Gangaji

Several days ago I went to a Gangaji satsang for the first time.  She's not the first advaita teacher I've gone to see - Adyashanti is another notable example - but I felt more “spiritual chemistry” with Gangaji than I have previously.  It may be that I respond differently to feminine energy, at least in terms of this kind of teaching, I don't know.  In any case I plan to see her again, and I've started reading her book The Diamond in Your Pocket.  I find her way of talking about these matters very direct and accessible, and in meeting with her (along with about 200 other people) I found her to be very grounded, embodied, and engaged with the problems of the world.

Has anyone else had experiences with Gangaji?

~~~

Gangaji website

Gangaji books

Gangaji meeting excerpts (transcripts)


~~~

“There is a great secret that beings throughout time have announced, the secret of an extraordinary treasure, the treasure of the nectar of eternal life. It is the nectar of pure beingness, recognizing itself as consciousness and overflowing in the love of that recognition.

Re: Gangaji

Hey Arthur,

I found Gangaji a few years ago while living in Colorado.  They used to air her satsangs on the community cable station.  I found her to be clear, soothing and loving. 

I also have the book you mentioned and have cracked it open a few times but not sat and read it through and through.

When I find a teacher that interests me, I usually go on line and research as much as I can.  She has some interesting 'story' running around currently involving her personal life. 

She hasn't been 'the one' for me (of course there hasn't been 'one' anyway) yet I find her words helpful at times.

I can imagine sitting 'with' her is vastly different than video or books.  Just as it would be with any other sage/guru.  (Amma comes to mind)

Re: Gangaji

Gina: She has some interesting 'story' running around currently involving her personal life. 

~~~

I assume you're referring to the scandal in which it was revealed, last October, that Gangaji's husband and partner Eli (who teaches with her) had a sexual relationship with a student for three years?  I only know a few details of that; there's some material here.  What an unusual occurrence, eh?  Although this time at least it wasn't the primary teacher herself, it was “sex scandal by proxy.”  It bothers me, but not enough in itself to put me off learning from her. 

Here's a few Youtube videos of Gangaji:

Gangaji [on Freedom] (2:01)

What's My Core Message? [www.gangaji.org] (9:41)

Gangaji - Spiritual Traps (9:03)

~~~

spiral out,
Arthur

Re: Gangaji

Cool…thanks for the links.
Doug

Re: Gangaji

Thanks Arthur,
I love her presence. Annie & I have sat & listened to her audios while 'working' at our computers.
She expresses the 'lineage' we are part of quite well.

I'll take this opportunity to mention one of the writings of Shankara, “Vivika Chudamani”…which means 'the Crest Jewel of Discrimination'. A wonderful treatise that deals primarily with what he considered the highest form of discrimination…between the relative & the absolute (what Ken refers to as the 'Two Truths' doctrine in Buddhism).

I think Gangaji spends much time around that general thread of 'ignorance'.
Very important IMHO.

Cheers,
Doug

Re: Gangaji

I'm never really entirely sure why you guys talk about these teachers the way you do.

For instance, the quote you gave, Art. it's the standard soul teaching, it's been said 10,000 times by 10,000 teachers, probably for 10,000 years (probably about 40,000), definitely for at least 6,000.

it's probably because I've been studying these kinds of teaching ideas for so long - i hear them repeated again, and my reaction is, “ho hum - same shit, different day”.

(yes, I know, this attitude of mine always pisses everybody off and is totally uncool, yada yada, I'm such as asshole yada yada.)

what interests me is what is unique in a persons teaching method and ideas, not what's the same as everthing else.

Because, the same old shit hasn't accomplished much in 10,000 years.

So, I'm curious, what's unique about this person's teaching?

Re: Gangaji

Hi Bill

I remember attending an elementary Buddhist class with my friend Sohan one time; afterward we had the following exchange:

Arthur: “This is pretty basic stuff; I've heard this so many times before.  I want to hear something new.”
Sohan: “So, you can do it then?”
Arthur: “Um, no.”
Sohan: <smirking> “Well, I guess you haven't learned it yet then, huh?”

I'm about 50 pages in to The Diamond in Your Pocket, and so far Gangaji hasn't said anything I haven't heard before; but something about her tone and the way she's putting things seems more accessible to me.  I sense this may not be the case for you; in that case, she may not be a teacher you're particularly interested in - and that's perfectly fine.

Something which has become more important to me over time is the idea of spiritual transmission; I do believe in some way we are all transmitting our states all the time - notice, for example, how you feel when you've been around an angry person for a while compared to how you are around a loving, peaceful person.  When I said in my initial post that I feel more spiritual chemistry with Gangaji than I have with other advaita teachers, I meant that I feel a potential connection with her, some quality of resonance which may go deeper (or may be a flash in the pan, a “false lead” - we'll see). 

As a result of this, I'm interested in reading more of her stuff - regardless of how many people have said it how many times; if it actually points to some deep truth, then I hope a lot more teachers will say it, in similar or different ways, so that more people will “get it,” will realize the same truth within themselves. 

Even more than reading her stuff, though, I'm interested in seeing her, hearing her, being in her presence.  Next time I hope I can screw my courage to the sticking place and go up to meet her on the stage, and talk to her one on one.  That's where the rubber really hits the road.

spiral out,
Arthur

Re: Gangaji

The following is from Excerpts from Meetings with Gangaji:

Nothing personal

Silver Bay, New York
Silent Retreat - September 20, 2005
……………………………………………………………………….

Questioner: Yesterday when you said, “Okay, find somebody next to you,” I thought, “Oh gosh, not that again.” But of course, it ended up being exactly the help I had asked for.

Gangaji: Yes.

Q: The question you asked was, “What is the danger of stopping your thoughts?” What I realized was that I couldn't stop them, but I could stop chasing them.

G: That's it.

Q: I have been chasing my thoughts and I am so exhausted. And I just saw that the danger was in the anger and the grief, which thoughts can kind of cover.

G: So you protect yourself by thinking. Yes, this is a common defense.

Q: So when it came up yesterday I realized, “Wow! No wonder I keep chasing my thoughts.” And then I started to wonder, “Am I willing to just stop?”

G: Are you?

Q: I have to be.

G: Good. And when you stop chasing thoughts, what is here?

G: Grief. Well, that is just right. So let this grief be here without any thought about the grief, or what caused it. Just grief, pure grief, pure energy: a form of shakti.

Q: It's like, “Let it just have me.”

G: And if it just has you?

Q: It is finished.

G: And what is here in its place?

Q: There is a kind of calm and a knowing that there is no safety.

G: And what happened to the anger? Is the grief under the anger or is the anger under the grief?

Q: I really don't know; it is all mixed up.

G: Then it really is just energy. It may be a very uncomfortable, crazy-feeling energy. But to experience it as that, without giving it a label, is to meet it. It is like waking up in a nightmare, and meeting the energy of it. The dream of it is gone. Maybe you can't even remember what the dream was, but just let the energy be here. It may have nothing to do with you.

Q: Wonderful! Oh, to truly feel that, to know that it doesn't have a thing to do with me!

G: Yes. Maybe it is coming to you for liberation, but it gets stuck because there is some identification with it. And that generates the thinking to avoid feeling it. This leads to the chasing.

Q: The chasing.

G: Chasing is….

Q: Running from…

G: Chasing and being chased. But you know…

Q: I think the anger is underneath the grief. Maybe that is what I am not finished with.

G: Good. That is telling the truth, so…

Q: Anger is not okay. Somehow grief is okay.

G: Grief is definitely more socially acceptable. So can you experience this rage? Let's don't call it anger; that's a little too nice. Rage is what a storm does. There is a raging energy. So without indulging it and without repressing it, just meet it. Let your consciousness fall into it.

Q: That is where the fear comes in. I want to stop this.

G: That is natural. So just meet the fear. What is that?

Q: It just went away.

G: Yes. It is liberated. So what is left? Is the rage there?

Q: No.

G: Just let it in. We are not trying to getting rid of it, you know. We know how horrible rage can be. We know how it can cause murder, and war, and violence when it is indulged. And we know that when it is repressed it causes a murder of your life force. This is an internal violence, a suppression of energy. Neither of those strategies works.

Q: I guess I just want to cut it off.

G: Yes. But it doesn't work because then you aren't alive. So the possibility is just to be here. It has come, so let it in rather than playing the game of chasing and being chased. It's an invitation. And it comes into your heart, because that is where satsang is offered. The mind will say, “No, I don't think that should come in. It isn't spiritual to be enraged.” Yes. That is when the mind is the leader. Well if you just drop that, and let the heart be the leader, then you welcome this emotion — this huge, negative force of the universe — into your heart. That is inquiry: emotional inquiry. Most people will stop with mental inquiry, because it is safer. What is that?

Q: I have been running from it all my life.

G: Well, this is a good place to stop. There is nothing wrong with rage. It is how it is used that makes it wrong. Rage is a natural phenomenon. I mean, look at the great teachers and leaders of our time. Look at Christ. Wasn't rage one of his strongest attributes? Look at God. Look at the goddess Kali. Look at this tree that was struck by lightning: it is still growing. There is a force, an aggressive force that is part of nature. It becomes rage when it is tortured, or indulged, or repressed, because it starts to build. But it is your life force. It is the force to live, the force to be. It is the force to say, “No, it's not right.” It is the force to speak when it's time to speak. It's not always pretty. Let's assume it is ugly. This ugly force gives rise to the beautiful flowers in the spring. Let the ugly in, the unspiritual…

Q: Yeah. Bingo.

G: Yes. So grief, fear, rage — let them in. The easiest, quickest way to let them in, is to not take them personally. It has nothing to do with you. Bring it all home, especially the parts of yourself that have been sent off to the concentration camps, the dungeons. Bring home the locked up ones, the ones in chains. Set them free. This can cause some shaking. It can trigger the tendency to chase your thoughts. But you can experience every aspect of yourself without taking it personally. That is the paradox. What is “personal” is still a thought, but when you stop, there is no personal. You discover just this energy.

Re: Gangaji

From the Ashland Daily Tidings:

Spiritual leaders' split leads to consolidation of groups

Marital problems between two leaders of prominent Ashland spiritual organizations have caused disturbances in both the Leela and Gangaji foundations.

Eli Jaxon-Bear, the former head of the Leela Foundation, publicly admitted to a three-year sexual relationship with one of his students, who later became a teacher in the organization.

Jaxon-Bear's affair during his marriage to Antionette Varner, also known as Gangaji, has affected her organization, as well.

“What was initially seen as a matter between two adults is now recognized to be a betrayal of the teacher/student relationship and an abuse of power,” said a letter posted on the Leela Foundation Web site. The letter was written by Barbara Denempont, the Executive Director of both foundations. “The repercussions of this betrayal are reverberating in ways that were never imagined, but are very painful.”

Jaxon-Bear stopped teaching and has resigned from the Leela Foundation. The Leela Foundation has merged with the Gangaji Foundation as a result of the affair, Varner said, though the letter on the Leela Foundation Web site does not mention this.

Varner added that she expects there will be more fall-out from the affair to come.

“People are shook up, as they would be in any relationship or family,” she said. “The staff is upset because they didn't know. It's been referred to as a family secret. I expect some people will leave and some people will stay.”

The Gangaji and Leela Foundations help people live more spiritually enriched lives, according their respective Web sites. Varner said, “Our mission is to support people in discovering peace in their heart.”

The two foundations moved to Ashland two years ago from Novato, Calif. They couple has taught together for 16 years and have been married for 30.

Jaxon-Bear admitted the affair to his wife in October of 2005. The two separated for three months before resolving their differences. In January of this year they not only mended their marriage but also merged the two organizations.

“We were duplicating functions,” Varner said about the organizations. About rekindling their marriage, she said, “He got that this was a betrayal of himself.”

Varner and Jaxon-Bear have decided to publicly address their marital issue within their own communities, and within the greater Ashland community too. On Wednesday night they held a public meeting at the Southern Oregon University Rogue River Room to address the public's concerns.

“A lot of people are upset with me,” Jaxon-Bear said. “I'm human. I make mistakes. This has been hugely humiliating, but I am willing to stand and face that.”

He said he hopes that people learn a lesson from his mistake, as he has.

“I feel like this itself is a teaching for people,” he said. “It's a great test for everyone to see what is true within their own hearts. My prayer is that people don't discard the teaching because of the flaws of the teacher.”

Jaxon-Bear said he met his mistress some three years ago during a book signing in Portland. She invited him over for dinner and, instead of accepting the invitation he gave her a scholarship to attend a conference, he said. Within a year their relationship had become romantic, and they had fallen in love with each other. Jaxon-Bear said he still loves the woman, but no longer in a sexual way. He would not say who the woman was.

“She is going through her process and doesn't want me to be a part of that,” he said.

Staff writer Robert Plain can be reached at 482-3456 x. 226 or bplain@dailytidings.com?subject=Spiritual%20leaders%27%20split%20leads%20to%20consolidation%20of%20groups">bplain@dailytidings.com

Re: Gangaji

I love the following piece from Gangaji, on the theme of what it means - and how important it is - to genuinely meet people.

from excerpts from meetings with Gangaji:

Endless meeting

San Rafael, California
Public Meeting - August 21, 2005
……………………………………………………………………….

I want to share with you something that happened the other day, because it exposes the obstacle to a true meeting. And it points to the necessity of a true meeting, to really receive what is being offered here. I was meeting with a small group of people, and I had never met this man before. As we spoke, he quoted Ramana and Papaji and Gangaji and another guru that he had followed, but it was clear that he had no satisfaction. I mean, he could quote Ramana much better than I could quote Ramana. He quoted me much better than I could, but what's the use if there is no satisfaction, and he was really frustrated. So I tried, unsuccessfully, to point out to him that it was not in the words. What Ramana was pointing to when he said, “be still” and what this man heard, were really different things. And he couldn't get that. He was looking at the words, “be still.” And he was unaware that he was interpreting those words through his own understanding, and that his interpretation was an obstacle to receiving what Ramana was transmitting to him in the phrase “be still.” So we went at it for a while, and we never met. It was an encounter but we didn't meet.

And that is often the way it is in our lives. We know when we have felt met, or recognized or seen or gotten, and we know when we haven't been met. And we know the frustration of our parents not meeting us, not seeing us, not getting us, or our lovers, or our friends, our government. We know that frustration and yet there is this place within each of us where we are stopping the meeting. The meeting is stopped when we believe that the words we hear (the way that we hear them), are what is being offered.

So I want to make it as clear as I can that what I am saying is not in the particular words I use. These words come from my vocabulary, from my life experience, from the way my brain is wired, from my interests. They somehow come together, metaphorically, to speak of what is true. But the transmission, which is alive and which your heart can resonate with, is really what this meeting is about. The words are not necessarily in the way of that unless you think you understand or if you think you know what it is about. What I am saying to you is: just forget all of that. What you think is irrelevant. Thought can be wondrous, beautiful, elevated, horrible, terrifying, true, a lie. But in this moment of actually meeting one another it is irrelevant. The transmission is heart to heart, and then mind to mind. The mind is a part of the transmission, but the mind has to follow the heart.

We have built our reality on thinking ourselves. And that is very powerful: I mean humans rule the earth. This is a huge part of our conditioning and it has to be recognized. This man I am referring to, refused to recognize it. He thought, he knew what “still” means: it means S-T-I-L-L. Period. End of conversation. And so that was the end of the conversation. The possibility we have here is for this to be the beginning of the conversation. What I want to say to you, very simply, is that the truth of you is already awake, is already free, is already pure, is already beautiful, whole, and in love with itself. And the only thing that keeps you from realizing this truth of yourself, really, fully, and completely — is the belief that what you think about yourself is real.

Regarding the truth of which you are, right now, thought will not help you. If you will give up searching for who you are in your thoughts; if you are willing to stop thinking yourself, stop planning yourself, stop remembering yourself, then in an instant, you meet yourself. Effortlessly. And the capacity for that meeting is what brings us together. We are all here to support one another in the deepest, truest meeting, so that each life here can be lived in the deepest, truest way: an unknown way, an unthought way, an unremembered way.

So as we engage in conversation, I invite those of you listening to the question or report to recognize that it is your own mind, your own heart, your own self. And then this meeting, which is a beginning, really has no end. The reverberations of what occurs here individually and collectively are endless. Because once there is true meeting, a recognition of what is true, what is real, who you are, who one another is, then there is choice about how to live one's life. There is responsibility in that all of a sudden you discover the capacity to respond, to be fresh and innocent and not know — to let the core of oneself direct your life.

Re: Gangaji

Cross-posted from Sacramento Zaadz Community:

Anybody interested in doing a satsang with Gangaji?  She's an advaita teacher I did a sitting with recently in Ashland, Oregon and I very much want to see her again.

On Sunday, February 10th at 5 P.M. she will be doing satsang in San Rafael, and on Friday, March 14th she will be doing satsang in Mill Valley; both are near the Bay Area, a couple of hours' drive from Sacramento.

Would anyone be interested in doing a road trip with me from Sacramento to either of these events?  (I don't drive, but I can share gas expenses.)  My wife Liz (who does drive and has a car) is interested in attending satsang with Gangaji; she definitely won't be able to do the February 10th date but she might be able to do the March 14th date.

cheers,
Arthur

Re: Gangaji

This excellent interview is from http://www.spiritofmaat.com/



Adams: Many people spend their lives trying to create security for themselves. They have all kinds of insurance plans and retirement plans. Their understanding of creating a secure life often keeps them locked into jobs that they don't like and marriages where there is no communication and little love. What are the consequences of this obsession with security and how does it prevent people from understanding their true nature and freedom?

Gangaji: It is all based on a lie. The lie is that you can control the events of life. September 11 penetrated that lie here in the United States. Now we have to see that no matter how much we try to be secure — even to the degree of selling our souls for security, living false, loveless lives for security — in an unexpected instant it can all disappear.

If we are willing to face this inherent danger of life and the inevitable, unknowable disappearance of the forms of life — in other words, if we are willing to face death — then we can live freely. Not stupidly — perhaps still with insurance plans, still with retirement plans — but unbound from the false hope that any plan can ever truly ultimately protect us.

Adams: How did you become interested in the true meaning of freedom? And what process did you go through in shifting to that in your own being?

Gangaji: I first dealt with the concept of freedom by being involved in the civil rights movement. I grew up in Mississippi and was conditioned to believe that black people were subhuman. It was not until I had professors who taught me otherwise that I had my first awakening to freedom.

When I was 19, I realized that my family had been lying to me about the innate inhumanity of black people — as past generations had lied to them through hundreds of years of self-perpetuating ignorance. I became involved in civil rights when I realized that black people were being denied the freedoms I had as a white person. That was in the mid-'sixties.

Then I recognized that our government was denying the Vietnamese people the power to choose their own destinies, and I became semi-active in the anti-Vietnam War protest. That was in the late '60s and early '70s. Later I was led into the women's movement, and I had to face how I myself was seen as a second-class citizen.

There was a lot of gratification in meeting these challenges. Still, there remained an underlying suffering that I couldn't put my finger on. I just felt myself to be unhappy, and I was searching for happiness. I can't say I was consciously searching for freedom — first, I simply recognized my continued unhappiness.

In the mid-'sixties I married and had a child, and soon I blamed the marriage for my dissatisfaction. In the early '70s, I left the marriage. I was living in San Francisco at the time, and began experimenting with LSD, mescaline, and different mind-expanding substances of the era. During this time something popped open, and I saw the bondage of my self-centered life. Now I see that this bondage was based on my identification with being a person, a woman, even a free woman — that was all part of the bondage. Although I had a good life, I was fighting myself.

Along with this, I did some meditation, and I was reading spiritual literature. I began to sense that real freedom was possible, and I could see that I was not free.

I began a spiritual search. Though I was still politically involved and participated in nonviolent protests, and even went to jail, I could also recognize in the political movement that we were bound by our self-righteousness. Now it was the PG&E representatives that were being made subhuman. This was sickening to me, and so I left the political movement. The struggle had become the idol.

I threw myself into spiritual searching through Tibetan Buddhism. Then I recognized that here, also, was that same kind of smugness: Those who were searching considered themselves better.

I was in a quandary. By this time I was married to my present husband, Eli, and I began to realize that Eli was devoted to serving the truth more than he was devoted to me. I was attracted to that in him, and I was attracted to that same devotion to truth in myself. I wanted truth even if the discovery led to the realization that freedom itself was an illusion. The truth was more important than myself, it was more important than happiness or even God.

My husband and I were involved in Tibetan Buddhism, then Zen Buddhism, and we also studied the Enneagram. We were interested in working on ourselves to get to our true nature; to see if freedom could be found.

We reached a point where we were stalled. We recognized that we had done as much as we could on our own. This was the mid-'80s — by that time we were living in Mill Valley, and I was practicing acupuncture. We had a materialistic lifestyle, and the more we had material freedom, the more we felt burdened.

In earlier years, I was married to a doctor, and felt that I had to give up that marraige. It had been a leap for me to give that up. I had “married well,” but I hadn't been happy because it was blocking my self-discovery. I'd had to take a leap and give up that secure life. Now, in the same way, Eli and I both realized that we had to give up the life we were living. It was eating us alive. We had a house, we both had practices — we were living a good life, but it was soul-draining.

We sold our house and moved to Hawaii. We wanted to open a spiritual center. We wanted groups that we could support and be supported by in discovering truth. We wanted to know truth, and what truth has to do with freedom.

We moved to Maui in 1989, and we both prayed for a teacher, since we had reached the end of what we could do on our own. We were unconsciously spinning in a mental wheel. We each asked for a teacher and synchronistically heard of a teacher in India, through one of his students. Eli went to India and met with Papaji, H.W.L. Poonja, in 1990. While there, Eli would write me letters, and these letters were filled with transcendence and joy. We felt this was the teacher we had been praying for.

In April, 1990, I met Papaji in India. I saw in his eyes something huge. He asked me what we wanted. I told him freedom. He laughed and laughed and said that we were in the right place. This was the defining moment of my life, as I recognized him as my true teacher and placed my spiritual questions in his hands. And Papaji asked me to stop my search for freedom.

It took me some time to understand what it meant to stop. I had feared that if I stopped my search I would lose what I had gained. I guess there was either a desperation, a maturity, or a grace so that I could finally just hear him. He asked me to stop following the stories of my mind; the thoughts and concepts of my mind. He was asking me not to follow any concepts of who I am as a person, as a woman, as a spiritual seeker, as someone who is free or not free: He invited me to just stop and to recognize the truth “I am.”

Adams: Can you describe this moment of stopping?

Gangaji: The power of stopping in the presence of someone who has stopped is indescribable. There's no concept of anything in that moment of stopping. Yet there's consciousness. Consciousness without concept is naturally and inherently free. In an instant, it is self-evident.

We are so trained to follow our concepts. We even believe that consciousness is a concept. When we talk of either being aware or not being aware, we are actually speaking of a particular state of awareness rather than of awareness itself.

In this timeless instant of recognizing that consciousness exists without any need of concept, identity with concept falls away. This is not the end, but this is the essential experience. What follows is the deepening recognition that consciousness is free regardless of concept. First, consciousness is free with no concept, then consciousness is always free regardless of concept or no concept. Nothing touches freedom. This is true freedom.

A concept of myself as a woman doesn't touch the truth of myself as consciousness.

Adams: Can this shift in recognizing the truth of our existence, of embracing our freedom, create great problems in terms of navigating the practical demands of daily life?

Gangaji: Let me answer that with a story from my own life.

When I was six years old, there was an internal event where I recognized that my body was empty. It was a terrifying experience. My mother took me to a doctor and I was given Phenobarbital for it!

Later, in meditation, that same experience arose. But because it arose this time during Buddhist meditation, there was a welcoming context that allowed me to sit with the terror.

So I would say, yes, terror is part of this essential shift, because the shift threatens the known structure of life. Terror can have many different disguises, including anger, numbness, and despair. This existential terror is like the gargoyle at the gate. It can keep you away from the revelation of the unknown.

The messages from great masters encourage us to meet the terror of dissolution of our individuality. The result is paradoxical: The individual is dissolved, and yet becomes more individuated. The uniqueness of consciousness is consciousness knowing itself through form — your particular form — and knowing itself as the animating force of everything.

There is a point where there is a willingness to give up individuality. In that willingness to surrender, what is actually released is conditioned individuality. What is revealed is consciousness that is unified with all consciousness. There has to be the willingness to lose everything, which is perceived to be the individual self. Terror comes with the fear of the loss. The reality of this loss is not what can be imagined. When the loss comes, it is only, really, good news. The individual identify is the husk that covers the sweet Truth of self-realization.

Part of the realization is that what remains of this body is conditioned. It is genetically, environmentally, and karmically bound. It may be relatively free, but it is subject to pain, disease, and death. Apparently free moments — like lovemaking, dancing, running — will all come to an end.

Adams: I know that you regularly meet with groups of prisoners; and about the transformation of John, one of the prisoners that you met with. I think it's a remarkable story, how John was sentenced to thirty years for robbing banks and organizing bombings and, three and a half years after meeting with you, was released on parole, and is now sharing his experiences of freedom in satsang [spiritual meetings].

Can you speak about the meetings that you have with prisoners and what they are learning about the nature of freedom.

Gangaji: I love going into prisons, because when we talk about freedom in prison, the men who have realized freedom know that freedom is not about the body. Out of three thousand men, fifteen or twenty will come to the meetings. As with our population at large, only a small segment of the prison population is interested in true freedom.

The freedom that prisoners realize in meeting their imprisonment reveals clearly to them why they failed in their search for freedom of the body. Many people are in prison for doing what they wanted to do regardless of the law. In recognizing the fallacy of that, and meeting the terror and despair of that, there's a discovery of what is truly, uncontrollably free. Their day-to-day lives are not free — yet freedom is there.

They realize that freedom is not about being inside or outside the prison, and they become great instructors for those who are relatively physically free. It is infantile to think, “If I could get to a point where I could do what I wanted to do then I could be free.” That is a lie. For those who are willing to meet the lie, and the disillusionment of the lie, what is always free, regardless of the limitations of the body, can be realized.

Adams: Why is it important to let go of our life story in order to access freedom?

Gangaji: In order to discover reality, there has to be a willingness to let go of the concept of reality. Reality can't even be compared to your concepts. Reality is beyond vast. Even to know another person, you have to meet that person in the Unknown. Whenever you really investigate something, you must let go of everything preconceived to meet what is really here.

Adams: Many people are talking about how we are losing freedoms in exchange for national security. Many of the freedoms guaranteed to us in the Declaration of Independence and in the Constitution are being canceled due to “national emergency.” What should we do to preserve these freedoms?

Gangaji: I don't have a formula. If you are drawn to protest and march and write letters, you should do that. And if you are drawn to be still, you should trust what you are called to do.

We live in an experimental state, and our freedoms are fragile. I happen to be the kind of person who reads the newspapers, but I wouldn't say that another person should do the same thing. If you are wired to speak, you should speak the truth. I never dreamed I would end up speaking to hundreds or thousands of people after I came back from being with my teacher in India. But I knew I had to share what I had realized.

Tell the truth about what you want. What is your life-form essentially about? It is deeper than a hunger for food and a procreative longing to couple. What is the longing of your heart and soul? Is it a longing for freedom and truth? If so, then you have an opportunity to surrender your concepts — even to surrender your concept of freedom and truth. There's no ABC formula. It's a sublime alchemy. It's all really about the individual mind trusting the deeper unity of consciousness, which is free already.

Adams: What causes suffering?

Gangaji: Suffering happens when your concepts of happiness, truth, and freedom are seen as separate from you. I'm not speaking of the compassionate suffering you experience when you see the suffering of the world. There is appropriate suffering, where you recognize the hurt that is part of life. Suffering may be a necessary part of life. There is also unnecessary suffering where one is wrapped up in replaying one's own dramas — that is neurosis.

Adams: Why do some people give up their freedom to teachers and gurus?

Gangaji: This question can be dangerous.

There has to be a recognition of a core of integrity. Papaji said, If God himself comes down and tells you that you are not free, then turn your back on God. You have to recognize the truth of who you are so that this truth cannot be coerced or manipulated. The danger is in the inflation of that — the inflation of ego. Megalomania is all around us. And there is the complementary, deflated belief that only the guru can give us freedom.

With both inflation and deflation, everything can be corrupted by the ego, either the student's ego or the teacher's. Ego is the concept of who we are. It's the ego, the concept of who we are, that keeps us from recognizing our true freedom.

Adams: Ramana said that self-realization can be found through self-inquiry — by asking the question, “Who am I?” Could you comment on the importance of asking this question?

Gangaji: If you just take a moment, this moment, to simply for an instant let everything go — the search, the denial, the rejection, the clinging — let them all go and just for a moment rest in the truth of your being, then you can know you are that! Whatever comes after that comes in the context of who you truly are.

An exquisite and important moment in a lifestream occurs when one recognizes the disgusting habits, the addictions, the horror, the violence, and the filth that one has called oneself. It is a great shock, a great shaking. And it is very important. Otherwise, the horror and filth just continue to accumulate in the name and the exultation of “me” and “my story.” This recognition is a spiritual shock, and there can be, and usually is, a great trembling — and then a desire to find what is true, what is real, what is pure, what is holy, what is free.

Gangaji is an American-born teacher and author. She travels the world speaking to thousands of people from all walks of life, responding to the deepest spiritual questions of our time. A teacher, wife, mother, and grandmother, she is the author of You Are THAT!, volumes I and II, Freedom and Resolve, and Who Are You? The Path of Self-Inquiry. In a time when so many are seeking new ways to discover peace through spirituality, Gangaji brings a timeless message in a contemporary form. Her words resonate with the most ancient of truths and confirm what we already know in the core of our being — true peace is already here. What we truly want is what we truly have. If you will tell the truth, you will see that the answer is alive in you. — Gangaji For information about meetings with Gangaji, retreats, books, and tapes, visit her website at gangaji.org or call the Gangaji Foundation at 800-267-9205. The above interview was conducted on April 13, 2002

Re: Gangaji

I just rediscovered a provocative blog entry by Robert Augustus Masters which I posted a while ago, The Non-Nonduality of Nondual Teachings, which I'm going to re-read carefully in the near future.  My current feeling is that Gangaji (and Adyashanti) are less likely to fall into the kind of traps he describes, and/or that using an integral framework can help one avoid such pitfalls. 

In this connection it is perhaps interesting to read the following partial transcript of a public meeting held by Gangaji on October 15, 2006, which would have been around the time that the affair between Gangaji's partner Eli and a female student (mentioned in previous posts) came to full public light:

~~~

Public Meeting - October 15, 2006

Ashland, Oregon
……………………………………………………………………….

Welcome.

However you come, welcome. I want to make really clear what's available in this meeting because it's possible some people may not want to stay when they realize what's available and you are free to leave, of course. Staying is not something you should do; it's just an invitation. It's always just been an invitation.

True meeting really has nothing to do with what you think about me or what I think about you. It's an invitation to experience what holds it all, including the thoughts.

I'm not here to tell you my version of this story and I'm not here to hear your version of the story. I respect that, and there are opportunities for that. I have a version and I have no problem with sharing it and there are particular places where that's appropriately shared, but what I've found in these meetings, what my teacher invited me to and invited me to invite you to, is that the story is just the catalyst, it's an event that starts something in action.

There is a possibility in truth, without denying the story, to not indulge the story, for this hour and a half. Not because you should or shouldn't, just an invitation, just an opportunity to see what is untouched by the story, your version or mine.

I have never encouraged you to repress emotions and I've never encouraged you to express emotions. I know and accept and experience that there is a time for repressing emotions and a time for expressing emotions. And I live my life like that. It's not a rule, it's not a formula but in our meetings if we are to really accept the invitation that my Teacher gave me, we have to be willing to directly experience, which is actually neither repressing nor expressing. And in order for that to happen, we have to stop telling the story. That's what stop means.

It doesn't mean the story is wrong or not legitimate, it just means by its nature, any particular story is limited. My version and your version may never match up. Then the question is, is that acceptable? Or does my version have to match with yours for you to be able to drop underneath the story? It's not for me to say. It's an invitation; it's not really even a teaching. It's an invitation I choose and it's an invitation I offer you.

My speaking to you, however, does come from my experience of this life, this me. Not necessarily what you think of me, high or low, but from the experience of this life. That's the only thing my teacher told me. He said you have to speak from your direct experience. Which meant not speaking of my story or of my feelings (both of which I have) but of my direct experience.

From that instruction from my teacher, I will tell you that in this firestorm that has been raging, I have experienced quite a lot. But for me the essential experience has been the challenge of peace and the nature of the human animal, hard wired for war.

I have experienced that an event can come in which blows apart an apparent peace. And there are many responses to that in my own mind and what I have observed in the minds of others. There can be an opening, equanimity, a raging, a deep grief, a sense of betrayal, a sense of “doesn't touch me”. And all of that is natural to the human animal and is not in conflict with peace. There has to be another step that's taken for war. Some story on top of even the original story. A story which has to do with ” What do I do about this, where do I go with this?” I've seen that in myself and I've recognized it in many people. And that's the way of the world, that's the way we are written.

But I've discovered for myself and I invite you into this discovery for yourself, not from me but for yourself, that in the core of the matter, in the core of any emotion, however horrendous, there is peace. Not in the story of the emotion, not in the defense of the emotion, or the justification of the emotion, but in the core.

And that is called direct experience, or death, because the death is the death of the story of me. Before justice is done, before I get what I need, before I know that you get what I want you to get. In this moment.

Just like this firestorm happened so unexpectedly, death happens very unexpectedly. Peace happens unexpectedly too. But you can actually chart war. You can see the steps. You know, in truth, I don't really have anything against a war. I know it's quite appropriate at times. I wouldn't always call myself a pacifist. But I do call myself someone who is interested in always going deeper than where I think I am.

This is my discovery and I offer it to you. It's not up to me whether you choose it or not. It's always, finally, only up to you. Like it or not, it's your responsibility.

So in that statement of intentionality, I really invite conversations. But if you feel you have to tell your story or correct my story, I don't invite that. You can do that later if you want to. We'll have another community meeting. There's nothing wrong with telling the story. I'll express my emotions to you and you can express your emotions to me. The mistakes you may think I've made, may not be the mistakes I think I've made. And the mistakes you may think you've made, may not be the mistakes I think you've made. But here we are. What now?

This is at the very least an invitation to be deeper here, no past, no future, here. Without denying the past, without denying the future, just here.

Thank you for this meeting.

AFTERWORD

I want to say to all concerned, that whenever you are feeling an extreme emotion, whether it be anger, hurt, despair, or even bliss and you act on that feeling, there can be no clarity. The feelings are here to be felt. True action or inaction has to come from what lies beneath all feelings.

Ultimately, each of us has a responsibility to ask ourselves, “What do I want?” If you want peace, it is here regardless of what you have done or what you are feeling. If you want war, you know how to go to war. We all do.

What do you want for yourself, for all victims and all victimizers? What do you want for all?

What a challenge. What an opportunity, right now.

I send you my love and support.

Gangaji

PS I also thank you for all the love and support that has come my way through letters and email and conversation.

Re: Gangaji

Bill said:

“I'm never really entirely sure why you guys talk about these teachers the way you do.
……………………..

what interests me is what is unique in a persons teaching method and ideas, not what's the same as everthing else.

Because, the same old shit hasn't accomplished much in 10,000 years.

So, I'm curious, what's unique about this person's teaching?”

…………………………

Re: Gangaji

A friend of mine was present when Gangaji first started speaking publicly on Maui. He brought back four audio cassette recordings and gave copies to me.

I listened to these four tapes over and over like someone obsessed with a lover. I listened and listened, until something inside was saturated and ready for more of the newer things she'd said.

One time, I wrote her a letter, saying that truly, the Ganga was now flowing in the West, just as Poonjaji had said it must. That Ganga was flowing in me and thankyouthankyouthankyou…please imagine that mantra going on forever.

I signed the letter saying something about recognizing a sister and my own future self in her. She promptly sent a handwritten correction back: Not your future self - this is what you are now… and invited me to write more, saying: I recognize my own heart.

She's been in many of my most important dreams since then. I love that woman, and to her speaking up I owe more than I can ever….

m

Re: Gangaji

Hey Mascha, that is so cool that you got to hear several cassettes of Gangaji's early days, great!  :)  It's also good to hear that you formed that strong a connection with her and her teaching; that's the kind of emotional link or resonance that can pull us forward, like a magnetic attraction pulling forth that which is in you, but which you initially see/feel in the other.

spirals,
Arthur

Re: Gangaji

Yeah, you got it, Arthur. And beautifully put, as usual.

(ah, sigh) now you get a click on that heart thingie down there on the right side of yer post.

:P

Re: Gangaji

Arthur – I enjoyed reading this thread very much.

I have not met with Gangaji, but like Mascha I have heard her on tape, (those were the days..). I was struck by her voice and I did experience 'something' simply by listening.

No, the content of what she says is not different to many other non-dual teachers. But I don't think this is the point – the point is, as you say, more about transmission; is what someone 'says'  or is their being shared in a way that the 'hearer' receives it as more than just 'information'? 

I've sat with Adyashanti and also with Isaac Shapiro (Adyashanti spent a lot of time with Gangaji, and Isaac with Papaji, Gangaji's teacher); I've spent some years with Paul Lowe who was one of Osho's 'main' teachers. 

None of these people say anything unique. I found Adyashanti quite wonderful, but without the presence of Paul or what I experienced listening to Gangaji. Same with Isaac.

I've watched Paul 'say' things to people that seemed from my point of view absolutely boringly normal and obvious, but clearly had a profound effect on the listener. I've also watched him say things that seemed shocking and surely would provoke huge resistance from the listener. Not so, not at all. I've experienced profound physical and psychological shifts from my interactions with Paul. He's not perfect, what he says is pretty basic.

You might like to read m. alan kaslev's short blog on his experience with Gangaji.

There is another piece that I thought of when I read this thread, which is an interview of David Deida by Vartman. Vartman is also from the Gangaji lineage,  (– the story goes that Deida told Vartman he wasn't enlightened so why was he giving satsang? And Vartman thought about that, and said, yes, you are right and so joined Deida, reverting his name to Sanford).

The interview is called Can You “Satsang” Your Way to Love?

In this interview, Vartman asks Deida: One thing that I am really curious about is why you spend so little time in your workshops explaining, reminding, or giving people the knowledge of the “native condition”, i.e. that they are pure Consciousness itself to start with and then to practice from there.

Deida's response is something I have 'seen' in students or devotees of non-dual teachers: “…because the explicit description of it, to those who are not ready, leads to the “satsang sickness” of premature identification with something that hasn't been actually realized, but is merely a thought, or, at best, a past experience that is now referred to in memory. I know many, many, many, more people whose practice has been retarded by their mental, or in-memory “understanding” of the native condition, compared to the number of people who are actually able to practice for real from this ground floor of love's no-dilemma…”

These days I'm moving away from 'teachers' in general – not that I don't love to watch, for example, Byron Katie or Eckhart Tolle in action (on YouTube…). When I do, I find myself feeling more at ease, lighter, more here.  But I feel the whole spiritual teacher thing is so hugely full of potential for transference that is not made visible or taken a look at,  (see Prof.Charley Tart on this); and can encourage behaviour of a kind that leads to the opposite of the exact thing the teachers are trying to share (non-separation).

And perhaps this is part of the 'journey'. I had to 'break' from Paul Lowe because I saw what was happening for me, I projected so much authority and father-figureness onto him, and his behaviour encouraged this. And I can see that this 'break' was an integral part of my own unfolding…. for which I am very grateful.

Regardless, I feel 'close' to Gangaji, and probably would go and see her talk if it was easy for me.

Sandra

Re: Gangaji

Sandra, that's a great post.  I may have more to say about it later.

I looked up a clip on YouTube from that great movie I (Heart) Huckabees…all this talk of “dropping the story” - doesn't it come down to asking: how am I not myself?

spiral out (of contracted over-identification with this particular bodymind),
Arthur

Re: Gangaji

Sandra, I've been looking into the material you linked to, and there's some great stuff there, especially in the David Deida interview.  I like the part you quoted,

“…because the explicit description of it, to those who are not ready, leads to the “satsang sickness” of premature identification with something that hasn't been actually realized, but is merely a thought, or, at best, a past experience that is now referred to in memory. I know many, many, many, more people whose practice has been retarded by their mental, or in-memory “understanding” of the native condition, compared to the number of people who are actually able to practice for real from this ground floor of love's no-dilemma…”

I do think that is a big pitfall, and I've seen some serious spiritual bypass happening in people and I'm wary of the possibility of falling into that trap myself.  I would hope that I'm evolved enough and have enough of a habit of self-work/improvement by now that I would avoid that trap or be able to crawl out of it, but I don't know.  If I did I hope that people I love and trust would call me on, and that I'd hear them.

Deida goes on to say,

“The Buddhists are very careful about this. You usually have to go through years of practice, hundreds and thousands of prostrations, mantras, offerings, and so forth to “purify” enough, before you are given “pointing out” instructions so that you then simply meditate (and do everything) as an expression of the native condition. And even that is considered the beginning stages of the Dzogchen, Mahamudra, and Ati Yoga levels of Vajrayana Buddhism.”

Perhaps I  would be better off if I spent years at that kind of discipline, but that has always been challenging for me and I just don't see it happening.  Meanwhile there are all these advaita people standing around offering pointing out instructions…  So far Gangaji is the only one that has made me feel unsettled - hmm, not quite true, I did speak to Neelam in Vancouver and felt a little unnerved by the experience (mostly because of what I experienced as my own projections coming up, recognized as such in realtime).  But I've sometimes felt unsettled just from watching Gangaji video clips.  I feel drawn to explore that further, as well as feeling a contradictory impulse to avoid such exploration - both of which seem like sound motivations for further exploration…

Deida again: ”I'm not basing my methods in Buddhism, but I certainly can understand their point. The “laziness” you have mentioned in “satsang” folks is, I believe, often a direct result of “settling for” a thin or in-memory version of the truth of no-dilemma, or tender okay-ness, or the non-need to change anything, or the perfection of consciousness, etc. I'm not apt to contribute to this error, not because I've got some strategy of teaching, but just because I deal spontaneously with what is brought to me, and what most people bring to me is not a genuine readiness to make non-lazy use of the recognition of the native condition.”

I have sensed this laziness in satsang, as well as feeling that tendency in myself.  Although on the other hand it seems like mulling over these concerns may be a  bullshit avoidance mechanism in itself - just another excuse to avoid “taking the plunge” into that kind of awareness.  And then I feel impatient with myself, “why don't I just get on with it.”  Because it also seems that until I'm seriously aquainted with, or  grounded in, some deep, genuine spiritual truth (which I don't believe is currently the case) then I'm just hanging out browsing magazines in spirituality's waiting room, wasting time.

Grrr.

spiral out,
Arthur

Re: Gangaji

Arthur –

on the other hand it seems like mulling over these concerns may be a  bullshit avoidance mechanism in itself - just another excuse to avoid “taking the plunge” into that kind of awareness.  And then I feel impatient with myself, “why don't I just get on with it.”  Because it also seems that until I'm seriously aquainted with, or  grounded in, some deep, genuine spiritual truth (which I don't believe is currently the case) then I'm just hanging out browsing magazines in spirituality's waiting room, wasting time.

I suspect this is why I tend to do 'drive by' postings on these kind of discussions – at some point I feel talking 'about it' unsatisfying - a bit like browsing magazines as you so well describe. And, I *have* also gotten a lot out of reading words – I remember m alan Kaslev talking about something that does seem to come through some people's writing.

I'm wondering if you have a specific question here, I think your post below does… I have a glitch in my interface where if I click on 'show all posts in this thread' I get an empty box. So I'll get to that in a minute.

I liked this: If I did I hope that people I love and trust would call me on, and that I'd hear them.

The 'work' (path/approach whatever you want to call it) that I did/do is very much about comitting to 'sharing'  - i.e.: “I'm up for feedback, and I'm also up to share what I *really* think/feel in any given situation, as responsibly as I can” - i.e. supporting connections between people which encourage as much transparency, honesty, vulnerability and openness as possible.

Perhaps I  would be better off if I spent years at that kind of discipline, but that has always been challenging for me and I just don't see it happening.

Well, did it 'do' anything for the people who spent years?  We don't really know this. I do believe in discipline, but towards an end (ie enlightenment), ?? no. I believe in it because I am an artist, and it is in the daily practise that the 'art' arises and fulfills me.

And this whole 'path' thing isn't clear. If I'm speaking about art ( writing in my case) - there is a both/and – the hours put into 'practice' seem to result in 'better art' *and* in a deeper appreciation of the process in and of itself, without regard to outcome.

My own teacher, like so many others, said, “nothing works,” and yet he did a lot of extreme spiritual experimentation and discipline type approaches for many years – he never said he was enlightened, but most of the more 'realised' people I have met ( Vartmann, Paul Lowe, Adyashanti etc) seem to have done rather a lot.

I suspect it is a both/and situation - one that most minds have difficulty in holding. ie. there is no cause and effect *and* there is a place where there is.

mostly because of what I experienced as my own projections coming up, recognized as such in realtime).  But I've sometimes felt unsettled just from watching Gangaji video clips.  I feel drawn to explore that further, as well as feeling a contradictory impulse to avoid such exploration - both of which seem like sound motivations for further exploration…

I'd definitely say yes to this, from my experience with teachers. Being in the presence of my teacher was an instant way to see / experience all my stuff. I couldn't get away from it. Horribly uncomfortable a lot of the time, but hugely valuable ( for me, at least). Doesn't have to be 'a teacher' - I think any 'triggering' experience is worth taking a look at (I don't mean being ridiculous and standing in the middle of a traffic jam etc ). Every time I visit my mother I get to see how I'm getting along with 'my stuff'!

And then I feel impatient with myself, “why don't I just get on with it.” 

Why don't you?

What would 'it' be?

Because it also seems that until I'm seriously aquainted with, or  grounded in, some deep, genuine spiritual truth

This to me sounds like avoidance – the mind coming up with reasons that are based on some future event, which simply take you away from what is happening now. This 'now' is, to me, the only deep genuine spiritual truth.

Love,
Sandra

Re: Gangaji

Sandra: These days I'm moving away from 'teachers' in general…I feel the whole spiritual teacher thing is so hugely full of potential for transference that is not made visible or taken a look at,  (see Prof.Charley Tart on this); and can encourage behaviour of a kind that leads to the opposite of the exact thing the teachers are trying to share (non-separation).

And perhaps this is part of the 'journey'. I had to 'break' from Paul Lowe because I saw what was happening for me, I projected so much authority and father-figureness onto him, and his behaviour encouraged this. And I can see that this 'break' was an integral part of my own unfolding…. for which I am very grateful.

~~~

Do you see yourself going back to teachers in the future at some point? 

The Charles Tart video was good - I enjoy reading/watching/listening to him; he has a very practical and grounded approach.  Transference and countertransference are problematic for sure.  On the other hand there is a lot of potential growth there.  I've got some degree of transference going on with Gangaji at present, and precisely because of that, I sense the potential for her to teach me something at a deeper-than-cognitive level. 

Both positive and negative projections are coming up for me.  Getting stuck in the projections seems to be the real problem, hence I feel I would best proceed by being aware of them, working with and through them, ultimately letting them go (or withdrawing the projections back into myself).  Does that make sense?

Challenging issues, fraught with danger - a.k.a. juicy and exciting.  :)

With this kind of transmission, you need to surrender to what the teacher is reflecting back to you (your true nature, or some aspect thereof), without confusing that with the actual bodymind doing the mirroring - or at least, without staying stuck in that confusion.  Do you agree? 

spiral out,
Arthur

Re: Gangaji

The Gift of Retreat: filled with privilege (Gangaji transcript)

Re: Gangaji

Arthur: Do you see yourself going back to teachers in the future at some point?

Spiritual teachers, I don't know. I'd certainly go see Gangaji if it were 'easy', and Thich Naht Hanh, and Byron Katie, Eckhart Tolle, and I adore David Deida, and I'd see my old teacher too, if he had an 'open evening' here or something like that.  I like these people, or I'm interested in them.

But to pursue a teaching? To do what I did?

My time with Paul was about 10 years, which meant one or two intensive groups a year (anything from one week to 2 months long), and in the final year of my 'break' with him I was on 'the team' which organised his several groups in Europe/US, meaning I was in every group he led, and also in his presence a lot of the time outside of the groups.  I also lived on his property for some months in Australia, when he was there. That year I also did the Deida teacher training intensive and a Satori process with Clare Soloway ( highly recommended, and bloody hell). That was it for me, I had enough. The Satori process - or Clare in particular - helped me see that it was time to do my own thing.

Now, I'm 'dedicated' to my work. I think this is what happened for me – I finally 'got' what I'd been avoiding: myself. Doing what I wanted to do. “Just getting on with it”.

And, this 'dedication', this personal surrender, if you will, took some time, it wasn't an instant thing.

Oh, I forgot one rather large matter. For about 10 years I was ill. Similar kind of thing to what Ken Wilber has. This is not completely over, but more or less. It probably began before I started my spiritual searching, but intensified after that final year with Paul - and got acute for lengthy periods of time after that.  My body and the sensations I experienced have been, and still are, one of my biggest 'teachers'. I can't exactly 'break' from my body, so I had no choice but to be 'with' what was going on.  I learned that there is always, no matter what is going on,  no matter how extreme the pain etc; there is always a place where everything and I mean everything is fine. Perhaps I could not have come to this without the help of the other 'work' I did, I don't know.

On the other hand there is a lot of potential growth there.  I've got some degree of transference going on with Gangaji at present, and precisely because of that, I sense the potential for her to teach me something at a deeper-than-cognitive level. 

I'd say yes to this. Go for it. Do anything that supports this deeper-than-cognitive level. Not that I'm against cognition, but the people who have the most difficulty 'being' also seem to be the ones who are the most intelligent – perhaps in the end, this intelligence is a great blessing - and it often crystalises ihto a form of defense (in my experience, both with spiritual seekers and with writers… and I include myself in each category).

Getting stuck in the projections seems to be the real problem, hence I feel I would best proceed by being aware of them, working with and through them, ultimately letting them go (or withdrawing the projections back into myself).  Does that make sense?

Well again it sounds like that active mind… it's not a problem now, so…. I'd say it was a fear of yours, and this in itself is probably connected to something deeper,  which you may only touch on if you let yourself  'get stuck'. Does it really matter if you get stuck?  I mean *really* matter? Go get stuck. Feel what it feels like…  come back and tell us!

And what is the likelihood of getting stuck since you are able to articulate the possibility so intelligently? Personally I doubt it would be an issue for you. More an issue would be holding back from something because of 'reasons' your mind gives you ( whatever this 'something'  is from spending time with Gangaji or growing potatoes - whatever gives you juice… what would you do if you knew you were going to die in  6 months time? Go do it). 

Stay connected to people who you trust for their ability to point out your blind spots.. and if you don't, that's okay too…

Taking a leap here, hope it lands ok.

Love,
Sandra

Re: Gangaji

Great replies, Sandra.  I'll be mulling over what you said.  I'll probably have something to say in response at some point - actually I still have more to say in response to your post where you were quoting Deida.  :)

Tonight I found an audio clip (in Gangaji's audio page) of her reading the following beautiful poem by Rumi:

How does a part of the world leave the world?
How does wetness leave water?
Don't try to put out fire by throwing on more fire!
Don't wash a wound with blood.

No matter how fast you run, your shadow keeps up.
Sometimes it's in front!
Only full overhead sun diminishes your shadow.
But that shadow has been serving you.
What hurts you, blesses you. Darkness is your candle.
Your boundaries are your quest.

I could explain this, but it will break the glass cover on your heart,
and there's no fixing that.
You must have shadow and light source both.

Listen, and lay your head under the tree of awe.
When from that tree feathers and wings sprout on you, be quieter than a dove.
Don't even open your mouth for even a coo.

~~~

Re: Gangaji

I'm still working on the Deida interview that Sandra linked to, Can You “Satsang” Your Way to Love? - which I highly recommend reading through carefully and pondering at length.

One thing that has bothered me about the satsang scene, which is well addressed in that interview, is the claim that there is nothing to be done, there is no practice, when clearly there is practice going on.

~

So it's absolutely simple, what I have to say to you…simply stop looking for what you want…I've blessedly travelled to Australia to challenge you [laughs] in that direction - that directionless direction. It's so simple that it has to be said over and over, because it just slips right by the mind; and if it's said over and over and in enough ways, and then not said - boom - it can just be revealed, not as something new, but as something absolutely fresh. - Gangaji, ”Simply Stop Looking”

~

To keep returning, to listen to Gangaji (or whoever), until BOOM, you get it - that's clearly a practice.  (Then there's the whole question of whether you can hold on to it, keep living from that place, to bring it fully into your life - does that not take a kind of practice?)

Here's some of what Deida has to say about that (bold emphasis added):

~~~

Maharshi spoke of inquiry and devotion as two types of practices, although modern “satsang” teachers for some reason tend to deny the need for practice based on recognizing that nothing needs to change for everything to be perfect as it is. Everything is perfect as it is. Nothing has ever happened. God or Truth or Consciousness or the Unborn is always already the case. And something seems to be happening. This seeming happening is definitely developing in a direction, or an evolution toward greater wholeness, integrity, and love, and different people represent different degrees of this evolution. Some people are murderers and some are saints, and, yes, all are perfect and are only “seemings” sourced in and made of the unborn, but there is still an apparent evolutionary momentum in the realm of this appearance.
 
So, the art is to recognize the perfection of things as they are, or to relax as the unborn that you and all are, while simultaneously practicing (via whole-bodied, every dimension, participation in) the art of the evolutionary process that appears whenever things appear. This evolution doesn't obviously occur in deep sleep, but it does in dreams and the waking state, and the fullness of resting as that which is always already the case (as Adi Da would say) while sleeping, dreaming, and waking, and artfully participating in the evolution of whatever appears (without losing the realization of always present okay-ness) is what it means to really practice.
 
That is, you practice in the midst of your karmas, in the midst of the momentum of seeming things, resting as the unborn (which simply means heart-recognizing what is the truth now with no change at all, while also artfully aligning or infusing or “transparentizing” the karmic manifestation with the unborn's native and effortless intelligence of being). [see Blue Truth]
 
…

“Satsang” as many teachers do it today, engenders (hopefully) the recognition or heart realization of, and relaxation as, the truth that consciousness/love is now and always already the case, and you need do nothing but surrender, relax, or effortlessly die to the untrue. And yet “satsang” often sets up a situation of formal practice (“satsang” itself) which is based on the karmic momentum of people getting their asses into the “satsang” hall, while denying that any practice is useful and asserting that practice or the intention to practice (which of course is the same intention that creates the situation of people sitting in a “satsang” hall) only strengthens or refines the ego (which poor practice, ungrounded in and as the unborn, actually does, whether in the “satsang” hall or in one of my workshops), and then people go home to their relationships and children and jobs and society or wherever their karmas and habit patterns dictate, and for the most part, they don't know how to practice in those situations like they might in the “satsang” hall. They lose the depth of present recognition of, or relaxation as “what is,” but have a memory of the heart-simplicity of being what is. So they return to the “satsang” hall… And so on.
 
Seeking is seeking, recognizing is recognizing (death, or love, or surrender, or feeling/being the okay-ness of everything as it is), and participating in the realms of appearances artfully as the “coming through” force of the unborn love that gives birth to, and is the very nature of, appearances, is yet another thing. Many people recognize the truth, and then fail to utterly surrender their lives to be lived by and as the truth of love; that is, their recognition is or was real, but their practice is or was weak in the midst of their karmas (even though those karmas are rendered utterly transparent or “unreal” or non-existent in any moment of genuine recognition and relaxation as the truth).
 
Anyway, the whole point of this for you is to practice relaxing open as love in the midst of wondering if you are doing it right. Wondering if you are doing it right may or may not change, but if you recognize and relax as the only One who is in the midst of your self-concern, then even through your karmic momentum the tangible “force” of love, consciousness, and heart integrity will infuse whatever seems to be happening, for as long as it seems to be happening, even though that very relaxation as Who is or What is carries with it the deep open bliss that nothing is happening or ever happens.
  
Perfection (now) and true practice (now) are one, seeming as two only in the mind of time.
  
(And, of course, this addresses only the masculine flavor of practice…. [for masculine spiritual practice see The Way of the Superior Man for feminine spiritual practice see Dear Lover])

- David Deida, Can You “Satsang” Your Way to Love? (bold emphasis added)

~~~

The most important part of the above is, “'satsang' often sets up a situation of formal practice ('satsang' itself) which is based on the karmic momentum of people getting their asses into the 'satsang' hall, while denying that any practice is useful and asserting that practice or the intention to practice (which of course is the same intention that creates the situation of people sitting in a 'satsang' hall) only strengthens or refines the ego…then people go home to their relationships and children and jobs and society or wherever their karmas and habit patterns dictate, and for the most part, they don't know how to practice in those situations like they might in the 'satsang' hall. They lose the depth of present recognition of, or relaxation as 'what is,' but have a memory of the heart-simplicity of being what is. So they return to the 'satsang' hall… And so on.”

Comments?

spiral out,
Arthur

Re: Gangaji

Thank you for your post Sandra. I got a lot out of this.
Eddie

Re: Gangaji

The Blessing of One Another - Gangaji transcript

I have great gratitude that you have appeared in my consciousness, and that you have invited me into your consciousness; and inviting me into your consciousness you invite my life's experience into your consciousness - as I invite yours into mine. And then we have a possibility of a deepening, broadening, unexpected sources of gratitude. The very fact that we can meet here like this, and speak to each other and receive the strength of each heart in this room, each mind in this room - this is astounding! And then to realize it doesn't end when this meeting ends, that there is a meeting that is so profound and so deep that it really doesn't even matter if we never see each other again, that we are in each other's consciousness; that consciousness itself is fluid and open - and by consciousness I mean heart consciousness, mind consciousness, even body consciousness.

It's like what's been fragmented comes back together. And we become whole with one another. We find our wholeness individually, and are complete in that wholeness. And then the mystery of more completion to what is already complete. [laughs] More satisfaction with what's already fulfilled. This is the great benefit of the play of one another, of the appearance of each another, of the differences in each other, different circumstances. The changes in form, changing relationships, comings and goings; the sadness in losing, the joy in gaining - all of it, the full and whole plate of being a human being, awake to itself as being a human being.

So I really value these meetings immensely, and your time that you take in coming here. And I do take you into my consciousness, and I am knocking on the door of your heart and mind consciousness, saying “let me in.” There's some place we go together that's beyond what any of us can know alone - even though to go there we have to know it first fully alone.

from http://www.gangaji.org/satsang/library/listening.asp

~~~

Re: Gangaji

Sitting Down With : Gangaji

By Julie Deife

Gangaji, an American born teacher and author residing in Ashland, Oregon, has traveled the globe since 1990, speaking with spiritual seekers from all walks of life. Through her Prison Project, public meetings, books, video and audio tapes her message reaches thousands. On a recent visit to Los Angeles she shared her thoughts with Julie Deife and then again following the tsunami.

Julie: Is there anything from your childhood that points to what you’re doing today?

Gangaji: I had some interesting experiences as a child, some kind of out-of-body experiences, but I don’t know if they were anxiety attacks or spiritual experiences. Who can say? I didn’t have an abusive childhood, but I wasn’t a happy child.
Oh, I did fall in love with Jesus at a particular time. I was absolutely in love with Christ. Just overflowing in this passion and love and it freaked my whole family out.

Julie: Why?

Gangaji: Because it was too much. Too messy. You’re supposed to be a Christian, but not like that. So I suppressed it. I believe that that was really the seed of a neurosis—suppressing that love and trying to control love and make it look a way that’s acceptable.
I met Papaji, who was raised a Hindu but didn’t teach Hinduism. Through meeting Papaji and being willing to die to all experiences, amazingly I could experience my initial love for Christ. It was a wonderful homecoming.

Julie: You’re a little like a missionary, it seems.

Gangaji: I hope not like a missionary. I think I may seem like one of those evangelists. This is what my parents were really afraid I would be when I was falling in love with Christ—one of these women who came through town and set up a tent.
But I’m not a missionary really because I’m only interested in speaking to people who are drawn in some way, or have reached some point in their lives where they are disillusioned either with success or with failure, and realize that something remains untouched. So that’s my mission, really, not to convert anybody, because I’m not interested in people becoming what I am or becoming something.

Julie: And, from what I can see, there’s no technique.

Gangaji: There’s no technique. It’s really the willingness to stop the technique for a moment at least. You can’t practice to be who you are.

Julie: What was your initial response to the tsunami?

Gangaji: Probably the universal, initial response: shock. Out of the blue, a human catastrophe, sadness, grief and recognition of the present moment.
Julie: And then?

Gangaji: That we really have no idea when death will come, or how it will come. How that fact alone is a wake up call to really examine what is important in ones life. The avoidance of death is what we spend most of our lives thinking about. That ultimate reality has to be met face on fully.

Julie: Why did the tsunami happen?

Gangaji: I don’t want to spiritualize it, because it’s really horrible; we don’t need to have a spiritual explanation, because that is a way of avoiding just being with it.
More important than the explanation, is what’s the response, and how deep can your response go? To spiritualize it, in terms of really meeting ones death and waking up, is a distraction.
It’s a way the earth has recycled its crust, and in that region it will actually become more fertile than it was before. Tsunami is not a new phenomenon. It’s part of the way the earth moves and breathes, so it’s humbling that way. Like looking up at the stars, whoa!, you get a perspective.
Yet, we have to cry for something like that and ask what does it mean to me in my life, just like 9/11. Then it’s not in vain, collectively, of the evolution of the human species.

Julie: Recently I’ve experienced what I consider an irrational fear of death. I have not had that idea enter my awareness before. I’ve always felt like I understand and I’m okay with death. I know this is a body.

Gangaji: Facing death as an idea is very different from facing it as a reality. An idea can be a useful signpost, but finally all ideas are useless in direct experience. Are you willing for a moment to stop clinging to the idea, to not even believe that you are eternal life…to not believe anything…and just face death? Just meet death. This body is going to die. Forever. Gone. No hope of eternal life?

Julie: Do you believe there’s eternal life?

Gangaji: I don’t believe anything. If you’re willing to not know, then the mind can actually open. What you call an irrational fear of death is actually, I believe, a rational fear of death. I think it’s a cellular recognition of “form dies,” and coupled with that is the identification, “I am this form. Therefore, I will die.” So it’s rational.
This is what happened to Ramana Maharshi. He had a fear of death. His father died and some months later he was overcome with a fear of death. But rather than retreat into his religion, he actually lay down and invited it as an experience—to actually meet and experience death.
This fear of death is a great call. It’s huge. It’s not trivial, and it won’t be satisfied with what’s been believed, or learned, or understood. But, amazingly, the satisfaction comes in the willingness to take a moment to inquire into death itself with no knowing of what’s on the other side.

Julie: How does one end the fear of death and awaken to awareness?

Gangaji: What are you willing to give for that? If you really do want to awaken, then you’ll give everything, including your life. So are you willing to give your past and your future? Are you willing to give it all up? Every idea of yourself, every understanding of yourself, or of eternal life or death or not death? Then we see what we want.

Julie: Do you follow politics?

Gangaji: Yes, I’ve always been very into politics and politics got me into spirituality, I believe. I was slightly involved in civil rights action and anti-Vietnam (War), and later in some anti-nuclear protests in Northern California as a non-violent trainer. I got very disenchanted with the political process because there was so much hate involved. We hated them so much. And it was sickening to me. It was actually making me sick. So I left it and I realized that the freedom I was looking for was a spiritual freedom.

Julie: What movies have you see recently?

Gangaji: I just enjoyed Sideways a lot, I thought What the Bleep was excellent, and I thought Huckabees was really good, but it was misunderstand and will be appreciated decades from now. Million $ Baby - Hillary Swank just blew me away and Clint Eastwood is very honest with his art and with himself.

Julie: How do you describe your core message?

Gangaji: My core message is that you’re not who you think you are. Who you are can’t actually be thought.

Julie: Thank goodness I’m not who I think I am?

Gangaji: Thank goodness we’re not who we think we are. Unless we’re in an inflated state, most of us spend much of our time in a deflated state of, “I’m worthless. I’m no good. I’m ignorant. I’ll never make it. I’m unenlightened.”
When we have a state of inflation, we want that to be who we are. That, then, creates a war between the higher and the lower, or the inflated and the deflated.
So my message is actually very simple. It’s just to continue to point people back to what is always here, regardless of the state.

Julie: And what is always here?

Gangaji: Awareness is present regardless of whatever else is passing through awareness. But it is awareness that gets overlooked in our attachment to, or rejection of states.
When I’m saying awareness, I’m not referring to a blank slate or a blank feeling. It’s consciousness. It’s intelligence. It’s just not an object, although it’s not separate from any object, because obviously no object can exist separately from awareness. So it’s finally coming back to what is always here.

Julie: Do you remember when it was that you finally fully understood this?

Gangaji: I don’t have to remember it, really, because in getting it, what’s gotten is what’s always here. What happens when people try to remember it is that it becomes located as the sensory expression of that moment, or the insight of that moment, or the bliss of that moment—the emotional state. But if it can be recognized as what is always here, then there’s recognition, “This is my self.”

Julie: How do we arrive at the realization of awareness?

Gangaji: This is the secret. You have to give up, at this point, any understanding of it mentally, because that’s a thought. It might be brilliant thoughts and beautiful thoughts, but for direct experience, you stop everything—all understanding, all searching, all seeking, all keeping away.

Julie: How do you know you get it?

Gangaji: You don’t know mentally. You know the same way you know, “I am.” You don’t have to remember that you are.

Julie: In your belief system, does karma play a role?

Gangaji: It’s such a tricky thing when you say, “my belief system,” because I’ve definitely believed in karma in the past, and I’ve had other times when I didn’t believe in karma and, I say, results of karma. Everything has a role. Everything has a place. Everything. Karma, dharma. No karma, no dharma—all of it has a role. And our mind’s futile work at trying to resolve it…trying to make it “just karma” or “just no karma,” this is the unnecessary suffering. It’s already resolved in the awareness that receives karma and everything else that passes through it. The resolution is already here, but it can’t be thought. I definitely experience karma.

Julie: How?

Gangaji: One experiences the karma of what was eaten yesterday. There is emotional karma….how events have affected you. My teacher used to say all of this, everything…it’s all karma. When you say that, you don’t need to dwell on it. It’s just here. If you meet your karma, if you meet what’s here, karma is freed - actually gets released.

Julie: Are we here for a specific purpose?

Gangaji: I know that that’s a useful belief, because it can stop the dialog about, “Why this family? Why did this happen?” which most of us have spent some time on. So belief in a specific purpose is a very useful medicine for that. If you just take the medicine and assume, like karma, all is for the purpose of you waking up to what is true and what’s possible, then you can directly experience the awareness that is awake now.

Julie: What would you like to say in closing?

Gangaji: Trust yourself. I mean that in the deepest yogic sense. At the core, the union is already present, and it’s an intelligent union. It’s a union of integrity, and while it may not look like what you think it should look like on the outside, if you go deeper…it’s filled with truth.

For more information about Gangaji or for her speaking schedule go to www.gangaji.org.

Re: Gangaji

The gift of an awake death

San Rafael, California
Public Meeting - December 26, 2004
……………………………………………………………………….

Gangaji: Oh Laura, what a report you have!

Laura: Yeah. It's been a wild time, really wild. A few weeks ago I found out, very surprisingly, that this body has cancer. It went from being the healthiest body I know to being a body in big trouble.

G: Very quickly.

L: Yeah, over night. So it's something. Such an opportunity to really meet everything we know in a much deeper way.

G: In a real way, not an abstraction.

L: Right. You think you have met death, well try this.

G: You prepared to meet death, and now here it is.

L: Yeah. You know, I thought I did meet it. But, you know, every woman in my family lives into their nineties and dies in their sleep when they are good and ready. So the actual physical death, I thought, would come much later. So this is just a whole different realm. And of course, there are all the other emotions that come with this. It's just been wild.

G: You look beautiful.

L: I feel wonderful, you know. I really do.

G: I am so happy this is captured on film, because what a fear this is. First of all the fear of death, fear of death of cancer, and, “It is really here, and I am young and healthy.” And look at this. Please take a moment and just show them your face. Something has been realized in this. Not to say that there hasn't been anguish with this, of course, and fear, and anger, and whatever else — everything.

L: The whole thing. The whole kit and caboodle.

G: The whole universe.

L: Yeah. I don't know if I told you about this, but the night after my surgery, they didn't get the pain medications right for a long time. So I spent a night really in pain, and I was like, “Meet it, meet it, meet it.” Thank God, I met you before this happened. I don't know what I would have done otherwise. I just thought, “Okay dive into this, dive into this,” and right in the middle of the night, I lay there and thought, “This is so wild. I am in more pain than I have ever been in my whole life, and I am enjoying myself.” How bizarre is that? You know.

G: This is what is meant by beyond. This is a report from the beyond. There is no way you can define that in your mind. If you do, it will be something that you hope will get you out of a night of pain. That is not what this is about.

L: No, the pain didn't go away. And it didn't get less intense. It was real pain. But I was better than fine, I was in delight. It was shocking.

G: It is shocking. What a surprise. What a confirmation.

L: Yeah. Oh, thank God. And there is something else I really want to say. I've always known, since I first came into the sangha, what a beautiful sangha this is. But it is beyond anything that I could have imagined. The sangha has just been such amazing support for me.

G: Well that is really when you find out, when the chips are down. Then it is not abstract.

L: I think I have always believed at some level that I really was in this alone: that I have to take care of myself alone. You know — “it is all up to me”. And then at the point where the body was not capable, I didn't need to. I didn't need to do anything. There were people to do the things that I couldn't do. Bless them.

G: Very beautiful. That's the point really. In this instant, support is here on the physical, emotional, and mental planes and deeper. I am sure you felt the support from (as you said when we spoke) all your teachers everywhere: past, present, and future. All those who love you, or have loved you, and all those who think they don't love you, but love you. The support comes, because there is an opening for it. You had the realization: “I can't do it.”

L: Yeah. I really want to thank you, and thank everyone here, and thank everyone in the whole universe.

G: What a true overflowing of joy. Who can expect that this is what comes from such a shock. It doesn't always, obviously. But that is the potential, and you are demonstrating the direct concrete potential of what is meant by “meeting it”. By asking for and receiving help, and by letting the full gamut of the emotional, physical, mental universe come to this meeting.

L: So sacred.

G: So sacred. What a blessing you give us.

L: What is given is what is received — all the same.

G: This is realization.

L: Thank you so much, Gangaji.

G: Oh I thank you. This is the thanks: the living truth, the living proof. I love you.

L: Thank you.

* * * * *

Laura Farrow, a beloved member of the Bay Area sangha, died May 3rd, 2005. She served on the Board of Directors for the Gangaji Foundation and was a volunteer at Bay Area meetings with Gangaji (at the Information Table). Her life was a beacon of love and light, touching so many other lives. Her death was an even brighter light; a confirmation of the freedom that is untouched by “death”.

Re: Gangaji

I just watched the YouTube video Gangaji - the ungraspable offering (5:03)
   
It starts out “So what I say tonight I will definitely have said before; but if you hear it tonight, you will hear it for the first time, again. There is no history and there is no stopping point to the truth of who one is…”

Watch the full 5 minute video here.

spiral out,
Arthur

Re: Gangaji

G & L conversation

Utterly beautiful. Folding that into my heart.

Re: Gangaji

Glad it spoke to you, Lisaji.  :)

I've applied for a scholarship to a Gangaji small group retreat (2 day) in Oregon; I hope the god/desses smile on me and I get to go.

I'm going to cross-post something I just put on the Eckhart Tolle thread, which has relevance here as well:

Here is a relevant section from a Q&A thread I hosted with Robert Augustus Masters on Integral Naked a while ago:

Dan/Crystallake asks:

 “The ego is the mind-made sense of self, the “problematic me”. You then go to a therapist to sort out the problems of this fictitious “me”. By developing presence and bringing space to this conditioned self, object oriented identifications begin to unravel. After years of psychotherapy the therapist will finally say 'I am done with you' and hand you all the notes and insights into yourself in book entitled “Me”…and you will still are not any closer to the root of the dysfunction the ego creates.” -Eckhart Tolle

How do you view the statement that seeking out a therapist is actually an exercise in sorting out the problems of the fictitious self (ego). Tolle's premise is that the dynamics of “having problems” is a structure of the ego, and that in reality there are no “problems”. If this is the case, does it alter the value and effectiveness of psychotherapy? I get the impression that the statement is saying that psychotherapy can actually perpetuate the illusion of a separate self and the whole process might be overridden by going to the root of the ego or self by practicing presence and the witness, therefore seeing our “problems” as an illusion. Hand in hand is the premise that one root of the ego is the need to be unhappy, making “enemies” with the now moment (as the space in which all things manifest as objects of consciousness).

How do we distinguish when psychotherapy perpetuates the illusion of self in a dysfunctional manner and psychotherapy that heals a fragmented “little me” and thus enabling a higher expression of the Self to emerge. You mentioned an Integral therapist, this means an AQAL approach?

Robert answers:

First of all, I’ll respond directly to the quote:

I don’t know how much experience Eckhart has with psychotherapy. Does he really think the reason (or the only reason) people go to therapists is to “to sort out the problems of this fictitious ‘me’”? If a woman comes to me in agony because she’s just discovered that her husband of two decades has been having an affair with her best friend, I’m not about to regurgitate for her the notion that her ego is fictitious or a mere sleight of mind, whatever truth that might hold. Rather, I’m going to help her deal with her pain, which is not just a problem of her ego (except to the degree that she dramatizes it).

In his quote, Eckhart simply demonstrates his all-too-conventional (and increasingly antiquated) notion of psychotherapy. Does he not realize that psychotherapy can be integral, can include the body, can incorporate spiritual practices and insights, can effectively work with egoity? I have seen clients have direct experiences of the Real during sessions, without any meditative intervention or discussion of the fictitious nature of the ego. Good psychotherapy will bring you closer to what Eckhart refers to as “the root of the dysfunction the ego creates.” (I don’t think we ought to be blaming the ego for this; egoity that is kept peripherally functional to Being does not create dysfunction on any significant scale. What matters is what we do with our egoity.)

And is ego really fictitious? Ego, which is not an entity, but a process, exists, however illusory or fictitious its representational elements may be. If we identify with it, it of course seems pretty solid, especially when it gets to refer to itself as a “me.” What is fictional then is not egoity itself, but the role we have allowed it to assume. If we don’t identify with our egoity, it’s going to seem far from solid, especially when it is allowed to become transparent to Being. But it is still real, if only as a process, an activity, a cult of one awaiting animation. I would say that egoity is not an illusion, however illusory it may be. Its fictitious features do not invalidate its reality.

Now on to your questions (which the above largely answers):
“How do you view the statement that seeking out a therapist is actually an exercise in sorting out the problems of the fictitious self (ego)”? Mostly false. False how? The ego (which is more verb than noun) is not necessarily fictitious, and so-called problems are, more often than not, clearly arising in interpersonal space, rather than just belonging to a self-contained somebody, and may also be challenges, very real challenges, to one’s core individuality. And true how? Many only see their problems from an egoic viewpoint, thereby severely limiting their options, including being drawn to therapists who operate from an merely egoic perspective (and whose rationality may be disembodied enough to actually be operationally irrational).

“Tolle's premise is that the dynamics of ‘having problems’ is a structure of the ego, and that in reality there are no ‘problems’. If this is the case, does it alter the value and effectiveness of psychotherapy?” Yes, in reality there are no problems, but this does not alter the value and effectiveness of psychotherapy (and I’m talking here about good psychotherapy), because what are referred to as “problems” often still need to be addressed, whether they’re reframed as “challenges” or “opportunities” or whatever. I’ve seen many spiritual seekers trying so hard to follow nondual teachings that they shortcircuit or bypass much of their humanity, treating it as though it were a problem!

Good psychotherapy does not just increase functionality, but also can awaken. Yes, psychotherapy can perpetuate the illusion of a separate self, but it does not have to, and can in fact illuminate that illusion to such a degree that the inherent inseparability of all that is becomes blazingly obvious. The fact that this doesn’t happen more often doesn’t mean that psychotherapy is a suboptimal strategy, but rather that not all that many psychotherapists have effectively integrated spirituality into their practice.

“How do we distinguish when psychotherapy perpetuates the illusion of self in a dysfunctional manner and psychotherapy that heals a fragmented ‘little me’, thus enabling a higher expression of the Self to emerge?” Compare psychotherapies and psychotherapists, and check out their results. Psychotherapy that heals and integrates has a very different feel than psychotherapy that merely rearranges belief systems or settles for cookie-cutter diagnosis.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I'm curious as to what people who are more familiar with Eckhart Tolle would have to say to this?  This is an aspect of the advaita/nondual scene that I have serious questions about, so I'd love to hear other perspectives.

Also what do you think about the points Robert raises in Spiritual Bypassing and The Non-Nonduality of Nondual Teachings in regard to Tolle specifically, or the advaita/nondual scene in general?

I do think that there are important messages being conveyed in that scene, and it's interesting that a large-scale webcast satsang with Tolle is going to be happening.  But I wonder…is it possible that this is going to facilitate spiritual bypass and complacency in a lot of the people who take part in it?

I mean, why work on your own shadow, or relationships, or the problems of the world, if you can just do an end-run around all that by accessing the ever-present bliss of being?  There's nothing that needs to be done, for I and the world are already perfect.

Please understand that these are questions I am strugging with myself, as I find myself drawn to - and resistent to - and questioning - the teachings of Gangaji and that whole scene.  I have not come to conclusions about the questions I'm raising, nor do I want to gloss over them. 

~~~~~~~~~

I wish she had chosen Gangaji instead; Echart Tolle already has a huge mass audience, but I personally would like to see Gangaji more prominently featured.  Gangaji's background in the south and having to overcome the racism in that culture, her period of experimentation with psychedelics, her involvement with the personal growth movement and progressive politics, her work with Papaji (who himself worked directly with Ramana Maharshi) - she appears to be more well-rounded, grounded, practical and embodied.

…plus she's way cuter…

cheers,
Arthur

Re: Gangaji

Thanks Much Arthur,
This is a great post. I love Eckhart Tolle (signed up for the Oprah thing).

And, I think Robert is right on the money. (can hardly wait til July).

I don't want to seem glib, but I think these things take time to work out in each individual life.

Personally, I kind of see Eckhart a bit like Krishnamurti…in that he can describe his state well, but cannot necessarily offer a practice to experience it for others.

This is a great subject, hope others will jump in. I'm being called by my better half.

Cheers,
Doug

Re: Gangaji

dugaum: I'm being called by my better half.

~

Aren't we all?  :P

If only we can heed the call. 

cheers,
Arthur

Re: Gangaji

More Youtube videos:

I Am Not Speaking of Exclusion (8:09) [Great Stuff - among other things, Gangaji talks about spiritual bypass - though she doesn't use that term - and explains that she is not an advaitist]

Simply Welcome What is Here (6:51) [goes well with the previous clip; Gangaji is speaking of nonduality, and discusses the duality of most nondual teachings…]

Dying 101 (6:28)

Simply Stop Looking (4:58)

~~~

Re: Gangaji

I love this transcript, freely.

from Gangaji Meeting Excerpts:

Free to love

Mill Valley, California
Public Meeting - July 11, 2004
………………………………………………………………………..

Questioner: The last time we met, I told you how surprised I was when I read those letters between you and Papaji; I was surprised at the worshipfulness in the letters.

Gangaji: Yes.

Questioner: And you said that by the time the letters happened, “it was just natural”. And you said love is a surprise. And I realize that what I wanted to talk to you about then was, how do I love you without worshiping you?

Gangaji: Just worship the love.

Questioner: Oh.

Gangaji: The love is trustworthy. As a person, God knows what you think I should be doing if you love me. Because that is what happens, you see. “I love this person, therefore this person should…” And then there is the list, having to do with what your parents didn't do, or your first wife didn't do, or your first teacher didn't do, and all down the line. I won't do any of that right. But the love is something bigger than either one of us.

Questioner: It's tricky, because I am getting the teaching from you, and so I am loving this…

Gangaji: Yes. Well, baby ducks love whatever gives them the instructions, you know. It is natural. And I understand that it is tricky. It is very tricky. But as you will see, this form will change. And you know, I absolutely love Papaji's form. To me he was the most beautiful human being I had ever seen: he was this eighty-year-old man, and he was like… wow!

Questioner: Were you idealizing him?

Gangaji: Oh yes.

Questioner: Do you still idealize Papaji, or do you just…

Gangaji: He is absolutely my ideal teacher. Now here is the surprise: he wasn't my ideal teacher until I met him. The love came first. He didn't fit my ideals; he raised the bar of my ideals. And in that he humbled me about what I knew about ideals. Because I had imagined (if I imagined a teacher that I would love), that first of all, she would be a goddess. I did not imagine a patriarchal Indian man who had relatively right wing political views — not that at all. I did not imagine my teacher as somebody that actually looked a little like my father. I mean, just none of it. But you see we have no control over love. And even though I didn't agree with his politics, I didn't have to give over to his politics. I didn't always agree with the way he treated somebody or said something to somebody, but that was all on the surface. There was this love here. And I recognized him to be my father. And when I recognized my guru to be my father, I could actually love my biological father in a way that I had never been able to before, because my father didn't fit my ideals either. So Papaji actually shattered my ideals, and in that I idealized him.

Questioner: I see. So what happened since I saw you last was that I met another teacher. And I asked him about this. Well actually, I thought back to the letters and then during this time with him I decided to just follow him around for the whole session and not have any barriers to loving him.

Gangaji: Yes.

Questioner: And I even said the same thing to him, “You are my father”. I totally got into idealizing him. But then I asked him, I said, “How do I love without idealizing?” And he said, “Just love.” So, you asked us, “What has happened since we last met?”

Gangaji: Yes.

Questioner: And what has happened is that I stopped fighting — for example in this case — loving you. And I have really been craving since I met you (not even in person, but since meeting your teachings), to tell you that I loved you. But I knew that I was in a trip about it and now it is just so nice to just love you…

Gangaji: Just right.

Questioner: …in the same way. And like you say, you can love other people.

Gangaji: That's right.

Questioner: And it is the same thing as loving everybody in the room.

Gangaji: That is exactly right, it spreads out — of its own accord. Love includes everybody in the room because it is set free of conditions.

Questioner: So I really wanted to thank you for that.

Gangaji: Oh, what a beautiful report. I am really happy to hear this. You are free to love. You are free to love! You know, maybe you love Mount Tam. If so, then really love Mount Tam, and you will see that that love spreads. And you can love downtown San Francisco, or San Rafael. If you really love, it can't help but spread, because it is freed of the bondage of, “I loved, but I was hurt.” Or, “I love but I am not sure that they are trustworthy.” You just love. And my God, then you are being yourself. For you are just love.

~~~

Re: Gangaji

This is posted in the Eckhart Tolle thread. I felt it approriate to include it here also in the Gangaji thread since it is her book “The Diamond In Your Pocket - Discovering Your Radiance” Forward by Eckhart Tolle;


 

Forward of  “The Diamond In Your Pocket - Discovering Your True Radiance” by Gangaji

“Know the truth and the truth shall set you free.” These words spoken by Jesus refer not to some conceptual truth, but to the truth of who or what you are beyond name and form. They refer not to something that you need to know about yourself, but a deeper, yet extraordinarily simple knowing, in which the knower and the known merge into one. Now the egoic split is healed and you are made whole again. We could describe the nature of this knowing thus: suddenly, consciousness becomes conscious of itself. When this happens, you become aligned with the evolutionary impulse of the Universe, which is towards the emergence of consciousness into this world. No matter how much you have achieved here, unless you know this living truth you are like a seed that has not sprouted and you have missed the true purpose of human existence. And even if your life has been full of suffering and mistakes, it takes only this knowing to redeem it and retrospectively endow the seemingly meaningless with profound meaning. If all your mistakes have taken you to this point, this realization, how could they have been mistakes? “I am not what happens, but the space in which it happens.” This knowing, this living truth, frees you from identification with form, from time as well as from a false, mind-made sense of self. What is that space in which everything happens? Consciousness prior to form.

Gangaji rightly says: “What I speak about has nothing to do with religion.” Although at the heart of every religion lies “the jewel in the lotus,” to use an ancient Tibetan Buddhist term, religion itself is not the truth but a story woven around the truth. Sometimes the story only veils the truth and it is still able to shine through it. At other times, it obscures and even usurps it. Whenever religion becomes divisive, as it frequently does, you know that the story has taken over. The essence that points to the underlying oneness of all life, has been lost. The story, of course, is thought, the conditioned, the timebound. The essence points to the unconditioned, timeless, formless, the realm of the sacred. “Be still and know that I am God.”

For thousands of years, mythologies, that is to say stories, were carriers of spiritual truth. Almost nobody was able to recognize the truth when it was pointed to directly. Most spiritual teachers used stories as their main teaching device. “All these things Jesus said to the crowds in parables, indeed, he said nothing to them without a parable.” (Matthew 13:34)

For millions of humans alive today the age of collective mythologies has already come to an end. Some substitutes lacking any depth, such as communism, were tried but proved to be short-lived and were quickly recognized as an illusion. All that's left now is each individual's private mythology, “the story of me.” Gangaji puts it: “Telling the personal story is the primary religion of most people on the planet.” Where is the truth hiding in all those stories? When you wake up in the morning. You may remember your dream and realize: it was just a dream, it wasn't real. But there must be something real even in a dream, otherwise it could not be. What is it? It is that which enables the dream or the story, the thought or emotion, to be. This is the consciousness that you are.

Stories that contain spiritual truth will continue to be enjoyed in books and films even by those who no longer need them. They also still fulfill a vital function in initiating a first awakening in those who would not would not have been reached without the story and its ability to pass undetected through the ego's defenses. The ego doesn't realize until it is too late that every spiritual story is ultimately about you.

This book is meant fir the rapidly growing number of spiritual seekers who are approaching the end of their seeking and who are ready for the undiluted truth. As Gangaji puts it: “At this point in our human history, what was once reserved for the most rare beings is available to ordinary people.”

This book contains the living essence of Gangaji's work with countless individuals over a period of 15 years. Gangaji must have listened to-and cut through-thousands of personal mythologies (stories) during this time, but you won't find any of them here. Instead, you are given the means, through question and investigation, of cutting through your own story, the mental constructs that make up your conceptual reality.

Except for the brief account of Gangaji's own story and how it came to an end, and the story about the diamond that gives the book its title, this book contains no stories and has no need for them. The words themselves are charged with extraordinary aliveness and transformative power. This is because they have come out of a living realization of the truth, rather than the accumulated knowledge of the mind.

This book is not only about the transcendence of compulsive and unconscious thinking and the end human suffering. It is part of an evolutionary transformation of cosmic magnitude: the awakening of consciousness out of the dream of identification with form, the dream of separation. The fact that you are reading these words means that it is your destiny to be an essential part of this great adventure of collective awakening.

~ Eckhart Tolle

Re: Gangaji

Thanks for posting Eckhart's forward to The Diamond in Your Pocket (lots of information on the book, including excerpts, here) - I've been reading it slowly for a while now, it's great stuff.  :)  Actually I bought it in Powell's Books (“the largest independent new and used bookstore in the world”) - one of my favorite bookstores of all time - a few days after seeing her for the first time in Ashland a while back.

I'm going to another satsang with her on Friday, and I just found out yesterday that I got a full scholarship to attend a 3-day retreat with her in April (I was literally called by Joy).  Whoo-hoo!  So I'll have a chance to suss her out more thoroughly.  (Now, of course, my resistance to her teaching is coming up more strongly, lol.)  I'm trying to have as little in the way of expectation as possible.

cheers,
Arthur

Re: Gangaji

The following is a transcript of “The Cruxifixion,” a five-minute excerpt from The Heart Broken Open: Reflections on the Life and Teachings of Jesus, an interview with Gangaji by Chris Mohr. 

~

Chris Mohr: In the third chapter of John, Jesus himself says “So god so loved the world that he gave his only son.”

Gangaji: What a rich aspect to discover!  Crucifixion, of course, the symbol of the crucifixion is what has been the symbol of Christianity.  But in most lives the invitation of the crucifixion in a very personal day-to-day sense is what is most avoided.  Above all let me not be crucified!   [laughter]  Let me escape crucifixion.  And so [the way] that Jesus has been used - the very fact that he was crucified means I don't have to be crucified.  But I believe this is a great error.  I believe that if you are willing to be crucified in small ways and in huge ways - if that is what is appearing - then you will realize what Christ has realized. 

Chris Mohr: Before he was even crucified, in the Acts of John, he said “Learn how to suffer, and you shall be able not to suffer” - and what an amazing promise that is!

Gangaji: That's right, and you can only know the fulfillment of that promise if you meet the suffering that is presented to all of us throughout the day, throughout one's life, in the extreme moments of suffering and death, or the suffering and death of loved ones, or the suffering and death of the planet - to meet that, to suffer consciously, rather than unconsciously, to experience the pain of suffering directly, without any hope of escape, to be nailed to the cross of suffering, at least for one instant, fully and completely, then you know how to suffer.  And there the promise is immediate, the resurrection is here.  The one who imagined himself to be nailed to the cross is none other than God, than the presence of love, than that which is eternally free, eternally saved from the misidentification of one who's separate. 

From the Book of James, five: “Become seekers of death, therefore like the dead, who are seeking life.  For what they seek is manifest to them - so what can be of concern to them?  When you inquire into the subject of death, it will teach you about election.  I swear to you, none will be saved who are afraid of death, for God's domain belongs to those who are dead.  Become better than I, be like the son of the Holy Spirit.”  This is directly related to “if you know how to suffer, you do not suffer.”

Chris Mohr: And if you know how to die you do not die.

Gangaji: Yes.  I believe it's been misunderstood, grossly misunderstood, that it is after death, in the sense of the death of the body, that the saving is found - when the truth is this death is possible every moment; and the fear of death, as we have talked about before, is what drives the ego to its survival of this particular body. 

If this fear of death can be recognized as the foundation for all actions of mind - even in the worship of God - then there is a possibility to stop.  To actually, directly, in this moment, meet the fear of death.  Meet death.  Die.  Not to physically die, but as if you were at the moment of physical death, and all will be lost - your body, your hopes, your victories, your defeats.  Everything that has been won is lost.  Your name, your relationships, your spiritual attainments, everything is gone.  You die.

And in this moment of dying, the promise of death, which is God's domain, is revealed to be here, is revealed to be unable to be lost.  So what can be lost will be lost; what cannot be lost is the presence of God, inseparable from the truth of who you are.  Who you think you are will be lost.  Let it be lost so that you can see directly who you are.

~~~

[Transcript of an audio excerpt from the Gangaji audio selections page, written by Arthur Gillard.]

Re: Gangaji

Gangaji on “spiritual bypassing” and fundamentalism:

~~~

Even the most profound truth gets used by the mind as a way of excluding. I was speaking with a friend yesterday who's a spiritual teacher, and she's also a psychotherapist, and she says she deals with many people who have come from Advaita teachers, who live in such a realm called “transcendence” that they exclude the human and the emotional, and wonder why they're still suffering. [laughs]  And then they say, “but who's suffering?” and then they return right back to the realm of the pseudo-transcendence - because the actual transcendence includes everything, excludes nothing.  And it is in that actual inclusion of everything (and nothing) that the unspeakable revelation of truth is recognized as who one is.

So, since what I say to people has been called “Advaita Vedanta” - even though I don't call it that and I have never called it that; when I have read about myself in certain publications [laughs] I have noticed that I'm classified as an Advaita Vedantist.  I want you to know I'm not - although I don't exclude it!  [general laughter]  Advaita Vedanta is profound and exquisite and true, absolutely true in the realms of the absolute, in the realm of totality.  Absolutely true.  But the moment one identifies oneself as an “advaitist” or an “Advaita Vedantist,” then one is not something else - and that's not true.

Then the old mental game of classifying, which relies on exclusion, comes into play.  And that of course gives rise to what we know of in all religions as fundamentalism, whether it's a religion of the ego, or the religion of Christ, or the religion of Buddha, or the religion of Ramana, or the religion of Muhammad - doesn't matter, it's irrelevant - it becomes a fundamentalism which excludes everything but itself, as itself is defined. And that begins where you are, in the seat you are sitting in. That begins with the religion, the fundamentalism, of yourself as separate from anything else.  As yourself as separate from anything born, anything that dies, or that which is unborn and undying - all of it. 

- Gangaji, from I Am Not Speaking of Exclusion (8:09)

~~~

Re: Gangaji

My wife and I went to see Gangaji with Arthur and Liz last night just north of San Francisco. It was magical, uplifting, inspiring. Exceeded my expectations. What a powerful presence. I felt a difference in my next morning's meditation. I was lighter, more settled, feeling a greater sense of myself, aware of a different line of thoughts. I'm looking forward to her next meeting in June sometime. Thanks Arthur for the encouragement to go. It was also my first satsang. I think I expected something more shallow. I am surprised at her intelligence, love, presence…she says she's not a 'holy mother' but it certainly felt as if she were. She's at Esalen this week with no other other workshop but hers. I can only imagine what 5 days with her would be like. Maybe I'll sign up for next year's Gangji retreat at Esalen….or try her more modestly priced 2-day ones in Ashland.

Re: Gangaji

Eddie: I am surprised at her intelligence, love, presence…she says she's not a 'holy mother' but it certainly felt as if she were. She's at Esalen this week with no other other workshop but hers. I can only imagine what 5 days with her would be like.

~

Liz and I had fun going to see Gangaji with you and Julie - I'm glad you liked it so much.  Wow, Gangaji at Esalen, that would be so great.  I remember you saying that it's quite unusual for there to be only one workshop at Esalen; when you have Gangaji, what else do you need?

I do find that she has a motherly vibe - well, she is a mother and grandmother, after all.  :)  That's part of the chemistry I feel with her, and part of the reason I feel “safer” with her. 

As with any spiritual teacher, she's going to get a lot of projections; she seems to handle it really well.

I haven't spoken with Gangaji one-on-one yet, although I tried at this most recent satsang - as I wrote in a post on the Big Mind / Big Heart thread:

“Last night I went to a satsang with Gangaji, the second one I've been to.  This time I raised my hand every time she was asking people to come up but she didn't pick me…which, frankly, felt a lot like dodging bullets, lol.  I had a high degree of inner conflict over going up and talking to her, a serious approach-avoidance conflict, manifesting as stress and muscular tension that has me feeling today like I was run over by a truckload of rabid ninjas on acid (trust me, you don't want to feel this way).”

I think I'll find it easier to talk with her in a small-group setting that isn't being recorded, such as the retreat I'm attending in April.

At the recent satsang I bought a great little book by Gangaji published in
Ashland - on acid-free and recycled paper, whoo-hoo! - called Freedom and Resolve: The Living Edge of Surrender.  Here's a quote from that book on deep dreamless sleep:

~~~

When the body is in deep sleep, and there are no reference points, no sense impressions, no perception of body or any object whether mental, emotional, or physical, still there is awareness aware of itself, and this is bliss.  This is the bliss of deep sleep.  When the body awakens and objects come back into view, still you know that there has been deep, objectless experience.  You don't have any sense impressions of it, but you know it because the awareness of itself is still present.  As objects appear, our conditioning is to fixate on the objects and to overlook the deep nourishment that is always present.  Vigilance is the awareness of what does not disappear even when objects appear.  Whether those objects are exquisite, horrible, or mundane, always there is awareness aware of itself.  Whether those objects are emotional, mental, or physical, always there is awareness aware of itself.  - Gangaji, Freedom and Resolve, p. 6

~~~

I have been wondering if Gangaji experiences awareness during deep dreamless sleep, so I was glad to find the above quote.  :)

spiral out,
Arthur

Re: Gangaji

~~~

In this business you are absolutely on your own. In that moment there is no teacher, there is no teaching, there is no God, there is no devil. There's no heaven, there's no hell, there's no enlightenment, there's no unenlightenment. It's simply a matter of telling the truth. You can get away with it, if you lie. There's nobody who will say, “gotcha!” I mean, there will be, but they're probably doing their whole thing too. [laughter] This is the beauty of this Lila. This is where you're absolutely alone. All the support has been to that moment. And teachers are fooled all the time anyway - because teachers believe those who are trustworthy and they believe those who are untrustworthy; they don't want to waste your time not believing somebody, right? You understand what I'm saying? You can't count on somebody, “well, you'll let me know if I'm off!” No, you are the only one who can really, finally, know. There are lots of great acts in the world, but you know. And this is a rare and precious moment, this moment before the choice of suffering is taken up again. - Gangaji, Innocence, Trust & Self-Betrayal

Re: Gangaji

Over on the Multiplex I started a thread suggesting Gangaji as a guest for Integral Naked: Gangaji as an IN Guest?  If anybody here on the Integral Institute pod would like to hear such a dialog - or dare we hope for video? - please post there in support of the idea.  Assuming you have a membership there, that is (and if not, you're missing out on tons of great material).

spirals,
Arthur

Re: Gangaji

Imagine that you're driving in a car, and you're going down a very steep mountainside. And now imagine that, for whatever reason, the brakes go out, and you're still going down this mountainside. And now imagine that for some other inexplicable reason, the steering goes out. What do you do? Stop imagining!

Re: Gangaji

So then we get to really the deeper issue, which is what you call resistance to me - a teacher, a guru. It's not resistance to me, it's resistance to yourself. It's a fear of giving up the self-doubt, because that self-doubt has been a companion - a tyrant of a companion, but nevertheless it's kept you in line. It's kept you from being too arrogant, it's kept you from being a megalomaniac - which you have seen, we have them in history, we have them in our lives - and there's a fear of that, because there's also a recognition of the talent for that, or the affinity for that. This is all part of the human makeup, the human aggression. So the self-doubt, or the superego, we're very afraid of giving up its power. But it must be given up. That's the leap, there must be a willingness to stop resisting yourself, however that forms, in whatever forumula - and it's infinite.

There must be a willingness to give up the self-doubt, so that if there is arrogance or megalomania or delusion there, it can be seen. If there is self-hatred there, it can be seen; if there is hatred for your fellow companions, it can be seen. The self-doubt, it's you that is basically wrong; of course you see those who are more wrong all the time [laughter] but at the core of it, it is you that is wrong. So this is a huge challenge - and I'm not saying that arrogance and megalomania won't appear; I would expect it, if I were you. If it's being hidden, it will appear. It's only then that it can be seen; and if it is seen, it is seen for the suffering that it is, for the absurdity that it is, and it's not followed. If it's not seen, it's followed unconsciously, subconsciously.

So then we have this duet between self-doubt and arrogance, ego and superego; and deeper than that, closer than that, is the Truth. At one time this teaching, which is really present in all religions, was kept very very secret, until you had proved yourself not a megalomaniac, [laughs] a level of maturity. I know that's true in the Tibetan Dzogchen teachings; it's only recently that they've even been spoken of, nobody even knew about them. And it's true of Christian mystics, you know, St. John of the Cross spent many years in a prison cell.

These are unusual times, this is a dangerous teaching. It is a dangerous invitation. These are dangerous times. And somehow, you are here - maybe thinking the danger is too big, or thinking you're not ready. Whatever you are thinking, that is ego or superego. The Truth is closer than that. And the invitation is to recognize yourself as the Truth, by that recognizing all the lies as they appear, the temptations as they appear, the elaborate explanations and justifications for the temptations as they appear - with now the capacity to choose the Truth. There is such space when the attention that has been knotted around seeking the Truth and resisting the Truth is cut.  - Gangaji, Innocence, Trust & Self-Betrayal

The entire video is on Google video:

Innocence, Trust and Self-Betrayal (1:06:02)

~~~

Re: Gangaji

I was lucky to have the chance to spend last weekend on a small group retreat with Gangaji in Ashland.  On the last day I got to speak with her directly, after a titanic inner struggle of approach-avoidance.  (The first thing I said to her was, “I didn't know if I was going to come up here.”  She replied, “Neither did I - I've been watching you.”)  As it was happening I didn't experience the encounter as really dramatic or intense - it was nothing like my projections of what it might be like - but we had a great conversation as well as long periods of just looking at each other, and afterward I felt a subtle shift (no pun intended).  I feel I've made a deeper connection and invited her more deeply into my heart.  It was very helpful getting direct feedback and advice from her. 

I also found it fascinating to witness all the interactions with other people, and talk with others in the group during breaks.  There were people there who have been students of Gangaji's for many years (one had been at her very first satsang when she came back from India), and I heard a lot of stories of encounters with her over a wide span of time.  More than one person told her they had been coming to see her for years, but were afraid to talk with her directly until then.  Several times she bracketed remarks with comments like “I wouldn't say this if this was being recorded, but…”    The setting was very warm and intimate, like being in her living room.

I would highly recommend attending a small group retreat with Gangaji, if that sort of thing interests you.

spiral out,
Arthur

Re: Gangaji

Hi Arthur

Thanks for posting your experience with Gangaji and the retreat.

I am heavily flirting with the idea of going to see her in Findhorn next month.

Cheers,
Lisa

Re: Gangaji

Lisaji: I am heavily flirting with the idea of going to see her in Findhorn next month.

~

GO FOR IT!  I mean, come on, Lisaji talking with Gangaji…how perfect is that?

spiral out,
Arthurji

Re: Gangaji

Thanks for that encouragement Arthurji,

Sealed the deal. Lisaji will be going to hang out with Gangaji in Findhorn on 24th May. - and as each days session is finished off with a spot of my kind of dancing and some devotional singing, I was further left with no choice today but to hand over the money!

Anyone else here going to that gig?

Lisa-G 

Re: Gangaji

I thought about it, and its a holiday weekend. I am moving house a week later though, so I can't face anything probing, I think I'll just be too tired and emotionally too raw to get the best from it.
I', spending the weekend in Pitlochry, swimming, having long walks and going to the Theatre in the evening. I am going to rest and gather my resources for the weeks ahead. I don't think I have ever felt so depleted. So I am going away, on my own, to emotionally nest build before I move. That maybe makes little sense, I just feel its what I need right now.

Liz

Re: Gangaji

Hi Liz,

Sorry to hear your feeling depleted, and won't make the Gangaji thing. Your alternative plan sounds like just what you need, hope your move goes smoothly.

Lisa

Re: Gangaji

Lisa, great to hear you're going to the gangaji thing.  Liz, sounds like you need a different cup of tea right now.  It's all good.  :)

spirals,
Arthur

Re: Gangaji

Thanks Lisa, I did think about it, but just feel the timing is wrong for me. f I was going to do this, I'd want time to process it afterwards too and I won't get that, moving house 4 days later, and by the time I have space to think about it, I feel I'll have lost the essence of it.

However, if your route home brings you anywhere near here, I'll gladly cook you dinner in exchange for the weekend's insider view……….in fact I'd gladly cook you dinner anyway., if there are any dishes here still unpacked:-)

Liz

Re: Gangaji

What a lovely invite Liz, you can PM me if you want - let me know where abouts you are. Only extraneous plan I have is that I need to get to Edinburgh on 27th for 6pm as I am going to a Krishna Das Kirtan in Queens Hall - and that cannot be missed!

If you live close to Edinburgh, then I will have to drag you along with me of course.


Love
Lisa

Re: Gangaji

IM coming, and yes, near enough to be dragged! In fact if you need a bed for the Mon night I can drive you.

Whoopee:-) I'm off work that week

Liz

Re: Gangaji

Take pictures, you two!

Liz

Re: Gangaji

oooh, Krishna Das - good for the soul!  Have fun, you two.  :)

spirals,
Arthur

“The sense that the 'I' that you go by is different from the 'I' that the person next to you goes by is the noose that you hang from. Turn your attention to this 'I,' to this individual, separate, struggling 'I.' If you are successful, then you will see that the knot is untied, and you are free.” - Gangaji

Re: Gangaji

Sometimes I just KNOW the whole thing is unfolding exactly as it should:-)

Liz