Eckhart Tolle on christmas

[DGA]

if one wants to call him new age thats fine,what do we call realized beings of the past that had no lineage?old agers?

Really realized beings of this kind? They are called pratyekabuddhas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratyekabuddha" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I have no idea if Tolle is one of these or if he is not.

[martin123]

Dead?

hahaha :p

[futerko]

Ah, but someone always goes and ruins it by claiming they are The One to have grasped the truth, and getting themselves crucified in the process (metaphorically speaking, of course).

I don't understand this comment at all futerko, what is the it that is ruined, and who ruined it?

It was a cynical reference to Jesus, in the light of what Jikan wrote about, "other writers in the "spirituality" section such as Ken Wilber, Marc Gafni, Andrew Cohen, &c."

It seems to me the difference is not necessarily whether their ideas are consistent with Buddhadharma or not, but rather the kind of arrogant egoism that can emerge as a result of believing you have single-handedly discovered the Truth. Actually I'm not so familiar with the other authors, but Ken Wilber's name stuck out to me there.

[lowlydog]

It was a cynical reference to Jesus, in the light of what Jikan wrote about, "other writers in the "spirituality" section such as Ken Wilber, Marc Gafni, Andrew Cohen, &c."

It seems to me the difference is not necessarily whether their ideas are consistent with Buddhadharma or not, but rather the kind of arrogant egoism that can emerge as a result of believing you have single-handedly discovered the Truth. Actually I'm not so familiar with the other authors, but Ken Wilber's name stuck out to me there.

There is only one absolute Truth, and all other truths emanate from it.
When you find that Truth, your actions will be in alignment with it. Human
action can reflect the Truth, or it can reflect illusion. Can the Truth be put
into words? Yes, but the words are, of course, not it. They only point to it.
The Truth is inseparable from who you are. Yes, you are the truth. If
you look for it elsewhere, you will be deceived every time. The very Being
that you are is Truth. Jesus tried to convey that when he said, “I am the way
and the truth and the life.”2 These words uttered by Jesus are one of the most
powerful and direct pointers to the Truth, if understood correctly. If
misinterpreted, however, they become a great obstacle. Jesus speaks of the
innermost I Am, the essence identity of every man and woman, every lifeform,
in fact. He speaks of the life that you are. Some Christian mystics have
called it the Christ within; Buddhists call it your Buddha nature; for Hindus,
it is Atman, the indwelling God. When you are in touch with that dimension
within yourself – and being in touch with it is your natural state, not some
miraculous achievement – all your actions and relationships will reflect the
oneness with all life that you sense deep within. This is love.

[futerko]

It was a cynical reference to Jesus, in the light of what Jikan wrote about, "other writers in the "spirituality" section such as Ken Wilber, Marc Gafni, Andrew Cohen, &c."

It seems to me the difference is not necessarily whether their ideas are consistent with Buddhadharma or not, but rather the kind of arrogant egoism that can emerge as a result of believing you have single-handedly discovered the Truth. Actually I'm not so familiar with the other authors, but Ken Wilber's name stuck out to me there.

There is only one absolute Truth, and all other truths emanate from it.
When you find that Truth, your actions will be in alignment with it. Human
action can reflect the Truth, or it can reflect illusion. Can the Truth be put
into words? Yes, but the words are, of course, not it. They only point to it.
The Truth is inseparable from who you are. Yes, you are the truth. If
you look for it elsewhere, you will be deceived every time. The very Being
that you are is Truth. Jesus tried to convey that when he said, “I am the way
and the truth and the life.”2 These words uttered by Jesus are one of the most
powerful and direct pointers to the Truth, if understood correctly. If
misinterpreted, however, they become a great obstacle. Jesus speaks of the
innermost I Am, the essence identity of every man and woman, every lifeform,
in fact. He speaks of the life that you are. Some Christian mystics have
called it the Christ within; Buddhists call it your Buddha nature; for Hindus,
it is Atman, the indwelling God. When you are in touch with that dimension
within yourself – and being in touch with it is your natural state, not some
miraculous achievement – all your actions and relationships will reflect the
oneness with all life that you sense deep within. This is love.

Who is the one misinterpreting them when the claim is, "I am the light"?
Surely according to your interpretation it should read, "We are the light" or "you are the light"
If I declare myself the son of man, the light and the way - aren't I the one misunderstanding the Truth?

[Grigoris]

There is only one absolute Truth, and all other truths emanate from it.
When you find that Truth, your actions will be in alignment with it.

Really? So where can I find this one absolute truth? If the other truths emanate from it does that make them then one absolute truth too? Does that make them parts of this one absolute truth? If they are parts though then the absolute truth is compounded and thus absolute. If they are absolute truth too then the emanations are absolute too and so absolute truth is not one.

The Truth is inseparable from who you are. Yes, you are the truth.

So then I don't need to find it. This (makes grand sweeping gesture with his arms) is the absolute Truth.

So do I need to find it or am I it?
Is it one or is it many?

More holy sieves!

[uan]

The Truth is inseparable from who you are. Yes, you are the truth.

So then I don't need to find it. This (makes grand sweeping gesture with his arms) is the absolute Truth.

So do I need to find it or am I it?
Is it one or is it many?

More holy sieves!

ahh Buddha nature? Perhaps you can use the same retort with the gurus in your lineage(s) the next time they expound on it. I'd also point out that there are some on the Dzogchen forum that have at the very least implied that Dzogchen is the absolute truth.

Btw, I like your new avatar

[Grigoris]

Buddha nature as enlightened nature as opposed to Buddha Nature as enlightened potential.

I think that "argument" has been going on ever since somebody came up with the idea of the Tathagatagarbha.

[Johnny Dangerous]

It was a cynical reference to Jesus, in the light of what Jikan wrote about, "other writers in the "spirituality" section such as Ken Wilber, Marc Gafni, Andrew Cohen, &c."

It seems to me the difference is not necessarily whether their ideas are consistent with Buddhadharma or not, but rather the kind of arrogant egoism that can emerge as a result of believing you have single-handedly discovered the Truth. Actually I'm not so familiar with the other authors, but Ken Wilber's name stuck out to me there.

There is only one absolute Truth, and all other truths emanate from it.
When you find that Truth, your actions will be in alignment with it. Human
action can reflect the Truth, or it can reflect illusion. Can the Truth be put
into words? Yes, but the words are, of course, not it. They only point to it.
The Truth is inseparable from who you are. Yes, you are the truth. If
you look for it elsewhere, you will be deceived every time. The very Being
that you are is Truth. Jesus tried to convey that when he said, “I am the way
and the truth and the life.”2 These words uttered by Jesus are one of the most
powerful and direct pointers to the Truth, if understood correctly. If
misinterpreted, however, they become a great obstacle. Jesus speaks of the
innermost I Am, the essence identity of every man and woman, every lifeform,
in fact. He speaks of the life that you are. Some Christian mystics have
called it the Christ within; Buddhists call it your Buddha nature; for Hindus,
it is Atman, the indwelling God. When you are in touch with that dimension
within yourself – and being in touch with it is your natural state, not some
miraculous achievement – all your actions and relationships will reflect the
oneness with all life that you sense deep within. This is love.

Why do you even need to be a Buddhist then? It sounds like this is pretty much taken care of without Buddhist doctrine and teachings, so why bother with Buddhism? Surely if this truth is so attainable that any and all religions have it, also no religion has it..so why even bother with this whole spiritual journey at all? I don't really see much Dharma in the above, it's very grandiose sounding, and makes a bit of reference to a world of "illusion", but I don't see much substance there to be compared to Buddhism, it's pretty sounding but seems a bit shallow on examination.

[martin123]

It was a cynical reference to Jesus, in the light of what Jikan wrote about, "other writers in the "spirituality" section such as Ken Wilber, Marc Gafni, Andrew Cohen, &c."

It seems to me the difference is not necessarily whether their ideas are consistent with Buddhadharma or not, but rather the kind of arrogant egoism that can emerge as a result of believing you have single-handedly discovered the Truth. Actually I'm not so familiar with the other authors, but Ken Wilber's name stuck out to me there.

There is only one absolute Truth, and all other truths emanate from it.
When you find that Truth, your actions will be in alignment with it. Human
action can reflect the Truth, or it can reflect illusion. Can the Truth be put
into words? Yes, but the words are, of course, not it. They only point to it.
The Truth is inseparable from who you are. Yes, you are the truth. If
you look for it elsewhere, you will be deceived every time. The very Being
that you are is Truth. Jesus tried to convey that when he said, “I am the way
and the truth and the life.”2 These words uttered by Jesus are one of the most
powerful and direct pointers to the Truth, if understood correctly. If
misinterpreted, however, they become a great obstacle. Jesus speaks of the
innermost I Am, the essence identity of every man and woman, every lifeform,
in fact. He speaks of the life that you are. Some Christian mystics have
called it the Christ within; Buddhists call it your Buddha nature; for Hindus,
it is Atman, the indwelling God. When you are in touch with that dimension
within yourself – and being in touch with it is your natural state, not some
miraculous achievement – all your actions and relationships will reflect the
oneness with all life that you sense deep within. This is love.

Why do you even need to be a Buddhist then? It sounds like this is pretty much taken care of without Buddhist doctrine and teachings, so why bother with Buddhism? Surely if this truth is so attainable that any and all religions have it, also no religion has it..so why even bother with this whole spiritual journey at all? I don't really see much Dharma in the above, it's very grandiose sounding, and makes a bit of reference to a world of "illusion", but I don't see much substance there to be compared to Buddhism, it's pretty sounding but seems a bit shallow on examination.

You dont need to be a Buddhist.

[Grigoris]

I think he was asking why you, martin123, need to be a Buddhist. To which you will reply: I don't need to be a Buddhist. To which the next question will be: then why are you a Buddhist? To which you will answer: I never said I was a Buddhist. To which the question will arise: Then why are you on a Buddhist site? Now the next answer, I don't think I can predict.

[martin123]

I think he was asking why you, martin123, need to be a Buddhist. To which you will reply: I don't need to be a Buddhist. To which the next question will be: then why are you a Buddhist? To which you will answer: I never said I was a Buddhist. To which the question will arise: Then why are you on a Buddhist site? Now the next answer, I don't think I can predict.

im not to sure he meant me,i think its a broader question?

[martin123]

im on a Buddhist site because i like the teachings of the buddha and i like people

[catmoon]

im on a Buddhist site because i like the teachings of the buddha and i like people

And those are excellent reasons, if I may say so.

[Grigoris]

Btw, I like your new avatar

Yes, it is quite a flattering photo, I'm really quite grotesque in real life!

im on a Buddhist site because i like the teachings of the buddha and i like people.

I wasn't looking for answer, I was just jibeing, but it is a good answer nonetheless!

[Johnny Dangerous]

It could be taken personally, universally, whatever..though it's not intended personally in a bad way..


All i'm saying is that personally I think Buddhism has things right that other philosophies don't - most notably with all the "self" stuff, the world is obsessed with self, people generally live inside "themselves" and are tormented endlessly by "themselves". Whether you try to say there is true self, or an illusory self, you are still positing a dualistic, "one v.s other" self that either is or isn't . I do not hear a message of Anatta in Tolle's stuff, in fact it is seems to be affirming a permanent self-entity which to me (again just my own experiences) goes the direction of suffering.

It's not a value judgement, just going on my own experience, so the thing is, if you accept that all religions or spiritual philosophies are one, or teach the same stuff, why bother with any of them specifically? At some point you have to decide on the truth of a number of things for yourself, and when you do you will run into places where (for example) Buddhism differs quite a bit from Christianity - even the mystical variety.

I don't think anyone is being closed minded or divisive by feeling this way, we are just asking why, and how it jives with Buddhism.

[martin123]

Btw, I
like your new avatar

Yes, it is quite a flattering
photo, I'm really quite grotesque in real life!

im on a Buddhist site because i like the teachings of
the buddha and i like people.

I wasn't looking for answer, I
was just jibeing, but it is a good answer nonetheless!

i know u weren't Greg,but i felt obligded to answer

[lowlydog]

Who is the one misinterpreting them when the claim is, "I am the light"?
Surely according to your interpretation it should read, "We are the light" or "you are the light"
If I declare myself the son of man, the light and the way - aren't I the one misunderstanding the Truth?

“I am the way
and the truth and the life.”2 These words uttered by Jesus are one of the most
powerful and direct pointers to the Truth, if understood correctly.

What does it mean to understand correctly, it means one must at minimum "glimpse" the shutting down of the 5 bodily sense doors(rupa) and the shutting down of the mind sense door(nama). One for lack of a better word must experience Nibbanic peace the ultimate reality, only then will this be a truth to you, and only then will and can the multi-dimensional teachings of Eckhart Jesus and the Buddha be partially understood at the experiencial level(bhavana maya panna).
If I asked you to describe the fourth dimension could you. Make me a four dimensional object. Impossible.
You are asking me to describe and explain the indescribable and unexplainable, at best one can point to the truth but in this reality what is being pointed at is not the ultimate truth.

Jesus is asking those to look within, as the buddha teaches us to do. The truth will be found looking within not by looking outwardly as a subject observing an object(duality). "I am the way" know thyself. If Jesus said "we are the light" he would be implying duality(multiple subjects), I am the light does not imply duality if understood correctly, if misunderstood we would end up with a bunch of people worshiping and waiting for an external person or object to save them. That's just crazy and not what Jesus had in mind for his students.

Eckhart does not imply that the way christians are practicing today is being done correctly, he is simply trying to explain how he interprets Jesus teachings, and his interpretation of Jesus teachings brings them in line with the Buddhas.

[Johnny Dangerous]

Just looking inward doesn't put something in line with The Buddhas teaching, if it did, nearly every Dharmic religion or form of mysticism focused on liberation would be Buddhism, but we can see they aren't, and have a wide range of views.

[martin123]

Just looking
inward doesn't put something in line with The Buddhas teaching, if it
did, nearly every Dharmic religion or form of mysticism focused on
liberation would be Buddhism, but we can see they aren't, and have a
wide range of views.

Its also possible that jesus teachings and others have been corrupted and misunderstood throughout timespane,and have become world religions!thats highly possible.