Tolle Thoughts
Tue Apr 1, 2008 3:27 pm
I've been accused of mischaracterizing and distorting Eckhart
Tolle's teachings. I think the real problem is not the
misunderstanding of Tolle, but myself.
I have therefore decided to cover a couple points about Tolle. I
think that when they are seen dispassionately that most will feel I
am fair about examining his teachings.
The first bone of contention came when I stated that Tolle
embraced the "Nothingness Philosophy."
I think what caused such a defensive reaction to this is that the
term Nothingness Philosophy sounds negative.
The nothingness experience itself is not negative but positive
and indeed it did save Tolle from suicide as he describes:
"I could feel myself being sucked into a void. It felt as if the void
was inside myself rather than outside. Suddenly, there was no
more fear, and I let myself fall into that void. I have no recollection
of what happened after that.
"I was awakened by the chirping of a bird outside the window. I
had never heard such a sound before.... Tears came into my
eyes. I got up and walked around the room. I recognized the
room, and yet I knew that I had never truly seen it before.
Everything was fresh and pristine, as if it had just come into
existence. Later I also learned to go into that inner timeless
and deathless realm that I had originally perceived as a void and
remain fully conscious."
Entering this void of nothingness which he later calls The
Unmanifest, The Stillness, the Now, etc., was a good thing for
him. It delivered him from the grave mistake of suicide and
brought him to a center of peace within himself. This was a
good thing as it gave him a reason to live.
Removing oneself from identification with form and focussing on
the center of peace within is a basic step that must be taken by
disciples.
Of course, taking this step is a good and necessary thing to do.
The fact that anyone takes this step has nothing to do with the
problem created by the Nothingness People of the past. My
problem with many of them is what they do after they take this
step.
DK [Djwhal Khul] tells us that each step forward releases latent energies from
the various centers. He tells us that a problem often created is
the seeker has more released than he can handle and it causes
extreme behavior and sometimes even mental or emotional
instability.
The seeker faces this danger when he discovers the stillness
within and sometimes such an energy is released that the bliss
feels so good that it seems to be the ultimate "end-all and be-all" of
the purpose of all life.
They thus approach others with a missionary zeal to find this
ultimate and if prospects do not get as excited as themselves
they often display odd behavior.
Not counting any present conversation, in the past we have had
many difficulties with these people because when they have
joined the list this is all they wanted to talk about and if the group
became impatient, or we moved on, then they quit. If they
couldn't proselytize they didn't want to stay. Dean seems to be
the exception. He seems to embrace a version of the
Nothingness Philosophy mixed with other stuff so he's got lots to
convert us to. For the peace of the list I have to reject most of his
posts.
Now I'm not lumping Dan and Susan's behavior with the
Nothingness People of the past who have created problems. So
far they have only presented material to the group that we are
willing to entertain and respond to. This is well and good as
dialog is needed with such old friends.
There is nothing wrong with discussing a subject that I, as the
teacher, make the topic of the class. Hopefully, when we move
on we can all move on and just put on the shelf the areas where
we disagree. This may take some detachment that Tolle
teaches we need to have.
Conclusion on point one: Tolle definitely teaches the
Nothingness Philosophy, but the problem is he places such
emphasis on it that students are likely to go overboard in
embracing it as the "end all and be all" of our purpose and become an
annoying distraction to those who want to focus on other things.
The second main problem is that I am accused of distorting
Tolle's teachings and even attacking or personally slandering
him. Xavier went so far as to accuse me of making up quotes
which I did not. He also claimed I said he had a chemical
imbalance. I did not say he "has" a chemical imbalance but did
say he could have had one when he was in the suicidal state.
Many people who are very depressed have a chemical
imbalance. The chances are that his chemical balance is fine
now that he is at peace with himself.
When I said that Tolle changed his name from Ulrich to Eckhart,
Dan responded with:
"You are claiming ignorance due to a failure to do your
own due diligence prior to passing on unsubstantiated rumor
and making libelous claims against another person?"
I do not know why this noting of the name change was the cause
of such strong language. I wound up giving many references to
prove the name change was real so this should no longer be a
point of contention.
What else have I done wrong here? I've quoted Tolle many
times and yes, it is possible that if one reads the whole chapter
wherein the quote lies that a fuller picture can be acquired, but I
think I have been fair in my presentation. And If I have made an
honest mistake, so what? Everyone makes mistakes. You
cannot expect perfection from me or anyone else. For one thing
perfection is in the eye of the beholder.
Conclusion:
I may not agree with Tolle 100 percent.
So what?
I may not interpret his teachings in the same light as others.
So what?
If I have made a mistake in presenting something he said -- so
what? I do the best I can. Give your views to let others make up
their minds and let it go.
From a larger perspective this contention over Tolle is a tempest
in a teapot. Normally one should just look at my views and
accept what seems good and reject or put on the shelf that
which does not. Hopefully we can do this so grievances will not
form.
Copyright © 2008 by JJ Dewey, All Rights Reserved
|