Guest guest Posted August 13, 2003 Report Share Posted August 13, 2003 Beware of Sidetracks [Let me state at the outset that I am guilty of all these, that is how I know about them. I am stating this for those [like me] who do not like being preached to.] If you really wanted to get 'enlightened' there is nothing stopping that. Unfortunately most of us don't really want that. We have only a vague idea of what we want and easily get sidetracked because we do not want our egos to be destroyed or sidestepped. We want to keep our minds busy. Enlightenment has such a finality to it ... we want to keep it at arms length. The most common sidetracks on the spiritual paths are: 1] Philosophy. Instead of applying the principles that we have learnt. We turn it into a study, a profession. We keep ourselves busy learning more and more about the issues and its adjuncts. We keep piling up concept upon concept. We become collectors and custodians of information ... instead of using that information. 2] We find excuses to delay the progress towards self realization. I am not ready. I have a family to take care of. I have not yet met the right guru. It is not my destiny or karma in this lifetime. The commonest, of course, is the myth that a lot of time and effort is needed to achieve spiritual progress. Even if the truth is staring right in our face, we pretend to keep looking for it. 3] We start taking keen interest into adjuncts such as poetry, communicating on lists like this, etc. For example many people take interest in Rumi's poetry instead of Rumi's message. They will discuss the finer points of writing poetry, Rumi as a great poet. The message is forgotten or ignored. We keep our egos alive by becoming great poets instead of self realized persons. Another example. It is great fun to debate and argue on lists such as this. Instead of practicing what we preach. We assuage our guilt by passing the message along. ... I am a bodhisattva, I will get enlightened last. Let me help others first. 4] Love. Yes love is the most loved cul de sac. 'Love is all.' What do we know about love? For us it is a mixture of compassion [another cul de sac] and that wonderful feeling in the chest. In real Love there is no other! Real Love only happens when 'you' are not there. And hardly anything can be said about real Love. So all the poetry and prose about love is about something else ... a side track. [Of course, for some, love could be a short cut towards enlightenment. However in the end even love [compassion, etc] has to be let go of.] 5] Religion and belief. All on the non dual paths know enough to stay clear of these. Yet many on these paths too fall into these traps. Edifices are built were none are required. We would rather create new security blankets and suck our thumbs then face the truth squarely. 6] etc. etc. So the right question is not 'Why do we want enlightenment' but 'Why we do NOT want enlightenment'! Why do we keep applying the breaks. Why do we steer away into side streets. Jan Sultan PS: Of course, there are many amongst you who have already reached the destination. On your way back you are just exploring the side streets! Just passing the time! :-) PPS: In the final understanding, nothing really matters. It is like a finger drawing pictures on water! The One pretending to be many. Come, lets have a cup of tea.:-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 14, 2003 Report Share Posted August 14, 2003 advaitin, Jan Sultan <swork@m...> wrote: > Beware of Sidetracks > > [Let me state at the outset that I am guilty of all these, that is how I know about them. I am stating this for those [like me] who do not like being preached to.] > > If you really wanted to get 'enlightened' there is nothing stopping that. Unfortunately most of us don't really want that. We have only a vague idea of what we want and easily get sidetracked because we do not want our egos to be destroyed or sidestepped. We want to keep our minds busy. Enlightenment has such a finality to it ... we want to keep it at arms length. > > The most common sidetracks on the spiritual paths are: > > 1] Philosophy. Instead of applying the principles that we have learnt. We turn it into a study, a profession. We keep ourselves busy learning more and more about the issues and its adjuncts. We keep piling up concept upon concept. We become collectors and custodians of information ... instead of using that information. Hello Jan, Those who would without any sense of self accusation hold this this could be dismissed with a cheap sneer eg. have you left your cave to tell us this or is this the intro. to your new book? I shall not stoop to that but rather try to take it as a serious thesis. Unfortunately when I do it disintegrates at the slightest touch. You see, and this is readily verifiable, all known saints and sages debated and discussed rigourously their particular position and were keen to show wherin they differed in points of doctrine, philosophy etc from the guy on the next bar stool so to speak. That is true in Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism and the sects thereof. These were not dim pedants but luminaries such as Sankara, Ibn Arabi, Ibn Raschd, Thomas Aquinas, Ramanuja, Nagarjuna etc. Rumi taught theology which I presume was distinguishable from the Christian and Hindu variety. Sankara was vigourous in the demonstration of incoherence in the thought of the Samkhya and others but he would not have held that they should be stifled at birth. God talk, for those whose predeliction it is, is a form of meditation on divine mysteries and a satsangh. It keeps them off the streets and out of pool halls and that has to be a good thing. Best Wishes, Michael. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 15, 2003 Report Share Posted August 15, 2003 Namaste Jan. Good to read you after a long pause. I liked it. I wouldn't, therefore, like to tread the Michael way. Instead, I would wonder why you wrote it at all. As you said, you have again drawn a picture on water like all the rest. Have the ripples subsided and are you now able to see your own self reflected there? The game is over. You can keep quiet, eternally so, like the Greek Narcissus (Please don't go by the linguistic connotations of the name in modern psychology. They have unpardonably abused it. Narcissus, I believe, should really be a guru, at least a positive symbol, to modern Advaitins.). When we see ourselves, there is only silence and no need to talk. You are in love with yourself - the yourself that encompasses everything. You are bang right there. But, still we talk. Why? I think the reason is not among the many quoted by you. What you see 'reflected' on the still water has to really sink in to you, grow there and consume you like it consumed Narcissus who, perhaps, is still sitting there by the side of the endless, timeless pond. Till then, you ought to talk. We, on this List and elsewhere, are really talking to our reflected image in a sort of Narcissisical (adjective ok?) love - the love for the self. We are talking to ourselves. We must continue to do so till we know that we don't have to talk because we are talking to ourselves. Till, then why don't you let the talking game be played? Does that harm anyone? PraNAms. Madathil Nair _______________________ advaitin, Jan Sultan <swork@m...> wrote: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 15, 2003 Report Share Posted August 15, 2003 >We are talking to ourselves. We must continue to do so till we know >that we don't have to talk because we are talking to ourselves. >Till, then why don't you let the talking game be played? Does that >harm anyone? > >PraNAms. > >Madathil Nair Namaste Madathil I did say at the outset of my email that I was guilty of all that I had written .... in fact more so than others. I am not saying that we should all shut up and hide in a cave. All I am saying is that we should be aware of the possibility of using 'the talking game' to halt our progress towards self-realization. As usual, I was impressed by the maturity and beauty of your reply! :-) PraNAms Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2003 Report Share Posted August 17, 2003 Hi Jan, I agree with you totally - I am one of those who has been side-tracked up the 'Philosophy' cul-de-sac as anyone who reads my post and website will know. (I have to discount Michael's comments on the grounds that the people about whom he speaks have already 'seen the light' and are just playing out their prArabdha.) But you end your post with the words: "So the right question is not 'Why do we want enlightenment' but 'Why we do NOT want enlightenment'! Why do we keep applying the breaks. Why do we steer away into side streets." What would you have us do instead? Should we (the ego) continue 'wanting' enlightenment, continue striving along a 'path', looking for a guru etc. I know we have all already visited these sort of 'pseudo' arguments before but surely you must indicate a positive alternative when pointing out the pitfalls. What exactly should we be doing to avoid them? Best wishes, Dennis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2003 Report Share Posted August 17, 2003 Dennis: I just wanted to thank you for going to the trouble to bring Bradley's :"Appearance and Reality" onto your Site. I think it is important to read as much as we can, in many diversified formats. If we were all truly "enlightened" we would not need to do this. But, I suspect, that most of us are still only on the path and need as much satsang with people and books as we can. Thanks again! Peace and Love Sarojini - Dennis Waite advaitin Sunday, August 17, 2003 7:55 AM RE: Why DON'T we want enlightenment? Hi Jan, I agree with you totally - I am one of those who has been side-tracked up the 'Philosophy' cul-de-sac as anyone who reads my post and website will know. (I have to discount Michael's comments on the grounds that the people about whom he speaks have already 'seen the light' and are just playing out their prArabdha.) But you end your post with the words: "So the right question is not 'Why do we want enlightenment' but 'Why we do NOT want enlightenment'! Why do we keep applying the breaks. Why do we steer away into side streets." What would you have us do instead? Should we (the ego) continue 'wanting' enlightenment, continue striving along a 'path', looking for a guru etc. I know we have all already visited these sort of 'pseudo' arguments before but surely you must indicate a positive alternative when pointing out the pitfalls. What exactly should we be doing to avoid them? Best wishes, Dennis Sponsor Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ To Post a message send an email to : advaitin Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 18, 2003 Report Share Posted August 18, 2003 Dennis Waite wrote: >What would you have us do instead? Should we (the ego) continue 'wanting' >enlightenment, continue striving along a 'path', looking for a guru etc. I >know we have all already visited these sort of 'pseudo' arguments before but >surely you must indicate a positive alternative when pointing out the >pitfalls. What exactly should we be doing to avoid them? > >Best wishes, > >Dennis Hi Dennis, I am in the same boat as you are. I think we have no choice in the matter. We are playing the part we are supposed to play and there is nothing else we can do instead. best wishes, Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 18, 2003 Report Share Posted August 18, 2003 namaste. Some points to ponder in this thread. 1. Enlightenment is *not* the result of whether we want or do not want enlightenment. 2. Studying the texts does not lead to enlightenment. It is the result of our wants getting dropped which is the result of cittashuddhi and sAdhana catuShTayam that result in spiritual maturity. The texts point to this fact; yet, it is only the jnAnam that is enlightenment. 3. shri madathil asks jan " .... Till, then why don't you let the talking game be played? Does that harm anyone? .." The game has to be played, but the important part of the game is it has to be recognized by the players that it is a game. Either writing to the Lists, or living the life itself - as long as it is recognized that it is a game and the game is played, that is jnAnam itself. But sometime, we forget it is a game and get ourselves seriously involved and that is saMsAra. Regards Gummuluru Murthy ------ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.