A Course in Miracles

Re: A Course in Miracles

Postby beginnersmind » Thu May 01, 2014 2:30 am

Starseed wrote:
beginnersmind wrote: I'm not sure I follow about the "seeking".


The seeker has not found. The object it is seeking is unattainable or so hard to attain that it makes the enterprise masochistic rather than heroic. Inevitably, the seeker is either disillusioned or unable to cope with the world of duality, and is seeking the ultimate release, nirvana, eternal bliss, or at least an escape. But does the seeker ever truly escape duality ? How many have you met in your life that did, and that you can verifiably certify that they did. The answer is obviously: nobody. So what is the point of the spiritual quest. Note, I am not talking about psychology but spirituality. Even what is labeled as spirituality works on the level of the mind, except it is often distorted and spiritualized and idealized (e.g. meditation). Working on psychological problems, knowing yourself better, etc., etc., all those are great things, but I don't call that seeking or spiritual. They are all valid endeavours. The mind needs correction, the mind needs sharpening, the mind needs a mirror to see itself, the mind needs rest, and work on the mind is fine - so is work on the body.



I understand what seeking is. What I wasn't following was how you attribute it to ACIM. But everyone is a "seeker" whether it be spirituality or not. So I tend to throw this word out along with "non-duality" and "enlightenment".

To me non-duality is simply a "hip spiritual" buzz word that is often thrown around in spiritual circles (especially in modern western culture) and so I tend to stay away from using it, unless the topic is specifically about it. Non-dual circles cannot even agree as to what it means anyway. As I've mentioned many times on this board, I am not seeking enlightement either. As to do so, I would first have to develop a conceptual idea of what it is and then try to achieve it. That is just another belief to try and attain.

Nor am I trying to escape the "world of duality" or care about platitudes of unmanifested consciousness or what The Absolute is. What you're describing here is not spirituality, but spiritual bypassing, which is often practiced in neo-advaita circles. It can also happen in psychotherapy or counseling in which the person sidesteps deeper issues that need to be dealt with instead looking to work on superficial issues that have no real bearing. So it is not just spirituality that "seeks" as you say. Interestingly though, it seems to me that you're asking me questions as if I had professed knowing enlightenment, or the trascendance of the "world of duality", or knew someone that had. I've never made any such claim nor even care about this, nor am I going to provide "certified proof."

You said that you're drawn towards J. Krishnamurti, Maharshi, and Tolle. Yet they would be in the realm of spirituality. J. Krishnamurti often belittled the beliefs of the organized religions of Hindu's, Muslims, and Christians, calling it childish nonsense, but also often said that he was not an atheist and was very religious. Maharshi advocated reading the ancient spiritual texts of The Vedas and Upanishads. He also advocated Yoga. Tolle, as most know here, uses the Tao Te Ching, The Buddha and Jesus both in the Canon gospels and the Gnostic gospels among others to convey his spiritual message.

Spirituality to me is very practical. There is much psychology in it. Shadow work is necessary IMO. Meditation not only helps one to come into intimate contact with the mind, but also learn the power of the mind and the tricks and defense mechanisms within the mind, which with continous practice can beging to heal the split mind and quiet the mind. Neuroscience has shown with evidence the benefits of meditation. I also practice Qigong and dan tien and some pranayama breathing techniques.

Anyone can call this whatever they want. I call it spirituality, because to me, being spiritually bankrupt is to not know one self. To be "lost" (or dissociated) from the self and instead be caught up in our conceptual self and all the distractions and ideas, where there is this seeming wall between us and life. It is inner work in which we reconnect with what is always there, our self/ life.

Eric
beginnersmind
 
Posts: 225
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 3:00 pm

Re: A Course in Miracles

Postby Starseed » Thu May 01, 2014 5:29 pm

beginnersmind wrote:You said that you're drawn towards J. Krishnamurti, Maharshi, and Tolle. Yet they would be in the realm of spirituality. J. Krishnamurti often belittled the beliefs of the organized religions of Hindu's, Muslims, and Christians, calling it childish nonsense, but also often said that he was not an atheist and was very religious. Maharshi advocated reading the ancient spiritual texts of The Vedas and Upanishads. He also advocated Yoga. Tolle, as most know here, uses the Tao Te Ching, The Buddha and Jesus both in the Canon gospels and the Gnostic gospels among others to convey his spiritual message.

I was drawn to those people, in my days of 'spiritual seeking', but as I explained in my introduction, I dropped all that a few years ago.
Last edited by Starseed on Fri May 02, 2014 1:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
Starseed
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2014 3:52 pm

Re: A Course in Miracles

Postby beginnersmind » Fri May 02, 2014 12:22 am

Well great.

You transcended spirituality and Ramana Maharshi who it seems spoke a lot of gibberish. And yet, you've signed up to a spiritual board, for what? To tell people this and how they are deluded in their beliefs about non-duality, seemingly being as dogmatic as the dogma you profess against? To borrow your own spiritual platitude that you used earlier, is this not ego sneaking in the back door?
beginnersmind
 
Posts: 225
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 3:00 pm

Re: A Course in Miracles

Postby beginnersmind » Sat May 03, 2014 2:28 am

Are you serious? You edited your reply to edit out the part where you said that Ramana Maharshi spoke a lot of gibberish? If you're going to say something like this, then either stand by it and/or explain why you said it, but to edit it out like it never even happened without explanation is completely dishonest IMO.
beginnersmind
 
Posts: 225
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 3:00 pm

Previous

Return to Recommended Books

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron