Sunday, November 4, 2007

An Apparition from the Present

The other day I was entering the lobby of my building at work when I was stopped short by a tall, elegant woman staring at me with a puzzled expression. All at once her face brightened in recognition, like one candle being lit from another. She rushed forward, graciously offering both her hand and her name, and in that instant I recognized her. "C" was a familiar face I'd encountered at the ashram for many years. I embraced her spontaneously; my body reacting to the joy of unexpectedly meeting another devotee out in the world a moment before my mind registered it. As we looked at one another our eyes radiated warmth, kindled by the flame of remembered fellowship. We made the usual inquiries after each other's welfare, and then she answered the question hanging over us both. "I'm still practicing; I just took the recent Intensive." "The one for Baba's mahasamadhi?" I asked, happy to know that little bit of what is still going on. She nodded and asked if I still practiced. I replied that I did in my own way; mentioning that I was blogging about my experiences. Her face flickered for an instant. I then tried on a role that an early commenter to "Rituals" bestowed on me and told her I was a jnani yogi now, practicing self-inquiry through writing—an answer that didn't really convince either of us.

And then, like every conversation with every devotee I've had in twenty years, the topic turned to Gurumayi. With a few words and gestures of resignation we shared our belief that she is not coming back. Or at least, the yoga that we had practiced so lovingly for so long would not return in its old form. Then "C" said something that astounded me; she confessed that this was not a surprise to her because of a letter she received from Gurumayi years ago. What could Gurumayi have communicated to a devotee in writing that would presage her own disappearance? She explained; it was a letter in which Gurumayi declined her request for an extended stay at the ashram, saying that "C's" light was needed out in the world. Suddenly, the bridge to the past we were standing on crumbled down the middle and an abyss opened up between us. Or, so I felt.

Undoubtedly I was projecting, but it seemed to me that "C" had accomplished a set of mental gymnastics that used to be as natural to me as yogic breathing, but that I no longer knew how to perform. She had taken a glaringly inconvenient fact about SY (the Guru had disappeared) and reconciled it in her mind by appending it to another experience that confirmed, explained or even mystically predicted it (Gurumayi told her that our light is needed not at the ashram, but out in the world.)

I didn't judge my friend: I envied her. Once I asked someone who has left SY what she misses most about the path. Her answer was devastating in its simplicity. "The certainty," she replied "I miss the certainty." Precisely. Siddha Yoga is a system of thought that, by brightly coloring every aspect of a devotee's life, eventually subsumes all others. Everything that happens can be explained through sustained contemplation of the teachings. Explained, not rationalized. Because much of what we came to understand and accept is anything but rational. I knew this even as I practiced contemplation to explain away contradictions between the teachings and their actual practice in SY. I practiced this "Self" mind control willingly and gladly—because I relished the feeling of certainty it bestowed, the freedom from questions that had no answer, the numinous aura of belief that lit up everyday reality in the physcial world, magically turning it from a bleak material plane of cause and effect into a playground of the Shakti.

The talks, the chanting and meditation, the ritual, the hypnotic repetition of the mantra in place of thought; all these built up, stone by stone by stone, a temple in our minds that was really a palace of mirrors. Every reflection corresponded to and explained another, even if it was warped by distortion. Gurumayi sat on her chair in the center of the palace, her image reproduced and reflected back a thousand times over. Because she held a candle, we believed that the hundreds of thousands of reflected flames we saw were ones she had lit in our hearts.

Maybe that's exactly what she wanted. I seem to remember a poem from her slim volume "Ashes at my Guru's Feet" in which Gurumayi used the metaphor of a shattered mirror to stand for the dissolution of her ego at the moment of enlightenment. Perhaps she wants us all to smash our mirrors. Or maybe, just maybe, finding herself once again in a hall of mirrors, she shattered them all herself. I hope so. I really do.

Nevertheless, it is left to each of us to pick up the pieces. "C" seems to have collected the shards of her experience and re-assembled them into a mosaic that paves a path she still faithfully walks. Every one of my Siddha Yoga brothers and sisters who have successfuly accomplished this, know that I hope to walk alongside you one day. Others, the ones who relished all those dancing saptahs, may have gathered their pieces of mirror and used them to create a disco ball. Excellent choice! Finding the unfettered joy and lighthearted laughter we shared together at the ashram in our mundane lives is miracle enough. Still others have swept theirs into a dustbin and walked out of the palace, never looking back. As for me, the pieces of my experience still litter the floor at my feet. For now, I like looking at them from the vantage point of my normal human height. I try to puzzle out how they could ever fit back together again, these shards of mirror that each reflect one fractured aspect of my features, like a Cubist collage.

64 comments:

Stuart said...

Once again, really great writing, SeekHer.

SeekHer wrote...
I practiced this "Self" mind control willingly and gladly—because I relished the feeling of certainty it bestowed, the absence of questions that had no answer, the numinous aura of belief that lit up everyday reality in the physcial world, magically turning it from a bleak material plane of cause and effect into a playground of the Shakti.

The way I see the dynamic... we started out with a belief, though largely unexamined. Our starting-point belief was that the ordinary, everyday world, the one we're experiencing right now, is mundane, bleak, physical. That left us seeking some different belief that could over-ride the first one. If we believe hard enough in an other-worldly Shakti or some such, it'll cover up that other belief about ordinary life being mundane etc.

These days, in case you haven't noticed, I'm not such a fan of belief. I prefer those unanswered questions 10,000 times more than any possible answer. So the strategy I'd now choose is to question deeply that original, unexamined belief that our just-now experience is "mundanity."

But (I ask rhetorically), how could anyone question that life is bleak? Doesn't everyone experience all the time that life is filled with wanting things that you don't get, or getting things that eventually disappear? True enough, but is that really "bleak" or "mundane"? Is it really true that a good life can only arise from getting what "I want"?

For people who like the answers that SYDA gives, God bless 'em. If you get tired of those answers, you can always try returning to the questions.

Stuart
http://stuart-randomthoughts.blogspot.com/

Anonymous said...

You seem to equate a lack of physical presence with abandonment. So if there's a change with the outer appearance of the relationship, then it follows that the inner relationship must change? Rather than feeling (or deciding) it's severed, one could actually expand and deepen the relationship by not identifying with separation but focusing instead on what's real and what's most important within one's self.

Anonymous said...

Gurumayi did presage the changes that would come in the outer path of Siddha Yoga. I remember many such comments beginning in the early '90s. She might have even made comments beginning before that. I'm sure others can chime in on this. At any rate, I remember such comments.

SeekHer said...

"rather than feeling (or deciding) it's severed, one could actually expand and deepen the relationship by not identifying with separation but focusing instead on what's real and what's most important within one's self."

Of course, this is just what I'm attempting to do here, seeking to understand what is most important within in the absence of a physical guru. I've been constantly amazed by facile comments such as this. Are there devotees out there who have discovered a magical alchemy that allows them to skip the necessary step of absorbing loss, which (in my book) is a prerequisite in assessing what of lasting value remains and how to integrate that into a renewed practice? I'd love to get my hands on their formula. Unfortunately, I know of no other way to forge such a transformation than in the crucible of hard truth. Shortcuts, while tempting, are deceptively dangerous. They tend to lead you right back where you started, older but no wiser.

Anonymous said...

I think your writing style is really good and you express things from the heart. I personally don't feel that Gurumayi has abandoned us in any real way. Although seeing her would be great, the outer stuff perhaps will never happen again in the way we were accustomed to. This is sad on one level, but we need to focus on the inner darshan. She is always there to support us, if we turn within. That is my experience. I still have dreams of Gurumayi where I receive helpful messages from her. I remember back in the mid-80s, somebody told me that they had heard that Gurumayi was eventually planning to go into seclusion and guide people from within. That freaked me out at the time, but at least I knew it was coming, so it wasn't such a shock. Also, Siddha Yoga has always changed. It has never been a static thing. So where it is at presently, is just another transition, another form of change. I myself don't like change, but flexibility is something we need to learn. And... from another point of view... other groups have gone through things like this, and they have bounced back a few years later into the external "light".

Anonymous said...

Re: "She is always there to support us, if we turn within."

If only, IF ONLY, this were true, I would not be posting on this blog. Did very intensive practices, contemplation, turned within so far, I turned inside out looking for her. You know what I found?

She's not there!

From a child have always listened to lyrics with the idea that the songs were being addressed to God or about God, rather than a person. It was my little joke, a way to have fun. Well this oldie fits this discussion:

Well no one told me about her, the way she lied
Well no one told me about her, how many people cried
But it's too late to say you're sorry
How would I know, why should I care
Please don't bother tryin' to find her
She's not there

Well let me tell you 'bout the way she looked
The way she'd act and the colour of her hair
Her voice was soft and cool
Her eyes were clear and bright
But she's not there

MC

Still broken hearted and it is NOT because I didn't 'turn within'.

Anonymous said...

Hello my fellow pining gopis,

(This is not for the 8 queens still living with their beloved.)

Can't help myself. Song stuck is my head.

http://hypem.com/track/397551

MC ;-)

Anonymous said...

>>"the numinous aura of belief that lit up everyday reality in the physcial world, magically turning it from a bleak material plane of cause and effect into a playground of the Shakti."<<

Dear Friend,
I think this "numinous aura lighting up everyday reality" is what is sometimes called "the truth". When we are children and the boundaries between us and "the world" are not so firmly established, it's easy to see "everyday reality" as filled with light. Later on, it becomes more difficult unless we have, somehow, managed to retain this "innocent mind". Some of us become artists or musicians or mathematicians...luck into a "career" that maintains the connection to the "numinous" (to use Nouwen's word). In my experience, siddha yoga seemed to "re-connect" some wires that had been unplugged during the years I was trying to "figure out the world" (which can sometimes seem like a "bleak material plane of cause and effect" when we are functioning from a particular part of our minds)..It allowed for a return to that way of apprehending the world that was full of mystery and a sense of wonder. For me, though, the ethical price was, eventually, far too steep and the "mystery" was far too "manipulated". After I left the yoga, I began to experience and understand something that I had known intimately as a child...the "numinosity" of ordinary experience...it was only then that I began to realize how the "numinous truth" is constantly available to EVERYONE. We choose, for one reason or another as human beings, NOT to see it. Part of choosing NOT to see it has to do with feeling that we absolutely need a "mediator" who can "reveal" it to us...a priest, a teacher, a guru, a saint, an "expert" of some kind. We actually KNOW it but have turned away from it and so we feel we need to rely on someone else who doesn't seem to have made that choice to turn away. I think any one of the "experts" can be helpful in some way for a certain time...re-connecting wires or reminding us of what we already know. But, perhaps, letting go of the "personification" of the truth (that the "truth" is something other than us: some person or deity or state)is just part of a natural process.
I still find the idea of the "Doctrine of Recognition" very powerful...we are "recognizing" something; something that we already know and are a part of! After that "recognition/remembering" happens, why cling onto anything? If the world truly is a "manifestation of "Shiva" via "Shakti"..to use the Hindu metaphor..then we can quite naturally begin to see the "numinous truth" of "god's" existence AS the world...then, the idea that the world is "bleak" seems funny to us. And since we are not outside of creation...it's equally clear that WE are also filled with "numinous truth". "Sadhana" (or what other people just call "life") is just a process of allowing the veils to be pulled away.

with alot of respect and sympathy for everyone who is trying to figure this out for him/herself,
sadhvi

Anonymous said...

Great writing -- I'll echo that!

In fact, I'm feeling more inclined to communicate here than over at Marta's blog (though I really appreciate what she started over there). Had one too many of my comments edited out by her, and read one too many promos for her classes, I guess! So I hope it remains open and fruitful over here.

I find the posts saying, on the one hand, that they feel the guru with them, and on the other hand that they don't, fascinating. I suspect the difference has something to do with how much (or not) at a deep level people feel separation between whatever they consider the guru and whatever they consider themselves to be. I think this might be what Sadhvi is speaking about with different terms.

I have an odd permutation of this. Which is that I find myself unable to relate to GM as the guru, given the kinds of things I personally experienced and witnessed on staff. At the same time, I still have dreams of her. Not all that often, but when it happens they can be really vivid. So, from that I would agree there's definitely no formula. If anything, the best means is to reject the notion of formulas and just keep observing whatever manifests for each person him or herself (which includes dropping expectations of some day "fitting back together again" what now seems to be broken.

Maybe the smashing of the mirror is not to be seen as "broken"? Maybe that's the only way to experience wholeness? I tend to see this metaphor as akin to the Zen use of "emptiness." Isn't that what allows us to appreciate the mundane as not merely bleak?

J

SeekHer said...

sadhvi

I love your post so much I want to use it as a map going forward! I struggled with whether to call this blog Rituals of Disenchantment, or Re-Enchantment. Because, ultimately, that is my goal--to rediscover and reclaim this 'fourth' dimension, the spiritual plane that, once it has been experienced, makes life in plain old 3-D seem...pale.

much food for thought here; particularly re: the Doctrine of Recognition. I too feel that this, among many teachings, still have much wisdom and grace to bestow, if we know how to look for ourselves

Anonymous said...

Re: "then we can quite naturally begin to see the "numinous truth" of "god's" existence AS the world...then, the idea that the world is "bleak" seems funny to us. And since we are not outside of creation...it's equally clear that WE are also filled with "numinous truth"
November 5, 2007 6:30 AM

-------------------------------

Hello Sadhvi,

Totally concur with Seekher's comment about your entry. It is wonderful and to be archived.

With my somewhat flippant post on an old Zombie tune,(sorry for that) this morning, I had in mind an exchange between you and Stuart on TGLG. It was about the human experience. You were defending the human tendency to frame, to use metaphor and association to create meaning.

It is not so easy to give up a love like I had for the Guru. But I must now that I have examined how, when, where and why the SY path was created, sustained, and destroyed.

Somewhere recently I read that Freud considered it infantile or at least neurotic to seek for meaning. Ah me! That is all I did for years.

Thanks Sadhvi for a great post. Apologies for what may seem trite responses. I think it comes from what you say you experience with your old Zen pals, the 'I just don't know' experience.

Watch out, here comes another song. 'Let It Be' I am a walking top 40 brainwash victim.

Best to all,
MC

Stuart said...

MC wrote...
I had in mind an exchange between you and Stuart on TGLG. It was about the human experience. You were defending the human tendency to frame, to use metaphor and association to create meaning.

To defend the tendency to create meaning is like saying it's "good," or perhaps that it's "necessary."

If someone likes creating a particular meaning, or likes creating meanings in general, I wouldn't call that good or bad. I'd just not lose sight of the fact that we're creating it. If you like what you create, OK.

Maybe saying that the tendency to create meaning is "the human condition," it's like calling it a fixed necessity of our existence. It's like calling it a part of who we are, so we can't possibly do anything about it, and we bear no responsibility for the meaning we create.

It's true that if we view something as a condition that's imposed on us by nature, then there's no chance in hell that we'll ever change it. But we do have a choice about whether to accept that view. And if it turns out that indeed a mandatory part of being human is the creation of meaning, then we still may have choices as to which particular meanings we choose to create.

There's a very simple calligraphy in some temples in Korea, which translates roughly as:

You Make, You Get.

Stuart
http://stuart-randomthoughts.blogspot.com

Anonymous said...

And if it turns out that indeed a mandatory part of being human is the creation of meaning, then we still may have choices as to which particular meanings we choose to create.

There's a very simple calligraphy in some temples in Korea, which translates roughly as:

You Make, You Get.

Stuart

Dear Stuart: Bingo! I was really interested in something I heard Adyashanti say on a tape: that the "problem" (and he meant it kind of jokingly..calling it a "problem") begins at the beginning...when we look inside and try to find "us", we all have the same experience (after plowing through our mental constructs, emotions, feelings, ideas, etc.). What is there? Just this "awakeness" ..but the "awakeness" is CONSCIOUS...conscious awakeness...and with this aspect (consciousness) combined with our mind/body "vehicle", comes the tendency to create and through the mind comes the tendency to create "meaning"..and, as Stuart says above, "you make: you get". I totally agree! but man it takes alot of unraveling of layers of meaning before the simple fact of awakeness is something other than a temporary visitor in our daily lives (in my experience and opinion anyway)..I think that's why people continue to practice....something. So when I use Nouwen's language of "numinosity", I mean exactly what Stuart says when he says "ordinary...what-is-ness". I think we are all so different in our sameness...one person comes at it through alot of complex and evocatively poetic metaphor and another comes at it by dropping a pail of water on his toe, grunting and waking up! About "defending" things...I don't find it necessary to. "What is" is obvious; it exists, why deny it?..there are these tendencies, some of them ingrained on levels deeper than our conscious minds. There they are...we may have some choice in how we frame things. I think it's important also to realize just how much our "choices" are conditioned by culture, upbringing, mental tendencies towards "romanticism" or "intellectualism" et. etc. Again, I personally feel it takes alot of "layer peeling" before we can actually make a clear, conscious and unmediated "choice"..just my opinion though..others make feel differently about this. thank you all for your welcome here. sadhvi

Anonymous said...

Sadhvi,

You mentioned Adya... From my understanding of what he's saying, it doesn't necessarily take a lot of layer peeling. Rather, it is a matter of stopping all the efforts to "layer peel" or mkae "choices." In my experience, it's about realizing that my *mind* is never going to grasp onto this awakeness/consciousness. What a relief!

J

Anonymous said...

seekher, that comment given earlier wasn't a facile one. no one says you need to deny pain, nor forego the process of loss. in fact if you don't go through it, you're trying to shortcut it. (and obviously you feel this is a loss, while others don't).

however, it also seems from your postings that your dilemma is actually far beyond abandonment - you're actually questioning your own faith, whatever that is (and no one says you shouldn't do that either). so is the loss just the removal of the physical Guru or is it struggling to understand what Siddha Yoga is for you, or if you even want it, given what you may choose to think what it is or is not. (for me Siddha Yoga is not something i need to follow in some prescribed way or even have to pursue in some group setting, whatever that may be).

from my experience Gurumayi always wanted us to feel and experience ourselves as God and to be able to stand on our own two spiritual feet.

the Guru is the mediator but I don't believe we were ever meant to be "attached" to the Guru or even the path per se. I think we were always meant to stand in our own power and truth.

Baba talked about the need to eventually let go of all forms.

of course you need to grieve loss if you feel "loss". and if you don't grieve in some form or another, you probably will remain stuck in the pain (and i'm not just saying that about you, it's true of anyone). at the same time, it is a choice what we wish to identify with. this is also where faith comes into play.

our fears hold us back from our own light. nelson mandela certainly understood that. do we each have the strength and courage to stand in our own power and light, to be all who we are.

Anonymous said...

Re; "from my experience Gurumayi always wanted us to feel and experience ourselves as God and to be able to stand on our own two spiritual feet ... the Guru is the mediator but I don't believe we were ever meant to be "attached" to the Guru or even the path per se."

November 5, 2007 8:06 PM
-------------------------

Hello Anonymous,

You can't possibly be a long time devotee of SY or have read the Guru Gita very often, or read many of Baba's books.

How many yagna's did you attend? Have you ever watched the brahmins adore our Guru? Seen the photo of the Guru as the centerpiece of a long yagna? You know the Guru that sits in the triangle in the lotus in our hearts gleaming like a pure crystal.

That is the Guru I am missing. And she is gone, gone, gone.

I do not need the 'physical' guru.

It seems you are sharing the SY Lite which passes for some kind of 'philosophy' at present. Complete pablum, not even pablum, that would be nourishing somewhat.

Do you think the folks pouring their hearts out at all the SY sites are that superficial?

Sorry for the tone. You are insulting a lot of people.

I think it is wonderfully courageous of you to post. I especially liked you comment:

"Have the strength and courage to stand in our own power and light, to be all who we are."

P e a c e
MC

Anonymous said...

Gurumayi's not around. When she was around, her Shakti was incredible. Nityananda is making himself very available, but he doesn't have much Shakti. What the hell is this all coming to? Why did we get love-addicted in the first place? Should we all have been in psycho wards all along?

Anonymous said...

>>"
You mentioned Adya... From my understanding of what he's saying, it doesn't necessarily take a lot of layer peeling. Rather, it is a matter of stopping all the efforts to "layer peel" or mkae "choices." In my experience, it's about realizing that my *mind* is never going to grasp onto this awakeness/consciousness. What a relief!"<<

Hi J,
Yes you are right! However, he also talks alot about what happens AFTER "awakening" (what I'm refering to as "layer peeling").What resonates with me: there IS the "awakening experience" to what IS right now, to what always IS in every moment! (which I think alot of us have had...many times..lol) and then there is the "post-awakening" experience of the two "realities" beginning to balance out in this particular incarnated human being. The "layer peeling" is NOT something YOU "do"; it's something that is part of a natural process as the layers of delusion are peeled off...maybe "shedding" would be a better word? lol! (by the way, folks, when Icapitalize, it's for emphasis..not because I'm mad..I'm not too computer literate..lol). Like you, J, I felt an immense sense of "relief" when I came upon Adya's tapes....because they were simply saying what I already "knew" and have "known" for a long time. But it's amazing how "hard"it is to trust your "own" knowing isn't it? I have no desire to go to a "satsang" with Adyashanti...but I found that his dorky personality, plain speaking, lack of "charisma" and ordinariness along with the truth of what he was saying, was extremely helpful to me in becoming clearer about my own understanding. As you say, it's NOT "intellectual".
best,
sadhvi

Anonymous said...

>"Gurumayi's not around. When she was around, her Shakti was incredible. Nityananda is making himself very available, but he doesn't have much Shakti. What the hell is this all coming to? Why did we get love-addicted in the first place? Should we all have been in psycho wards all along?"<<

Dear Anon,
Some will disagree but I feel the Hindu "system" is particularly susceptible to "shakti-induced decompression syndrome". Post syda, I spent alot of time in India and with Indian priests and practitioners. I got to live out my "pujari/sadhu" fantasies big-time. I can tell you, personally, that gurumayi's "shakti" is not particularly intense compared to alot of hangers-on I met in various temples..not to mention the "big guns", who would literally blow your socks off with a glance. It helped me to experience this...when I realized that the incredible "highs" during the 7 day Chandi yagnas (with 16 chanting priests, etc.)...were INEVITABLY followed by a huge "crash" of energy...exactly like after taking acid, I was able to begin to deconstruct the whole "shakti" thing..whatever term you want to use to describe it. I could see how people very naturally began to glomm onto the NEXT yagna or puja or intensive or "great experience" and how they could begin to feel a real separation between what is "spiritual" (meaning this "high" state) and what is not (meaning "ordinary life") and how the only "truth" in their lives could easily become the kind of arcane "practices" that led to "experiences". Very basic buddhist practice I had been exposed to years earlier began to make ALOT of sense to me as I saw how the "orgasmic theory" of liberation that seems to be so much a part of siddha yoga...didn't pan out. You know, just ONE more "big" experience and I'll be there! And 20 or 30 years later, you are still chasing the "big experience" that will liberate you.... but all that has happened is that an addiction has been created...an addiction that is a HUGE distraction from what IS, what IS in every moment and available to every single sentient being....if we choose to stop chasing it in temples and yagna pits! It's very simple but some of us (including me) seem to have to go through an awful lot of complexity before we can see what's right in front of our faces! Just my experience, for what it's worth.
best regards,
sadhvi

Anonymous said...

One other thing I wanted to mention regarding "shakti". Some people may dismiss the idea of some "special" kind of "energy" and compare what sometimes happens in a hindu temple to a rock concert and the "good feelings" you might have while listening to the Rolling Stones . I don't really agree with this point of view. It offers ONE way of "understanding" a phenomenon that has been experienced by many who have also "experienced" rock concerts, acid trips, Southern Baptist tent shows and the like. In my own personal opinion (for what it's worth) there is a tremendous difference (in power and effect)between these experiences..and, after having many of them, I can't readily disregard the "reality" of an energy (called "shakti", "holy spirit", "shekkinah", "life force energy", etc. etc.), a mystery that human beings seem to have been trying to pin down for as long as we've been on the planet.
best,
sadhvi

Anonymous said...

Is this the same "C" that runs the eXSY message board with an iron fist?

Anonymous said...

Is this the same "C" that runs the eXSY message board?

SeekHer said...

"Is this the same "C" that runs the eXSY message board with an iron fist?"

Don't know the message board you refer to, but I can assure you, no.

Anonymous said...

Sadhvi, do you remember Country Joe and the Fish? In one of their songs they sing "just one more trip now, and you know I'll be high all the time..." The Words:
http://www.countryjoe.com/electric.htm#bass

The song: http://www.radio3net.ro/1001/?cx=list_piese2&id_album=1570
Click on #9 "Bass Strings"

Epi

SeekHer said...

Yo--whoever keeps posting comments here and at guruphiliac whether "C" is some exSY hall monitor--chill. I made up that initial to maintain anonymity for someone who doesn't even know I was blogging about our encounter--something I'm having second thoughts about as I revealed a conversation my friend would have a reasonable expectation was private. Just so you know, "C" is the first letter of my pet name for her, not her name (spiritual or otherwise) and certainly not a tag she hides behind in her "She-Wolf of the SS" role as online enforcer.

No evil witches here; come out, come out wherever you are!

Anonymous said...

To seekher: Hey, Mr. Ninth Grade Creative Writing Genius, why the fuck don't you "chill", dude? Who died and made you Commandant? At least some of us don't go around "outing" opera singers on Guruphiliac and sharing their very personal kriyas with the whole world. How about "seekhelp"?

SeekHer said...

"Hey, Mr. Ninth Grade Creative Writing Genius, why the fuck don't you "chill", dude?"

and so it begins.

Anonymous said...

Re: "Hey, Mr. Ninth Grade Creative Writing Genius, why the f**ck don't you "chill", dude? At least some of us don't go round "outing" opera singers on Guruphiliac and sharing their very personal kriyas with the whole world. How about "seekhelp"?

November 6, 2007 8:03 PM

-------------------------------

Hello Anonymous,

Since you are sharing your personal kriya over Mr. Ninth Grade Creative Writing Genius, (or Mr. NGCWG as I will refer to him - love that moniker!)I couldn't help but to respond.

Mr. NGCWG felt so deeply about his spiritual path that he decided to do something about it. This blog is the result of that deep feeling. Really Mr. NGCWG is not showing off his considerable writing skill, so much as carrying tremendous feeling with his words, thus their considerable impact on the readers here, including yourself.

It is not surprising that you are having an emotional reaction to Mr. NGCWG's words. We all are. And it is great. It sure beats what passes for a spiritual discussion at SGMKJ. Which reminds me of a hackneyed communist party meeting.

None of the comments here have been lobbed like malatov cocktails. That is not civlized behavior. You can be passsionate and articulate at the same time. Make your case, talk about your feelings.

This is how Mr. NGCWG is seeking help and he is helping a lot of others along the way. You could do the same, from whatever perspective you have.

Truly we are all in this together.

P e a c e
MC

Anonymous said...

Dear Seekher,

I'm back as Mr. Hypothetical speaking again, and I'd like to ask both a question for clarification and also ask if I can offer a brief recommendation?

First, for my question: I'm confused. Are you "Christopher"? When you used "C" I thought you were referring to yourself since I thought your name was Christopher. If I'm mistaken in these assumptions, I'd ask you correct my misunderstanding, since I'd bet others are equally mystified. Not asking you to out yourself, just asking to correct my own misunderstanding.

And now, for the brief recommendation. The confusion arose around "C" yesterday because the EXSY list site owner on Yahoo refers to himself/herself (pretty sure it's a "himself but that's just a guess) as "C". And thus arose the confusion. You may wish to consider avoiding references to other people as "C" simply to avoid situations like yesterday, for folks who just didn't seem able to figure out on their own that you were referring to a totally different "C" altogether.

As for the EXSY "C" ruling that site with an iron fist, I can assert that after having been an active member there for going on 2.5 years now (under a totally different alias), after seeing some of the shenanigans I've seen happen on that list site, I'd venture to say that the EXSY "C" has pretty much been forced into it for two reasons:

1. The obvious need to maintain a semblance of order on a site where trolls and other wackos have truly loved to come in and rattle the cage really, REALLY hard.

2. The EXSY "C" appears to personally know some of Muk's formerly young, underage victims and their parents, and know them well. That "C"'s tolerance for anything suggesting those victims underwent anything other than sexual abuse is pretty thin. So is his/her tolerance for some of SY's shenanigans when it comes to dealing with perceived threats.

I can see why some people consider EXSY "C"'s moderation there to equate to ruling with a Nazi-like iron fist but frankly, my personal opinion is that he does a good job of walking a fine line between too much control and too much chaos. S/He simply has really strong ethical & moral principles S/He feels S/He needs to uphold over there. But that's just IMHO.

As for you, Seekher, it seems to me you've never been on that list site since you appeared to not have an idea what EXSY was, since you said "Don't know the message board you refer to" yesterday. I would venture that, particularly in its archives, are a plethora of really useful perspectives, perhaps even "anonymous insider info" over the years the EXSY site has been online, about SY in its permutations through its recent history...meaning starting with Muk even before he "claimed" that Bhagavan gave him charge of the "lineage", which many folks actually dispute, both in the West and in India.

Searching through the voluminous archives there would take quite a bit of reading time, but there's some valuable reading there, IMHO. Again, just IMHO for whatever it's worth.

If needed, the URL is:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/exSY/

Finally...as for the troll who called you the "Ninth Grade Creative Writing Genius" yesterday, and your saying "And so it begins"....heck, I think you deserve to give yourself a pat on the back!!! Look how many weeks went by on your new blog BEFORE a troll came in here to slam ya! This long??? Gotta be a new world's record! It was bound to happen sooner or later.

Peace back atcha.
Mr. Hypothetical

Anonymous said...

"I'm confused. Are you "Christopher"? When you used "C" I thought you were referring to yourself since I thought your name was Christopher. If I'm mistaken in these assumptions,"

---
Yes, me too. And especially because Christopher would be male, but on the other site you described yourself as a "hostess" (or did I get that wrong?)

Anonymous said...

OK, that makes three of us confused as to whether Seekher is male or female and whether Seekher is Christopher or someone else.

Help!

SeekHer said...

Mr Hypothetical:

thank you for some much needed perspective! I've visited LSY website and read archived material, but never participated in or saw the message boards (?) hence my ignorance about "C". I'm sorry that, by using that letter in my post, I hit a nerve for some. I'll avoid it in the future-in fact, I'm rethinking how I write about conversations or encounters here with people who don't know I'm blogging. In retrospect, I'm not sure it's ethical to recount a private conversation without someone's consent--even if I do maintain their anonymity. So, that may obviate the need for initials altogether. Am officially retiring "C" however!

As for C being short for Christopher; I like the name SeekHer. Bad pun, I know, but I couldn't resist. However--MC seems to like Mr. NGCRG and I agree that it is one hell of a moniker! So, I'll answer to that, too (even when it's not abbreviated.)

PS Re; the privacy of the fifteen year-old kriya I posted about on Guruphiliac; I can assure you when a classically trained opera singer gets a bellow kriya in a public space at the ashram, privacy is not able to be maintained! In any event, having subsequently made the acquaintance of the lady in question--she was one tough Texas cookie who decamped SY years ago. Miss her a lot; she would have been the first to pull up a chair and tell you that little story herself, even more colorfully than I managed!

Anonymous said...

>>"However, he also talks alot about what happens AFTER "awakening" (what I'm refering to as "layer peeling")."

Hi sadhvi, if you're still reading here...

This is getting into subtleties perhaps, but the "layer peeling" image personally reminds me a bit too much of the SY approach. Where sadhana was assumed to go on forever as we peeled away at our layers (I recall the onion analogy in so many ashram talks, some years back). As a result, i got into a very static mode of being. The "now" seemed very distant. It was, say, at least 10,000 Gitas distant.

In contrast, when Adya talks about the period between awakening and full embodiment of it as a process, it becomes clear at some point that all those practices are just that--more practices. If I want to do them, or like doing them, fine, I can do. But the illusion that they (including the practice of peeling layers) will make THE difference is gone. For me, that has the effect of collapsing time so the now is actually NOW. And collapsing the layers, too, I guess.

J

SeekHer said...

PS

Readers who are mystified re: the Guruphiliac mentions in these posts; Jody was kind enough to write about this blog on his. The kriya story I mentioned was one I posted on his comments page following the story.

BTW--Jody's lead story currently is a link to a wonderful article called "Fire your Guru" It's a well considered plea to pursue the spiritual quest solo. Think Stuart in particular will find it resonates with his spiritual POV (as I'm coming to understand it)

Anonymous said...

Re: 'But the illusion that they (including the practice of peeling layers) will make THE difference is gone. For me, that has the effect of collapsing time so the now is actually NOW. And collapsing the layers, too, I guess.

J

November 7, 2007 8:32 AM

------------------------------

Hello J,

Thanks so much for this post. What you describe is becoming my daily experience now post SY. I think of it as open eye meditation. I recently reread HH Dalai Lama's Q & A book, I think it is called 'Answers'. I don't have it with me at present and Google was no help. It is very slim and I keep rereading it. What I got from reading it is that the path to our evolution doesn't take 3 years, 9 years, 12 years as we were instucted in the manuals by Tejo, but thousands, many many many lifetiems. So why bother to think about achieving realization at all? Just be kind. That is what I am getting.

I love remembering that Aldous Huxley, when asked if he could have changed anything in his life what would it have been, said, "I ask myself, could I have been kinder?"

And to Mr. Hypothetical. Thanks for that response also. I was thinking those same thoughts but they completely lacked your clarity and would have taken a day to compose.

Best to all,
MC

Anonymous said...

>>"In contrast, when Adya talks about the period between awakening and full embodiment of it as a process, it becomes clear at some point that all those practices are just that--more practices. If I want to do them, or like doing them, fine, I can do. But the illusion that they (including the practice of peeling layers) will make THE difference is gone. For me, that has the effect of collapsing time so the now is actually NOW. And collapsing the layers, too, I guess."<<

Hey J,
Thanks very much for continuing this discussion. I think maybe I was not clear about the layer peeling, shedding process being a NATURAL outcome of awakening..not something that you "do". I think I may have caused a little confusion regarding that. In my understanding (and limited experience), resting in that inner truth results in the "falling away of everything that is untrue" and that's what I meant by the "peeling or shedding process".
best to you,
sadhvi

Anonymous said...

"shedding process being a NATURAL outcome of awakening..not something that you "do".

Right! Got it, Sadhvi. In fact you did make that point. My bad for focusing on the other aspect. (isn't it remarkable how words can ignite us-- one way or the other)

J

Anonymous said...

It's Mr. Hypothetical again.

I'd like to add a point of further clarification vis-a-vis the whole "LSY or EXSY" issue.

They are two totally separate websites.

The two websites link to each other, and the site owners appear to communicate and coordinate on a not-infrequent basis, but as internet entities, the two sites are completely separate and distinct in terms of ownership, management, web address, content.

Note that "separate and distinct" is NOT meant to indicate that some information is not shared between the two sites. On a Venn diagram, there would clearly be a notable shaded area of intersection between the two in terms of commonly stored information.

And perhaps that intersection is wherein lies the confusion held by some folks.

LSY is owned and operated by Dan Shaw. It has people's personal stories and letters, links to cult-recovery sites, and the like. LSY contains information that I consider to be completely ground-breaking, such as personal stories of abuse by Siddha Yoga by Joan Radha Bridges and Allison Cliatt, two women whom I have known personally for years and have held high regard for their courage, both before and after we all respectively chose to leave Siddha Yoga. LSY is not an "interactive" website in terms of individuals being able to post messages, whether fact or opinion, there. All content is loaded by the site owner, Dan Shaw at his discretion. Personally, I find LSY to be a treasure-trove of information to chew on and contemplate, to say the least.

EXSY is a Yahoo forum site owned and operated and moderated by someone identifying themselves simply as "C". The list site is designed for people who have left Siddha Yoga or are contemplating leaving Siddha Yoga. On EXSY people post their own writing, their thoughts, opinions, information, facts, etc. In other words, it's a list site where topics are discussed by many. Members choose to have, or to not have, messages posted to the list site, forwarded to their e-mail addresses. It's not as rapidly interactive moment-to-moment like a chatroom is, but it's still reasonably interactive. Most people, but not all, who participate in EXSY choose aliases to hide their identities. Often, the reason for this is, close family members and/or friends are still "in" Siddha Yoga and either people don't want repercussions for themselves, or (in my own case) wish to avoid repercussions for the family members who are still in. I will be honest and state that the ONLY people who aren't welcome to express themselves at EXSY are people who are either:

A) Firmly still deeply entrenched as a supporter of Siddha Yoga,

or

B) Someone who truly likes to stir up the pot in abusive, impolite ways. (Or as it's said in internet parlance, a "Troll".)

Some members there really like to ensure the integrity of the conversation and wish it stay focused on Siddha Yoga-related topics. Other topics such as world events, politics, etc. usually get asked by the site owner (or other members) to take such topics elsewhere.

I'll close this by copying in the text used by EXSY to describe itself. Hopefully, this will end confusion. Or, it might start a firestorm here.

My response: Whatever. I'm interested in the TRUTH and in FACT. I can separate rumor, hearsay, and fact from each other and would expect that most readers here are adults and can decide the difference for themselves. OK, here's my paste-in of EXSY's self-description:

"There is no one without faults, not even men of God. They are men of God not because they are faultless but because they know their own faults, they strive against them, they do not hide them, an and they are ever ready to correct themselves.— "Mahatma Gandhi ***

Welcome to eXSY. This forum is for people who have been (past tense) in Siddha Yoga or a similar group, people who are seriously thinking of leaving Siddha Yoga or having doubts about becoming involved, or those who may have people they know still in Siddha Yoga, or a similar organization. Posting may be on the subject matter of Siddha Yoga, Leaving Siddha Yoga, or whatever. Please note, spam is 'not' welcome here.

There are thousands of people who have been, or still are in Siddha Yoga, or know of someone in Siddha Yoga. For this reason, it is logical for some to conclude, that there will be a 'diverse' range of thoughts, perspectives and opinions on this subject matter.

This forum is open to 'diverse' posting, as it is also felt that this is a great avenue for all of us, in reconnecting with a full range of thinking, a realistic view of the world, and one that also allows the uniqueness of each 'individual to be shared and heard.

This forum is unmoderated, but with this policy of no moderation, comes a personal responsibility to each individual poster. It is asked that each person consider the content and quality of the subject matter submitted to this forum. Also, anyone who comes on to this site with the clear intent of disrupting its membership or trying to dominate its content, will NOT be tolerated.

Also, please feel free to click on either the 'Files', 'Photos' or 'Links' sections, located on the left side of the screen, once signed onto this site. They contain some reading material, archives and links, including those to other ex-SY sites and forums, past and present."

OK, there it was. IMHO, the ONLY statement I would take issue with is the bit about being unmoderated. "C" does moderate with a fair bit of attention. Some have found that moderation heavy-handed. Again IMHO, "C" has been forceful when the situation has called for it appropriately about 98% to 99% of the time. Hey, everybody's human and any site owner/moderator can have a bad day. But my preference would be for "C" to remove that piece about not being moderated. It may have been true at one time. Circumstances have forced "C", again IMHO, to manage the site a lot more proactively for the past few years.

I hope this information removed some people's confusion. Even if I helped clarify these differences for even just one person, I will feel all this typing will have been worth it.

Cheers,
Mr. Hypothetical

Anonymous said...

There are actually three Siddha Yoga related sites: LSY, exSY, and sgmkj. LSY being only a repository of contributed information and opinions. exSY and sgmkj being interactive, but opposite sides of the same coin.

Someone named "Pendragon" started up and ran LSY, set up the whole format, then after many years handed it to Dan Shaw, who has made Siddha Yoga his life's work (for better or for worse, for he seems to argue mostly with anti-SY people, as pro-SY people don't engage in conversations with him).

I read the exSY intoductory blurb, and was surprised they used Mahatma Gandhi as a role model. If they read his autobiography and other biographies, they will find:

(1) that he slept with underage girls, as an experiment in self-control.

(2) that he didn't attend the funeral of his daughter, who had committed suicide because he had rejected her for marrying a Muslim man.

The above two are not meant to detract from Gandhi's accomplishments, but just examples to show that one can focus on a few facts and have a distorted view of the whole picture. Most people attach themselves to Gandhi without having read anything about him, which is quite normal behavior these day, just look at our educated political views.

The sgmkj forum is really pathetic, for people there seem to self-castrate themselves before writing anything. It is so sugar-coated that no sense of reality exists within. Everything there is "perfect."

The exSY, in their own words (up front in the introduction), is unmoderated, except when moderated. This sounds like a Monty Python explanation. They want it both ways, the glory of stating they are unmoderated, but with the fact of heavy moderation. A lot of dictatorial countries are run this way, but I digress.

I have written on exSY, but have chosen not to write, as the conversations have converged over the years. Most freethinkers have left, because there is a narrow mindset, and after a while, it gets very tiring and tedious to read the same regurgutated stories.

A lot of opinion is masqueraded as fact, just because someone of "stature" in the group has written it. Most people have left out of boredom than anything else, for the group has outlived is usefulness for them. That is not to say that it is a good place for certain kinds of people.

But, the way it functions is an exact mirror of Siddha Yoga. There are SC (Special Consideration) members, who would have been banished ("C's" favorite pastime) many years ago if they were mere mortals. It is sad that exSY has chosen the path of "kill them all, and we'll get some of the terrorists," the same strategy as our government uses to combat domestic "terrorism."

Marta Szabo's site started off well, but with her random and heavily skewed moderation, it has petered out into a commercial site. This was discussed heavily on exSY, and people were vicious towards Marta about her perceived motives, and then they realized that they were criticizing their own, so C abruptly decided to stop all such talk. As I said, unmoderated, unless moderated!

What was my original point? I just wanted to thank you for your writing. It is refreshing to read your stuff.

To me Siddha Yoga was a life-changing experience, and I am still sorting it out, while enjoying life more thoroughly than ever.

As anyone of substance will realize, the Siddha Yoga journey is a complicated affair, and there are more than one or two ways to view the experience. Unfortunately, the prevailing discussion groups have severely fallen short in this regard.

So thanks again for your blog!

Anonymous said...

"Marta Szabo's site started off well, but with her random and heavily skewed moderation, it has petered out into a commercial site."

So true! I hope Marta reads over here so she can see that more than one person feels this way (and I'm not over at exSY). Obviously there would be no way to express this opinion over at her site!

GL

Anonymous said...

To Anonymouses:

Re" "Marta Szabo's site started off well, but with her random and heavily skewed moderation, it has petered out into a commercial site."
-------------------------

Could you explain further what you mean by 'random and heavily skewed" and also 'commercial'?
and "Obviously there would be no way to express this opinion over at her site!"

November 7, 2007

------------------------
What is the point with these remarks? Division? I see nothing positive in them. No clarity at all. I think the term 'sour grapes' might apply. As in 'feign disdain for that which one could not attain."


I submitted several comments which were not posted by Marta. So what?

These are unsubstantiated and I think petty remarks about Marta. Her courage to post her memoir opened up a huge highway for all of us. In light of that I think she should be given quite a bit of consideration to manage her blog the way she sees fit.

MC

Anonymous said...

>>"This was discussed heavily on exSY, and people were vicious towards Marta about her perceived motives, and then they realized that they were criticizing their own, so C abruptly decided to stop all such talk. As I said, unmoderated, unless moderated!"

Dear Anon.,
Well, it's "amusing" unless you were there and know better. It's so interesting to see how every person views things through his or her own particular lens (thus the value of IMHO...lol). I think what happened was that a memo was sent to the ex-syda site...essentially an "advertisement" for an upcoming writing workshop with Marta..and people reacted strongly. I don't think people were "vicious" but there were some very strong opinions about people "trolling" on ex-syda for "business" (and I'm sure all of us remember how much "trolling for business" among the devotees was part and parcel of life in syda). IMHO, it was more the way the information was presented that got people in a snit and the fact is that it was NOT Marta who sent the "advertisement"; I doubt if she would do that. There is no "monolithic view" of Marta or her blog on ex-syda. Some are taking her writing workshops; others feel she "used" the site to drum up business. Others (myself included) have no opinion one way or the other about it. I personally think Marta did a tremendous service by publishing her "memoir" of syda on-line. For one thing, she managed to generate a discussion between people who rarely have the patience to talk to one another.
I don't know how "anyone of substance" will respond to a situation, since I'm not at all sure what that means..the last time I heard that phrase was at a dinner party. A rather terrifying Boston Brahmin from "old money" was talking about "people of substance"..meaning, HER kind of people. Is that what you mean by "people of substance"? lol!
sadhvi
PS...I've been "banished" by CJ 8 or 9 times..I never take it personally..it's always a good reality check.

Anonymous said...

Hi MC,

I wrote the "random and heavily skewed" post, but not the one that followed.

My point in writing it was to point out my observation, which apparently you cannot stomach since it differs from your obviously superior opinion, and which could not be written on Marta's site, nor on exSY.

No one is denying Marta the right to post and manage her blog the way she wants. Why are you trying to stifle comments about it? This site seems to be the only one that is free of bias, and where people can express themselves freely without the fear of "moderation."

So some of your posts were not permitted. BFD. There were many others who are sensitive to this type of activity, particularly Koyuki Doll, who posts there as "K," who was very upset that:

(a) her posts were not getting through, and

(b) Marta didn't give any explanations.

In fact, Koyuki was the first one to raise the idea (on exSY) that Marta's blog was a set up so that she (Marta) could snare people with huge Sy-related issues (and thereby emotionally weak) into her "authentic writing" web. It's there for everyone to see at exSY. The discussion was rather spirited, the way people started piling on, even Howie. I felt bad for Marta, but then, there was a robust logic to what Koyuki said.

If you look at Marta's site now, it's almost dead. The stories have ended. People in the ex-SY framework seem to be hungry for nostalgic stories, so that they can relive their long gone days in the ashrams. I don't know any of the ashram people that were being written about and discussed, so it wasn't that interesting to me. No one ever talked about what was going on inside them, but focused on the external, so it's not surprising that they came away with a sense of having attained nothing out of the SY experience. Well, did they even read anything?

SeekHer said...

"OK, that makes three of us confused as to whether Seekher is male or female and whether Seekher is Christopher or someone else.

Help!"

That makes four of us!
;)

SeekHer said...

Wow! The comments page on this post is def where the action is this week.

Love the absorbing and fascinating thread we have going with teh Fantastic Four--Sadhvi, J, MC and Stuart on the nature of awakening, and whether it is a natural process available right here, right now, versus a bi-product of a relationship with a teacher or guru. It is a perfect complement to Tijn Touber's column in the Huffington Post called D.I.Y. Guru:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/11/05/diy-guru_n_71127.html

Highly recommend reading it. Favorite quote from the article:

"More than 1,000 years ago, the Chinese Zen master Lin Chi underlined the danger of gurus. He saw that many of his contemporaries in the 9th century transferred responsibility for their spiritual well-being to others. He said this meant they gave away their power and authenticity. This inspired Lin Chi's oft-quoted statement: "If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him." In other words, if you think you can find enlightenment outside yourself, you're on the wrong track."

So, Fantastic Four--you're up. Let's hear more!

Regarding the thread about the relative merits of various websites/blogs frequented by SY folk. I'm glad to be filled in on the goings on at places like exSY and LSY, but my hope is that we can move off that particular subject. This blog will remain unmoderated, and it's my hope that we can moderate ourselves, as MC so generously agreed to do on the comments page to "Not to Get All Drippy on You".

SeekHer said...

"These are unsubstantiated and I think petty remarks about Marta. Her courage to post her memoir opened up a huge highway for all of us. In light of that I think she should be given quite a bit of consideration to manage her blog the way she sees fit."


I agree wholeheartedly with this comment, having read the negative comments here about Marta's blog with real sadness. I have no idea how she could be a controversial figure in these kinds of forums. Her writing workshops are a business, true, but they are "on-topic" in that anyone who wants to write about their experiences in SY and feels they need help, can get it from someone who has written with such success and grace. This is someone, let's remember, who gave ten years of her productive work-life to the ashram and is trying to start over from scratch. She's not out there to con anyone in a vulnerable state. That's just patently ridiculous. Let's all be as supportive as her as we would wish others were to us, were we in her shoes. (I know Epi will love the "do unto otherness" of that last line!)

And as for her having no new posts--her whole book is up on her site! And she's opening up her site to others who want to post their experiences. There will come a day when there are no new post here too. People build something, others engage, we all move on, hopefully for the richer. I feel tremendously richer for having read Marta's blog. I got me started on this one.

Anonymous said...

""These are unsubstantiated and I think petty remarks about Marta. Her courage to post her memoir opened up a huge highway for all of us. In light of that I think she should be given quite a bit of consideration to manage her blog the way she sees fit."

---As the person who wrote (at least one of) the comments, I'd like to chime in one more time to say my intentions were not petty and the remarks were not made without respect to Marta and her valiant efforts. That said, it is my honest observation that some things have changed over there. Posts I submitted were not put up when they had any slight flavor of pro-SY (and I'm in the ex camp, if you have to categorize), so I started to feel the vibe of selectivity I rebelled against so much in SY creeping in. That iron control over what is okay to say and what not (assuming all in kindness). Old habits die hard?

I guess the underlying reason for bringing it up was to express the hope you will continue to maintain the openness (using your discretion, of course) you've established thus far. I feel it is working very well. Thank you!!!

SeekHer said...

"I guess the underlying reason for bringing it up was to express the hope you will continue to maintain the openness (using your discretion, of course) you've established thus far. I feel it is working very well. Thank you!!!"

You have my word. Listen. Anyone who has taken on this moderator role knows how difficult it is. Truthfully, that is one reason I've opted not to moderate. It would take more time than I have to devote. Let's all be one. OK? that's what I really want to say. As a community let's keep our own ranks on topic. That's all I can hope.

someone posted a deceptively simple comment:
peace
I am with that person, and everyone else.

Anonymous said...

POEM BY SRI CHINMOY

Be happy
You will grow into God's greatest blessing, His highest pride.

Be happy
Yesterday's world wants you to enjoy its surrendered breath.

Be happy
Today's world wants you to enjoy its surrendering breath.
Tomorrow's world wants you to enjoy its fulfilling breath.

Be happy
Be happy in the morning with what you have. Be happy in the evening
with what you are.

Be happy
Don't complain. Who complains? The blind beggar in you.
When you complain, you dance in the mire of ignorance-condition.
When you don't complain, all conditions of the world are at your feet,
and God gives you a new name: aspiration.
Aspiration is the supreme wealth in the world of light and delight.

Be happy
Do you want never to be poor? Then be happy.
Do you want ever to be great? Then be happy.

Be happy
You will get what you like most. You will be what you like best.

Be happy
When you are happy, you and God command each other.
God commands you lovingly. You command God hastily.
When you are unhappy, the Hostile Forces command you ruthlessly,
doubt commands you openly, bondage commands you triumphantly and fear
commands you unconditionally.

Be happy
God sees in you His aspiring Creation, His transforming Realisation,
His illumining Revelation and His fulfilling Manifestation.

Be happy
God sees in you another God. God sees you as another God.
God sees you and He as One.

Anonymous said...

Is this the same Chinmoy with the sex scandals?

Anonymous said...

Re: This inspired Lin Chi's oft-quoted statement: "If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him." ...if you think you can find enlightenment outside yourself, you're on the wrong track."
November 7, 2007 4:47 PM
----------------------------

Re: Huffington Posty "DIY Guru" article Thanks Seekher.

Caught these lines
"people continue to seek handholds"

Got that right. "I want ot Hold Your Hand" was called "Come Give Me Your Hand" in German People need that.

"Every time we call in an expert, we lose a piece of ourselves."

Yes, but isn't that the point? ;-)

Some of the remarks remind me of the observer effect, things are effected by being looked at. I think T.S. Elliot said the same thing somewhere. Paraphrasing here, supposed to be on the road by now. "And the unseen eyebeam crossed, for the roses had the look of flowers that are looked at."

Loved this one
"Free beer tomorrow."

Best to all,
MC

Especially K, who I wish would start signing her posts. Her writing and tone are unmistakeable.

P e a c e










(

Anonymous said...

sadhvi wrote:

"... PS...I've been "banished" by CJ 8 or 9 times..I never take it personally..it's always a good reality check. ..."

Hi Sadhvi, I don't want to insult your intelligence, but either you're clueless, or you are a Stepford wife of C, just like most of the male members of that forum.

Banishment is final, there are no return trips. An example is what happened to Winston Smith. There are many others, you have to be blind to think that it doesn't hurt them, or that it doesn't hurt the cause of exSY. Why do you think there are only about a dozen posters there? Most people don't want to waste their time to in the end get the boot. You have never spoken out against injustice.

Here's another example: C made a big show about silencing someone by telling him that discussion of American Indian philosophy or rituals was not pertinent to the exSY context. Yet, the forum continually discusses Episcopalian topics, home made poetry, and Mormons (recently written by Stuart), as if these are more relevant. What this points out to is that people who have gained some level of importance on that forum are free to write whatever they want, but others are on a short leash. I think the writer of the American Indian philosophy (which was more interesting than most of the stuff that's spackled onto that site) was put on "read-only" status, a laughable creation meant to waterboard suspect individuals into submission, on their path to becoming Stepford wives. This is what happened to you over the years, and now you suffer from the Stockholm Syndrome vis C and exSY. Indeed, exSY has become exactly like the SY ashram, with a hierarchy of people, a pecking order, and ritual banishment of perceived malcontents. If I were you, I'd look hard in a mirror and see what you have become. You prefer to be on that site and abide by their SY-style rules, only because you would die without a place to write 50,000 words a day. You never speak out against injustice, because you might be banned. Think about it.

Another point: There are people on that site who have spent more time outside SY than inside, and yet they are so worked up about it. Examples:

Stuart: 4 years in SY, 23 years outside. He can write anything, and is not censored.

Howie: More out than in. Special case, as he is unbiased.

Dan Shaw: more years out than in, but blood pressure is still high. He has a special pass that allows him to write any rubbish, and was shocked when his endorsement of Marta was given a high tech lynching, with people questioning HIS motives, in trolling for "patients," something he denies, but that has been going on for years (just look through the archives, he had run ins with Spiritual Tree).

Why do I write this? Not to denigrate SeekHer's blog, but to point out that SY is an all-consuming topic. It changed people's lives, but the few sites that exist, only want to discuss their narrow agenda. And people like you are endlessly compliant. That's why you went from one group to another through your life. Nothing wrong with that, as long as one keeps progressing, rather than regressing.

Koyuki Doll kowtows a bit as she has been beaten and abused by C for so long, but at least she has a backbone, and questions blatant bullshit that goes on. Good on her.

Sadhvi, what have you become?

PS. Please could you use PARAGRAPHS, otherwise it is difficult to read your stuff, so I skip most of it.

Anonymous said...

To Anony November 8, 2007 6:24 AM

A refreshing, however caustic post. Lye is a very useful substance in the world, the most stringent cleaner there is. Totally potent as your comments.

However, lye has a very specific purpose. It burns like hell and has to be used with caution and restraint.

Appreciate your comments. But they seem almost nihiblistic to me. After you tear everything down. what to do have?

Come on 'where's the love, where's the love? We are flesh and blood. We need to connect, Only connect, wasn't that CS Lewis, or rather Antony Hopkins in the film.

MC

Anonymous said...

>>" If I were you, I'd look hard in a mirror and see what you have become. You prefer to be on that site and abide by their SY-style rules, only because you would die without a place to write 50,000 words a day. You never speak out against injustice, because you might be banned. Think about it"<<

LOL! I was drinking a glass of water when I read this..now it's all over my keyboard! You're funny, anon. Usually I wouldn't bother to respond to something like this...I will say, though, that the people who make me the angriest (although I don't feel the need to attack them personally) are usually the ones who reflect the worst of myself back in my face...is that what you mean by "looking in the mirror?"...have a cup of tea, bro.
Sorry I can't accomodate your attempt to "monitor" my writing style..why don't you just continue to "skip my posts"...better for both of us, I think..lol!
sadhvi

sadhvi

Anonymous said...

You see sadhvi you blessed your own f**n keyboard. No guru in sight. Good for you!

MC ;-)

Anonymous said...

Re: "Be happy
When you are happy, you and God command each other.
God commands you lovingly. You command God hastily.
When you are unhappy, the Hostile Forces command you ruthlessly,
doubt commands you openly, bondage commands you triumphantly and fear
commands you unconditionally.

Be happy
God sees in you His aspiring Creation, His transforming Realisation,
His illumining Revelation and His fulfilling Manifestation.

Be happy
God sees in you another God. God sees you as another God.
God sees you and He as One.

November 7, 2007 7:27 PM
------------------------------

I could buy this, but not the person preaching.

Such a breach between ideals and reality.

Who can fill that breach?

DIY Guru? Hmmmmmmm.......

Lots of entries by me of late could have/should have been edited. Will make an effort to post in a more moderate tone. Can't help the typos. I am TBI, but will make more of an effort. I hate sloppy typing too.

Heard a song in my travels, would like to share. The message was so plain.

"We're all heading in the same direction.

We're all heading in the same direction,

We're all heading in the same direction,

Perfection.

Allelieu.

P e a c e

MC

Happy trails all,
MC

Anonymous said...

To "Anonymous Nov 8, 6:24": Thanks so much for your post addressing Sadhvi and blowing the lid off much of the insanity inherent in eXSY. Your post was devastatingly accurate and beautifully written. It's the kind of coherent, logical exposition of fact that usually gets you branded a "troll" in the anti-SY blog industry. Please keep it up if you're not murdered first.

Now to "MC": Your posts continue to be uniformly irritating, ego-driven, preachy and self-righteous in tone. Thanks - not. And, oh yeah, I got your "love" right here.

SeekHer said...

"Now to "MC": Your posts continue to be uniformly irritating, ego-driven, preachy and self-righteous in tone. Thanks - not. And, oh yeah, I got your "love" right here."

MC is a frequent contributor here. If you don't like the tone or content of MC's emails, don't read them, or better yet, post something better yourself. Note: the above is not better, but very much worse.

Anonymous said...

I heard that M.C. stands for Master Charles, the former SYDA Swami Vivekananda. That explains a lot about this M.C. character, especially the egomania.

SeekHer said...

Note to all:

There has been a lot of anger and infighting imported here from other SY related sites. It doesn't belong here.

Knock it off.

PS My blog my rules. I want to maintain an unmoderated blog, but I won't put up with this level of discourse.

Anonymous said...

Seekher: You're quickly falling into the C school of moderation with these iron rules: 1. Criticism of you or anyone you like is absolute heresy and strictly verboten, 2. Rush to the defense of the biggest ass-kissers on the list. Their feelings are inviolable. 3. Treat any critics and dissenters as loathsome human garbage. Excommunicate them ASAP.

If you prefer this level of discourse, congratulations ... you're there!

SeekHer said...

"Regarding the thread about the relative merits of various websites/blogs frequented by SY folk. I'm glad to be filled in on the goings on at places like exSY and LSY, but my hope is that we can move off that particular subject."

"Anyone who has taken on this moderator role knows how difficult it is. Truthfully, that is one reason I've opted not to moderate. It would take more time than I have to devote. Let's all be one. OK? that's what I really want to say. As a community let's keep our own ranks on topic. That's all I can hope."

"There has been a lot of anger and infighting imported here from other SY related sites. It doesn't belong here."


"Seekher: You're quickly falling into the C school of moderation with these iron rules: 1. Criticism of you or anyone you like is absolute heresy and strictly verboten, 2. Rush to the defense of the biggest ass-kissers on the list. Their feelings are inviolable. 3. Treat any critics and dissenters as loathsome human garbage. Excommunicate them ASAP.

If you prefer this level of discourse, congratulations ... you're there!"

Anonymous said...

Anon, I agree.

SEEKHER = BASTARD SON OF C.

It's obvious, same charm school, same Nazi mentality.

Robert Adan Williams said...

"You can't possibly be a long time devotee of SY or have read the Guru Gita very often, or read many of Baba's books . . . You know the Guru that sits in the triangle in the lotus in our hearts gleaming like a pure crystal . . . Sorry for the tone. You are insulting a lot of people."

I'm not insulted by that poster's interpretation or experience. How could I be?

The Guru 'gleaming like a pure crystal in the triangle of the lotus in our hearts' is clearly not GM but the inner Guru. I don't believe GM coopted the purport of the GG on that level. No matter how egotistical you may believe Gurumayi is or has been, she and Baba both made it very clear that the true Guru is the inner Guru. It's really up to us to understand that and to separate the person of the Guru from the Guru-principle within ourselves. Which is tricky.

Even so, any argument that GM is an egomaniac is disabled by citing verses from the Guru Gita. The GG ping pongs back and forth between references to the inner Guru and the outer Guru for 182 verses - and ultimately it's all about the inner Guru, not the outer. Which is to say, the GG is all about oneself.

This poster seems to be talking down to the quoted poster with sarcasm. Maybe I'm wrong, but it sounds unnecessarily harsh.

Baba said alot of contradictory things in many of his books. One can take from them what one wants, as with everything.