Fwd: Message 5462 / AC/Dan/Questions

[Guest guest]

NonDualPhil , " greg_goode_2000 " <goode@D...>

wrote:

 

Here are the Q's and A's. The A's preceded by ==='s.

 

(1.) Although, I do value teachings that Judi offers.

 

Do you?

 

===(1.) Yes I do. What I like most is that she

de-mystifies this stuff and likens it to maturity.

Put together with the cowgirl aspect, it's a

down-to-earth, folksy way of teaching with an

edge. I even like her style, it's like the

military (I'm a 9-yr veteran). In the midst of

all the gruffness and toughness and cussing

and strange forms of punishment, there is real

heart and cameraderie. Like the Marine Corps

says, " Leave no man behind. "

 

 

(2.) How do you feel about the conflict she

had with Harsha?

 

===(2.) Which year? I don't recall a particular

conflict, as opposed to memorable ones she had

with others. But I do know that the style and

content of her teachings are as distant from

Harsha's as can be and still be listed in the

same category.

 

Actually, I don't really see Harsha as a spiritual teacher.

I see him more as a cheerleader and a self-proclaimed

icon for a certain way of life and a certain approach to

spirituality. He does recommend ahimsa, and dietary

measures. I'm largely in favor of the style and content

he utilizes in these areas. When talking about these

things, he doesn't offer himself as the Great Non-harming

One To Be Emulated. Instead, he talks with humility

about the teachings he received from his Jain teacher

on ahimsa.

 

But when it comes to nondualism or advaita, I see don't see

Harsha as really teaching. To me, a teacher hunkers down

with a person, trying to meet their needs with the teacher's

own insights and skillful means. To some extent, the teacher

will tailor their response to the abilities and vibes of the

student, and has the student's benefit in mind.

 

Harsha doesn't do this. Rather, he offers a kind of canned

image of Ramana, and to quite an extent, an image of himself,

as figures for the student to emulate. (I wondered when I

was invited many years ago, why it was *Harsha*-satsang).

What he offers is more like a focal point for a person's

bhakti yoga. On these topics, Harsha will provide Ramana

quotes on broad general topics, but not really get into a

questioner's particularities.

 

And even though Judi says stuff like " Don't you get it?

There's no HOW, " she'll go on to tell the person this

or that thing to do to get unstuck. Judi I do see as

a teacher. She likes to impart insights, she likes to

talk about this stuff, and has almost limitless energy

devoted to sympathetic dealing with an individual when

that person is really interested. (She has almost limitless

energies in a name-calling contest too.) Her style isn't

for everyone, but then not even Ramana's is.

 

 

(3.) Did you see her point about how his ways of supporting

everyone's spiritualized self-esteem end up functioning as

a stance of control based on an authority-oriented rule

of " friendship " ?

 

===(3.) Sure. In fact, that authoritarian rule might

not only be in the *result* of this encouragement you

mention, but it could well be in the his motivation from

the get-go. The old game of " Praise you, Praise me,

Who da Man?? " . You know, lofty spiritual images are

high-maintenance. In the environment where this happens,

like on his list, it makes for a very narrow and delicate

environment. Like " The Truman Show " where the walls are

made of paper. I'd like to see Jody's dog make an

appearance there, stir things up!

 

 

(4a.) Of course, saying everyone is expressing sahaj samadhi is

a nice side-step of that issue. :-)

 

===(4a.) I didn't see it as an issue until I saw that

it seemed pretty important to you to talk about this.

So now I'm talking about it too!

 

 

(4b.) What I mean is, to take an extreme example, would you

not object to a cult that conducts ritualized abuse

and sacrifice of children?

 

===(4b.) I object to all inflicting of suffering. This samadhi

that I was talking about is radically democratic.

 

 

(5.) After all, everyone involved is expressing sahaj samadhi,

and the entire universe is enlightened?

 

===(5.) Sahaja samadhi is not such a useful term if what we're

trying to do is figure out how to stop cults of abuse.

It's too across-the-board for that. In the quest to stop

cultic child abuse, more helpful terms might include FBI,

www.factnet.org/Children.html, and http://earthops.org/cult.

 

But sometimes experience itself is looked into. In the

investigation into the nature of all experience, which

includes conversations like these, meditation, holy

texts, websites and even abuse and prevention of abuse,

sooner or later the sahaja samadhi term might come in handy!

 

There might be an implied question in your questions -

similar to the age-old conduct question upon which Andrew

Cohen has launched a magazine:

 

" Would an enlightened person do evil things? Would

an enlightened person ritualistically abuse a child? "

 

Not that I go for the premises of that question. But

if I had to answer Yes or No, I'd say " No. " Just

like I object to the inflicting of suffering, I'd

object to a definition of personal enlightenment

that makes enlightenment compatible with the inflicting

of suffering. I'd say, let's go for a kinder notion of

enlightenment. The notion's very lack of fixity

allows this.

 

--Greg

--- End forwarded message ---