Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Talk about anything Tolle-related here.

Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby sevenworlds » Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:31 pm

I've been checking out this forum now and again for some time but this is my first post. I learnt of Eckhart exactly 2 years ago, having no prior interest in spirituality.

I've now reached a point where I'm questioning the state Eckhart is in. This began about one year ago, where I stumbled upon another individual, U.G. Krishnamurti. I was actually looking up J. Krishnamurti on youtube and at the side, in the 'related videos' section I saw a clip of U.G and was more drawn to it. At first I didn't want to hear what he had to say because it seemed to be blowing up all that I'd discovered through Eckhart during the previous year but I knew he was speaking the truth. I started to lose interest in Eckhart, and although I could still sense something from him whenever I listened, the language he used didn't hold me anymore. The thing with Oprah kind of finished it for me.

For a while I had a bit of a battle going on, because I couldn't dismiss U.G. so easily and I felt a power and effortlessness with him that seemed to be lacking in Eckhart. At the time I thought it was probably my mind, comparing, trying to figure out which one was 'better' or more 'real'. Eventually I accepted that they were probably both talking from the same place but the form of expression it took was just very different and since then I have rarely watched, read or listened to Eckhart. Every time I do, I feel compelled to move on.

In the last few months I've been drawn to Mooji, Papaji and one or two others who have helped me see the same thing from different perspectives. U.G. has remained consistent and I have never once had a doubt that he is 'the real deal'. Just recently I've had the feeling that I am in the same state as all these people yet I can discern there is still a subtle 'I' feeling there. I can even go long periods of almost fooling myself that there is no 'I'. Yesterday I came across an article related to Ramana Maharshi where it spoke of the 'I' needing to "die in the heart" and how the 'I' can enter the heart for long periods but not completely die. A person in that state could speak like a fully-realized being and have all the experiences of one but wouldn't be completely finished. I feel this may be happening to me.

It made me wonder if Eckhart is also sort of 'stuck' there without realising. U.G. spoke of how he underwent a physical death and all these changes took place in his body. Over the last 2 years I also have had many physical changes yet I've never heard Eckhart speak of this. U.G also stated many times that there was no chance of a fall from grace for him. That his transformation was so complete the ego could never return. You only have to look in his eyes to see there is literally nobody there. Ramana also underwent this second final death experience. This was one of the things that puzzled me about Eckhart when I first heard U.G.'s story. Eckhart has never really went into detail about his transformation other than it all happened in one night. But did it? He has stated many times that he must be vigilant or his ego could develop again. When you watch video of U.G., his movements look so effortless. Everything about him is so effortless and natural. The fearlessness in his speaking and so on. The feeling I have with Eckhart is there is some very slight effort involved to remain "present". Also when he speaks there doesn't seem to be quite the same authority to his words. Very very close but not the same power and I wonder if this is what repels me from him now. When I watch Mooji or Papaji I sense that power - they can be gentle and humourous but at the flick of a switch can become provoking and blunt if it is necessary to shatter somebody's illusions.

I'm not interested in attacking Eckhart for the sake of it. I'm doing this for purely selfish reasons. By finding out what's not real, what is real must remain. Eckhart plays his part and possibly gives people their first experience of this but for whatever is there to express itself completely naturally and freely he could be stalling the process.
sevenworlds
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 11:12 am

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby Webwanderer » Mon Feb 02, 2009 3:17 pm

To say that "I" no longer buy into a "me" is one thing. It frees one from the identification with thought and allows one to truly live in the moment as aware being. But to say their is no "I", no sense of self or being that transcends the experience of the physical world, seems to plunge one back into a purely mind based reality/experience, even though it is one of randomness rather than imagination.

Such disdain for the human expression of essential beingness is not at all attractive. I listen to ET and my consciousness clears and expands; UJK feels more like fingernails down a chalkboard. Admittedly I have not read nor listened to a great deal of his work as I get no sense of inherent love nor joy in his teachings. Following UJK's teachings seems to be an invitation to despise mankind's existance on the earth because of its often detrimental effect on other ecosystems, the world thereby being better off without its presence.

But humanity may have a higher purpose than just another animal destructive to ecosystems, and the world and its natural systems may owe it existance to that purpose.

WW
User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 6278
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby sevenworlds » Mon Feb 02, 2009 4:02 pm

No, that's not what I'm talking about. How can there be true freedom with an 'I' still there? That means there is a still a doer. Eckhart may have helped in recognising the "me" you speak of and I would say the link or momentum of thought was broken at that point. From then on, for the last 2 years, an intelligence other than mind has taken over and has been guiding my actions. I've had all sorts of experiences and the body has went through very painful processes and since this year began I feel a very definite sense that there is nowhere else to go. It's as if the 'I' is now somehow drowning in the sea with a feeling of almost constant peace, no matter what aches and pains are on the surface but the fact is this 'I' is still bobbing around in it, still able to recognise the peace.

Basically, there is some entity, very subtle, but still there, which seems to know it is in the same state as Eckhart and others. That is all that seems to be left that gives me a clue it cannot be the real thing, final death, whatever you want to call it. I don't think there is anything to be done about it but for some reason this morning it threw up the question about whether Eckhart is fully liberated. What really makes me wonder is the way he often says he has to watch for his ego returning. To me, being in this state now, that seems like an 'I' entity which has diminished greatly but is still lurking there in the background.

It surprises me you feel the way you do about UG. What I hear from him is a very positive message. If you really hear what he is saying it is not at all an invitation to despise mankind but the mind will make you believe so. I don't mean to cause offence but it is comments like that which are precisely what make me wonder about Eckhart's teaching. The flowery language and terminology he uses seem to encourage people to intellectually grasp this but not directly know it.
sevenworlds
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 11:12 am

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby randomguy » Mon Feb 02, 2009 4:40 pm

I guess we're not going to resonate with every teacher. Hasn't any explanation or teaching beyond "I am" left the realm of truth anyway, and exist only as pointers at best? I have read Krishnamurti in the past and did not continue reading past a few days. However, after reading this post I may check out some videos. Sounds like it's time for you to leave ET's books on the shelf. I find presence from his teaching.
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 » Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:15 pm

Yes, the words themselves can never capture and contain the pure truth, no matter from which teacher. I did listen to and read Eckhart frequently for about a year and was drawn to do so by more than the words. He was the first spiritual teacher I came across - accidently - and from the first moment I heard him I never had a doubt what he was saying was true. I still don't doubt that.

When I found UG though, there was suddenly something not quite sitting right with Eckhart and I haven't been able to see him the same way since. I can still feel a strong presence from him but something in me seems to be now suggesting he hasn't gone all the way. It's almost like something is missing. It's not so much what he has said because I don't doubt that but it's what he leaves out. I don't think it's about the form because although UG resonates with me most strongly, I can hear the same truth coming from Mooji, Papaji and Ramana. They all leave me with the feeling they are completely 'dead', nobody there and they all seem to suggest there is no way back from that state.
sevenworlds
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 11:12 am

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby eputkonen » Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:47 pm

sevenworlds wrote:an article related to Ramana Maharshi where it spoke of the 'I' needing to "die in the heart" and how the 'I' can enter the heart for long periods but not completely die. A person in that state could speak like a fully-realized being and have all the experiences of one but wouldn't be completely finished.

How can there be true freedom with an 'I' still there? That means there is a still a doer.

That is all that seems to be left that gives me a clue it cannot be the real thing, final death, whatever you want to call it.


U.G. still has an ego. I watched a video of his and someone said "U.G., I have a question" and he said "Yes?" He responds when his name is called. There is a mental recognition that 'people are referring to "me" when they say "U.G."' The same goes for Ramana and Papaji and Mooji. No ego would mean no response to a name/label.

The concept you have built around what "final death" means is flawed and also is trapping you; furthermore, any concern you have for the ego will strengthen and empower the ego.
"Completely die", "final death", and "completely finished" are traps...they keep you playing the game. There is only the realization that occurs in which all seeking vanishes.

There can be true freedom with an 'I' still there because the 'I' only binds when it is considered real. When the realization that the ego is a mirage and the Self is realized...then whatever remains of the "I" is no longer problematic or of concern. Like a mirage, it only causes problems when you think it is real (and there really is water over there). The appearance of the "I" can not bind...just as an image or hologram of handcuffs could not bind you. People do not swing sticks at shadows to beat them...so there is point at swinging at the mirage of ego once it is seen. As the "I" is only a mirage...has appearance, but no substance...there is no doer.
Namaste,

~ Eric Putkonen
@EngagedNondual on Twitter
Blog at http://www.EngagedNonduality.com
User avatar
eputkonen
 
Posts: 446
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 4:53 pm
Location: Mound, MN

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby kiki » Mon Feb 02, 2009 6:19 pm

Nicely said, eputkonen.
"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 sevenworlds » Mon Feb 02, 2009 6:26 pm

That is how it looks from the outside. We see someone shout their name and they look as if they respond like anyone else but it's all one movement in that state. UG doesn't even know why he is responding. We are functioning no differently, except we delude ourselves we are involved in the process. The whole thing is automatic and mechanical. If you listen to some other UG talks, you will often hear him say he never listens to anybody and he doesn't even know what he himself is saying. Some talking happens over there, in the other person, and a response comes from him. He doesn't know how it is happening. If all is one how can it be any other way?

When I speak of "final death", yes, that is simply a concept I use for the purposes of communication on here. There is no other way I can explain. As I said earlier, I'm not looking to DO anything to bring about some final end. You could say something is getting in the way otherwise I wouldn't be writing this but at the same time I understand whatever will happen will happen in it's own time and no effort is necessary. So I'm not posting here looking for any answers. I don't even know why I'm posting. It just dawned on me this morning that going through some mystical transformation all in one night the way Eckhart apparently did could put you in a state extremely close but not really 'there'. So I thought I'd throw it out here.

Words are very tricky with this of course. What I'm trying to get at is first of all, the 'I' seems to separate itself from the ego, and at that point you no longer believe you are anything. You can say you are not this or that. Yet there is still an 'I' left and at that point you can experience bliss, understand all the texts in a new way and have all sorts of mystical experiences and believe you are in that state but the very fact you know you are in that state means the 'I' has not completely merged/dissolved into nothingness. That's where I seem to find myself.
sevenworlds
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 11:12 am

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby James » Mon Feb 02, 2009 6:50 pm

Sevenworlds,
To think in terms of either it is this teaching or it is that one, and one excludes the other, is in the realm of duality. All teachings are at best useful fiction, approximations of truth but not truth itself. They are meant to point you in the direction of experiencing it directly, to realize it. Each teaching is a different expression, like facets on a jewel. To fixate on only one facet and say that is it, to the exclusion of the other facets, is to stay stuck. If one teaching resonates with you more than another, then explore it, that is probably what you need at the moment. If some aspects of a teaching, don't bring you to a direct experience, than put them down. That is not to say that it is wrong, It may be helping others. Go with the flow of life, stay fluid, and don't personalize expressions of truth as if it is anyone's personal property; it all comes from the same source.

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

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby sevenworlds » Mon Feb 02, 2009 7:07 pm

No, that's not what I'm saying. I've stated that I can see the same thing behind the words of many teachers. Whether I listen to UG, Mooji or Papaji, I feel like I'm listening to myself. Pure and simple. It has nothing to do with personalising a teacher. Having said that, if you look at those teachers, you will often find they hold one particular person up as their Master - usually the one who played the biggest part in their awakening. They understand there is really only one Master appearing in various forms but for some reason, in this world, we often feel a pull to one over the other. Maybe UG plays that role for me, I don't know, but it doesn't detract from any of the others. Truth is truth.
sevenworlds
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 11:12 am

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby randomguy » Mon Feb 02, 2009 7:43 pm

Would it mean anything if I said, you are right about Tolle and everything you have stated here?
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 » Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:18 pm

:lol: Funnily enough, no. That's what I'm saying, I don't know why I'm doing this. I've no interest in being critical of Tolle. I'm curious to know why he often states he still has to be vigilant of his ego returning when the others don't seem to have that concern. Something about that doesn't sit right with me.
sevenworlds
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 11:12 am

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby James » Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:26 pm

sevenworlds said:
Maybe UG plays that role for me


If something resonates, why worry about what no longer resonates? You are your own authority, you don't need us to tell you what works for you :D

J.
"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 sevenworlds » Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:01 pm

I'm not worried about it. It's just that I seem to have reached a point where I feel I am in the state all the teachers speak of. Yet there is still this sense of 'I' that knows it is in that state. It's a very odd feeling. All through this topic there is a deep sense of peace, a space of peace constantly there around this 'I' who is writing. The other teachers seem to have spoken about this point, this dilemna where the 'I' has to sort of implode or disappear into nothing but curiously it's an aspect Eckhart doesn't seem to cover. That combined with his statements that he has to be vigilant of his ego somehow seems to suggest to me that he is possibly operating from this state also, which is not quite the same as the others. Maybe by going into this examining Eckhart something will be revealed to me. In the process, maybe this topic will inadvertently help someone else here to reveal something in themselves. Who knows why we do anything? :)
sevenworlds
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 11:12 am

Re: Is Eckhart FULLY realized?

Postby randomguy » Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:56 pm

sevenworlds, have you listened to End of Your World by Andyashanti?

I like his teaching because he speaks to the physical changes in the body-mind that you mentioned, while Tolle does not.

In the interview at the end of the EOYW set Adya talks about a gap between a thought emerging and the recognition of that thought being not true. He described there being no way to control the emergence of thoughts, but through a practice of present awareness and inquiry, the recognition of thought as untrue happens nearly instantaneously with the emergence of the thought.

I believe he has quoted another teacher who says that one can sooner lose your ego as lose your shadow (which was elegantly described by eputkonen above). I have a mild curiosity too why both Tolle and Katie who described a sudden awakening speak little about changes in the body. Though, I doubt neither as a teacher. It could be as simple as more kinesthetic perceptive awareness in one over the other.

Anyway, I feel there is still a lot I have yet to absorb from the EOYW set, but it is teaching that really goes into the awakening process and might touch on your questions about the 'I'.
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

Next

Return to General Eckhart Tolle Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron