Indications of fruitfulness of the orthodox church

[mapeli]

Since the divine made an entry into my life, thought the practice of surrender and faith in meditation, I had to re-evaluate and re-read most of what I thought I knew about religion. Reconsidering Christianity was especially important for me, as I noticed I carried deep aversions towards it, yet now the "trinitarian mystery" seemed to be a very good description of what had become an experience for me.

Now, much of what is considered Christianity, especially what I came to think of as "american Christianity", fundamentalist, non-contemplative, plain crazy, neurotic-magic-world-view-style I still find appalling, and I realize that many of the mystics of this forum has probably never had an experience other than this.

However, looking though the eyes of the religious experience described in the GWV, which have come to be my default glasses, I would like to point out some indications of fruitfulness within the Orthodox Christian Church. Now, I'm pretty sure I would be able to provide a one-to-one mapping from the classifications of the jhanas to the "royal road" of the church, however that would be a bigger undertaking and I will for now only indicate.

The first indication is a clear focus on the dark night of the soul, but they would call it simply "despair", and that the Holy Spirit pulls back and makes the aspirant struggle and repent ("change his way"), to build regret and humility. This process is then deepened and repeated. This we know as the workings of the nights, or "the spiritual crisis", and "descent into hell" etc. Tears are emphasized, "warm tears but not from the ego", and I associate with Jhanandas discourse where it is said that eventually one does not know where the tears come from anymore. It's just a letting go.

The second indication an emphasis on working for permanence, what we would call saturation. They say, the first step is to have the prayer sink down from the mind to the heart, even so that eventually my heart prays while the body sleeps, as it is said in the psalms. We would associate "the prayer of the heart" with the first Jhana. The process of saturation they call kenosis, that is, partaking of the divine in such fullness that one becomes divine.

It is also emphasized that it is important, and hard work, to reach a state of dispassion, apatheia, of being free from passions (the fetters and such of course). This we would pin as either the tranquility of the second jhana or the equanimity of the third.

I would also, and maybe most importantly like to point out, that it is said, that true prayer is praying "with a pure nous", that is, with a still mind, so that one would be pulled into forgetfulness of ones surroundings and own body and self and be lifted up into the eternal one, and lose one self in God. This is called "seeing", which after having been experienced, no beauty in the world would compare. These are clearly examples of experiences of the higher sammadhis.

What caught my attention to begin with, was when I heard that there is at least one Christian book (Lossky's "The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church") that emphasizes that the Light of God is a concrete thing, not a metaphor.

It is also pointed out that Christ came "to free us from the bondage of the fear of death" primarily, and secondly it is said that "God became man so that man would become divine", or "to remind us, and show us, from where we had fallen". This claim, "so that man would become divine" would probably be rather of offensive to most Christians, ironically. (It is written in "Saint Silouan, the Athonite", by Sophrony: http://www.amazon.com/dp/0881411957)

A thing that have helped me establish a rigorous contemplative life and eased the negotiating process, is the strong emphasis of "not being of the world" simply because it is fallen and corrupt - "in the hands of the evil one".

One last thing that is striking, is that it is said that God can only be known through his energies (And that we truly know nothing) - therefor the Jhana-nimittas are essential to know, if you don't have access to a monastery with a living tradition.

I will post below a link to a video of a documentary of Mount Athos which I belive to be inspiring, although of course the production team might not have focused on the most important things. What I like best, and as an indication of saturation in the first Jhana is the monks reply when asked if he prayed constantly - he laughs and says "How could I not pray?". (It has also been pointed out that there are two distinct traditions on Athos - one who believes is fantastic miracles, and one who doesn't.) It is also rather striking, that when one of the monks are asked about how they are different from the Vatican he smiles and says something like "some would say, in all aspects."
They also say that what they do is "practice the art of salvation" - which should probably prompt the other "magic thinking" type of "Christians" to ask them selves what they themselves are doing, when they are not practicing.
Mount Athos: A Visit to the Holy Mountain - Part one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erUBejuwd1Q
Mount Athos: A Visit to the Holy Mountain - Part two: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLS9-v9TpPU

These are some indications of the fruitfulness (of at least the monastic aspect) of the Orthodox Church that I have posted here to share with you so that the fellowship of mystics and contemplatives from different traditions can grow stronger and so that the fallen versions of each tradition will have less of an impact on the beauty and similarities. I intend to do this work more thoroughly eventually, so that I can use it to point out that Christians no matter what tradition should meditate rigorously, as it is hard for any aspect of the church to claim that they did not originate from the orthodox, and that their origin contain teachings that are compatible with the GWV. This will probably fail.

Anyway, I've been noticing these things for a while and thought that maybe I should rant them down and maybe another contemplative might benefit in some way, especially with so many having issues with the church.

Love and blessings and hesychia to all.

[Jhanananda]

Since the divine made an entry into my life, thought the practice of surrender and faith in meditation, I had to re-evaluate and re-read most of what I thought I knew about religion. Reconsidering Christianity was especially important for me, as I noticed I carried deep aversions towards it, yet now the "trinitarian mystery" seemed to be a very good description of what had become an experience for me.

Good to hear from you again, mapeli.

Now, much of what is considered Christianity, especially what I came to think of as "american Christianity", fundamentalist, non-contemplative, plain crazy, neurotic-magic-world-view-style I still find appalling, and I realize that many of the mystics of this forum has probably never had an experience other than this.

Yes, I agree with your point of view on Christian fundamentalism.  It is for the most part a bunch of mumbo-jumbo.

However, looking though the eyes of the religious experience described in the GWV, which have come to be my default glasses, I would like to point out some indications of fruitfulness within the Orthodox Christian Church. Now, I'm pretty sure I would be able to provide a one-to-one mapping from the classifications of the jhanas to the "royal road" of the church, however that would be a bigger undertaking and I will for now only indicate.

I look forward to any and all contributions of classifying the jhanas with the "royal road" of the Orthodox church.  The pronblem of doing so will require dumping much of the mumbo-jumbo of the early Greco-Roman Church, such as trinitarianism.

The first indication is a clear focus on the dark night of the soul, but they would call it simply "despair", and that the Holy Spirit pulls back and makes the aspirant struggle and repent ("change his way"), to build regret and humility. This process is then deepened and repeated. This we know as the workings of the nights, or "the spiritual crisis", and "descent into hell" etc. Tears are emphasized, "warm tears but not from the ego", and I associate with Jhanandas discourse where it is said that eventually one does not know where the tears come from anymore. It's just a letting go.

Any genuine contemplative movement is going to have a context for the spiritual crisis.  The fact that non of the contemplative movements today seem to have any context for the spiritual crisis only reflex poorly upon them.

The second indication an emphasis on working for permanence, what we would call saturation. They say, the first step is to have the prayer sink down from the mind to the heart, even so that eventually my heart prays while the body sleeps, as it is said in the psalms. We would associate "the prayer of the heart" with the first Jhana. The process of saturation they call kenosis, that is, partaking of the divine in such fullness that one becomes divine.

Yes, we too use the terminology of saturation.  The senior members of the GWV, such as Sam, Michael Hawkins and Stu have noted that we carry many of the charisms with us throughout the day, which we experience in our deep meditations.

It is also emphasized that it is important, and hard work, to reach a state of dispassion, apatheia, of being free from passions (the fetters and such of course). This we would pin as either the tranquility of the second jhana or the equanimity of the third.

I agree that dispassion (apatheia) is part of the experience of deep meditation.  It is both required to meditate deeply, and as we meditate deeply, we gain dispassion.

I would also, and maybe most importantly like to point out, that it is said, that true prayer is praying "with a pure nous", that is, with a still mind, so that one would be pulled into forgetfulness of ones surroundings and own body and self and be lifted up into the eternal one, and lose one self in God. This is called "seeing", which after having been experienced, no beauty in the world would compare. These are clearly examples of experiences of the higher sammadhis.

I agree that at depth we find a still mind; however, I would stop using the term 'prayer' as it is understood to be a request, often verbal; and resort to other terminology, such as John of the Cross called it contemplation, when the mind was still.  Ecstasy is a term Teresa of Avila used.

What caught my attention to begin with, was when I heard that there is at least one Christian book (Lossky's "The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church") that emphasizes that the Light of God is a concrete thing, not a metaphor.

The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, by Vladimir Lossky sounds like an interesting book for us to read and discuss.

(please note: Someone should tell Amazon that they should not make it so very difficult to post a link to one of their books.)

It is also pointed out that Christ came "to free us from the bondage of the fear of death" primarily, and secondly it is said that "God became man so that man would become divine", or "to remind us, and show us, from where we had fallen". This claim, "so that man would become divine" would probably be rather of offensive to most Christians, ironically. (It is written in "Saint Silouan, the Athonite", by Sophrony: http://www.amazon.com/dp/0881411957)

For me this is part of the hocus pocus of the Christian Church.  Jesus was not God, nor the son of God.  Nor does God beget.  God, in the epistemology of the Abrahamic religions creates, not begets, if those Abrahamic religions wish to stick to a cogent and logically true theology.

The message that the GWV wants to promote is anyone can lead a rigorous, self-aware contemplative life to acquire the superior fruit of the contemplative life (maha-phala) and by so doing one becomes a Buddha, Christ, messiah.

A thing that have helped me establish a rigorous contemplative life and eased the negotiating process, is the strong emphasis of "not being of the world" simply because it is fallen and corrupt - "in the hands of the evil one".

One last thing that is striking, is that it is said that God can only be known through his energies (And that we truly know nothing) - therefor the Jhana-nimittas are essential to know, if you don't have access to a monastery with a living tradition.

I will post below a link to a video of a documentary of Mount Athos which I belive to be inspiring, although of course the production team might not have focused on the most important things. What I like best, and as an indication of saturation in the first Jhana is the monks reply when asked if he prayed constantly - he laughs and says "How could I not pray?". (It has also been pointed out that there are two distinct traditions on Athos - one who believes is fantastic miracles, and one who doesn't.) It is also rather striking, that when one of the monks are asked about how they are different from the Vatican he smiles and says something like "some would say, in all aspects."
They also say that what they do is "practice the art of salvation" - which should probably prompt the other "magic thinking" type of "Christians" to ask them selves what they themselves are doing, when they are not practicing.
Mount Athos: A Visit to the Holy Mountain - Part one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erUBejuwd1Q
Mount Athos: A Visit to the Holy Mountain - Part two: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLS9-v9TpPU

Thanks for the links. I will check them out, when I have time.  However, I find little evidence that there is a "living contemplative tradition" anywhere in this world.

These are some indications of the fruitfulness (of at least the monastic aspect) of the Orthodox Church that I have posted here to share with you so that the fellowship of mystics and contemplatives from different traditions can grow stronger and so that the fallen versions of each tradition will have less of an impact on the beauty and similarities. I intend to do this work more thoroughly eventually, so that I can use it to point out that Christians no matter what tradition should meditate rigorously, as it is hard for any aspect of the church to claim that they did not originate from the orthodox, and that their origin contain teachings that are compatible with the GWV. This will probably fail.

Anyway, I've been noticing these things for a while and thought that maybe I should rant them down and maybe another contemplative might benefit in some way, especially with so many having issues with the church.

Love and blessings and hesychia to all.

The problem with any branch of Greco-Roman Christianity is it was hijacked by Constantin in the 4th century, and the only way to fix it is to dump a lot of the hocus pocus that he invested the early church with, such as the divinity of Jesus.

[mapeli]

Good to hear from you again, mapeli.

Thank you. It is nice to have a place to discuss these things.

Any genuine contemplative movement is going to have a context for the spiritual crisis.  The fact that non of the contemplative movements today seem to have any context for the spiritual crisis only reflex poorly upon them.

I agree, that is why I listed its' presence and emphasis as one indication that there might be a living contemplative movement within the orthodox church.

Yes, we too use the terminology of saturation.  The senior members of the GWV, such as Sam, Michael Hawkins and Stu have noted that we carry many of the charisms with us throughout the day, which we experience in our deep meditations.

I was not clear here, I meant "we" as in the GWV (as in, "we, in this forum"). However, considering I have been around here for what, a couple of days, it is most unclear of me to include myself in such a way. However, it written within this forum, and I have been following the GWV for many years.
I too enjoy the charisms daily and find the concept of saturation important.

I meant to point out that there is such a concept, "kenosis" and even "the mystery of the incarnation" that would correspond to "saturation".

I agree that at depth we find a still mind; however, I would stop using the term 'prayer' as it is understood to be a request, often verbal; and resort to other terminology, such as John of the Cross called it contemplation, when the mind was still.  Ecstasy is a term Teresa of Avila used.

I agree that the use of the term prayer is confusing, that is why I wrote about it, so that if a contemplative was reading mystics of the orthodox tradition (I saw that there was a thread on the Philokalia) it would be found under the topic of prayer, in that tradition. As it is also called by Teresa of Avila BTW, together with 'ecstasy'.

I also do agree that contemplation or meditation are probably more fitting, but just to point out that it might not be super clear cut - contemplation might also be thought of as reflecting or pondering some thing, which would be far off the mark, and meditation in a Jewish context would mean to mumble and ponder the scriptures.

Thanks for the links. I will check them out, when I have time.  However, I find little evidence that there is a "living contemplative tradition" anywhere in this world.

They are not that important, just might be interesting to someone as a glimpse of another way of life, that contain at least indications of the fruits of deep meditation, IMO.

The problem with any branch of Greco-Roman Christianity is it was hijacked by Constantin in the 4th century, and the only way to fix it is to dump a lot of the hocus pocus that he invested the early church with, such as the divinity of Jesus.

You are probably right about this, however, this drove the serious contemplatives out into the desert where they kept practicing (As can be read in the Philokalia and such) and which eventually led to monasticism, which is still today considered the heart of church.
Also, the Coptic orthodox church would have been untouched by the "hijack of Constantin".

Maybe I should also point out that I'm in no way an orthodox Christian, I just enjoy reading their mystics.

[Jhanananda]

Oh, yes, mapeli, I agree, the fact that mystics arise in every religion proves that a few stumble upon a path that leads to liberation and enlightenment; and it is certainly my aspiration to document and validate every genuine mystic in every religion, which is a huge job that requires the help of all here.

However, Teresa of Avila and John of the Cross, only serve as proof that the mystics are the exception not the rule, when 1/2 of Teresa of Avila's books were burned by the church, she was kept under house arrest, and John of the Cross was imprisoned and beaten by the church.  Centuries later making them Doctors of the church only allows the frauds of today to appear as open minded, when they are all about appropriation and subversion of a path to liberation and enlightenment.

[Alexander]

The first indication is a clear focus on the dark night of the soul, but they would call it simply "despair", and that the Holy Spirit pulls back and makes the aspirant struggle and repent ("change his way"), to build regret and humility. This process is then deepened and repeated. This we know as the workings of the nights, or "the spiritual crisis", and "descent into hell" etc. Tears are emphasized, "warm tears but not from the ego", and I associate with Jhanandas discourse where it is said that eventually one does not know where the tears come from anymore. It's just a letting go.

Yes, although I do think hell and purgatory are better metaphors for the early parts of the mystic life, what John of the Cross calls the "night of sense." I would say that Catholicism is unique because it is the only religion in the world where there is a comprehensive explanation of the "night of spirit" - and that explanation exists in only two figures of Catholicism, Therese of Avila's The Mansions, and John of the Cross' Dark Night of the Soul. These two works are really for the most mature of spiritual persons. And it's ironic that people on the lower end of the Path read them and interpret them in their own way.

The second indication an emphasis on working for permanence, what we would call saturation. They say, the first step is to have the prayer sink down from the mind to the heart, even so that eventually my heart prays while the body sleeps, as it is said in the psalms. We would associate "the prayer of the heart" with the first Jhana. The process of saturation they call kenosis, that is, partaking of the divine in such fullness that one becomes divine.

Yes, I remember this experience, of the mind sinking into the heart. And that experience is certainly what Jhananda would call the first jhana, or as a Christian would put it, the first Fruit of the Spirit, joy.

Meditation is also not necessary per se to establish oneself in the first jhana. Rather, it is the product of (as the Orthodox monks would put it) a holistic, powerful transformation of the "entire man." A Christian would also call this transformation (which ends in the first jhana) "repentance," "change of heart" or "metanoia."

Mount Athos: A Visit to the Holy Mountain - Part one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erUBejuwd1Q
Mount Athos: A Visit to the Holy Mountain - Part two: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLS9-v9TpPU

I watched them. Haha I liked when The Fuhrer decided to protect the monks.

(It has also been pointed out that there are two distinct traditions on Athos - one who believes is fantastic miracles, and one who doesn't.) It is also rather striking, that when one of the monks are asked about how they are different from the Vatican he smiles and says something like "some would say, in all aspects."

Ah where were these in the video? Both of them. Personally I do believe that even gross, material miracles are possible. But they do not come to all holy people - only very few. Certainly Jhananda has experienced mystical contemplation, recollection of previous lives, etc. But there are probably other possible miracles, too. I think most of us here would agree about the psychic powers; maybe healing; etc. Perhaps Rasputin had the power to heal, as he needed to be a healer to fulfill his role in history.

Except - even if you could do miracles to what use are they? In the night of spirit you subdue your will to that of the Real. And whatever you becomes only the will of That.

[Jhanananda]

This afternoon I watched the two videos: A Visit to the Holy Mountain - Part one:, and A Visit to the Holy Mountain - Part two.  They reminded me of the video aglorincz posted a link to, Into Great Silence.  All three videos provided an inspiring look into contemplative traditions, one within Catholicism and one within Orthodox Christianity.  There are numerous such videos of inspiring contemplative places in Buddhism and Hinduism.

The questions that I was left with were:
1) If these contemplative places were indeed nurturing places for liberation and enlightenment, then why do we not see people and/or literature in support of this?
2) If these contemplative places were indeed nurturing places for liberation and enlightenment, then I would greatly like to go there, and I would happily lose myself into a crowd on enlightened and liberated people?
3) If these contemplative places were indeed nurturing places for liberation and enlightenment, then why am I not welcome to reside there?

My answers:
1) A characteristic of religion is tends to obsess over the doctrine and the progenitor, and it too often relies upon profound errors in translation.  It is this obsessing over an erroneous doctrine, and religious devotion that does not lead to liberation and enlightenment.
2) I do not expect that I would be welcome to live in any of these well established religious communities, because they would see my views as "heterodox," and would not welcome my interest in seeking an accurate translation of the doctrine.

Religious communities exist all over the world, yet few people find liberation and enlightenment.  It is all too easy to sell your spiritual aspirations for a bed and a bowl of food.  I chose not to do so, and would prefer to starve freezing in the snow, than embrace a lie for a comfortable, dry and warm bed.

[Alexander]

This afternoon I watched the two videos: A Visit to the Holy Mountain - Part one:, and A Visit to the Holy Mountain - Part two.  They reminded me of the video aglorincz posted a link to, Into Great Silence.  All three videos provided an inspiring look into contemplative traditions, one within Catholicism and one within Orthodox Christianity.  There are numerous such videos of inspiring contemplative places in Buddhism and Hinduism.

The questions that I was left with were:
1) If these contemplative places were indeed nurturing places for liberation and enlightenment, then why do we not see people and/or literature in support of this?
2) If these contemplative places were indeed nurturing places for liberation and enlightenment, then I would greatly like to go there, and I would happily lose myself into a crowd on enlightened and liberated people?
3) If these contemplative places were indeed nurturing places for liberation and enlightenment, then why am I not welcome to reside there?

My answers:
1) A characteristic of religion is tends to obsess over the doctrine and the progenitor, and it too often relies upon profound errors in translation.  It is this obsessing over an erroneous doctrine, and religious devotion that does not lead to liberation and enlightenment.
2) I do not expect that I would be welcome to live in any of these well established religious communities, because they would see my views as "heterodox," and would not welcome my interest in seeking an accurate translation of the doctrine.

Religious communities exist all over the world, yet few people find liberation and enlightenment.  It is all too easy to sell your spiritual aspirations for a bed and a bowl of food.  I chose not to do so, and would prefer to starve freezing in the snow, than embrace a lie for a comfortable, dry and warm bed.

You would be an eccentric there, assuming of course you chose not to censor yourself. Eventually they would ask you to leave. But I do think a place like this would have spiritual people. There would likely be a few adepts there who are nonreturners. And, while these nonreturners would not have gone through the night of spirit, they would still be enjoying the relatively still mind and the peace of the second jhana. Of course, those nonreturners might not be recognized for their gifts by the abbots or head monastics. They might even be considered novices by others.

I would also expect there to be oncereturners there, who are enjoying the joy of the first jhana, as these would be people who have gone through the Christian transformation of "repentance" or "metanoia." And then, there would be stream-winners, who have some substantive knowledge of the world's vanity... and then, the majority of monks, while not exactly making great progress at religion, are certainly building a large amount of merit there for their future births.

[Jhanananda]

You would be an eccentric there, assuming of course you chose not to censor yourself. Eventually they would ask you to leave.

So, you are saying that it is better to buy into a lie for a bed and a bowl.  That is not me, nor will any genuine mystic do that.  Instead I imagine a time when spiritual and contemplative communities might just value the presence of a mystic, who can provide guidance for those who meditate deeply.  However, I have yet to find any spiritual or contemplative communities that value my skills, which suggests no one at these communities meditates deeply.

But I do think a place like this would have spiritual people. There would likely be a few adepts there who are nonreturners. And, while these nonreturners would not have gone through the night of spirit, they would still be enjoying the relatively still mind and the peace of the second jhana. Of course, those nonreturners might not be recognized for their gifts by the abbots or head monastics. They might even be considered novices by others.

I would also expect there to be oncereturners there, who are enjoying the joy of the first jhana, as these would be people who have gone through the Christian transformation of "repentance" or "metanoia." And then, there would be stream-winners, who have some substantive knowledge of the world's vanity... and then, the majority of monks, while not exactly making great progress at religion, are certainly building a large amount of merit there for their future births.

I find your conclusions, interpretation and assumptions interesting.  Religious communities are populated by religious people.  Religious people are not necessarily contemplatives.  In fact in most cases they are not.

Religious people are defined by their devotion to religious beliefs and devotional practices.  We have already demonstrated that there are deep flaws in the religious beliefs of all mainstream religions, which are supported by gross errors in translations of their own literature.

From observing these people I am sure their devotions are supported by pleasant feelings and joy, which we can call bliss (piiti) and joy (sukha); thus, by definition, these people may very well have arrived at the first religious experience (first jhana).  Relevant here, the stream winner is characterized by overcoming doubt.  The devotee is full of faith, therefore they are most probably stream winners.

Another characteristic of the devotee is they tend to be self-righteous and dogmatic.  While they may fill every moment with a mantra (nam yo renge kyo, or the Jesus prayer, or Hari Krishna...), they typically never get to a still mind, and in fact devotees will often say that a still mind allows the devil in; therefore we can conclude that most devotees never get to a still mind. 

A still mind is the definition of the second stage of the religious experience (2nd jhana).  This level is required for attaining once returner, and progressing to the stages of mysticism.  We can conclude that it is very unlikely that any of the devotees in any of the religious communities of the world; which do not value a still mind, and mysticism; have every arrived at more than the first jhana, and thus stream entry. 

The fact of the matter is, if there was any depth of religious experience going on in any spiritual or contemplative community, then I would be a welcome visitor.  The fact that I am not welcome anywhere is proof that there is not depth in meditation or religious experience going on in any spiritual or contemplative community.

[mapeli]

This is a most interesting discussion. I too often wonder if I would be welcome. And so I wonder, would I benefit from letting my self live in such an environment during my non-meditation time. If so, it would be a wonderful life. However, so far I have a hunch that I would not enjoy the strictness, and I certainly do enjoy just being a free person. But I don't know.

Also, a bit off topic, I'm impressed by the clarity of classifications used here, as always. I'm currently very un-ready, and I would greatly appreciate a thread on clarifying both the non-, once-returners and stream-winners, as well as the different aspects of the night within the conceptual context of the GWV. You guys seem so comfortable with the concepts so I thought I might ask.

[Alexander]

So, you are saying that it is better to buy into a lie for a bed and a bowl.  That is not me, nor will any genuine mystic do that.  Instead I imagine a time when spiritual and contemplative communities might just value the presence of a mystic, who can provide guidance for those who meditate deeply.  However, I have yet to find any spiritual or contemplative communities that value my skills, which suggests no one at these communities meditates deeply.

Well how can you not lie? Or we? Do you go to the supermarket and tell everyone there you are an enlightened being? That you can travel out of body; that you can do this or that miracle. Especially in this profane American world, it isn't India, it's always a sin of omission.

[Jhanananda]

Well how can you not lie? Or we? Do you go to the supermarket and tell everyone there you are an enlightened being? That you can travel out of body; that you can do this or that miracle. Especially in this profane American world, it isn't India, it's always a sin of omission.

Just because I do not broadcast to the public that I am a mystic, does not mean that I lie by omission.  On the other hand, if I were to join the Catholic clergy and turn the other way when I see the monsignor molesting a child, then I would most certainly be buying into a system of lies.

However, more relevant to my experience is one is expected to discuss one's interior life (aka religious experiences) with superiors in any religion.  It was my experience as a Buddhist and Hindu contemplative to be marginalized by the teacher (guru) for those experiences.  Why would I expect any different treatment within any faction of Christianity?

Also, a bit off topic, I'm impressed by the clarity of classifications used here, as always. I'm currently very un-ready, and I would greatly appreciate a thread on clarifying both the non-, once-returners and stream-winners, as well as the different aspects of the night within the conceptual context of the GWV. You guys seem so comfortable with the concepts so I thought I might ask.

Please see this link: Levels of attainment

[Alexander]

However, more relevant to my experience is one is expected to discuss one's interior life (aka religious experiences) with superiors in any religion.  It was my experience as a Buddhist and Hindu contemplative to be marginalized by the teacher (guru) for those experiences.  Why would I expect any different treatment within any faction of Christianity?

Ah that is true. If only you could have a confessor who was actually someone spiritually, and would recognize your attainments. But rather than pine for that... it's better to form your own movement.

[Jhanananda]

Ah that is true. If only you could have a confessor who was actually someone spiritually, and would recognize your attainments. But rather than pine for that... it's better to form your own movement.

After 30 years of not finding any Christian minsters, priests, meditation teachers, gurus, or Buddhist priests with any attainment at all, it is exactly what I set out to do.  My method has been recognizing people for their attainments, and building a peer-level group out of people who meditate deeply.  Sadly there are not many who meditate deeply., but there are some, and some who are trying, as we see here on this forum.