Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by:
rrmoderator
()
Date: December 31, 2019 03:03AM
Wow! James Swartz and his followers certainly seems to obsessed with trolling this thread.
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by:
earthquake
()
Date: December 31, 2019 05:11AM
Hey Rick, you got your work cut out on this topic! Lol.
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by:
Sahara71
()
Date: December 31, 2019 07:32AM
Some interesting points:
Advaita Vedanta as a belief system has a strong ethical component. I mention this because someone posted on here that they were not interested being "good" but merely in being "free". As though being "good" is a little old-fashioned and restrictive. How can you ever be "free", and therefore in a constant state of "bliss" (I presume), if you have to be good as well?
In seems to me like contemporary spirituality has gone down the road of being entirely self-serving and introspective in the worst possible way. In doing so, it has to completely disregard history, the scriptures, thousands of years of practice and the tidal wave of religious/spiritual scholarship that points to "being good" and consciously "doing good" as being essential to spiritual liberation.
I refer to this article by Dr. N. K. Srinivasan:
[www.advaita.org.uk]
He writes:
"The three gateways to ‘hell’, according to the Bhagavad Gita are lust, anger and greed. Avoiding these gateways would be the most essential step in the practice of advaita. Advaitins, as a group, are given to intellectual arguments and ‘logical’ reasoning. They can easily invent ways to circumvent the moral injunctions. Herein lies the danger in the practice of advaita."
And later he writes:
"It is alright to have glimpses of “Reality’ or advaitic experience or anubhUti . But that is fleeting indeed. If one wishes to be ‘stabilized’ in advaitic or Vedantic experience as a j~nAnI or Advaitin, one needs the tail plane of ethical practice. Otherwise an advaitin may have a tail-spin leading to depravity, as many philosophers and new-styled gurus have experienced in mythical times as well as in modern times - in our living memory."
In other words, without knowing right from wrong and putting this into practice, you will end up 'depraved'. I suppose there is some kind of freedom in depravity, but if depravity is what you are after, why embrace spiritual practices at all? You may as well be a depraved atheist and save yourself time and energy!
Swartz and others who brag about being a "lothario" or whatever, without any remorse or insight into their actions, will not progress along a spiritual path, be it Advaita or any other path. If they believe that they can, then that is a very unhealthy misunderstanding of the teachings and they will only lead others into unhappiness.
I refer also to [newworldencyclopedia.org]
Quote:
"Ethics has a firm place in Advaita; the same place as the world and God. Ethics, which implies doing good Karma, indirectly helps in attaining true knowledge. The Shruti (the Vedas and the Upanishads) constitute the basis of merit and sin. Dharma infuses truth, non-violence, service of others, and pity while adharma (sin) infuses lies, violence, cheating, selfishness, and greed."
Also take a look at [liveanddare.com]
Quote:
"It is true we are not bound and that the real Self has no bondage. It is true that you will eventually go back to your source. But meanwhile, if you commit sins, as you call them, you will have to face the consequences of such sins. You cannot escape them.
If a man beats you, then, can you say, ‘I am free, I am not bound by these beatings and I don’t feel any pain. Let him beat on’? If you can feel like that, you can go on doing what you like. What is the use of merely saying with your lips ‘I am free’?"
- Ramana Maharshi
Advaita Vedanta as a belief system has a strong ethical component. I mention this because someone posted on here that they were not interested being "good" but merely in being "free". As though being "good" is a little old-fashioned and restrictive. How can you ever be "free", and therefore in a constant state of "bliss" (I presume), if you have to be good as well?
In seems to me like contemporary spirituality has gone down the road of being entirely self-serving and introspective in the worst possible way. In doing so, it has to completely disregard history, the scriptures, thousands of years of practice and the tidal wave of religious/spiritual scholarship that points to "being good" and consciously "doing good" as being essential to spiritual liberation.
I refer to this article by Dr. N. K. Srinivasan:
[www.advaita.org.uk]
He writes:
"The three gateways to ‘hell’, according to the Bhagavad Gita are lust, anger and greed. Avoiding these gateways would be the most essential step in the practice of advaita. Advaitins, as a group, are given to intellectual arguments and ‘logical’ reasoning. They can easily invent ways to circumvent the moral injunctions. Herein lies the danger in the practice of advaita."
And later he writes:
"It is alright to have glimpses of “Reality’ or advaitic experience or anubhUti . But that is fleeting indeed. If one wishes to be ‘stabilized’ in advaitic or Vedantic experience as a j~nAnI or Advaitin, one needs the tail plane of ethical practice. Otherwise an advaitin may have a tail-spin leading to depravity, as many philosophers and new-styled gurus have experienced in mythical times as well as in modern times - in our living memory."
In other words, without knowing right from wrong and putting this into practice, you will end up 'depraved'. I suppose there is some kind of freedom in depravity, but if depravity is what you are after, why embrace spiritual practices at all? You may as well be a depraved atheist and save yourself time and energy!
Swartz and others who brag about being a "lothario" or whatever, without any remorse or insight into their actions, will not progress along a spiritual path, be it Advaita or any other path. If they believe that they can, then that is a very unhealthy misunderstanding of the teachings and they will only lead others into unhappiness.
I refer also to [newworldencyclopedia.org]
Quote:
"Ethics has a firm place in Advaita; the same place as the world and God. Ethics, which implies doing good Karma, indirectly helps in attaining true knowledge. The Shruti (the Vedas and the Upanishads) constitute the basis of merit and sin. Dharma infuses truth, non-violence, service of others, and pity while adharma (sin) infuses lies, violence, cheating, selfishness, and greed."
Also take a look at [liveanddare.com]
Quote:
"It is true we are not bound and that the real Self has no bondage. It is true that you will eventually go back to your source. But meanwhile, if you commit sins, as you call them, you will have to face the consequences of such sins. You cannot escape them.
If a man beats you, then, can you say, ‘I am free, I am not bound by these beatings and I don’t feel any pain. Let him beat on’? If you can feel like that, you can go on doing what you like. What is the use of merely saying with your lips ‘I am free’?"
- Ramana Maharshi
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by:
corboy
()
Date: December 31, 2019 11:24AM
Here are excerpts from a post made by Sattva back on December 17th, 12 days before writing that post where he or she said he wasnt interested in being good but in being free.
This post made almost 12 weeks ago, reveals this is a stable theme - that someone claiming to have benefitted from Swartz' teaching believes its possible to divorce
wisdom from any interest in goodness or in being good.
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: Sattva
Date: December 17, 2019 09:12AM
So..we have here someone who considers his or her life has been transformed "in the utmost positive way possible."
This attitude implies that wisdom and concern for morality and ethics can be separated.
Suppose this teaching were available from a person whose past was clean, not heinous. There are plenty of such persons teaching Advaita Vedanta.
Why not leave the teacher whose past is possibly heinous and opt for a teacher whose past is quiet, clean, who has garnered no harm reports from former students?
Why so eager to divorce wisdom and freedom from "goodness"?
Corboy suggests that this liberation from suffering is merely a numbing of one's capacity for empathy, leaving you capable only of feeling attuned to Swartz and others whose empathy has been blunted in the same manner.
All in all, a menace to civil society.
Amoral elitists such as Swartz and his "beneficiaries" can only find life enjoyable if the rest of us do care about living life in a reliable trustworthy manner. If civil society were to collapse because we all followed Swartzian teachings, Swartz and his chief disciples would be unable to travel to beautiful European cities.
Without any concern for rules or goodness, the airlines would not function safely or follow schedules. Not if the pilots achieved Swartzian enlightenment.
Without concern for rules or goodness or good faith, hotels and retreat centers would not recognize payments made to secure them for Swartz and his students.
Meals would not arrive on time and food safety guidelines would not be followed.
Nope, this amoral wisdom is enjoyable only if a small elite attain it, while the rest of us follow the rules and keep the world safe, predictable--and exploitable--by such gurus and their grateful enlightened disciples.
Once one has discarded conscience and empathy -- both of which give us the capacity to suffer -- life does indeed feel lighter.
Lighter for the elite, amorally enlightened few.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/31/2019 10:11PM by corboy.
This post made almost 12 weeks ago, reveals this is a stable theme - that someone claiming to have benefitted from Swartz' teaching believes its possible to divorce
wisdom from any interest in goodness or in being good.
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: Sattva
Date: December 17, 2019 09:12AM
Quote
James has never set himself to be Miss Goody Two Shoes and taught me to become a do-gooder. What James taught me is how full, whole and complete I am, a simple fact that I never knew until I learned this from Vedanta via James as Isvara's instrument. More importantly, James taught me what I need to do to prepare my mind so this important knowledge about myself becomes firm.
Suppose you learned something about yourself that transformed your life in the the utmost positive way possible and you find out that the person who taught you this most wonderful thing about yourself actually had a heinous past.
Does the knowledge of this person's past negate what the person taught me about myself that I value so much? I understand that it might be the case for some people, but I know that the knowledge would not negate the wisdom for me.
I believe that Jesus would be happy to learn from sinners as well as do gooders and I personally think that sinners have more to teach me than the do gooders.
I personally do not want to ignore a good message that is delivered by a flawed messenger.
So..we have here someone who considers his or her life has been transformed "in the utmost positive way possible."
This attitude implies that wisdom and concern for morality and ethics can be separated.
Suppose this teaching were available from a person whose past was clean, not heinous. There are plenty of such persons teaching Advaita Vedanta.
Why not leave the teacher whose past is possibly heinous and opt for a teacher whose past is quiet, clean, who has garnered no harm reports from former students?
Why so eager to divorce wisdom and freedom from "goodness"?
Quote
I recalled reading someone on this board saying that all or nearly all of James' students that he has interviewed became disillusioned, disenchanted or disgusted with James after associating with James for many years. I want to say that certainly is not my experience and the experiences of my friends who have studied with James for many years. James is the most important teacher I have ever had and I had the benefit of studying with many teachers who have taught me how to lessen my suffering as a human.
Corboy suggests that this liberation from suffering is merely a numbing of one's capacity for empathy, leaving you capable only of feeling attuned to Swartz and others whose empathy has been blunted in the same manner.
All in all, a menace to civil society.
Amoral elitists such as Swartz and his "beneficiaries" can only find life enjoyable if the rest of us do care about living life in a reliable trustworthy manner. If civil society were to collapse because we all followed Swartzian teachings, Swartz and his chief disciples would be unable to travel to beautiful European cities.
Without any concern for rules or goodness, the airlines would not function safely or follow schedules. Not if the pilots achieved Swartzian enlightenment.
Without concern for rules or goodness or good faith, hotels and retreat centers would not recognize payments made to secure them for Swartz and his students.
Meals would not arrive on time and food safety guidelines would not be followed.
Nope, this amoral wisdom is enjoyable only if a small elite attain it, while the rest of us follow the rules and keep the world safe, predictable--and exploitable--by such gurus and their grateful enlightened disciples.
Once one has discarded conscience and empathy -- both of which give us the capacity to suffer -- life does indeed feel lighter.
Lighter for the elite, amorally enlightened few.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/31/2019 10:11PM by corboy.
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by:
Valma
()
Date: December 31, 2019 04:41PM
i came up to this old post from Sahara71:
"I did find this anonymous comment from back in 2008:
"I am so glad to be able to tell you about James Swartz, aka Sunny Jim, or as we all knew him—Rama. I lived in a communal situation, (ashram?) with this man for two years and knew him for two years prior to this. Let’s be clear, like other false gurus, Jim is very charming and charismatic. He has a good Vedantic rap and I believe he has developed a siddhi or two. If you are naïve and have no prior knowledge of Vedanta he can seem very impressive, and can even trigger altered states that may mesmerize you. But be forewarned. Like many false gurus he is also a chronic liar and once he has lured you into his web with his rap, he can be verbally and emotionally abusive—all in the name of giving you a teaching. His little speech in his story about not knowing about ‘crazy wisdom’ would be laughable, if he hadn’t disappointed and messed up so many peoples’ lives. He has a knack for messing with people’s minds and sending them right off the deep end. The parts of his ‘autobiography’ that I was a witness to are so inaccurate that I am now wondering if he is delusional. He also forgot to mention the time he spent studying with a black magician in India. Another good story he forgot to mention was the time he was told he was no longer welcomed at the Chinmayananda Mission Summer Camp because it became known that he had seduced and then ridiculed a young woman that came to him for teaching. If you meet this man, run as fast as you can in the opposite direction."
guruphiliac.blogspot.com
END OF QUOTE
It is incredible how some posts here of JS's followers/defenders show the same kind of signature as if he is speaking through them!
Advaita Vedanta can be badly misused and misinterpreted: we owe these observations to JS and some of his followers. JS thought he just needed to hear the ultimate truth like Arjuna and he was done and cooked ready to teach Advaita Vedanta. But Arjuna did not get it at first and so the whole Gita came into being for Arjuna to finally just do his job which was to be his best warrior self. JS will teach you all right the importance of ethics preliminaries before the assimilation of that knowledge, but between what one teaches and one is able to implement, there is often a huge gap.
Unfortunately i see severe spiritual bypassing in JS in so far as he is not even able to admit his connection and abuse of Heather when she was around him, denying it at all occasions to his students and not doing the necessary apology to her but plunging frantically in his teaching activities and Vedanta thinking as if to avoid facing unpalatable facts and experiences
AND
spiritual bypassing in those followers of him who believe uncritically in his lies or think it is ok for a teacher not not admit his failures as teacher and the possibility that he may be caught in a terrible denial mechanism which he is unable to break. So those guys have to find reasons to justify still supporting someone with whom they found their way to the age-old teachings of Vedanta.That is also a kind of spiritual bypassing or inability to confront the reality of dealing with someone with personality disorders to whom one has given one's whole trust as is the case in a teacher/student relationship That would need a serious arduous psychological investigation. But who is willing to face the truth of oneself and one's cherished psycho-spiritual investments?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/31/2019 04:43PM by Valma.
"I did find this anonymous comment from back in 2008:
"I am so glad to be able to tell you about James Swartz, aka Sunny Jim, or as we all knew him—Rama. I lived in a communal situation, (ashram?) with this man for two years and knew him for two years prior to this. Let’s be clear, like other false gurus, Jim is very charming and charismatic. He has a good Vedantic rap and I believe he has developed a siddhi or two. If you are naïve and have no prior knowledge of Vedanta he can seem very impressive, and can even trigger altered states that may mesmerize you. But be forewarned. Like many false gurus he is also a chronic liar and once he has lured you into his web with his rap, he can be verbally and emotionally abusive—all in the name of giving you a teaching. His little speech in his story about not knowing about ‘crazy wisdom’ would be laughable, if he hadn’t disappointed and messed up so many peoples’ lives. He has a knack for messing with people’s minds and sending them right off the deep end. The parts of his ‘autobiography’ that I was a witness to are so inaccurate that I am now wondering if he is delusional. He also forgot to mention the time he spent studying with a black magician in India. Another good story he forgot to mention was the time he was told he was no longer welcomed at the Chinmayananda Mission Summer Camp because it became known that he had seduced and then ridiculed a young woman that came to him for teaching. If you meet this man, run as fast as you can in the opposite direction."
guruphiliac.blogspot.com
END OF QUOTE
It is incredible how some posts here of JS's followers/defenders show the same kind of signature as if he is speaking through them!
Advaita Vedanta can be badly misused and misinterpreted: we owe these observations to JS and some of his followers. JS thought he just needed to hear the ultimate truth like Arjuna and he was done and cooked ready to teach Advaita Vedanta. But Arjuna did not get it at first and so the whole Gita came into being for Arjuna to finally just do his job which was to be his best warrior self. JS will teach you all right the importance of ethics preliminaries before the assimilation of that knowledge, but between what one teaches and one is able to implement, there is often a huge gap.
Unfortunately i see severe spiritual bypassing in JS in so far as he is not even able to admit his connection and abuse of Heather when she was around him, denying it at all occasions to his students and not doing the necessary apology to her but plunging frantically in his teaching activities and Vedanta thinking as if to avoid facing unpalatable facts and experiences
AND
spiritual bypassing in those followers of him who believe uncritically in his lies or think it is ok for a teacher not not admit his failures as teacher and the possibility that he may be caught in a terrible denial mechanism which he is unable to break. So those guys have to find reasons to justify still supporting someone with whom they found their way to the age-old teachings of Vedanta.That is also a kind of spiritual bypassing or inability to confront the reality of dealing with someone with personality disorders to whom one has given one's whole trust as is the case in a teacher/student relationship That would need a serious arduous psychological investigation. But who is willing to face the truth of oneself and one's cherished psycho-spiritual investments?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/31/2019 04:43PM by Valma.
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by:
zizlz
()
Date: December 31, 2019 05:58PM
Quote
Valma
But who is willing to face the truth of oneself and one's cherished psycho-spiritual investments?
Exactly! Sunk costs make it hard to face the truth. Not just psycho-spiritual but also monetary investments. I donated generously this year at his satsangs in Amsterdam, because he told us he could really use the money, now that he had a mortgage to pay for his villa in Spain. Someone else in this thread reported that James also asked the attendees in Berlin to help him pay for his mortgage. It's likely that these weren't the only two times that Swartz solicited donations in this way.
Swartz's loyal followers have probably donated many thousands of dollars to him; I can understand that this makes it extra hard for them to wake up from the Swartz-spell.
As if we needed more evidence that JS is morally bankrupt, here he writes that he never solicited donations for personal financial reasons and that he fired a teacher in his organization because he asked for donations to help him pay his medical expenses: [www.facebook.com]
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by:
zizlz
()
Date: December 31, 2019 07:54PM
Some closing thoughts on this topic on this last day of the year:
- It should be clear to anyone who's read JS's biography that he scores high on the Dark Triad personality traits: machiavellianism (a manipulative attitude), narcissism (excessive self-love), and psychopathy (lack of empathy).
- Advaita Vedanta is an exceptionally valuable system of knowledge, but it can't give you a conscience if you're born without one. It can't take away the dark triad traits.
- The way you interpret and apply Vedanta will be affected by your personality. When your personality is low on conscience and empathy and high and manipulativeness, the way you use Vedanta will reflect that. Heather describes the terrible results it can have when Vedanta teachings are used to manipulate people, and the more I get to know about JS and the mindset of his loyal followers, the more plausible Heather's testimony seems to me.
- James' supposed state of enlightenment is not a state of being free from ego, but a state of the ego being free from conscience.
- If you want to wake up from the Swartz-spell, you don't have to throw out everything you learned from him. You don't have to burn his books. You don't have to dislike or even hate him. No one is all bad, and much of what he teaches is very valuable, because Vedanta is very valuable.
From [www.electricalspirituality.com] :
- It should be clear to anyone who's read JS's biography that he scores high on the Dark Triad personality traits: machiavellianism (a manipulative attitude), narcissism (excessive self-love), and psychopathy (lack of empathy).
- Advaita Vedanta is an exceptionally valuable system of knowledge, but it can't give you a conscience if you're born without one. It can't take away the dark triad traits.
- The way you interpret and apply Vedanta will be affected by your personality. When your personality is low on conscience and empathy and high and manipulativeness, the way you use Vedanta will reflect that. Heather describes the terrible results it can have when Vedanta teachings are used to manipulate people, and the more I get to know about JS and the mindset of his loyal followers, the more plausible Heather's testimony seems to me.
- James' supposed state of enlightenment is not a state of being free from ego, but a state of the ego being free from conscience.
- If you want to wake up from the Swartz-spell, you don't have to throw out everything you learned from him. You don't have to burn his books. You don't have to dislike or even hate him. No one is all bad, and much of what he teaches is very valuable, because Vedanta is very valuable.
From [www.electricalspirituality.com] :
Quote
Swartz does not grok spiritual enlightenment. He tells us “Enlightenment does not feel like anything. It is simply the hard and fast knowledge that I am limitless, partless awareness.” This statement contradicts the famous Hindu formula Sat-Chit-Ananda, which informs us that spiritual enlightenment - Being-Consciousness (Sat-Chit) - is inherently and absolutely blissful.
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by:
Traveler99
()
Date: December 31, 2019 09:51PM
For Monitoring the Site So Well
The "late" AreYouKiddingMe person, upon reflection, did indeed (as Corboy put so nicely) write as a teenager might.
It could well be that he was just raising hell and throwing out random words, thoughts, and insults to enjoy the new-found "power" that he had as an anonymous poster. For the first time, perhaps, that individual was treated, initially, as an adult whose perspectives might be worthy of consideration. That his (he was almost certainly male) blatherings got him banned must sting a bit, though he will likely brag to his friends about how "I was too much for them." Plus, he might try to come back under another name, just as James Swartz and Isabella have done, apparently, a few times.
Now, if in fact this person with the energy of a male teenager was Isabella, as Earthquake suspected, then, wow, what does that say about Swartz and his wife? Has James changed as regards his feelings about homosexuals so much (from his time with Heather documented in "Guru? The Story of Heather") that now he has married a woman with male energy? Is so, is this an "improvement" or a "growth" in Swartz, or is it a sign of his aging and diminishing faculties? Neither? Both?
As Swartz moves into 2020 this topic, his topic, moves to 20,000 views. The book of claims about him by Heather (which he himself has given evidence is true), "Guru? The Story of Heather", is read by more and more people. His 'followers' get questioned about his crimes continually, and people watch and listen to him much more carefully, and with a "raised eyebrow," as compared to just a few years ago.
Heather has won, in that her goal was to warn people about the dangers of being around such a conscience-less being as James Swartz. She has also triumphed in that she is stronger, and more healed, than at any time since escaping from Swartz's Montana hell (for her) when she was 16.
Enjoy 2020, Sweet Baby James. The Truth about you is known. It's out there. Be glad you at least have Isabella. She'll hang with you no matter what--right?
Gurus - Investment Vehicles For Those Who Trust Em
Posted by:
corboy
()
Date: December 31, 2019 10:55PM
Trusting that a guru's teachings are valuable, so valuable that it is worth ignoring harm reports from a guru's former students -- this is no different
from decisions made to buy and hold an investment you have purchased.
You've decided there is no better investment.
The danger is that you've decided to buy and hold stock and also decided you must ignore *any and all reports* that this investment, is losing value and should be cashed out before you lose your shirt.
A fantasy metaphor.
Swartz had better hope his financial advisors are not as blindly trusting as Sattva of the investments they've made to structure JS investment portfolio.
A wise investment strategy, whether emotional or financial, means you diversify, by investing your or your clients money in more than one stock or fund. If one loses value, the others do not.
A guru'students are trapped when they are indoctrinated that there is no other investment but their guru, that all other gurus are unworthy. They'll not diversify their emotional investments.
When these loyal students invest all their trust, their ultimate trust, in only one guru, they will live in fear, unacknowledged fear, lest they have made a mistake.
If others issue harm reports that this guru could be unworthy, the students who have put all their trust in that one guru and have devalued all other teachers, and have devalued their own past lives prior to their being 'saved' by this one and only guru - they will feel threatened by these harm reports.
They will not feel free to cash out and leave.
A fear all the more powerful for being disowned and disavowed.
In cult psychology this is termed "Exit Cost".
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: Sattva
Date: December 17, 2019 09:12AM
Corboy:
Hmmm.
First, let me suggest that Swartz' teachings have no inherent value. None.
Instead, I suggest that Swartz teachings only have value to the extent that you have been persuaded to value them -- and that other teachings are less
valuable, or have no value.
Let us look at gold. Gold. Aurum. The most stable investment. The heavy metal that people hide in their clothes when fleeing for their lives.
Yet...gold has no inherent value. Same thing for gemstones.
Prices per ounce of gold December 31 6:46AM Pacific Standard Time
1,972.27 Canadian Dollar
1,351.73 EURO
$1,522.90 USD
Gold is at these prices not because it is valuable in and of itself but because enough humans have agreed at the same time what gold is worth.
Gold is valuable because lots of people share a belief.
That belief can change.
In disasters, people have handed over piles of gold to buy a bit of food - or get smuggled out of the besieged city.
But, if the warlord pirate occupying your town decides your beautiful daughter is worth more in that moment than the $1 million pile of gold you're offering instead, you and your daughter are in deep trouble.
Your gold will be worthless if the warlord decides he wants, not a million dollars in gold, but that your daughter is worth a million dollars.
Corboy suggests that Swartz' teachings are not valuable by themselves, but because enough students have been persuaded and continue to persuade themselves that Swartz' teachings are valuable.
How we price a guru depends on our method of assigning value:
* Can wisdom be separated from goodness and virtue? If wisdom can be separated from goodness and virtue, then such wisdom will never lose value.
* If we consider that wisdom is inseparable from goodness and virtue, then wisdom will lose value if a teacher's behavior is immoral.
We have already seen that there are circumstances (famine, a warlord's whim)where gold can lose its value.
But if we are persons who are convinced that wisdom can be separated from goodness/virtue and still remain wisdom*, then a guru's teachings can never lose value - no matter how dreadfully a guru has behaved in the past, in the present or in the future.
* This doctrine was popularized by Chogyam Trungpa (alcoholic lecher) as 'Crazy Wisdom'.
There is a real comfort in such a sense of security. That there exists wisdom that can never lose its value.
Disciples of crazy wisdom gurus enjoy this security. No matter what their teacher has done or is doing or could do in the future, the teaching remains valuable. This is a peace that passeth all understanding.
A sort of pearl beyond price, eh?
But...those of us who regard wisdom as inseparable from goodness and virtue regard this price is too high to pay -- and regard such a stance as a menace to civil society.
Sattva wrote:
"I am not interested in learning how to be good. I want to know that I am free."
Was Sattva like this before meeting Swartz or after becoming Swartz' student.
If Sattva had these priorities before meeting Swartz, hmmm.
If Sattva developed these priorities after meeting Swartz, hmmm.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/01/2020 06:35AM by corboy.
from decisions made to buy and hold an investment you have purchased.
You've decided there is no better investment.
The danger is that you've decided to buy and hold stock and also decided you must ignore *any and all reports* that this investment, is losing value and should be cashed out before you lose your shirt.
A fantasy metaphor.
Swartz had better hope his financial advisors are not as blindly trusting as Sattva of the investments they've made to structure JS investment portfolio.
A wise investment strategy, whether emotional or financial, means you diversify, by investing your or your clients money in more than one stock or fund. If one loses value, the others do not.
A guru'students are trapped when they are indoctrinated that there is no other investment but their guru, that all other gurus are unworthy. They'll not diversify their emotional investments.
When these loyal students invest all their trust, their ultimate trust, in only one guru, they will live in fear, unacknowledged fear, lest they have made a mistake.
If others issue harm reports that this guru could be unworthy, the students who have put all their trust in that one guru and have devalued all other teachers, and have devalued their own past lives prior to their being 'saved' by this one and only guru - they will feel threatened by these harm reports.
They will not feel free to cash out and leave.
A fear all the more powerful for being disowned and disavowed.
In cult psychology this is termed "Exit Cost".
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: Sattva
Date: December 17, 2019 09:12AM
Quote
James has never set himself to be Miss Goody Two Shoes and taught me to become a do-gooder. What James taught me is how full, whole and complete I am, a simple fact that I never knew until I learned this from Vedanta via James as Isvara's instrument. More importantly, James taught me what I need to do to prepare my mind so this important knowledge about myself becomes firm.
Suppose you learned something about yourself that transformed your life in the the utmost positive way possible and you find out that the person who taught you this most wonderful thing about yourself actually had a heinous past.
Does the knowledge of this person's past negate what the person taught me about myself that I value so much? I understand that it might be the case for some people, but I know that the knowledge would not negate the wisdom for me.
I believe that Jesus would be happy to learn from sinners as well as do gooders and I personally think that sinners have more to teach me than the do gooders.
I personally do not want to ignore a good message that is delivered by a flawed messenger.
Corboy:
Hmmm.
First, let me suggest that Swartz' teachings have no inherent value. None.
Instead, I suggest that Swartz teachings only have value to the extent that you have been persuaded to value them -- and that other teachings are less
valuable, or have no value.
Let us look at gold. Gold. Aurum. The most stable investment. The heavy metal that people hide in their clothes when fleeing for their lives.
Yet...gold has no inherent value. Same thing for gemstones.
Prices per ounce of gold December 31 6:46AM Pacific Standard Time
1,972.27 Canadian Dollar
1,351.73 EURO
$1,522.90 USD
Gold is at these prices not because it is valuable in and of itself but because enough humans have agreed at the same time what gold is worth.
Gold is valuable because lots of people share a belief.
That belief can change.
In disasters, people have handed over piles of gold to buy a bit of food - or get smuggled out of the besieged city.
But, if the warlord pirate occupying your town decides your beautiful daughter is worth more in that moment than the $1 million pile of gold you're offering instead, you and your daughter are in deep trouble.
Your gold will be worthless if the warlord decides he wants, not a million dollars in gold, but that your daughter is worth a million dollars.
Corboy suggests that Swartz' teachings are not valuable by themselves, but because enough students have been persuaded and continue to persuade themselves that Swartz' teachings are valuable.
How we price a guru depends on our method of assigning value:
* Can wisdom be separated from goodness and virtue? If wisdom can be separated from goodness and virtue, then such wisdom will never lose value.
* If we consider that wisdom is inseparable from goodness and virtue, then wisdom will lose value if a teacher's behavior is immoral.
We have already seen that there are circumstances (famine, a warlord's whim)where gold can lose its value.
But if we are persons who are convinced that wisdom can be separated from goodness/virtue and still remain wisdom*, then a guru's teachings can never lose value - no matter how dreadfully a guru has behaved in the past, in the present or in the future.
* This doctrine was popularized by Chogyam Trungpa (alcoholic lecher) as 'Crazy Wisdom'.
There is a real comfort in such a sense of security. That there exists wisdom that can never lose its value.
Disciples of crazy wisdom gurus enjoy this security. No matter what their teacher has done or is doing or could do in the future, the teaching remains valuable. This is a peace that passeth all understanding.
A sort of pearl beyond price, eh?
But...those of us who regard wisdom as inseparable from goodness and virtue regard this price is too high to pay -- and regard such a stance as a menace to civil society.
Sattva wrote:
"I am not interested in learning how to be good. I want to know that I am free."
Was Sattva like this before meeting Swartz or after becoming Swartz' student.
If Sattva had these priorities before meeting Swartz, hmmm.
If Sattva developed these priorities after meeting Swartz, hmmm.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/01/2020 06:35AM by corboy.
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by:
earthquake
()
Date: December 31, 2019 11:02PM
In regard to James Swartz' feelings toward homosexuals, I have an interesting true story. Not directly related, nut shows his intolerance.
I am going to take out names, etc, but James and Isabella will know what I am saying, as will the students that witnessed this.
There has been a very big Shiningworld event recently. The organiser of this event has children. One of the children in late teens/early twenties. This person is transgender.
James has known about this for some time. During a live teaching, James decide to go off on an tangent. (Are you reading this Shiningworld?) With the course organisers in attendance, James felt it was valid to tell everyone that it is against God's wishes for someone to have a sex change.
I mean, I don't where to start with this. The parents were there when he said this. They were the organisers. If that wasn't bad manners, and sheer
ungratefulness enough, James Swartz is absolutely wrong in this teaching.
The enlightened person would not hold this view. And that is because every single thing that exists is God, according to Vedanta. Created by God. Not seperate from God. Therefore everything, including gender change, is of course God's will. As it is God!
What James Swartz showed was his own prejudices. Prejudices that the knowledge of enlightenment should have sorted by now. What after 50 years? A teacher should not be like this in course.
I have to also say, in response to Zizliz. Thank you so much for another former Shiningworld member coming out. This person has actually been quite important in this topic in many ways. I hope they dpn't mind me saying. There are quite a few former SW people here. I would encourage more to join Trav's topic.
Regarding Dakshina. Donations. I want to speak about this a little. Tradtional Vedanta has no expectation on this. Swami's would do it all for free. And I have saw this in person. In fact, they would do it at expense, and I have saw this also.
Once a person asks for money, in course, it is no longer 'voluntary' physiologically. For one feels compelled.
Anyhow, someone else helped them with that love nest in Spain. I told Shiningworld members that JS & IS would take the persons cash and then burn them. And they actually have recently.
James Swartz, I want to address you...
You allowed Isabella to get in the way, once again, of your relationship with your students. Once again you permitted the charms of this woman to soil the sanctity of the lineage. For when she goes against your students, you gave in. There is no honor there. But it is worse.
You and Isabella had the egotistical nerve to publicly humiliate one of your student teachers. Simply because he asked for donations for MEDICAL expenses. And You Isabella, you assaulted him mentally so much, it is my, and others, opinion he has never recovered spiritually.
Yet both of you amazingly think you have the right to lobby students, in course, for money to support the Spanish cult headquarters.
Who do you both think you are? You are completely hypocritical, and adharmic. You can just keep sucking this up. We are not letting either of you away with this.
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 12/31/2019 11:09PM by earthquake.
I am going to take out names, etc, but James and Isabella will know what I am saying, as will the students that witnessed this.
There has been a very big Shiningworld event recently. The organiser of this event has children. One of the children in late teens/early twenties. This person is transgender.
James has known about this for some time. During a live teaching, James decide to go off on an tangent. (Are you reading this Shiningworld?) With the course organisers in attendance, James felt it was valid to tell everyone that it is against God's wishes for someone to have a sex change.
I mean, I don't where to start with this. The parents were there when he said this. They were the organisers. If that wasn't bad manners, and sheer
ungratefulness enough, James Swartz is absolutely wrong in this teaching.
The enlightened person would not hold this view. And that is because every single thing that exists is God, according to Vedanta. Created by God. Not seperate from God. Therefore everything, including gender change, is of course God's will. As it is God!
What James Swartz showed was his own prejudices. Prejudices that the knowledge of enlightenment should have sorted by now. What after 50 years? A teacher should not be like this in course.
I have to also say, in response to Zizliz. Thank you so much for another former Shiningworld member coming out. This person has actually been quite important in this topic in many ways. I hope they dpn't mind me saying. There are quite a few former SW people here. I would encourage more to join Trav's topic.
Regarding Dakshina. Donations. I want to speak about this a little. Tradtional Vedanta has no expectation on this. Swami's would do it all for free. And I have saw this in person. In fact, they would do it at expense, and I have saw this also.
Once a person asks for money, in course, it is no longer 'voluntary' physiologically. For one feels compelled.
Anyhow, someone else helped them with that love nest in Spain. I told Shiningworld members that JS & IS would take the persons cash and then burn them. And they actually have recently.
James Swartz, I want to address you...
You allowed Isabella to get in the way, once again, of your relationship with your students. Once again you permitted the charms of this woman to soil the sanctity of the lineage. For when she goes against your students, you gave in. There is no honor there. But it is worse.
You and Isabella had the egotistical nerve to publicly humiliate one of your student teachers. Simply because he asked for donations for MEDICAL expenses. And You Isabella, you assaulted him mentally so much, it is my, and others, opinion he has never recovered spiritually.
Yet both of you amazingly think you have the right to lobby students, in course, for money to support the Spanish cult headquarters.
Who do you both think you are? You are completely hypocritical, and adharmic. You can just keep sucking this up. We are not letting either of you away with this.
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 12/31/2019 11:09PM by earthquake.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.