Questioning some thoughts on "God" and human progress towards enlightenment

[dwai]

Not very well, I sure. But let's see what happens, Okay?

 

First, you spoke of God as if you had placed your own personal expectations on this deity. Okay, I do not hold to the concept of God or any other deities. And even if there were such entities, do you really think that they would care about your opinion?

 

It is my understanding that the purpose of enlightenment (whatever that is) isto gain wisdom so that we can live our life to its fullest potential. So yes, in this regard, enlightenment is important.

 

So what is enlightenment? Isn't it a personal journey with the goal of understanding our Self? Now, I won't place judgement on the importance of teachers because there are many who has the honest goal of helping others find their true Self. But the journey must be undertaken by the individual; the teacher is the guide providing the guide-posts.

 

If we find that the guide-post have all been put in the wrong places then we should remove ourself from the presence of that teacher. You have done that. Good. So do you look for another teacher, do you communicate on a forum such as this, do you strike out on your own? Your choice. At the moment you are with us here. That's good.

 

Test everything you have any doubts about. Even test what I am saying here. Find your own truths. But what you hear and see should not be added to nor subtracted from. And even question what you hear and see to make sure that they are not illusions or delusions. I'm not really speaking against illusions and delusions, it is just that we need to know those things in our life, our belief system, that are illusions and delusions. (But still, it is best to not have them as a part of our life.)

 

So basically, my little comment above was nothing more than an attempt to get you to look at "your" reality, where you are along your journey, where you wish to be, thoughts on how you will proceed in order to get there, without relying on a teacher (but get one if you feel it would help) or omniscient powers, etc.

 

Peace & Love!

 

well said!

[sifusufi]

hi Sifusufi,

 

I watched the whole thing as you requested. It was all right ,

and I got the point, but sorry Carlos Santana can beat the crap

out of him. Carlos Santana can use those notes to play my

spine-strings like they were his...Duende duende oh

holy effing shakti up the spine, hehe.

 

Try some Carlos Santana, you'll see....

 

Thanks for sharing the video though .

 

Righteous!

The walls sweat! I bought this on DVD about 3 months ago... The real deal!

Please PM me or continue on this thread if you wish... Soul activation!!!

 

Best,

Bobby

[tyler zambori]

And I want to add this one:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-y2LUh-9AA

 

 

I haven't got the hang of embedding youtube videos yet.

 

There's nothing like a yogi-guitarist, hey yah!

Man it never fails...

Edited June 1, 2010 by tyler zambori

[goldisheavy]

Tyler,

 

I am going to summarize each paragraph of your initial post to show I how understand each paragraph. Hopefully this will help you understand why I have replied as I have.

 

I mean on the relationship between the two...

 

OK so the title of the thread is "Questioning some thoughts on 'God' and human progress towards enlightenment', and "the relationship between the two" refers back to the title, meaning the relationship between God and enlightenment.

 

Ok ,so my teacher is really really arrogant, moreso with people who are

not his students, and who don't seem at all like good prospects.

He is not an evil cult leader type, he just doesn't have that schtick going,

not enough charisma for it. He has been known to cut off all the students

who aren't making progress and announce that he wants to be left alone

with his four real students, (I'm not one of the four), then quite a while

later come back to making a public appearance.

 

"I am not my teacher's favorite student and my teacher has been arrogant to me in the past. My teacher is not a complete asshole, but nonetheless, he has been known to flake out."

 

So I'm working up to a general thought here.. I figured out his personality

is a lot like a cross between J. Krishnamurti, and Alfred Korzybski.

As I Understand it, J. Krishnamurti would tell people to "just still the mind,"

and he would be impatient with people who couldn't understand it or do it, all

the while being clueless that people actually need more instruction than that.

This is exactly my teacher, this is why I'm here doing Taosim to actually

learn to get somewhere. No matter how times you tell people to "just

still the mind, just do it," it isn't going to happen by just saying so.

 

"I can't believe my teacher would actually be bad. Teachers don't work that way. All teachers are good. So I need to justify my teacher's behavior by citing a case of some famous teacher from the past who has behaved similarly to my teacher. Aha! Looks like J. Kirshnamurti and Alfred Korzybski had similar personalities, so there is a good chance my teacher is OK just like J.K. was also OK. Still, I am critical of J. Kristhamurti's approach to teaching ('just do it'), so maybe my teacher is really not OK after all."

 

So there seems to be a general idea, in Yoga/Vedanta/HInduism

and etc., that we are here on this planet to work towards our own enlightenment,

and we probably really need the help of an enlightened teacher to help us

get there. So if this is so, then why doesn't God give these teachers

close personal supervision in how they teach people? Why does God

make himself subservient to dysfunctional cultural influences and

perosnality quirks that essentiually cause the teachers to be clueless

about how to get through to people at the basic level? Or for that

matter, why doesn't God just teach people individually his or her own

self? That would cut out a lot of problems for sure..

 

"The idea of God seems contradictory to the idea of personal responsibility."

 

I mean seriously, if human enlightenemnt is the point of the whole game,

then why leave it to such a chance? Or could it be....that "God"

actually doesn't have a human personality with a personal interest

in what humans do or do not do to gain enlightenment? And that

is why we are left with struggling with cultural dysfunction and

personality quirks, on top of our own problems? yeah.

 

"Maybe God does exist, but is not like a sentient being with free will?"

[tyler zambori]

Gold is heavy,

 

Have Fun.

Edited June 2, 2010 by tyler zambori

[Sunya]

Tyler, wake up. If you can't see your issues when they are pointed straight out to you, then you are a fool and not a sincere seeker of truth. No wonder your teacher thinks so low of you, however enlightened he truly is. Keep seeking that divine fatherly figure and you'll keep suffering like a confused child seeking a nipple that doesn't exist.

[tyler zambori]

Tyler, wake up. If you can't see your issues when they are pointed straight out to you, then you are a fool and not a sincere seeker of truth. No wonder your teacher thinks so low of you, however enlightened he truly is. Keep seeking that divine fatherly figure and you'll keep suffering like a confused child seeking a nipple that doesn't exist.

 

 

Apparently you have zero reading comprehension too.

[goldisheavy]

Apparently you have zero reading comprehension too.

 

Tyler, so basically you seem to question the idea that there is a personal God, a God as a cosmis person with a free will, right? You think that Tao is like an impersonal God, without free will, and more automatic, right? Do I understand correctly?

 

My question to you is this: if God is like a force of nature that exists and permeates everything and is automatic and subject to some kind of universal laws, why call it "God"? Why even think about it? And also, how will this type of God be any different from the Western conception of substance-matter-energy, which fits that description perfectly ("something that exists as a force of nature, objectively, independently, subject to laws, etc.").

 

In this case it seems to me that God simply becomes substance. When I talk to physicalist atheists I like to tell them that substance is their God. They tend to get offended because they don't understand that substance must be taken on faith, just like God. All we have are our experiences. Nothing in our experience suggest an objective substance. If we hold to a materialist mindset, we simply have faith that there is substance "out there."

 

In any case, I enthusiastically mirror your concerns about the concept of a personal God. I just don't think you go far enough. I think it's a good idea to ignore the concept of God, or even Tao, altogether, and to simply focus on why you needed that concept to begin with. Chances are you needed the idea of God or Tao to solve some kind of problem in your life. I would ask you to revisit that problem. To recall the original problem. Consider that problem one more time, and ask yourself if there is any other approach to that problem that simply does not require reference to God or Tao. That's all.

 

By all means I am not telling you how to be or what to believe. If you think that the idea of Tao is simply fun, then good for you and more power to you. If my assumption that you have a real concern that you're trying to solve with the idea of an impersonal God is wrong, and if you are investigating the notion of an impersonal God purely out of idle curiosity, please forgive me and carry on.

 

Chuang Tzu mused something like this, paraphrased, "When you catch a rabbit, you get rid of the rabbit snare and keep the rabbit. Words are like snares, and ideas are like rabbits. Once you get the right idea, forget the words. Where can I find a man like that to have a few words with?"

 

So once you get what the word Tao is trying to tell you, you can then forget about the word. You don't need to refer to Tao. If you continue to refer to Tao, you turn Tao into some kind of substance and that's not what Tao is. You can't study the Tao like you can study a substance. So once you understand what Tao means, you don't need to talk about it too much.

Edited June 2, 2010 by goldisheavy

[Stigweard]

 

So once you get what the word Tao is trying to tell you, you can then forget about the word. You don't need to refer to Tao. If you continue to refer to Tao, you turn Tao into some kind of substance and that's not what Tao is. You can't study the Tao like you can study a substance. So once you understand what Tao means, you don't need to talk about it too much.

[Guest paul walter]

It could be that Gold reminded Tyler too much of his Croatian teacher, thereby bringing up some adverse reaction. Just a thought. Sorry.

 

 

Yes, probably Cow. People who put up with shit in one area of their lives usually reject it (or what is perceived as shit) in another cause it creates overload. After all we choose such 'teachers' cause our moms and dads didn't give us the self-sufficiency to DIY, so there is usually a psychological undertone that are felt as reactions to authority thing somewhere in the mix. There's definately some denial going on here. Paul.

[Guest paul walter]

Do not tell me whose help I should or should not take.

 

 

 

 

You're (you're ego wall that is) the boss. Paul.

[Mal]

Is this questioning some thoughts on "God" or declaring judgment on Tyler day? The thread seemed to split about page 2, very strange, not that wandering threads are strange here at TTB...

[Marblehead]

 

So once you get what the word Tao is trying to tell you, you can then forget about the word. You don't need to refer to Tao. If you continue to refer to Tao, you turn Tao into some kind of substance and that's not what Tao is. You can't study the Tao like you can study a substance. So once you understand what Tao means, you don't need to talk about it too much.

 

Indeed. Excellently spoken!

 

Peace & Love!

[tyler zambori]

Tyler, so basically you seem to question the idea that there is a personal God, a God as a cosmis person with a free will, right? You think that Tao is like an impersonal God, without free will, and more automatic, right? Do I understand correctly?

 

My question to you is this: if God is like a force of nature that exists and permeates everything and is automatic and subject to some kind of universal laws, why call it "God"? Why even think about it? And also, how will this type of God be any different from the Western conception of substance-matter-energy, which fits that description perfectly ("something that exists as a force of nature, objectively, independently, subject to laws, etc.").

 

In this case it seems to me that God simply becomes substance. When I talk to physicalist atheists I like to tell them that substance is their God. They tend to get offended because they don't understand that substance must be taken on faith, just like God. All we have are our experiences. Nothing in our experience suggest an objective substance. If we hold to a materialist mindset, we simply have faith that there is substance "out there."

 

In any case, I enthusiastically mirror your concerns about the concept of a personal God. I just don't think you go far enough. I think it's a good idea to ignore the concept of God, or even Tao, altogether, and to simply focus on why you needed that concept to begin with. Chances are you needed the idea of God or Tao to solve some kind of problem in your life. I would ask you to revisit that problem. To recall the original problem. Consider that problem one more time, and ask yourself if there is any other approach to that problem that simply does not require reference to God or Tao. That's all.

 

By all means I am not telling you how to be or what to believe. If you think that the idea of Tao is simply fun, then good for you and more power to you. If my assumption that you have a real concern that you're trying to solve with the idea of an impersonal God is wrong, and if you are investigating the notion of an impersonal God purely out of idle curiosity, please forgive me and carry on.

 

Chuang Tzu mused something like this, paraphrased, "When you catch a rabbit, you get rid of the rabbit snare and keep the rabbit. Words are like snares, and ideas are like rabbits. Once you get the right idea, forget the words. Where can I find a man like that to have a few words with?"

 

So once you get what the word Tao is trying to tell you, you can then forget about the word. You don't need to refer to Tao. If you continue to refer to Tao, you turn Tao into some kind of substance and that's not what Tao is. You can't study the Tao like you can study a substance. So once you understand what Tao means, you don't need to talk about it too much.

 

 

Very nice and pretty words. Everybody likes them. Good for you.

 

If you had started out with this, I might have talked to you about

it, but not now.

[tyler zambori]

Is this questioning some thoughts on "God" or declaring judgment on Tyler day? The thread seemed to split about page 2, very strange, not that wandering threads are strange here at TTB...

 

 

It is declare judgment on Tyler day.

[Marblehead]

It is declare judgment on Tyler day.

 

I have not judged you Tyler. I really don't think anyone is intentionally trying to do that. They are saying what they believe is true based on very little knowledge. I honestly believe that all the posts have been with the intent to help you see your own reality. Some speak with words that may not be comfortable but we all cannot speak the same way with flowery words. Sometimes down and dirty is best.

 

Please Tyler, don't judge the others as you will be falling into the same whole you may be thinking others have fallen into.

 

I wish you well Tyler.

 

Peace & Love!

[suninmyeyes]

 

"Why can't people be happy with good friends? Why do they need a dominant father-like figure? I don't think I can understand that. Well, I guess I can. People want the responsibility for making them safe to fall on the shoulders of a strong and perfectly dependable man. I think such desire is spiritually regressive."

 

I think that everyone is different with different understanding.Learning and expiriencing at different speeds with different ability to assimilate.

Her id like to point out the importantance to take in consideration and and try to recgonize when one is actually forcefeeding the person, even though some of the food(for thought)might be nourishing.

Not that Im always very succesfull at that.

 

 

 

 

"Why doesn't God help Gurus be nicer? Seriously, why not? For someone who believes in God, that not a question that can be answered satisfactorily, without creating some kind of consternation in the psyche."

 

God is not only some nice guy sitting on the cloud or a wish fullfilling fairy or Santa Claus.

God is.

Problems created on the path of loving God or any path /life are valuable tool used to understand given situation.Its up to the individual.

Some friction has to be created in all of us somehow ,something has to crack open -one way or another,through Tao,Buddhism,Shamanism ...or it can happen just like that when i wasnt even interested remotley in anything spiritual as it was case with me.

Loving God does not mean eliminating personal responsability ,I feel to say on contrary it is recgonizing its massive cosmic scale and still keep on loving fearlesly.

Thats it i cant write anymore Im so slow and feel to serious right now.

Oh and Tyler everyone is trying to help in our own way and dont forget that we are not perfect...So forgive.Take what you feel it is good,discard the rest ,have a good deep think and keep on dancing.

Edited June 3, 2010 by suninmyeyes

[Guest paul walter]

It is declare judgment on Tyler day.

 

 

Well at least you're being honest about your state of existence (though the tragedy is you don't know it). War is over if you want it . Paul.

[Creation]

Nothing like some Santana to raise the vibe of a thread

 

[tyler zambori]

Let's recap.

 

I've been told that:

 

 

 

I can't see my issues, that I'm not awake.

 

They were pointed out to me, but I still can't see them

 

I'm a confused child seeking a nipple that doesn't exist

 

I am a fool

 

I am not a sincere seeker of the truth

 

I put up with with shit from people

 

Therefore I don't take shit from Taobums

 

because I am messed up

 

I chose my teacher because my parents were fucked up

 

and so am I

 

I am totally ego driven

 

But nobody has judged me, no

 

An nobody intended to judge me

 

people said all these things with very little knowledge

 

They want to help me see my own reality (WTF?)

 

Down and dirty is better than flowery in this case

 

I'd better not judge them even though they judged me

 

because then I'll be just as bad as they are.

 

But they aren't really bad, I'm the one with problems.

 

The people criticizing me are not perfect so I'd better forgive them

 

 

 

 

ALL of these conclusions were arrived at without talking to me as a human being

or asking me anything about myself or my situation, in any way shape or form.

Therefore, all the people who made the above statements were

 

MERELY PROJECTING THEIR OWN CRAP ONTO ME.

 

So the one thing I will agree with, is that people said all these things with very little knowledge.

And it says a lot to me about the level of consciousness that is going on here. Two words:

 

VERY LOW

 

 

 

Stigweard, you're right, that was very useful.

[tyler zambori]

PS: in case any of you are wondering why I even bothered to come back -

I got an advertisement from a taobums moderator, and felt inspired as

a result.

 

Moral of the story: don't send me advertisements.

 

 

Don't worry, I don't intend to stick around.

[Aaron]

Ok ,so my teacher is really really arrogant, moreso with people who are

not his students, and who don't seem at all like good prospects.

 

Tyler, if you do not like your teacher, find someone else. There are plenty of people that can teach you, don't hamper your own ability to learn, by choosing someone who is not willing to teach because it doesn't suit his mood.

 

So I'm working up to a general thought here.. I figured out his personality

is a lot like a cross between J. Krishnamurti, and Alfred Korzybski.

As I Understand it, J. Krishnamurti would tell people to "just still the mind,"

and he would be impatient with people who couldn't understand it or do it, all

the while being clueless that people actually need more instruction than that.

 

The more you try and still the mind, the harder it will be do to do it. The next time you meditate, don't try and still the mind, concentrate on something else, your breathing is good. Just focus on the way your breath enters and leaves your body. If a thought comes, address it, then let it pass. It's as simple as that.

 

 

So there seems to be a general idea, in Yoga/Vedanta/HInduism

and etc., that we are here on this planet to work towards our own enlightenment,

and we probably really need the help of an enlightened teacher to help us

get there. So if this is so, then why doesn't God give these teachers

close personal supervision in how they teach people? Why does God

make himself subservient to dysfunctional cultural influences and

perosnality quirks that essentiually cause the teachers to be clueless

about how to get through to people at the basic level? Or for that

matter, why doesn't God just teach people individually his or her own

self? That would cut out a lot of problems for sure.

 

First I think you need to define God for yourself. What is God to you and are these people actually doing "God's" work? First most of the people you meet that practice these traditions, may have a distinctly different opinion of what God is. For me, there is no such thing as God, for instance, there is only the universe and me. Is there a higher power, something greater than myself? I think so, can I define it with certainty and tell you exactly what and who that is? No. Do I have to? No. I merely have to do what is right and if I do what is right by me and the universe, the question of God isn't important.

 

I mean seriously, if human enlightenemnt is the point of the whole game,

then why leave it to such a chance? Or could it be....that "God"

actually doesn't have a human personality with a personal interest

in what humans do or do not do to gain enlightenment? And that

is why we are left with struggling with cultural dysfunction and

personality quirks, on top of our own problems? yeah.

 

Again, quit worrying about God so much. I think your problem doesn't stem from God, but rather a need for purpose. The purpose of life is living. If you live each day and accept it for what it is, then these questions will not be so important. If there is a God, I highly doubt that his intentions are for you to waste the time you have on this Earth worrying about what he wants you to do. If he wanted you to do something, don't you think he'd come to you and tell you personally?

 

My own belief, that stems from a spiritual experience, inspires me to learn "the lesson". The reason I try to learn the lesson I'm supposed to learn, is because I believe that is what ties us to this world. If I work as hard as I can in this life and fail, then I will have another lifetime to get it right, so there is no "you must", rather it's, "you try".

 

Success or failure, it doesn't matter. Eventually you will get it right, but worrying about getting it right is only going to stress you. There are so many things one can do with life that will give us satisfaction and purpose; raising a family, creating art, spending time with friends and loved ones, and yes, all of this is transient, but it serves a purpose. To discount these things as pointless or a waste of time is not only silly, but wrong.

 

Do what you can with the time that you have. Don't worry so much about enlightenment, you're already enlightened, just no one has told you yet. Tonight as you prepare for sleep think about the things you want to know and the things that bring you peace. Think about the fact that everything in this reality is defined by you. If you can define reality, then certainly you can define your purpose.

 

Aaron

Edited December 7, 2010 by Twinner

[Alfred E]

Tyler, if you do not like your teacher, find someone else. There are plenty of people that can teach you, don't hamper your own ability to learn, by choosing someone who is not willing to teach because it doesn't suit his mood.

 

 

 

The more you try and still the mind, the harder it will be do to do it. The next time you meditate, don't try and still the mind, concentrate on something else, your breathing is good. Just focus on the way your breath enters and leaves your body. If a thought comes, address it, then let it pass. It's as simple as that.

Aaron

 

 

Aaron - who taught you the Yoga of meditation ?

Do You do more damage than good with this subject?

 

There is No god - no jesus. Both are christian excuse for WAR. Read history of Roman Emperor Constantine year 300 AD - This is where christian religion began.

 

Constantine_the_Great_and_Christianity

Edited December 7, 2010 by Alfred E

[Vajrahridaya]

No god - no jesus. Both are christian excuse for WAR. Read history of Roman Emperor Constantine year 300 AD

 

I agree, even the gods fight in the heavens for who is the real form of the transcendent first cause. I guess all the theistic wars waged on Earth is just a reflection of that. "My God is the true God of all", "No mine is the one and only God of them all." Then there's the "My God is the god of all gods, the formless one that is the source of all other gods."...

 

Anyway... I'm just saying that I agree.

Edited December 7, 2010 by Vajrahridaya

[tyler zambori]

Twinner, thank you for being nice.

 

I'm no longer so inclined to be very open with any of you,

but I will say that I still like Taoism and Taoist methods

of spiritual practice.

 

I'm quite happy with the instruction I'm finding within

the Taoist books I have. Not looking for any opinions

about that either, thank you. But I really do appreciate

that you tried.

 

I was having a further thought for the rest of you -

those who gave me all your nasty comments. What

the F*** were you people thinking about how that

would help me spiritually? Was I supposed to go:

"oh yeah, I'm really fucked just like you say."

And then what?

 

I see no cohesive point of any kind being made

in that "bulleted list" which could not be bulleted.

There was no cohesive point because it was what it was,

simply a

 

collective belching of projective crap.

And this is why I called this forum a cesspool,

in the "Insult policy reminder" thread.

(she says looking in the moderator's general

direction).

 

I'm just not open to advice any more.