Spotting a fake master

[liminal_luke]

41 minutes ago, Cobie said:

 

sex and money

A real master does not have sex with you, full stop.

A real master does not demand much money, just the normal entertainer fees. 

 

 

 

I'm with you as far as the no sex rule; less sure about the criteria of money.  Wang Li Ping's retreats are not cheap (if memory serves --- about $5000 for a few days several years back) and yet he's widely regarded as the real deal.  

[snowymountains]

2 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

I'm with you as far as the no sex rule; less sure about the criteria of money.  Wang Li Ping's retreats are not cheap (if memory serves --- about $5000 for a few days several years back) and yet he's widely regarded as the real deal.  

 

Theravada Bhikkhus charge exactly zero for teachings, Dhamma teachings are not meant to be a source of profit. Zen Roshis charge something but it more or less reflects simple maintainance costs.

 

I agree with the money criterion. Not everyone who charges is a fraud of course, but I've noticed everyone who charges a lot, including entire traditions, tend to create artificial progressions, curriculums and gatekeeping in ways which "coincidentally" are super profitable.

[Nungali]

4 hours ago, Maddie said:

The best way to know if someone is a master is to sign up for my course on "who is a master" brought to you by self proclaimed and self taught grand master Maddie 

 

No , dont do that . This is about  spotting a fake master . Sign up for MY course on 'spotting a fake master' bought to you by self proclaimed and self taught grand fake master Nungali .

 

- takes one to know one .

[Nungali]

3 hours ago, steve said:

 

On the one hand, there is no way to tell if someone is enlightened, or not. We may think we know but that is all projection. An enlightened master could lead us to believe whatever they feel is prudent in any given set of circumstances. On the other hand, anyone claiming they’re enlightened is not. Period. My opinion only, of course. 

 

Fake masters have a lot of tells. They tend not to show any vulnerability or admit mistakes. They often claim their way is the only or best way or that they know what’s best for others. They like fancy titles but don’t share who bestowed them, they often don’t reveal their lineage or teacher(s). They tend to talk more than listen and often like fancy clothes and trinkets and other external paraphernalia, often appropriated from other cultures, that helps sell their package. Their prices are often exorbitant compared to others. Their behavior outside of the teaching environment, how they treat others for example, especially when criticized, is often a dead giveaway. They tend to talk down about other styles or teachers, even about their own students. They like to put themselves on a pedestal and enjoy adoration. They get defensive and evasive when challenged. 

 

These are some things I’ve observed over the years in people who proved to be, or that I concluded (right or wrong) are fake or bad news.

 

 

..,. and they dont know how to change the formatting when they post ' their knowledge' directly lifted from Wikipedia    

[Nungali]

3 hours ago, The Biggest Nobody said:

Your post appears to be a response to recent discussions, likely influenced by me. Therefore, I will first contribute then present my defense, given my frequent self-identification as a Master.
 

Identifying fake Masters involves scrutinizing those who promise results without transparency, often resorting to manipulative tactics. They often rely on their credentials and schooling rather than any honest merit. Their demeanor also speaks volumes; if they lack love for others and exhibit distasteful characteristics, their legitimacy to me is doubtful. Me personally, I do not care for their credentials or outstanding achievements; if they don't treat others humanely, I stop listening. 

Now on to my defense; responses in here present several methods to identify fake Masters, yet there's a notable lack of application of these said methods by those very people.

 

You just listed your own  way of  telling if someone is a master and then declare that should apply to every one else .  Why should they use YOUR value systems ? 

 

 

 

Reading through these comments leaves me quite indignant. While some offer effective methods of exposing false mastery, I have not been afforded the same luxury of these "filtering process".

 

Sure you have . I just pointed out above , regarding your non ability to re format  Wiki quotes.

 

 

 Despite labeling myself as a Master in specific mindful contexts,

 

Errrr   what ???     

 

my ideas remain unchallenged, the "filtering process" being overshadowed by cheap personal attacks. 

Their claims of ego; I acknowledge having one.
My observations of intolerance and ad hominems beget dismissal and further hostility.
 

The hypocrisy is glaring, casting doubt on their character. It is unlikely anyone will acknowledge their past dishonest actions, nor will I expect them to. It is easier to cling to their belief that I am merely a joke, rather than engaging in an open-minded, intellectual discourse without the ad hominems. 
 

Well, if you start any kind of ' open-minded, intellectual discourse ' in the first place  , then things might have turned out differently , but you didnt did you . YOU chose to start out (yet again )  as you did .

 

What did you seriously expect  -  a flock of  daobums telling you how great and wise you became, since your last failed attempt at exactly the same thing ... and with the same fake outrage  ?

 

[Nungali]

1 hour ago, Cobie said:

@Apech I have put you on my ignored users list. 
 

 

 

Can I go on that too please ?

[blue eyed snake]

 

I went by my intuition and when I found him it was clear after we looked each other in the eyes.

 

before that I met a woman that seemed to get her 'greatness' from pushing down on others, i found her abusive and left.

a guy that smelled of sexual predation, i did not start. 

a guy that was so swollen with his feeling of self importance i did not give him another glance.

 

Memory from the first time I visited the dojo, these people are all very nice, calm and well-behaved, the place is very clean, has a nice vibe. And apart from a strong feeling of Yes, this is were i should be,  that teacher showed and told some thing that ring true to me. 

 

I think its only reasonable that payment is asked, he has to feed his family and those that work for him. He has to pay for the large facility, the energy to keep it all warm et cetera.

 

totally normal to me, I do not work for free either.

But these were reasonable prices, like when you would do chi gung, tai chi or karate elsewere you would pay for the lessons too.

[liminal_luke]

17 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

Can I go on that too please ?

 

I'd offer to put you on my list but it wouldn't do any good.  I could no more ignore you than I could ignore a pint of coffee Hagen-Daz sitting in my freezer.  I've got a weakness for the wickedly delicious.

[Apech]

2 hours ago, Cobie said:

@Apech I have put you on my ignored users list. 
 

 

 

delete

[Maddie]

2 hours ago, Cobie said:

@Apech I have put you on my ignored users list. 
 

 

 

Think of it as a badge of Honor Apech 😂. It doesn't take much to get on that list. 🤭.

[Maddie]

2 hours ago, old3bob said:

 

well at this site (as has been repeated thousands of times)  most folks here usually mean spiritual enlightenment/liberation as in Buddhism, Taoism,  Hinduism and other spiritual ways, thus it seems your argument is apparently only for the sake of argument considering the common context that exists here?  

 

You just listed three different types of enlightenment that differ vastly by definition. You're kind of reinforcing my point about definitions.

[Apech]

10 minutes ago, Maddie said:

 

Think of it as a badge of Honor Apech 😂. It doesn't take much to get on that list. 🤭.

 

I'm going to grow bangs to celebrate.

[blue eyed snake]

16 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

I'm going to grow bangs to celebrate.

 

quick solution

 

Spoiler

 

[old3bob]

24 minutes ago, Maddie said:

 

You just listed three different types of enlightenment that differ vastly by definition. You're kind of reinforcing my point about definitions.

 

not really since there aren't vast differences...being that most have non-duality pointers and many similar meanings about the masters and ways of their schools.  If I had included Abrahamic schools then the differences and meanings would be vast.

[Maddie]

18 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

I'm going to grow bangs to celebrate.

 

that's the standard procedure  

[Maddie]

Just now, old3bob said:

 

not really since there aren't vast differences...being that most have non-duality pointers and many similar meanings about the masters and ways of their schools.  If I had included Abrahamic schools then the differences and meanings would be vast.

 

The Buddha didn't teach non-duality, not sure why so many people (including Buddhists) think he did. 

[old3bob]

since many Buddhist schools and teachers speak of the same "Buddha nature" in all beings then I'd say that that doesn't mean various dualities of Buddha nature.  (or non-existence of Buddha nature)

[Apech]

4 minutes ago, Maddie said:

 

The Buddha didn't teach non-duality, not sure why so many people (including Buddhists) think he did. 

Because the yogacara schools and some vajrayana do teach a form of non- dualism.

[Maddie]

Just now, Apech said:

Because the yogacara schools and some vajrayana do teach a form of non- dualism.

 

True I guess. Most of my learning has been Theravada. 

[old3bob]

and there is "sunyata" that many Buddhists define or is pointed too as non-dual:

 

"sunyata, in Buddhist philosophy, the voidness that constitutes ultimate reality; sunyata is seen not as a negation of existence but rather as the undifferentiation out of which all apparent entities, distinctions, and dualities arise".

 

Edited March 1 by old3bob

[Apech]

9 minutes ago, Maddie said:

 

True I guess. Most of my learning has been Theravada. 

If you stick to the srvakayana then you are correct of course but then who are we to question the conclusions of actual realized Buddhists?

[Elysium]

This is not a foolproof way of picking chaff from wheat but if I am asking a question and the answer comes to me as incoherent I will flee from there. A master should be able to explain something cleanly, in my opinion.

 

But again, its not a foolproof way, after all there should be experiences that could be beyond reason.

 

Demonstrations of power would always be a sketchy point for me, there is a stage trick for anything nowadays. Suppose its just best to follow ones instinct and learn what you can even if they turn out to be a fake master but do steal id's of fake ones) 

Edited March 1 by Elysium

[-ꦥꦏ꧀ ꦱꦠꦿꦶꦪꦺꦴ-]

5 hours ago, The Biggest Nobody said:

Your post appears to be a response to recent discussions, likely influenced by me. Therefore, I will first contribute then present my defense, given my frequent self-identification as a Master.
 

Identifying fake Masters involves scrutinizing those who promise results without transparency, often resorting to manipulative tactics. They often rely on their credentials and schooling rather than any honest merit. Their demeanor also speaks volumes; if they lack love for others and exhibit distasteful characteristics, their legitimacy to me is doubtful. Me personally, I do not care for their credentials or outstanding achievements; if they don't treat others humanely, I stop listening. 

Now on to my defense; responses in here present several methods to identify fake Masters, yet there's a notable lack of application of these said methods by those very people.

Reading through these comments leaves me quite indignant. While some offer effective methods of exposing false mastery, I have not been afforded the same luxury of these "filtering process". Despite labeling myself as a Master in specific mindful contexts, my ideas remain unchallenged, the "filtering process" being overshadowed by cheap personal attacks. 

Their claims of ego; I acknowledge having one.
My observations of intolerance and ad hominems beget dismissal and further hostility.
 

The hypocrisy is glaring, casting doubt on their character. It is unlikely anyone will acknowledge their past dishonest actions, nor will I expect them to. It is easier to cling to their belief that I am merely a joke, rather than engaging in an open-minded, intellectual discourse without the ad hominems. 
 

 

This man is a fake master! I’m the real Master Solo!

[snowymountains]

1 hour ago, Apech said:

If you stick to the srvakayana then you are correct of course but then who are we to question the conclusions of actual realized Buddhists?

 

@Maddie @Apech

 

The Theravadan view is discussed by Bhikkhu Bodhi https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/bps-essay_27.html 

 

If the argument is don't question realised Buddhists ( whatever that means ), then it simply translates to which realised Buddhists.. realised Theravada or realised Mahayana..

 

Which again simply becomes a question of textual references, ie if the Vimalakirti Sutra has its origins in the historical Buddha.

 

 

Edited March 1 by snowymountains

[silent thunder]

5 hours ago, Cobie said:

@Apech I have put you on my ignored users list. 
 

 

 

3 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

Can I go on that too please ?

Me too.  (hoping this won't be replied to as it may mean i already am)