Hi Wanderer,


Thank you for getting back to me. I find it helpful hearing alternative perspectives on this matter. I believe your right that he is indeed a money making machine, but I do not believe that he has trod on anyone to make it so. I get the feeling it was not self serving (ie.egotistical) and that people came to him to solve personal problems and not vice versa. I rack my mind sometimes to find some substantiative egotistical behaviour so I can flaw him (make me right!!!), but like trying to run up a wet slide I fall back every time (funny I don't seem to learn the lesson?). This is just a feeling, but I get the instinct with you it is more of a personal issue that fogs your interpretation of who ET is (ie. your past), and not necessarily objective observations of his behaviour. For instance the Buddha is one of the most famous people of all time, and the interpretation of that could be he had one of the biggest egos, but we know that not to be the case. I must say though there are certain things that make me think his ego is back (not that anyones ego ever truly goes), for instance at the end of A New Earth, he says 'there is a new species arising on this planet, and you are it.', it seems quite a divisive statement.... anyway, if you want to reply, great, if not thank you,

Ruary

bump

What happened to me is that I suffered a lot after becoming involved in one of these LGATs. All the usual stuff... massively depressed, anxiety, confused, negative or broken sense of self, etc etc. Dreadful suffering after living a decent life for many years. So I went looking and reading for anything that could help me. I'd never felt the need to seek out this kind of thing before and as I now did not trust anyone I was wary.

Eventually I came across The Power Of Now. Infact I had the audio book and started to listen to it a few days after my 29th birthday. So you can imagine how it felt when I heard Tolle's words about how he had his depression and then this big breakthrough and awakening experience a few days after his 29th birthday. It really resonated and hit me on a deep level.

I really wanted this to work for me and so I tried to do what it was saying about dis-identification. Years later I am still suffering and in a lot of pain and not able to function very well. I just feel that If I don't have the intellect or depth to understand this and use it then who does? I mean that in the best possible way.

I think there is some mis-understanding with what he terms "being". I think he thinks that this automatically grants feelings like love, joy, peace etc. but I actually think this is to do with having a soul and that being present in the body. Since I became traumatised and depressed I lost that and I am sure that is what I would term "soul" and soul feelings. I believe the soul breaks off and leaves a person if they are in a lot of pain. I have being or "consciousness", just like anyone else, but when I sit alone and bring my attention to that there is now this emptiness, or nothingness there where previously there was my soul that I could see. The nothingness does not give anything... it does not do anything, I can do nothing with it. It absolutely does not change my mind or free me from anything that I am troubled by. My soul could do, but not that, so I am kind of stuck now wondering what he is trying to teach. I think it might lead to something else eventually but I have been in this state a long time now and if this was the end result of all this spiritual clap-trap then I think a person could just see it as another hell and another misery. I honestly think that it would be easier to climb everest than to get enlightend. It's very hard for me to fool myself that this state I have is desirable and better than having a soul and an ego that was intact. It's nothing to do with any mind-stuff either that judges this - I simply don't rate it or care for it and really it's quite a shocking thing to discover.

I think he means well though and that he is a decent person, I can't believe he is just another charlatan like these more nefarious cult leaders. I just wish it worked for me what he is trying to get across.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/06/2012 02:31PM by billy77.

attn: rr moderator

I was delighted to stumble upon a forum space that is discussing Eckhart Tolle. It is important to be skeptical and objective.

However, I was disappointed to discover that you, RRMODERATOR, among others that have conbtributed to this discussion, have made a fundamental category or ontological error.

This is highlighted by your use of the word ´believe´in the context of saying ´you´re a believer´ (...of Eckhart Tolles teachings). To say that someone can ´believe´ in the (power of) NOW is an oxymoron. Can you believe in gravity? Can you believe that this moment is all that exists? Can you believe in the truth? At the heart of Eckhart Tolles ´teachings´ is a truism - that this moment is all that exists. Accordingly, you can´t believe this - it is not a matter of opinion. Concurrently, this suggests that Eckhart Tolle is not actually a teacher at all. Has he ever described himself as a ´teacher´? No. I can´t teach you the sun - I can only draw the curtains to reveal it.

RR MODERATOR - since you moderate this forum, you have the implicit responsibility (if you hope to have an objective forum) to understand the topic at hand.

Your preposition that what Eckhart Tolle says can cause psycholoigcal distress or worse is ridiculous because your preposition is rooted in the aforementioned ontological error. Psychological dysfuntion (such as schizophrenia) is characterised by duality. Indeed, the prefix ´Schiz´ origintaes from the latin word ´to split´or to ´cleave in two´. Opposite to this is to be ´undivided´, or ´one´. To be sane (Latin: ´sanus´) is related to the word healthy - and ´healthy´ is closely related to the word holy or ´to be one´. Thus, Eckhart Tolle correctly defines psychological duality as one of the possible sources of psychological dysfunction.

Eckhart Tolle´s The Power of Now does NOT propose a new psychological paradigm. If you (RR MODERATOR) taught your interpretation of The Power of Now to students it would indeed cause pyschological harm because you (like so many of the contributors to this forum) misunderstand the book at an absolutely fundamental level.

Do wild animnals have psychological problems? Do Wild animals live in the past and future or the moment?
What is the only species on the planet that has systemic and chronic pyschological problems? Humans.

RR MODERAOTR - you MUST understand the topic at hand and, if you do not have the intellectual ability to understand the topic, please, in the name of humility, do not write anything on the matter.

I trust you will post this reply up with swift effect in the name of reasoned, rational and fair debate.

John Smith:

When people disagree with you it doesn't mean that they don't "understand the topic". It simply means that theyt think you and/or your assumptions are wrong.

You apparently are a Tolle "true believer". That is, you believe in Tolle's claims and wish to assume that they are facts. But what you offer is really merely a postulation based upon assumptions you have picked up from Tolle. But these assumptions and not somehow factual.

Simply because you have faith in Tolle's teachings, this doesn't make his faith claims real or prove that they are factual. There is no objective scientific evidence or proof to support Tolle's belief system.

If you wish to believe in Tolle and his teachings that's your choice, but it's not a "truism" or "all that exists".

Based upon Tolle's bio it seems that he experienced something like a nervous breakdown and became delusional. He then constructed his belief system based upon his personal revelation. Hardly a scientific process based upon objective reality. More like a religious belief system that might be called Tollism. No one "must understand" otherwise and you have offered no compelling reason to do so.

Thank You for taking the time to reply. It is, however, overwhelmingly obvious that you simply do not understand the central tenet of the argument - i.e. the difference between a belief and a fact. With the exception of an exploration into metaphysics and philosophy, you can´t have faith in the existence of the present moment in the same way that you can´t have faith in the law of gravity or the fact of evolution by natural selection. Is it really that difficult to understand? If you truly analyse what I am saying you will discover that I am being far more objective than you. In my arguments, I use logic.

You say: ´There is no objective scientific evidence or proof to support Tolle's belief system.´

Firstly, Eckhart Tolle doesn´t have a belief system! That´s the whole point! He realises that the present moment is the only moment that exists (with the exception of an exploration into metaphysics and philosophy - but people read Eckhart Tolle´s books for life guidance, not to stoke intellectual debate).

Secondly, is scientific proof for the existence of the present moment even possible? Your statement here is burdened with subjective-objective ontological error. It ironic that you seem to support the scientific method without being aware of the intrinsic logical parameters of this objective methodology.

In respect of the people who write on this forum, please do your homework and deepen your understanding and knowledge of the topic.

John Smith:

Your post is redundant.

"Overwhelmingly obvious"?

That's a fairly ridiculous claim. No overwhelming basis to demonstrate that Tolle's teachings are obvious. They actually seem a bit mad.

"Can't have faith"?

Get serious. Tolle is preaching a belief system that requires faith in his teachings and you are foolish to argue this point. He is little more than an obscure fringe "philosopher", despite his "Oprah" moment.

"subjective-objective ontological error"?

As you must know Tolle has plenty of critics that see him as little more than a nut.

You really are really embarrassing yourself here. But I guess going by "John Smith" will keep this from going on your permanent record as an identified humiliation.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/11/2013 05:41AM by rrmoderator.

John Smith,

He does actually say that he decided to become a spiritual teacher if you listen to him on the audio version. His website has "Eckhart Teachings" all over it aswell. So I think that he is describing himself as a teacher.

Of course it turns into a belief system for his followers. What else would these truisms turn into? Nobody can do anything with truisms. At some point it has to turn into mind stuff.

Of course everyone who really understands enlightenment knows that it has nothing to do with truisms or mind stuff.

billy77:

I might be wrong, but I am very sure Eckhart Tolle has never said that he ´decided´ to become a spiritual teacher. His website does indeeed have ´Eckhart Teachings´ as a title but Eckhart himself definitely did not set up the website; - he has said many times that he is very computer-illiterate. Yes, he has said that he became a spiritual teacher ´´in the eyes of the world´´ (quote). But the word ´decide´ implies something very different to simply the word ´became´. His role as a spiritual teacher is more a result of people wanting to spend time with him rather than an active choice on his part to become a teacher.

I invite you to find an audio version of transcript where he says ´I decided to become a teacher´. He has said several times that a true spirital ´teacher´ cannot teach you anything and, thus, my initial point that he is not a teacher stands. I can´t teach you the sun - I can only draw the curtains to reveal it.

Regarding truism and belief, I strongly encourage you to explore the fundamental difference between a truth (fact) and a belief.

Can you believe in the law of gravity? Does a belief or dis-beilef in the law of gravity make any difference to the existence of the law?

Can you believe in the law of evolution by natural selection? Just because there are creationists, does this weaken the scientific validity of the process of evolution?

Can you believe in a fact? That is an oxymoron. Is the present moment the only moment that exists? Yes, it´s a fact. Does it make a difference if people don´t believe in the central tenet of Eckhart Tolle´s argument? No. Why? Because the existence of the present moment is a fact. It is the Truth.

John Smith:

You are reciting the same rant or mantra over and over again.

But repeating the same verbiage redundantly doesn't make it any less ridiculous or prove anything. Other than it provides rather compelling evidence that you are a devout disciple of Tolle and his teachings.

BTW -- It is ridiculous to suppose that Tolle is not well aware of how his works are titled and displayed through his associated Web sites. If there is one thing Tolle knows it's how to market himself. "Eckart Teachings" was certainly reviewed and approved by Tolle.

Tolle certainly sees himself as a "spiritual teacher" to say the least. Probably more like a prophet that received revelation.

If Tolle has nothing to teach maybe he should stop all of his ongoing marketing and shut down his Web sites?

FYI -- Preaching is against the rules you agreed to before posting at this message board. If you want to preach your beliefs about the "Power of Now" and recite mantras extolling Tolle "Truth", set up a soap box or Web site and do so, but not here.