|
|
|
Hi NikGood questions; thanks for the links, I have followed them up with interest. EV gives no indication of what it means by self-fulfilment I don't know about EV's definition, or lack of definition as you say. But Maharaji's is pretty clear - this is my take on it, distilling thousands of hours of his satsang: As an end state, Maharaji's self-fulfilment is breaking free completely from the clutches of your mind, and living 100% from your heart. What is heart, as Maharaji means it? Among other things, it is the place where there are no doubts. Anyone else care to attempt defining what Maharaji means by 'heart'? It is, after all (excuse the pun) the heart of his message. To achieve self-fulfillment, as Maharaji means it, is to devote your life totally to the superior power in person (who of course happens to be Maharaji himself). And how do you do that? By surrendering yourself totally so that the grace can fill you up. And how do you do that? By practising satsang, service and meditation (sorry: listening to inspirational talks from Maharaji, helping out, and meditating) so that the 'connection' to Maharaji is kept clear and open so that the grace can flow, and that you are empty enough to receive it. The question: What is self-fulfillment? is actually I believe an important question, both to understand what it means for each of us as individuals, and how to set about achieving it. Needless to say, I reject Maharaji's answers to this question I paraphrase above unequivocally. -- Mike
www.MikeFinch.com
|
|
|
|
Anyone else care to attempt defining what Maharaji means by 'heart'? In my memory, Rawat always described this by what it isn't, which is a rhetorical ploy he uses a lot. It's not your brain and it's not your mind, and it's, well, indescribable, although he will go on for a long time saying what it is not. About the only descriptions are that it's peaceful and "so beautiful," and various other superlatives about how it's what you have always been looking for, even when you didn't know you were looking. Double talk, basically. The bottom line is that the description is so vague that it allows one to imagine this place as one in which you can check out from your life and all its problems, where you don't feel insecure or frightened in any way, where things aren't messy or confusing or comlicated (which life is), and where it's just peaceful and clear -- This allows someone feeling insecure, or sad, or unsure about themselves, to pin their hopes on this simple solution. And, of course, once you get into the "preparation" process during which this "gift" has been dangled over your head for perhaps years, some people have so invested their hopes in it, that they will repress all their doubts just to get the "gift" that will give them access to their "heart." If they are properly indoctrinated by this point, they will probably become cult members, give money, and "love" Maharaji. It's a compelling come-on, with lots of flair but saying very little.
Modified by Joe at Wed, Dec 14, 2005, 14:51:12
|
|
|
|
There is a whole interesting issue here IMO.
Is it a good idea to actually look for such a thing ?
What will you achieve in life (beside being satisfied) in case you find such a thing ?
Did you ever meet someone who actually found it ?
Is it not a pretty much desperate attitude ?
Why couldn't one accept frustrations and dissatisfaction ... that actually are the best motivations in life ... and find some solutions ?
|
|
|
|
Hi Nik! I would think Abraham Maslow's ideas about "self-actualisation" might be interesting in this context. It's been a while since I read his books, admittedly, but I think he might have been on more solid ground (psychologically speaking) than the airy-fairy stuff we were so ready to accept at one time, as good little premies! (Ah but I miss the magic! The wand...where is it?...) Cheers, Shelagh
|
|
|
|
When I became a premie, Knowledge was about knowing the ultimate truth, although it helped that it was also supposed to be blissful. Over the years I did get some bliss, but the ultimate truth I never did quite get the hang of. Now, Knowledge is marketed as personal peace and fulfillment. That could never be fulfilling for me, however blissful the meditation or devotion is. It was truth that drove me, and if premies have forgotten that some of them came for truth, and they are now in it for the good feeling, then at least they should realise this change and admit they are no different than the rest of the human race.
Give me truth and freedom over pleasure any day.
John.
|
|
|
|
Hi John I came to maharaji on his promise to reveal to me the "Ocean of Satchitanand" which he alleged resided within me. I was led to understand that Satchitanand consisted of three aspects in one, truth, conciousness and bliss but that was suddenly transformed into a mere catchphrase within a song, "truth is the conciousness of bliss". That which was undefinable was suddenly defined. That which was allegedly absolute in its own right, was suddenly a selfish pursuit. I agree that our longing for truth brought us to maharaji. The longing to know the truth, reality. How can so fine a pursuit as wanting to know the truth be so easily forgotten by current premies? So how did a longing for truth suddenly become transformed into the soma of the conciousness of bliss? Like you, I am glad to have discovered the truth.
Modified by MarkT at Wed, Dec 14, 2005, 18:44:52
|
|
|
|
'how did a longing for truth suddenly become transformed into the soma of the conciousness of bliss?'
Good question. Truth being the conciousness of bliss was the hook that got me.
I guess I didn't question the logic of that statement very hard. I did get the bliss, but I still don't know what that has to do with any underlying absolute truth. Nothing at all, I reckon, and I have no more desire to go for that bliss any more than take acid or whatever. Been there, done that, and it was interesting at the time.
I suppose bliss is the result of 'raising your consciousness' as far as it will go. These days, I don't see any truth behind even that premise, that consciousness can be 'raised'.
|
|
|
|
Pursuing bliss and happiness are major motives for all of us but we usually temper that with balance as to how we interact with the world around us. Pursuing bliss and happiness though is not pursuing truth. I can understand wanting to experience such a pleasant effect as bliss but why pretend it's connected to truth? Modern western psychotherapists reveal breathing techniques that are similar to maharaji's knowledge to reduce stress but never pretend it has anything to do with truth. In fact I found meditation very dry most of the time and anything but blissful. Instead it was often rather frustrating at times. To accept that truth had become simply the consciousness of bliss simply meant that no further answers need be provided to any questions that arose within me. The solution was always the same, meditate, with the result that all I experienced was a withdrawal from the world around me and a denial of any problems that arose. I would feel more relaxed about my situation and any problems but I had gained no understanding of it and whatever needed understanding was simply being repressed to arise once more another day. There was nothing further to be taught as the solution was always to shut up and meditate. Now I feel I am more aware of my true potential and skills and without knowledge much more likely to consider them as valuable and worth fulfilling. Like you, I don't understand what raising my consciousness would entail. How can it be raised? I'm alive so have consciousness and that's all there is to it for me.
|
|
|
|
When I was first a premie, I never had a clue what that meant. When I heard people say it, it kind of just went in one ear and out the other. Later, I came to believe that bliss was a constant thing like truth, and so was available all the time, and you could be aware of it and live in it. But if knowledge was what was supposed to get you there, it didn't work. I went for years trying to "meditate constantly and remember holy name," and it made me nuts. Then, in formal meditation, it mostly wasn't blissful. I would estimate as a premie, I was in the "consciousness of bliss" less than 1 percent of the time, which is less than I experience now. Anyhow, like you, I reject all that now. The idea of "raising consciousness" or needing some technique to be aware of "truth" is a bunch of nonsense. And it can make you nuts, too.
|
|
|
|
The effect of meditation was to withdraw me from rationalising anything that happened in my life by providing me with a retreat but one that was not seen as simply being a period of relaxation but allegedly "truth" itself. A state of never challenging anything with reason. While that was what I experienced within then what I saw around me was a world vision that was constructed in which cause and effect became meaningless as everything that occured was by the grace of maharaji. If it was good then the praise was to him and if it was bad it was because of my failings as a premie. Is that what they meant by "truth"? Is that what they call "liberation"? Contrary to the numbing experience of meditation and the fantasy world around me, was satsang and service which hyped up my adrenalin. This contrast between meditation & belief and satsang & service was what I found so difficult to adjust to and in the end simply made me withdraw from the world of premies and maharaji for much of the time. I ended up in a type of limbo and I believe most current premies inhabit that limbo world today in which they have withdrawn from active involvement but still retain the belief system. Considering the automatic guilt that we became accustomed to accepting under such circumstances it is a pity if they cannot overcome their fear and with courage and independence read the information contained on EPO. It is our love of truth that brought us to maharaji and it is our love of truth that eventually takes us away from him.
Modified by MarkT at Thu, Dec 15, 2005, 15:14:40
|
|
|
|
What meditation became for me was a tool to try to stop myself from thinking, especially when the thinking appeared to me to be "doubts." In reality, they mostly weren't doubts at all, just the normal, human process of evaluation of the environment. But for a premie, you can't do that, so "holy name" was a way to try to stop it. The rest of meditaiton -- sitting and squeezing eyeballs and putting my thumbs in my ears, became just rituals, mostly. I did them because it was agya and because I believed they were good for me -- transformative in some way. Yuck. Just thinking about that -- something I lived in for years, makes me nauseous And I agree completely about the attribution of events which is the premie belief system that good is Maharaji, bad is due to you or your failings as a premie. It's a closed belief system, but I found that to be completely independent of meditation. It's a system that makes you more dependent on Rawat all the time, because you constantly see your own inability to do what he asked, so you have to pray for his grace. And of course, this is not liberation, this is not even what was advertised as a life of "peace and love." It's really drudgery and very constricting, but if you follow rule numero uno and refrain from doubting, that isn't allowed to enter your mind. And I also agree that most premies give up fairly quickly in being able to do it. Many premies even then hardly meditated, and some got into "service" or "satsang" instead, service freaks being quite numerous in places like Miami, from what I saw. I guess the limbo state as you say is just the next step in which they just start coasting on the belief system alone (good = Maharaji/bad= me) without doing the practice. It's more of a passive falling away than an active one, and it leaves you vulnerable to getting sucked back in, and it certainly isn't helpful to human growth to leave that whole system unexamined. .
Modified by Joe at Thu, Dec 15, 2005, 15:46:56
|
|
|
|
That was my experience too, the belief that maharaji was god incarnate remained even through long periods without meditation and that horrible feeling that because I was not practising knowledge then my life was being wasted for which I carried some guilt. I suppose he became someone I spoke to in my imagination, an image of a crutch to lean on. So deep was the impression planted in my mind at the deepest level. Terrible when I now think back and yet I was trapped with nowhere else to go. Although it was always claimed that this was not a new religion, references were constantly made to various scriptures over the years. Well, here's one. "By their works ye shall know them". When I first met maharaji he said words to the effect that one day we would be able to see who was the true master because a tree would emerge from the many saplings of which many would be only weeds. So where is the tree? Well, that's not just my experience Joe, it was also my life. It was also the life of many others, many of whom it still remains so for. Was it scripted, of course it was but not by me. Was it contrived, of course it was but not by me. I read EPO in February of this year and posted briefly on F8 but that's what happened to me and it has felt good to write about it. The fantasy world of maharaji can be broken free of. The bubble can be burst and that is real freedom. That is truth.
Modified by MarkT at Thu, Dec 15, 2005, 18:04:23
|
|
|
|
And it's a very powerful thing -- sincerity that is. And I think that's what Rawat took advantage of, the sincerity of people, mostly young people as most of us were when we got involved. Thanks for your posts, Mark. You write really well and I know for myself that putting your feelings into language is a really good way to work throught them, which you are obviously doing. Thanks again.
|
|
|
|
I remember when people starting translating 'satchitanand' as 'truth is the consciousness of bliss', which it does not mean.I used to give satsang that if you were going to do that, at least make it meaningful by saying 'bliss is the consciousness of truth'. At least that makes sense, in that 'truth' exists first (if it exists at all in a metaphysical sense), then you are conscious of it (if you surrender your life to M, blah, blah) and the result is bliss. -- Mike
www.MikeFinch.com
|
|
|
|
Of course! As you say, that does make more sense logically. Funny, I never heard it that way round, and never questioned it, thinking it was some spiritual truth I was too small to yet appreciate.
It is still a lot to take on board though - that there is an empirical truth, and that if you knew that truth, you would experience bliss.
I don't suppose anyone would really be interested in a truth that didn't promise a lot - it wouldn't be worth pursuing. If the truth is mediocre, we'd never know it!
|
|
|
|
The point for me is though that whatever the experience we had when we meditated it was labelled "Truth" but even if it appeared timeless and infinite, it was only occuring because I was alive, meditating and experiencing it. It still relied on conditoning and belief to even consider it as "truth" and therefore something to be worthy of bliss at experiencing. Take away the belief implanted into our mind and the experience becomes void of meaning. A phychotherapist can give the same experience via breathing techniques but does the subject experience it as eternal truth and bliss? Unlikely. I feel I was hyped up to view my experience of meditation as something "spiritual". Take an empty canvas and you can paint the picture you want.
Modified by MarkT at Fri, Dec 16, 2005, 17:22:45
|
|
|
|
The bliss experience I was on about doesn't need conditioning to give it its' value. The experience was of a powerful ecstasy, once the mind becomes very quiet. It was a powerful feeling, like an explosion...
I think all kinds of conditioning and belief are applied to that experience, and we get all kinds of shamans and gurus claiming it to be their direct access to some higher consciousness. The experience comes with a deep sense of meaning - but what that meaning is gets translated through whatever culture surrounds it, I suppose like those interpretations of near-death experiences which seem to depend on the cultural background of the person.
When I first got 'knowledge', I thought this was what we were all aiming for. It took me a while to realise that some people didn't actually like meditation, and they were into it because they liked going to satsang, or they liked being part of a community, or they thought just being around M was all they needed. I had taken all those other things to be supports for getting to the meditation experience.
Of course the goal had changed by the time I got there, which was a little confusing!
|
|
|
|
The bliss experience I was on about doesn't need conditioning to give it its' value. Very true. When I first got 'knowledge', I thought this was what we were all aiming for. It took me a while to realise that some people didn't actually like meditation, and they were into it because they liked going to satsang, or they liked being part of a community, or they thought just being around M was all they needed. I had taken all those other things to be supports for getting to the meditation experience. At first it seemed as if the emphasis was on what you say, providing the right environment for meditation to be effective. By the late seventies, it became more and more about idolisation of maharaji and complete devotion to him. I agree many seemed more interested in the communal aspects of knowledge. Personally, like you, I always felt the primary reason for practising was meditation and felt awkward with satsang and service.
Modified by MarkT at Fri, Dec 16, 2005, 18:29:21
|
|
|
|
That bliss has always felt connected to an underlying truth about reality for me, was before knowledge, is since.
The difference now is that other more short term surface realities carry more truth as well now, ie multiple truths that are even quite often in conflict from a logic angle. Too knacked to go further than this tonight, but wanted to post a seed for myself for tomorrow.
Truth is the consciousness of bliss still makes a lot of sense to me, even though I know my focus on that as my main priority also means I've lost out in other areas, but that's a price I'm prepared to pay, every route has it's price etc etc
|
|
|
|
Ok Hamzen, you old devil, go for it - what is the connection between truth and bliss? Is this an extension of 'if it feels good it must be right'? That is, if it is blissful, it must be the ultimate truth?
I have experienced a very profound bliss twice when I was meditating. There was a deep sense of meaningfulness associated with it - in that sense, it felt very 'real'. But I never saw the expected link between that experience and truth. I was no wiser during or after those events. In fact, I have since learned to doubt even that grand old bedrock of 60's thinking, that if it feels right, it must be good.
There is an association with ecstasy and truth in Christianity, and there is samadhi - god - consciousness in Hinduism, and nirvana in Buddhism. Having been there, I can see the connection. The profound sense of meaningfulness could be taken as an experience of God, and I feel sure that that is what is behind a lot of religion. But I can't take that sense as my guide any more. It is entirely subjective, and I think completely useless.
I can easily imagine someone very affected by that experience being totally convinced of his/her own authenticity as they spout out a few 'eternal truths' and advocate that people should follow their route to the same profound experience. But in my book, it isn't enlightenment. It is just profound pleasure.
I'm not against pleasure by the way, but these days prefer the easy pleasure of a glass of wine or beer with friends to intensive mental masturbation.
|
|
|
|
But I must admit the other stuff is still important to me, if not quite with the totality that it used to be.
And even if I do see it as a deeper truth, in a meta level sense,, that doesn't mean I see it as higher/better either though. After all if yiou're dead because you aren't eating enough, or you're getting ill because you're without shelter have some inner what's it's isn't going to do you much good apart from tranquillize you out as best.
For me the truth that comes from those experiences is a whole body truth, and no surprize to me that I get better at sports the stronger those experiences I'm having.
That it has a spiritual feel about it, no doubt, but it's much more a zen one body experience, not dissimilar to the kind of deep states a lot of martial arts are about, or the kinds of places sportsmen go into when they are 'in the zone'.
|
|
|
|
Hiya all, its good to be back, albeit in a fresh incarnation... I am the hermit formerly known as flywithoutwings, from the north country fair. I`ve been keeping an eye on the events over the past few months. All very interesting it has been... and here we are again in a nice new forum, all shiny and sparkling clean. So I`ve come back as Milarepa, one of my Tibetan heroes. This thread interests me, so I post a few humble thoughts on consciousness and self fulfilment. Truth is the consciousness of bliss or Jai sat chit anand was also the cult-hook that caught me back in 74. Like many other young seekers, acid trips had shown me a glimpse of an inner world that was `brighter than a million suns`. So I chose to follow the path of the boy god... for a while. Unlike many others, I was out of it within 4 years... at least on the surface. But the conditioning was far deeper than I could imagine. What I am trying to say is that something kicked off back then, and the process continues. We are in this thing together wether we like it or not, and each of us is a part of something quite profound, of that I am convinced. I`m just sorry that Prem Rat turned out to be such an arse. Seems to me self fulfilment is a contradiction in terms. There is no self to fill full with anything. Consciousness is the greatest mystery of all. It is notoriously difficult to define. It cannot be put under a microscope or dissected like a rat. It cannot be seen or held, measured or weighed. It appears to be nothing but an emptiness... and yet we all know what it is from direct experience. And bliss is, well, bliss. It happens. Truth, on the other hand is a term often abused, but in the end we all know that too, though sometimes its hard to admit it, coz it hurts. Love  Milarepa (formerly flywithoutwings)
Modified by milarepa at Thu, Dec 15, 2005, 12:10:46
|
|
|
|
Hi Fly, Thought I'd make this my first post on the new forum. On his forum ,Knerde posted the Grateful Dead Lyrics of " Friend of the Devil" which in turn reminded me of these lyrics from the same Album ( American Beauty)
"Attics of My Life" words by Robert Hunter; music by Jerry Garcia
In the attics of my life Full of cloudy dreams unreal Full of tastes no tongue can know And lights no eye can see When there was no ear to hear You sang to me
I have spent my life Seeking all that's still unsung Bent my ear to hear the tune And closed my eyes to see When there were no strings to play You played to me
In the book of love's own dream Where all the print is blood Where all the pages are my days And all my lights grow old When I had no wings to fly You flew to me
In the secret space of dreams Where I dreaming lay amazed When the secrets all are told And the petals all unfold When there was no dream of mine You dreamed of me.
These lyrics in turn reminded me of the music I was influenced by before I heard of the LOTU ,and also of your previous forum name " Fly withoutwings".
Lexy. Sorry I haven't really replied to the points you made in your post. I liked it though.
Modified by Lexy at Thu, Dec 15, 2005, 17:16:07
|
|
|
|
As a long time Grateful Dead fan I really disliked it when premies wrote new words to Ripple. Some fragments came back to me just now but I'm not going to attempt to post them. 'Balyogeshwar' is in there somewhere. I loved the song and hated to see it destroyed as a devotional song. Of course I thought I was too attached....
John.
|
|
|
|
That`s a beautiful song. Inspirational... thanks
|
|
|
|
As someone who considers 'self-fulfilment' to be a non-notion probably invented by lotus eating reality avoiders , I can't make any comment on what it might mean to those who think it's a concept worth thinking about.
Cultures around the world
have regarded self-fulfillment as the ultimate goal of human striving
and as the fundamental test of the goodness of a human life.
This is total bollocks, who is this Gewirth . Most cultures around the world regard self sacrifice to the common good as the touchstone of virtue.
The essential question is , & always has been , What is Love?
I think I may have got a little insight into that one after all these years, but for sure my involvement with Rawat wasn't much help there. No wonder EV has had to downgrade the claims of connectivity with the Universal Source of the stuff into bland bullshit.
|
|
|
|
>Cultures around the world have regarded self-fulfillment as the ultimate goal of human striving and as the fundamental test of the goodness of a human life.
This is total bollocks, who is this Gewirth . Most cultures around the world regard self sacrifice to the common good as the touchstone of virtue.< Indeed ! It was really the common sense of language that I was trying to get to grips with rather than what the Rawat/EV back story is. The point is that EV has a public function - it even claims to be an Educational Trust, as such it has obligations on a whole set of levels which require it to use language in a clear and honest manner. Self-fulfilment is an utterly ambiguous term and no self-respecting Educational Trust would employ it, at least not without providing a clear description of the intended context. Of course even the name Elan Vital is a lazy and dishonest borrowing of term coined by the philosopher Henri Bergson whose ideas have nothing whatsoever to do with Rawat's banal dribblings. But hey, the name came to Rawat in a dream so it must be soooo, soooo full of meaning. Nik
|
|
|
|
Hi PatAs someone who considers 'self-fulfilment' to be a non-notion probably invented by lotus eating reality avoiders , I can't make any comment on what it might mean to those who think it's a concept worth thinking about. I think that to be self-fulfilled is a notion that you can't just write off, but I suspect that you mean it in a new-agey cosmic sense, in which case I agree with you. The essential question is , & always has been , What is Love? Yes, nice one. Many people link the two, though, Love is self-fulfilling (as well as fulfilling all else that it touches). -- Mike
www.MikeFinch.com
Modified by Mike Finch at Fri, Dec 16, 2005, 07:57:13
|
|
|
