Eckhart teaches dualism

Talk about anything Tolle-related here.
innerhike
Posts: 258
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 4:23 am

Re: Eckhart teaches dualism

Post by innerhike » Thu May 29, 2008 5:32 am

The best teachers destroy the student.

There is no student left to receive the teaching.

Until such time that we are destroyed, it is best to speak of the incomplete creation that we are.

Until such time that we are in non-duality, it is okay to be in duality and use it to reach non-duality.

Even Parsons is teaching dualism. No one can say or teach anything that is not dualistic.

Some of these non-duality teachers seem to have made it a business to say that they are the only one who knows what is going on, while the other teachers are just a bunch of crap.

The best teachers and students take what they can from every situation and apply it to their lives.

There are levels of stabilization in the Now/Presence/Awareness/Reality.

To say that the idiot is a genuis and that everyone is awake, is a lie.

People are waking up in spurts, in bursts, and integrating these awakenings in different ways.

From a non-dualistic perspective, which is rather absolutist, there is no progress and everyone is awake even though they don't know it.

Frankly that is like saying no one is need of food when we know that so many are hungry around the world.

Ramana Maharshi has an interesting quote on this subject which I will paraphrase since I don't have the book with me currently:

When a teacher uses non-duality to teach his students, it is no different than the tears being shed by someone who has been hired to mourn at a funeral.

I don't care about semantics that Parsons is trying to parse.

I care about the level of consciousness that Eckhart and Ramana and other significant teachers of non-duality exhibit and radiate outwards. This silent force is more important than anything that Parsons or anyone like him can say.

User avatar
Intel
Posts: 166
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 3:34 pm
Location: Near wild heaven

Re: Eckhart teaches dualism

Post by Intel » Fri May 30, 2008 12:37 pm

James wrote:In one of his talks, Eckhart brings up the question: Is the world of form an illusion? The audience is waiting for an answer and he pauses and says "leave it", and jokes "you were waiting for an answer". He is saying, don't try to figure it out, just accept what is appearing now. He goes on to say (paraphrasing): even an illusion must have a degree of reality or it would not exist at all.

The formless appears to express itself in a myriad of individual forms, (hologram or not).

A Course In Miracles emphasizes that the only real choice we can make is to accept or deny our spiritual inheritance, which is to say live out from our source, the one source of all, or continue to live out from a dream state. Nothing is ever separate from the one, there is only the dream of separation. The only duality occurs in the mind that dreams of separation.

So then, the most important question we need to ask ourselves is: what is my relationship to my source right now? It always begins with the individual, that is the meaningful choice we can make.

James
The point Tony Parsons was making is that there is no choice. There is no choice about choosing to stay present or indulge in thought, because there is nobody there actually having the experience. It is simply experience arising, happening to nobody. How can nobody make a choice? Only somebody can make a choice.

If experience happens to no one, then even the experience of being an individual making a choice is just an experience, which in reality isn't true. I think Tony is trying to take the weight off of us. He's saying "Don't worry too much about enlightenment or staying present, you don't have a choice in the matter anyway. Infact, 'you' don't exist as anything you imagined you were."

Its like when were in a dream, and experience arises. But it doesn't actually happen to anyone, although it appears as if things are happening to someone. It appears as if we make choices in a dream, but when we wake we see that all we did was watch spontaneous arisings.
I would lick your feet, but is that the sickest move?

User avatar
Sighclone
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6364
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 6:22 pm

Re: Eckhart teaches dualism

Post by Sighclone » Fri May 30, 2008 5:36 pm

intel -

First let me say that your posts are provocative and helpful. In general, I do not have a problem with them, and particularly I do not have a problem with this one...

But I've got a problem with Parsons, and despite the hiker's wise comments, I'm going to stay on it for a while because I think it's haughty and presumptuous.
The point Tony Parsons was making is that there is no choice. There is no choice about choosing to stay present or indulge in thought, because there is nobody there actually having the experience. It is simply experience arising, happening to nobody. How can nobody make a choice? Only somebody can make a choice.

If experience happens to no one, then even the experience of being an individual making a choice is just an experience, which in reality isn't true.
The statement that there is nobody making choices because there is nobody to do that may be true from the perspective of some Being in Pure unmanifested Brahmin Consciousness (whatever that is).

But this forum is mainly about a guy named Eckhart who wrote a couple of books. Those were for people who are in some lesser state of consciousness who are interested in the subject and may wish to change their life. Telling them they are not a person and can't make choices doesn't help them. It demeans and insults them and places the speaker on some self-constructed 'way holier than thou' pedastel. I'd ask for my money back.

In my humble opinion,

Andy
A person is not a thing or a process, but an opening through which the universe manifests. - Martin Heidegger
There is not past, no future; everything flows in an eternal present. - James Joyce

dutchred
Posts: 69
Joined: Sun May 04, 2008 3:19 am
Location: Madison, Indiana

Re: Eckhart teaches dualism

Post by dutchred » Fri May 30, 2008 10:12 pm

The only Parsons I've read is what is on this thread, and so I won't comment on Parsons.

But I don't agree that "Eckhart teaches dualism." Eckhart comes from a place of compassion, recognizes that most of us experience a world of forms, and accepts that. Eckhart is willing to meet me in the world I am experiencing, and I am grateful. That James, Innerhike, Andy, Kiki etc. can accept that they still experience a world of forms helps me to accept I do, too. And without my acceptance of this moment, the road out of it will not appear.

Parsons' words may be quite right. But in this excerpt, he is not presenting his worldview in a way that makes me want to reach toward it and feel its truth. Perhaps he is more cosmologist than teacher?

dutchred
Yes, the umbrella was the real trouble. Behind Monet and Debussy the umbrella persisted, like a steady beat of a drum. "I suppose my umbrella will be all right," he was thinking....

User avatar
tikey
Posts: 345
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 11:40 pm
Location: Warsaw, Poland, Middle East Europe

Re: Eckhart teaches dualism

Post by tikey » Sat May 31, 2008 2:14 am

Intel wrote:
The sentence means Eckhart is implying there is a seperate 'I' located within the body that can choose to stay present, or not stay present. Tony Parsons is saying this is dualistic.

for me it is completely clear what Eckhart says and not so completely clear what this Tony says. After I had satori I KNOW that for me the filosophy
of "identifications" works the best and I will stik to it as I made unmeaserable progress with this. And I still do.

But this guy Tony is just to tricky for me ok? I just need the old-fashioned spiritual teaching, like Eckhats' one, no other. Because If I will mess up with
the teaching and start comparing them I will go mad. That just will be a bunch of problems and my self esteem will go lower, as it no hangs on one tiny
scratch and this scratch is all that Eckhart tought me. If any confusions will creep in, I will die. I mean I will go back in depretion and I will say to myself
"go fuck yourself, there is no chance for you". But some quotes from other teaching also look familiar to me. Many, many, many of them are understandable.
I haven't seen any movies of that guy, and I do not want. It's like choosing the dark side, or bright side of the force. But it's just about the "force", isn't it?
Im just a cloudless sky :)

User avatar
Intel
Posts: 166
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 3:34 pm
Location: Near wild heaven

Re: Eckhart teaches dualism

Post by Intel » Sat May 31, 2008 5:55 pm

I want to make clear that I am not attacking Eckhart, but simply exploring truth. It seems a few people have confused Eckhart's form with truth, but that is their business. Thanks for your comment Signclone, and I think you're right. Eckhart was speaking to people on a level they could relate to, which is dualism. But Tony has a raw no-nonsense approach. Its all good, depending on where you're at in your spiritual search. I guess it all leads to the same place anyway.

Peace. :)
I would lick your feet, but is that the sickest move?

User avatar
Sighclone
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6364
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 6:22 pm

Re: Eckhart teaches dualism

Post by Sighclone » Sat May 31, 2008 6:10 pm

intel -

Your comments are welcome! And attacking Eckhart is absolutely fine. Remember that about half the dialogue questions in PON could easily be considered to be 'attacks.' Sometimes we need to attack to understand something better. Attacking is not being disrespectful. For those of us who love Eckhart, our little antennae may fire off and we will 'defend' him. So attack away, respectfully. And attack me too. I'm just a guy who helps manage the threads here. And I'm far from perfect. We are all trying to expand our understanding of something which transcends 'understanding,' so however we jab away at it is OK, so long as it is possible to make some kind of sense of the words, and they are not disrespectful. Critical is fine, disrespectful is not. There is nothing disrespectful at all in this thread...and, thanks to erict and others, very little which is disrespectful or trivial in this forum. It is kind of a refuge for folks groping around in the dark for a big final Truth. And you are one of the glimmers of light.

Namaste, Andy
A person is not a thing or a process, but an opening through which the universe manifests. - Martin Heidegger
There is not past, no future; everything flows in an eternal present. - James Joyce

haniwow
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2005 11:12 pm

Re: Eckhart teaches dualism

Post by haniwow » Sat May 31, 2008 7:47 pm

Parson, Leo de Hartog, even Krsihnamurti can make you craaaaaaaaaaaaaaaazzzzzzzzzy. "Nothing" cannot be grasped by the mind ..." and trying to teach through no mind makes you insane. Eckart has managed to stay on the non dualistic path by showing portals which can be construed as duality. And as a recovering Krishnamurti addict ""portals" is a dirty word. I am glad that I read these posts, it once again reminds me to stay far away from these purists. My problem with all of it actually is Eckart, Katie and so on all had that shift. Then out of that shift supposedly they tried to show people how they could get to that shift. But it's still trying to tell a blind man what the color green looks like. That is the major problem with all of this. And how did they get the shift? Supposedly it just happened. Which in Byron Katie's case I don't believe for a moment because there was an intensive intensive search prior to that shift. I know that Eckart was very influenced by Joel Goldsmith who used the purity of Jesus's teachings and does Eckart who references him a lot.

User avatar
Sighclone
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6364
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 6:22 pm

Re: Eckhart teaches dualism

Post by Sighclone » Sun Jun 01, 2008 10:13 pm

Eckhart and Katie both suffered profoundly. Both were intelligent and had studied their "problem." I do not have a list of the books/satsangs each had read/attended before awakening. But both are now dedicated to exposing the ego and allowing the greater truth of who we are to emerge.

Stating that "I am God, you are God and that is God." doesn't help most people. If it did, that sentence would be the first one every child learns and it would be reinforced by every already enlightened person on the planet...so the child would be enlightened by age 6 and we could be done with it.

Maybe that is the New Earth, several hundred years from now. But it's not gonna work today, in my opinion.

Namaste, Andy
A person is not a thing or a process, but an opening through which the universe manifests. - Martin Heidegger
There is not past, no future; everything flows in an eternal present. - James Joyce

Larryfroot
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 304
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 9:49 pm
Location: Devon, United Kingdom

Re: Eckhart teaches dualism

Post by Larryfroot » Mon Jun 02, 2008 12:40 pm

Tony Parson's approach and style is gloriously, uncompromisingly absolute. I have read something of his a couple of years back, but my memory can only recall the power of his teachings rather than the content. If someone could remind me, does Tony promote or advise any meditational techniques or suchlike? Often people who are very focused on delivering the absolute perspective on experience just tell the rest of us to awaken or to see without much in the way of tools to achieve it. And when we ask for them we are told that there is nothing to achieve. Which may be true, but is about as much use as a fart in a spacesuit to anyone (such as myself) living a life outside of a Zen monastry. Just because something starts in the relative - from where we are - doesn't mean to say it ends in the relative. For Tony the end is the beginning, and the beginning the end. The goal and the means are non-different...which is funky indeed. But it really precludes any practice other than the realisation itself, or at least that is the impression I have gotten over time through people who are seriously serious about the primacy of the absolute over the relative. But to me, and I only am speaking for myself here, that is like declaring the primacy of a city by demolishing all the roads that lead to it.

Yes, I am in danger of falling in love with the road. Yes I may end up being an avid cartographer rather than actually arrive at the destination. I may fall ill with a heavy dose of believing there is a destination. I do understand all the health warnings that come on a pack of relative practices, honestly! But to basically make a presentation to someone who is suffering and who has little experience of alternate ways of being based on the 'absolute primacy perspective' is to allow them to continue to suffer, only this time with an aversion to that crazy, unsettling spiritual stuff.

I am very keen on a balance here. Yes, the primacy of the absolute is not in question. No, this does no invalidate relative means that enable us to go beyond the relative.
Many a mickle muches a markle.

D'ray
Posts: 187
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 7:01 pm
Location: Something Now-ish ;)

Re: Eckhart teaches dualism

Post by D'ray » Mon Jun 02, 2008 2:07 pm

In order that your post is valid, Eckhart teaches dualism, first there has to be YOU and Eckhart who teaches to YOU, which is a statement of duality :wink:
There's no "I" to become enlightened. The "I" can have spiritual experiences.

DON'T resist the RESISTANCE! The resistance is there. Walk into it. Feel it. Become one with it.

Larryfroot
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 304
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 9:49 pm
Location: Devon, United Kingdom

Re: Eckhart teaches dualism

Post by Larryfroot » Mon Jun 02, 2008 4:01 pm

The Tao Te Ching:
Four walls make a house, but because of the spaces in the walls we are able to use it as a house.
So we make use of existence through non existence.
for me this encapsulates the whole balance between relativist teachings (which are so often dismissed as dualistic without any appreciation that they exist to facilitate oneness in time) and absolutist teachings.
Many a mickle muches a markle.

haniwow
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2005 11:12 pm

Re: Eckhart teaches dualism

Post by haniwow » Mon Jun 02, 2008 5:40 pm

I think for the pure non dual teachers who must have had a shift, there is no tool box. There is, just what is. Nothing else. I like the house analagy. Without walls there is no house. But we do live in glass houses, don't we. Isn't that relative?Joel goldsmith who at first would be considered a dualist teacher, is basically a non-dualist, but he uses the pure teachings of Jesus as portals. His teachings revolve around "I AM". Non dual. Eckart does the same. Without it, you are the blind person trying to understand what the color green looks like, aren't you. isn't that what the pure non dual teachers preach? I've read just about every book and when I read them, I feel peace, but the minute I close those books I'm completely in the muck, trying to figure out what the color green is because i don't see it.
Haniwow

Larryfroot
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 304
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 9:49 pm
Location: Devon, United Kingdom

Re: Eckhart teaches dualism

Post by Larryfroot » Mon Jun 02, 2008 6:24 pm

It all points to non-dualism...so I am somewhat at a loss to understand one camp disrespecting the other based on chosen techniques (the dread non-duality comments of Mr Parson rears its head at this point) or none as the case might be. But at the end of the day its been more words in an ocean of them. Lets all simply touch our own sincerity, wish well to all and live love.
Many a mickle muches a markle.

haniwow
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2005 11:12 pm

Re: Eckhart teaches dualism

Post by haniwow » Mon Jun 02, 2008 7:21 pm

Absolutely! Sometimes Eckart resonates, sometimes Leo de Hartog, sometime Joel Goldsmith. Eckart resonates the most for me, but if Parsons rocks your boat... more power to you.
Namaste

Post Reply