Current Page: 37 of 42
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: earthquake ()
Date: January 03, 2020 08:52PM

Quote
Zizliz
>
> JS is in a constant state of bliss (or so he
> claims in the same interview linked above):
>
>
Quote

Since my guru erased the veil I am in
> savikalpa samadhi all the time.
>
> I'm not entirely sure what savikalpa samadhi is,
> because there seem to be different definitions,
> but their common factor is that it is a state of
> bliss. Is that really what we see and hear when we
> look at and listen to JS and his rants? Is this a
> man who's constantly in bliss?

The two Samadhi of savikalpa and nirvakalpa are taught be Sri Adi Shankara, in Drik Dryhsa Viveka. Samadhi is very profound concentration. Savikalpa is with thought as an aid, nivakalpa is without.

Samadhi is also taught in Panchadasi. Remember the text that Sattva says, Swartz' commentray is better than the original. Lol.


He is wrong is his teachings. A person will not be in savikalpa samadhi all the time. It comes, and it goes. As does nirvakalpa.

However, he is showing something that is true. In savikalpa samadhi, conditioning is still present. So if he thinks that this is what he thinks it is, that is due to his wrong teachings. It is not what he is alluding to, removing the veil, enlightenment. So if he is in this, and claiming it, that is NOT enlightenment.

He is confused as he was taught one way by Swami Chinmayananda, more mystical, which places samadhi at the top. However, Swami Dayananda taught the Shankara way. Guru and then scripture, i.e knowledge. At the top.

For the enlightened person, they are sahaja samadhi. And it is here that conditioning does not exist. Or if it does, it is not acted upon.

I will say, perhaps a little clumsy, but it is correct, in order:

1. Savikalpa Samadhi
2. Nivakalpa Samadhi
3. Sahaja Samadhi.

I want to point out, that none of these are needed for enlightenment. Samadhi is not needed. knowledge is. The first two samadhi are useful for the listening phase, sravana. The last one is a product of the knowledge of enlightenment.

What he thought he was teaching when he spoke of savikalpa samadhi, should have been in fact sahaja samadhi. They are very different.

With Sahaja samadhi, the enlightened person has dis-identified with the body and mind. This is at the congitive level. Can everyone see why I highlight Shiningworld's wrong teaching on managing life internally? Such as in guna managements, and inherent conditioning like vasanasa.

As the understanding is clear for the enlightened person, they are in SAHAJA samadhi. That means they remember the teaching all the time. And here is Zizliz point validated by Vedanta.

This remembrance is natural. It doesn't matter what up's and down's are caused by karma, the enlightened person remembers the teachings. I can tell that personally, in private, James and Isabella often to do not be like this. I don't judge that, it just makes a point.

As the enlightened person is in Sahaja Samadhi all the time, this means they never lose sight of the teaching. I will say that outwardly they will appear to be dharmic. It is the default way. And as I said to some former Shiningworld members yesterday, after 50 years, once would think conditioning was addressed fully by Swartz.

For the enlightened person, every perception is samadhi. They do not lose sight they are limitless.

Regarding Swartz' claiming to be enlightened in front of Swami Chinmayananda. I cannot speak negatively about Swamiji (unlike Swartz has), I can reiterate a point. That the, erm, most prominent student in the Chinmaya mission, Swami Dayananda, who was due to take over the whole thing, he did not attain enlightenment after 10 years. So, and oxygen bottle carrier, did, after two years. Very convenient to claim that.


I don't know what the big deal is claiming it anyhow. The enlightened person is humble. And they are certainly nor special. Nor above anyone else. That does not make sense. They do not sit in glory, as Shiningworld keeps posting these student adorations. Another one or two yesterday.

To be honest, for the enlightened person, a sense of 'I' and 'Mine' goes.


What I have shared here, is vedanta. When we look at what Zizliz, a former student has shared here, does that tally up with James Swartz?



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/03/2020 08:58PM by earthquake.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: zizlz ()
Date: January 03, 2020 09:32PM

Thank you for your excellent explanation (again), Earthquake! It's so good to read some valid information about Vedanta, untangling the sense from the nonsense in what James says.

Quote
Earthquake
I don't know what the big deal is claiming it anyhow. The enlightened person is humble. And they are certainly nor special. Nor above anyone else.

That corresponds to my experience. I've met many spiritual teachers, but the one that stands out for me was an elderly Japanese Zen master. His level of realization was so deep that his presence felt like a hole in this reality (Maya). It was as if through this hole, you could feel the infinite power and stillness of the absolute (Brahman). These words don't do it justice. And I felt a deep humility in him. I've never felt such humility in anyone else.

James Swartz is on the opposite end of the spectrum. He's the least humble spiritual teacher I've met. His presence isn't impressive or profound. He's much like your typical uncle ranting about politics at family gatherings. He probably has had some glimpses of awakening and may still have them, but no more than that. He has a broad factual knowledge of Vedanta (even though part of his understanding is wrong). This, and his lack of conscience and self-doubt, and his skill of manipulation may give the impression of him being awakened, to some people who don't know better. Also, there may be some truth to one of my earlier quotes from the book Saints and Psychopaths:

Quote

Psychopaths can develop paranoid samadhi, which is a concentrated mind, because they have done so many unskillful things such as lying, theft, injury, adultery, substance abuse, etc. Their powers come from having to have a very sensitive awareness to perceive when someone is coming after them.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: corboy ()
Date: January 03, 2020 11:24PM

Hey, here is one way nasty brutal teachers reframe their cruelty into a selling point:

By claiming their approach is for elite souls tough enough to take it.

Its effective.

Anyone who refuses to be abused or flees, show themselves as weak, inferior.

Compassion is reframed as weakness, inferiority.

Those who remain faithful to the abusive guru convince themselves that they are elect, superior to the weaklings.

The abused disciples reframe torment of suppressing their own misgivings as purification that they are tough enough to bear.

For examples, read Men Wilbers praise of Rude Gurus and the excuses made on behalf of Andrew Cohen.

Males disciples of DA Free John rationalized in this manner when DFJ demanded access to their wives.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: earthquake ()
Date: January 04, 2020 10:49PM

Shiningworld seem to be taking some notice of our critique. Their failure to lead students out of samsara, even though they publicly laud these so called enlightened people in their fictional e-satsangs, has created much suffering.


A poster-child for this is Sattva. This person it seems is proud of the fact they are 'free', for they repeat it a lot. And they are told they are enlightened. Often publicly.

I was also in the same situation as sattva. Exactly. And also were many others.

For an actual enlightened person, they never want to, nor need to advertise this. And enlightenment is not big deal, to the enlightened person.

Being free also means being free of the teacher. There is no need to 'defend' the teacher. And certainly there is no irrationality.

Now Shiningworld are advertising this year 'The Complete Teaching'. Nice marketing hyperbole. I ask you James, why are you feeling the need now to take students back over stuff you should have actually been doing years ago?

You said it yourself in the event advertisement, that self-realised individuals find bliss obscured. Well, I am asking you, what use is your 'self-realisation' then? This is still samsara.

Enlightenment is enlightenment. You have placed these confusing grades in things, and I am telling you straight a high percentage of Shiningworld student have not got a clue what these gradations are.

It is just another ploy to keep people in samsara. You award them enlightenment, and then they are still suffering, and you murky the waters why. They go about thinking they are enlightened, sattva is an example. But sattva is great. Sattva is so full of ego, they accuse victims of abuse when sattva was not there to know this. Sattva is not free. Not free from the controller-ship of the teacher. This blind devotion is cult territory.

In any event, we have been saying here for a year now how Shiningworld are not teaching properly. How their students are left suffering. And while we understand THAT message is getting home, by virtue of the timing, here is something you will resist to the death...

It does NOT matter what new material you re-package. You have not completed your own learning all those years ago. You were forced out of two ashrams. It is obvious that you can only have learned from books.

Here is something important...

In the Swami tradition, the training is many years. The swami's that are called 'Chaitanya' retain a guru. The Swami's that are called 'ananda' have no guru. They are free. Are you really trying to imply that you once you had to leave Chinmaya mission, and Swami Dayananda did not want you, that after those little two years, you did not need a guru? You were equated with an ananda Swami?

I know you have claimed you kept in contact with Swami Chinmaynanda. I also know you are clever. Like you said the other day, Swami Dayananda was your teacher. Though only for two weeks really. So, prove that you have a teacher-student relationship with Swami Chinmayananda for the rest of his time.

Also, I am callng you out again. If you really were a student of Swami Dayananda, you would be his disciple. If you were is disciple/student, you woudl NOT call him Swami Dayananda. You would refer to him as Pujya Swamiji! You are caught out again. In that lineage, his student refer to him as Pujya Swamiji.

Isabella. You made a satsang today in regard to nididyasanam. I have made it know here before that you have taught wrong in regard to it never ending. As i said before it was agreed by two Swami. I see today you have posted something which is more in line, with the way it should be. You are also listening to the critique here.

The patterns are noticeable. You changed that abuse satsang to Tom the other day. You are having to take care in what you say now.

You are now realising current teachings have not been effective, so you see the need to give a 'complete' teaching on top, for these already 'self-realised' souls.

And you, Isabella, you are righting, previous wrong teachings that have been highlighted here.


I know the both of you have known what I have been talking about here. It doesnt matter what you say to your students. Your circle. You will save face. Though I am telling the truth. You both know what I have been saying from the start here.



If you keep these wrong teachings in place, it will be highlighted. If you change the teachings due to what we have been saying, it will also be highlighted.

It does not matter what you publicly claim. We are having an effect or you would not be trying to address things we are highlighting to the world.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/04/2020 10:55PM by earthquake.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: earthquake ()
Date: January 05, 2020 02:58AM

I am going to double post here.

We spoke on here the other day about the issue of James and Isabella Swartz placing pressure on people for money for their love nest. I mentioned that to withhold teachings from someone on the basis they are not giving you money so you could pay the mortgage of your new Spanish home in the hills, is not voluntary.

As in my last post, Shiningworld are trying to damage limitation. But as me and another former Shiningworld member said yesterday, they cannot help but trip themselves up.

This is priceless again guys.

Here is the Shiningworld response to what we said in regard to their donations:

Quote
Shiningworld

Teaching by Donation: Vedanta teaching is not a profession, although James teaches it professionally. In the great tradition of Advaita Vedanta the donation, which is not voluntary, is called guru dakshina which means that you contribute to the teacher and the teaching tradition according to your means and your appreciation of the spiritual value of the teaching.

Link: [www.shiningworld.com]

You guys have a bit of a problem though. What is your lineage? Swami Chinmayananda. Who authorised you to teach? Swami Chinamyananda.

So, why have you changed things? Why have you went against the tradition?


Here is what the Chinmaya Mission say in regard to Daksina:

Quote
ChinmayaMission
Jnana Yajnas could spread over five-to-seven days with 60-90 minute public discourses every day on the Bhagavad-gita or other Vedantic texts. Jnana Yajnas are free of charge. Gurudakshina is a voluntary offering devotees make to the Acharya on the concluding day of the yajna.

The Indian tradition of Gurudakshina is a way of showing gratefulness and respect to the Guru. It was an attempt to repay one's teacher or Guru after a period of study in the Gurukula. The repayment was not always monetary. At times, a teacher would simply ask his student to execute an important task. However, the Guru often received a valuable gift or donations from the pupil and his family as Gurudakshina. Though the life style of Indians has changed majorly down the years, yet the reverence and respect we pay to our teachers still remains largely intact.

At Chinmaya Mission - in keeping with the old age tradition - knowledge is available for all and at no charge. Thus, at the end of a Jnana Yajna - the beneficiaries offer Gurudakshina to the Acharya as a token of gratitude. It also highlights the fact that knowledge should not be taken for granted. The offerings received are used for sustaining and furthering the propagation of knowledge and Mission activities.

Can you see this? The Ashram of James Swartz own guru says it is voluntary.

James and Isabella say it is not. Of course, they have to pay the mortgage on the Spanish love nest.

Again, why did you destroy one of your teacher students over asking for medical expenses, when you are twisting what real vedanta teaches, to justify your own selfish interests?

I am also showing further proof that your own Guru's ashram does not teach what you do...


Quote
ChinmayaMission
Chinmaya Mission relies entirely upon volunteers. No one serving here receives monetary payment for their efforts.

Suggested Gurudakshina donation level is $40/month. However, this is voluntary and you can choose another amount

The big mistake that James and Isabella have made, is that they have publicly said that they will withhold teachings if there is no money being offered. You have crossed another line.

The teachings are to be gave freely. You do not own the teachings. They are not your's to sell. And no price tag can by placed on the teachings.

I've personally saw Swami use their own money, that has been saved, to potentially much lose. I have explained to them, they might not recompense the money. And they told me, they do not go to a teaching expecting money. If they get money, good. If they don't be anything, no problem.

This is voluntary. The teachings of actual Vedanta are always gave freely. This is why dakshina, donation's are on the last day. Teachings first.

You have shown to 'Tom' the other day, you have placed money before teachings. Just like you place your wife before students. And, Isabella, you wrote the above event description, saying wrong teachings again.

Buyer Beware!

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: Sahara71 ()
Date: January 05, 2020 06:38AM

Very strange response from Swartz to one of his "students" on his ShiningWorld website:

[shiningworld.com]


Swartz writes:

“You can’t have your cake and eat it too, Jane. It’s time to quit whining and grow up. But you don’t want to do that, because you would have to abandon shagging the exciting young counterculture guys with stiff dicks who don’t know what they want and knock about working for 300 dollars a month, sleeping on couches in communal flats and having their way with hippie babes. Think John and Frank, etc.”


Really ????? Does anyone else find this response a tad inappropriate to a student from a teacher? I do.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: zizlz ()
Date: January 05, 2020 07:01AM

Quote
Sahara71
Really ????? Does anyone else find this response a tad inappropriate to a student from a teacher? I do.

Yes, highly inappropriate. JS clearly showing his true colors as the abusive narcissist he is.

Jane's reply to his insults ("I love you, James!") is another example of very unhealthy cult dynamics at work.

BTW, your link goes to a different satsang. The site is designed in a way that the url in your location bar sometimes doesn't update when you navigate to a different satsang. The correct url is written at the top of the page after "Share Link". This is the correct link to the satsang you quoted:
[www.shiningworld.com]

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: Traveler99 ()
Date: January 05, 2020 07:03AM

Excerpts from a Letter to a Friend.
A Summary of the Charges
Against James Swartz


Recently a good friend sent a message which, in part, queried as to how I'd summarize the charges against James Swartz. Below is an amended version of my reply.
-----------------

Yes, "How" James Swartz teaches is excremental.
Many of his teachings "techniques' are terrible, with mind-screwing, bullying, and manipulation which is unethical, to say the least. Now Earthquake has also shown his financial corruption. Withholding teachings to force people to pay him money is beyond the conception of a true spiritual teacher, even, and especially, in Swartz's own (falsely claimed) lineage.

The thing is, "What" Swartz claims about his spiritual history, and what he teaches, are both reprehensible. He is not only a (sex and other) criminal, but has also lied about his spiritual history and deliberately teaches Rubbish (incorrect and distorted versions of Advaita Vedanta).

These things combined totally finish James Swartz as a credible and reputable spiritual teacher.

In summary, without even including the book "Guru? The Story of Heather" in the mix, this thread on the Cult Education Forum has made four huge points;

-- James Swartz has been proved to be a criminal. At the very least, he is the self-confessed killer of a neighbor's family pet who sexually preyed upon poverty-stricken widows in India. Add to this the fact that he has confessed to knowing 14 year-old Heather intimately during the time in which she claims he was her rapacious and drugging "guru."

-- As a teacher, he has bullied and mind-screwed his students during his whole (over 40 year) "career" as a (self-proclaimed) spiritual teacher. The whole time, he has used others (wife, students, and whoever else he can) for his own financial gain. This included having his first wife do sex shows live on stage, training two underage 'students' to work as strippers, and, more recently, demanding "donations" to pay for his (underhandedly obtained) "ashram" in Spain
.
-- Regarding his spiritual history, Swartz's lies have now been documented. Where he claims he was a valued assistant and achieved a sort of "teacher certification," instead the truth is that he was evicted for having sex with other students and was never accredited in any way. To him, claimed "years" were really "weeks before being expelled."

-- Regarding his teachings, his lies and distortions have been totally illuminated and proved. He claims to be fluent in Sanskrit and able to translate sacred texts to English. His attempts at translation are, by experts, found to be "poor," "lamentable," and "apparently purposefully distorted." Whole verses of the Bhagavad Gita are left out of his versions. (Why? They would point students to the Truth, not to his distorted teaching of Swartz.) Plus, he leaves the "heart" out of Advaita, which Ramana Maharshi never did. He makes Advaita Vedanta totally a mental construct, and then distorts the thinking it's based upon.

In the Forum, and in and by his entire life, Swartz has been shown to teach others to and himself behave as a Sociopath, using his distorted versions of Advaita Vedanta to promote his "I can't sin, since you don't exist," philosophy. To the question, "How could anyone even consider such a person as a teacher?" the only possibility can be terrible stupidity or blind ignorance. That, or a masochistic nature.

James Swartz is a proven criminal fraud in all important aspects of his life.
What else can be said of such a "person"?

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: earthquake ()
Date: January 05, 2020 07:15AM

In the sampradaya, such sexual language is not permitted. He would never have been taught that under Swami Dayananda. No disciple of Swami Dayananda speaks to a student like that.

In tradtional vedanta, teachers are taught to use language in a certain way. It is an oral tradition. So there is a tonality used. The actual words used are very important also. I have never came across a teacher of tradtional vedanta that would use such language.

That language would most certainly be offensive to any number of people. A vedanta teacher has to mantain a degree of almost professionalism.

Oh, in the link I shared earlier, Isabella has said that James is a professional, even though does not do this as a profession. The language used here is hardly professional.

Speaking of Isabella not saying this is a profession for him.

Isabella and James, and indeed the Shiningworld inner circle. You will know this.

When you were so quick to ostracise one of your students for asking for medical expenses, you did have the requirement that a teacher had to have an individual means of income. For you, it was easy to then say and i quote;

"You are NOT to SOLICIT donations."

However, Isabella, being the shining example of an enlightened person that she is, vis a vis, shanti, She put an end to James' little business in the USA.

James and Isabella had been staying somewhere for many years, at the hospitality of the owners. They were teaching from there. James also had a side-business. Which made some decent money.

Isabella does what she does best, and started a whole load of trouble over nothing with the property owners. So they were both told to go. James actually went crazy with Isabella, in front of students. Remember JS & IS?

It was amazing. So, James lost his income out of that.


Now we see that they are no longer bother about soliciting for money. As they have took a financial hit.

They got a huge lump some from someone for the Spanish place. And I said to former members, wait to you see what happens. This person will be used and burned.

And that is what has happened. I won't go into the exact details here yet.

Use and abuse.

It is fine for you to change the rules, as long as it suits you. Extorting money out of people. Threatening to withhold teachings unless they give you cash for your spanish love nest in the hills.

This spiritual profession, it ain't a bad racket after all, eh? You guys 'retiring to the spanish hills. Off the back of poor unknowing people that are suffering.

P.S. Brilliant posts guys. I am sorry to post so soon myself. I have just been doing this is a work break lol.

A very astute point in Trav's post...

James Swartz seem's to not like kama and prema that much. That is, romantic/sexual love, and emotional love (such as parental). While he himself can indulge with his students sexually. He often talks this down. And as a member of the inner circle I can validate this is the way it is. I'm leading to something here...

...He does indeed leave the heart of out what he teaches. And he sells Ramana stuff. He should at least have assimilated some things.

Initially it looks like Shankara is drop dead cold in what he taught. That Advaita is a cold wasteland. This is not true. One of the last teachings Shankara taught was Bhaja Govindam. Which is about Bhakti. And Although James Swartz teaches Narada Bhakti Sutra, it is only lip service.

I know of lineages that teach advaita vedanta, and absolutely regard bhakti, actual bhakti, advaita bhakti, as enlightenment. This is not different from jnanam, knowledge. In fact, knowledge is assimilated in the buddhi, intellect. Which is metaphorically, loosely taught is in the heart 'area'. While not strictly physically true, the reason this is taught is very important.

It supports completely what Trav posted. There is no fun, without the bhakti element. But there can be lots of by-passing with the Shiningworld way.

Lastly, in the tradition, vedanta teachers are taught to be compassionate to people as they can sensitive. There is never trying to give them tough love, or deliberately saying things that might provoke or hurt. A vedanta teacher is to be polite and courteous at all times. Both James and Isabella Swartz will try to destroy whoever opposes them.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/05/2020 07:29AM by earthquake.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: zizlz ()
Date: January 05, 2020 07:26AM

Quote
Traveller99
To the question, "How could anyone even consider such a person as a teacher?" the only possibility can be terrible stupidity or blind ignorance. That, or a masochistic nature.

That's a little harsh. I may be terribly stupid and blindly ignorant, but in my defense, to someone like me who doesn't have a solid knowledge of Vedanta, James' teachings were very interesting in the beginning. As may be clear by now, there are serious problems with his teachings, but that's not something I noticed at first. And James has a charm about him (which isn't necessarily a compliment, because as noted before, he seems to have many traits typical of psychopaths, and charm is one of those typical traits). And I genuinely like his irreverent sense of humor. For example, I had a good laugh about his idea for a new kind of yoga: FYFY — Fuck Your Feelings Yoga, because people tend to get in trouble because they take their feelings too seriously. In retrospect, it's less funny, because "Fuck your feelings" is also the psychopath's attitude towards others.

Edit: on second thought, you probably were talking about students who know the extent of the allegations against JS (which I didn't) and still choose to stay with him. Still, the way you put it is a bit harsh, because it can also be admirable qualities like loyalty and gratefulness that compel his students not to believe the allegations.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/05/2020 07:33AM by zizlz.

Options: ReplyQuote
Current Page: 37 of 42


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
This forum powered by Phorum.