Seems everybody’s doing it, which makes you wonder... just how real can it be.
As the "awakening' movement takes hold we can just imagine future conversations at the country club: “Buffy, did you hear Chad had an awakening!” “No! Reeeaaally? I wonder how Margot feels about that?”
Awakening is chic....
Nevertheless, you gotta be wounded first, or it simply isn't credible, and many of our modern spiritual teachers are themselves nothing more than the walking wounded (In my kids school, the walking wounded are referred to as the "emo" clique)
The "awakened masters" report that it was intense suffering that brought them to the “truth.” But, then why do they teach us to avoid that same suffering if it was, in fact, the way to truth?
Why teach that there is a "path to awakening” if they got 'it' completely by surprise? Even the most revered, Sri Ramana, had to experience the throes of death before “awakening” to the truth and Eckhart Tolle virtually became suicidal before his illustrious “awakening” (and his more illustrious collaboration with Oprah).
It seems that traumatic suffering is the way to “awakening." Only through trauma can we realize truth, but not just any old trauma... it must be a profound life changing trauma.
But then, do these teachers of “awakening” do us a disservice by providing spiritual ideologies and techniques that seek to make things easier on us (provide shortcuts) if, in fact, there is such a thing as “awakening?
It seems that everyone can “Awaken”…but first you gotta be royally fooked up!
Just another rule of conventional “spirituality” or “I once was lost, but now am found.”
Rarely will you ever hear: “I was rich, fat and happy… and then I became an awakened master.” Since it’s the disciples who choose the 'guru,' we would never choose a guru who did not pay his/her dues, since to be reputable one must be credible. Inevitably, they must conform to your demands regardless of what they think is “true," because they can only teach what you are willing and prepared to accept (and I'll bet you thought you had nothing to do with it).
In other words, you damn well better be close to death, or else it don’t count and we won't revere you!
You have to play the game of "struggle and sacrifice" before you can be a spiritual superstar. You have to traverse Dante’s Inferno before you can have the 72 virgins, walk through the pearly gates, attain nirvana or experience “awakening.”
Ha! But isn’t that like everything else in the world. No pain, no gain! Without enduring sacrifice and plenty of painful struggle, you can't win the 'prize' simply because that's how the game is played.
Nevertheless, once you finally do hit bottom, it’s easy to “awaken” and that’s because anything has to be better than the bottom.
Yet, what they often fail to convey is that, once at the bottom, you suddenly feel the need to reach out to others, because it was loss of ‘contact’ that caused your plummet in the first place. Therefore, the only truth you've awakened to is how much you need others. Nevertheless, as the enlightened ones always demonstrate, soon as you're standing on stable ground, others are discounted as having anything to do with the new and improved, awakened “you” (same as the old “you,” just a bit shinier).
What they fail to convey is that they have nothing to teach, because teaching is simply an excuse for deeply engaging with the world. Awakening proceeds from engagement, it doesn't result in it. It is deeply engaged in relationship from which awakening is experienced.
But individual ego’s don’t like hearing this, since it obviously negates the "personal awakening” that they alone, ‘achieved.’
Obviously, if you’ve come to love your ‘story’ of awakening then you might inadvertently discount other stories, but without other stories, there would be no story of “you.” Does your wife/husband have a story? Your children? How about your parents, your friends and neighbors?
"Ah…what do they know, they ain’t “awakened” yet!"
Ah.... so that's your story????
The parts cannot realize the whole as long as they remain fixated on parts. However, parts can realize “stories” that result in illustrious "awakening" careers.
Image by Caniglia - "Days of No Horizon"
Hey Mike, good one. As my friend Lune waxes poetic..."The only enlightenment is to realise there is no enlightenment."
ReplyDeleteAnd so true...hitting bottom always has to do with separation, isolation, being cut off, and finally being motivated to reach out for help...
And this (sometimes unwritten) motivation of "teachers" to "relieve suffering" is puzzling...surely suffering is a big part of the story of the human condition...without which there is no deliverance. In the story that unfolds, perhaps the trick is to bear the suffering, until, like everything else, and, as you emphasise, with the help of others, the suffering changes into yet another face of life.
Life is everything, and everyone. No escaping it! Although many seem hell-bent on trying (to escape).
Love, Suzanne
"And this (sometimes unwritten) motivation of "teachers" to "relieve suffering" is puzzling...surely suffering is a big part of the story of the human condition...without which there is no deliverance."
ReplyDeleteWell said!
I feel that this motivation to help others is nothing more than a misinterpreted desire to deeply engage with others and nothing more than that, because we cannot negate that teaching demands an intense level of engagement or relationship with others.
I feel that the problem is that some teachers miss the engagement part and feel that they have some unknown "truth" to impart, which then distracts from the truth of the engagement.
"Life is everything, and everyone. No escaping it! Although many seem hell-bent on trying (to escape)"
Yes! Exactly! And any ideology that directs individuals to follow exclusive individualized paths are essentially teaching escape from what cannot be escaped and thus maintain suffering by claiming that until you take this path suffering will remain.
Thanks!
mikeS
Very interesting Mike (my name is Helder by the way...nice engaging with you:)
ReplyDeleteI feel the same, and that is seldomnly "taught": suffering is part of life. I guess even in the "awakening" is duality: first rock bottom, then getting up and realising there was no suffering in the first place. Had to be there to see this. What is wrong with this? Why struggle to get rid of anything in the first place? Why not struggle? :)
For me all is well when I know all is well, when there is no searching. I actually think that is why "I" am here: to experience the beauty of all that is. And for this I need no teachings :)
Hey Helder!
ReplyDeleteTo struggle or not to struggle that is the question...
"For me all is well when I know all is well, when there is no searching. I actually think that is why "I" am here: to experience the beauty of all that is. And for this I need no teachings"
Well said! Actually it seems we only teach our 'self' anyway. Imagine the thrill in realizing that there is no longer a need to teach anything at all. We can finally relax
It's "Miller Time"!
Good to hear from ya, hope to hear more!
mikeS
Well thank you Mike!
ReplyDeleteI was actually also hoping to hear more from you. I was pondering more on this thing about suffering and enlightenment. Basically you point out something very interesting and that I wondered myself at times: all these "awake masters" seem indeed to have had in common intense periods of suffering yet, after awakening, they all dismiss it as "just a story" with no relevance. And I am not saying that they are not fundamentlaly right, but is that helpful to others?
I experienced a sort of an awakening in the past (obviosuly it was not permanent) and it happened after intense suffering/trauma. Then there was a sudden switch and an opening. So, I guess I am interested in your opinion: do you think awakening (defined as a substantial switching in conscioussness/perception) happens only after intense disilusenment/confusion?
That is something I can actually understand. But something that is not really talked about much. Suffering is really mistreated these days...
Sorry, I haven't read any of your other posts but I will. Sounds really interesting your blog. I gather from the subtitle that you are seeking enlightenment?
Greetings.
Helder,
ReplyDeleteActually, I am not seeking enlightenment and because of that 'not seeking' I may in fact find it. Therefore, I don't hold much credence in paths to "enlightenment."
If we consider awakening or enlightenment as a means of 'knowing' truth, then I do not feel individual relative minds have the capacity to awaken. However, I do believe many minds or more specifically the collective can 'know' truth as soon as they decide that it is impossible to know truth individually. However, this hypothesis is not very credible in awakening circles. Nevertheless, I continue to hold it all the same.
However, it's all merely food for thought, since I really don't know anything of any importance.
Thanks,
mikeD
As my husband is fond of saying: "Just get on with it!"
ReplyDeleteHe's a much better teacher than I am.
Hi Mike~
ReplyDeleteIt only goes to show that it is not the wound nor the experience of having shed or healed, but what one does with it.
I wonder that in a world which has conspired to have us all live dishonest lives, that until we awaken to this "truth", there can be no "truth" beyond it.
Good Post.
Blessings~
Hi Mike,
ReplyDelete"What they fail to convey is that they have nothing to teach, because teaching is simply an excuse for deeply engaging with the world. Awakening proceeds from engagement, it doesn't result in it. It is deeply engaged in relationship from which awakening is experienced."
Mmh. Aren't these lines a kind of teaching?
Why are you writing this blog? Why not in form of private notes in your old desk at home? Why on the internet?
I like your texts. They give food for thought. And this is exactly what teaching (except instruction for meditation) often does as well: giving food for thought. But I fear, that way you keep people from realizing what is (in this blog and elsewhere) called "truth". So why do it?
Just wondering :)
Roger
P.S: Now you might ask why then, I do respond? And ask Questions? ;)
Hey Roger!
ReplyDelete"Mmh. Aren't these lines a kind of teaching?"
They certainly are. I would only add that they are not consciously chosen lines. If the ego-self consciously chooses the teacher than it will learn what it expects and is prepared for. Therefore, if the ego consciously chooses a teacher, nothing will be linearly transmitted from the teacher, however, from the depth of the relationship both will learn.
"Why are you writing this blog? Why not in form of private notes in your old desk at home? Why on the internet?"
Because I enjoy the engagement.
"I like your texts. They give food for thought. And this is exactly what teaching (except instruction for meditation) often does as well: giving food for thought. But I fear, that way you keep people from realizing what is (in this blog and elsewhere) called "truth". So why do it?"
Nothing I do or do not do (or anyone else) will keep you from truth, unless, of course, one chooses not to learn (which is actually impossible). I do not teach truth. However, I do believe it will be found where it is least expected, since expectation is an egocentric function.
I merely advise that in the depth of relating truth is available mutually, so be careful who you expect has nothing to teach since most likely truth is "there."
Thanks!
mikeS