Explore
Gaia Soulmates
 Advertising keeps Gaia free! Interested in sponsoring us?

Speaking.

Posted on Feb 8th, 2007 by Ian Gardner : Mystic Ian Gardner
Quoting only the words of others is parrot-like;

Quoting what you know, is wise;

Quoting what you are, is enlightened.

Access_public Access: Public 13 Comments Print views (478)  
Tagged with: Quoting, speaking, parrot-like, wise, enlightened
4 days later
summersolstar said

I like this very much.  I believe you are saying here that one should not quote or blindly follow another but be still, quiet the mental chatter (the ego mind, so to speak, the individual I), and just be and seek or develop no mind for direct experience, yes?  Otherwise they may be fools and/or hypocrites?  As in, unless you are enlightened (and you will know if you are), you should not try to point the way to enlightenment. 

I do believe that many people, however, can intuit truth and wisdom, even when they haven't directly experienced it or come to some original expression of the truth for themselves or even when they haven't made it to a higher stage of enlightenment or plane of consciousness, if you will.  Truth comes in many forms, in many guises, through many different filters but content will be the same, the same seed.  At least, this is a close approximation for what I feel I know.

And as for me, I'm a quotaholic!

Any clarifications?

Ian Gardner : Mystic
5 days later
Ian Gardner said

Hi Jennifer,
re. para 1: You are close enough, although I am not sure that I would agree with the last sentence - see below.
re. para 2: Yes. There is a difference between understanding something, knowing something and being something. At any level it is acceptable to pass on one's understanding, knowledge or being to another if the intention is to help.
re. Para 3: There is no harm in that. The quotes one reads are like the rungs of a ladder if used to climb. If used for self-aggrandisement one is standing in a hole in the ground!
()

peter : ______
15 days later
peter said

Who talks by silence, does the most. :-)

Ian Gardner : Mystic
16 days later
Ian Gardner said

Thanks Peter,
I have often come across this, and each time it raises the question, 'If so, why did The Buddha, The Christ and many, many others not remain silent?'
()

peter : ______
16 days later
peter said

Since they don’t have so many people to talk with by silence…If you don’t have the ears you do not hear. Thus the words which create a dualstic contrast & separation and are the seeds for all the misunderstandings. Derivatives are never the real thing but only a poor model and illustration.

But, still those who talk by silence do they most :-)

Ian Gardner : Mystic
16 days later
Ian Gardner said

“Talk by silence.” I do not know what you mean, I am seeing nothing. Could you please elucidate? Ta.

peter : ______
17 days later
peter said

:-) That's the reason the great teachers often prefer to be the practical example themselves e.g. Jesus. This may clarify/confuse more….

Ian Gardner : Mystic
17 days later
Ian Gardner said

That is a lot of Silence! I would have expected it to be all blank.

peter : ______
18 days later
peter said

By the words of physics we could say that those are the higher energy frequencies that we do not have the senses to acknowledge.

Ian Gardner : Mystic
18 days later
Ian Gardner said

Dear Peter,
What you say seems to be contradictory. You appear to give Jesus as an example of one who “talks by silence” yet he apparently spoke volumes.
Regarding some people not having ”the energy frequencies … …to acknowledge … .” I know what you mean and have alluded to it in what I have written elsewhere.
It seems to me that what you mean by one who 'talks by silence' is the person who seeks enlightenment entirely on their own and either during the seeking or afterwards does no communicate to anyone what the seeking revealed e.g. many sadhus in India and many Christian monks elsewhere. If this is what you mean there have been many, and are many, who have opted for this path. I think it would be correct to say that the silence precludes advice to others or commentary on the chosen path or views of others.
In any case, there are many paths and each is correct for the chooser at the time.

peter : ______
18 days later
peter said

There appears to be a contradiction only if one assumes that 'talking by Silence' and living a 'practical' life are mutually exclusive which they are not. However, we are getting too academic here and thus there is little point going further from here in the discussion.

<”it seems to me that what you mean by one who 'talks by silence' is the person who seeks enlightenment entirely… ”

–> Basically I referred to the situation after the 'conventional' enlightenment that can be also referred as the fourth initiation. However, that's also only a middle point of the path forward and not any end means by itself. It only enables some more enlarged vision and capabilities but then the practical application of the pursued wisdom has just began.

This is exactly what I meant by using words as a means to communicate: they can only create ever more confusion and misunderstandings ;-)

Ian Gardner : Mystic
20 days later
Ian Gardner said

I do agree, Peter. Especially in a place like this, where dialogue is by words and not telepathic, and where the ability to understand varies considerably, one has got to do one's best to reduce confusion and misunderstanding.

PS. By 'conventional' enlightenment do you mean 'Nirvana' after the attainment of which there are four stages to enlightenment?

peter : ______
21 days later
peter said

Regarding the 4th Initiation(Crucifixion/Renunciation) here are some pointers:
- Intro
- eastern and western traditions clarified
- practical info

You have to be a Gaia member to post comments.
Login or Join now!