Thread: Spiritual Masters that aren't Swindlers and Frauds

There is something about Osho that transcends duality in my opinion. One cannot say this or that with any conviction. For example, did it not work? What was it that lead to his insanity? Was it being a flamboyant guru? Did he really become insane? Or was he always insane? Or merely pretending to be insane? Or neither? All we can have are empty opinions. (BTW, I only like his teachings from before he came to America, those were genuine teachings. I stopped being interested when he talked about Zorba the Buddha and the Rebel and the 'new man', he was reading too much Neitche)
I agree with what you say about the government, it is a good example of an empty concept. However, he certainly was on the government's tip, namely the FBI and the CIA. This is not a conspiracy theory. He went on a world tour and was arrested in every country because the CIA influence. This is fact. He turned it into a publicity thing.

There Is No Such Thing As Enlightenment - YouTube

My husband is into the spiritual side of things a lot more than me - and he really likes:

Shinzen Young

When typing his name into youtube - I came up with a video on OBE.
It is quite bad quality and bit hard to listen to - and is a bit repetitive.
What he seems to stress, is, that in that state of consciousness there is the potential to relatively easily enter what he calls witness consciousness - an equanimity - the potential to separate oneself from the drags of your worries, ego - whatever.

Seems he says meditation is the way to systematically induce this inherent ability - like it also happens when you are in intense danger - time slowing down.
He says it is natural - something inherent in our bodily make-up - even says animals do it all the time.
Us being hindered by our addiction to "thinking".

He says it is the real significance of the experience to unravel the connection between the body and the mind - liberate the mind.

Here we go:



I also came across criticism of his person.

What do you people think of him?
Thanks in advance!

^^ Your husband has good taste!

Aside from what Young might mention in the video, Vipassana meditation is part-and-parcel to the kind of self-awareness that drives lucid dreaming.

Regarding that "natural" awareness he descibes in the video, keep in mind that that is only the tip of the iceberg of Vipassana's non- dual point of view. Though his example is a good start, though in my opinion only considers OBE from a "perspective" and not active point of view, it only illustrates the beginning of a Vipassana practitioner's journey.

Russel Brand
Hunter S. Thompson
Bruce Lee
Shakespeare
Grant Morrison
Alan Moore
Austin Osman Spare
Anton Lavey
Aleister Crowley
Anonymous
Alex Jones

Mr Deity

But to be serious Krishnamurti is probably the closest thing I can think of, but I don't think he would have liked being called a spiritual master. People have this idea that spiritual teachers have their shit together. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't. The fucked up things they do in their personal lives don't necessarily negate their teachings, but it does show that those teachings are not some kind of magic pill that if swallowed protects you from fucking up. There is no magic pill. The sooner you realize that the sooner you can actual begin to make real progress spiritually.

I really like what Ramana Maharshi had to say. Here's one video of things he talked about.



I especially like what he says about mind and doubt and living in the heart: "Investigate what the mind is, and it will disappear. There is no such thing as mind apart from thought. There is no use removing doubts, if we clear one doubt another arises and there will be no end of doubts. All doubts will cease only when the doubter and his source have been found. Seek for the source of the doubter and you will find that he is really non-existent. Doubter ceasing, doubts will cease."

Originally Posted by StonedApe

Mr Deity

But to be serious Krishnamurti is probably the closest thing I can think of, but I don't think he would have liked being called a spiritual master. People have this idea that spiritual teachers have their shit together. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't. The fucked up things they do in their personal lives don't necessarily negate their teachings, but it does show that those teachings are not some kind of magic pill that if swallowed protects you from fucking up. There is no magic pill. The sooner you realize that the sooner you can actual begin to make real progress spiritually.

Buddha said, "Wisdom in the mouth of a fool is still wisdom, just as gold is still gold whether in a leather sack or an ornately carved box."

Originally Posted by WakingNomad

Buddha said, "Wisdom in the mouth of a fool is still wisdom, just as gold is still gold whether in a leather sack or an ornately carved box."

Yeah, but the ornately carved box can hold your stuff!

Originally Posted by WakingNomad

Buddha said, "Wisdom in the mouth of a fool is still wisdom, just as gold is still gold whether in a leather sack or an ornately carved box."

Do not trust something is gold merely because of the package it comes in, is something he's basically said as well. One can only trust information based on the fruit yielded by that information's source. In other words, pay attention to people who are good at what you want to be good at and have that which you want to have. If someone basks in a state of happiness you're envious of, how can you call them a fool?

Nice to see you post again.

Originally Posted by Original Poster

If someone basks in a state of happiness you're envious of, how can you call them a fool?

I can without hesitation call a happy person a fool. What if a man sucking his own blood, or someone else's is basking in happiness? But if I'm envious of them, then I'm twice the fool.

In any case, we can both agree that fruit tends not to grow on thistles, that the foibles of ostensibly great teachers usually do show us something.

You're bringing complexity to something I was simplifying and I appreciate that. But I'm also not using envy in a negative way, envy gives me the desire to be more like someone and thus listen more to what they have to say. I would rather listen to someone I desire to be more like than someone who claims any other type of authority on a subject. That's all I'm saying.

Sorry If im interupt in something here now. But Jiddu Krishnamurti is one legit teacher! He explains the most simple things in a hole new way. I just love it.

I started out with Wayne Dyer by accident after I left contemporary Christianity looking for what I was after..

I was watching tv and Wayne Dyer comes on in a PBS presentation on a Friday evening. I looked at that and said something like "WTF, who the hell is this new age balding dude ?"..and promptly flipped to another channel

Saturday afternoon was the same story after work. "OMG not this guy again"...flipped the channel yet again

Sunday evening I was beat tired. Sat in the chair in front of the tv already playing. Programs changed and... you guessed heres Wayne Dyer again.
This time I didn't have the remote and was too tired and lazy to go find it, so I watched. By the end of the program I was on the edge of the seat listening and seeing what he was talking about inside myself and my experience.

Went on from him to reading of Nisargadatta Maharaj, then to Dzogchen in the writings of Chyogal Namkai Norbu, to Shri Ramana Maharshi, RamDass , Neem Karoli Baba, and a seemingly endless list of others of all religions in all time frames. Seeing what each was saying inside myself and my own experience, which is the key to determining if the mesaage is based in truth or not.



The water from the well is water from the well..

Regardless of the bucket that carries it up from the depths..

Remember..

The bucket itself cannot quench your thirst..

And..

A bucket without holes carries more water..

Without such a wasteful mess..

But in the end..

A bucket, is a bucket, is a bucket...

Its the water one is after

My introduction to Buddhism came from the guy that wrote Surfing the Himalayas. I had been reading Manly P Hall and when I started Snowboarding to Nirvana I peaked and interest in Buddhism. I looked up Buddhist Cosmology and had a prolific click as I saw Buddhism explain, in completeness, all of the details beyond the veil that all of Manly P Hall's research could barely collect a few pieces of. If not for Manly P Hall's research, however, I would have taken Buddhist Cosmology with a grain of salt. Only both combined could provide insight.

Later I discovered that the author of Surfing the Himalayas was a total fraud. But he still opened me up to Buddhism so that I could go on to read from more insightful eastern philosophers.

Originally Posted by NonDualistic

Seeing what each was saying inside myself and my own experience, which is the key to determining if the mesaage is based in truth or not.

I think one thing to watch out for here is that since we are all psychically connected, you can often find their 'truths' inside of yourself even when they're mostly bullshit. Lots of people get trapped by this, if they find 'internal' experiential confirmation they trust it unquestionably.

Originally Posted by Original Poster

I had been reading Manly P Hall and when I started Snowboarding to Nirvana I peaked and interest in Buddhism. I looked up Buddhist Cosmology and had a prolific click as I saw Buddhism explain, in completeness, all of the details beyond the veil that all of Manly P Hall's research could barely collect a few pieces of. If not for Manly P Hall's research, however, I would have taken Buddhist Cosmology with a grain of salt. Only both combined could provide insight.

I bought and attempted to read "Secret Teachings of All Ages" a few months ago. I thought it was terrible, almost utter bullshit. But yeah, even shit has a lot of food value if you can kill the microbes and you don't have anything else to eat. For instance, I keep recommending Ramana Maharshi to people even though I think his teaching doesn't lead to where he claims it leads. The movement of identity it involves is at least partially real, because it does something.

Manly P Hall's conclusions aren't always perfectly apt (like his connection between Sir Francis Bacon and Shakespeare, for example) but really? Utter bullshit? He revealed Christ's sun god connection before Zeitgeist ever popularized it (as in circa 1920s). Did you read anything he wrote on Hermeticism? On Pythagoras? On the Mysteries? Damn dude, that's a pretty provocative opinion. Wait, I remember you now, were you the one that claimed an infallible authority over esoteric knowledge because you can read greek?

Originally Posted by Original Poster

Wait, I remember you now, were you the one that claimed an infallible authority over esoteric knowledge because you can read greek?

No, that was tsiouz. My experience with him was pretty much the same as yours. Remarkable that you and I exchanged many dozens of posts and you can't remember who I am.

Yeah I read much of Hall's stuff on Pythagoras, Hermeticism, and mysteries. Part of the problem is I had already read other Theosophists extensively, such as Blavatsky's Secret Doctrine and Isis Unveiled, Percival's Thinking and Destiny, which I read several times, and other things like Steiner's Theosophy or Max Heindel's Rosicrucian Cosmo Conception. They all draw from many of the same sources, and I spent many years sorting out what might be real and what is clearly not. So by the time I read Hall, I was already pretty close to the subject. Plus I have an extensive scientific background, so when an esotericist makes scientific claims those errors are often fairly obvious to me too. I'm not suggesting Hall didn't do anything of value for anyone, I was just shocked at how bad it was from my standpoint, since several people had recommended it. Your background is different from mine obviously, so different things stand out.

Oh no, I actually understand that. But I still consider Hall a pioneer. Keep in mind a lot of his claims reflect the era he wrote in. We're on the same page again, I don't dismiss Freud as bullshit but of course we have also moved passed his insights in modern psychology.

And sorry, I remember your name and I remember having lengthy discussions with you but I can't sort out what, specifically you advocated compared to other participants. I remember you being quite a bit more intelligible and coherent than tsiouz, though.

Originally Posted by shadowofwind

I think one thing to watch out for here is that since we are all psychically connected, you can often find their 'truths' inside of yourself even when they're mostly bullshit. Lots of people get trapped by this, if they find 'internal' experiential confirmation they trust it unquestionably.

Seeing or finding, is probably the wrong choice of words, "tasting" first hand what they are talking about would be a better descriptive term. People can talk of apples and oranges, but unless you taste one you really only have assumptions and heresay to go on. If someone tells you an apple tastes like an orange, if you have tasted them both, you can immediately tell he does not really know what he is talking about.

So, if one does not know the taste first hand, it is good advice to be wary and maybe shop around to see what everyone else is saying on the subject too so as to find the differences and similarities and go from there until one does taste for themselves.

One thing is for sure, if someone that is teaching comes out wanting something from you, or says "my way is the only way", well then red flags should be springing up everywhere..