Upon Being a Seeker and Religious Disclosure

Few people have sought 'truth' as I have. I have a strange and unique spiritual background. My parents owned a psychic institute when I was in my early teens. I also went to Catholic school. I practiced Transcendental Meditation and seven of their advanced techniques and the TM Sidhis. Then later I became Dzogchen Buddhist. I have also done sweats with Medicine Med of Cree Indian, and been introduced into the Golden Dawn of Mathers. I was asked to join at age fourteen. I turned it down following Maharishi Mahesh Yogi instead.

I have always been what I call a seeker. When one finds a truth and starts to espouse it or even sell it, when one makes lifestyle choices like becoming a nun or priest and ones life is thereby simplified, one is then no longer a seeker. The profession of the seeker is to always seek. Finding answers leads to more seeking. The real seeker after truth stops nowhere for long. The real seeker experiences an ever more lucid and expanding world picture. They become ever more universal. They do not rest amongst their laurels. They do not hide from anything revelatory. They also do not accept superstition, the infallability of 'the holy' nor do they submit to sublime authorities like gurus, kings, popes, or senators.

http://guruphiliac.blogspot.com/

It is always worthy to remember that all humans are composed of the same things - arms, legs, hearths, mouths, eyes, ears, brain. There is no especially gifted person. When persons are found who are gifted, it is usually in one area and in others that person may well be idiotic.

Thus priests may be well versed in spiritual lore but due to their withdrawl from society at large they may become morally corrupt. Nuns may be following their rules to such a dregree that they miss the spirit of things. Buddhists may be caught up in the reason of the Buddha and miss out on the specialness and holiness of things. Yogaholics may become blinded by a vision of the divine but unable to function amongst the material.

The main point I am trying to make is that if you are a seeker then you are not going to take someone's word for important things even if they yell their credentials from mountaintops and say they are sons/daughters of Gods. If they are true then they will check out. Those who seek to pursuade you to believe are often those who harbor greatest concerns and who seek to pursuade themselves. One should take a step back from all well accepted idiologies and give a thought to what things are being touted loudest and why they need to be so.

Secrecy? Why? What makes them so righteous that they can proclaim who is ignorant and who enlightened? Sometimes a system may well be proprietary and therefore could be very open to criticism even from others of like minded pursuit. Still, one must be able to be themselves the judge of this.

As in learning, the Sheldrake field, applies also to spiritual things. When I was a kid we had few supernatural thrillers. Now, in 2011 there are hundreds. One person's secret becomes ten years from now the basis of a whole new paradigm. Secrets do not last long, especially if they were valid and useful.

My main point is do not be absurd in thinking of yourself special for receiving some teaching, do not also think that that teacher is special. What you experience trying to practice Pada 3 of Patanjali as the TM Sidhis, next becomes the subject of a TV show like Heroes. What doesn't change is the implausibility of the act. The impractibility of being a Sidha. The falacy of thinking one is in the know more than others. Such egotism is never rewarded. The best leader shares their spoils. Got anything for me? I am all ears. Does that mean I'll take your word for it? Probably not. If I were to believe everything and everyone then that would also mean I had no experience and believed nothing and nobody especially.

Okay, over....

 

your main point is that your emphasizing your viewpoint over others but disagree with this way of "following". So to be a seeker we should not listen to you, I get it....
teachers that teach lessons are special to you and for that reason otherwise teaching would be free but its not...

 

can you tell us some of your truths? ..i'm interested in hearing some you have found

 

Spiritual truths are personal and do not apply for everybody for everyplace. One should be especially concerned with the quality of the truth which they have found if they make money because of it, that is, if they founf a spiritual truth and now it makes them money or they get some other, benefit from it. The reason one should be concerned if they are truth seekers is that contentment that comes from fulfillment of material desires but which has come as a result of protraying some spiritual nature may not in fact be spiritually fulfilling but materially.

People could not follow me. I could not even follow me. You cannot follow yourself as to do so you would have to be before and after yourself. But instead we all walk as we do, and there is no before nor after ourselves. those leaders we believe we follow yet do no longer exist, no do their millieux.

The best truth is that one found very personally, and lived also personally. The worst sort of truth is the unfelt contrivance of posturing to seem like one is satisfying another ideals, out of time and context. So one lies, follows a lie, and leaves themself no place for truth.

All I am saying is that if you're a truth seeker then you must be true to yourself. I am also implying that just because some spiritual 'masters' seem to be especially wise about some things, that doesn't mean they are always wise about everything.

I was really thinking about the Transcendental Meditation cult, and how it's really Vaishnavaism and politically runs to the extreme right with all the diminishment of women and democracy that Vaishnavaism expects, but TM lied about many things, and in so doing it belittled its clientelle, and therefore itself. Just as when either member of a couple belittles the other so they also belittle themself.

Can you think if any examples of this?

 

I have found that there are psychic experiences which prove that the higher faculities of humans do in truth exist. I have also found, because of that, that most stuff that people heave heard of is rank bullshit. Few people really have those psychic experiences.

Here's a truth I have experienced though practicing meditation for 30 years - all the symbols of all religions are taken from the transcendental deep meditation from cross, to third eye, to shiva, to buddha, and all the symbols - I have seen them all - and in truth they all do not mean anything qualitative or quantitative because that meditation experience cannot be qualified or quantified. Thus, no religion, or spiritual path has any quality or quantity, never will, and therefore is not any 'thing' and never becomes any 'thing.'

One other thing I knw - there is no previous life, no after life - this is all there is. How do I know? Because I can't even remember yesterday.

I know this - if humans destroy this planet there will not be another one.

What do you know? Nevermind what I know.

 

wow its really hard for me to follow some of your writing, I need to slow down and take each sentence at a time lol. You write very well, its filled with understanding it just takes me awhile to comprehend it.

which psychic experiences are you talking about? (you mean any?)
"Few people really have those psychic experiences. "

it seems right that each person would take his or her own spiritual path.
I am very earth centered and find that my spiritual path is much harder to
connect with when im in a hectic city location with many people.

Isn't life about connecting to our spiritual path?

Last night I had a truth come to me, they don't come that often maybe every 4 months or so depending on how I am following my path. I was "told" by my spirit guide (well she is present about half of my waking life so not sure if it was her or me but...)
she said that life is about following the light
she said anger hides the light
she also said in order to feel better you simply need to feel better
However, 2 nights before I had a dream with her in it so I have been feeling very "connected" lately.

Do these count as truths? they just came to me after she and I were trying to fall asleep.

 

another thing is I was pondering how symbols (the cross) and materialism can help people channel energies and ideas through materialism. What do you think of this?


Also
"one other thing I knw - there is no previous life, no after life - this is all there is. How do I know? Because I can't even remember yesterday."
what do you mean by "this" is all there is

Sorry for all the questions i'm just interested in trying to clarify your points so I can understand them in my terms, I like it!:2thumbsup:

 

The cross and symbols channel energies through materialism - not sure I get the concept. Can you break that down a bit?

By 'this' as all there is I mean that this life here and now. We have no real proof that anything else exists. Many people presuppose one thing based upon the mythos that someone else dreamed up so then we have systems of spiritual tinkering many steps removed from the original concepts.

There's a fantastic statement from someone (I forget who) about whether they believed in Jesus. The person answered that their only proof for Jesus was in how the people who believed in Jesus acted. To which he answered then - 'no!'

The proof for any spiritual entity is only as profound as the person who acts based in that being's belief.

I don't understand why some book or another prophecizes an afterlife. What is it about some other time which is any better than now? In what form would life be better served in thana this body, now? This is amazing and mysterious enough. Profound enough.

 

Yah I totally agree, what better way to live than through homosapien!!!!!

I'll tell ya, the MOST spiritual I ever feel and the ONLY way that I am capable of being spiritual is if I am conscious of my greatfullnes of being human and plainly, just being alive! being alive! be thankful every second of the day you are here and you will begin to see a light.

I was just saying that some mediums or psychics believe that through holding objects like a blanket a kid had, they can "channel" energies from the blanket and "read" it. I think some objects do hold energies, what do you think?

 

By holding another person we still know nothing about them.

 

You might want to work on that lol. you mean by being around someone you don't know anything about them?
You can't really prove anything spiritual right? ...you say the proof is through the actions the person makes in belief of a spiritual entity?
I would like to continue our discussion, how would you like to take it from here, what would you like to discuss? Are truths really important or just observations?

 

You asked me about claravoyants and clairsentience, or the ability to touch an object and know about it. I replied that even when touching the person themself what do you actually know?

However, different people have different levels of intuition. Some people can know quite alot, others maybe nothing.

An interesting clairavoyance is clairgustance, which according to Wiki is "...is defined as a form of extra-sensory perception that allegedly allows one to taste a substance without putting anything in one's mouth. It is claimed that those who possess this ability are able to perceive the essence of a substance from the spiritual or ethereal realms through taste."

Now that is fascinating to me. And also, because I have had some clairavoyancy in my life, yet I haven't ever experienced the types relating to smell or taste. Many of my yogic friends have told me about smelling, amrita, ambrosia, nectar, and so on. Me, I have never.

We can keep chatting here. This thread was very broad in scope so it's not like we're derailing it. Thanks for playing and continuing things.

In clairavoyancy the proof is not the vision but the accompanying feeling. That is the gold standard for the clairavoyant. Because the vision happens utilizing the same centers of the brain as dream. In Vedism it is called 'ritam bhara pragyam." http://masteryofself.wordpress.com/2010/10/27/deepak-chopra-ritam-bhara-pragya/

Both dream and clairavoyance utilize the visionary function of the brain but the internal difference or the truth quality is that the claravoyant also gets the definite feeling from the vision, whereas in dreams feelings are not so clear.

The one thing which stands out in the clairavoyant arts is the word, 'clear.' Truth is clearer than fiction. The meaningfulness of truth is punctuated by the truth itself. The most important truth will be shown over and over and highlighted for the observer.

Many people will proclaim one truth or another but the person listing will fall asleep or not grasp the significance. Thus, the truth spoken will not be particularly universal.

Many people get a bit of truth from something, that is, they feel the sense of truth even though they do not grasp the whole subject. Then they run off and start to preach that feeling to others, still never having understood the whole. Others yet get the feeling, without maybe any understanding. And then we have cults of people all thinking they know the truth. All the more especially because they then have others confirming their suspicions.

We should know that popularity is no grounds for the truthfulness of anything. Just because Britney Spears has masses of followers doesn't mean she's a good writer, or even singer. How often do we find this in other examples?

Popularity is no basis for truth. The basis for the truthfulness of anything spiritual is how specifically one has felt the truth of it.

The gist of this whole thread was that things are rarely as perfect as people want them to be. To the drgree that a spiritual system seems to be completely final and perfect, to that degree it often is merely supressing flaws, or being endlessly self redundant.

 

interesting viewpoints. some of them i would confirm, but i really know nothing. mostly, it seems, people come to understanding on their own schedule. sometimes that seems to me to be too damn slow. i would support an injection into the collective consciousness, but someone's already doing that.

 

Who is injecting what into collective consciousness?

Slow is the best for total transformation. Any quick solution to problems tends to go retrograde soon.

I used to hate the slowness of society. Same as I hated slow drivers. But then, put a cell phone in the hand of someone going 90 mph and you have a guided missile. Not all people can drive fast and with skill. Not all segments of society can cultivate more consciousness.

In Transcendental Meditation we were taught to go into samadhi, then just to act. To not make moods of expanded awareness. And in that way consciousness would become grounded and ones mind would be flexible.

Then you have people doing mindfulness techniques like 'walking meditation' and taichi. Sometimes people who are 'trying' to be 'mindful' seem to be very ponderous and slow. Is that mindfulness? Is that increase in consciousness? If society grows in consciousness will people brake for bugs? What's the line between the ponderous and the expanded awarenesses?

I still wanna know who is injecting what into collective consciousness?!