Genie in a Bottle

Saint Joseph of Nazareth

 

 

So… As I’ve grown and changed over the duration of my life so far I’ve found myself less and less inclined toward being attached to ritual of any kind. My life still entertains a number of rituals, some mystical and some mundane but the over all less and less. Generally speaking, the increase of freedom I know in my life is directly proportionate to the decrease of ritual therein.

I have, however, in the past had a tendency to implementing ritual the most when it’s needed the most. And is that not what it’s for, after all? Ritual could be described or defined as an algorithm. It’s a set of steps in a set order that solves a problem. There are lots of different kinds of problems, so naturally there are many different ways to tackle these and solve them. To be clear, when I use the word “problem,” I don’t mean it strictly in its typical negative usage. I think there are lots of so-called “problems” that are good to have. Good problems.

I think, too, that it makes me rather typical that I care most about ritual when I perceive a greater need. I don’t feel bad about it, though. Using ritual just when you need to solve a problem or accomplish something isn’t any better or any worse that using a hammer when you need to drive nails or a screwdriver when screws need tightened. Ritual serves a purpose and nothing can be better than knowing and honoring that purpose.

Two years and one day ago I employed ritual like nobody’s business and achieved a goal I’m still unsure I’d have succeeded at otherwise – or at least, I perhaps wouldn’t have succeeded so terrifically. And I’m right back at it – and crossing religious lines to do it!

 

We’re selling our townhome and I’m told that the Catholic Saint Joseph is the man to make it happen. The maternal side of my gene pool is very Catholic so some of these things I’m a bit familiar with. Still, St. Joseph isn’t super familiar to me. In fact, it wasn’t until I decided to do some homework that I even realized that this Joseph was the step-dad of Christ Almighty. A dear Lutheran friend of mine insisted that I give Joseph a shot. Willingness wasn’t much of a stretch for me. Here’s what I understand about the ritual surrounding using St. Joseph helping to sell one’s home.

 

1) St. Joseph was THE family man and a prime example of what fatherhood should be.

2) St. Joseph is the saint of departing / departed souls, selling houses, and maybe a few other things.

3)  If you have a back yard, you bury him upside down, facing the property and exactly 3 feet from the structure.

4) If you have only a front yard (as with my property) then you bury him right side up, facing away from the property, exactly twelve inches into the ground.

5) If you have zero yard, then you can simply place him on a shelf or some other prominent place in the home.

6) The image of St. Joseph is supposed to be owned as a gift from a friend and not bought by the person selling their home.

7) There can be found a prayer or two that a person is supposed to say to invoke the blessings and intercession of the saint.

8) Once the sale is a success, it’s said that St. Joseph is due lots of glory and credit and so forth. Some literature on the matter even indicate that Joseph is supposed to be exhumed and brought with to the new home location.

 

I don’t know Joseph well at all. It took me a bit of reading before I even realized that THIS guy is the same as the one who was an adoptive parent to Jesus. I’m not planning to “be” Catholic or anything, although that would thrill my grandmother. I just want my house to sell, and sell quickly, and Saint Joseph is apparently just the hammer needed to drive that nail.

 

Aum Shri Mahaganeshaya Namaha

Aum Shanti

Advertisement

Ashvamedha

The videos included in this post are the two mentioned in comments from the post before this. They are somewhat lengthy talks (as far as YouTube videos go) by a Doctor from the Oxford Center for Hindu Studies.

I this first video, which is the longer of the two, the speaker details pretty well how vast the collection of Hindu scriptures is and goes into some detail about selective Hindus can be in identifying which scriptures they will or will not adhere to. I found this interesting because it’s one of the aspects of the practice of Hinduism that I think really sets it apart from the other major world religions.

With many of the other major world religions there can be found a prevalent habit of picking-n-choosing which holy literature is most valid or applicable to today’s living. In their context (the context of the Abrahamic religions, for example), however, believers are quite literally talking from both sides of their mouth. They’ve already attributed ultimate sanctity and supreme authority to their holy texts and maintain that claim all the while they select which parts of the same text support the current goal or focus. Naturally, this leads to contradiction and hypocrisy – which I have found to be inherent in Abrahamic religions, specifically. You end up with a religion saying one and ONLY one text is holy (Only the Bible, or only the Q’uran), and then in that same text find them pointing to words that say you should kill someone wearing clothing made from cotton-polyester blends or who eats shrimp (Leviticus) while ignoring other parts of the same textual body that says we should love people as much as we love our own self (New Testament).

In Hinduism, according to the video, Hindus have an historic tendency to abandon entire bodies of scripture when then become irrelevant or create situations like the one mentioned above with the Abrahamics. An example cited in the video is of Gandhi’s stance on widow remarriage. The Manu Smriti / Dharma Shastras are clear that widows are not allowed to remarry. But this was challenged in a big way. Another example was that of wives seeing their husbands as gods – despite poor behavior on the husband’s part, including things like adultery. The speaker was among a group of Hindus and asked the women present about if they do this or would be willing to, and laughter was the answer he received in addition to a lady who went so far as to say that scripture was evil. For Hindus, it seems, the relationship to scripture is sacred insofar as the scripture itself makes sense and serves the purpose of benefiting the greater good, otherwise the scripture risks losing its sacred status in a very real way.

This next video is one in which worship itself is discussed a bit more. The speaker still touches a bit on scripture and its value, but relates it the actual process of worship within Hinduism. He points out that there are different varieties of Sanskrit, some of which are so poorly understood that there are yet words in our Vedas the meaning of which is not likely to be known ever. I appreciated this video because he discusses what murti wrship really means and does so in an intelligent way. He provides answers to some common questions that probably most Hindus would agree on and speaks some about the differences of belief within Hinduism in regard to prana, pranaprathistha, whether the murti is actually god or just the carrier, whether we really are in the presence of god when a murti is worshipped or whether we might be just as effective worshipping the god-amsha within instead. And I also really liked how he was knowledgeable about the Vedas and other better-know Hindu scriptures in regard to how little they actually “support” murti worship.

These videos are definitely informative and an overall good resources that may well answer a few questions for the wondering mind. If you have a free hour, or so, I would encourage you to watch these. If they don’t change your mind on one thing or another, then they may well at least help you understand the larger Hindu picture. It’s probably not entirely what you think.

Aum Shri Mahaganeshaya Namaha
Aum Shanti

Seeking Converts: Apply Within

As I’ve mentioned a number of times, I practice a form of Raja Yoga that has been systematized for the modern grhasta into what is now called Sahaj Marg. My first six months with it kind of led me to put it aside, actually, and view it as a valid-but-not-for-me path. About a year after that (I think), there was a change of heart and after assessing a few things in my life, the Marg felt like a better fit than it previously had. Since that time, I’ve practiced as faithfully and diligently as I have been able while living the householder life (S.M. is actually quite suitable for those living as householders) and I attend satsangh as often as I am able. From time to time, in waves it seems, I’ll write here about concepts or beliefs pertaining to this path. On that note, and leading into the rest of this post, I want to make very clear that Sthapati is not a “Sahaj Marg blog” and never will be. It’s a Joshua/Dhrishti blog and will be.

Still, web searches on the matter will turn up this blog and a number of other online resources for Sahaj Marg, both official and unofficial, legit and bogus. I wonder if it’s because of this that an issue of Sahaj Sandesh was written as it was. The Sahaj Sandesh is an email newletter of sorts that kind of is usually pretty specific – it might mention points of interest regarding upcoming events, or provide a status update on the health of our guru. Those kinds of things. Recently, the Sahaj Sandesh came as a warning, and considering the amount of writing I’ve done about Sahaj Marg here on Sthapati it hits rather close to home. Immediately below, I’ll post the October 5th Sahaj Sandesh and maybe you’ll understand why.
———————————————————————————————————————————————-
“Dear sisters and brothers,

“We see ever-increasing instances of people spreading ‘news’ from Manapakkam through social media like Facebook and messaging platforms like SMS, Whatsapp, etc, which is factually incorrect and even misleading. While the intentions of the concerned abhyasis may not be bad or harmful, this leads to widespread dissemination of wrong and at times undesirable information. Please note that any ‘news’ or information for abhyasis will only be done through the official Mission channels like Sahaj Sandesh, or through functionaries of the Mission.

“Abhyasis are also reminded that whenever they use these platforms for sharing unsolicited audio, video or photographic material, they are violating the Mission’s copyright laws and are advised to refrain from doing so. Please be assured that for the willing heart, there is sufficient material to read, hear, view and digest already available in the Mission without having to resort to such content for spiritual motivation.

“With sincere prayers,
Kamlesh D. Patel”

———————————————————————————————————————————————-

This kind of rubs me in two ways. The first, and probably the most obvious, is that it looks a lot like abhyasis like myself are advised against doing what I have done (and am doing right now). “Don’t share our information” is what this issue of the Sahaj Sandesh boils down to. I’ve never shared anything that is “factually incorrect” and have cited the source for every Sahaj Marg quote or video or anything that I’ve shared here. So, in my case if something I shared was “factually incorrect,” then it was incorrect when I received it from the works of the Sahaj Marg Masters. And since I’ve not really done any slandering, per se, of this material, I would also find it difficult to believe that anything shared here on Sthapati would be “undesirable” as indicated in the Sandesh. Maybe I’m too focused on myself and Sthapati in this context with the egoic part of my mind wrongly thinking this is somehow referring to me (like I’m THAT important), and maybe there are other things, of which I’m not currently aware, that this Sandesh is actually referring to. At this point, with my very limited knowledge, I’m going to remind myself that nothing I’ve shared here, to the very best of my ability, has been “factually incorrect” or paints the Marg in any “undesirable” light. So for Sthapati, things will likely remain business as usual.

The second way this rubs me is more positive. All copyright threats aside, I find it really reassuring that there was emphatic mention that those who seek will find. You don’t have to go shoving anything in anyone’s face because if they want it and if it’s meant for them to see, then it will find its way to their face anyway. Personally, I don’t feel like Sthapati has shoved anything in anyone’s face in any remotely unsolicited manner. As with anyone who finds official and legit Sahaj Marg websites, Sthapati and its “Sahaj Marg” posts will only turn up if someone 1) goes looking for them or 2) is a subscriber to Sthapati which carries the implication that the subscriber already has interest in whatever content might appear on the blog.

Still, one of the most appealing aspects of my experience with Hinduism is that it doesn’t seek converts. Certain Hindu paths are definitely more prone to “advertising” than are others, but I think I would say that even most of those paths still allow space for potential converts or devotees to say no and leave. With that in mind, this Sandesh reminds me of a response I once received from a past temple president here locally when the Indian mother of my “bahin” in Atlanta called to my temple here in Indiana and asked about a conversion puja (or something, idk exactly how she worded it). The response she received from the then president was along the lines of “absolutely not.” He stated that the temple had no interest in doing anything that even remotely looked like it was seeking converts. Of course, her own local temple was more than happy to perform an equivalent puja for me, if only I made the trip.

So there you have it. Honestly, I’m not sure what this means for future posts on Sthapati. I will continue to share insight gained as I walk my path, and with credit being given where it is due, I’m likely to cite any current or past Sahaj Marg Masters – that’s the point of Sthapati, which is spelled out on the “Samyag Akhyate” page. Although, out of respect for Brother (and next guru) Kamlesh’s request, perhaps I’ll be less direct with this kind of material? I don’t know. Thoughts and suggestions are welcome!

Aum Shri Mahaganeshaya Namaha
Aum Shanti

Easy, Sleazy Slut

Often my department is the loudest block of cubicles on our floor. We’re a mixed group and sometimes get quite chatty. But today, another section was actually a bit louder as they were making lunch plans.

A remote employee was in the office and those who work with him on a regular basis were trying to organize a group lunch out. There’s another man in the group who is vegetarian. I happen to know this man and he’s not pushy about anything but sales. I know for a fact that he wouldn’t make an ordeal out of wanting not to eat meat, but would instead probably just order from the menu what he was comfortable with.

As I’m overhearing the conversation surrounding the lunch location, I hear a lady pipe up and reference this dude with, “Well he’s the picky eater!” as though it was a hassle for someone to be selective in their food choices.

I think this is another instance where, like the military general mentioned in a prior post, people aren’t aware of what they’re actually saying it when they say it. Like saying, “I could care less!” when you actually mean that you COULDN’T care less. In that instance, you’re literally and mistakenly saying the exact opposite of what you mean. As with the general, this lunchtime lady wasn’t aware of a difference existing between being picky and responsible.

Another interesting thing I noticed is that we’re expected to be a bit “picky” with things like our clothing, our cars, our education, our housing, and our sexual partners – to name only a few – and if someone slacks in those areas people usually have something to say, implying that pickiness is good. We’re supposed to have standards, after all. Anyone who isn’t picky to some degree about their clothing is labeled a slob. And anyone who isn’t picky about their sexual partners is labeled an easy, sleazy slut. Even fitness buffs who refuse to eat junk food in any form aren’t called picky – People might say instead things like, “Oh he doesn’t eat the good stuff!” or “He only eats healthy!” but whatever they might say, it’s not actually critical.

Of course, when it comes to food the aforementioned value of standards goes out the window. Anyone “picky” with what they eat or won’t eat where meat is concerned is somehow a pain in the ass. I think people are a pain in the ass when they order $30 of food in the drive thru, or when they ordered their Starbuck’s at 130 degrees and it’s only 125 degrees when they get it and complain, like they can tell a 5 degree difference. I can even see vegetarians being a pain in the ass if they insist on making a religious or political campaign at every meal and can’t be around others eating meat without contorting their faces in displeasure (judgment). But simply abstaining from foods not possible without a self-aware life form dying a fear-filled and sad death is not being a pain in the ass.

It’s being kind.

Aum Shri Mahaganeshaya Namaha
Aum Shanti

Not Fair

A week or so ago I published a post regarding some frustration surrounding my relationship with someone I had considered my Best. Shortly thereafter, in fact the next day, we had a nice long chat. The result of that chat amounts to two realizations: The first is that I should maybe give more effort at recognizing and acknowledging what progress he does make, however much or little that might be. And the second isn’t so much a realization as a clarification between us. In our discussion, I feel I made it clear that I cannot continue to see him as I have because it’s essentially unfair to him.

That realization, and using that realization to govern my thoughts and actions going forward, have meant some real change on my part. Everyone knows it’s total shit from a bull’s ass when someone breaks up with you and they’re like, “It’s not you, it’s me.” But this experience has shown me that there sometimes can be truth to that. From the most genuine place inside myself, I sincerely feel that it’s unfair of my friendship with this human to have expectations that he simply isn’t likely ever to live up to. The reasons why he won’t pertain to his personal development and are all entirely on him and completely his own responsibility – plain and simple. But from my side of the fence it’s important to recognize the lunacy that I might be carrying: Turkeys are not capable of long distance flight. It’s terribly unfair to fault a turkey for being a turkey and being unable to fly like sparrows. The reality of what a turkey is has to be met and accepted, for at least as long as it takes the turkey to evolve into something capable of flying longer distances. Right?

In a rather unexpected turn of events, it would appear that this lesson has somehow also landed in the thoughts of my Beloved.

A little back story: Our neighbor lady has recently swapped her male companions and the new guy is a “composer.” By “composer,” I mean anything but what you’re thinking. He’s not a composer. From my own experience, the best he could be considered would be a “mixer” and I wouldn’t be surprised if he fancies himself a DJ or something. He’s a younger male (maybe early 20s), he’s fond of dragging one of their kitchen chairs out front and reclining on it in a way that just looks like slouching – all while wearing only her sunglasses and some camo cargo pants. It’s very clear that, in addition to a legit composer, he also sees himself as some kind of Armani model. Priceless, to say the least.

My Beloved and I have discussed this young wannabe a number of times in the recent weeks since he moved in. My Beloved is actually quite affected as his favorite place to hang out within our home happens to be probably the closest point between our property and the neighbors’ which means that my Beloved is subjected to the “composing process” more directly than I.

Last Friday, as we were deciding where to grab dinner he says, “Josh, we have to move.” We discussed what that would mean and require and then almost immediately reached out to a realtor friend of ours. I can tell you all about the difficulty in getting your home “staged” for showing while still living there – a process made even more difficult by a third adult who’s in the mix because he has nowhere else to go, yet who doesn’t seem to understand the urgency of trying to sell one’s home at the end of the prime home selling seasons.

I’m getting kinda wordy and side tracked here…. What I’ve been meaning to get at is that during our discussion, my Beloved actually said to me with his mouth something to the effect of, “I don’t think it’s fair to our neighbor that we can’t tolerate his work with music.” And the result of this view is that we’re now planning to sell and move as soon as we’re able.

The situation with the neighbor and the one with the person I’ve referenced before as my Best are obviously very different. However, I’m now entertaining questions in my mind about when it’s most appropriate to “lovingly step back” or to “lovingly disconnect” (as a Christian friend of mine is so fond of saying) for the sake of allowing others to be who they are for as long as they insist on not evolving and when it’s not appropriate. In the past, this wouldn’t be something I’d do. I’m confrontational and as directly honest as I’m able to be in any situation.

If how and where you’re walking ends up with my toes stepped on, do I let you know as much in no uncertain terms and expect you to become more aware of your own walking or do I simply move to stand in a different place?

Aum Shri Mahaganeshaya Namaha
Aum Shanti

Is breá liom tú

Earlier yesterday I noticed a Facebook notification that a friend’s birthday had arrived. Along with that notification I noticed it was my mother’s sister’s birthday as well. I clicked on the notification where it allowed me to wish my aunt a happy birthday and typed, “Happy Birthday! I love you!” before clicking on the same place in the friend’s notification to wish him a happy birthday, too.

Then something happened that I didn’t realize until hours later when that friend “liked” my birthday wish to him. I am still not sure if it’s because Facebook auto-populated my greeting to him or if it’s because I was still half asleep when doing both greetings, but my greeting to this friend ended up identical to that of my aunt’s, “Happy Birthday! I love you!”

Almost instantly I could feel my face flush with redness. How could I have made such a goof!?!? This friend isn’t even someone I am close to. I haven’t seen him in person in most of a decade and when I did last see him we weren’t really more than friendly coworkers. Had there been chance for more to develop it would have flopped with 110% certainty: He’s a smoker. He’s a recreational drug user. He’s not taken care of himself AT ALL. And he has some other health concerns I’ll not mention here exactly. In so many ways he is someone who could never be a spouse to me, or even much of a good friend really and he’s someone I NEVER see or hang out with… And yet there I was saying, “I love you!” to him. Ridiculous.

Ridiculous? Why? I spent about 10 minutes in intense debate with myself: How did I let that slip? Should I edit my post to his page to remove the last three words? Is he laughing at me? Would others see this and wonder?

I remember when, once upon a time, I listened to “regular” radio in my car instead of satellite radio and usually had it tuned to a specific local station where the main host is a guy named “Dave Smiley.” The Smiley Morning Show had no shortage of antics and many were amusing. I recall that whenever they took a call from listeners, which could be hilarious or quite serious, Dave would always close the call by saying, “Ok. Thanks for the call. I love you.” He didn’t do it as a joke or facetiously or anything. He didn’t make a big deal out of it, but just said it. A time or two I recall some of the cohosts expressing how they are uncomfortable saying that to just anyone. And I recall thinking how mean that they wouldn’t want everyone they encounter to feel loved by at least one person. And yet there I was practically embarrassed that I “accidentally” said it to someone AND was concerned what they and others might think.

How ridiculous! Saying, “I love you” a hundred times a day to perfect strangers doesn’t make it meaningless or cheapened. Your actions surrounding those words are what do that. And I’m increasingly convinced, in today’s world, that those who reserve this phrase for a guarded and select few are as exclusive as the most hateful Abrahamic extremists because that reservation is a form of personal withdrawal that only serves to create more division between a group called, “Those I Love” and another one called, “Those I Do Not Love.” Whenever people have thought they knew the mind of God so well as to discern which other people would fall into one group or the other, then we’ve seen the foulest hatred and murder. This is not to say that if you don’t “love” someone then you automatically “hate” them. But please think about what it actually means to have those two groups in your life.

I’d like to say that my face went red because subconsciously I was ashamed of having divided my world into those I love and those I do not. That would be giving myself far too much credit, though. My face went red not only because I do have those two groups within my personal existence, but also because I was shamefully ignorant of this and what it actually means or implies.

Dear reader, regardless of your personal background – whether, your guidance tells you to “love your neighbor as your self” or to experience the same Atman within every living thing, or whatever – do try to love all, and do not, like me, be caught embarrassed by it.

Aum Shri Mahaganeshaya Namaha
Aum Shanti

Sting, Stang, Stung?

Just about the meanest person I know is my best friend. He has his moments of kindness and thoughtfulness, but the mode he operates in the majority of the time is neither of those and his level of self-endearment and selfishness is second only to that of my (terrible, horrible, no good, very bad) birth mother.

It’s not very often that I allow my day to be ruined almost as soon as my feet touch the floor – but today that’s just about exactly what happened. I had an exam for school scheduled for mid-morning, and I awoke early enough to enjoy an enormous volume of coffee, piddle around online briefly AND review some of the test material before I would need to hit the shower and head out. This happened to coincide with his getting out of bed, dressing for work, and leaving for work. As he neared my home’s door to exit he let me know that he would actually be gone only a short while because he was going in for just one client and would then be returning home to then head back out to go to a wedding.

“A wedding?” I asked. “Whose wedding?” “Shawn’s,” he said. “You’re such an asshole” I responded. “What? Why?” “Because you just are” I finally said, shaking my head as I walked away from him. He muttered something like, “ok” and then left. For the next 30 minutes, at least, I was pretty upset. At this point you may be wondering why my best friend going to a wedding would be upsetting. Allow me to provide some background.

He and I have known each other since before we either could drive. In fact, LONG before we either could drive. At this point in our lives, I’m almost proud to say, we’ve known each other longer than we haven’t. For me that means a lot because in any human’s lifespan the number of people who fit that description is usually a very small number – which to me makes these folks real gems. And during this expansive period of human time he and I have seen and been through many dark and wondrous things. On more than one occasion I’ve bailed him out of nastiness that was his own creation. Currently, he’s paying (just about THE lowest) rent to stay in what used to be my home’s temple room – which I was glad to help him with, but which was no easy thing for me to allow.

“Yeah, yeah” you say. What’s that got to do with the price of eggs? Well, for starters I have this apparently ridiculous habit of expecting in return, that which I have given. It works like this: I give you respect, and in return you give the same to me. I give you dedication, and in return you give the same to me. That kinda thing, y’know? This ties directly back to my Best because I’ve been just about the only person in his life who has treated him as I do and helped him as I have. That’s not tooting my own horn, please understand. And on top of all that, I don’t actually – really – expect to receive back all that I have given because I know that he’s not capable.

Still, something in me (ego, perhaps?) thinks it should be natural for a grown person to extend to others the same courtesies they have been afforded. The wedding he planned to attend today was that of a hair client of his, who also works at the gym where my Best works. They’ve known each other well enough to be “friends” for maybe 18 months. And even if it’s twice that long, it still doesn’t compare with the nearly 20 years he and I have been close – in neither duration nor quality of relationship. So many times I’ve asked him to take a day off work to do something together. In virtually every single instance he’s refused flat-out and almost immediately – citing reasons like his boss is a Nazi and wont let him take time off, or there’s not enough time for him to submit the PTO request (even when this was more month in advance!). And yet, to take time off to attend someone’s wedding is no problem.

I’ve asked my Beloved about all of this. He happens to know my Best quite well. His response was that my Best is immature, self-centered, and immensely self-serving and that it should be no wonder that he behaves in the way that he does. I agree, and it makes me feel silly for kind of ignoring the truth about who my Best is. My Beloved has suggested that I tell the Best exactly how I feel about all of this – which is typical for me. But something about these things lately (there’s this and a few other things that have been building up) is keeping me from doing that. Instead, I’ve fond it more manageable to hold my tongue around him and even be a little cold. The Best has remarked once or twice this week that I’ve been “hateful” lately, but as far as I can guess I’m doing him a favor by holding my tongue. People don’t usually enjoy being told about themselves, and those who know me in person can probably attest that if there’s anyone who’ll tell people about themselves, it’s me.

Perhaps going forward I’ll be anyone’s Best, but will refuse having Bests myself until I can do so without certain hopes. I apologize that this post seems to be as much rant as anything, and I’m not entirely certain how much of it ties together well or if I’ve communicated the real point I meant to. At any rate, you can’t get blood from a turnip and I really need to stop trying.

Aum Shri Mahaganeshaya Namaha
Aum Shanti

The Important One

A Sahaj Marg book I finished a while ago, like many other of the Marg’s books, has me really pondering some things. I’ve been planning to write a post about the unity of Truth and how it is indivisible and had kept putting it off. Based on reading of late, I kinda feel like this might be that post but I’m still yet unsure.

Let’s see where this goes.

So, within the Sahaj Marg the focus is absolutely on spirituality and not religion. In fact, religion has been referred to as a form of kindergarten which is eventually (when the individual is ready) surpassed, transcended, and left behind. Naturally, abhyasis are encouraged to transcend that component of human existence as soon as he or she is able. It’s because of this that Sahaj Marg doesn’t endorse any particular form of God or murti or mantras, yantras or tantras, etc… Depending on who you speak to within the Sahaj Marg there is assigned more or less value on these things, but the Goal is understood to be far beyond and infinitely more subtle than any component of religion can actually offer.

I think one critique Chariji offers of the Hindu religion (which, btw, he is clear about thinking is the most sublime of humanity’s many paths.) is its depiction of Truth, or rather its multitudinous depictions. Our Vedas are clear in the popular mahavakyam, “Ekam sat – vipraha bahudha vadanti,” but I think in the hands of humans this often becomes a trap of sorts. Instead of focusing on the “Ekam” we focus on the “vipraha bahudha vadanti.” Yeah, sure – we use this to validate the assertion that all paths are valid and contain the same Truth. But even then, the emphasis placed on the One Truth is weak and we still find ourselves having to make a strong effort to see past external differences to find that One. The attention is always given to the “various ways” in which Truth is experienced and expressed. This can be understood to be the foundation of religion, and if not, then certainly the skin it develops.

Deepak Chopra has said that all religion really is, is the attempt at replicating one person’s experience of That. I experience Yoga, I tell you the path I took and possibly even recommend it, and then you attempt to recreate that experience yourself. Voila: The Religion (of Yoga).

Speaking of religion, Yoga was likely never intended to be a religion. Well, at least not a religion that belonged to more than the soul practicing it. Yoga was around long before religion was and that’s a very powerful and indicative piece of knowledge. Truth is one – yoga is one. And those who experience it, experience and name it variously. Ekam Sat, vipraha bahudha vadanti. No where in that mahavakyam do we read, “Truth is one and groups of people experience it collectively.” The minute you have groups experiencing collectively, or trying to, you have religion. You have separation.

If one group says, “We experience Truth like this” and another says, “We experience Truth like that” you can assume they’re speaking of the same Truth – after all if Truth is one, then those experiencing it must be experiencing the Same. But you can also know that something not quite true is being said. A more accurate thing for them to say would be, “We try to experience Truth together in this way.” But even then they’re missing the mark: They are seeking the same Truth, perhaps in the same way, but so long as the individuals within that group have unique karmas and samskaras, etc… you can be sure the experiences will be equally unique – not the same.

Just some food for thought on your Thursday. I’ll close with a quite from the well-known Dr. Vamadeva David Frawley, “The Hindu mind does not seek to impose itself upon people from the outside through force or persuasion. It is not interested in a mere change of names, labels, titles or beliefs. It looks to restoring our linkage with the higher consciousness behind the world, whatever name or form we might want to approach it through. The Hindu mind’s wish is that we reconnect with our true Self and Being that transcends all outer appearances and religious divisions and that we honor all the various expressions that Self takes, which can never be reduced to one religion, philosophy, language or culture.”

Aum Shri Mahaganeshaya Namaha
Aum Shanti

Automatic Heaven

I came across an article posted to Facebook this early afternoon that made me gag. The article, which can be found here, details briefly an incident where a snipit of conversation between two cricket players was caught.

In the conversation one player, who is a Muslim, is telling the other player, who is a Buddhist, that anyone who converts to Islam automatically is allowed into Heaven. Automatically. This kind of pisses me off.

For starters, I’m pretty sure that’s not what the Koran actually teaches. I might be wrong, but I think that’s oversimplifying the doctrines of that religion and I feel like more credit should be given to the path itself. Some years ago Islam was the only religion I studied (this lasted for over a year) and during that time I learned many dark-n-wondrous things about Islam that many others might not know. It’s been a while, but I don’t recall anything so flat or sweeping.

The second thing that struck me is that it appears to somehow be okay for this Muslim man that someone would join his religion JUST for the prize in the box. How cheap is that? And I’m wondering what kind of person he thinks he’s attracting by discounting his own dharma in that way? I would assume an offer as simple and cheap as the one he’s making to this Buddhist would only really be attractive to someone so lazy in their own religious / spiritual life that avoiding Hell is their only real concern. There was no mention of “Islam will make you a better human” or anything like that. Just “join the club, and get the prize.” Pathetic, and frankly dangerous. I think it follows that if someone is lazy enough in their own effort or their own understanding and joins because it means “automatic heaven,” then my guess is that this same person is probably going to make a fool of himself at some point – inviting this kind of fool into one’s “religious club” seems to put the club at risk of looking stupid when this new (selfish and lazy) person inevitably shows his arse. Why would anyone care to risk that – especially when considering a religion like Islam, which is unfortunately already suspect in so many regards?

Thirdly, the offer as it was made implies that the Muslim not only understands very little about his own dharma but also the dharmas of non-Abrahamic believers. If you come from an understanding that Heaven isn’t the final stopping place, then what value is automatic admission through the pearly gates going to hold? Probably, temporary value at best. So to offer heaven to someone who sees it as a pit stop more than anything else seems about the same as making a bid deal out of offering a rented video to someone. They understand that they cannot keep the video, so what exactly is the favor being done here?

The last thing that bugged me about this is what was said to the Buddhist when he apparently refused the heavenly offer. He was met with a response like, “Be prepared for fire, then.” (The actual response may have been differently worded, but that’s pretty much what was said to him. I don’t have the article opened right now.) If one’s offer in conversion was truly as sincere as I’m sure this Muslim man would have everyone believe, then why was the reaction to the answer he received from the Buddhist, “Fine then, but you’re gonna be fucked after you die”? If that response is any indication of the personal development Islam is capable of, I’d say the Buddhist is better off staying with his current dharma. Sadly, I know similar behavior to be true of Christians, also. I know this because once upon a time I was guilty of nearly identical behavior.

The biggest question of all that this brought to my mind is: Where are the Hindus that do this? Where are the Buddhist attempting compulsory conversion of non-Buddhists to Buddhism?

Can anyone point me to resources that illustrate this behavior among Hindus and Buddhists?

Aum Mahaganeshaya Namaha
Aum Shanti

WWYD

The other day, on Facebook, I posted a snipit from a quote of one of the Sahaj Marg’s masters. By far, the responses I received were disappointingly typical. I was discussing this, just a little, with a friend who commented and whose comment was about the only one that could be taken in the way I feared people would respond as well as the way I’d hoped some might.

His comment was to the effect of, “This goes against what many gurus say.” One implication of something like that being said (and in fact, probably the most common implication) is that if the majority of other gurus disagree, then the teaching in question must probably be incorrect on one or many levels. As if to going with the crowd is invariably a good thing. We seem to be okay with having our own teachers – so long as they’re saying pretty much the same thing.

Frankly, it makes me more than a little sad. People are so…. typical. Like, Kali Yuga typical. And I think even if a person becomes aware of this within himself, and can say to himself that he’s just being egoic and shouldn’t think in a certain way that is obviously flavored by that ego, then there’s a great chance he’ll still act or behave or believe in a manner than is still far too flavored by the ego. We seem to carry certain …. expectations, or something…. and if those aren’t met then it’s no good. It’s like learning something about someone and seeing them differently as a result. Same person before as after, and yet you don’t see them the same. How accepting were you before?

I think more recently this unfortunate truth has been apparent when it comes to gurus. I mean, it’s been true for a long time but has stood out to me a bit more lately.

Certainly there are traits and whatnot that any “true” or “real” guru will possess. And regardless of one’s chosen path in spirituality, one can find valued texts that will spell out as clearly as possible what that devotee should look for when accepting a teacher.

But what if a teacher possess all of the things one seeks in a teacher, and a few things one wouldn’t expect? My guess is that the potential devotee would be far too busy judging the teacher and would be more than willing, on a subconscious level if nothing else, to throw the baby out with the bathwater, so to speak. Because that’s what makes people comfortable.

Let me ask you: Say you were examining a guru and you were impressed enough to keep examining. The teachings seemed in line with what you value. All the things you’d expect in a guru were found in this guru. And then he or she lit a cigarette.

Seriously. What if Mata Amrtanandamayi Ma (The Hugging Saint) took a break from hugging devotees to grab a quick smoke? What if Paramahansa Yogananda taught Kriya Yoga and also enjoyed vodka from time to time? What if Swami Prabhupad’s “Hare Krishnas” held their so-called Love Feasts and served fried chicken with the palak paneer?

Game over? What would you do?

Aum Shri Mahaganeshaya Namaha
Aum Shanti