middleMan wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 10:13 am
The one huge contradiction I have found between his teachings and his very own actions has also bothered me to an extent.
He has spoken, in several of his retreats or talks (many of them available on YouTube), in a very chastising tone, about the logging industry that "cuts down the sacred forests (for money)". He says, "When they cut down these trees, they don't know what they are doing."
Of course, the above ^^ is true, but then I just cannot help asking - Ok, then please tell me how many trees were sacrificed to print the millions of copies of your best seller books, Eckhart ? How many sacred forests were cut down so you could amass your fortunes ?
If you really cared about the sacred forests, why do you not insist that your books be distributed only in electronic formats (now that such formats are readily available and widely accepted) ?
If I criticize the world for doing something, then do the very same thing myself, I would say that that is just about the dictionary definition of hypocrisy.
I'm hoping that I'm not the only one who has noticed this.
If you feel I'm wrong in what I say, by all means, let me know. I'm not averse to discussion.
Thanks for the invitation.
Middle Man, I was intent on moving on from this discussion, but it seems you wish to continue to express more justification for being so wronged by my comments.
So this is what I take issue with. To me it is unfair criticism to compare the manufacture of books, and all the value those books have brought to the world, to the destruction of 'Sacred Forests'. Not just Tolle's books, but anyone's books. They're pretty much all made from trees, yes? Where would we be without books? I certainly don't mind thoughtful criticism. I support it completely. But linking Tolle's books to the the destruction of sacred forests seems hypocritical if you've bought any books at all in your life. If only you and others didn't buy his books, and those of Shakespeare, and Lao Tzu, and so many others. If only schools the world over didn't use books to teach our children. Think of the trees that could be saved. Think of the Sacred Forests. (parody)
Can you not see how misapplied this is? This is why I referred to it as a thought storm. It seems little considered as if driven more by emotion than fair consideration. That's how thought storms are born. They are designed to elicit emotion and effect others opinions through false or irrelevant connections. Oh the children! If I spoke too strongly for you, it's because I'm not a fan of someone trying to play the emotions of others through misrepresentations only to make a point. In this case I found it worth calling out.
Consider, do you really know whether the trees used in his books came from some old growth 'sacred forest' or maybe from a tree farm of some small business owner grown just for that purpose? Did you call the publisher to inquire? Did you ask Tolle? Was it just hyperbole?
Of course thought is the foundation of conversation here. So are statements of love and of hate. That doesn't make them equally valuable. It's a straw man argument to suggest I don't agree that thought happens here just to validate your position.
For the record, I think there is no teacher, who is placed under sufficient scrutiny, that will not be found wanting in some way or another. Let's be accurate and clear in our criticism. Let's appeal to thought, not emotion.
WW
