What reality does a ‘seeker’ have?

It is what we call a gross understatement to say that there is a great deal of misunderstanding amongst ‘aspirants’ or what we call ‘spiritual seekers’.

The very notion of being a seeker is a misunderstanding.  Consciousness/awareness is not seeking anything – it IS everything without exception.

Now, if consciousness is everything, without exception, and therefore it is not seeking anything, then what reality does a ‘seeker’ have?

How can anyone actually be a seeker or be separate from consciousness?

There is apparent evidence in so-called ‘teachings’ that do little more than divide up consciousness/awareness into ‘parts’.  It is impossible – erroneous and to base a teaching on such divisions is ludicrous – nothing but misunderstanding.   To ‘teach’ misunderstanding, notions of ‘awakening’ and ‘embodiment’ is very common but it is all based on imagination – and it reveals the ignorance of the ‘teacher’ without a shadow of doubt.   How can one speak of ‘embodiment’ or ‘learning to embody the teaching’ or some projection about some conceptualised ‘awakening’ and not know that it is nothing but erroneous belief.  They say they must meet the ‘seeker’ where they are.  Bollocks.

Where is anyone other than right here, right now.  So if you must meet them, meet them right here, right now.  No need to coach anyone with erroneous beliefs.  It is a false premise.  Very famous teachers teach crap and no one notices, so it seems.  The teachers wallow in self-indulgent notions of being a ‘teacher’ and of being a ‘special being’ with ‘special knowledge’, of being an EXAMPLE of the teaching – and YES they are just that.  It is all misunderstanding – nothing to be proud of.  It is all bollocks. No one challenges them.   Why?   Because everyone is swooning in their own ‘spiritual self-image’, imagining a ‘future time’ when they will ‘attain enlightenment’ – bollocks.

What is even more remarkable is the resistance that shows up when one of these teachers or teachings is threatened with exposure – exposure of what it is.  Some folks get Very Irate – Very Disturbed – thus proving that their teaching is useless.  They don’t see that evidence clearly.  Ironic – no?

Self-delusion is so common, no one suspects it.   Group mentality supports the illusion and the ‘teacher’ is blinded by all the attention that is spun around him or her, like a cocoon.

The investment in a ‘self-image’, someone who has advanced on some imaginary ‘path’ in their own mind, is a very common stumbling block but the teacher is unaware of it, because he or she has no idea they fell for it themselves.  And they dress the obstacle up as something other than what it is.  Embodiment is such a concept.  Learning to embody the teaching – bollocks.

Other teachers mention the word love so frequently, it robs the word of any meaning.  These ‘teachers’ are often mentally disturbed or suffer from gross delusions about themselves and their ‘teaching’.  I notice one has ‘created’ a new conceptual ‘mind game’ as an integral ingredient of ‘their teaching’ and it reveals a great deal about their unfortunate ‘condition’ – not noticing it themselves because they are obviously wallowing in the ‘spiritual self-image’ they believe to be themselves.

Incidentally, these teachers go out of their way to discredit me to anyone who brings up my name (so I am told frequently).   Who cares?  Not me.  It only proves that they are disturbed by what I point out about ‘teachers’ like themselves.

The bottom line is:  WHO cares?

2 Comments
  1. “Who cares? Not me. ”

    Hope not, seeing as there is no “me” to care.

    “It only proves that they are disturbed by what I point out about ‘teachers’ like themselves.”

    Could be that. Could also be what I keep harping about: they conclude that one who insists on pointing out the motes in other people’s eyes must have a log in his.

    “The bottom line is: WHO cares?”

    Then drop it, and keep on posting the “good stuff.”

  2. I would like to say…Debate is traditional in Buddhism for sure, since ancient times is a necessary tool to help distinguish between advices leading to ‘real freedom’ and points of view that are missing it, even if it is by very little. “Who cares?”: those in need of a little push out of doubts. It can give one the strength to trust one’s own guts, a good pointer can encourage one to let go of fears and dependence on the ‘authorities’. The tendency to rely on others’ authorities can be so brutal, that one may not SEE that ‘if they are not teaching it, it is because they themselves ignore it’, as Gilbert said