Re: Examining Tolle

2008-3-13 15:21:00

Dan, quoting JJ:

"Again, I would bet if you specifically tell me of truths you gleaned from his writings that I would agree with you."

Dan then writes:

"If you read the 40-some odd quotes I listed and still do not think you may have mis-characterized his teachings a bit in your posts, I'm afraid I don't see the point.

"It's okay though, I don't need you to agree with me -- it's all good.

"I am curious as to where you got the information that he changed his name, though. What is the source? Do they say when he did it? or Why?"

JJ:

I do not think I mischaracterized him if you consider his writings as a whole. Most of the quotes you give do not reveal the illusions I mentioned and such illusions are not obvious to many readers. The story I brought up was a good example. On the surface it sounds like a good teaching but when you think about it, it contains a number of illusionary directions. If I wanted to spend the time I could get the text and go through it and make my case but that wouldn't be productive and I have absolutely no problem with you receiving edification from his writings. I enjoyed many of them myself though I didn't get any "ah-ha moments" from them as I do regularly with DK [Djwhal Khul].

I read in several places about him changing his name. I know Wikipedia has it. He changed his first name to Eckhart because he admired Meister Eckhart.

In a follow-on post number 24629 made on the same date as the above post was made, Dan writes:

"I wasn't aware that you had read his writings even in part, let alone in their entirety."

JJ:

I've just finished listening to a whole book of his for around ten hours. That's enough for a fairly good assessment. It only took a couple pages of DK to assess him as the most intelligent author I have ever read.

Dan:

"Either way that's okay, I simply disagree."

JJ:

I'm having difficulty pinpointing where we disagree. When you say you disagree you give me a bunch of quotes that really do not disagree with anything I have said. I think we would need to get specific to even see if we disagree and when we do I would think we may not.

We can start with his story on the guru who was falsely accused. Do you disagree with my assessment of that. If so why?

If you have the text of that you ought to post it as it would make a good subject of discussion.

Dan:

"One thing you seem to have a problem with is his occasional use of some traditional Zen (and other) parabolic stories."

JJ:

You are right there. I have never liked the Zen stories and they have never made sense to me. I think they are full of illusion and have subtle glamours.

Dan:

"Yes, if someone were to unthinkingly apply some of the details in those stories without judgment, they could be harmful. The same could be said of any parable, or principle for that matter, that is applied with no judgment.

"It should be noted also that Tolle did not himself make up these stories but simply quotes them from tradition and taken in context (and with judgment) they help to illustrate his point."

JJ:

But he obviously believes and embraces them as I accept the parables of Jesus which I quote.

Dan:

"I understand that you do not feel it would be productive for you to take the time to read his writings right now and am perfectly fine with that."

JJ:

But I have spent ten hours listening to an entire unabridged audiobook.

Dan:

"As I said, I have read ALL his works, watched several videos, a few audios, read some interviews, have done some other research and I simply disagree with your assessment. No harm, no foul."

JJ:

And you are probably a greater authority than me on what he has said.

Dan:

"As an aside, it is really none of my business but I don't think that is a very good excuse for making a fairly derogatory characterization of an entire work after only such a very limited investigation (listening to the audio of only one of his books whilst busy doing other tasks)."

JJ:

Thus is not true. I have praised his entire work, but disagreed with parts. I can't think of any book that I have accepted the whole of it. DK's [Djwhal Khul] work is the closest, but the are four or five things that I disagree on until he comes back and explains himself.

Dan quoting JJ:

"I read in several places about him changing his name. I know Wikipedia has it. He changed his first name to Eckhart because he admired Meister Eckhart."

Dan:

"Oh, yeah I read the Wiki article too, it didn't list a source either.

"It didn't say that he had changed his name because he liked Meister Eckhart though, where did you get that from? I've done a lot of research but I haven't come across that one yet.

"It's curious that you have had time to do research about him, but no time to read what he actually says himself."

JJ:

It took me about five minutes and found several references about his name change. I spent ten hours (plus the expense of the audio) listening to an entire book just so I can accurately understand the guy. I don't think your criticism is justified here.

Dan:

"As far as name changing as an indictment of glamour goes -- do you apply the same standard to Abram, Sarai, Jacob, Saul and Simon?"

JJ:

I have no problem with people changing their name if it is harmonious with their own belief system, but he preaches to others to accept themselves as they are and to not be or project anything else but what they are. Also there guru story tells us we should accept the lot we are given.

He is not Meister Eckhart and trying to project himself as being like him does not harmonize with his teachings as to what the rank and file should do.