Hi, context is *everything*. I was responding specifically to Buck's statement about praying for those who attempt to derail others spiritually, and implying that I didn't consider it an effective means of spiritual progress vs. dedication. You may be right about all of this being predetermined - not something I ever consider one way or another - no *practical* value. The way I live is that I will take action or share something if I think it is helpful. If it turns out not to be, that's life. I don't see a contradiction there wrt "take it easy...". I am not advocating straining or behaving unnaturally, though progress often involves much dedicated and consistent effort.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain <no_reply@...> wrote: > > While I am not arguing, and certainly I have no fix on the definitive word on > anything, I view it (at times) from a different angle than you. You present a > sort of Horatio Alger spiritual unfoldment bio and "can do" gumption and > earnestness. I can relate. My first 12 years of TM, 17-29 or so, seemed like > that at the time. Looking back at that, or any aspect of my life, the > question that arises is "could I have done anything different". As posted > previously, I think free will is a bit of a mirage. It sure seems real, but > when you look deeper at it, live deeper aspects o fit, there is no "there > there", it would seem. > > Or much less there than we presume. What else could I have done? Its like an > equation A + B = C. A = my internal state, vision, POV, yearning for > something undefined but tangible. B = Broad and deep spiritual awakening in > America and the world in mid to late 60s spilling over into the 70's. (Broad > and deep relative to where the culture was at that time.) Lots of teacher and > books emerging. Nothing like today, but lots of new stuff, relative to that > time and what preceded it. C = a 12 year (turn of Jupiter) deep dive into > TM, MMY, teaching, globe trotting. A + B = C. > > C was the only possible (or at least one of a few) result. Sure, on the > surface, it LOOKED like there were a billion degrees of freedom. Looking > deeper, I think there were very few degrees of freedom, very little free will > to not jump in tenaciously with everything I had. I simple followed the path > of least resistance. The ball of my life could only roll in one direction. > There was no free will in that, just as the ball has no free will to roll > down and alternative course. > > My sense is, that while it may appear to you that you sucked it up, made a > huge decision to follow this path, gritted your teeth and perceivered across > a trail of great hardship and challenge, Indiana Jones style, from another > angle, you did nothing but follow the path of least resistance. You simple > did what you HAD to do, There was no alternative. > > Does telling others the Horatio Alger version benefit others. Yes, I think it > does. It opens up options in peoples minds, trains their intellect a bit, and > fills in some pieces that make up the terrain by which their ball rolls down > the hill, EFFORTLESSLY, on the path of least resistance. While the Horatio > Alger story has value, it is also a myth. (Myths have value, IMO, even if not > literally true.) > > A Maharishi Jyotishee (of all people -- one who I would have expected to at > least parrot the outer house / party line) indicated some things that would > unfold in my lifetime (several jyotishees, at different readings said the > same). However, the latter one, I politely but firmly challenged. Among my > points of challenge was "So even if i totally abandon my practice, this will > unfold?". He was adament that my karma was clear from my chart and nothing I > could do could stop it -- even if I abandoned all spiritual practices and > pursuits. > > While I don't live my life by jyotish, nor necessarily grant this guy a huge > assessment of credibility just because he was a MMY Jyotishee, I do find that > this is reflective of the inner message of some if not much of MMY's > teaching. "Take it easy, take it as it comes" if REALLY lived, can have as > much power in ones life as TM itself, IMO. While in outer forums MMY may have > stoked the fires of Horatioism within the weary masses of seekers, I found, > when he was more informal, not lecturing and inspiring masses, his approach > was along the lines of "Take it easy, take it as it comes./ Do nothing, > accomplish everything/ Let go / Act naturally, according to your nature." > > I have found in my own life, that letting go, not being tied to certain > envisioned outcomes, taking it as it comes, being easy with it all, doing > nothing (in the sense of NOT bucking it up, gritting ones teeth, pounding the > table, and vowing to achieve a particular envisoned goal or requiring a > particular outcome) have all been a fuel of nectar for me. > > Thus, I periodically rib you a bit about the irony of intensely desiring > (which is my take of your view and advice) the desireless state. I can and do > see it both ways. But the intense desire, relentless, tenacious thing, while > that may be what it appears to be on the outside, on the inside, for me, on > the inside, its all "take it easy, let the ball roll where it will, down the > path of least resistance, don't resist, take it as it comes". > > So I am puzzled if you really mean "tenatious" (and relentless) as a > reflection of your inner experience. At least looking back on it. Could you > have done anything different? > > > > > > > . > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" <whynotnow7@> wrote: > > > > If a person holds their goal of spiritual liberation tenaciously, nothing > > can stop them. Absolutely nothing. On the other hand, if at the first > > serious challenge to the ego, the person derails themselves spiritually, > > their desire was weak anyway. On thing I clearly received from Maharishi's > > teaching was to be self sufficient in our desire for liberation, dependent > > on nothing, particularly outside support. > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" <dhamiltony2k5@> wrote: > > > > > > "But if thou declinest to undertake this righteous combat, then, having > > > relinquished thine own dharma and glory, thou wilt reap sin." > > > > > > Yep, I pray for these guys; particularly the ones who work so hard at > > > de-railing folks from the spiritual road. > > > > > > -Buck in FF > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" <whynotnow7@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Sure. There are many ways to do this. Energetic healing is one way to > > > > take on someone else's, or a group's, karma. Another way is to engage > > > > others as an aspect of oneself, diving deep into their thought process, > > > > even mirroring it at times, to gain insight into them. Trippy stuff and > > > > very revealing. I don't know that I can explain it better than that. It > > > > is a natural result of the internal infinite meeting the external > > > > infinite. I realize this still sounds abstract, though it is a definite > > > > and concrete experience. > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1" <steve.sundur@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" <whynotnow7@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Maharishi's general advice aside, there is nothing wrong or scary > > > > > about taking on the karma of someone else. Its actually quite an > > > > > amazing > > > > > experience, and a great indicator of attachment to our ideas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Would you care to elaborate on this? Give an example of what you > > > > > mean? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
