--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, a_non_moose_ff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Irmeli Mattsson" > <Irmeli.Mattsson@> wrote: > > > > In this post there are some important observations of the value of > > tradition. My comments in between. > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, a_non_moose_ff <no_reply@> > > > > wrote: > > Irmeli: MMY represents his interpretation of the holy tradition. The > > main problem with MMY is, that he says his interpretation is the only > > complete and pure one, the others are some ways flawed. This kind of > > understanding in itself is enough to place him in the fundamentalist > > category. It is also good to observe, that he is not respected and > > recognized by many influential vedic scholars. There also seems to be > > suspicions that at least some of those who recognize him, have been > > bought by money. > > >Moose: Reasonable points. They don't seem to contradict what I said, "Not to > say the holy tradition that MMY says he represents is the > single ultimate gold standard." > > > > >Moose: Traditions are like guideposts. They provide useful maps and markers. > > > Maybe not always "interoperable" between traditions, but consistent > > > and useful within a tradition. Its sort of like scientific theories > > > and paradigms. One experiment (one person's experience) does not > > > create or substantiate scientific knowledge or theory. It takes many > > > experiments, repeated by independent researchers, under diverse > > > conditions, and examining many various ranges of observations, to > > > create a sustained and accepted scientific model of how the world > works. > > > > > > Spiritual traditions are similar. One persons experience, no matter > > > how grand, does not map out the entire territory of spiritual growth. > > > Nor the liklihood of this or that method on this or that aspirant. A > > > spiritual tradition synthesizes the experiences of many diffferent > > > types of people, under different conditions, over long periods of > > > time, and creates a coherent model and standard accepted practices > > > suitable for "many" -- not just one person. > > > > > > Such spiritual tradition are not created in one generation. It is not > > > ad hoc. It is not made up as one or a group of yogis progress. It > > > links individual experience with the experinces, sadhanas and > > > roadmaps/views of many aspirants over many generations and centuries. > > > > > > To disgard all traditions, to make it up as one goes along, is in my > > > observations over the years, usually quite foolish and unproductive. I > > > have seen a fair amount of people delude themselves over the years. > > > > Irmeli: It is beneficial to study and follow a tradition, but in the > > following lies dangerous pitfalls also. The most seductive of them for > > many aspirants is starting to obey and follow a teacher or an > > organization in an unquestioning fashion having intense need to > > believe in the superiority of the leader and his path. A > > fundamentalist teacher usually encourages and favours this kind of > > behaviour. More beneficial would be if you could take from the > > teaching only the part you can with good conscience accept and is in > > line with your observations of reality. Blind following permits and > > bypass form your common sense and sound judgement. It makes possible > > to start act out your low minded impulses. Suppressed negative and > > disowned emotions and thought forms are a burden to our mind. Either > > you work slowly to uncover and transform those energies or you find > > justifications to act them out. Unquestioningly following gives that > > kind of justifications. As a fundamentalist you can make others to > > feel the fear or coercion, that was too much for you. And > > simultaneously feel to be in the service of a higher purpose. > > > > Moose:Reasonable points. They don't seem to contradict what I said. > > > > > > >Moose: In the latter 70s, a prominent Golden Boy SIMS lecturer, Walter Belin > > > (sp) and his wife, Margurite (long time int'l staffer) wrote a letter > > > to MMY about a new guru they had met and were following, a South > > > African businessman. MMY said, "So the choice is clear, you can follow > > > the ageless vedic tradition, our ancient holy tradition, or you can > > > follow the Johanesberg (sp) tradition." He laughed as did everyone for > > > about five minutes. > > > > > > > Irmeli: The situation could also be seen as a choice between a > > fundamentalist teacher unrecognised by important representatives of > > the tradition he represents and a more pragmatic teacher, who was > > better capable of integrating his teaching to modern reality, even if > > having less knowledge of vedic tradition. > > > Moose:Ok. We can create any number of nice hypotheticals. > > > > > Not to say a person of great purity and insight doesn't come along > > > occasionally and total knowledge just unfolds within them with no help > > > from tradition. But this is a "soul" beyond most, beyond the path and > > > "needs" of a young SB Saraswati, Yogananda, etc. Usually its an > > > avatar, like Shankara who wrote all or most of his commentaries by > 16. > > > > > > People outside of a tradition often borrow terms from other > > > traditions, and use them -- but without the substance, the > > > meaningfulness from the tradition. The grand terms are used to > > > describe the more trivial and mundane. It becomes a semantic hodgpodge > > > and furthers the delusion of proponents and those sucked up in the > > > nonsense. > > > > > > Not to say that many can't and don't have good spiritual experiences > > > outside of formal traditions. But without a tradition that has stood > > > some test of time, of long-range view, the "neo-traditions" -- > > > first-generation ad-hoc, make it up as you go patchworks of > > > "knowledge", tend to create interpretations of experiences that are > > > more fantasy and "belief" based than substance based. > > > > > > To follow the TMO tradition, and then "go beyond it" outside of any > > > other tradition, may work for some. But it explicitly means that one > > > is rejecting the "insights" of MMY's "vedic/holy" tradition, and that > > > they are holding out their own insights as superior (for themselves, > > > at a minumum, and for some, they claim universal application of their > > > insights.) For example, you differ from MMY, in > > > > > > i) the role of belief in the effectivness of TM and TM siddhis (as > > > well as most all sadhanas presumably) > > > > > > ii) the attributes of Brahman Consciousness (you appear to hold the > > > absence of suffering to be the sole criteria.) > > > > > > iii) that CC, GC, UC are not milestones to BC; BC is gained without > > > passing trhough these milestones (even a non-linear set of such > > milesones) > > > > > > iv) that extensive long rounding is not necessary for cc for all but a > > > few (he says this in smaller groups) > > > > > Irmeli: Leaving the TMO teachings behind doesn't usually mean that you > > hold your insights superior to MMY's. Often it means that you start > > more to trust your own understanding and insights, and you stop > > justifying your actions by a doctrine or by suggestions from a guru. > > And then you can benefit even more from the valuable and for you > > suitable aspects in the tradition, because you are now capable of > > studying it with more open heart and mind. > > > Moose:Perhaps. I agree that one can "fill in the gaps" of TMO doctrine based > on experience and study, not contradicting it, but taking the > "skeleton of knowledge" given and filling it with life. > > On the other hand, when when takes an opposite view of MMY, they may > wel be right, but they are in fact, rejecting (that part) of his > teaching. That I believe is what Jim has done. > > > >Irmeli: I also feel it to be quite appropriate to create your own combination > > of old traditions, by taking from different traditions, what you feel > > to valuable in them. > > > Moose:Thats fine. Just be careful in not assuming the same terms mean the > same things across traditions. Lots of confusion and delusion arises > when people use such terms interoperably, IMO.
Irmeli: Yes this is important observation. However, human evolution passes irrespective of tradition and culture through the same stages. Different approaches can in different cultures make these stages to envelope externally to somewaht different forms. Men and women also evolve differently. Traditionally men have seen their evolving to be much more advanced compared to that of women. Intense meditation can create certain states that are highly appreciated in the Hindu tradition, but these states are not identical with cognitive, emotional etc stages of development. Stages of development are permanent, lasting acquisitions. States are not. Here is the most severe confusion that prevails also inside traditions. > > > >Moose: In the modern world with the multitude of > > influences we all do that more or less. It is arrogant to claim to be > > representing a tradition in its pure form. Some ancient text can be > > said to represent a tradition in its pure, original form. But this > > native form, even if it has many pearls in it, shouldn't be followed > > as an absolute truth. It rarely is sensibly applicable in modern > > reality. Our morals and values have changed and also evolved from > > those times. > > Moose:Fine. Thats a clarification. But does invalidate the main point that > traditions can provide internally consistent roadmaps, terminology, > practices and validations. All useful things. > Irmeli:I made my comments only on those aspects in which I wanted to point out another aspect. Generally I respect and appreciate these important functions of traditions you brought out. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 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 <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
