wrote:
>
> on 5/23/06 11:20 AM, Vaj at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >
> > On May 23, 2006, at 10:55 AM, Rick Archer wrote:
> >
> >> I was listening to Eckhart Tolle yesterday (Silence Speaks) and
he was
> >> saying that any thought is a viewpoint, and how liberating it is to
> >> realize
> >> that. It's like a small segment of a wide spectrum. Other segments,
> >> even
> >> contradictory and paradoxical ones, are equally valid. So its true
> >> that if
> >> we take our thoughts too seriously, we're addicted - we're locked
> >> in or
> >> trapped by a narrow perspective, unrepresentative of Reality.
> >
> >
> > That's interesting because essentially what it points out, from an
> > experiential point of view, is that Tolle has not reached self -
> > liberation of thought. In others words, he ain't very realized.
>
> Seems to me you're too quick to judge someone's level of realization
based
> on some quote, or someone's recollection of a quote. Maybe you have this
> capability, but I can only vaguely approximate. I prefer to go with
what's
> inspiring and uplifting, and not make unprovable assumptions about t
> speaker's level of consciousness.
This exchange raises some interesting points -- germane to several
themes that periodically arise here.
Is there already a silent presumption that Tolle is "realized" -- and
thus a parallel presumption that his words are valid and/or relevant?
Do you find the words inspiring and uplifting in-and-of-themselves
--- regardless of the source of, and presumptions about, the speaker?
For example, would one find the words inspiring and uplifting if the
speaker was acknowledged as clearly unqualified to know anything about
realization?
If not, then wouldn't one already be making some degree of unprovable
assumption about the speaker's level of consciousness?
If the above is so -- that one is already making some degree of
unprovable assumption -- presumbable its not a well-examined
assumption. Is it a useful assumption? How would views change if the
assumptions about the source were dropped?
Do we tend to believe somethings from one source, but tend to
disbeleive the same words from another source that we have
pre-characterized, pre-judged, pegged a certain way? Same words,
different source. Does the source make a difference in the value,
relevance, validity and inspiration drawn from the same words?
Is the opposite of Tolle's words also at least partly true? (Fully
true? More true than the original statement?) If the words are both
true and untrue, what is their validity and value?
Can one be falsely inspired and uplifted? Many proclamations,
initiatives and themes of the TMO inspired many us in the past. At
least some now seem empty -- a false inspiration. Inspired by a
phantom, a vacuum, by something of little substance.
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
SPONSORED LINKS
| Maharishi university of management | Maharishi mahesh yogi | Ramana maharshi |
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
