NormanN

Well thank you very much for the concern, although I would prefer to have some fun and discuss this topic ?

In our interconnected world, there are so many ‘mass’ teachings about Enlightenment out there that seekers are swamped by a sea of opinions and systems on the subject. A teacher can have thousands of followers and provide a one-size-fits-all system for them, a system which may not have an effect on the majority of their followers. The amalgam of ideas and theories which a seeker has to wade through is caused by the ease with which any teacher can spread information across the planet, and while that is helpful, it leaves those teachings open to innumerable interpretations and distortions. i have been wondering recently whether it would be better for Enlightened Teachers to now focus on providing guidance to individuals, as that may be of more value to seekers than just being given another perspective on the mass teaching of Enlightenment. So my question is: should teachers spend more time on one-to-one teachings and small groups, so that seekers can be properly guided and helped along their path, or is it better to continue to relay information to the masses and leave each person to find their own way? What do you guys think?

@Nahm what is your opinion on the question? After nearly 15000 posts, you’ll probably have had more discussions like this than I have had ?

Thanks @Nahm, but I’m really just interested in hearing what you guys think on the matter. I agree that it’s not a topic of crucial importance. but it’s interesting to discuss nonetheless.

No, not at all! It’s just that there are so many amazing teachers out there that I would like to meet 1-to-1 and learn from , but they are so busy creating mass teachings and have so little time for giving their attention to individuals like me . It makes me wonder whether what they are doing is the most effective way to teach.

I think that’s a common misconception about the process too, that there is an end to it. Even the greatest sages of all time never reached ‘completion’ or ‘perfection’, and that is such an important thing to understand. Teachers are learning as much every single day, if not more than, their students, and it is far too easy to fall into the trap of idolising teachers as perfect beings. There isn’t an end to the journey, we just become more and more independent in our learning, more focused on learning from the actual experience of ourselves.

Well then you’ve found a very good teacher for where you’re at @LfcCharlie4 which is fantastic! I think the Enlightenment industry is one of those places where you can find such a variety in the styles and emphasis of different services/teachings. Sure, you do get a wide range of quality and personality types, but it is a very rich environment where you will always find whatever it is you need from one individual or another. The whole world becomes a place of learning for a seeker, and that is really special. Ultimately though, as we’ve said previously, it all comes back to You and what is going on inside You. There is no greater source of the knowledge of being than your own being, and every teacher, no matter what it is they bring to you, is only a guide along the way.

I’m not sure you can state that as fact. Sure there are better teachers at different stages on a person’s journey, and some teachers may be almost useless for the serious seeker altogether, but there is so much more to Enlightenment than just pure non-duality. The full flowering of the Enlightenment process cannot be boiled down to just ‘realising the self’. Although that is a key part of it, there is so much more to that process which very good, pure non-duality teachers often fail to address because they are so centred on that subject alone. This is where other teachers step in who can enrich a seekers understanding of all aspects of their being and life.

When we say a teacher is ‘better’ than another, I think we have to be careful with that. I know what you mean, some teachers are more knowledgable and have a deeper understanding, while others can be dogmatic or manipulative. Nonetheless, a person who is attracted to the latter category may well make enormous progress through them, simply because their attraction to what can only be described as a ‘toxic teacher’ will come into friction with their aversion to those toxic traits, and that friction will force that individual to grow, They may not make the same level of progress by sticking to ‘safe teachers’ if they are still attracted to the more volatile and charismatic personalities often present in ‘toxic teachers’. I do agree though that any individual should always put their own needs and instincts first, and should not be drawn into any teaching or to any teacher for any other reason other than making a conscious decision to do so.

Thanks for your input @LfcCharlie4, @Angelite and @JustThinkingAloud. Maybe the best way to summarise our opinions here is to say that a teacher teaches in the best way for them to express themselves individually and that the seeker can choose to learn from a teacher or teaching which suits them the best. This perspective gives both the teacher and the seeker the volition to teach and learn in the best way for them without the need for there to be a hierarchy of who teaches what and who teaches best. From this stance, we can accept all teachers and the choices of other seekers without the need to judge or rank them. Does that seem like the best way to answer my initial question?

Okay so optimum method in your opinion is still 1-to-1 followed by a genuine transmission at the correct time. That suggests to me two things. Firstly, as individuals, we are generally powerless to progress without direction and guidance which is directly relevant to us. It suggests that consistent progress is made by seekers only when there is a direct external influence on them to help them break out of their inertia. Secondly, as a consequence of the first point, human beings are actually reliant on their connection with others in order to progress. That’s quite clever because it forces seekers to swallow their pride and ask for help, something which can be quite difficult to admit to oneself. I’ve done lots of inner work, and I generally lean away from things like transmissions because they don’t make sense to me. I’ve experienced what @Angelite spoke about as presence, but it seems quite normal and natural to me to be affected by the inner state of someone else. For me, it’s transmissions which seem like a strange idea. I know stories about transmissions are littered throughout spiritual culture, but I am always doubtful of any powers in those stories, particularly those which are able to awaken someone, wielded by only a certain few. It seems like a subtle power game to me of ‘I gave you Enkightenment’.

So basically we are back to square one in our discussion in that there is no optimum method to teach and to learn, but that it is instead down to an individual’s needs ?. In which case mass teachings, one-to-one teachings, and non-verbal teachings are of equal value, and whether they are presently useful depends solely on the seeker.

I agree with you on that @LfcCharlie4, if none of those who lived in truth said a word about it, then there would never be the concept of Enlightenment in the first place, the very concept which arguably causes a lot of the problems which we as seekers face. Thinking that there is something we need to find to become Enlightened, we miss the entire point that we already are Enlightened. As a consequence of that, would you say that a teacher’s work is therefore not to teach Enlightenment, but to undo that ideal, that concept of perfection, which is so deeply ingrained into our psyche? If we lived in a world with only non-verbal transfer of that knowledge, do you think we would learn the secrets of being faster?

@LfcCharlie4 thanks for your opinion on this. I’m certainly with you that one-to-one is the best way forward for quality personal guidance on an individual’s journey. You say RASA transformed your existential experience, which is fantastic, and I’m certainly open to the idea that there methods other than words which can create existential changes in people, akin to what you have said about presence @Angelite. Perhaps we could say then that there are many methods of teaching, and that each method is helpful for different reasons. Whether a method is suitable for an individual at one time or another is up to them to decide because they must be open to receive it. As per my original question in this topic, maybe we could say then that more teachers teaching one-to-one is the way forward to help people to gain more value from the time they spend learning from Enlightened teachers, both in terms of the personal verbal tuition an individual receives and also the access and exposure to non-verbal teachings through methods like RASA and presence. Would you both agree with that?

@Angelite I have heard that being in the presence of an Enlightened teacher can help; I think it's known as 'spiritual osmosis'. Have you ever had any experience of this, and if so would you say it was effective? If it is so effective, then that would suggest that it would make no difference whatever else a teacher did, whether that be teaching many people at the same time, teaching just one individual, or just existing, all seekers would receive the same experience and the same benefits. However, I'm not convinced teaching through exposure to an Enlightened Teacher's presence would just solve every issue a person is having. Every individual has so many issues buried inside of them that have to be worked through, so surely it would be better to be guided while working through those issues rather than just to leave it to chance while being around a teacher?

So @LfcCharlie4, I've just looked up Ramaji and Ananda Devi and what RASA is about. Would you say that the best teachings therefore are neither mass teachings nor conversations between a teacher and a seeker, but instead are the sort of psychic/shaktipat awakening methods which Ramaji and Ananda Devi are using? If so how are you able to determine the effects of those methods within yourself? I'm not dismissing the idea altogether, but it seems to me very easy to tell a person that something like RASA is helping them, and then through suggestion that person will automatically assume that it is having an effect on them. Also the idea that someone has control over your awakening doesn't really sit right for me, surely it is a personal process that another person can only support?

@Angelite I agree that Reality is the greatest teacher, but are not other people part of that Reality and as good a teacher as anything, particularly those who have trodden the path and know the pitfalls? I understand what you’re saying, no person can best life as a teacher, but I wouldn’t write teachers off just out of principle.

Interesting thoughts guys. TRUTHWITHCAPITALT while I agree that we don’t need a teacher to certify that we are Enlightened, it is certainly difficult to awaken without guidance from somebody else who understands the trials and pitfalls of the journey. Personally, I think individuals woukd greatly benefit from 1-to-1 teaching as LfcCharlie4 has said, so long as the teacher who is coaching a student is able to do so effectively. While it might be up to each individual to assess whether a teacher is suitable for them, I think any person struggling to understand their awakening would benefit from the attention and guidance of an effective teacher, more so at least than through just listening or reading mass teachings.