Beyond isolation
The first is that he has a huge number of people on his friends list, and that always majorly puts me off (i make exceptions with people on the Zaadz team who i have become friends with. so they really are my friends, like ~C4Chaos and Siona; altho, being in the admin they would obviously have heaps on their friends list).
Also, I have the impression, perhaps a totally unfair and unwarranted one, that this person seems to have taken one or been given the role of some sort of guru, with a number of people gathered around him, and hence the big friends list (for more contacts). And like i said, i support his sincerity, and i consider him a genuine persion and someone working for the betterment of the world, and perhaps an authentic teacher, but i myself am not into someone being the center of attention.
But this got me thinking, maybe i'm the same. Maybe i've also unwittingly taken on teh role of guru of sorts (although i always try not to, because you can't be an authentic guru unless you are enlightened, and i'm certainly not enlightened; too much ego!). So who am i to judge?
(note, in using the word "guru" in this context I mean someone who has a spiritual message or teaching or viewpoint which he or she gives out to the world without any financial or narcissistic motivation, whether it be through personal contact and example, or through writing books, blogging, websites, emails etc over the net. It does not have to be guru witha cpaital "G", i.e. authentic enlightened guru. However I do believe that any guru or Guru (small or capital G) who charges money or who abuses their position for power or sex or emotional gain is an absolute fake and should be sterred clear of)
And that then got me thinking further, here is this gentleman, and here is me, and we are both in a sense giving out spiritual wisdom to the world (being teachers). So why don't we just join forces, and work as one? Answer, we can't. Each of us has a unique way of doing things, and a unique gnosis. And this goes for everyone mind you. So it becomes almost impossible to arrive at creative unanmity because each of our visions and creativite methodologies is so different, because we are still relative beings. Or at least because I am. My passion is with my work and what i am doing, just as his is with his work. I have often wondered why all the spiritual people don't get together as one, and the answer is, they can't, for this reason!
Yet that can't be the whole answer, because even enlightened beings don't get together! Ramnana and Aurobindo were only 150 km apart, contemporaries, yet neither met the other. Everyone chooses to be isolated. Why didn't Ouspensly join the Aurobindo ashram (he met Sri Aurobindo in the early days, apparently). For that matter why didn't Gurdjieff? Why didn't Meher Baba and The Mother work together?
Apart from that one single shining exception - Sri Aurobindo and the Mother, in this regard they are abnsolutely, totally unique. For the rest, there may be an enlightened guru and an enlightened disciple - e.g. Ramakrishna and Vivekananda, but there is never a partnership of two very different individuals, working as one. Except in that one instance. Why? I don't know.
And yet. And yet.... maybe this will change. Maybe it is already changing. And maybe that is the new evolution the planet is going through.
My friend Mushin and I share a certain common spiritual vision. We both reject authoritarian hierarchical spirituality in favour of a more egalitarian approach (that said, i would accept a hierarchy if it was of a genuine enlightened being, like Ramana or The Mother. But not these intermediate zone gurus). We both see the next buddha as a collective. So different spiritual individuals, with very different personalities, can still share the same truth. Perhaps Zaadz is proof of that. So maybe this isolation that has ruled up till now will be healed, will be transformed, in the next collective buddha, the collective gbostic community.
But until then, i have a lot of ego to transcend.







Hey Alan
This set me contemplating. I don't think one has to totally ditch the ego in order to be enlightened. You have to at times, for sure. But you are in the world, and you are the way you are, for a reason and a purpose. Isn't the Bodhisattva, who turns back at the last moment, more of an ideal than the Buddha? To me, the Buddha represents a purely ontological ideal, not a personal goal, because if that were so, s/he abandons this world.
I think rather it is about the capacity to have that selfless moment and bring it back, like for example, I have times when I'm so filled with love for all beings, all things in fact, that it almost cracks me down the middle. I don't mean love in a new agey, superficial way either. It's actually scary it's so intense. And then I know, I just Know that all beings will find completion in the end. Bad things have to be there for their own purpose but in the end all is or will be whole. And even though I don't maintain that feeling or knowledge, it never really leaves me.
Your thoughts?
Hi Arachnid
I agree, the Bodhisattva is a greater ideal than the Buddha who renounces the world. But transcending ego doesn't have to mean transcending the world. The Bodhisattva is able to renounce nirvana precisely because he/she has transcended ego. And when you say:
“I have times when I'm so filled with love for all beings, all things in fact, that it almost cracks me down the middle. I don't mean love in a new agey, superficial way either. It's actually scary it's so intense”
well, that's what being Enlightened (egoless) is! That's what Jesus felt, that's what Shantideva felt, that's what Ramana felt (well, at least I *assume* that's what they all felt….)
hello Alan!
So different spiritual individuals, with very different personalities, can still share the same truth.
yes. I enjoyed reading your thoughts on this. I even have opened up my friend's list lately for more people who don*t seem to just be 'collecting numbers', even though I'm not in regular contact with most of them… somehow the simple fact that they have 'found' me and wanted to connect has touched me
I strongly sense that networking and being part of a spiritually connected collective is what actually needs to happen now, for me. even though I'm quite fond of my withdrawel and isolation, there has been growing commitment to being 'out here' in various ways and connecting with people in real life and virtually…
we are living in a global community, and our destiny is that of all humankind. I have never before felt this, and it's getting stronger each day. this has become really personal for me, not just a slogan. I'm feeling connected more and more to the whole - though I have to say, I'm far from feeling overwhelming love for ALL.. so I suppose I'm not yet enlightened! ;)
compassion, yes, shook up by violence and murder in Burma, and all over the world, where ever you look - I also see the beauty, just have to look out of my window into the grey autumn sky and the colorful leaves in front of my window… I love autumn…
interesting times we're living in, to say the least. gonna go and checkk out that collective budda link now, have seen it around before but never really had a look…
Alan,
Hello
I was searching for a blog to provide some guidance for online safety and your blog was one in the search results. I like the contemplation of your thoughts with considerations of other points of view as you lay out your process. Thanks
For me, I understand the Guru concept you describe here and staying away from participating in creating more confusion. It is the inside where Love resides and no other can be that or give the answers. However, some people, like myself, do support themselves with the way they spend their time in service. Receiving money for assisting others was an issue I had with myself for a long time and I judged this part of who I AM.
No more. Receiving money for my plerking is a way for me to be available to assist and serve.
I enjoyed reading your blog.
Thank you for posting it. Friendship is cherished.
LeAnn