The Association for Spiritual Integrity — honor code of ethics for spiritual teachers

[Carl-Richard]

50 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

 Is society not an organization ordered i  a dominance hierarchy? Does that mean all sex is an abuse of power?

I basically answered this already, but make the distinction between professional roles and private persons.

[Nilsi]

4 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

We can keep going through all kinds of examples, but you can't deny that there are levels to these things. A spiritual teacher is dealing with people in a very vulnerable situation. It's not just people who come with issues like in psychotherapy, but they also come to deconstruct their sense of reality. The "weighting" on the power differential and the potential for misconduct is much greater than in almost any other example I can think of.

How do you want to prevent this without creating a whole set of new problems?

If you really care about people, you have to think about this from first principles and take into account the whole universe.

Just from the reactions to this thread, you should be able to tell that this is not an omni-considerate solution, but a rather lazy pseudo solution. 

You're saying "let's focus on ethics to the detriment of other values, which I consider less important." 

How can we actually create spiritual teachers that won't do fucked up shit, without undermining their gifts and service? I bet you the solution doesn't involve the ten commandments and an ethics board.

[Carl-Richard]

16 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

How can we actually create spiritual teachers that won't do fucked up shit, without undermining their gifts and service? I bet you the solution doesn't involve the ten commandments and an ethics board.

Give me a practical example of where an ethics board impinges on the practice of spiritual teachers in a way that justifies eliminating the ethics board.

[Nilsi]

5 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Give me a practical example of where an ethics board impinges on the practice of spiritual teachers in a way that justifies eliminating the ethics board.

An ethics board would have cracked down on Adi Das commune from the first day, which would have resulted in a lot of people missing out on genuine spiritual growth; Carl Jung would have lost his clinical practice for consensual sex with his clients; Leo would be banned from YouTube for telling people they are imagining all of reality; Ralston would be cancelled for using his enlightenment to beat people up... If you force people to operate on some lowest common denominator, you kill all genuine spiritual and creative expression.

A simple linear ruleset isn't adequate for dealing with the complexity of reality in any scenario. Add in an executive function and you're destined to wreak havoc. 

The only earnest solution is to think about the ethics of spiritual practice in the context of the whole Kosmos; of all the issues upstream and downstream and all the resulting externalities... And pretty soon you're back to inquiring into the nature of reality itself, because you realize you can't solve a problem you don't fully understand. 

[Leo Gura]

The issue is that teachers who would abuse you will not care about reading your ethics.

[Carl-Richard]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

The issue is that teachers who would abuse you will not care about reading your ethics.

Ethical violations don't require a psychopathic mind. Their subtle nature makes normal people subject to them as well. I don't call the people I'm arguing with psychopaths ? 

Unethical behavior is something you can easily fall into if you're not deliberately watching out for it. It often deals with normal behavior which feels totally ok from an emotional level, but which is only seen as problematic from a more abstract level (professionalism, etc.). I think it's negligence and ignorance rather than deliberation and evil that will stand for most of the ethical violations. That doesn't mean they're not a big deal. It's just means we have to be better at watching out for them.

A better predictor for violations would probably be openness (which is associated with spirituality btw) and of course low conscientiousness: "I don't like these rules; let's make some new ones!" or "fuck rules!". Besides, look at it statistically: it could save some psychopaths, certainly some people who are on the boundary of psychopathy, and certainly some normal people.

Edited December 27, 2022 by Carl-Richard

[Carl-Richard]

19 hours ago, Nilsi said:

An ethics board would have cracked down on Adi Das commune from the first day, which would have resulted in a lot of people missing out on genuine spiritual growth; Carl Jung would have lost his clinical practice for consensual sex with his clients; Leo would be banned from YouTube for telling people they are imagining all of reality; Ralston would be cancelled for using his enlightenment to beat people up... If you force people to operate on some lowest common denominator, you kill all genuine spiritual and creative expression.

I think all of these deserve ethical questioning indeed. I'm certainly not uncritical of past spiritual teachers, or Leo, or 100 year old psychoanalysts. However, it's one thing to look in retrospect and think "all of that would've never happened, and we would've been so much poorer as a result", but it's another thing to imagine an alternate timeline where they did follow some ethical guidelines. From that perspective, I don't think they would've been too hindered in performing their work in any significant way. I don't think Carl Jung was fucking people's brains out of their childhood traumas ?

Edited December 27, 2022 by Carl-Richard

[Razard86]

On 12/25/2022 at 9:56 AM, Carl-Richard said:

You start to wonder though when people start insinuating that abuse at the hands of a teacher might be a necessary part of awakening.

Carl your definition of abuse is your own creation. You could literally call anything abuse, in fact how you reacted to said abuse was with abuse. So how can you demonize, what you yourself are guilty of? You see? Egos play this game of doing the very thing they demonize. Its why you cannot defeat evil, by doing the same thing. You literally have to do the hardest most counter-intuitive thing, which is love.

Also abuse is love, stop this nonsense. Humans view tornadoes and hurricanes as nature abusing them. A mother yelling for her baby to stop crying from the babies eyes is abuse to them. Sometimes what you view as abuse is NECESSARY!! All actions and all identities are relative!!! If a man comes in a room and starts killing everyone, are you going to demonize murdering him? Abuse isn't a problem, its whether that abuse was necessary or not.

Some people respond better to the stick, and some respond better to the carrot. If you hate the stick you will call it abuse, some see it as love. Your inability to see it as love is your own problem. I say this with love, but you might see it as abuse lol.

[A_v_E]

who is gonna judge and put an arbitrary reasoning behind those relative integer ?

 

@Razard86  every time I read you it's godlike thought to me

 

BIRD UP

 

Edited December 27, 2022 by A_v_E

[Razard86]

5 minutes ago, A_v_E said:

who is gonna judge and put an arbitrary reasoning behind those relative integer ?

 

@Razard86  every time I read you it's godlike thought to me

 

BIRD UP

 

I appreciate it, its because I strive to see reality as it is, not how I want it to be.

For example....I don't like murder, but I understand that is my own bias. When Martin Luther King was murdered his death propelled the civil right movement in a way that him living could not have done. Many tragedies shake humans up and cause a massive raising in consciousness that wouldn't have happened otherwise. 

So while I wish he didn't die in the fashion he did, I recognize that sometimes the stick is necessary (his death) to create a positive result.

[A_v_E]

@Razard86  to reach true truth you must love for real REAL, omg you almost makes me cry, I know we could be in a room and maybe we would be able to listen and see into each others eyes without bypassing with non sense.

I get you here, I feel your intense love for no bs, I know it's all ego, but I m like, YES yes yes yes yes reformalizing my intuition in such a beautiful way, I cannot stop taking pictures of your dance, that's such a wonderful play !!!

HUGHING brother, I love you, keep shining

 

 

Edited December 27, 2022 by A_v_E

[Nilsi]

6 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

From that perspective, I don't think they would've been too hindered in performing their work in a significant way. 

I'm not so sure about this.

In the end these institutions will just be a microcosm of all the shit that's not working in governance at large, which as Osho put it so poetically is that "the people are retarded."

Spirituality is the nearest thing to a safe haven from human bullshit we have and we're just not mature enough to tinker with it in a way that is helpful.

Edited December 27, 2022 by Nilsi

[Razard86]

1 hour ago, A_v_E said:

@Razard86  to reach true truth you must love for real REAL, omg you almost makes me cry, I know we could be in a room and maybe we would be able to listen and see into each others eyes without bypassing with non sense.

I get you here, I feel your intense love for no bs, I know it's all ego, but I m like, YES yes yes yes yes reformalizing my intuition in such a beautiful way, I cannot stop taking pictures of your dance, that's such a wonderful play !!!

HUGHING brother, I love you, keep shining

 

 

^^^Yes powerful!!! Martin's message shines through you!!! You got it!!! I can't wait for the day humanity can drop the fear they have and learn to love themselves. 

[Carl-Richard]

3 hours ago, Nilsi said:

I'm not so sure about this.

In the end these institutions will just be a microcosm of all the shit that's not working in governance at large, which as Osho put it so poetically is that "the people are retarded."

Spirituality is the nearest thing to a safe haven from human bullshit we have and we're just not mature enough to tinker with it in a way that is helpful.

So spirituality is above ethics. Is spirituality above the law? Can I literally kill for someone's awakening?

[Nilsi]

11 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

So spirituality is above ethics. Is spirituality above the law?

It should be.

11 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Can I literally kill for someone's awakening?

Ideally you wouldn't do that.

[Carl-Richard]

38 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

Ideally you wouldn't do that.

And why is that? Is it because if you ask people prior to joining the organization "would it be ok if we were to kill someone for your awakening?", many people would be skeptical? Do you think if you ask people "would it be ok if we had sex?", many people would be skeptical as well? Because I can envision both of these things happening (killing and sex) once you trap them into some teacher's orbit and slowly erode their boundaries over months and years, certainly if they've conceded their friends, family, money or any normal sense of autonomy. Non-dual mindtricks makes all of that exceedingly likely.

Edited December 27, 2022 by Carl-Richard

[Nilsi]

9 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

And why is that? Is it because if you ask people prior to joining the organization "would it be ok if we were to kill someone for your awakening?", many people would be skeptical? Do you think if you ask people "would it be ok if we had sex?", many would be skeptical as well? Because I can envision both of these things happening (killing and sex) once you trap them into some teacher's orbit and slowly erode their boundaries over months and years, certainly if they've also conceded their friends, family, money or any normal sense of autonomy. Non-dual mindtricks makes all of that exceedingly likely.

We can agree as a society not to kill each other, but you will have to question and transcend these rules at some point in your spiritual journey.

This doesn't mean, that it's not desirable to have these rules, only that they can not possibly be adequate for all states of consciousness.

[A_v_E]

@Carl-Richard it's all ok carl, god has a greater schemes for all of us, you is being stuck in making fancy topic, me it's in irritating lower tier ego with a bit of push into real love.

 

[March]

On 26/12/2022 at 6:18 PM, Someone here said:

So are you suggesting that spirituality as a whole is a scam ? I don't see your point clearly. I think you've been highly influenced by Nahm's communication that you just parroting what he says . If there is no spiritual teacher nor student because there is no separate self then why are you on two spiritual forums?  What are you trying to achieve with engaging in spiritual communities? 

Hey guys,

Just a general observation / question: I looked through Nahm's last posts before he left / was made to leave the forum. His words seem surprisingly crude, like some common "unadvanced" spiritual teachers. This is a stark contrast from his earlier posts.

Example: I asked if I should tell a girl I didn't like her and was avoiding her, and he said something like "is that because you are afraid of hurting her or you are afraid of telling the truth." Like general personal development tips infused with spirituality (eg. in this case it sounds like ideas from the book Radical Honesty). 

Basically, my opinion (and I'm asking if you guys feel this way) is that Nahm was actually a pretty good person to take advise from - there was lots of wisdom in his replies - then he just... lost it? That's what it feels like. Like. No offense. But I'm 18. I currently meditate and know about enlightenment. But I don't give a fuck about spiritual nuances (which probably aren't nuances) but you get the idea... I just want general everyday wisdom. So should I look at Nahm's previous posts and take wisdom from there?

Edited December 27, 2022 by March

[roopepa]

If we must go with the "spiritual teacher" stuff, it's not a role or identity you take. It's not a "I'm a spiritual teacher now and as such I'll use this ethics code."

That's just ego. It's not the path.

This whole list thing just doesn't make any sense for the actual path and spirituality.

It just sounds to me like some folk are simply hung up with wanting a teacher-role for themselves, as egoic venture. Wanting to appear as a one who knows more, lecturing others. And then come up with a list of ethics, cause there isn't actual insight and path walking.

Isn't that just obvious?

Why on earth would anyone recognize someone who needs a list like this as a "spiritual teacher"? ?