Eckart Tolle - master of the park bench

[reddust]

The thing Tenzin Wangyal was connecting with Tolle's idea of the pain body is this:
http://rywiki.tsadra.org/index.php/sdug ... i_phung_po

If you go here: http://www.calameo.com/books/000039257ea5fbb9806b9, hit 'read the publication'
and search for 'Tolle' you can read the section where he discusses this.

Does that translate as the suffering/clinging aggregates? Sunday is my day to goof off and this is a blast, thank you very much

EDIT: I found duHkha-skandha
IW, RY mass of suffering

[dzogchungpa]

I think it may actually be an epithet for samsara, but maybe it has a different usage in Bon. Perhaps some expert can explain?

[reddust]

I think it may actually be an epithet for samsara, but maybe it has a different usage in Bon. Perhaps some expert can explain?

When you read the book you linked to it speaks of a couple arguing and their bodies where in pain. Dang, now I really want to know!

This really ties into the connection of our consumer society and selling us products and ideologies that are sold through fear, craving, aversion, and ignorance that was talked about early on in this thread. Freud's nephew Edward Bernays made a living doing this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bernays

[padma norbu]

This thread has turned out to be more interesting than I thought it would. Thanks for the links!

[padma norbu]

I think it may actually be an epithet for samsara, but maybe it has a different usage in Bon. Perhaps some expert can explain?

When you read the book you linked to it speaks of a couple arguing and their bodies where in pain. Dang, now I really want to know!

This really ties into the connection of our consumer society and selling us products and ideologies that are sold through fear, craving, aversion, and ignorance that was talked about early on in this thread. Freud's nephew Edward Bernays made a living doing this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bernays

All the handlers behind child stars who market underage sex to children do this, too. I can't imagine being such an unconscionable creep that I would intentionally take a young kid like Britney Spears or someone and tell them what to wear and sing in order to market directly to kid's insecurities, selling children garbage ideas and exploiting a child star in the process. You know they have to be thinking "glad it's not me!" while they make their millions of their little puppets. By their 20s, these kids are all messed up in the head from people hating on them and calling them ugly, slut, etc... which would never happen if they weren't being told to dress in dental floss and sing about sex all the time.

[reddust]

All the handlers behind child stars who market underage sex to children do this, too. I can't imagine being such an unconscionable creep that I would intentionally take a young kid like Britney Spears or someone and tell them what to wear and sing in order to market directly to kid's insecurities, selling children garbage ideas and exploiting a child star in the process. You know they have to be thinking "glad it's not me!" while they make their millions of their little puppets. By their 20s, these kids are all messed up in the head from people hating on them and calling them ugly, slut, etc... which would never happen if they weren't being told to dress in dental floss and sing about sex all the time.

I had to fight this conditioning with my kids, not only my kids but me too! Media really manipulates our kids, those child stars are out there to sell products, I really feel sorry for them. Body image and beauty, I wanted to ban TV from the house at that time, but my ex husband wouldn't let me. I was fighting a huge force and it really ticked me off!

[padma norbu]

Yup, my mom and I used to have some big fights about my heavy metal and punk music. For some reason I was convinced they weren't influencing me. What a joke! Profiting off little kids like that is ultra scummy: "Hmmm, how do I get to mommy and daddy's wallet? Through the kids! The totally inexperienced, easy-to-manipulate kids!"

[duffster1]

I feel Eckhart Tolle is quite genuine in his level of realization and i certainly don't think he is a fraud and just out to get people's money.He apparently sat on a park bench for years in bliss and didn't teach for a long time.He was also teaching a long time before Opera got her claws into him(maybe he is just not selective,he will give the teachings to anyone as we all deserve it)I really am puzzled why some people get so uptight about this man,he is not calling his teachings Buddhism and i personally think he is on another level to most of the other new age guru's out there.If one went into his teachings a small bit one would clearly see he doesn't teach this positive thinking etc that some are accusing him off.

Its not ideal to throw accusation's out there without looking at what he is saying but maybe that's to hard for some,sorry.

[Lindama]

[Johnny Dangerous]

I have mixed feelings on him.

Mainly in the sense that he presents his "realizations" as something that were just his personal experience, which coincidentally is basically Advaita and Mahayana Buddhism, with some Christian mysticism and Kabbalah sounding stuff thrown in for good measure. It gives the appearance of taking credit for a bunch of things that (quite obviously) deeply influenced what he wrote..whether or not he gives credit to those things later. He kind of gives the impression that what he is teaching is just stuff he figured out himself.

From what i've read/seen, what he is saying itself is pretty good, but i'm not sure I believe he has any realization, and I think his ideas about what constitute realization come off as somewhat muddled...I also definitely think his image and what not is a marketing thing, and I find the story of his "transformation" rings a bit suspicious to me personally.

As to being on Oprah, so have TNH and HHDL..so it's not as if association with Oprah or lack of it has any bearing on legitimacy.

[padma norbu]

My feelings echo Adamantine's and Johnny Dangerously's. Like Tolle and many others on these forums, I have a long history of exploring different religions. I have thrown most of that out for reasons of incompatibility with the dharma or unnecessary confusion that arises as a result of trying to compare different things. Since Tolle is not a Buddhist teacher and not specifically teaching Buddhism, I don't take him all that seriously. That is not to say he's a fraud or a fool or anything like that. I am open-minded and if someone relays a lot of interesting Buddhist things that are useful, then that is great. If he sprinkled a little Kabballah or Christian Mysticism into this video, I wouldn't have posted it. ...well, maybe I would have, depending on how much he sprinkled in. After all, Thich Nhat Hanh had a tendency at one point to talk about Christ and God a lot, Chagdud Tulku and a few others thought God was an okay term to utilize depending on who he was talking to. I try to stay away from that kind of thing myself because I have BIG problems with that little word, but all these teachers are undeniably great Buddhist teachers. But, I do make a conscientious effort not to post anything that will become a comparative religion discussion. Since what I saw here was basically a buddhist method being relayed, I saw no problem.

[duffster1]

I have mixed feelings on him.

Mainly in the sense that he presents his "realizations" as something that were just his personal experience, which coincidentally is basically Advaita and Mahayana Buddhism, with some Christian mysticism and Kabbalah sounding stuff thrown in for good measure. It gives the appearance of taking credit for a bunch of things that (quite obviously) deeply influenced what he wrote..whether or not he gives credit to those things later. He kind of gives the impression that what he is teaching is just stuff he figured out himself.

From what i've read/seen, what he is saying itself is pretty good, but i'm not sure I believe he has any realization, and I think his ideas about what constitute realization come off as somewhat muddled...I also definitely think his image and what not is a marketing thing, and I find the story of his "transformation" rings a bit suspicious to me personally.

As to being on Oprah, so have TNH and HHDL..so it's not as if association with Oprah or lack of it has any bearing on legitimacy.

Eckhart Tolle has stated(as far as i am aware) when he discovered his true nature he had no words to describe it until he started ready about spirituality so then he started to borrow terminology from various sources,the realization came first.That's why he quote's so many different sources believing that ultimately their is only one truth but many ways to get there,so i don't think he is trying to take credit for the terminology that he uses to express his teachings.

[Johnny Dangerous]

Eckhart Tolle has stated(as far as i am aware) when he discovered his true nature he had no words to describe it until he started ready about spirituality so then he started to borrow terminology from various sources,the realization came first.That's why he quote's so many different sources believing that ultimately their is only one truth but many ways to get there,so i don't think he is trying to take credit for the terminology that he uses to express his teachings.

Right, and my point is that I find his claim to have "discovered" the same thing as these traditions dubious, since he is utilizing their doctrines. So basically, he had some vague "realization", then he read a bunch of other stuff..and his teaching is basically from the stuff he read, not from his realization..which he admits he couldn't verbalize. So I would say he is crediting his "realization" as being what his teachings are from, when obviously this is not the case. I think this is why many people bristle at him, basically he is not giving credit where it's due. He's saying "yeah, all those teaching are great, and they basically say the same thing as My Awesome Teachings (TM)". In this regard, he is forwarding a kind of ego-based approach to spirituality, and in particular, appealing to westerners who have this sort of post modern distrust of tradition in general, and think they are smarter than pretty much any spiritual tradition.

So I think what he is saying is kind of positive (it's not his own anyway..basically by his own admission), especially for people who use Oprahs book club and whatnot to get some exposure to that kind of material is a good thing. Personally though, I think his back story is a bit more questionable, and he is very good self-marketer.

[padma norbu]

I don't know, he does seem very natural and convincing to me, actually, to some degree at least. Of course, a good conman would be just that (a good conman), but he strikes me a bit more authentic than quite a long list I could rattle off. The bit he said about having no thought and then just speaking spontaneously without effort was unique.

[duffster1]

Eckhart Tolle has stated(as far as i am aware) when he discovered his true nature he had no words to describe it until he started ready about spirituality so then he started to borrow terminology from various sources,the realization came first.That's why he quote's so many different sources believing that ultimately their is only one truth but many ways to get there,so i don't think he is trying to take credit for the terminology that he uses to express his teachings.

Right, and my point is that I find his claim to have "discovered" the same thing as these traditions dubious, since he is utilizing their doctrines. So basically, he had some vague "realization", then he read a bunch of other stuff..and his teaching is basically from the stuff he read, not from his realization..which he admits he couldn't verbalize. So I would say he is crediting his "realization" as being what his teachings are from, when obviously this is not the case. I think this is why many people bristle at him, basically he is not giving credit where it's due. He's saying "yeah, all those teaching are great, and they basically say the same thing as My Awesome Teachings (TM)". In this regard, he is forwarding a kind of ego-based approach to spirituality, and in particular, appealing to westerners who have this sort of post modern distrust of tradition in general, and think they are smarter than pretty much any spiritual tradition.

So I think what he is saying is kind of positive (it's not his own anyway..basically by his own admission), especially for people who use Oprahs book club and whatnot to get some exposure to that kind of material is a good thing. Personally though, I think his back story is a bit more questionable, and he is very good self-marketer.

In fairness i think his teaching comes from his realization more than the words he uses but i'm not here to convince anyone of anything.

[Johnny Dangerous]

I don't know, he does seem very natural and convincing to me, actually, to some degree at least. Of course, a good conman would be just that (a good conman), but he strikes me a bit more authentic than quite a long list I could rattle off. The bit he said about having no thought and then just speaking spontaneously without effort was unique.

Hmm, the skill of deeply communicating with people, we associate with high levels of realization, however, many people have this skill that are not only that way, but some are absolutely horrible people, who in turn convince others to do horrible things using this kind of skill. Not to say he is one of those people by any means..i'm just saying, having gifts like that does not say anything about the content necessarily, plenty of cosmic monsters, and saints out there who are natural and convincing.

From a Buddhist perspective, it's either skillful means or chicanery right? I don't have a verdict on him personally, but I will say again I do not like the way he glosses over crediting the traditions that obviously make up a bulk of his teachings, and crediting instead his non-verbalized realization as the source of what he's teaching, which from what i've read..sounds like the experience of many who discover spirituality in the midst of dark personal experience.

Perhaps a good question to ask, do you know anyone who has started a serious spiritual practice by reading Tolle, or was he a kind of springboard to something else? I.e. can what he is teaching stand on it's own?

In fairness i think his teaching comes from his realization more than the words he uses but i'm not here to convince anyone of anything.

What makes you think that? Surely it's smarter to simply evaluate his teachings on their own merits, isn't it?

[padma norbu]

I don't have a verdict on him personally, but I will say again I do not like the way he glosses over crediting the traditions that obviously make up a bulk of his teachings, and crediting instead his non-verbalized realization as the source of what he's teaching, which from what i've read..sounds like the experience of many who discover spirituality in the midst of dark personal experience.

What do you mean by "glosses over crediting the traditions that obviously make up a bulk of his teachings?" I don't know too much about him. I never took him very seriously at all because he was a popular New Age author being promoted by Oprah, but last year I picked up FOR FREE, as I said before, The Power of Now, and read about 50 pages or so while on vacation. I was surprised to see Dzogchen mentioned, as I said before. I have also heard him give credit to Buddhism. Apparently he also talks about Kabballah and stuff, so it seems like he is crediting the traditions he is taking from.

In watching the first video, it seems he is trying to convey a method of meditation (or non-meditation, actually!) directly without dogma. That doesn't strike me as a bad thing, really. It kind of reminds me of "pure dzogchen" like Namkhai Norbu teaches—OF COURSE Namkhai Norbu educates us all many times a year about the lineage of his tradition, etc., but he also frequently talks about dzogchen being not religion, not dogma, not limitation and deities as personifications and Buddha as your real nature which he teaches you how to recognize. In the video, it seems Tolle is using a method to recognize... well, something either zen-like or maybe dzogchen-like depending on who you are, I guess. I'm not saying he has the power to give direct introduction or anything, but I am saying I found myself very quickly in a state I've come to know quite well using Namkhai Norbu's methods and that is primarily why I shared the video: to see how other people experienced it. You know, I was kind of shocked. Wait a minute, does this guy actually know what he's doing? Does it work? The kid in the video seems to be having his mind a little blown the way he's giggling and stuff. I don't know...

[Johnny Dangerous]

I mean what it sounds like, he is setting himself up as a sort of "non tradition" guru, and saying that his realization is the same as those traditions...it's sort of underhandedly..spiritually imperialist you might say. Has he taken Dzogchen teaching, is he connected to any lineage or teachings of anything? It doesn't seem like it, it seems like he had his realization, then read some stuff and decided these people knew the same stuff he had already supposedly figured out.

I admit I have only read snippets and watched short videos, but this is the distinct impression I get, I could certainly be wrong and I will endeavor to read more of his stuff to whether i'm on the right track or not.

[duffster1]

Simply by listening and seeing that he speaks spontaneously and a lot of the time not using terminology from traditions.

[padma norbu]

I mean what it sounds like, he is setting himself up as a sort of "non tradition" guru, and saying that his realization is the same as those traditions...it's sort of underhandedly..spiritually imperialist you might say. Has he taken Dzogchen teaching, is he connected to any lineage or teachings of anything? It doesn't seem like it, it seems like he had his realization, then read some stuff and decided these people knew the same stuff he had already supposedly figured out.

I admit I have only read snippets and watched short videos, but this is the distinct impression I get, I could certainly be wrong and I will endeavor to read more of his stuff to whether i'm on the right track or not.

Well, like I said, I don't really know much about him. I know he mentioned dzogchen in that book and I think he claims to have spent some time in a buddhist monastery (not that this would mean anything). I will have to re-read and finish the book now and let you all know what I think.

However, if you compare what his instruction is in this video, it does sound remarkably like this, doesn't it?...

(from Naturally LIberating Whatever You Meet by Khenpo Gangshar. )

Keep your body straight, refrain from talking, open your mouth slightly and let the breath flow naturally.

Don't pursue the past and don't invite the future. Simply rest naturally in the naked ordinary mind of the immediate present, without trying to correct it or 'replace' it. If you rest like that, your mind-essence is clear and precise, awake and naked, without any concerns about thought or recollection, joy or pain. That is awareness (rigpa).

you can read more of this book here: http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f= ... ad#p205034