Hi all, i have been a reading deeply on ET's material since two years back and it have changed my live positively
If its ok, would like to post a link to an article where the reporter who i think is pretty astute brought up some criticism (and also defense) about Tolle. Can anyone reply if the criticism is valid? Namaste
http://blogs.vancouversun.com/2009/09/0 ... art-tolle/ <- Link to material below!! Sorry for the upper case
DOUGLAS RESPONDS: I PROBABLY AGREE WITH TOLLE HERE. BUT I ALSO AGREE WITH PHILOSOPHER KEN WILBER THAT THE DANGER OF TEACHINGS SUCH AS THAT ABOVE IS THAT IT CAN ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO NOT ONLY DISENGAGE FROM THEIR OWN NEGATIVE THOUGHTS AND FEELINGS, BUT TO DENY THEM COMPLETELY. WE HAVE TO OWN UP TO THE FACT THAT WE HAVE NEGATIVE EMOTIONS. WE NEED TO INCLUDe THEM AS PART OF WHO WE ARE, THEN TRANSCEND THEM.
DOUGLAS RESPONDS: THIS SEEMS TO CONTRADICT TOLLE’S EXTREME EMPHASIS ON “THE NOW.” ALL OF A SUDDEN “THE NOW” IS NOT SINGULARLY SPECIAL WHEN TOLLE TEACHES THAT BEING IN “THE NOW” INCLUDES BEING AWARE OF THE PAST AND WORKING TOWARDS A GOAL. THAT’S NOT MUCH OF A FRESH INSIGHT. I THINK TOLLE MAKES AN IDOL OF “BEING IN THE NOW.” IT’S JUST COMMON SENSE THAT BEING PRESENT REQUIRES A SENSE OF THE PAST AND A LEANING TOWARD THE FUTURE. I THINK TOLLE UNDERRATES HOW MUCH WE ARE DRAWN, IN A HEALTHY WAY, TO THE POSSIBILITIES THE FUTURE OFFERS. INSTEAD OF TALKING ABOUT ‘BEING ( A LA HEIDIGGER ETC) I PREFER TO TALK ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF ‘BECOMING.’
DOUGLAS RESPONDS: I TEND TO AGREE WITH TOLLE HERE. BUT I DON’T AGREE THAT ANYONE CAN EVER BE ‘ABSOLUTELY PRESENT.’ I DON’T LIKE THE WORD, ‘ABSOLUTELY.’ IT SOUNDS MAGICAL, OVER-SIMPLIFIED, THE KIND OF WORD A FUNDAMENTALIST WOULD USE. IT ALSO REDUCES SPIRITUALITY TO A KIND OF PEAK EXPERIENCE, WHICH IS ONLY ONE LIMITED UNDERSTANDING OF SPIRITUALITY.
DOUGLAS RESPONDS: I AM A BIG FAN OF ENTHUSIASM. MOST PEOPLE ARE. IT’S COMMON SENSE. EVERY MOTIVATIONAL SPEAKER AROUND SAYS THE SAME THING. THE FRENCH PHILOSOPHER AND NOBEL WINNER, HENRI BERGSON (left), WOULD CALL ENTHUSIASM ‘ELAN VITAL.’ THE GREEKS CALLED IT “EROS.” ALFRED bergson A defence of Eckhart TolleNORTH WHITEHEAD AND CHARLES BIRCH AND A HUNDRED OTHER PHILOSOPHERS IN THEIR GREAT TRADITION WOULD CALL IT ‘ZEST.” I THINK THIS IS WHERE TOLLE IS NOT AT ALL UNIQUE AS A PHILOSOPHER. IN FACT, HE’S JUST BORROWING FROM THINKERS OF THE PAST — AND, REGRETFULLY, IN MANY CASES NOT GIVING THEM CREDIT.
DOUGLAS RESPONDS: I HAVE NO TROUBLE AT ALL WITH PEOPLE READING TOLLE. BUT I DON’T LIKE THE WAY HE ACTS AS IF HIS APPROACH IS ABSOLUTELY NOVEL. I ESPECIALLY DON’T LIKE THE THE WAY HE TELLS READERS IN A NEW EARTH THAT IF THEY DON’T FIND PERSONAL ‘AWAKENING’ THROUGH HIS BOOKS, IT’S SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY’RE NOT SPIRITUALLY READY FOR IT. AS IF THEY ARE THE PROBLEM — NOT HIS LIMITED PHILOSOPHY.
DOUGLAS RESPONDS: YOU’VE RAISED SOME IMPORTANT POINTS, BAIRD. GIVEN THAT MILLIONS OF PEOPLE ARE READING TOLLE THESE DAYS, HIS TEACHINGS ARE WORTH DISCUSSING AND DEBATING. TOLLE HAS SOME USEFUL THINGS TO SAY. BUT MY KEY HOPE IS FOR PEOPLE TO READ AND LEARN FAR BEYOND TOLLE. THEY’LL REALIZE HIS TEACHINGS ARE NOT AS RARE AS HE OR HIS PROMOTERS SUGGEST. I ESPECIALLY DISAGREE WITH HIS WEBSITE TELLING THE GROUPS THAT FORM AROUND HIS BOOKS AND DVDs THAT IT’S “BEST NOT TO ENGAGE IN DISCUSSION, AS IT TENDS TO STIMULATE THE MIND AND EGO.” THAT, MY FRIEND, IS DANGEROUS. IT HINTS AT THOUGHT CONTROL.
Thank you and much love.
