I've been sitting on this blog post for a while now. It's created a bottle neck effect on the other ones that want to push through and be shared, so I had to get it off my chest, so to speak.
I have found myself at a bit of a crossroads lately. I’ve written quite a bit on the subject of “enlightenment” over the last few years, much of it representing where I envisioned readers to be on their own path, which has also reflected where I have been on mine. However, I have tried to avoid certain ideas that might turn some people off. As I ran across quotes and insights, each one was instantly judged based on how useful it would be for my projected audience. As time went on, I found myself revising my writing more and more to make the message more palatable for the potential readers in my mind. All of this has become much more noticeable of late, which makes me think I used to be less concerned about how my message was received than I am now.
The Internet has increased the exposure of my writing, and its potential circle of influence and exposure. The potential audience has now diversified and left me a bit uncertain as to who will be reading these words. Will it be spiritual adepts, teachers, critics, or will it be the curious and beginning seekers (which seems to be mainly who I have had in mind when I write)? Is it possible to write something that resonates with everyone? Whose needs am I trying to appeal to anyway?
Up until now, I have had a “known” audience of about 90 people on an email list comprised of friends, family, and acquaintances, plus a blog. So, I have written with many of those people in mind. Now, there are online discussion groups popping up all over for Truth seeking people and those interested in enlightenment. There are a lot of people out there, such as myself, who have a very firm grasp on the ideas surrounding enlightenment. They have it all figured out on an intellectual level, have had a few awakening experiences, and want to tell people how it is. I’m no different, but I am not one to debate another on what’s true and what’s not (at least not openly ;), but that’s what I have seen in some of these online discussion forums.
There are those people drawn to these discussion groups wanting more insights from fellow seekers or teachers. Then there are others who seem to have all the answers, while others who disagree and point out inconsistencies in what someone else has said. Ultimately they are all saying what’s true for them and disagreeing with someone else who doesn’t see things the same way. In many cases it’s a philosophical debate over semantics among egos about Oneness.
After seeing this a couple of times, I decided these groups weren’t for me. Obviously there is no harm in a friendly debate, which is what these tend to be. But if I don’t resonate with what’s being said on a deep level, then it’s just brain candy and fodder for the ego. Having said that, I have benefitted from this ego fodder because it has pointed out my own judgments I have about people, but that’s a different story.
I have found online discussion forums that are a bit more structured, which involve an actual teacher answering questions, that serves members well. A spiritual teacher who is willing to foster and facilitate online discussions is a wonderful thing. Not only is it enlightening, but it prevents endless debates from arising, and actually points readers toward what lies underneath the words.
As for me, there is nothing I can say that is actually true (except for maybe what I just said). However, I am finding myself projecting out my own insecurities, being careful not to say something that an imaginary spiritual critic might take issue with. Basically, my ego is trying to protect itself from criticism by censoring what it says. The increasing tendency to revise is how its desire for praise is manifested. This is very interesting to notice and acknowledge, so I felt compelled to share it.
Of course, this idea filtering has been going on all along, I just happen to be noticing it more and more these days. Much of what I have written has been written with specific people (or types of people) in mind, and my perception of how my message would be received by those people based on my story of them. I have avoided using many terms and phrases that I thought might alienate those with only a mild curiosity, or those who still have firm beliefs. I would prefer to tone it down a bit rather than cause a mind to close down by stepping on a sacred cow (so to speak).
My intention has always been to spark interest in those who have accepted simply being content with life, rather than search for that unadulterated joy that’s at their fingertips. That joy is what we are all searching for, and I want everyone to know that it is attainable at this very moment. This is something that everyone should know.
Now that I am becoming connected with more and more people via Facebook, I am feeling a bit more pressured to watch what I say. There is great potential here to reach hundreds of people with tiny bits of wisdom that might resonate with someone who had no interest in the idea of enlightenment before. I think the key is not to make broad sweeping statements as an authority figure (i.e. “This is how it is.”), but instead scatter ideas or questions that might spark interest.
It’s yet another example of how I have been living my life. I find my actions governed by what I think “so and so” will think about such actions or words. It’s been that way all along and I’m seeing it for what it is more clearly now – protection of the ego. At this point I feel it’s time to be a bit more free with my words, with less concern about how the imagined world perceives them to be. I can learn more about myself by seeing the “me” in “you” anyway ;)
Peace,
Trey
Comments
> Living in a maybe-world of late.
>
> When there is a perceived "other" then communication may come alive. Before communication, there is judgement: "what shall I say, or not say? How will it be perceived? Will 'they' like it or think I'm really smart and wise?" etc. Kind of like a chef preparing a meal for a variety of guests.
> We all do it. At times, I just want to shut up forever and ever amen...but then something happens, my mouth opens, words occur. amazing....
>
> Yet, even before judgement there is that which exists prior to other. When resting in the Singularity, contentment remains still and silent. When That moves out of contentment "others" arise and communication often follows. But, maybe it isn't as linear as I make it sound to be.
>
> Frankly, I'm feeling it viscerally that I AM is basically bored with the singular vision of One. So it says "Ya know what? Let's have some fun!" And here We are.
>
> It is like " I" agree to a "We" becoming All so We can talk. A game. And I play this game as long as We agree to engage. Interest wants to engage in something, so IT creates mini-its to take an interest in. "I" make up this costume party and the agents wearing the costumes arise out of my mind and "I" decide which character next becomes the sage and which the fool, which the teacher and which the student, which the "elightened one" and which the seeker.
>
> "IAM" seeker sought seeking losing finding forgetting remembering....
>
> Otherwise, there is no such thing as enlightenment because this One is Aware and inifinitely pervasive - then what is it that "awakens" and what is it that is "asleep"? When the Buddha said "I am awake." Who remained asleep? Or, what is the nature of that which believed itself to be asleep in the face of that which was believed to be awake?
>
> Some say it is a "mistake" or "illusion". I feel it is more like an agreement that is forgotten and the process is one of remembering the agreement I made initially into We. So far, I've not come across a mistake or an illusion. The Real is pervasively Total. All perceptions arise and exist within the Real, therefore all perceptions are Real...event the so-called "mistakes, illusions, dreams, and egoic imaginings."
>
> Gold jewelry is all gold - and it is also rings, braclets, earrings, noserings, etc.
>
> To the point of this communication thing : let it fly. You'll make no mistakes with your words.
> "We" exist to listen and read and respond. It hits where it intends. It is received where it will. It responds as it should. Self talking to Self. Self listening to Self. Self responding to Self. Why worry?
>
> love peace blessings and all...Jerry
"
Dear Trey,
From my perspective, you've never held yourself out as a guru or "expert". I've always seen you in a facilitator role, very open and supportive to allow the ideas and flows of others.
And yet, even in this "open" capacity, even when we are careful, we influence others.
We are always influencing others, except for when we are completely hiding.
I've taken a bit of a different approach with my blog postings on Asheville Sangha. I've written for a audience of myself (mostly), sharing inner themes and materials that I am often out-of-balance and struggling with. A few folks that I have befriended (allowing me and them to become candid, i.e. without the issue of having to be careful or censoring) have told me face-to-face that my postings are [raw?, lay-it-on-the-line, honest, confusing, whatever?].
It is my own way of sharing a personal truth (a form of therapy). I suspect at times I should be using more "I" statements AND yet I know we are all in this together, so my approach has been to be more inclusive, i.e. "me" "us", i.e. whoever else resonates ...
In the beginning and every so often, It seems to me as if my postings are"bold" AND I now know that my experiences are but the tip of the iceberg of the inner struggles that many/most of us are encountering with life.
From another perspective, I see a lot of supposed "experts" only posting highly polished, flowery writings. It is my sense that they may not be sharing their fuller sense of self, as life wears away at all of us.
With all that said, I would encourage you to write more freely, the chief benefit being that unedited writing (or minimally edited) is a fine way to see what your own inner voices are needing to say, explicitly.
To assist various audiences with absorbing the value (or skipping over a posting superfluous to them), You might start certain postings with a framing message, indicating what you, yourself are exploring..
In some of my postings, I work to distill the messages, trying to create food that is more universal, and not so personal. When I feel I have accomplished this, there is a sense of satisfaction, i.e. encompassing so much more than the personal!
Another lesson I have learned is that "you cannot control how your words or actions will land, or be received, by others.
Anyway, these are my candid thoughts.
Much love to you dear brother.
Howard
828.280.4780