end_of_faith
Member
I realize that a new person, coming to view page 52 for the first time, would not necessarily know what to believe given the comments on this page. Certainly the comments condemning MasterPath feed upon the fears of new seekers. Consciously or unconsciously, the fear of being taken advantage of is strong, and is the main opposition to exploring the possibility that a spiritual teacher might be legitimate.
You *realize* what a new person may or may not (know to) believe? Really? Wow, does that type of omniscience qualify you to be called master? But hey, all kidding aside, why not just accept that people believe what they want to believe regardless of evidence supporting or condemning that belief. Ultimately, each of us must stand alone in our truth.
Negative criticism of MasterPath does not feed upon the fears of new seekers. It allows contrary viewpoints to co-exist in exploring the probability that a teacher claiming to be spiritually legitimate may not be so.
Wait, so Gary is smart enough to teach Karma, but doesn't believe in it himself? He's smart enough to know that false gurus will pay a heavy, heavy reckoning, but considers himself exempt from such rules? Even though every one of his lectures stresses the importance of treating others fairly and upholding the truth?
Plagiarizing the writings of other paths does not mean the author has realized the teaching. Regurgitating principles codified by other teachings does not mean realization of the consciousness. Familiarity with a word does not mean the utterance of it is a living testament of the spirit behind it. A change in consciousness (profound in the believers mind) is not conclusive evidence that the teacher attributed with effecting the change is a sat guru.
Karma is one of the most misunderstood spiritual concepts I have encountered.
Then why are you so concerned with what a new seeker may or may not believe given your deep and far-reaching understanding of karma?
...In my experience, karma does not have anything to do with morality. It is simply cause and effect. And, as spiritual students, it is knowable. The effects of our actions come back to us immediately. What would be the instructive value of Karma if it worked independently from us, and we had no idea what was going on? That's like hooking someone up to electrodes and shocking them randomly--there is no behavior you're trying to elicit. Karma doesn't work that way. It's intent is to give us exactly what we envision or try to create. The issue is, most of us are trying to create better physical conditions for ourselves, which is not a spiritual goal. It's not an un-spiritual goal; its purpose is to wake us up eventually to realize that's not really what we should be going for (if we are fortunate enough to find material things unfulfilling.)
It is entertaining to read your thoughts on karma, what it is, what it is not and how spirituality is defined according to your paradigm. You state: most of us are trying to create better physical conditions for ourselves, which is not a spiritual goal.
Your master envisioned flying to and from seminars in a private jet to create better physical conditions for [himself]. Based on your articulation of karma, is your masters goal (serving his personal comfort) spiritual? Or, through the lens of your spiritual paradigm is that a "guru perk" beyond the ken of our understanding? Or, perhaps your guru has been fortunate enough to find that material thing [an expensive & luxurious lifestyle perk] unfulfilling?
For me, teacher and master mean the same thing. People on this forum who don't like Gary are so sensitive about that word "master". I come from an eastern tradition, and the word master simply means teacher. Because pseudo gurus have done so much damage in the US, it has become a dirty word. Every single talk, Gary stresses that he's just an outer guide (he literally uses those words.) In most talks, he emphasizes that our own involvement is the key to our spiritual unfoldment, in conjunction with the help of the INNER master. Gary himself would say he's only pointing his finger at the moon, and to NOT worship him, the man. Every single talk he says this, but still people who have no idea keep picking and choosing whatever they want to misquote Gary.
Im not sensitive about the word master. There is great humor in meaninglessness. Ah, the eastern tradition bastardized by western men all claiming to be the master guru. Co-opting the honorific title of Sri or adding the ji to their names to be used as a mantra by devoted followers. Yes, they all share in the damage.
Lets see: Gary was a 12-year student with Eckankar before declaring his Godhood. From Eckankar alone we have Paul Twitchell, Darwin Gross, Harold Klemp, John Rogers, Michael Turner, Gary Olsen, plus others. Thats a whole lot of Saints, Masters, and Gurus the Lord done sent us common folks. Woo-hoo! And what have they really created and whom do they truly represent and what have they actually realized in consciousness?
A seeker should not be made to feel that doubt is opposition to knowing the spiritual within oneself how can doubt be opposition to the very thing it protects? Doubt is the guardian of wisdom.