2008-4-1 15:27:00
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