Coming Home - Cheltenham Group, 20/1/2011

Meeting reports, papers and discussions from Cheltenham Group. All Society members are welcome to join in the discussion here.

Moderator: ADMIN2016

User avatar
Rumpelteazer
Posts: 143
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 5:30 pm
Group: Cheltenham
Location: Gloucestershire, UK

Coming Home - Cheltenham Group, 20/1/2011

Postby Rumpelteazer » Fri Jan 21, 2011 4:06 pm

We started by discussing the quotation from Leo Hartong. Different views emerged:
  • We need to distinguish between the substantial and the insubstantial. Obviously the body has substance, but there is more than just the material world. H.H. says we should fix our attention on the permanent – so that means the spiritual world rather than the material world.
  • The body, ultimately does not have substance – it is just an arrangement of energy. That is true even from a scientific point of view. The science helps, because it loosens the false perception. Everything is One – just energy.
We then went on to discuss the ladder. It was pointed out that this comes from the Nyaya tradition and is not Advaita. Some initial comments on the ladder were:
  • I don’t find it very helpful – what timescale is it over – a day, a week, a year, a lifetime? And one just goes up and down it all the time.
  • One suggestion was that the ladder is simply an octave. The law of octaves works on every timescale – there must be an octave between each step of the ladder. Octaves within octaves. And that's the way octaves work - one just does go up and down them. It does help to see the state in which one is now and what needs to happen next.
  • I don’t think there are specific steps – it is just a continuous spectrum.
  • This is in line with what H.H. said about the difference between the path of knowledge and the path of devotion with respect to the ladder:
H.H. wrote:Knowledge comes through Buddhi, for only Buddhi can discriminate and give decisions. That is why on the Way of Knowledge we have definite levels. Out of the seven levels the first five come under proper light and the levels can be seen; beyond them the experiences become more inward and not discernible from outside and not possible to discuss and explain. This way the disciple takes in knowledge and develops being and releases barriers around Self and thus comes closer to self realisation.

The Way of Love is different to the Way of Knowledge. Love is based on the emotional centre and is a sort of stream in which the disciple surrenders himself to the mercy of the stream. On this way he or she takes in nothing but gives up everything and in doing so merges into the stream and unites in Love with the lover (object of love). Being a way of love, knowledge is rather secondary and unimportant. It is a field of experience beyond Buddhi. That is why there are no stepping stones or steps of the ladder to be seen and marked. Anyone who would venture to mark them would not have direct experience so it will only be guesswork and will be based on knowledge and devoid of love. One should not and could not establish the levels on this way.

Everyone seemed clear about the first step “Good Impulse”, but the second, “Decision”, caused some problems. One person felt that we have no choice and cannot make any kind of decision. He did not decide to marry the women he married. It just happened. Everything is entirely mechanical. And even when he is awake he still feels things just happen and he watches them happening. Another agreed that everything is mechanical and we cannot decide anything. However she felt that nonetheless, at some point a decision did happen although she didn’t make it – she was just aware of it having been made. It's not the decision to join the Study Society, it's a lot further along the path. They are very big steps. The only real choice we seem to have is to be still, now. So the steps aren’t something we can ‘do’ – we just become aware of them having occurred, and they do seem to signal a change in how the machine works. However, the original questioner remained unconvinced. If anyone reading this can help, please press Reply.

One person who had been reading about the life of the Maharishi told us about how the Maharishi, before he started teaching people Meditation, went to a certain town and put up a sign saying "Who Wants Instant Enlightenment?". When a customer had handed over his money, the Maharishi struck him a blow on the forehead. It didn't say whether anyone became enlightened that way, or whether they got their money back!

Reflecting on "right effort", one group member reminded us of the story of Valmiki, and the importance of good company:
H.H. wrote:A robber called Valmiki used to kill people and feed his ten dependants with his loot. Once some ascetics were passing through his area. He stopped them and asked them to give away everything they had. The leader of the group said, “Although we have very little to give, we will give you everything if you answer one question – You kill and rob people to support your dependants. They share your loot, but are you sure that they will not share your sins as well?” The robber said, “I never thought of that”. The leader promptly said, “ Well then, this is the time to think, and go to people and ask them if they would like to share the sins.” The robber went home and enquired from each of them. They all said that no doubt we depend upon you for our food and life, but we don’t want you to kill and rob others for us. You could equally work and support us. Why should we share your sin? You love to sin, so it is only your business. This gave him a shock, and on return he requested the leader to tell him the way to get rid of his sins. By meditation this robber not only got rid of sins, but became one of the most celebrated Sanskrit poets and wrote Ramayana.

There was then some discussion about the gunas and the problems caused by a predominance of rajas or tamas in meditation. We had some ideas about how to deal with rajas, but no one seemed to know how to cope with tamas and falling asleep. Ideas on this would also be welcome.
Attachments
20101019 Coming Home.doc
(50.5 KiB) Downloaded 381 times

Norman.W
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 6:40 pm

Re: Coming Home - Cheltenham Group, 20/1/2011

Postby Norman.W » Tue Jan 25, 2011 12:55 pm

As the writer of the ‘Coming Home’ paper can I try to comment on what I thought were the very interesting responses and questioning in relation to the step DECISION on the apparent ‘ladder of realisation’. ( I use the word ‘apparent’ on purpose.)

HH speaks of realisation being “the journey of the Vyashti ( individuality ) into the Samashti ( universality )”. When Vyashti goes into Samashti we all know it dissolves and is seen to have been illusion, but all teachers – in accordance with time and circumstance – find they need to speak and teach sometimes from the standpoint of Vyashti as well as Samashti. eg : HH “ There is nothing to do, nothing to achieve in this already perfect creation” ( Samashti – or non-progressive ) or “ We can welcome difficulties but only on condition that we are completely resolved to go on the way” ( Vyashti – an apparent contradiction ! )

Advaita explains this apparent paradox however and tells us it uses one thorn (the ignorance of progression) to remove another thorn (the ignorance of individuality). All this may be explained better later in the paper.

It is ignorance from the standpoint of Samashti, to think we ‘do’ anything, ‘choose’ anything, ‘decide’ anything – everything just ‘happens’ – actions are ‘willed’ by situations – not from within an illusory ego. This could be the most marvellous good news I think because, if only we could EXPERIENCE this (as opposed to just ‘knowing’ it) it would mean the ‘me’ could truly retire at a very early age !!

It seems excellent that the first questioner conceives that everything (even marriage) just happens. Then the second commentator seems to me to put the finger on the crucial understanding i.e. that it is perfectly possible to have ‘doing’ ‘deciding’ or ‘choosing’ without there being a ‘doer’ a ‘decider’ or a ‘chooser’ !

I hope this makes some sort of sense but because of the limitations of language, I think words mean different things to different people and I believe the only ‘real’ answers we ever get to deeper questions are answers that come from within – from our self, when we ‘live with our questions’.

Norman

fiona
Posts: 43
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 10:22 am

Re: Coming Home - Cheltenham Group, 20/1/2011

Postby fiona » Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:47 pm

On behalf of the Cheltenham Group, thanks to Norman for responding with such lucidity. Your feedback to our discussion on 'Decision' was read out at our meeting last night and we were most grateful for it.


Return to “Cheltenham Group”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests