Negative Enlightenment vs Positive Enlightenment
It's interesting how frequently people start threads here of the sort "what about my husband / women / money?".
And the reason is that ET has had a
Negative Enlightenment, which has nothing to say about the world. It is the inner half of life only, an achievement for sure, but partial.
And that's the reason people keep asking "well TPON is great, but what about my ... need for women etc...". Again and again we see these posts, these questions.
The same issue underlines ET's $200 million/ a year. Yes, that seems to me to go explicitly against his message of meekness. And the answer to how he comes to be in this contradictory situation is that he has not paid enough attention to the meaning of the outer world ... so it creeps in through the backdoor.
He doesn't refer to the outer world, but as he has
not dealt with it, the subconscious movements continue and hence he finds himself hoarding wealth.
Positive Enlightenment, teachings of, are quite rare. Most teachers of the past have taught asceticism ... to try to be still and ignore the body. To be celibate, poor, meek etc...
ET's message of being NOW says nothing about being wild like an eagle soaring in the sky, or the rapture of sex, or the need to express and create.
In fact he often mocks modern things. But even modern things ... are in Creation. His limited enlightenment does not include these parts of God.
RickRoss ... if you can withstand his negativity ... is sensing some of these problems in his thread.
To examine the difference we can take what the first poster here said : "Getting angry does not help anything".
This is the kind of comment that goes around spiritual groups. But is true ?
If a tiger comes to hunt you ... you better hope you get angry or you will be eaten. And that is how God's world is. Accept that.
And to my eyes, thread after thread on this board concerns the world ... and the lack of help with the world that TPON gives - TPON omits / avoids the world.
Sit still in the Now ... all will be well. But is it true ? What is you are starving ?
You see ....
Acceptance can be of a much higher order.
Accept the need to fight, to have sex.
Someone may appear
Still... but they may just be dead. Actually
Stillness is on the inside, being physically still is meaningless.
In the recent aside with WW and SC ... I suppose I am attempting to come out of group-think that defends Eckhart Tolle ... and to gain a deeper understanding.
Positive Enlightenment as you can see, is a deeper acceptance of "What Is", that includes the Outer World.
For the World,
Totality is what is necessary. This is Krishna's teaching.
In fact The Key Master did mention this on Page 3. But no-one on the thread understood the signficance :
This gives the appearance to the mind that the cause of peace and stillness, the cause of detachment from thinking, is that there isn't thinking taking place. That ain't right.
Eckhart wisely teaches to accept what is. But the conceptual framework for his "ego" implicitly includes a thinking resistance variable.
