Adyashanti - Steven Gray

[idiot_stimpy]

 

[Jeff]

Why the name change?

 

Best,

Jeff

[idiot_stimpy]

[Jetsun]

While there are many teachers with amazing qualities is there anyone else who speaks with as much clarity as Adyashanti? I am yet to find anyone, and I have been looking for a long time.

[idiot_stimpy]

[MooNiNite]

There is still depth to be found. it isnt like i am who iv been looking for. its not an idea. its an experience. an experience that can be expanded with truthful expression. 

[lifeforce]

Why do these 'self-proclaimed masters' choose Asian names ? The skeptic and questioner in me would suggest it's a marketing ploy. After all, someone naming themself 'adyashanti' would sell more books, seminar tickets etc, than plain old 'Steven Gray'

Why don't these people just be who they are. I sense a strong ego still running the show in these pseudo-asian 'masters'.

[johndoe2012]

Speaking of names I think it is ridiculous that people are not using their real names on this forum, shame on you :-)

[lifeforce]

Speaking of names I think it is ridiculous that people are not using their real names on this forum, shame on you :-)

 

Ha ha nice one. 

[idiot_stimpy]

[idiot_stimpy]

[Jetsun]

Why do these 'self-proclaimed masters' choose Asian names ? The skeptic and questioner in me would suggest it's a marketing ploy. After all, someone naming themself 'adyashanti' would sell more books, seminar tickets etc, than plain old 'Steven Gray'

Why don't these people just be who they are. I sense a strong ego still running the show in these pseudo-asian 'masters'.

 

He isn't a "self-proclaimed master", he was authorised to teach the Dharma after over 14 years of personal teaching from the Zen master Arvis Joen Justi and is the heir of her lineage which is authorised by Taizan Maezumi a lineage holder in Sōtō, Rinzai and Harada-Yasutani traditions of Zen.

 

The name change is done for those who have died to their former self, so the person they were is effectively dead, the name change can help others to recognise that. Not that I would do such a thing myself, but I can understand it.

 

I wouldn't say he is pseudo-asian at all, if he was he could have worn all the robes and kept all the Zen trappings, but he didn't. If you listen to his talks and watch his videos he is quite American in his approach, he talks to the western mind with western concepts most of the time. And if all he was concerned with was selling tickets and books he wouldn't set up his Sangha as a non-profit organisation or give away the book with his main teachings in for free. http://www.adyashanti.org/wayofliberation/

 

 It seems to me that people often try to criticise him without even examining what he is saying with any sincerity, they just look at the surface and jump to conclusions. 

Edited May 17, 2015 by Jetsun

[Tibetan_Ice]

http://integral-review.org/documents/McGonagill,%20Appreciatively%20Critical%20Reflections,Vol.4%20No.1.pdf

 

He does not teach dharma, he pisses all over dharma.

He does not teach zen, he abandoned it.

 

Despite the pretensions of his name, (Sanskrit for “primordial peace”) Adyashanti encourages people to call him “Adja.” He reports with amusement that his audience tripled when he switched from his given name (Stephen Gray). He trained for many years as a Zen Buddhist with Arvis Joen Justi, a (female) student of Taizan Maezumi Roshi of the Zen Center of Los Angeles. But he left this tradition and has gone out on his own. His retreats are now in such demand that access is by lottery. There were 350 people at this retreat.

 

...

 

Part of his appeal results, I think, from his presenting himself as a kind of “regular guy,” one who enjoys playing cards, riding his motorcycle, and watching sports on TV. He sits in a comfortable chair rather than on a traditional mediation cushion. And he says he does not like burning incense or doing other conventionally “spiritual” things—all in all, a very “non- spiritual” spiritual teacher, in his own words. Consistent with this image, he disdains many of the formalities and rigors of Zen practice, such as maintaining a rigid posture even to the point of intense pain (he reports that such practice led him to do serious damage to himself by tearing a ligament). And he has little patience with the hair-splitting ideological wars within different schools of Buddhism or among other religions. For example, early in the retreat he made fun of the mindset that led one school of Buddhist thought to refer to itself as Mahayana (“greater way”) and the preceding tradition as Hinayana (“lesser way”). Similarly he mocked the tensions between the “gradual awakening” and “sudden awakening” schools of Zen which was very amusing. And he couldn’t resist making a joke of more innocuous traditions, such as the practice at many meditation retreats of “eating abnormally slowly.”

 

...

 

I also found myself troubled by Adyashanti’s use of concepts to explain his approach. Although I liked his approach to meditation, I was less fond of his name for it: “true” meditation. Doesn’t this name imply that other approaches are not true, or less true? And if so, isn’t Adyashanti doing precisely what he criticized others of doing when they declare their approach to be “better”?

 

...

 

But although there were a number of exchanges that seemed productive and some that I found personally helpful, at many other times I felt troubled by the interaction between Adyashanti and the people who came forward. Many described their problem in such abstract terms that it was hard for me to understand what they were asking, and equally hard for me to imagine that he understood them either. Sometimes the description didn’t go beyond metaphors, e.g., “I’m like a dog that won’t let go of a bone, and the bone that I’m chewing on is my own leg.” In this instance Adyashanti deftly invited the speaker to consult his own inner wisdom, which seemed to work very well, and didn’t require that the teacher understand the literal content of the metaphor. However, in most cases he began offering commentary, often without asking questions, or very many questions. Rarely did he ask for concrete examples. Instead he tended to move quickly to dispensing advice, sometimes even before a question had been posed. I often found the advice to be quite abstract and as unclear as the questions. People usually reached a point where they seemed satisfied, but I wondered whether they felt too embarrassed to say that they, like me, didn’t get it. (I recognize that these critical observations would carry more weight if they were supported by concrete examples, but I failed to note any at the time and couldn’t recollect any later. I recognize that others might have interpreted the interactions differently).

 

 

Edited May 17, 2015 by Tibetan_Ice

[Jetsun]

If his way of doing things doesn't suit you there are plenty of more traditional Buddhist teachers around. 

 

All I can say from personal experience is that I went on a silent retreat of his last year and it is by far one of the most powerful things I have ever done spiritually, it actually took me about 6 months to fully integrate and understand what even happened there. Such a powerful force of awakeness comes through in his retreats that it can be overwhelming and there are a number of energetic transmissions throughout the week. My experiences led me to believe there is a whole load of "higher level" stuff he is a master of which he barely talks about.

[amoyaan]

I like Adyashanti. Of all the modern western advaita-type/neo-advaita teachers, he's probably the best. I do think he's probably self realised and he's a decent communicator. I started with Eckhart and progressed to Adyashanti, as his teaching seemed to have more depth. I read all his books and listened to a lot of audio. It helped me up to a certain point, although it only took me so far. 

 

I guess my issue with Adyashanti is common to most western teachers of the ilk. He takes elements from Vedanta and other traditions and is repackaging and teaching them in a decontextualised manner. Does this work? I guess the proof is in the pudding. If his students are getting enlightened, then he's doing it right. I don't personally know of anyone set free by his teaching but maybe they are, I don't know.

 

The fact he's teaching outside of a tradition appeals to western spiritual types cos we like to be 'rebels' and aren't eager to embrace tradition or 'authority'. I was like that for years. It's only recently I realised that was a slightly immature mindset. There's a reason for sampradayas. Over the millennia Vedanta and certain other traditions have been guarded and taught in a certain way that's time-tested and proven to work. The moment teachers start to fiddle the teaching to suit their preferences and personal experience, blind spots can and do occur. When a western teacher starts to cherry pick teachings they inevitably end up with gaps and, unless they are super-skilled at wielding the teaching as a means of knowledge, contradictions and subtle confusions are inevitable. 

 

Simply being self-realised/enlightened doesn't qualify one to teach...yet this has passed by many if not most of the modern day teachers. They just spout waffle and end up waxing lyrical about consciousness/awareness in a masturbatory way. If the student is highly qualified, then that might be enough for them. Most people however need a clear, comprehensive teaching that covers all bases and offers a sound methodology. All this talk of 'you're already free, there's nothing you need to do' is not at all helpful so long as the individual is still identified with their ego/individual self. 

 

Again, I do like Adyashanti. He's one of the best of the western satsang/neo advaita types. But compared to skilled Vedanta teachers such as Swami Dayananda, Swami Paramarthananda and James Swartz...he's not really a teacher because he doesn't really have a comprehensive teaching, just repackaged, decontextualised fragments of one. 

[gatito]

APPRECIATIVELY Critical Reflections on a Retreat with Adyashanti (My capitals)

 

Well worth a read, so that you can make up your own mind regarding the out-of-context selective quote.

[Jetsun]

On one hand there is the advantage of tradition, in that it gives a framework which has been tested and proven to work, but on the other hand life and the human psyche is ever changing, traditions need to change in order to continue to be relevant, fresh and to be able to communicate to modern minds with modern issues. Traditions only work if they are alive, and to be alive they have to be dynamic. Buddhists call it skillful means, otherwise they become dogmatic fossils which no longer serve the purpose which they set out to, which can be seen in the rigid institutions of all religions.

 

There is also the problem of transferring a tradition and a teaching which is set out for one group of people from one era to another, for example the Western psyche is in many ways different than the Eastern. Many Eastern teachers have come over and failed to communicate their teaching to Western minds. For example the Dalai Lama is trying to use skifull means in his own teachings in the West by including a lot of secular teachings and neuroscience, whereas if he came with all the Tibetan jargon half the audience wouldn't be able to understand.

 

Adyashanti is one who transcended his own tradition, he came to realise that there is inherent conditioning contained within Japanese Zen traditions that are essentially limited, especially to Westerners and if you want to be free you have to break free of such constraints not pay lip service to them just because they are traditional.

 

In his own experience he had trouble connecting to the heart within Japanese Zen and it was through Christianity that facilitated his own heart opening, which isn't to say that that heart isn't in Japanese Zen it is because it isn't in Western culture it is hard for Westerns to get it. Which is one reason why he teaches more of a fusion. He also teaches in a way which is most likely to get through to his students, what use is a load of culturally alien jargon?. He also teaches a fusion because it works, which is proven by the amount of people who are being brought to realisations through his teachings.

 

You can listen to his radio show every week where people are calling up to talk about their their realisations from his teaching, also there are a large number of students of his who are now teaching and holding their own retreats and writing books etc, I can give you a long list. 

 

Marlies Cocheret

Stephan Bodian

Jon Bernie

Craig Holliday

Sharon Landrith

Loch Kelly

 

All these people have their biographies on the web, most have interviews on batgap.com, you can decide for yourself if what they teach and what they realised through Adyashanti's teaching is legit or not. In the case of Loch Kelly he trained with some of the highest Tibetan Lama's including Tulku Urgen and is officially authorised to teach the Dharma by Mingyur Rinpoche, yet he holds Adyashanti and his teaching on the same level as these great Tibetan teachers. 

Edited May 17, 2015 by Jetsun

[Tibetan_Ice]

Apparently Adyashanti transmits enlightenment.. (Or should I say, "sells enlightenment". ). I have never read any Buddhist book that has said that this is possible...

 

http://wanderer62.blogspot.ca/2012/03/how-awake-is-adyashanti.html

 

The reason Adyashanti is different from any other teacher I've indirectly encountered online or in a book or audiobook, is that he believes that he is enlightened and that by teaching he can aide in the "transmission" of enlightenment to some of his listeners. It appears that there is a growing community of people who have had awakenings (temporary enlightenment), maybe even some who have become permanently enlightened like Adyashanti. My first reaction was shock more than disbelief. I found his claim and position was enticing. Could I wake up in this lifetime? Could this man, who I discovered was my age, lead me to an awakening? I hadn't really considered the possibility that I could become enlightened in this life or any life. I hadn't really thought about the goal of the path because I was taught through Pema Chodron and others that the path is the goal. Then again, Pema Chodron has spent much of her time teaching others to follow the path of the bodhisattva. A bodhisattva is an awakened being. A bodhisattva is anyone who is motivated by a deep compassion to become enlightened in order to return to benefit all sentient beings.

 

...

So why don't I believe him? I don't have a really good answer to that other than I started to have some psychotic reactions to his presentation and he barely mentions compassion as a motivation at all.

 

 

More..

http://www.zenforuminternational.org/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=4596

 

According to a couple online sources (one being an interview), he studied under a woman named Arvis Justi for a time, who encouraged him to teach. When he found himself drifting away from zen, she was supportive of his decisions. Arvis herself was never a lineage holder, although she studied under Maezumi Roshi. Adyashanti also studied under Kwong Roshi, a teacher in Suzuki Roshi's lineage. Kwong Roshi was purportedly concerned when he heard that Adyashanti was teaching, and Adyashanti weakly claims that while he never received Kwong Roshi's blessing, he never didn't receive it either. To be clear, Adyashanti was never ordained, nor does it appear that he even received jukai.

 

 

Apparently, these guys don't like Adyashanti either...

 

http://www.harekrsna.com/sun/editorials/12-13/editorials11120.htm

 

Adyashanti is simply perpetuating the deceit. He has dumbed Advaita way down, stripped out everything that would scare away potential followers and repackaged it with Madison Avenue gloss. He keeps refining his act so it will appeal to those who don't want to have anything to do with crosses, burkas, or holy books but still crave for at least a reflection of a "spiritual" fix. The sad thing these folks don't realize is that the Non-dual path is just the negative side of material life. The only thing it changes is it makes those who get involved with it more egocentric, confused, morose and unreachable.

 

Ok tell you what. Listen to this video. Adyashanti doesn't have a clue, or maybe he just doesn't reflect on what he is saying. At one point he refers to "awakened mind" or the "transcendent witness" and then eventally how the emotional body "unhooks" into "awakeness", like it is a downward progression from mind to emotional body. Adyashanti calls the heart the emotional body, "where most people come into allot of resistance".

 

This, to me proves that Adyashanti hasn't realized much... Perhaps he hit the arupa jhana of infinite consciousness and has mistaken that for the "transcendent witness"? And he mistook that for enlightenment too? There is no such thing as "awakened mind" nor is there an awakened emotional body.

 

The mind and emotional bodies are piddly little things that pale in comparison to the pool of awareness that resides in the heart, and occasionally comes out of the eyes. When it comes out to play, you will know what I mean. There is no trouble at all from the emotional body (or the mind) because the pool of awareness in the heart is so powerful and large that it makes the mind and emotional body seem insignificant.

 

If you ask me, Loch Kelly has a better understanding of the mechanics of it all than Adyashanti, because he does mention that love comes out of the eyes, (the Kati channel), but I wonder how deep his realization is too.

 

 

 

.

Edited May 17, 2015 by Tibetan_Ice

[Tibetan_Ice]

Video:

 

[amoyaan]

Hi Jetsun

On one hand there is the advantage of tradition, in that it gives a framework which has been tested and proven to work, but on the other hand life and the human psyche is ever changing,

 

I'm not sure I agree with this. Do we have evidence that the human psyche is ever-changing? It seems pretty constant to me. The context is ever-changing but the structure of the human psyche and our basic wants, needs and predilections remain staggeringly constant. "Money, sex and power" as one ancient sage described it. Add to that health, family and for those rarest of rare people, spirituality. It always struck me reading the Tao Te Ching how the society described by Lao Tzu and the mentality of the people is pretty much the same as it is today. Only difference is we have iPads and widescreen TVs and twitter. 

 

 

traditions need to change in order to continue to be relevant, fresh and to be able to communicate to modern minds with modern issues. Traditions only work if they are alive, and to be alive they have to be dynamic. Buddhists call it skillful means, otherwise they become dogmatic fossils which no longer serve the purpose which they set out to, which can be seen in the rigid institutions of all religions.

 

Good point. I'm not really speaking about religion or traditions though, but a science of consciousness and enlightenment, which is what vedanta is (I can't really speak for other systems that people on here follow because I'm not intimately familiar with them, but I'm willing to include them). It works the same now as it did then, because consciousness doesn't change. The structural and cosmetic changes to society over the millennia haven't changed anything with regards to the teaching because it's well outside of those factors. It's every bit as relevant now as it was then. Same with the Tao Te Ching. Truth is truth and it's timeless. It's chronocentric to assume that our 'modern minds' are so far above primitive old minds that we need some special 'new' teaching.

 

There is also the problem of transferring a tradition and a teaching which is set out for one group of people from one era to another, for example the Western psyche is in many ways different than the Eastern.

 

This is true. It's not easy for the average westerner to embrace the whole context of the teaching and to be willing to learn Sanskrit terminology for example, some of which is essential to communicate the subtlety and nuance of the teaching. It's not that Westerners and Easterners have a 'different' psyche...human beings are human beings and our psyche is essentially the same, it's just a different cultural context (i.e., what we're used to). It's been made a lot easier however. It's only within the past 50 years that vedanta teaching has been given in English. I guess prior to that the interest wasn't there.

 

 

Many Eastern teachers have come over and failed to communicate their teaching to Western minds. For example the Dalai Lama is trying to use skifull means in his own teachings in the West by including a lot of secular teachings and neuroscience, whereas if he came with all the Tibetan jargon half the audience wouldn't be able to understand.

 

Adyashanti is one who transcended his own tradition, he came to realise that there is inherent conditioning contained within Japanese Zen traditions that are essentially limited, especially to Westerners and if you want to be free you have to break free of such constraints not pay lip service to them just because they are traditional.

 

 

In his own experience he had trouble connecting to the heart within Japanese Zen and it was through Christianity that facilitated his own heart opening, which isn't to say that that heart isn't in Japanese Zen it is because it isn't in Western culture it is hard for Westerns to get it. Which is one reason why he teaches more of a fusion. He also teaches in a way which is most likely to get through to his students, what use is a load of culturally alien jargon?. He also teaches a fusion because it works, which is proven by the amount of people who are being brought to realisations through his teachings

 

You can listen to his radio show every week where people are calling up to talk about their their realisations from his teaching, also there are a large number of students of his who are now teaching and holding their own retreats and writing books etc, I can give you a long list.  

 

Well, if he's successfully helping people 'get' self realised, then his teachings are obviously working for some people, which is great

[Tibetan_Ice]

If his way of doing things doesn't suit you there are plenty of more traditional Buddhist teachers around.

 

All I can say from personal experience is that I went on a silent retreat of his last year and it is by far one of the most powerful things I have ever done spiritually, it actually took me about 6 months to fully integrate and understand what even happened there. Such a powerful force of awakeness comes through in his retreats that it can be overwhelming and there are a number of energetic transmissions throughout the week. My experiences led me to believe there is a whole load of "higher level" stuff he is a master of which he barely talks about.

Hi Jetsun,

I have to ask.. Exactly what kind of transmissions were they, that you received?

Were they kundalini shaktipat? Or were they blessings from the Holy Ghost, since you've said that Adyashanti is more Christian now?

In Buddism there are many types of transmissions, each for a specific thing or practice. What type of transmission did you receive? From which lineage? Did he even tell you?

[Jetsun]

Hi Jetsun,

I have to ask.. Exactly what kind of transmissions were they, that you received?

Were they kundalini shaktipat? Or were they blessings from the Holy Ghost, since you've said that Adyashanti is more Christian now?

In Buddism there are many types of transmissions, each for a specific thing or practice. What type of transmission did you receive? From which lineage? Did he even tell you?

 

I'm not sure if anything I say will satisfy you in any way as you clearly have your mind made up already about what constitutes the real path and anyone who doesn't fit your own already firmly defined criteria is discounted. And you clearly have your mind fully made up about Adyashanti so I doubt there is any sincerity in your questions.

 

But i'll give it a go explaining for those who are not already so full. The way it worked on retreat is that every morning Adyashanti would come in for silent meditation and during some of those he would non-verbally put emphasis on different movements of energy. Then later on in the day he would come and give a guided meditation on the same movements of energy but this time it was done verbally, so essentially the mind can catch up on what has already been pointed out energetically. So those who are sensitive energetically can recognise what is going on before it is brought to the attention of the mind.

 

So basically the transmission isn't shaktipat or anything like that, is was bringing attention to movements of energy which are already present, which is basically the same as many forms of transmission you get in many Buddhist lineages in that what is being pointed out is what is already present but you aren't aware of it.

 

For example one day there was a Christian transmission called descent of the dove or the descent of grace, which was basically bringing attention to the downward flow of energy from above the head to the right of the heart, which is the downward flow of redemptive love. After this was done basically most of the hall was in tears it was that powerful. I tried to do it before the retreat with no success, but now it has been transmitted it is far easier for me to locate and meditate on that flow of grace, sure it was there before so Adyashanti hasn't given it to me, but now it is much easier to be aware of it. 

 

But I never said Adyashanti is a Christian, his retreats are mostly Zen Buddhist and there is full homage paid to the lineage of masters and ends with a recital of the heart sutra. But if you asked Adyashanti what lineage was being transmitted he would probably say the one which is eternal and formless. 

[idiot_stimpy]

I'm not sure if anything I say will satisfy you in any way as you clearly have your mind made up...

 

Hence why I didn't even bother to respond to his post. 

[lifeforce]

 

For example one day there was a Christian transmission called descent of the dove or the descent of grace, which was basically bringing attention to the downward flow of energy from above the head to the right of the heart, which is the downward flow of redemptive love. After this was done basically most of the hall was in tears it was that powerful.

That sounds very much like the shaktipat I received from Dr. Gabriel Cousens. I was in tears for quite a while. The love and pure beauty of life itself overwhelmed me and changed me forever.

I'm still not down with Steven Gray's Indian pen-name though lol.

Edited May 20, 2015 by lifeforce

[GrandmasterP]

Duplicate

Edited May 20, 2015 by GrandmasterP