Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Donate money for Peace Palaces

Sat, 06 Aug 2005 06:28:23 -0700

 
----- Original Message -----
From: TurquoiseB
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2005 5:53 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Donate money for Peace Palaces

--- In [email protected], "Llundrub" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]...> wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: TurquoiseB
> To: [email protected]
> Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2005 1:08 AM
>
> My point is simply that in organizations where the
> students are making regular progress in their spiritual
> development, and such progress is easily discernible,
> no such tactics seem necessary.
>
> ------Could you name such an organization because I have never seen one.

I found it true of two Tibetan-based organizations in
Santa Fe, and it seems to be true of the Tibetan organ-
izations I have encountered here.  I could be wrong in
my perceptions, of course, but I have never seen such
Next Best Thing tactics in any of these organizations,
or the need for them.  ,And the people I talked to seemed
very happy with their practices and with their progress
with them, and still were after, in many cases, many years
or decades with the organizations.

Sorry I can't give you the actual names/lineages/titles
for the organizations, but that stuff just goes in one chakra
and out another for me.  I get invited to places, spend some
time there, and within a couple of days I couldn't tell you the
teachers' names or the actual name of the organization.  I
suspect that part of this is because I don't value lineage or
"collect" enpowerments or value having seen Guru X or
Rinpoche Y terribly much.  Another part of it is that during
the time I was in Santa Fe I was not only not looking for a
group to be part of, I was somewhat averse to being part
of one.  I'd just go places, check out the scen, and whether
I was impressed or not impressed, leave and usually not
go back.

The only reason I can remember Gangaji's name (of all the
teachers and organizations I interacted with in Santa Fe)
is that her name was short and I got to spend a little "offstage"
time with her because I was invited by one of her old friends.
On the other hand, I wouldn't class her organization as being
of the type I mentioned.




-----Not that it's really important, since the only person who benefits from discriminating one way or the other is the person doing it, but all these comparisons are apples and oranges.  TM had a type of model for enlightenment, which as it turns out, is a bit too much for most people.
 
Tibetan Buddhism looks for no exact markers like the "Seven states of consciousness."  Rather, enlightenment is more a thing of ability to cut through limited viewpoints using wisdom, and cut through selfish, negative karma producing behavior using compassion. To the degree that one is successful one is enlightened.
 
Buddhist's don't seek to qualify it by some neurophysiological evaluation. They also have developed so many different means for investigating awareness that no markers could possibly be developed. Not to mention any markers developed would be coonsidered no more true than anything else. Therefore Buddhists may actually very well be happier than TMers, though that's not necessarily the case as often attested to here. Many TMers are superlatively happy with TM. 
 
Does each system work by its own definition if practiced in accordance with its epistimology. This is the real standard of investigation. Not some intersystem showmanship.



To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'


YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



Reply via email to