Christian Mystics

[Jaco]

ok, if we are mystics as souls in bodies as the quote says, then why a website, why classes and training, why 'real' teacher and master teachers.

looks good though, well done website. but, i'd imagine Jesus with his stick running them out of the temple court yard for selling doves and such. i mean how much does 'peace' cost?

to be true to one's self is to listen and learn from your self. this obstructive obsession of attainment from external sources is just that, an obsession from compulsions affixed with an external identity.

On a side note, I just noticed something hilarious. Jesus himself was a travelling preacher. So ironically, listening to his teachings doesn't make sense, because he is an external identity to those who listen to him.
Forget about Jesus (and of course about the other teachers), just listen to yourself - kill all the Buddas and Jesuses.

[star]

ok, if we are mystics as souls in bodies as the quote says, then why a website, why classes and training, why 'real' teacher and master teachers.

looks good though, well done website. but, i'd imagine Jesus with his stick running them out of the temple court yard for selling doves and such. i mean how much does 'peace' cost?

to be true to one's self is to listen and learn from your self. this obstructive obsession of attainment from external sources is just that, an obsession from compulsions affixed with an external identity.

On a side note, I just noticed something hilarious. Jesus himself was a travelling preacher. So ironically, listening to his teachings doesn't make sense, because he is an external identity to those who listen to him.
Forget about Jesus (and of course about the other teachers), just listen to yourself - kill all the Buddas and Jesuses.

IMO the meaning of "if you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him" is just a way of removing the tendency towards dependancy on others. There really is nothing wrong with having a guide or teacher who has traveled the path before. It can speed up your progress immensly.
Why else does Robert Bruce and so many others hold seminars and workshops? To teach and guide, while making a dime. (Money isn't as evil as people make it out to be)
Of course if you don't do the ground work yourself you'll end up going no where, just remember that the heart chakra is a chakra that functions through others. As opposed to isolation.

[Jaco]

IMO the meaning of "if you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him" is just a way of removing the tendency towards dependancy on others. There really is nothing wrong with having a guide or teacher who has traveled the path before. It can speed up your progress immensly.
Why else does Robert Bruce and so many others hold seminars and workshops? To teach and guide, while making a dime. (Money isn't as evil as people make it out to be)
Of course if you don't do the ground work yourself you'll end up going no where, just remember that the heart chakra is a chakra that functions through others. As opposed to isolation.

I think I agree with you.

In my post I was trying to show that when one says that the answers can only be found within and that outside teachings are meaningless, one has to have no outside master and follow no outside teachings, because if one does then he/she contradicts him/herself.

[ButterflyWoman]

Forget about Jesus (and of course about the other teachers), just listen to yourself - kill all the Buddas and Jesuses.

While I understand what you're getting at, nobody lives in a vacuum. I read the writings of mystics, saints, and teachers because I want their perspective on things spiritual, to compare to my own experiences, point of view, etc.

Going inside myself is all well and good (and I do), but that doesn't mean I can't have an interest in the words of those who have taken the spiritual path in the past. There's a great deal of wisdom and enlightenment to be found in the writings of the great teachers. Sometimes, just hearing/reading the words of some great saint can spark a whole new awakening, great or small.

There's absolutely no need to throw out the baby with the bathwater.

[CFTraveler]

The manifested baby with the unmanifest bathwater? No, I've got it backwards- the primordial baby with the collective bathwater- or something like that. Tee hee- excuse me, I'm being silly.

[Jaco]

While I understand what you're getting at, nobody lives in a vacuum. I read the writings of mystics, saints, and teachers because I want their perspective on things spiritual, to compare to my own experiences, point of view, etc.

Just to clarify. I don't think that receiving guidance from more experienced practitioners is meaningless. The point of view I was presenting isn't my own. I was just explaining that someone who tells that only personal experiences are important and outside teachings and experiences are meaningless, by the definition can not follow any masters and teachers.

[CFTraveler]

But there is a difference between studying and following. I can read all the mystics in the world (and enjoy reading about what they have experienced) without 'following' them. The theories or interpretations of what they see and experience is not necessarily how I would- so there is a difference between saying that the personal experience is more important than saying 'you shouldn't' do this or that.

If you look at history you get a few mystics who had this or that experience, were able to achieve things that were miraculous in the context of their own place in history- and then what you see next is others who didn't have the experiences, who tried to use the movements these mystics started and created systems that developed into social controls (religions) based on what the mystics experienced, but based on the followers' own interpretations. And you know how that goes.

So yes, it's ok to tell you to seek your own experience, and it's also ok to study what other mystics saw or experienced, and even to read how they reconciled their experiences with what their beliefs of the time is.
If you're a mystic, and you have experiences, chances are you'll do the same.

What's not cool is telling people that they shouldn't strive to find their own personal connection with God- because that is what most seekers are trying to do anyway- or getting lawyerly about what others are reading and what they're not.

I'm just sayin'
MO, of course.

[Jaco]

What's not cool is telling people that they shouldn't strive to find their own personal connection with God- because that is what most seekers are trying to do anyway- or getting lawyerly about what others are reading and what they're not.

But of course. People have the right to find their own personal god, centre, source, mystical magical experiences and so on.
And about telling others what they should and should not do, well, people do have the right to state their opinions and say why they disagree with each other. It is good if the conversation is civilized and backed up by valid arguments, but that is not always the case. And even if it is not civilized and not backed by solid arguments, people still have the right to state their opinions anyway. The line is drawn when one party is trying to impose their way of life on others.
We can accept other peoples opinions and we can ridicule or ignore them. But when one places him or herself as an authority in a given field, he/she needs to show on what basis he/she is an authority. But the rant above is a bit off the topic.

My one and only point that I was trying to express in my first post is a logical contradiction of one’s statement: If a person says that teachings and experiences of other people are meaningless and the only way to find true answers is from within, then by definition he or she should not follow the teachings of other people or give them any validity. So, if he or she says that the only valid answers can come from within but accepts Buddha or Jesus or whoever/whatever as a teacher, then he or she contradicts him/herself, because by the definition the outside teachings should not be valid to him/her, including Buddha’s or Jesus teachings.
That is it. I just wanted to point out a contradiction in ones reasoning.

[CFTraveler]

I wasn't picking on you specifically- I was pointing out that it can be equally valid to go within if you're led to or go without if that's where you are. Both groups (mystics and religionists) have a drive and a need, and the problem is when either of them disparage or try to take away either group's rights to look for their own spirituality in their own way. Unfortunately, the drive to control what others do or think is not limited to one group.

[Tom]

Why can't they just be mystics and abandon the Christianity thing?