--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: > > I am following up on my own post because I realize belatedly that there > are probably a great number of people here who don't understand my point > because they've never known any *alternative* to "learning via words" in > a spiritual context. Every technique and every piece of knowledge > they've ever been given was given to them in words. > > There are alternatives to this, alternatives that many here will > understand because they may have experienced them. One simple, non-Woo > way that one can learn from a spiritual teacher more effectively than in > words spoken by that teacher is by simply *watching* (and, on a more > intuitive level, *feeling*) how the teacher deals with common > situations. I know that I learned far more from Maharishi, from Rama - > Fred Lenz, and from other teachers I've had the opportunity to be with > for extended periods of time by simply observing them than I ever did > from anything they said. One of the most valuable lessons *to be > learned* from such observation -- and the basis of my former > WikiSpirituality rap -- is the opportunity to observe when the teacher's > walk doesn't match his or her talk. THAT is a real eye-opener, > spiritually. The teachers says A, and tells others to do A, but the > teacher *actually* does the exact opposite of this, Z. > > A more Woo Woo description of an alternative to learning via words is > found in teachings that DON'T CONTAIN ANY WORDS. I can recall dozens of > techniques and bits of knowledge that have been imparted to me by > various teachers across the years. For example, many of the techniques > of advanced meditation I've learned are *not* taught using words at all, > but by merely sitting with the teacher as he or she *demonstrates* the > technique or state of attention being taught. You pick it up via > transmission, or via some kind of psychic link...I don't pretend to > understand the mechanism, just the result. I've sat in rooms with a > dozen or more other seekers and had the teacher thus "demonstrate" some > aspect of esoteric experience without saying a single word, or issuing a > single verbal instruction. Yet at the end of the evening, when I > "compared notes" with the others, we all learned essentially the same > things. We agreed on the nature of the technique we had been taught, we > agreed on the intellectual basis for it, and we agreed on what it might > "mean" to us, and to our ongoing evolution. > > Again, I have no explanation for how this might work, only that it seems > to. If I were to attempt to "rate" or "rank" what I consider to be the > most valuable spiritual teachings I have ever received from a teacher > I've met and interacted with, the "Top Ten" would ALL fall into the > "wordless instruction" category. NOT A SINGLE ONE would be based on > anything expressed by these teachers in words, or in writing. > > This is probably why -- at this point in my life -- I do not seek > "wisdom" or "spiritual teaching" *in* words, whether spoken by some > teacher in person, or written by some teacher in some book. Based on my > own experience, there is less likelihood that anything taught in such a > manner will prove valuable in the long run, so why bother? >
Dear Turqb, We don't got one of those Starbucks in Fairfield but we do got a Paradiso Cafe. You; really should come sit with me, and have coffee at Paradiso Cafe in Fairfield and chat. You and me. Anytime. Hey, I also been studying a lot how to be a cult leader too. This Sunday past I went to Mennonite Church and i was really impressed with the theatrical art of the pastor there. You know, the performance art of the guy. God was he good. The script content, his voice control, timing, body language, the whole expression. It was incredible and the congregation obviously liking what they had in him leading them through the service responded. The guy was really good. I did transcribe as he was delivering the service. Just for practice I transliterated it for our purposes here. Link below. In words I know intuitively you'd feel what I have written and am saying. Now, take a look and I think you could even hear it said in just my written word. But really, I think you should come sit with me. I'd be glad to help you with your experience, you know, like a lesson over coffee sometime. Black coffee Americano at Paradiso. It's up to you. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/325898 -Buck > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > Here's a topic for discussion, if anyone finds themselves interested > > enough in it to pursue one. If not, that's OK, too. :-) > > > > I've been trying to figure out what makes some spiritual seekers -- > NOT > > just here on FFL, but across the board in lots of so-called spiritual > > groups -- so prone to believe what people SAY, and to prefer that to > > what these people's actions say about what they ARE. And one of the > > answers to this koan I've come up with for myself is that a LOT of the > > people who tend to prefer words to actions, and who tend to > > automatically believe what the teachers or wannabee teachers they're > > attracted to say or write, are merely doing with them what they've > done > > their entire spiritual "career." They're engaging in long-distance > > WikiLearning. > > > > On almost every forum I visit, when I run into someone who seems to > > believe everything SAID by some teacher or wannabee authority figure, > I > > have taken to asking about the nature of their spiritual path. What > has > > emerged from these questions is what seems to me to be a veritable > > trend. In most cases, they never spent any actual face time the > teacher > > or teachers they feel that they "studied" with. Many never met these > > teachers in person, and even those who did only encountered him a few > > times, either seated dozens of rows back from him in an audience > > somewhere, or they managed to hand the teacher a flower as he or she > > walked by. That's it -- the full extent of their personal interaction > > with the person they consider their spiritual teacher. > > > > EVERYTHING ELSE THEY FEEL THEY LEARNED FROM HIM CAME IN THE WAY OF > > WORDS. Words either written down in a book somewhere, or spoken on an > > audiotape or videotape somewhere. > > > > WHY would people like this tend to believe the words of others? Duh. > > They received their entire spiritual education in the form of words, > as > > surely as if they had received it by looking things up on Wikipedia > the > > way Willy does. As Empty and Salyavin and Bhairitu and others have > > pointed out, "studying" that way is not the same as working one-on-one > > over a long period of time with a real, live teacher. Apples and > > oranges. When I encounter seekers who have had real, prolonged, actual > > relationships with their teachers (as opposed to virtual or imaginary > or > > fantasy relationships with them, or with their ideas), they RARELY put > > very much emphasis on the *words* written by or spoken by those > > teachers. They've had the opportunity to discover that the most > valuable > > spiritual teachings cannot be conveyed in words. > > > > The long-distance WikiSeekers have never experienced this. They > actually > > seem to believe that by reading about something they can learn the > > essence of that something. And so as a result, they tend to overvalue > > the things that teachers or wannabee teachers SAY, and ignore what > they > > DO. Again, duh. That's the only way they've ever learned *anything* in > a > > spiritual context, never having had the opportunity to work with real, > > live teachers up close and personal. > > > > Anyway, that's my theory. At least my theory for today. An alternative > > theory is that these people who have a tendency to base their beliefs > on > > what people SAY more than on what they DO are just gullible as hell. > :-) > > >
