This is Tim Rimmer's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Tim Rimmer's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Tim Rimmer
Recent Activity
Hey Sonia I had a look at the link to ‘Essential Sant Mat’ from the RSSB website. After an initial scan, some of it does seem to be shifting focus. A few direct quotes: 1. ’A true spiritual master is interested only in developing the disciple’s awareness of truth’ Can’t argue with that - however I find it hard to remember if it was ever put that way in the literature I used to read, and there are several lines in the article that mention ‘Awareness’. 2. ‘…merging our consciousness with the creative energy or divine power which permeates every human being and indeed the entire cosmos’. Ok = Other words for shabd. Yet it also seems to becoming more ‘inclusive’? Maybe in future they may add in references to the Divine Mother or even Shakti? - Holy Gaucamole! 3. ‘….the natural consequence of being born into a body that will not last forever. True masters view the present human life as one in a series of lives, governed by cause and effect’. While karma is mentioned, what’s interesting here is that nothing is said about the ‘soul’ being affected by karma. In my view this is another and more useful signal that what gets affected by karma is mind not soul. Clarified further when Charan Singh is quoted: 4. ‘When it [the mind] becomes attached to the inner sound and light..’ The only time soul is mentioned is in a quote from Jagat Singh: 5. ‘All the pleasures of the world, the attachment to body and senses, the I-ness and duality have to be discarded before the soul can become fit to partake of the sweetness of Nam. Sets a hi bar for us plebs. Soul comes into play in/is a state of non-separation. It’s about the totality of consciousness imo. As I keep harping on- the interpretation of soul as some sort of separated individualised entity is problematic. Current RSSB teachings seem to be evolving? to address this while at the same time maintaining a line of dogma to keep the organisation functioning? Oh and by the way a last quote: 6. ‘….live a clean, honest and moral life, in all areas of personal and sexual relations and in business. A true master sets very high standards here, well beyond what is required by society at large’ While this may still be the case it sure looks like this is problematic also! Best wishes
1 reply
Did you hear the one about the bearded baba who shaved off the face fuzz and sported a moustache instead. However, he got fed up with the handlebar style and went for something trendier. Henceforth a rumour then spread by blind believers saying that the ‘Mou’ had changed. But more seriously wouldn’t it be good if GSD just fronted to either legally clear his name and this on going saga up or take the rap. I tend to agree with what j wrote. One small part of me still hangs on to the idea that he’s somehow innocent. This thought helps me to partly reconcile i.e. justify all the years spent following RSSB. Yet a bigger part of me considers GSD really has dropped the ball and with it a great deal of credibility around the fundamentals of an organisation I really did once feel part of but now believe to be flawed. It all comes from the top.
1 reply
Brian Had a look at what you posted from Le Doux (a neuroscientist). First thing that comes to mind is whether or not he has researched any spiritual paths, been in nature a lot and/or is a meditator? If he was I might be more receptive to his take on consciousness, which from the quotes you give he believes is a function of the brain only? He (Le Doux) says ‘behavior has mostly been generated by nonconscious systems, and that behavior, even in humans, should be assumed to be nonconsciously controlled unless proven otherwise’. What does he mean by a nonconscious system? Something that is not conscious? I suppose he’s talking about human evolution being driven more by necessity and ‘external factors’ rather than choice? My thinking is that this is part of the problem with us humans - If we were more tuned into/conscious about these ‘systems’ we could well have more control on how we choose to react and therefor what our behaviour will be? I presume he is talking about such behaviour when he mentions anthropocentrism and anthropomorphism however saying the latter is about attributing too much to animals I don’t really get in the context given. I follow your argument about memory in regard to experience, and that this is a strong point Le Doux’ makes in regard to how humans survive and evolve. Le Doux says: ‘Separation of the history of emotions and other states of consciousness from the deep history of survival circuits allows us to see our place in this ancient story’. So part of the link as far as I can tell is that it is important to limit excess information that could impede/reduce connection with our survival strategies. Such info relates to events with emotional charge etc that may not be recorded correctly - fair comment. I wonder what Le Doux means by ‘other states of consciousness’? My view is that his view is limited and that we can only get to know the whole story when we have access to all available information. I reckon his use of the term ‘survival circuit’ could well be another name for the brain’s DMN or Default Mode Network, which to my current understanding is a kind of consciousness filtering system employed by the brain as a survival aid. However, when you look at what Pollan wrote and what is said about it by other neuroscientists, a lot of folk consider it to be the seat of the ‘self’ as it appears to govern a lot of behaviour that generates such. You (Brian) talk of conscious awareness being the tip of the iceberg. I’m assuming the picture involves a tip with a vast unknown bulk below. How about it being a tip with a vast expanding bulk above? I.e. the bigger picture is chopped down so to speak by such things as the DMN which helps generate this self with all its belief in separation and need to survive. As has been discussed several times on this blog various drugs can alter this perception. As can deep immersion in ‘nature’ a cool look from an ‘awakened one’ and of course meditation. As tucson reminded us: ‘We brains do the brainy stuff and continually fool ourselves. Thus, Self and 'other' are born. The search for self begins in a sea of 'other', always seeking what it already is. Separation and the resulting suffering and anxiety appear. Awakening is seeing:... The Universe is Conscious. This makes so much more sense to me.
1 reply
Hey s* Always cool to see/read a sufi story! Afterwards I went to the bookcase and grabbed a book and opened it at this page: “The Gamble of the Self” ‘Real prayer can only be yours When you have staked and gambled yourself away And your essence is pure. Then “a joy of the eyes” are your prayers And no separation remains, For knower and known are one and the same”. from Shabistari The Secret Rose Garden. Best wishes
1 reply
Hey Dungeness Great comment. ‘There is no separate entity. It's the One diminishing its awareness for a thrill-ride in duality’ - like it. Be a fine quote! I kind of agree with you that RSSB ‘mystics’ say we never left particularly when they state such things like ‘Love is becoming another being’ etc. What I still don’t get is why there’s so much emphasis on: - ‘Look mate, I made you separate from me and kicked you out of here, now it’s your job to earn my help to get your sorry arse back here. If you’re lucky (as I’m not in any real hurry) you may manage to do this after struggling through 4 lifetimes’. Recipe for staunch believers!
1 reply
Hey Sonia I hear ya - nice to read something from someone with a similar take on what ‘soul’ is/is not and also from a RSSB initiate too. I think the whole shebang throughout religious history particularly in the West has created a problem with this notion of a separated soul or ‘spark’ of the divine. Maybe its the word itself. It’s my view that many folk consider this soul thing to be an ‘entity’. It’s just taken for granted that ‘inside’ we are this entity somehow related to a bigger picture. Religious teachings such as RSSB dogma built a whole system about giving this separate entity a way to be reconnected. This is a dualistic process. Other traditions such as Buddhism keep the soul out of the process and concentrate (excuse the pun) on mind and realisation of such things as ‘anatta’ or no-self. In light of my own experience my interpretation is that the so-called separate soul is actually the self, small s (thought creation) rather than the Self, and that Self is the soul. We are actually Soul not ‘a soul’. Soul is consciousness. As you say “There is no where that “God”/the life force/love does not exist. The space in between spaces is filled the life force that many call God.” While you may use different terms I think we are talking of the same thing. We are already IT, we only believe and think ourselves separated from it, as someone said EGO = Easing God Out. The so-called spiritual path is about realising we are not separate - ‘we’ never were. Dogma of RSSB helps to strengthen the notion of separation imo. This is contradicted by the likes of GSD when he tells the likes of Osho Robbins that there is only the One, and on other occasions like when he said ‘Soul is the Truth’ - I was present when he said the latter. While this involves some intellectualising, I consider that understanding and seeing/processing this stuff and letting go of (or at least investigating) strongly held ‘unquestioned’ belief in such things as separate souls, can only help us on the journey. Came across a great term in the Recognition Sutras the other day that you might like: “Confabulating” - i.e. the inner commentator (who self-references and self-images constantly - i.e. the ‘self’) makes up plausible explanations for things, including one’s own behaviour, that actually have little to no basis in fact, while concealing to oneself that the explanation is fabricated. :-) BFN
1 reply
Now that's definitely a nice drop as I remember - Dera Chai! Isn't there some court deadline approaching? Best wishes
1 reply
Brian In the deep green/eco-centric philosophy of ‘Deep Ecology’ they talk of expansion as/into the ‘Ecological Self’ in contrast to the isolated/separated, non-connected ‘self’. In the former state one can make sense of a famous term (I think coined by the founder Arne Naess) —- ‘Thinking like a Mountain’
1 reply
Found some time to have a look at and respond to what Manjit (M) posted on the 20th. M - ‘truly amazing and genuine "medicines" are so maligned & demonised in western culture’ Certainly seems that way. Pollan’s book was really interesting and gives some background to why this is the case. Seems like a lot of the relatively recent negative press relates to issues stemming from bad trips and counterculture use in the 60’s. M - ‘my real interest or passion here is the intersection of "psychedelics" and "mystical experiences”’. Intersted in this too, so is Pollan. To me mystical experiences are essentially of the non-dual type. Some of the experiences discussed in Pollan’s book and by others definitely present in this way. So one could argue that taking psilocybin mushrooms could well provide experiences of a unitive nature ‘beyond mind’, whereas visions produced/witnessed in a meditative state are of a ‘lower order’. M - ‘it's [Mystical shabd yoga] only for about 1% of the RS sangat worldwide......and that 1% eventually leave the organisations.....:) The rest are content with their worldly psychological issues masked by religious-like blind belief, miracle stories, minor visionary experiences’ - These figures could well be accurate. Brian has often discussed current Sant Mat and that the vast majority of practitioners have few or zero experiences in meditation. However, maybe there’s truth to the stories about not getting off at train stations before the final destination. That is, some folk are prevented from having such experiences as their sense of ‘ego’ would be increased. Maybe. Interestingly we just had a visit from a couple of RSSB devotee friends . One actually mentioned the terms ‘blind faith’ being part of their current modus operandi. Amazing that they could still think like this after decades of meditation/RSSB path walking. M - 'the history of eastern mysticism, which is something that no follower of RS I have ever encountered does understand, believing as they do the erroneous version of mysticism painted by "Sant Mat" dogma, which has only existed for 200-300 years'. This is really interesting. I guess many of us when we found the ‘path’ never considered it’s authority and history. All this was taken on good faith as it was seen as the highest path of all so how could it’s history be questioned? I agree with Manjit that Shabd yoga likely came out of the ‘deeply sophisticated non-dual philosophy of kashmiri shaivism’. What’s possibly questionable about this is how/why the Sant Mat dogma developed into what Manjit calls ‘erroneous mysticism’ that - ‘over a period of centuries become associated with a life-negating, anti-world ancient-gnostic-like cosmology’. As I’ve said before the dogma of RSSB seems to generate such views in at least some of the followers. Case in point - one of our recent guests said with full conviction about ‘wanting to get out of here ASAP’. Granted things are getting pretty rough on planet earth. But having this thought as a central theme throughout one’s life, is likely not the best for the development of an empathetic, helpful, socially and environmentally responsible citizen - so needed at the present time imo. Definitely a limitation imposed by dogma and enhanced through blind belief. Also I’ve never really considered where Shabd Yoga originated. If you think about it scientifically/historically and not in mythical terms it could well have originated with early hunter gatherers in Africa hundreds of thousands of years ago. Who knows? Has David Lane looked into this? Without going on too long Manjt’s point about ‘soma’ is also interesting, as is it’s likely use in a lot of earlier religious/spiritual practices in India. I found Chowdry’s presentation on this quite eye-opening when I viewed it several years ago: https://youtu.be/kPf4FYNt9ok Some may think this is all intellectual waffle - I think it’s not only intellectually stimulating but highly relevant to how consciousness is evolving and could well help to fill in the gaps/provide insight into a path many of us have/continue to follow. A path which seems ultimately non-dual. But in my view both dualistic in its approach and potentially limiting/problematic for those with open minds who are after the truth of things and adverse to dogma. Best wishes
1 reply
Yes Brian an enjoyable read. Re the comfort and certainty of belief - the picture of the two crusaders often comes to mind - ‘isn’t life simple when you know you’re right all the time’ - :-) 5 …. ‘Unlike other animals, we construct an ego, I-ness, by looping our awareness back onto ourselves’. Was thinking about this the other day. Really interesting how I-ness is generated. It appears that existence happens as ‘I exist’ which as life progresses and we need to 'survive', for most changes to the belief ‘I’ exist. So it’s simply about reorienting back from the ‘I’ exist self to the ‘I exist’ Self by de-looping Awareness (for those who have an interest in this). 9 …..We just happen to be beings who can conceptualize ourselves as separate from everything else, which we really aren’t. We just need to get out of the habit of thinking ourselves separate including the notion of being a separated ‘soul’. That’s my current take on it with a r value of approx 0.75 Hi Eric I think we may have met at the Dera at least once. Best wishes
1 reply
Hi D Good link to the book by Geoffrey Folk - ‘Stripping the Gurus’ Certainly illustrates the dirt on many of the big names and after a brief scan also seems somewhat critical of Sam Harris too. I had to laugh at some of the table of contents subject headings: ‘Sex, Bliss, and Rock 'n' Roll-Satchidananda’, ‘Up the Asana - Yogi Amrit Desai’, ‘The Krinsh- Jiddu Krishnamurti’, ‘A Bit of a Booby - Ramakrishna’. Seems like quite a number get caught by the re-awakening of the one-eyed trouser snake! Interestingly no Sant Mat Gurus make the main list though I did see Kirpal Singh’s name mentioned in the Yogananda blurb. Maybe Gurinder may make the next Edition? After reading this stuff and Jim’s recent story I recall an experience I had with Thakar Singh in India: In the mid 80’s a girlfriend and I were making our way from Shimla to Manali via bus, thumb and foot when walking up a side lane in Shimla we walked straight into Thakar. I had met him once before so just said ‘It’s Thakar Singh isn't it?’ He nodded and invited us to a satsang he gave that evening. Pretty much the same as what I was hearing at RSSB meetings also. What was interesting was getting an invite back to stay the night at this Dharamsala where a number of devotees were bunked down. I remember seeing him the next morning surrounded by all these strung out/sick followers: the place was freezing (it was November) and they were all coughing and spluttering, trying to keep it together/meditate and live on raw food! Did not make much sense to us so we got out of there quick. Illustrates how we can have different experiences with these guys. Returning to Folk who ends his Yogananda essay by saying “One does not ask for perfection in any organization—spiritual, humanitarian or otherwise—knowing that it is run by imperfect human beings. One simply asks for minimal competence, basic integrity/ethical behavior, accountability, and the ability to admit when they are wrong, to be able to correct their course’. Not too much to ask, basic decency and applicable to all yes?
1 reply
Yet another relevant and useful contribution from Manjit imo. I also think Sonia does indeed wear her heart on her sleeve and is processing her RSSB/GSD stuff on this blog more than most. As Manjit says many commentators here (me included) continue to be influenced by decades of belief in what now is a religious system loaded like many others with outmoded dogma - of use to us in the past, but now arguably not. Question is what to do? Clearly one has to be careful about throwing one’s focus into yet another guru trip, when it seems clear a great number of ‘them’ have fallen off the perch for one reason or another. I was talking with a friend yesterday about some of the pod casts/conversations Sam Harris has on his App. I have not heard them but my friend discussed how various interviewees, mostly mindfulness practitioners, were endeavouring to develop criteria people could use to assess competency of teachers and how easy it is for the mind to gain control when one gets in a position of ‘knowing more than others’. In regards to the use of psychedelics, which I have little experience (but interest) I really enjoyed reading Michael Pollan’s book ‘How to Change your MInd’ - in particular its discussions of the similarities psychedelic experiences have with those resulting from deep meditation etc. Also Pollan goes into some depth re the medical and healing benefits of the likes of psilocybin. And although he was clearly another ‘Guru’ I like what Nisargadatta had to say about the need for us to grow up and stand on our own two feet: "You must find your own way. Unless you find it yourself, it will not be your own way and will take you nowhere.” Best wishes to all and the planet.
1 reply
Posts such as this provide me with a degree of frustration, because unless post readers have read the book, folks (like myself) who have not, are left with a cool excerpt but not much context in which to place or critique it. Yet that’s the nature of the blog and Brian is the ‘BlogMeister’, so If we are keen to clarify what’s quoted then I guess it’s up to us to read the book ourselves. When I think of calculus I think of integration such as dy/dx etc (as remembered from final year at high school). What I see in this post is information pertaining to the super usefulness of calculus especially its predictive power. However, and although it’s related, the discussion then morphs into someone’s theory of quantum electrodynamics, aligned with terms such as ‘the language god talks’ and the theory of how ‘light and matter interact’. I find this is more interesting, and it’s affect was to remind me of what I perceive (as a ‘lay person’) is the ‘non-nature’ and unpredictability of quantum mechanics. Also, the whole thing of how the observer and observed are entwined. That QED is about how light and matter interact got me thinking: that this points to how energy operates, about the interplay between matter and ‘consciousness’, the caused/uncaused, being/non-being etc. Such things are equally the domain of other modes for finding truth and dare I say it ‘mysticism’. Also when it comes to quantum mechanics, while it’s often somewhat hard to decipher/follow (for me anyway), it’s intriguing to read what 777 (alias the Qubit Kid) has to say: 18.12 .19 - ‘YOU are the Energy …. a LOVE Accumulator’- ……. there’s got to be some calculus in this :-) Also in regard to free will: ‘You have it at the start and at the end of the “voyage” which doesn’t happen, But not when You imagine that something happens’ i.e. ultimately there is no one there to take the trip - just energy/consciousness - however as ‘matter’ someone may appear and apply some calculus to crunch the numbers. That’s my take on it. Best wishes for Xmas and New Year to all
1 reply
Manjit’s recent post provides some great food for thought, particularly for those starting to question their relationship with RSSB. I believe his version of events in the evolution of Sant Mat is as likely as any and an important alternative analysis for folk who traditionally followed (like many of us) the standard RSSB story. That Sant Mat evolved out of Kashmir Shaivism is also plausible given the emphasis the latter has on the ‘vibrational nature’ of awareness/consciousness. Such a perspective could also offer argument that Sant Mat in it’s earlier form had a non-dual focus, and only in more recent time has this ‘faith’ taken on what Manjit calls a ‘demiurge infused, world-denying, escape-based’ focus. I guess a few others who have studied the history of Sant Mat such as David Lane could support or refute Manjit’s claims, be interesting to see, though such debate has probably been thrashed out elsewhere and even here in the past. I can’t recall it however, and it could prove helpful to folk who are trying to reassess how and where they now stand. I had a bit of a reaction to Manjit’s comments in regard to Charan: his parroting of the teachings and weather or not he was a real mystic. From my memory of previous posts, Manjit is not initiated by Charan and did not meet him? All I can say is that it was pretty good hanging out with him. Pretty cool as masters go imo. Which brings me to something ‘um’ said a while back in regard to reasons why we (generally speaking) got initiated, what we understand by ‘master’ and why we chose RSSB and not other so-called paths. At the time (1981), I came to the conclusion that the Sant Mat path as per RSSB had the highest so-called ‘reach’ - this was after an intense search. What then clinched it for me was another so-called guru’s answer to a question I'd asked, he replied ‘there are 7 Perfect Masters in the world, Charan Singh is one of them’. So it’s interesting to observe and assess where we now find ourselves. One wonders about these paradoxes that still rankle so-called former followers as well as those whose adherence to dogma is being shaken-up: That a ‘perfect master’ appointed a successor who certainly seems to be behaving not how a new ‘perfect master’ is supposed to behave. That this master lives in luxury while promulgating teachings based around living a life of low-impact simplicity and honesty That this guru is involved in a large-scale complex interplay of financial dealings that many consider to involve fraud. That this guru continues to publish a swag of old teachings/concepts based around such things as spiritual hierarchies, reincarnation, negative/positive powers and the soul’s separation. Yet in certain circumstances he says there is only Oneness and that the ‘soul is the truth’. This stuff if looked at critically has to help folk wake-up and better utilise both heart and head in trying to get some balance and find out the truth of things. I think approaches such as Kashmir Shaivism as pointed out by Manjit are both more integrated and inclusive in spite of being held within their own 1000+ yr old tradition. I think Sonia’s recent points about the need for more of the feminine is relevant. It would be good if ‘essay’s’ such as this latest from Manjit could make their way to places like the RSSB website, thus indicating they are open to informed critical comment. After all didn’t Charan Singh often say critics are our best friends? (or something to this affect).
1 reply
Yes Brian Like you I find not just this, but several of j’s recent comments good reading. I think he/she makes some great, logical, concise points - a nice contrast to the many ‘beliefy’ posts proclaiming the workings of karma, the guru as GIHF etc. Based on the on-going information from the Indian Press I read on this blog, it appears what j says is FACT: “What we're commenting on is public record: 2 separate parties have accused Baba Gurinder Singh Dhillon of taking huge sums of money and refusing to pay it back”. Something’s not right. This is just not ‘cricket’. Let’s hope that justice is served to all parties and the drama get’s sorted. J made several other comments that triggered further reflection on my part: j - “I haven't picked up the book in many years, and I probably first read it 40 years ago. When I first read it I was filled with wonder, if not outright belief. But reading it last night the feeling was one of deep suspicion. Scratch that. I now feel that 90% of Yogananda's book is just made-up stories that were published for the sake of attracting new students.” I recall having a hard time putting the book down as I read it on a bus trip in the Vancouver area in 1981 - (almost 40 years back). Blew me away too and I couldn’t wait to get into the SRF teachings and visit some of the Centers. Pretty different these days eh? It seems like there’s dirt on just about all the Gurus! (except for Jesse’s Missus’ one :-)) j - “What a strange, dry, humorless and soulless religion RSSB has become. Everything about it is bleak, robotic and antiseptic”. I found this comment a bit harsh but think there’s some truth to it, though it’s nearly 10 years since I attended a satsang or visited the Dera. Back then it seemed clear to me that the whole thing was transitioning into a religion. For those interested in truth rather than dogma that generates belief - time to shift focus. How about some Zen metal ? Check out what’s said at 2.05mins: https://youtu.be/CbI79e5iZKs Best wishes
1 reply
Hey Whodunit I’m assuming your ‘intellect is a hindrance’ comment is in response to my recent post? Yes, it is an ‘intellectual’ response to what 777 posted earlier, how else is one to engage in such discussion? As said, I’m enjoying reading and assimilating what I currently see in ‘The Recognition Sutras’. It’s always good in my view when someone else says something that resonates/gels with how I’m thinking/feeling about stuff - particularly when it comes to gaining further insight/perspective into the truth of things. I’d say that over the years some aspects of my intellect have sharpened as I’ve become more aware of how the mind operates. I’d also like to think that my ‘heart’ has remained open. I believe that this so called ‘spiritual path’ is as Spencer says a combo of both head and heart. A good word for the result of the two working together would be ‘discernment’. Discernment imo is another term for ‘clear thinking’ which (putting a Sant Mat view on it) according to Jagat Singh means the job is 90% done. In my view such discernment would be important for understanding this relationship of perceiver and perceived which according to Kashmir Shaivism provides insight into that which is the ground of everything. Of course if you can do the full Bhakta as per Sant Mat then arguably one could arrive at a similar place but who does that - a few fingers on a Saint’s hand? Hail James Sutherland! How are you? Pardon my ignorance but I’m trying to get my head around a vision of the ‘Spermy 500’ and hatching from an egg! :-) No, I can’t recall/am unable to retrace a spermy path back to the Ultimate Creator. Though I understand that the spermy racers derive from the Central channel? Have you done it since winning the race? Is it a take on destiny? Or soul? I remember re-experiencing some of my birth trauma when I did some rebirthing trainings in the late 80s - does that help?. Are you lumping the Neo-Advaita Vedantists in with the Kashmir Shaivites? Tut tut. :-) Best to all
1 reply
Hey 777 All this crying is gonna make the blog soggy! ‘That each consciousness IS THE CREATOR - TOTALLY’ Well, well - if that ain’t what the soul is then more rain falls up then falls down! Both individuation and universal simultaneously, well that’s my take on it - blows the mind I reckon. All this stuff about separate pieces trying to find their way home = a diversion imo. Also, as I’ve been slowing moving through the ‘Recognition Sutras’ it seems that these teachings have similarities with some of what you get in Sant Mat - only more in depth with both a top down and a bottom up approach to things. At the moment it even seems to me that Sant Mat may well have come out of teachings such as these (Kashmir Shaivism), as folks like Manjit have mentioned in earlier posts. Further To quote Wallis (p.89/90) - ‘In the act of perceiving, the perceiver is subtly changed by what s/he perceives, and what s/he perceives is changed as a result of being perceived, and this is constantly happening, moment to moment in an endless flux - the infinite dance of awareness….. …what you bring to any given experience (which of course is your entire history) profoundly shapes the nature of that experience …… the object affects your consciousness, and your consciousness affects the object …..’ In regard to being aware/paying attention to this he [Wallis]says: ‘This intimate of a relationship between subject and object is only possible, the Tantrikas argue, if they are two aspects of one reality, and therefore they sought, through awareness-cultivation techniques, to realise each object of experience in its true nature: as a vibration of Awareness’. Wallis then goes on to draw parallels between these teachings and Quantum Mechanics: ‘ …. There is no such thing as observer-independent reality. In other words, we cannot ever know the purely ‘objective’ or unobserved nature of a thing, because it has no such nature…. If you wish to experience reality differently, you must radically reconfigure the way in which you perceive …' I think this is good stuff. Best wishes
1 reply
Hi folks Always good to read something deep, meaningful and heartfelt amidst all the hullabaloo re RSSB. Thanks Jim Sutherland for your recent post again outlining your inner experience with Charan Singh and your description of Samadhi ‘but ONLY AWARENESS OF,....”I” still exist’ I like your use of the term AWARENESS and that you link it to the “I” still existing. If you don’t mind an interpretation - it’s my view with some experience, that what you describe is the “I Am” state - and it’s not about the self (little I) but is about expansion as Self/Consciousness. There’s some interesting reading to be had in Chris Wallis’ book ‘The Recognition Sutras’ about the role of Awareness in all this i.e. it is our essence. Rodney Smith calls it ‘Formless Awareness’, Jiddu Krishnamurti ‘Choiceless Awareness’. I think Maria de La Torre adds to this information by sharing her own experiences with Charan Singh and her talk of Amma Amritananda (who I know very little about as yet) and the ‘breathless’ state - where the body is essentially dead, the mind is still yet (as I see it), Awareness remains. From memory, such perspectives/takes on things were not discussed in Sant Mat literature, however I think many if not all sincere truth seekers/devotees and deep meditators will experience this at some time. Thanks guys for your posts.
1 reply
To Manjit and any others who maybe interested: “In the Tantrik view, each of us is a complete expression of the energy of consciousness. Each of us is a perfect movement in its endless dance of self-exploration self-realisation, and self-love. Let us then celebrate the fact that the opportunity has been given us to become aware of what we are. Our awakening to our true nature is integral to the energy of life and instrumental to its unfolding. Whether you can sense it right now or not, you long to awaken to your total being, and by so doing to fall in love with the whole of reality, which is nothing but an expression of your own Self….” From Christopher Wallis - The Recognition Sutras, intro p.11. If this is not a cool take on the ‘What is’ , then what is? Marjorie Woollacott mentions the same at the end of her book ‘Infinite Awareness - The Awakening of a Scientific Mind’ -‘Pratyabhijna - hrdayan’ - The Heart of Recognition. A useful, practical Buddhist take that compliments this stuff imo, is Rodney Smith’s ‘Awakening - A Paradigm Shift of the Heart’. Best wishes to all.
1 reply
Tim Rimmer is now following The Typepad Team
Oct 31, 2019