Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Talk about anything Tolle-related here.

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby kiki » Mon Feb 02, 2009 11:26 pm

Yeah, I've heard ET mention his being "vigilant" about ego returning as well as saying his ego had "died", most notably on the Oprah webinar. It seems to be an inconsistency that doesn't quite jive. As for me, I don't let it bother me one way or another. The only thing that really matters is what "I" experience. To me the ego isn't real, and I can see the truth of this, so I no longer get hung up whenever it shows up because I know it's only an illusion. It is quickly and easily spotted when it surfaces, and what I really am doesn't get overshadowed anymore, and it easily fades away again.

Early in my exposure to ET's teaching I felt he didn't address the illusory nature of the ego as he could have. Too many people take an adversarial stance against it, and we see the result of that on this site quite frequently. Even so, I haven't any question about ET's "realization". His teaching is a work in progress, as is everyone else's teaching about "this". That's a good thing, I believe. It shows how awakened understanding evolves in the world of form.
"Miss Kelly, perhaps you'd like this flower. I seem to have misplaced my buttonhole ... Miss Kelly, you know, when you wear my flower you make it look beautiful." Elwood P. Dowd
---
Your donation will help keep us online.
User avatar
kiki
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 4363
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 8:55 pm
Location: Wherever "here" happens to be

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby Webwanderer » Tue Feb 03, 2009 12:14 am

sevenworlds wrote:No, that's not what I'm talking about. How can there be true freedom with an 'I' still there?


How can their be true freedom without some cognizance of being? This is not to suggest that ego identification is anything other than illusion. It is to suggest that there is a sense of beingness inherent in awareness. One may choose not to be cognizant of self while clearly aware, but that sense of being remains latent as a composite of awareness without need of thought to manufacture it. "I Am" exists beyond the words that define it.

There is no need to bury one's sense of being just to prove enlightenment.

WW
User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 6280
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby James » Tue Feb 03, 2009 12:58 am

Lots of good responses in this thread from WW, eputkonen, randomguy and Kiki. I think I see where you are coming from sevenworlds, but I believe to some extent you are making projections onto Tolle, Krishnamurti, Papaji, Mooji as to what you think their experience is like. One can't really know. You may feel the Presence in their words and actions and may realize what their words point to.

As eputkonen stated, you seem to have conceptualized what ego death entails. That is often part of the mythology of spiritual enlightenment, that there will be complete irreversible death of the ego, a state of never ending, pure heavenly bliss; walking on clouds the remainder of one's days on earth. Not a trace of "I" or "Self" That is nice concept, many of us including myself, strived for that state for years. But here again is a dualistic concept, we can say there is no self, yet there is a self at the same time; strangely enough, those statements are not mutually exclusive. They are just different facets of truth. When students of Zen would say there is no "Self", the traditional Zen masters used to like to whack students on the head with a stick. And then ask the question, "who feels the pain if there is no self?"

As randomguy mentioned, Adyashanti addresses much of what you are talking about, The End Of Your World, is some of his finest material. I like Papaji a lot too, Mooji seems realized to me but his teaching does not resonate with me, for some reason. Krishnamurti never resonated with me either, although I like some of his quotes. I have listened and watched countless hours of Tolle's recordings and retreats, and as Kiki stated, I don't doubt, Tolle's realization one bit.

If a teaching resonates with you, that is the Presence within you responding, recognizing Presence in the other, (an idea you touched on earlier.) But if a teaching does not resonate or you don't feel Presence in it, then move on, but be careful not to extrapolate and jump to conclusions about that teachers degree of realization. The ego is very cunning, and it can trick one into believing all kind of stories in the name of truth. The ego likes to convince us that our spiritual path is superior to others, it is a clever way it can hijack awakening. It wants to believe it is on the "right" path or the "best" path; the mind/ego loves comparative thinking, evaluation and analysis. That is what it does best, it is helpful in some aspects of life, but not so helpful in spiritual awakening.

I would suggest not "kicking the old school", as the expression goes. If Tolle' message helped begin your awakening process, then the teaching served its purpose; say thank you and move in the direction of your inner flow. There is no such thing as an ultimate teaching or best way, there are only alternatives. Find what works for you and trust your own inner guide. But as Papaji says: "refuse the mind's guidance".

James
James
 
Posts: 983
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:06 pm

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby Webwanderer » Tue Feb 03, 2009 1:21 am

Wise words James. It's interesting to note that all the responders you listed, as well as yourself, spoke with clarity and insight. None were exactly the same, yet all added something valuable to the discussion. Were some right and others wrong? Or was it just our individual perspective on the same essential truths.

This just adds to all our understanding that, although we may gain useful pointers from any number of teachers, we must look for ourselves to truly appreciate clarity. Thanks for your always insightful comments.

WW
User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 6280
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby James » Tue Feb 03, 2009 1:31 am

Thank You WW, that is an interesting observation, there is that "uniqueness of expression."

One more point, sevenworlds. You mentioned how it seemed to you that Eckhart was using effort to stay present. I don't see that now, but there have been times in the past, when I was expending effort to remain present, so then it seemed to me that Tolle was too. That is an issue that many students of his have dealt with. There is a little me that is striving to maintain present awareness, which actually can just reinforce the little me. But this just shows the limitations of language. Eckhart gives the pointers that are the nearest approximations. And for while there may be struggle, until there is sufficient realization, and then effort is no longer an issue. Eventually one discovers Presence is always there, and always has been, not a me trying to be present, but Presence.

james
"Awareness is already present, already here, already now; before you try to be more.... In that recognition there's no effort, there's just acknowledgment"..."Awareness is not something you can understand, it's something you are."
James
 
Posts: 983
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:06 pm

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby Betty » Tue Feb 03, 2009 2:25 am

What does any of this matter? What does it matter if someone answers to their name? If what someone says strikes a spark in you, does it matter whose mouth it came out of? Everything that comes before you comes from the same place. Whether it comes from Tolle, your dry cleaner or the crazy man on the corner, if it hits its mark, you know you've been hit. If you still disregard what arises because it isn't pretty enough or because there might be something better around the next corner or because you're just plain bored with what's in front of you, then you've missed the point, entirely. Even I know that it all comes from the same place.
Betty
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 3:08 am

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby sevenworlds » Tue Feb 03, 2009 3:12 am

WW, what do you mean by "I am"? Is that synonymous with the terms God, Being, Consciousness, Self, etc... for you? And do you know what that points to directly and with complete certainty or is it knowledge you have acquired that makes you say "it exists beyond the words that define it"?

James, what you have stated about never-ending peace/pure bliss is exactly why I felt unsatisfied with Tolle's teaching after discovering UG. Eckhart often says things like "you can judge your state of presence by how much peace you feel" which is very easy to mistake for That itself. UG demolishes those ideas and says trying to hold on to the blissful experience chokes what is already there. Mooji also very clearly emphasises this. The very fact the peace can be seen to come and then go means there is a witness there. Then that witness must go too. Then, yes, thoughts and feelings can come but there is no 'I', no centre there to even recognise and believe in them as thoughts and feelings.

I understand the seeming paradox when this is spoken about. It is not the word I have a problem with. UG will give you one statement followed by it's opposite to such a degree that it makes it very hard, if not impossible, to intellectually grasp in comparison to Eckhart's teaching. It either hits you or it confuses you. Which is another thing. You must also have the freedom to compare. Eckhart helped free me from the trap of "myself" but then into another because through his explanations you start to build knowledge of that state. Not getting angry, not comparing, being compassionate, being loving... these are all traps that Eckhart can easily guide you into through the way he describes the state. UG was the first I heard say "you will never know what will express in that state". That freed me greatly to realise you can allow that energy or life force to express in whatever way it chooses - even anger or so-called bad habits - and it won't leave a stain.

One final thing which may or may not help emphasise what I'm getting at. I read an account of Papaji and his shopping habits when going to the market. A student asked him how he could buy the best quality veg at the cheapest price if he had no mind. Papaji laughed and said The Self does all these things automatically but it appears to the onlooker like there is someone inside the body making decisions. A similar comment from UG about his shopping habits: "I push my trolley down the aisle and watch an arm reach out, pick up a can and put it in the cart. It's nothing to do with me. I didn't tell the arm to move in that direction and select that particular can. It just happened by itself. When I reach the checkout counter, I have a basketful of food, none of which I have personally selected". That is the kind of pure autonomy I'm talking about.
sevenworlds
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 11:12 am

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby randomguy » Tue Feb 03, 2009 3:28 am

"you will never know what will express in that state"


That's good.

"I push my trolley down the aisle and watch an arm reach out, pick up a can and put it in the cart. It's nothing to do with me. ..."


Byron Katie has also said similar things (Thousand Names for Joy). If I recall correctly, I think she said we are all being lived. (We're not doing it even if we think we are and resist what is). Perhaps this shows Papaji completely surrendered to being lived.

I'm glad you stopped by the forum, 7w, good stuff.
Do the yellow-rose petals
tremble and fall
at the rapid's roar?
- Basho
randomguy
 
Posts: 923
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 1:00 am

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby sevenworlds » Tue Feb 03, 2009 3:30 am

Sorry, to reply to your second post James, it has been the other way round for me. For the first year of when all this happened to me and I was still finding my bearings, I didn't see the effort in Eckhart. I assumed that was the form it took. It wasn't until I started coming across other teachers, most notably UG, that I noticed a slight sense of effort that Eckhart seemed to be requiring to maintain that state. This aligns with his statements that even now after all this time he could lose the state of presence.

Betty, of course you are right. You can find this in anything and once you find it in yourself you start to see it in everything. I don't know myself why this question about Eckhart has thrown itself up but I just followed through to see where it would go. I certainly don't have anything against him. Before him, David Icke and Bob Marley were amongst the first people I encountered who touched on this truth and I got what I needed and moved on. There have been many others I've come across which my bullshit detector rejected immediately. Not based on what they say but what I feel when they speak. That has always been how I've discerned everything so far. Maybe I was silly to come on this forum and say such things but it was the only place I knew to throw the question out there.

I'm not saying for certain Eckhart ISN'T realised but that is the point. I know the only way to find out for sure is to finish what's left in me. Not that I can do anything about it. It was a very spontaneous question that arose in bed this morning while examining the state I seem to be in and my reasons for putting it out were selfish, to see if I could reveal what is going on with myself. I still feel the same. It's like this one thing of turning whatever seems to know I'm in this state back on itself is all that is left swirling around my head. Thanks for all your replies. I'll be off now.
sevenworlds
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 11:12 am

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby Onceler » Tue Feb 03, 2009 3:43 am

I'm with Betty on this one. Partial or full realization resides with the individual and has nothing to do, it seems, with the validity of this or that teacher who may be identified ( by whom exactly? ) as more or less fully realized. It reminds me of a more sophistcated version of the tantalizing boyhood discussions about which superhero could beat up the other. ( I always thought Spiderman could hold his own because he was smart, but arguably Batman was more resourceful and kept a cooler head-- Superman had obvious invincibility and was usually not allowed into the argument unless , of course, one took the kryptonite angle....then there was always Aquaman who I always maintained could kick everyones a** underwater...)

Is the quandry about whether ET is fully realized or are you? How to get rid of the pesky "I"; reduce the irreducible. It's a personal question that I have no idea about....sorry.
Be present, be pleasant.
User avatar
Onceler
 
Posts: 2200
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 1:35 am
Location: My house

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby Betty » Tue Feb 03, 2009 4:53 am

Wow. That was a lot of "me/not me" for someone who has experienced "no I".
Betty
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 3:08 am

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby James » Tue Feb 03, 2009 5:48 am

Sevenworlds you said:
Maybe I was silly to come on this forum and say such things but it was the only place I knew to throw the question out there.

I don't think it was silly, you felt the need to ask the question, so that is what happened. I am glad you stopped by. Somehow we get what we needed, it may not always be in the form that we were expecting. I think we all benefit from these dialogs. Life has a way of presenting us with lessons in various forms, sometimes they appear disguised in other forms. Asking questions, inquiry, contemplation can get to the root of our issues. We may think we need to know the answer to a question, only to discover that perhaps our questions themselves need to be examined, or it is our motives that need to be looked at in a sincere, honest way. It is all good.

Awakening is about removing our preconceived notions, the lifting of the veil. If our mental positions are well defended, we can't reach that state of unknowing in which we actually experience the unknown. We need to relax and let go, so the light of realization can penetrate, so we can see beyond what we have heard or expect or assume. So we can find out for ourselves, not taking anyone else's word for it. This may take time. Yes there is no time, and yet there appears to be time. For most of us this maturing does not occur all at once but rather gradually, with one moment of realization and then another. Yet as they say, it is really just a journey from here to here.

Take care and stop by whenever you feel inclined.

james
James
 
Posts: 983
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:06 pm

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby Webwanderer » Tue Feb 03, 2009 6:41 am

sevenworlds wrote:WW, what do you mean by "I am"? Is that synonymous with the terms God, Being, Consciousness, Self, etc... for you? And do you know what that points to directly and with complete certainty or is it knowledge you have acquired that makes you say "it exists beyond the words that define it"?


In the still clarity of presence awareness, "I" know. In the thinking of a spinning mind, I imagine I know. And the real beauty, is in knowing the difference.

You have brought an interesting question to the board in your topic. But at its root, as has been expressed here by so many in their own unique ways, it matters little how much ego ET still has. His writings appear to come from a far deeper place than a worldly ego can exist, and for his clear and insightful pointings I am deeply grateful. Sevenworlds, you have been a good sport, holding up well to a certain degree of "piling on". I hope you will stay with us awhile. Honest inquirey is always welcome.

WW
User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 6280
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby Craig » Tue Feb 03, 2009 8:08 am

I'd like to add that Eckhart does seem unusual in some ways because his teachings do seem to leave out certain aspects related to awakening. While I can certainly see the resonances of Advaita in Eckhart's teachings about watching your thoughts, it also seems at times that a lot of what he discusses involves practices or things we should "do", which seems that it could fuel the belief that you're a separate, individual "doer". I do acknowledge, however, that many of the sutras in Stillness Speaks have qualities more similar to the writings of other non-dual teachers.

Ironically enough, I've never felt that Eckhart perhaps wasn't fully realized the way sevenworlds suggests. Nevertheless, I do get the feeling that there's sort of a "two-track" system of spirituality, with Eckhart's teachings not quite the same as those of others. But, this could be- and probably is- all just perceptions and opinions in my mind. Even so, I can't help but be a little unsure at times.
Who am I?
Craig
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 5:49 am

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby goldenbirdies » Tue Feb 03, 2009 12:54 pm

Betty wrote:What does any of this matter? What does it matter if someone answers to their name? If what someone says strikes a spark in you, does it matter whose mouth it came out of? Everything that comes before you comes from the same place. [/i].


I found myself asking the same question, what does it matter ? Then I found myself taking it one step further - "does it matter if we awaken or not?" In the eternal Oneness, does it matter which bits are awake and which bits are "asleep"?

David
David

Steal Softly through Sunshine, Steal Softly through Snow - Don Van Vliet
goldenbirdies
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: St.Ives, Cambridge, England

PreviousNext

Return to General Eckhart Tolle Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest