Jim Newman and Tony Parsons

[SoonHei]

I wasn't able to find any posts or topics about these guys (unless I don't know how to use the search feature correctly).

 

But I wanted to hear what some of us here understand what they are on about?

 

Clearly they are both enlightened it seems. But their way seems so radical or straight forward?

 

Like they both say, this is nothing happening?

 

Is their way the most direct, kinda like a buzz kill to life? Vs others like Mooji, Sadhguru, Rupert Spira, they make it seems very nice and pleasant journey process 

Just wanted to hear what some of you think about them.

[cirkussmile]

It’s their style of teaching and it leaves nothing for you. 

But enlightenmet have so many more factors than that.

Edited July 8, 2018 by cirkussmile

[noselfnofun]

Yeah not a fan of there teaching, main reason being is it's to direct and dose not accommodate to the fact everyone is at different levels of understanding so it will just resonate with a am very small niche audience, I just think it could be done with a bit more empathy. But if it resonates and it helps nothing wrong with that 

[tecladocasio]

@SoonHei Their teaching are what enlightenment really is about , but people really can't relate to that . Although , I think is the most straight-foward teaching there is . I like to listen to Jim Newman , you can see how non-serious he is , he is just telling you what you asked for , and egos are not ready for it ( egos wants to listen there own ideas of what is true)  , that's why maybe there is some resistance to this kinds of ''simplistic'' teachings . 

Edited April 13, 2019 by tecladocasio

[AlwaysBeNice]

It's in some way the only true 'teaching':

-this is it, there is only what is appearing

-it is nothing/an appearance/infinite [you are not the appearance]

All else is kind of bullshit. But I think self-enquiry and doing nothing meditation are amazing tools, that should be recommended to a seeker.

-

I think Jim's great, I was at the Amsterdam meeting, good time. Also quite different than watching videos, from the videos I got a more authoritative 'cold' impression, but in person it was more casual, cozy, nice.

Also such a non-duality meeting is a nice way to interact with people, you know, whom are in the same boat, not much seriousness, so you can joke around easily.

[SoonHei]

Hmmm

Yeah

This is an older post of mine And yes I can see how these teachings just kinda put a dead end for the seeker. 

It was confusing for me back then but i see what they are on about now

 

[David Hammond]

@SoonHei Tony Parsons is a good teacher. You have to be ready for his pointers though, on the edge of a breakthrough. He will get you there. Newbies are advised to tread a path. 

[SoonHei]

@David Hammond yes. I may not be at that level just yet. But i do get what he is speaking about now vs initially it was all like waaaaaaa? Lol

[Leo Gura]

Brutally direct teachings can be good, but they are also too advanced for most people to get results from it, and they oversimplify things too much, to the point of ignoring important complications, sticking points, pathologies, stages of development, and stuff like emotional mastery, shadow work, integration, etc.

Brutally direct teachings often ignore the human side of this work. The pasison and the love. They can be too autistic and masculine. Some enlightened masters are basically autistic so their style will reflect that. This may not resonate well with you. Personally I prefer a more passionate, warm approach. Love has the power to transform a person like nothing else.

[Natasha]

@SoonHei I got what Tony Parsons and Lisa Cairns were saying only after my awakening. They like to call it communication, not teaching, though.

[kieranperez]

@Leo Gura who are some masters today you think show this in their work?

What do you mean when you say “autistic”? 

In terms of teachings are referring to something like a sort of Zen approach where you just sit for hours contemplating? 

Do you feel that “cold” way is inferior since they tend to exclude aspects like Love, passion, etc.?

Edited April 14, 2019 by kieranperez

[Leo Gura]

@kieranperez Different people need different teachings. This stuff is too complex for there to be one best way.

[JohnnyBravo]

@Leo Gura

Is Peter Ralston too direct?

To me he is. I like listening to small doses of him, but i cannot understand him one single bit. I wish i could but i cant.

I feel bad about myself when I try and listen to him because I feel too novice to understand.

But I listen to Osho and I can immediatly feel the love.

[Leo Gura]

@JohnnyBravo Ralston is way too advanced for most mortals to comprehend.

Don't feel bad. Just realize this work is extremely deep. It will take you 10-30 years of full time work to understand everything someone like Ralston has to offer. He does not lay things out for newbies like I do.

Yes, his approach is direct, brutal, and a bit cold. You're gonna have to really work at it to understand it.

[FoxFoxFox]

@JohnnyBravo Ralston is unnecessarily harsh. He is also unnecessarily confusing because he doesn't just teach about enlightenment, but also other stuff that are derivatives of that mode of absolute consciousness. I read Ralston's book and while I can say that he is most definitely legitimate, I cannot recommend him to beginners. I don't recommend any Zen-flavored teacher. They are, for the most part, too concerned with cultivating a certain type of personality, and that is not all that necessary for enlightenment itself.

Read Ramana Maharshi. That's who most of these people (neo-advaitan or not) got most of their "enlightenment" from anyways. 

[kieranperez]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Ralston is way too advanced for most mortals to comprehend.

Don't feel bad. Just realize this work is extremely deep. It will take you 10-30 years of full time work to understand everything someone like Ralston has to offer. He does not lay things out for newbies like I do.

Yes, his approach is direct, brutal, and a bit cold. You're gonna have to really work at it to understand it.

Are you talking about embodiment and understanding or understanding alone?

The thing that blows my mind is that he did it living in the US, having a job, going to Cal and living here in the SF Bay Area where I live lol. 

I think what gets to me most about his videos is that he’ll say something separate from just enlightenment and I’m shocked l, literally shocked no one in the background is asking “how do I do that?!?!” What he suggests is possible to do is so mind boggling that it literally makes me question what’s possible to do and to learn and so on and the fact that I won’t hear anyone having their mindblown is mind blowing to me me lol

One thing I find refreshing that I think @Leo Gura does point out that I wish was just admitted more is that these people are often exceptions in terms of how quick they get it, extrodinary levels of discipline and focus, and also having an upbringing where they didn’t have that much trauma. Not that it’s an excuse but that talent among individuals does exist and that spirituality is no exception.  

Edited April 14, 2019 by kieranperez

[SoonHei]

4 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Love has the power to transform a person like nothing else.

@David Hammond 

 

 

 

@Leo Gura amen to that Leo!

[SoonHei]

18 minutes ago, kieranperez said:

What he suggests is possible to do is so mind boggling that it literally makes me question what’s possible to do

@kieranperez like what? For example?

[kieranperez]

13 minutes ago, SoonHei said:

@kieranperez like what? For example?

I thought you’d never ask...

Actually stop and listen to what he’s actually saying... Try to actually grasp what he’s actually trying to communicate and is suggesting here... 

The tricky part with Ralston is that he’s so clear that people don’t really grasp what he’s saying. It falls on deaf ears. 

Edited April 14, 2019 by kieranperez

[JohnnyBravo]

The only Ralston I could understand is when he teaches martial arts.

 

All the way he presents other things annoys me dearly.