The two types of seeker

[Nikolai1]

The longer I spend mixing in spiritual circles the more I'm noticing two different types of seeker, who have two different ideas about 'finding'.  I wonder if this resonates with you guys?

 

The Healed

 

The first is a person who, for whatever reason, has suffered greatly in their life.  They have turned to religion as a means to heal their suffering, and very often they succeed.  After success has come, they are the passionate advocates for whatever path they have taken, but they are basically just everyday, ordinary people.  Their practice has enabled them to go from sub-average, to average levels of happiness, and they can't really conceive of anything higher than that.

 

The Wholed

 

The second type has probably had a good, stable and happy start to life,  They are emotionally robust and cheerful enough.  They are however plagued by a subtly existential malaise: 'there must be more to life?'  With practice, these people are able to lift themselves above the normal levels of happiness, wisdom and ethics.  They become teachers and examples to others.  They have moved from average to above average.

 

 

The problem is: during the seeking phase these the types of people inevitably come into contact with each other.  And because they haven't gained perspective on their own path, they tend to view each other as peers.  And then the disputes begin:

 

For example, the Healed don't tend to have the stability to question their own chosen teacher, path etc.  They can seem dogmatic to the Wholed, who don't panic when things they need are brought into question.

 

Or, the Healed may think the path is about coming to terms with and accepting our imperfections.  For the wholed, the aim is to remove imperfections altogether.

 

These are just two examples, but I think many of the disputes we all encounter can be explained by this split.  I shouls also say that many people, and these perhaps make the best teachers as all, start needing healing but don't stop when they get it but carry on to become whole.  What do you all think?

Edited October 5, 2015 by Nikolai1

[manitou]

I think this is the beauty of our forum.  I do think the two come together after much time and practice.  I fall into your first category of The Healed.  And I did turn to religion after I first got sober 35 years ago.  I had to re-immerse myself into Christianity, which I had walked away from in my drunkenness.  I was a horrible Bible thumper for a few years, alienating every single person I ever knew, lol.  Being banged up by life sort of thumped that out of me.

 

And the 12 Steps were so incredibly important in my recovery, that when I got here - I was thumping the 12 steps because I saw them as a purgative for anyone that need purging of unwanted defects.  I guess we all do that to some degree until we mellow a bit.

 

But TDB's has shown me many different paths from which I have drawn.  I love things Buddhist, I love things Hindu, I love things Daoist, I love things Metaphysical - and I enjoy things written by Jesuits, without the need to go through Jesus to find the One.  This forum has been a huge factor in my own spiritual development, and triangulating all the various paths of wisdom has resulted in a patchwork quilt of my own making.  I cannot tell you enough how very much I appreciate this forum and the loving people here who have been patient with me, as I try to pass on that patience to others who now Thump their own ideas over and over.

 

If we see each other with the eyes of the One, there really is no need for dispute.  We are all different facets of That Which Is, and if we are arguing with each other, we are merely defending that which we are unsure of.  If we were Absolutely Sure of what we were saying, there would be no need to argue.  The ego wouldn't be piqued at all, if the ego has been tamped.

 

I think a path that doesn't address our personal egos isn't that functional a path at all.  It results in head knowledge, not 'gnowledge' of the inner self.  Gnowledge of the self is where it ultimately must come from - to find that commonality that we all share, the Oneness within us all.

[Nikolai1]

Thanks Manitou - it actually sounds like you are one of those I meant when I said:

 

 

 I should also say that many people, and these perhaps make the best teachers as all, start needing healing but don't stop when they get it but carry on to become whole.  

[Karl]

The universe has an immensity of things to discover and understand. It is humanity in number that works together to make these discoveries. Its everyone working as an individual that allows this to happen. Argumentation is in fact a process of mental intercourse entirely necessary to push forward our greater knowledge, just as sexual intercourse creates stronger human diversity.

 

We are the universe discovering itself by passing around the sperm and egg of ideas through communication. Our arguments fertilise those we communicate with, but we are both donor and recipient. Just as we trade sperm and eggs, so do we trade the handiwork of our own physical production in goods and services, thus do we trade our ideas and thoughts.

 

Therefore there are as many types of seeker as there are people on the planet.

Edited October 5, 2015 by Karl

[manitou]

 

We are the universe discovering itself 

 

Nicely said indeed.

[Jeff]

I would also agree that there are two types of seekers...

 

Those that are afraid and those that are not.

[Karl]

"I'll never find another you" "I'll will beg, steal or borrow"

 

Old seekers and new seekers.

 

So, 2 kinds.

 

 

[Flolfolil]

"I'll never find another you" , "I'll will beg, steal or borrow"

Can you elaborate on these please?  Especially the second one.

[Karl]

Can you elaborate on these please?  Especially the second one.

 

:-)

 

[Karl]

[wilfred]

funny thing is how there's not actually anything to 'find'.

 

i'm in the former when it comes to suffering, often things work out that way for beings in order to get them back on the path.

[Kubba]

funny thing is how there's not actually anything to 'find'.

 

Thats only partialy true. A best known selling pith of non-dual teachings. Usually propagated theough half-baked teachers that talk from witness state of consciousness. Usually its just lying to oneself.

If that would be only truth, then there would be no need for practice.

[Geof Nanto]

I also have noticed a split but I'd question your summary, and your labels 'Healed' and 'Wholed'.  From my perspective, your overview is far too simplistic to be helpful. The only part I agree with is your final sentence,  "I should also say that many people, and these perhaps make the best teachers as all, start needing healing but don't stop when they get it but carry on to become whole." And even here I'd question your use of the word 'whole'. Are any of us whole, or are we all seekers of wholeness? According to Carl Jung "all religions are therapies for the sorrows and disorders of the soul.” 

 

The second type are not whole or they would not be seeking more to life. In my experience these people often have trouble with humility. They view themselves as successful people and they are seeking greater success. For a true spiritual path to progress, the hero - the egocentric self that been running the show -  must die. This means devastation; hence the expression "dark nights of the soul."  For me this is the distinction that underpins the split; those who have experienced "dark nights of the soul" and those who have not. 

Edited October 5, 2015 by Yueya

[Nikolai1]

Hi Yueya,

 

Great questions, thanks.

 

The second type are not whole or they would not be seeking more to life. In my experience these people often have trouble with humility. They view themselves as successful people and they are seeking greater success. 

I agree that my labels aren't the best.  To be honest I didn't give them enough thought.  

 

The second type I've noticed aren't suffering people.  They aren't afflicted with depression, anxiety, guilt, addiction.  They haven't been set back by some really shitty parenting.  They are balanced, happy, functioning and, yes, maybe successful.  But this is not enough for them.  There is something more to life, they feel.  This is what brings them to the path.  They are looking for more than worldly happiness offers.

 

These people will find it hard to understand the first kind, who have overcome their had start in life and have reached the level of the normal person.  They are as happy and contented with their path/teacher as the everyday person is happy with their house and car.  They defend it likewise. They are nominally religious but spiritally and psychologically just veryday people.

 

The third kind I considered rare and so didn't give them much attention, but they are probably more common than I thought.  These are the ones have have found a solution to their suffering, and yet haven't rested contented.  This takes immense courage, because to push on usually requires a reevaluation of the path we started on and grew to love.  We have to become more open than feels comfortable.  We have to deal with ambiguity rather than certainty.  To question what has clearly worked for us and with nothing obvious to replace it takes courage.

 

Thanks for you words. 

[idiot_stimpy]

I believe I have experienced both.

 

My intense suffering (The Healed) lead me to question the meaning of life (The Wholed).

 

And here I am today. Still not quite healed or wholed yet.

[Kubba]

[ilumairen]

I am part both, and part neither - that often happens with generalities.

I have experienced what some would call great suffering, but to me it was just life, and I looked for the best ways to navigate through it. I learned the usefulness of situational awareness at a young age. I listened when I was told that Jesus was the only one who would never let me down, but he did. My mom's suffering would not abate. Religion did not work for me.

Later in life I entered into a series of abusive codependent relationships. I realized that the commonality was myself. I worked on myself. I quietly worked my way out of the cycle of abuse that I myself had been unknowingly been perpetuating. If someone crosses my path, and wishes to talk I listen. I tell them that they don't have to accept abuse, but I don't thump them because I know from experience that this is counterproductive.

Through out all of this I have been seen as someone exuding great happiness. Happiness that I did indeed feel when nothing was going wrong.

In my life there are moments of this and moments of that. I respond, and sometimes react, to the moment I am in - sometimes whole, sometimes healed, and sometimes damaged.

[Ell]

I find this to be a very interesting read/theory. Upon initial review, I kind of feel as though I'm part both, too. I'll have to think about it.

[Nikolai1]

An important trait of the first kind - the Healed - is the sense that their own search has ended.   They suffered, they found truth, and their suffering ceased.  They may well be unable to conceive of any further spiritual development either necessary or possible.  They have found everything they needed, and wish only to give others the same opportunity.  Hence, they are passionate advocates for the specific path they took.

 

They are untroubled by their anger, their upsets, their disputes.  They consider these part of the human condition and the notion that we might be free of them is idealistic moonshine.  They are fond of the acceptance teachings.  if we get anger just accept it and don't feel too much guilt about it.  Morally they appear as ordinary citizens, despite having religion as an extremely important part of their identity.

 

Intellectually too, they are satisfied with the conventions of their time.  The interest in the paranormal that we see in those with supernormal spiritual ambitions is also dismissed as illusion.  Only figures like the good Lord Jesus can perform miracles, and to suppose that you and I might do the same is either gross pride or madness.

Edited October 7, 2015 by Nikolai1

[manitou]

They are untroubled by their anger, their upsets, their disputes.  They consider these part of the human condition and the notion that we might be free of them is idealistic moonshine.  They are fond of the acceptance teachings.  if we get anger just accept it and don't feel too much guilt about it.  Morally they appear as ordinary citizens, despite having religion as an extremely important part of their identity.

 

Intellectually too, they are satisfied with the conventions of their time.  The interest in the paranormal that we see in those with supernormal spiritual ambitions is also dismissed as illusion.  Only figures like the good Lord Jesus can perform miracles, and to suppose that you and I might do the same is either gross pride or madness.

 

 

They are untroubled by anger and disputes - but do you find that they get into that mindset very often?  It seems to me that the longer life files down the rough edges, there are no rough edges left to get caught up in other people's rough edges - ergo very little dispute.  And when you say "despite having religion as an extremely important part of their identity", I assume you are speaking of what a metaphysician would call 'the Religious Mind', as opposed to being aligned with any religion?  

 

I agree that The Healed, at a certain point, cease looking further.  The I Am consciousness is sufficient; and at this point, the I Am draws what it draws to It.  There is no need to go out and seek, to thump, to even look for ways to be helpful.  It manifests before us every day, and beautiful Intuition will always provide the right thing to say or do, if we wait for it.  It's all in the timing; not jumping the gun, waiting for it to come.  Everything has its season.

 

I'm questioning your last sentence, about Jesus being the only ones to perform miracles.  I do think healings can be classified as miracles, and healings we can do.  Perhaps not the same drama as the Nazarene, but if the inner dynamics of another can truly be seen for what they are, the Seer (or healer) can tweak those dynamics and cause the process of disease to reverse.  My husband and I have done it.  This is why, in the Bible, Jesus would say 'go and sin no more'.  He wasn't speaking of sin in the sense that current Christianity sees it, as a good or bad issue, heaven or hell issue.  Rather, he was seeing it as a 'miss the mark' issue - a wrong mindset in the mind of the diseased one.  A well placed word from an Enlightened One can instantaneously cause a budding dynamic of enlightenment in another because of the change of the inner dynamic from fear or hatred, self loathing or judgmentalism, to Love of self, and consequently love of our brothers.  Love and forgiveness of self must come first.  But if, as you say, gross pride comes into play, it's all false.  It's not there in the first place.

 

Nice thread, Nikolai.

[Nikolai1]

Hi Manitou

 

I'm questioning your last sentence, about Jesus being the only ones to perform miracles.  I do think healings can be classified as miracles, and healings we can do.

Yes I think so too, and I fully believe in your healing gifts and have seen something of the same in myself - self-healing I mean.

 

 I think the attitude that only Jesus can do such things is the attitude I'm talking about in many religious people.  The have been Healed by the path they are on, but they do not think that healing is something that they can do themselves.  They believe in the moral perfection of the prophets, but do not expect the same of themselves.  

 

The key point of the Healed, as I paint them here, is that they appear to the Wholed to have stopped their spiritual development prematurely.  Of course, this is simply not true to the Healed.  The spiritual ambitions of the Wholed are, to them, unrealistic and proud.

 

I agree that The Healed, at a certain point, cease looking further.  The I Am consciousness is sufficient; and at this point, the I Am draws what it draws to It.  

The I AM consciousness is something I would associate with the Wholed rather than the Healed, again, as I define them here.  The suggestion that we somehow partake of God's person would be totally blasphemous to the religious mind of the Healed.

 

The Healed are still highly religious people, but their relationship with the Divine principle is dualistic, and that is how they want it to stay and believe it should stay if we are to avoid blasphemy.

[manitou]

The only problem, as I see it, is that to group folks into one category or the other is to shut our minds to truly Seeing other people.  We are looking at them from our own opinion, our own previous image of what we think they are.  In truth, they may be totally different upon your next meeting with them, but because we have a pre-determined fixed idea of them, we only see what fits into our previous idea of them.

 

I do understand, though, why you brought this all up because of the various arguments we can get into on this forum.  It may very well explain our different worldviews, and it's probably valid for discussion at a particular point in time.  But I wouldn't get too attached to this delineation...

[Nikolai1]

Hi Manitou,

 

But I wouldn't get too attached to this delineation...

Yes, I don't for a moment think these categories are anything other than very vague generalisations that may resonate for some people.  My own main criticism of my idea I've presented is the fact that there are many people who pass from suffering to personal healing...and don't stop there!  They go on to become whole people and agents of healing themselves.

 

Why did I write it?

 

I think many of us understand and accept that many, if not most, people simply aren't drawn to the spiritual way of life,  Fair enough.  But what can be confusing is when we meet people who are very passionate about the religious life, and yet have a radically different idea about what that is and should be.  All that we consider right, they consider to be wrong.

 

Hence the theory as to why a person can be passionately religious, and yet not feel the need for the higher moral life or spiritual vision.  They are content to leave all that to prophets, and wish only that the rest of us don't get too far above our station.

 

Some of us recognise great spiritual genius in men and women who in their day were persecuted by their own brethren.  This sad situation is mirrored in all the disputes we have amongst each other, even on this website.

 

But, actually, this website is not bad at all in this respect.  We all freely discuss high notions about, say, Christianity.  Were we to speak these ideas aloud in our local church we would be met quite often with a shocked non-comprehension.

 

For those of us who may at some point start to step out of our coterie and start teaching to men and women on the street, it is useful to understand the different styles of spiritual motivation so that we can sympathise with them all the more.

Edited October 9, 2015 by Nikolai1

[Unseen_Abilities]

Thinking back to when I would visit an/the odd group or three - really, probably.!/there are many many different kinds of people though...-there's likely never-ending disputes between people of all races, genders.sexual preferences.what have you? there's no black and white/! the endless blend of difference across all life - Esoteric/Mystical/Spiritual.and others! Why does my own 'Religion' of Art/Music allow THRASH Dao/Christ-like Energy."badass" take on life and reality.!. Where as a Gnostic Christian might like only White mAgic.! -making him, perhaps...closed.in a sense, to other people? Even though non-allownace (unconsciously, even.- do we ALL have to/seek.REAL DEEP EXPLORATION of our lives to be where we want to be? OF COURSE NOT! Taoists - are you A TONg LONg TAAOO!GINGShhhRAWWWW!! kind of guy or a mellow, peace-seeking Tai Chi Chuan practitioner? Abstract perhaps, but are your local Gung Fu Sifu's even 'Spiritual' most of the time?.Unseen_Abilities.

[manitou]

Hi Manitou,

 

Yes, I don't for a moment think these categories are anything other than very vague generalisations that may resonate for some people.  My own main criticism of my idea I've presented is the fact that there are many people who pass from suffering to personal healing...and don't stop there!  They go on to become whole people and agents of healing themselves.

 

Why did I write it?

 

I think many of us understand and accept that many, if not most, people simply aren't drawn to the spiritual way of life,  Fair enough.  But what can be confusing is when we meet people who are very passionate about the religious life, and yet have a radically different idea about what that is and should be.  All that we consider right, they consider to be wrong.

 

Hence the theory as to why a person can be passionately religious, and yet not feel the need for the higher moral life or spiritual vision.  They are content to leave all that to prophets, and wish only that the rest of us don't get too far above our station.

 

Some of us recognise great spiritual genius in men and women who in their day were persecuted by their own brethren.  This sad situation is mirrored in all the disputes we have amongst each other, even on this website.

 

But, actually, this website is not bad at all in this respect.  We all freely discuss high notions about, say, Christianity.  Were we to speak these ideas aloud in our local church we would be met quite often with a shocked non-comprehension.

 

For those of us who may at some point start to step out of our coterie and start teaching to men and women on the street, it is useful to understand the different styles of spiritual motivation so that we can sympathise with them all the more.

 

LOL .  I think all the paths are 'right'.  It is the motivation of the Great Intelligence within, Logos, that draws all of us to discover something more than merely the physical in front of us.  We seem to instinctively know that there is something more, and we can't quite put words to it.  I look back on my own personal evolution in all this and can see how caught up my mind has been at various times, thinking "I finally found it!  This is the right way!  It's this brand of Christianity, or Buddhism, or Daoism, or Theosophy!"  But it all keeps evolving, if we keep our minds open.  And we finally realize that it's all the same thing seen through different filters.  I think where in the world we happen to be born primarily dictates what our spiritual world view is slated to be, at least as our parents or society hands it down to us.  It's up to us to see through these structures - get what we will out of them - but to ultimately transcend them.

 

It's only when ego gets involved that we feel that we have the answers, the 'only' answer, as in "I am right and you are wrong".  Ego wants to be first, to be the one with the answers, to separate ourselves from the masses so that we can feel validated, special, better than the others.  What a strange thing ego is.  But ego is the very thing that, once tamed, creates self awareness and the realization that we are all One, we are all cells of the same body.  How silly it seems for one cell to try and elevate itself above all the other cells.  But ego certainly has its value, in that without it, there would be nothing to conquer, and no way to find self-realization.

 

I guess animals have a type of ego too, in that they know when they are threatened.  But that seems to be about it - unless you happen to be such a pretty little french poodle that your master feels the necessity to enter you in dog shows.  The Westminster dog show - the dogs almost seem to react to the applause!  I wonder if they haven't 'caught' a bit of the ego of their master?

 

You mention Christianity - I happen to live in a huge Bible thumping area.  There are some real good folks here - my cousin being one of them, and she's never questioned the Bible stories, or the premise of Christianity at all.  She's a real fine, kind lady - and she actually 'lives' her beliefs.  But I interact with others who will get in your face and practically holler that their way of seeing things is the only way - and sure enough, I'll be going to hell soon enough because I don't see it their way.

 

We live in such a disposable society here in the states.  No depth, so much emphasis on the material and acquisition.  I've come to realize how very suitable the current state of Christianity is to this societal condition.  There is no requirement for inner work, no necessity for them to be responsible for their own attitudes or opinions.  After all, the Nazarene did it all for them.  They can go on living selfish lives, accumulating all they can possibly accumulate - and not questioning this at all.  The Nazarene died for their sins, in their minds, and so what the heck?  Why worry about changing your behavior at all?  You're covered - you put money in the collection plate every week.  and you celebrate Jesus' birthday once a year.   At least that's how I see the condition here in this part of Ohio.  I've always lived in California, up to 7 years ago - and I never noticed this phenomenon there.  Not because it wasn't there, but because there is so much of a mix of ideation in a more cosmopolitan area.  It's just not as visible.

 

I'm not sure we even have to teach, Nikolai.  I think all we have to do is walk our talk.  Any lessons derived from us by others are most effective if Unseen and Unheard.  Just like the Dao.  When we are in Awareness, we realize our connection with everyone else, all other things in the world.  We just become the teaching.

Edited October 9, 2015 by manitou