajneesh

was originally a Jain. My teacher knew him well and as I recall gave

him one of the first platforms in Bombay to speak to a large crowd).

Anekantavada implies multiple perspectives on Reality, each valid

depending on the location of the observer in the "Psychological

Space".

Your trips and path that took you through Rajneesh, Bazza, Andrew

Cohen was fruitful because now you know the knower as the

self-knowing.

It doesn't matter now if one or two or all three gurus you had

are/were full of crap and charlatans, does it?

Maybe it does, I don't know. But what should we do here in the Sangha

about the problems of gurus and disciples?

If they want to screw each other, that's their business, is it not?

Maybe not. Maybe its all our business. Maybe we should be writing

letters to someone.

Now get rid of the judgments baby! :-). Oh, sorry, I have no right to ask you that.

Bring on more juicy stories then!

Here is the real question. In this sangha we have former students of

Rajneesh, Saibaba, this swami and that swami and this living divine

mother and that living divine father and this living divine uncle,

etc. So conversations will happen and there will be disagreements.

I guess the bottom line is are you Warwick willing (and able) to hug

SamP and makeup. If not, what use is all this.

At the end of the day, I don't care how enlightened you are. I want

to see you all hug each other.

This is my sangha and I make the rules.

Love to all

Harsha

Warwick Wakefield [formandsubstance (AT) tpg (DOT) com.au] Sent:

Saturday, April 24, 2004 3:01 AMTo:

Subject: Re:

Warwick/Adiji/ Re: Rabi'a Basri - the Mystic - a sufi saint !

Hi Lynne,

Yes, I met both of these guys.

I met Rajneesh somewhere around 1971 or 72. It was just after he left

Bombay and moved to Poona, up in the hills.

I spent maybe two years in Poona, as a disciple, and I spent maybe

twelve or thirteen years altogether as a disciple.

When I left the fold it was with no hard feelings and I still

considered that he was probably the Satguru that he claimed to be;

(What did I know? I was no spiritual adept-- That was the way that

we Sannyasins used to think and talk.) It was only later that the

pennies dropped and it became clear what a fraud he was.

I met Barry Long at his first series of meetings in Sydney. Somewhere

around the late eighties.He advertised them with half-page

advertisements in the local broadsheet and a few hundred people

attended. He was a smooth talker. I expect he had had some kind of

awakening experience, and he made a nice little earner out of it.

And I met him again in the mid-nineties, this time when I was a member

of the Cohen cult, and when I met him this time, the second time, it

was after Cohen had endorsed him as the genuine article.

Now Lynne, I could tell you hundreds of stories about Rajneesh. But

what would be a really relevant story?

The way I see it, a really relevant story would be either

1) A story that illustrated his authentic understanding of what is our

real essence, and his ability to teach that to others. (And I know;

there are no "others", but the statement that there are no "others"

only has relevance in a certain context, a context of much deeper

understanding than we are operating in at the moment.)

2) A story that illustrated that he really lacked this understanding,

and behaved in such a way that it was obvious that he didn't at all

know who he was.

The way I see it, stories of "going into rapture" in his presence are

not relevant. That happens at pop concerts. It was very common at

Hitler's rallies. There can be dozens of causes, ranging from having

one's pre-conceived ideas confirmed in an especially vigorous way to

having one's emotional susceptibilities manipulated.

It can happen in the presence of a Master also, but I think that the

most interesting story I've ever heard in relation to rapture in the

presence of a Master was the account of one seeker who visited

Ramana. He used to fall into bliss during satsang, but something

about it made him uneasy. After much reflection, he understood that

while the bliss was wonderful, after the bliss had passed he was in

much the same condition of ignorance as before. So, at the next

Satsang, when he felt the onset of bliss, instead of just giving

himself over to it he struggled to maintain his awareness of "who he

was" and what was the relevance of the presence (or Presence) of the

Master in relation to that question of all questions, "Who am I?"

I forget all the details now, but I remember that he did receive an

answer to that question, and that answer stayed with him after the

satsang was finished. In other words, his ignorance was, at least to

some extent, destroyed.

Now Lynne, I am going to put my cards on the table. There are great

revelations, there are intuitions and inklings, there are

intellectual understandings and there are understandings that affect

not only the intellect but have a transformative effect on the fibres

of the body, the structure of the emotions and one's moment to moment

experience.

During my adolescence and young manhood I had many inklings of a

spiritual presence. Inklings and intuitions that were relevant and

good, but left me in as much ignorance as ever.

When I was about twenty one I began reading a book about Buddhism. The

book gave an historical and cultural outline; it mentioned Buddhism's

arising, its rapid spread, the societies that grew up around it and

the magnificent artworks, temples, statuary, paintings, song and

suchlike that were rooted in, and expressions of, Buddhism.

Then it dropped the bombshell -- it said that the Buddhists themselves

regarded all of this magnificence, at the level of society, at the

level of the world, at the level of culture and art, as unreal, as no

more than a dream, an illusion.

I threw the book away. No point reading junk like that.

But five or six years later I had an experience which had no relation

to anything I could understand, and it occurred to me, with total

certainty, "My God, those crazy Buddhists were right; the whole world

was a dream, Warwick was a dream, the only reality is....whatever this

non-thing is."

But the person of Warwick came back, and the world came back, and I began the spiritual search.

I was a Rajneeshee, an encounter grouper, and a member of the Cohen Cult. All to no effect.

But over the last three or four years I have been given glimpses of my

true nature.....which is also your true nature.

I have seen, with great clarity, who, or what, I really am --- what is my essence.

It has not been accompanied by the tremendous bliss that accompanied

my realization, when I was a young man, that the world and the

persons in it, and he whom I had believed myself to be, were dream.

But it is much more valuable. It is what various Advaitists call

knowing, not the knowing of an object but a knowing that is totally

subjective, the knowing of the knower. And this knowing is available

more or less whenever I look for it.

And the implication of this knowing is that we are not flesh and blood

bodies, and we are not thinking and feeling beings, we are spiritual

being. Not beings --- being.

And we do not live in a material world, the world is also spiritual

-- forms within consciousness.

Consciousness is, in fact, that within which every happening occurs.

And the happenings are not what is important --- what is important

is that within which the happenings take place, consciousness, the

Self.

Now Lynne, before I tell you about Rajneesh, the relevant things about

Rajneesh, and before I tell you about Long, I want you to tell me

about you.

What type of spiritual search, or practice, are you involved in?

What has been your real experience?

How significant is it all, not theoretically but in terms of actual experience?

I have no intention of making any judgment, but I want to talk to you, not some vague entity.

Much love

Warwick

-