HAVE YOU SHIFTED? – ‘SOCIETIES & YOU & ME: BIG CHANGE, LITTLE CHANGE’

metamorphosis-dragonfly
RP If you look in the mirror and this is what you see great things are ahead – or perhaps you should re-boot your life? – Lol!
WikiPedia – A dragonfly in its final moult, undergoing metamorphosis from its nymph form to an adult.

-0-

HAVE YOU SHIFTED? – ‘SOCIETIES & YOU & ME: BIG CHANGE, LITTLE CHANGE’ session 12 25/03/15

“Breath is the bridge which connects life to consciousness, which unites your body to your thoughts. Whenever your mind becomes scattered, use your breath as the means to take hold of your mind again.” ― Zen Master Thích Nhất Hạnh. He also says; “Breath is my anchor.”  BREATH MANTRA – IN: ‘breath…’ OUT: is my anchor

QUESTIONS: Q 1. On your spiritual or inter-spiritual journey have you undergone one big life-changing event or a series of smaller ones – i.e. little steps of insight or one big ‘shazam’ experience?  Q 2. Is the history of humankind a mirror of the inner struggles of the individual’s spiritual journey?  What are the successes so far – e.g the establishment of the Red Cross (cf The Good Samariton?)  Q.3 Is it useful to see so-called paradigm shifts in as the social co-equivalent of what happens to us as individuals?

A) Ulrich Leonard Tölle became Eckhart Tolle – One night in 1977, at the age of 29, after having suffered from long periods of suicidal depression, Tolle says he experienced an “inner transformation.” That night he awakened from his sleep, suffering from feelings of depression that were “almost unbearable,” but then experienced a life-changing epiphany.

Recounting the experience, Tolle says;  “I couldn’t live with myself any longer. And in this a question arose without an answer: who is the ‘I’ that cannot live with the self? What is the self? I felt drawn into a void! I didn’t know at the time that what really happened was the mind-made self, with its heaviness, its problems, that lives between the unsatisfying past and the fearful future, collapsed. It dissolved. The next morning I woke up and everything was so peaceful. The peace was there because there was no self. Just a sense of presence or “beingness,” just observing and watching.”  (remember his zen quote ‘No self – no problem!?

Tolle recalls going out for a walk in London the next morning, and finding that “everything was miraculous, deeply peaceful. Even the traffic.”  The feeling continued, and he began to feel a strong underlying sense of peace in any situation.[7]

Tolle stopped studying for his doctorate, and for a period of about two years after this he spent much of his time sitting, “in a state of deep bliss,” on park benches in Russell Square Central London, “watching the world go by.” He stayed with friends, in a Buddhist monastery or otherwise slept rough on Hampstead Heath.

His family thought him “irresponsible, even insane.” Tolle changed his first name from Ulrich to Eckhart; by some reports this was in homage to the German philosopher and mystic, Meister Eckhart.

A 2012 interview article states that he saw the name Eckhart on one of a pile of books in a dream, and knew he had written the book; soon after in real life he ran into a psychic friend who called him Eckhart out of nowhere, so Tolle changed his name. SOURCE http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eckhart_Tolle

B) SAUL BECAME ST PAUL – As he neared Damascus on his journey, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?”

“Who are you, Lord?” Saul asked.

“I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,” he replied. “Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.”

The men traveling with Saul stood there speechless; they heard the sound but did not see anyone. Saul got up from the ground, but when he opened his eyes he could see nothing. So they led him by the hand into Damascus. For three days he was blind, and did not eat or drink anything. —Acts 9:3–9, NIV

C) PARADIGM SHIFTS in society – All disciplines have assumptions. Empirical sciences are data-based and assume that theories can be formulated to explain that data. Empirical sciences also assume that data is neutral – which it is not. A paradigm is a result of these assumptions- it is the existing beliefs, practices, and general perspective of a discipline. The paradigm of a discipline is expressed through various products of the discipline such as laws, theories, generalizations, methods of collecting data, and methods of evaluating data.

Paradigm Shift – Findings that do not fit within the existing paradigm may cause a paradigm shift may occur. This happened with Einstein’s theory of relativity. It was previously believed that time was constant throughout the universe. Einstein showed that it was not, so the paradigm shifted- now the belief is that time is a dimension like space.

Some of the “classical cases” of Kuhnian paradigm shifts in science are:

1543 – The transition in cosmology from a Ptolemaic cosmology to a Copernican one.

1687 – The transition in mechanics from Aristotelian mechanics to classical mechanics.

The acceptance of the theory of biogenesis, that all life comes from life, as opposed to the theory of spontaneous generation – began in the 17th century & was not complete until the 19thC with Louis Pasteur.

1920 – The transition between the worldview of Newtonian physics and the Einsteinian relativistic worldview.

DATE ? – The development of absolute dating. (Techniques include tree rings in timbers, radiocarbon dating)

1965 – The acceptance of plate tectonics as the explanation for large-scale geologic changes.

In social sciences – In Kuhn’s view, the existence of a single reigning paradigm is characteristic of the sciences, while philosophy and much of social science were characterized by a “tradition of claims, counterclaims, and debates over fundamentals.”[5]Others have applied Kuhn’s concept of paradigm shift to the social sciences.

EXAMPLE; The movement, known as the Cognitive revolution, away from Behaviourist approaches to psychological study and the acceptance of cognition as central to studying human behaviour.

RP Many think the term is frequently inappropriately used or mis-applied – or even too troublesome.

D) WHAT I WAS became WHAT I NOW AM – WHAT YOU WERE became WHAT YOU NOW ARE

Q. 4  If you, within, have had a paradigm shift from what was the old & the new inner paradigm?  Q. 5 How important is self-knowledge? Which self is it that we come to know – small self or big Self? Or both? Do we hide from it? Is it thrust upon us?  Q. 6 What kind of knowing flows from gnostic or irfan-ic experiences that enable self-knowing?  Q. 7 Is the ‘no self’ the higher or lower self – or is there only one self?        -0-

TAGS: self-knowing, Kuhn, mystical experience, life-change, knowing, gnosis, irfan, paradigm shifts, Pauline conversion, spiritual journey, self-knowledge, change………..

Either we see it – or we just don’t ged…

Either we see it – or we just don’t geddit!

.

usaflag-magic-eye(source)

Often I feel that I can see too many connections.

Consequently every now and then I get around to re-focusing on what really is most important to me – I try and sort the most important from the important.

Successful people seem to have been focused during the time that they were becoming successful – but I suspect that there were earlier stages.

I suspect that before they have the ability ‘stay focused’ they have  to become focused, and there must have been a pre-condition to becoming focused.

The pre-condition is the possession of such qualities as the desire to move forward and the confidence that things will come into focus, and a sense of purpose will announce.  We can make our sense of purpose concrete as a visualization.  With a visualization we can see with purpose and have purpose in our seeing.

Of course many of us have a nagging voice of self-doubt – from which we have to learn to become detached.  With or without the help of others we have to integrate within the whole that is us the source and the messages of that nagging negativity.

As with the ‘magic eye’ pictures it is a matter of relaxing – until things come into focus.

As an inspiration here is a quotation from a spiritual source;

So long as the thoughts of an individual are scattered he will achieve no results, but if his thinking be concentrated   on a single point wonderful will be the fruits thereof.

One cannot obtain the full force of the sunlight when it is cast on a flat mirror, but once the sun shineth upon a concave mirror, or on a lens that is convex, all its heat will be concentrated on a single point, and that one point will burn the hottest. Thus is it necessary to focus one’s thinking on a single point so that it will become an effective force.

Abdu’l-Baha – http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/ab/SAB/sab-74.html

Another nice piece of artwork on the theme of focus;

kitaoka-outoffocus333

Source

.

Is Eckhart Tolle anti-intellectual?

j04389291

A thoughtful respondent stimulated me in to raising a few more issues re Eckhart Tolle, so here they are.

Is Eckhart Tolle in his teachings anti-intellectual – or at least might he be playing into the hands of anti-intellectualists?

My perspective is from within a Perennial Philosophy and Universalist world-view, as is Wilber and Tolle.

So, in my understanding:-

You said:

‘Tolle does not speak of ‘non-duality as everything’. But he speaks of duality and our relationship to it often.’

The ‘it’ that relates to the non-duality I am arguing is part of the design – not just a deficiency on our part!

Does he celebrate duality as one of the two wings of being human, in this world with others. Or does he say, or imply, that the non-dual is not just desirable but the only goal – to such an extent that a newcomer might think, “I’m not good, I’m not normal, I’m not a true Tolle-ist (God forbid – but I bet it happens) unless I experience complete non-duality 24/7.”

I guess my question is, “Would God’s Creativity have failed if for all humans there was 24/7 non-duality?”

I want to argue that non-duality is the goal and indispensable to unity, peace, stability, conflict-resolution, an end to suffering etc. BUT being in duality is also normal, beautiful, testing, the source of compassion and empathy etc. It is more than just the darkness to the realization of the beauty of light.

I don’t underestimate the collective pain-body and collective insanity that continues to rule our world.

Duality is THE means of all growth and development – up to the need to realize non-duality. It’s the name of the game in this world. My understanding is that babies don’t immediately realize that they are separate beings from their mothers – although the birthing process and daily experiences get that process going pretty quickly!

My point is that although duality is not the goal – it is the means, and a means without which we would neither realize the essentiality of non-duality nor would we have the means to accomplish the realization of it.  We have to feel separate to realize at-one-ness. If this is the case then both non-duality and duality are part of the game – and part of God’s great teaching ‘machine’.

So in my view we come to realize that we need (at least in this world) two wings – not one wing and a useless stump! To change metaphors – the purpose of life is for the drop to lose itself in the Ocean – not all the time but sufficiently deeply and sufficiently often to become the conditioning bedrock for all of our living within duality. The dynamic is where knowledge comes from – and duality is not just a design fault or sin!

I have the same problem with an even greater ‘genius’ Ken Wilber. God speaks via duality as well as non-duality, He speaks via subjectivity as well as objectivity AND He speaks via mind and reason as well as their opposites.

A separate, but vitally connected subject concerns the nature of the pain-body and how it relates to mind and thought. The great Tolle also gives the impression that the mind is virtually the same as the pain-body. I would say the the ‘egoic-mind’ = the pain-body – or more accurately the pain-body is the habituated shadow-self created in us via our egoic responses.

He should be ‘condemning’ the egoic-mind not the mind! The mind free of the egoic pain-body = a ray of the Holy Spirit. I don’t think because I’m sinful, I think because I am made in the image of God! Tolle is at risk of giving the mind and thinking a really bad name, whereas they are, when free from the egoic pain-body, first in Creation – the very purpose of Creation.

I have the same problem with (possibly) an even greater ‘genius’ Abraham Joshua Heschel.

You said:
‘When a person is not in the now, it is natural to ask where they should be, because there is an inner sensing that they are not where they belong.’

The ache you refer to is when we haven’t realized that we already have enlightenment, and that it is simply a matter of ‘letting go and let God’. When we have had experiences of non-duality, and re-cognize them and re-alize them, the wood chopping is in the enlightenment and the enlightenment is in the wood chopping!

You said:
‘When you are not in the now, God continues on. Your presence in the now, or not, has no effect on God.’

Yup! The sun shines whether I choose to face it and reflect it or not.

You said:
‘Duality is not ‘not non-being’. Duality is the natural state of the world of form. Seeking an understanding of ‘non-duality’ is not the only thing to do in life, but understanding ‘non-duality’ gives one a profound foundation for all of living.’

Yup! – Beautifully put.

You said:
‘All knowledge comes from consciousness, and you are consciousness. So when you behold, or categorize, the inter-play between duality and non-duality, you, that is consciousness, has created knowledge.’

Ah but what is ‘you’?

For me your term ‘inter-play’ is the key – it indicates the dynamic between experiences of duality and of singleness: me-not me, me and ‘the greater whole of which I and all other phenomena are emanations’ etc.

The explanation that works for me goes like this. I ask of my Spirit a question. My Spirit answers, and lo the light breaks forth. The ‘I’ of course is the egoic self and the Self, ultimately, is God within. But it is more then the pain to which I am addicted – it is God’s Creativity via difference (diversity) – complementary to His/Her/It’s creativity via sameness.

Ultimately I suppose I’m arguing that to deny God’s Creativity in His creation of difference is to deny some aspect of Him/Her/It that cannot be denied. I, and you and him and her and them, are important outside of  complete self-abnegation in non-duality!  Hooray – vivre la difference – I want dia-logos from you as well as silence, I gratefully acknowledge the dia-logos within me as well as the speechless silence of complete self-abnegation!

The ‘me’ is vital – along with experiences of non-duality – for God to perpetually continue His Creation-emanation. The film projected needs a screen. Every lily of the field is different or unique as well as belonging to the same species.

If you accept the temporary naming of the un-nameable both are part of God’s teaching machine. Difference as well as sameness reveals. The uniqueness as well as the sameness of each of us ‘reveals’ – to us and to others. It is ‘me and non-duality’ that gives rise to development in consciousness, which gives rise to the kind of knowing to which you refer.

This ‘knowing-that-comes-through-raised-consciousness’, comes to us as a ‘gift’ without book-learning and academic study. It is the majority of what we know.

An Islamic (hence Arabic terms) and Bahá’í distinction helps (me) here;

SOURCE: Two words for knowledge, but very different kinds of knowledge. Ilm can be acquired by education and training and through the exercise of reason. Irfan is higher knowledge, or gnosis, that can only be acquired by, first, education, and then contemplation under the guidance of a master. The guidance would include spiritual training in zikr, music (sama) and meditation. Ilm is expected to lead to the sober contemplation of God as both Creator and Judge—his awesome power– whereas irfan may lead to ecstasy as a person is simply overwhelmed by God’s immense beauty and falls in love with that Beauty.  SOURCE

The sheer weight of emphases in Tolle might give the impression that mind and thinking = bad. Whereas although the soul is infinite because it is ultimately God, and the mind is finite, the two are essential – from our perspective. Religions can suffer from anti-intellectualism as well as what a friend calls ‘adminology’ in which the essential heart is set aside in favour of jurisprudence and nit-picking.

I am wondering if Tolle, understandably, started from the (to me erroneous) Western view that separates heart and mind, as opposed to the Chinese view of heart-mind – ‘xin’.

I don’t think Tolle is anti-intellectual but I wish he would celebrate a bit more the other wing of being human – duality, without which non-duality would not be.

******

May the Nameless One, who some call God,  finish raising up the Self-actualized 2% , the yeast for the bread of humanity!

Maybe He/She/It already has and they are just really badly organized!

“How does the energy generated by Tolle actually get transformed into social action and social transformation?”

Now that’s a really challenging question!

Photo source: Microsoft Clipart