Episode 4: Panel w/ Joan, Judy and Tom
Vložit
- čas přidán 23. 08. 2024
- Episode 4 : Panel discussion with Joan Tollifson, Judy Cohen and Tom Thompson
www.joantollif...
irreverentmind...
www.theawakened...
About the Host:
Shiv Sengupta is the author of the Advaitaholics Anonymous books (published by New Sarum Press) and Facebook page.
Free chapters of both books can be read here:
www.newsarumpr....
www.newsarumpr....
Both books are available for purchase on Amazon:
www.amazon.com...
www.amazon.com...
Wow. The discussion certainly raised good reasons to forget it all.
Thank you Shiv. People who know they don't know ask questions. People who think they know defend their position.
Great podcast. My personal view is life takes us through the journey and creates circumstances , whatever is needed for our maturity. There is no set rules or patterns. Life is the ultimate teacher. Sometimes we suffer and sometimes we are happy. It is so simple. There is no need to inject spirituality and glorify normal day to day life processes
which is in a way unglorifying day to day processes and trying to reglorify them with a technique instead of seeing them for the glory they are
This was a great conversation. Thank you all for getting in there!
Really engaged , energetic , thought provoking discussion- i really appreciated the willingness of all participants. Thanks ✨✨
We are all human, we are all connected.
I think one cannot make themselves spontaneous for that very movement prevents spontaneity. Maybe at best one can notice how they are busy blocking spontaneity at this moment or they are already in the flow. Fruits of labor are not up to us. :)
Again,there comes the intention to " notice what blocking the spontaneity", but what for. Let it be.
Haha- this is some sweet candy for the seeker's mind!🤣🤣🤣
Just this being knows whole of it, still wants to know for sake of it, that listens and discards.Because nothing changes ,mental and physical patterns remains the same, "quirky "behaviour is what it is.
There is no you in choiceless awareness. You don't rest in choiceless awareness.
Frankly, to me, the debate about the word "allow" was a debate about semantics. What the term means in the context of meditation is to give thoughts passage through the mind without those thoughts causing a prolonged mental or physical reaction. I've practiced meditation for years and there is no question that you can choose to react to the random thoughts that enter your mind or let them (allow them to) pass without reacting to them as the untrained mind normally would. You in essence remove the power from those thoughts by not reacting to them. Judy appears to believe that what Joan and Tom were claiming is that you can choose to allow or not allow the reality of any given moment to happen.
I guess it's not surprising that Judy didn't seem to understand the concept since she says she never meditates. Perhaps it's possible to find what is called "enlightenment" without a meditation practice, but it would be like trying to get physically fit without exercising your body. I would say the best that can be achieved would be a state of contentment. But hey, that's certainly no small achievement, and that would be a massive improvement in the lives of most people.
I think that if "allowing" means doing then it feels wrong and dull in the body. If "allowing" means stopping/not doing, then it feels right, restful, ready-for-action.
"The person who says it cannot be done, should not interrupt the person doing it"
Yeah, I just see it as a linguistic intervention in an ‘automated’ process which (at times) will respond to these interventions, that can then release or redirect energy trapped in certain patterns (of automation).
Even Judy Cohen we need to “trick the mind” (whatever that is).
And who is doing the tricking.then?
Isn’t this too implying a doer?
Here it seems there might be some over-correcting in their critique.
when the student is ready the teacher will appear
Just allow the traffic to be as it is
Can you not accept what is?
please read The Whole Brain by jill bolte taylor ... we really operate on 4 parts of the brain ... 2 left and 2 right ...
Does it really matter!!
Very interesting podcast. Specially after the 1h00 mark when the discussion heated a bit up. And that's thanks to Judy ! So thanks Judy !
She questioned Tom's idea that there are "good teachers"/"correct meditation techniques" that can make one "ALLOW what is". Which is total bullshit to me. So I'm totally on Judy's side on that matter.
To me, "acceptance of what is" can only happen spontaneously, one cannot "learn to allow" or "learn to accept", what kind of "acceptance" would that even be ?! If it's not spontaneous, then it's simply not "acceptance", it's some sort of weird mind programming, and it's fake.
In fact, as Judy pointed out during the discussion, it goes even further than that : 'you'/'me' doesn't NEED to 'allow'. 'you'/'me' can only do 'you'/'me'. That's it. "acceptance" is not "you" 's job !
"What is" doesn't need "me" to be "allowed". "Me" shouldn't even care at all about "what is". The job of "me" is to simply be "me", not a "grander me", not a "more expanded version of me", not a "cosmic connected to the whole universe me". There is no "being more me" somewhere awaiting to experience "being more what is", that's all some mind bullshit that is passed on by "spiritual" people like Joan and Tom, in that "spiritual circus culture"...
The "what is/god/everything aspect of what we are" is always there, "me" cannot decide to be aware of it or not, "awakening" happens spontaneously, whether we meditate 'correctly' for 30 years or not, have a "good teacher" or not. I've personally never meditated, but the "realisation that I'm made of the same nature as the 'whole'/ that "god" is not someting other than me or outside of me" came gradually, spontaneously, simply by being 'me', doing 'me'.
And now, as Judy and Joan pointed out : BOTH are there, both "me" and "not me", simultaneously at all time. So, really interesting discussion.
And a thank you to Tom also, because without him, the discussion wouldn't have been so interesting.
I just posted a long comment that may address some of your concerns, but I do not want to debate any of it with you. I respect that your path is different from mine, and that's totally okay. I wish you well.
@@joantollifson7408 I wish you well too, Joan. I've really nothing personal against you. What happens is that I sometimes attack some of the spiritual IDEAS (and not the person you are) that you seem to be attached to. And because you are somewhat attached to those ideas, you get personally involved when you see someone attack them, because it triggers in you a desire to defend them, and that can be tiring. It's very human, I totally understand it.
To be honest, when you say to me "I do not want to debate any of it with you" (It already happened a few times on FB), I see a form of protection. Again, totally normal human thing to do. Not blaming you. I'm just sharing what I see : You protect yourself from someone that could "harm you ideas" or "take them away from you" or "make you change your mind". It's a basic human protection mechanism. I respect it.
Maybe one day, we will be able to have a deep discussion on all those fundamental "spiritual" ideas/concepts. And of course, in the process of that potential future discussion, I'll be open to question my own ideas/thoughts/"truths" and open to see you attack them, while I would be questioning yours, all of that in a playful atmosphere. 😊
In short : I'm not here to hurt you, I'm not a "bad guy" and I'm not an "internet troll". I'm genuinely interested in having a genuine deep discussion, if one day you want to. And if that day never comes, I'm fine with it too.
@@-cedric- I don't think you're a "bad guy" or a troll. You may even really believe you are wanting "a genuine deep discussion" with me. In any case, you have many strong opinions and judgements of others, and that's fine, but I'm not interested in having a discussion with you. All the best....
@@joantollifson7408 Fair enough... but do you realize that this very discussion IS a discussion you are having with me. ;-) If you want no discussion with me at all, there are no other options than to totally stop interacting with me... :-) ( in others words : you have to let me have the "last word" lol :-) )
@@-cedric- Yes hahahahahahahah ; o )
Awful sound quality!
Accept what is..constantly interrupting Judy..LMAO
Allowing what is, except allowing Judy to complete a sentence.
yes, they suck at demonstrating what they had been preaching all their lives. And they don't even want to see that for they are blissfully lost just like their followers.
@@pretheeshgpresannan4172 Allowing what is also means allowing the resistance to what is ;) so feeling resistant to Judy also needs to be allowed. Well, that's the minds reasoning anyway.
@@liggjasolsen yes, instead of acknowledging or allowing that I f'ed up and here I am so what now we can listen to mind's unasked for explanations. 🙂
We cannot say whether a person is a good martial artist or not just because he does the right movements exactly as trained. Being a well-trained robot is possible without ever touching what needs to be touched--just like trained hardcore robotic meditators. Lots of coping out with saying, 'words can get in the way, it is not intellectual, etc, ' Clearly, Tom and Joan are being helpless in living what they are teaching in this very interview--being helpless in allowing and demonstrating what they want to preach. They suck at letting a real-life situation (such as this very interview) change them for they are busy holding on to what they had acquired--"the skills I had acquired, or the seekers I had acquired" as Liam Nesson says in the movie Taken. Well, they can always copout saying, 'well, this is just an interview. I wanted to explain. What an idiot, etc etc.' The litmus test always fails.
Still have a difficult time understanding the point of all of this. Perhaps there is no point and you just talk about stuff. Judgmental is not the perspective in which to talk about this. I would suggest looking at haracter, biology, science there is so much to choose from here.