Edg, since you have taken upon yourself the mantle of being "the chronicler of Daniels' life," please repost for us the instances on BATBAP in which he said some- thing a little "off" and was called on it by other forum participants, including yourself. Thanks in advance.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <no_re...@...> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: > > > > > > Dan was special -- way wise beyond his age. Not that he was > > > a guru one would seek, but that it was he who sought -- sought > > > hearts to engage -- and pushed them faster into depth and clarity. > > > > The same depth and clarity that drove him to > > taking his own life? > > You're assuming that suicide is an absolute immorality? That's been my > stance too I admit, but I recognize that I'm merely resonating as an > individual -- not being truly able to say even if there is life -- for a > personality -- after death, or that there's some spiritual proof of > suicide being one of the "great sins." And, if he was enlightened, and > that's not a gimme, then by definition, suicide is acceptable in some > way. If he was not enlightened, then, hey, who's clarity doesn't waver > from bookend to bookend? I don't know what happened in his last days > that might have pushed him past the tipping point; it could have been > but a final straw or a spur of the moment misstep, but I'm certainly not > going to say no one has the right to end his life no matter what the > circumstances. Nor would I say that depth and clarity would drive him -- > it could have been a temporary triggering not an act of intellect or > heart. > > > > > > Edg, I *understand* that you found someone who > > was willing to go back and forth with you over > > the emotional hyperbole of spirituality, and > > that this made a big impression on you. I never > > met or interacted with the dude, and I have a > > somewhat different impression, based on the > > followup to his death, and what has been posted > > by him and about him. > > If you read the conversation I had with him over hundreds of posts, I > don't think even you could conclude that it was a process of "emotional > hyperbole of spirituality." Instead, it is a display of my true doubts > about his claims of enlightenment and his very gentlemanly patience with > my challenges. I don't just do hundreds of back and forths with anyone, > ya know, this kid was special, and in many ways he got me to reconsider > what I thought were very firm positions. > > > > > > I'm seeing more of the "echo chamber effect" I > > wrote about earlier, back when Ravi was being > > touted as the latest realized being by this > > *same* group of discerning seers. The reaction > > I'm seeing on BATGAP and to some extent in some > > of the posts forwarded to FFL is "protect the > > idea that we're realized," along with an IMO > > unhealthy dose of "realization is by definition > > 100% life supporting...it's all good." > > The group as a whole accepts the statements of others at face value for > the purpose of mutual exploration. I didn't think it matters what the > reality is in that the logical consistency of the presentations of those > with such claims are spotlit. Those who claimed enlightenment were not > looking for followers so much, but they were definitely there with > rolled-up sleeves working the neurons with us mundaners. It was a > service you simply cannot purchase -- try to get any preacher or priest > of any religion to jaw with you about the nuances of spirituality over > hours and hours -- as if. The BATGP group is significantly about just > such service. > > > > > > Duh. The lesson one should take away from this > > whole sad business is IMO more along the lines > > of "realizations come and go, they're *not* > > inherently all "life-supporting," and sometimes > > they need *real* feedback from someone who knows > > the pitfalls of spiritual practice and how to > > deal with them. > > It would be hard to imagine Dan fitting into your above cubbyhole. He > was never heard to say his actions were purely sattvic or that his > intellect had clarity about the import of his existence, yet he felt he > was part of a perfection beyond words. > > His family and his friends were not ignoring obvious signs such as, say, > Ravi's friends are even now being presented with. Dan had it together in > many of the environments he participated within. Rick's statement about > telling him to be quiet, for instance, shows that that group thought of > Dan as a knowing chum more than an all wise guru -- that speaks to Dan's > intent and humility and mitigates any assertions that he was merely a > smart kid who'd studied Advaita and now was puffing up his ego-gone-nuts > with it. > > And who knows the pitfalls of spiritual practice? -- only a very rare > counselor could be said to be on top of this issue such that some sort > of effective therapy could be interceptive. > > I've had some experience with folks going nuts due to "enlightenment," > and I have failed to penetrate those delusions enough to help anyone, so > I know that any group is unlikely to be therapeutically expert, and, so, > yes, to the extent that the group members are picking up on "signs" and > yet blinkering it out or rationalizing it, then there is a need for > recognizing that lack of integrity, but at the BATGP group, there are > many challengers who would nitpick all the statements. No one at BATGP > had, in my opinion, any reason to suspect that Dan was so close to a > cusp. > > > > > > On reflection, I do *not* think that a group of > > amateurs dealing with confusing experiences that > > they share is the same thing as being in a trad- > > ition that has seen this sort of thing for many > > centuries, and has learned over those centuries > > which of the confusing experiences *are* really > > beneficial and which are not. Nothing I have read > > in the followups to Daniel's death leads me to > > believe that anyone in the satsang group or on > > the BATGAP forum has that kind of perspective. > > And maybe so, but isn't that besides the point? The group serves a few > needs, but no group serves all needs. Nor, again, do I think, by my > having failed more than once to help someone who was obviously askew, > that there are places where such a person can go for a substantial > look-see. Sometimes even a shot of lithium just will not do the trick. I > paid for a person to go to a psychologist recently, and that didn't cut > it, and he ended up hospitalized, and even there with all the chemical > straight jackets, it took months for him to "come down from his frenzy > about being enlightened." BATGP and the ilk simply cannot be held to a > standard even modern medicine has yet to sustain. > > > > My points all along have been that the desire > > to "protect the realization" is not an inherently > > safe one. It "works" to create a group who can > > feel all cool and realized because no matter what > > they say to others around them, they tend to get > > reflected back to them a hearty "Yeah...that's > > some neat realization all right." But what happens > > when someone says something that should trigger > > alarm bells in the listeners, and no alarm bells > > go off? > > I'd say that Dan gave no such signals in his postings. In real life, it > seems he was telling some folks he was troubled, but I didn't know him > "in real life," so I can't say if anyone dropped the ball. BATGP > constantly interacted with Dan, and we just didn't see anything that > could trigger an alarm. I invite you to read his words and see if you'd > be thusly triggered by anything he said. > > > > > > I am *not* trying to "assign blame" in this. I > > *more* than understand the sense of isolation that > > someone who has convinced themselves that they are > > "realized" enforce upon themselves. I am merely > > pointing out some of the dangers inherent in doing > > so, and the dangers of people around them *rein- > > forcing* possibly unsound ideas because their > > allegiance is still to an unsound piece of dogma: > > "Meditation and realization are 100% life-supporting." > > I don't think Dan was isolated or that he'd painted himself into a > corner by asserting enlightenment that gradually became a jailcell for > him. Maybe, yes, but he was competent and functional in so many ways > that put himself "in smarm's way," and he DAILY was confronted by those > who took his statements with a grain of salt. That he got positive > feedback from those who really couldn't know his true state is not a > moral crime or a psychological error on the parts of those who bought > into his claims. In all my exchanges with him, he never tried to get me > to buy it; instead, he just kept presenting logically instead of > "believe me you turd." Dan's ego was not clamoring for outer validation > anywhere near to, say, the level I personally find myself seeking. If > anyone, it would have been me to recognize such signs in him, but he was > very humble -- very. Read his words! > > > > Things *can* and *do* "go wrong" along the Way. My > > point is that you're not likely to get any real > > feedback on whether the experiences you're caught > > up in and overwhelmed by are positive or negative > > from a group of people who are still committed to > > the unsound idea that all of them are positive. > > Again, at the BATGP group, Dan got tons of corrections and questions, > and you simply don't see anyone sucking up to him as if they'd want him > for a personal guru. Yes, there's some mood making and glorification of > experiences, but they are rare compared to a rather scholarly intent on > the part of all. Certainly in his posts, Dan just never came off as one > who was "caught up in" an experience. In real life, maybe there someone > could or should have been alarmed, but if so, and if no one was able to > help him with that greater intimacy with him, the BATGP folks cannot be > expected to have done better. The BATGP is sort of a philosophical > hobbyist place; not a mutual admiration blinkering event. > > Edg > > > > > > Just my opinion... > > > > > > > I just posted this at another site: > > > > > > > > > Dan is an evolutionary wind at my back; he shepherds me still. > > > > > > He words still scintillate living inside my intent. > > > > > > I;ve read his words for hours today and there's not a hint of > > > any fading of the power with which he effortlessly touches a life. > > > > > > Not that he wrote creatively, though he did, not that his love > > > was angelic, though it was, not that he slogged for hours writing > > > to help me step into love, and he did, it is the source that > > > flowed through him that I can never forget, for is not the > > > silence of his missingness yet the best of him? > > > > > > When thoughts stop, there he is. > > > > > > Yet do I cry and cry and cry . . . his bell still tolls for me. > > > > > > Edg > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <salsunshine@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > On May 30, 2010, at 5:13 PM, Rick Archer wrote: > > > > > > > > >> FW; > > > > >> "I knew Daniel well and have a little different take than some > others. this is what my perception was knowing what was going on. Had I > known the last 2 months he told so many people his pain was too great > and he was thinking of killing himself I would have intervened strongly > in some way. intervention may have helped but at the same time. a person > has to be receptive and I don't know how receptive Daniel was. that > advaita group all think they are beyond human help and looked to him as > the mentor and teacher and he had no one." <end paste> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Whoever wrote this doesn't know what they're talking about. They > may never have been to the group, and you certainly haven't. We loved > and respected Dan, and he spoke with great clarity from a great depth, > but the group in general did not look to him as mentor and teacher, and > he had people he respected to whom he could talk as much as he wanted > to. > > > > > > > > I sure hope not, Rick. There seems to be something > > > > profoundly odd about a group of middle-aged people > > > > looking to someone more than half their age as a > > > > "mentor and teacher," JMO. > > > > > > > > Sal > > > > > > > > > >
