Fake, Failed & Fabulous

[Guest guest]

What would you think of a doctor who cured

only a dozen people during his whole career,

or a lawyer who won only six cases? Would

you become his/her patient, or client? That rate

of success is dismal, pitiful, and wouldn't be

tolerated in any profession.... except.......... the

guru trade. Those above are top numbers of

success at gurudoing. Christ seems to have

graduated only 12 students, Buddha just about

the same. Eno ( the six patriarch of Zen) it's said

to have enlightened six. Ramana none, but

I'm not positive. Krishnamurti admitted to have

left no successor. Nissargadatta left one, or

maybe two. That is, if you consider Ramesh or

Dunn enlightened. Ramesh left us only Wayne,

if you consider Wayne a gift.

 

So what's wrong here? Is it that most gurus are

fakes? Or is it that the trade itself is a fake and

doomed to fail? IMO, it's the later. What they

pretend to teach, can't be taught; what they

portend to give, can't be given. And the honest

ones, in moments of candor, admit it readily.

 

So, why people flock to them? Why so many

think them fabulous? Because they

symbolize our deepest aspiration to see

beyond the veil of the flesh, to know the

unknown, to conquer suffering, to live in

joy and unite, free from fear of pain and

death, and to smell the heady fragrance of

infinity and eternity.

 

Can they deliver? Obviously, their record says,

NO. But, but... they are the bearers of the dream,

they can get us hooked, they can keep us committed,

and being passionate and obsessed about anything

is a joy in itself. And who knows, a few of them burn

in such peaceful light, that our mirror neurons could

begin to glow. After all, the chances of winning

millions with a lottery ticket are far worse. Can't win, if

you don't play, or so they say!

 

 

Pete

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Yup, the guru himself will say nothing can be done to cause enlightenment to

occur. The Truth cannot be spoken. This makes perfect sense to me since I see

perception as a creation of one's limited awareness. All that can be

experienced is that of which one is aware. Therefore, Truth can never be found

here

unless one already sees Truth.

 

So the question is, why does the teacher teach? I don't pretend to know the

answer to that. The teacher teaches that the Truth cannot be taught. This is a

rather strange lesson plan. The teacher then says that, although this is not

Truth, it is a pointer to Truth. What does this mean? " Hey, look over

there " ? The teaching is actually a concept, and in the next breath, the teacher

will say that the problem is that you must cease conceptualizing.

 

One way of looking at this is that, in this dreamscape, the mind/ego thinks

and the body does and nothing at all is actually occurring because there is no

individual identity related to that mind/ego/body. It's just a dream

character. The teacher is not exempt from this. He will tell you that thoughts

arise, the body moves and speaks, but he is not doing it. And so the teacher is

not choosing to teach, and in fact does not identify himself with the teaching

that is occurring. Everything occurs as sourced from the totality of divinity

itself.

 

The dream occurs on it's own, without volition or control. There is nothing

ego can do to cause enlightenment, or even the tinniest awareness, to occur,

because ego doesn't exist as a volitional entity. This is not good news for

the ego.

 

However, awareness does seemingly occur within consciousness and the dream

reflects this increase of awareness and so ego benefits from this seeming

process of awakening. How does this awareness seemingly take place? It seems

clear that it 'results' from the exploration of the illusion, even though the

illusion does not contain Truth.

 

Truth is what we already are and so we don't need to find it, but only

recognize it. What keeps us from recognizing it is our obsession with illusion

(untruth). Therefore, Truth is revealed by removing untruth from view. What

remains is what we have always been.

 

And so awareness, which occurs in consciousness rather than in the human,

increases as the illusion is removed from our attention. This is surrender,

acceptance, non-attachment, nonjudgment, equanimity, tolerance, willingness,

desirelesness. (It's all the same) Is this not what the teacher teaches?

 

Phil

 

 

 

 

In a message dated 10/22/2005 12:49:26 PM Pacific Daylight Time,

pedsie4 writes:

 

What would you think of a doctor who cured

only a dozen people during his whole career,

or a lawyer who won only six cases? Would

you become his/her patient, or client? That rate

of success is dismal, pitiful, and wouldn't be

tolerated in any profession.... except.......... the

guru trade. Those above are top numbers of

success at gurudoing. Christ seems to have

graduated only 12 students, Buddha just about

the same. Eno ( the six patriarch of Zen) it's said

to have enlightened six. Ramana none, but

I'm not positive. Krishnamurti admitted to have

left no successor. Nissargadatta left one, or

maybe two. That is, if you consider Ramesh or

Dunn enlightened. Ramesh left us only Wayne,

if you consider Wayne a gift.

 

So what's wrong here? Is it that most gurus are

fakes? Or is it that the trade itself is a fake and

doomed to fail? IMO, it's the later. What they

pretend to teach, can't be taught; what they

portend to give, can't be given. And the honest

ones, in moments of candor, admit it readily.

 

So, why people flock to them? Why so many

think them fabulous? Because they

symbolize our deepest aspiration to see

beyond the veil of the flesh, to know the

unknown, to conquer suffering, to live in

joy and unite, free from fear of pain and

death, and to smell the heady fragrance of

infinity and eternity.

 

Can they deliver? Obviously, their record says,

NO. But, but... they are the bearers of the dream,

they can get us hooked, they can keep us committed,

and being passionate and obsessed about anything

is a joy in itself. And who knows, a few of them burn

in such peaceful light, that our mirror neurons could

begin to glow. After all, the chances of winning

millions with a lottery ticket are far worse. Can't win, if

you don't play, or so they say!

 

 

Pete