Why Eckhart Tolle’s Evolutionary Activism Won’t Save Us

[Canadian_watcher]

l
As someone who lives with depression and anxiety which at times is unbelievably devastating I can tell you that repeating positive messages is in fact one of the most helpful things I can do to recover from an episode. If the only good thing that ever comes from someone like Tolle is to help people who are sick in the same way that I am to get to higher ground well then, that's good enough.

It's more than good enough, it's a boon to the world. I didn't say that yesterday because I thought it would just look like I was being an unrealistically goody-two-shoes apple-polishing show-off for brownie points. Which it probably does.

But it was still cowardly not to respond. Because it's just not okay to leave someone who says this in the lurch as to whether anybody's answer is basically:

"Well, tough luck for you, but you're just going to have to bite the bullet and/or live in shame when it comes to that irrelevant little devastating-depression-and-anxiety thing you've got going on, because social/political shit comes first!"

I'm absolutely positive that nobody on the thread thinks that, or is capable of it. But since it can't hurt to say so: On those terms, that's a beautiful, positive thing that doesn't necessarily have any direct relationship to social/political issues, although -- as it happens -- it's a beneficial one when it does.

As I understand it, the problem arises because Tolle is so aggressive about expanding the terms past the limit of the realistically beneficial. But that doesn't mean everyone who reads him is, too. It's just a critique of something that's open to specific criticism.

And, um....Sorry I'm me. But I mean it. Pretend it's someone else.

I hear you wrt the problematic parts of Tolle's .. umm.. mission, maybe? See, that's the part that I am unaware of - all I know is that the guy wrote a book or five and speaks and encourages people but I didn't think he was trying to build a society out of it. If you guys think he is you know more about it than I do, for sure. I really don't know much about him at all, to be perfectly honest. What I'm reacting to is this weird insistence that it's got a dangerous element to it because to me that would indicate that there are vast numbers of people seduced by his theories and lifestyle recommendations to the point where they are automatons. Further, this army of Tollebots would have had to have been distracted from action of some sort for AD's ideas to really hold water. As if let's say they would be rebuilding Haiti right now if they hadn't heard of Tolle back in 2004 and gotten all self centered. You know?

I just don't see it as as big a problem as even football or hockey is in terms of leading people away from activism.

[compared2what?]

(grossly) exaggerated satire.

Some context: I am a member of a worker's cooperative. Before that I ran a small company, in as democratic a fashion as I could.

Characterizing cooperative effort as idiots without the ability to solve as basic a problem as fixing a water pump is not useful in any way.

it was funny AND I've sat in meetings like that, myself.

I hate to say it, but I can recognize a little bit of a reality that's known to me somewhere in there, too. It's partial, prejudicially exaggerated and not universally or truly representative. And it doesn't work for me as satire. So I didn't find it funny. But I didn't think it was completely out of the question that it might be, for someone else.

I'm dubious about its usefulness, though. Let's put it that way.

(Solidarity on your post before this one as well, unqualifed. It's like a world gone mad.)

[American Dream]

I hear you wrt the problematic parts of Tolle's .. umm.. mission, maybe? See, that's the part that I am unaware of - all I know is that the guy wrote a book or five and speaks and encourages people but I didn't think he was trying to build a society out of it. If you guys think he is you know more about it than I do, for sure. I really don't know much about him at all, to be perfectly honest. What I'm reacting to is this weird insistence that it's got a dangerous element to it because to me that would indicate that there are vast numbers of people seduced by his theories and lifestyle recommendations to the point where they are automatons. Further, this army of Tollebots would have had to have been distracted from action of some sort for AD's ideas to really hold water. As if let's say they would be rebuilding Haiti right now if they hadn't heard of Tolle back in 2004 and gotten all self centered. You know?

I just don't see it as as big a problem as even football or hockey is in terms of leading people away from activism.

Isn't there a significant element of "strawpersoning" here? Who after all is maintaining that:

...it's got a dangerous element to it,,there are vast numbers of people seduced by his theories and lifestyle recommendations to the point where they are automatons...this army of Tollebots... have been distracted from action... As if let's say they would be rebuilding Haiti right now if they hadn't heard of Tolle back in 2004 and gotten all self centered.

Some quotes or other specific citations would be great!

Also, wrt sports being a distraction from political action, ok true, but I hear Scofeld in the op as suggesting a more positive outcome, e.g. "Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now apolitical and/or liberal got more serious, started questioning their own views of the world and got more involved with radical, grassroots movements for deep social change"...

With that I strongly agree!

[compared2what?]

Hi c2w? - Yes - as an inscription from an old English gravestone says much more eloquently than I did...
A vision without a task is but a dream,
a task without a vision is drudgery,
a vision and a task is the hope of the world.

That was a great story re Joe Hill. I think mourning is an important emotion to go through - I took it that Joe Hill would regard the greatest tribute to him as being concerted action rather than words, which was his own highest principal.

I think he wanted...autonomy and freedom for all people? Maybe? It's not easy to state it briefly. But more than the above. To change the world, essentially.

Concerted action was a part of that, certainly. But so were words. They're not really conceptually opposed to one another, per se.

...

I don't think.

...

Ugh. For the first time in my life, I can see how "semiotics" and "practical advantages" might not be as many universes apart as I've always supposed. Upside: Progress is more possible than you think, sometimes.

[compared2what?]

I just don't see it as as big a problem as even football or hockey is in terms of leading people away from activism.

They're loosely equivalent in a lot of ways. Probably better in some but worse in others, at a more detailed level, I guess. But not all bad, it must be said. The distinction-with-a-difference is:

There is no place anywhere in football or hockey where anyone mandates acceptance of the proposition that without football (or hockey) activism is pointless, as a part of the price of admission.

And the same can't be said of Eckhart Tolle.

[brekin]

Here's Tolle on politics in his newsletter.
Seems like he straddles between turn off your mind and go with the flow.
But I don't know, stop seeking the truth, not identifying with what you believe, being passive - don't seem like pro-activism ways of thinking to me.

This passage is especially troubling:

Your first responsibility is not to identify with a position. Everybody has to practice that one way or another. It's a beautiful practice. It's expressed in Zen. I don't remember who said it, some Zen master said, "Don't seek for the truth – just cease cherishing opinions". And that's enough. Many spiritually inclined people look for the ‘truth' – hopefully at some point within, but first it starts outside. But don't look for the truth, not even within, just stop cherishing opinions. Cherishing, not having. It doesn't say stop having opinions, because that would be difficult – maybe a very advanced practice. Even I have some opinions, about Fox News, and so on – but cherishing means to identify with the opinion, to be in the thought. [/b]And then it gives you your sense of "I". Then anybody who has a different or conflicting position becomes a kind of enemy. Then you're trapped in form. This is a very common human condition. Most humans on the planet derive their identity from their thoughts. So the thought is invested with self. Maybe this is another way of speaking about the essential truth of the Buddha, who discovered that this sense of ‘self' is an illusion. You derive your sense of self from form – because every thought is a thought-form. It's an energy field.

Your first responsibility is not to identify with a position? Don't look for the truth? Don't cherish your opinions? The sense of 'self' is an illusion?

I think having a healthy sense of "I" makes good emotional and political sense.

http://www.eckharttolle.com/newsletter/Eckhart-Answers-Question-on-Spiritual-Differences/
Member Login | Events Login
Are you ready to be awakened?

JULY 2010 Newsletter Content
Eckhart Answers a Question on Differences

Q: "My husband holds extremely different political views from mine. He believes in war, guns, Fox News, and Sarah Palin. I do not. How do I constructively handle our differences?"

A: Viewpoints, opinions, and mental positions are all thoughts – the thought says "this is how it is", it is some kind of judgment or perspective on things. To be identified with a mental position is to derive your sense of self from that mental position. It's a substitute identity, form identity, ego – a substitute for your true identity which is formless and has nothing to do with any thought – but is consciousness itself.

This is a good opportunity for not giving up your thoughts – you are not required to watch Fox News, but if he is there watching Fox News, and the sound is there filling the house, you can either ask him to turn it down or close the door, or surrender to what is, or walk out, or ask him to walk out. There are many choices, other than negativity. The main thing is mental positions – to withdraw your identification. You can still have your position, but there's no ‘self' in it anymore – it does not supply your sense of identity. Then you can allow somebody else to have their mental position. Perhaps you can then discover that beyond both your and your husband's mental positions – there is something beyond, where you are not in conflict. Beyond his thoughts and your thoughts – maybe you can find that place.

Your first responsibility is not to identify with a position. Everybody has to practice that one way or another. It's a beautiful practice. It's expressed in Zen. I don't remember who said it, some Zen master said, "Don't seek for the truth – just cease cherishing opinions". And that's enough. Many spiritually inclined people look for the ‘truth' – hopefully at some point within, but first it starts outside. But don't look for the truth, not even within, just stop cherishing opinions. Cherishing, not having. It doesn't say stop having opinions, because that would be difficult – maybe a very advanced practice. Even I have some opinions, about Fox News, and so on – but cherishing means to identify with the opinion, to be in the thought. And then it gives you your sense of "I". Then anybody who has a different or conflicting position becomes a kind of enemy. Then you're trapped in form. This is a very common human condition. Most humans on the planet derive their identity from their thoughts. So the thought is invested with self. Maybe this is another way of speaking about the essential truth of the Buddha, who discovered that this sense of ‘self' is an illusion. You derive your sense of self from form – because every thought is a thought-form. It's an energy field.

If this were your only spiritual practice, it would be enough. If you can try, for example, talking to the questioner, your husband can then become your spiritual teacher because he can continuously remind you not to be identified with mental positions. Then, you don't resist the other person's mental position, because you don't need to – you allow it to be. You can even allow your own mental position to be. If you resist someone else's mental position, you only strengthen it. Try arguing with him about Fox News or Sarah Palin, and you'll see what I mean.

You may find the miracle that it can happen quite easily, that somebody's mental position either weakens or it may even dissolve when it's not resisted – because it needs resistance to strengthen itself, and to gain energy through fighting another. It's quite miraculous to see how it can happen when it's not resisted, when it is allowed: "I know that's what you think, and that's okay".

[Canadian_watcher]

I hear you wrt the problematic parts of Tolle's .. umm.. mission, maybe? See, that's the part that I am unaware of - all I know is that the guy wrote a book or five and speaks and encourages people but I didn't think he was trying to build a society out of it. If you guys think he is you know more about it than I do, for sure. I really don't know much about him at all, to be perfectly honest. What I'm reacting to is this weird insistence that it's got a dangerous element to it because to me that would indicate that there are vast numbers of people seduced by his theories and lifestyle recommendations to the point where they are automatons. Further, this army of Tollebots would have had to have been distracted from action of some sort for AD's ideas to really hold water. As if let's say they would be rebuilding Haiti right now if they hadn't heard of Tolle back in 2004 and gotten all self centered. You know?

I just don't see it as as big a problem as even football or hockey is in terms of leading people away from activism.

Isn't there a significant element of "strawpersoning" here? Who after all is maintaining that:

...it's got a dangerous element to it,,there are vast numbers of people seduced by his theories and lifestyle recommendations to the point where they are automatons...this army of Tollebots... have been distracted from action... As if let's say they would be rebuilding Haiti right now if they hadn't heard of Tolle back in 2004 and gotten all self centered.

Some quotes or other specific citations would be great!

well, if no one is saying that then I don't see the problem with Tolle at all. Are we really debating about the habits of a handful of people, then? If so, who cares about any of this. Some people never wash their hands after they go to the bathroom. I think that's dangerous and disgusting, frankly, but I wouldn't make a post here about it unless it was a significant and widespread social problem with real fallout. or if it were really odd or cool or something. So I guess if that's not what this series of posts are about then I admit that I don't understand them.

Also, wrt sports being a distraction from political action, ok true, but I hear Scofeld in the op as suggesting a more positive outcome, e.g. "Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now apolitical and/or liberal got more serious, started questioning their own views of the world and got more involved with radical, grassroots movements for deep social change"...

sure, same can be said for the people who are couch potato sports fans, tho, right?

[American Dream]

Isn't there a significant element of "strawpersoning" here? Who after all is maintaining that:

...it's got a dangerous element to it,,there are vast numbers of people seduced by his theories and lifestyle recommendations to the point where they are automatons...this army of Tollebots... have been distracted from action... As if let's say they would be rebuilding Haiti right now if they hadn't heard of Tolle back in 2004 and gotten all self centered.

Some quotes or other specific citations would be great!

well, if no one is saying that then I don't see the problem with Tolle at all. Are we really debating about the habits of a handful of people, then? If so, who cares about any of this. Some people never wash their hands after they go to the bathroom. I think that's dangerous and disgusting, frankly, but I wouldn't make a post here about it unless it was a significant and widespread social problem with real fallout. or if it were really odd or cool or something. So I guess if that's not what this series of posts are about then I admit that I don't understand them.

Also, wrt sports being a distraction from political action, ok true, but I hear Scofeld in the op as suggesting a more positive outcome, e.g. "Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now apolitical and/or liberal got more serious, started questioning their own views of the world and got more involved with radical, grassroots movements for deep social change"...

sure, same can be said for the people who are couch potato sports fans, tho, right?

I think that a main point is that lots of sincere, very well meaning people who want the best for Humanity and all of life are getting caught up in Tolle and other such philosophies which may dull their effectiveness by encouraging too much navel-gazing as well as unrealistic attitudes that ultimately lead them far afield from social/political goals such as transforming racism, economic injustice, patriarchy and all the rest.

It's really a shame because this is (potentially at least) a very potent group of people...

[compared2what?]

I think mourning is an important emotion to go through

Sorry. Partially delayed response, for logistical reasons.

I'd say it's not only an important but also an inevitable process for most people to go through, usually entailing many emotions, notably anger, which is -- as I said -- generally what that quote is construed to be referring to, loosely speaking. When I'm applying it to myself, I amend it to "Don't moan, organize!" Because I'm kinda inclined to be excessively fond of complaining. But to most people, it means something closer to "Better to light a candle than curse the darkness."

That notwithstanding, I take the above to mean that you're asking for more, better examples of the left addressing the issue of too much politically ineffective anger more explicitly, but simply forgot to say so.

So here you go:

"Anger or revolt that does not get into the muscles remains a figment of the imagination." - Simone de Beauvoir

(Maybe more to come, if I have the time.)

[Searcher08]

"Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now apolitical and/or liberal got more serious, started questioning their own views of the world and got more involved with radical, grassroots movements for deep social change"...

The apolitical strand
A) What about expanding this statement to be three strands?
Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now apolitical
got more oriented to external action,
started questioning their own and others views of the world and
got more involved with radical, grassroots movements for deep social change

The liberal / progressive strand
B) Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now liberal / progressive got more serious, started questioning their own views of the world and got more involved with radical, grassroots movements for deep social change

The conservative (*) strand
C) Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now conservative got more serious, started questioning their own views of the world and got more involved with radical, grassroots movements for deep social change

What these descriptions are lacking, which AD's description had in abundance - is rich sensory detail.

Due to time, I'll just look at A
Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now apolitical
got more oriented to external action,
started questioning their own and others views of the world and
got more involved with radical, grassroots movements
for deep social change

Next Iteration, (incorporating AD's Sensory-Rich description and my expansion ideas)

Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now apolitical
got more oriented to making do-it-yourself art, raising babies, distributing free food to all who need, playing music in the park, building community gardens- and meditating in them!, building up squats, standiing in solidarity with the most poor and oppressed;
started questioning their own and others views of the world through learning both creative and design thinking and critical thinking skills and the skills of being a very productive and stress-free person - and got more involved with both creating and growing radical, grassroots movements for deep social change.

Personally, for a first draft, I think that looks , sounds and feels pretty rockin











(*)Second Realmers, Ron Paul libertarians, Paleo's

[American Dream]

"Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now apolitical and/or liberal got more serious, started questioning their own views of the world and got more involved with radical, grassroots movements for deep social change"...

The apolitical strand
A) What about expanding this statement to be three strands?
Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now apolitical
got more oriented to external action,
started questioning their own and others views of the world and
got more involved with radical, grassroots movements for deep social change

The liberal / progressive strand
B) Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now liberal / progressive got more serious, started questioning their own views of the world and got more involved with radical, grassroots movements for deep social change

The conservative (*) strand
C) Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now conservative got more serious, started questioning their own views of the world and got more involved with radical, grassroots movements for deep social change

What these descriptions are lacking, which AD's description had in abundance - is rich sensory detail.

Due to time, I'll just look at A
Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now apolitical
got more oriented to external action,
started questioning their own and others views of the world and
got more involved with radical, grassroots movements
for deep social change

Next Iteration, (incorporating AD's Sensory-Rich description and my expansion ideas)

Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now apolitical
got more oriented to making do-it-yourself art, raising babies, distributing free food to all who need, playing music in the park, building community gardens- and meditating in them!, building up squats, standiing in solidarity with the most poor and oppressed;
started questioning their own and others views of the world through learning both creative and design thinking and critical thinking skills and the skills of being a very productive and stress-free person - and got more involved with both creating and growing radical, grassroots movements for deep social change.

Personally, for a first draft, I think that looks , sounds and feels pretty rockin











(*)Second Realmers, Ron Paul libertarians, Paleo's

Although I would add that all the romantic, prefigurative and/or culturally centered type of activity represents only one aspect of the work. There is also the grappling with the- admittedly sometimes sticky- "single issues": Global warming, wars and occupation, the whole long list.

Through getting to the particulars we must be sure to get at the big picture too: Moving towards a world that is Post-: Hierarchical, Capitalist, Patriarchal,"White" Supremacist, Heteronormative etc. etc.

This is a task for all our lifetimes!

[Searcher08]

"Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now apolitical and/or liberal got more serious, started questioning their own views of the world and got more involved with radical, grassroots movements for deep social change"...

The apolitical strand
A) What about expanding this statement to be three strands?
Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now apolitical
got more oriented to external action,
started questioning their own and others views of the world and
got more involved with radical, grassroots movements for deep social change

The liberal / progressive strand
B) Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now liberal / progressive got more serious, started questioning their own views of the world and got more involved with radical, grassroots movements for deep social change

The conservative (*) strand
C) Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now conservative got more serious, started questioning their own views of the world and got more involved with radical, grassroots movements for deep social change

What these descriptions are lacking, which AD's description had in abundance - is rich sensory detail.

Due to time, I'll just look at A
Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now apolitical
got more oriented to external action,
started questioning their own and others views of the world and
got more involved with radical, grassroots movements
for deep social change

Next Iteration, (incorporating AD's Sensory-Rich description and my expansion ideas)

Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now apolitical
got more oriented to making do-it-yourself art, raising babies, distributing free food to all who need, playing music in the park, building community gardens- and meditating in them!, building up squats, standiing in solidarity with the most poor and oppressed;
started questioning their own and others views of the world through learning both creative and design thinking and critical thinking skills and the skills of being a very productive and stress-free person - and got more involved with both creating and growing radical, grassroots movements for deep social change.

Personally, for a first draft, I think that looks , sounds and feels pretty rockin


(*)Second Realmers, Ron Paul libertarians, Paleo's

Although I would add that all the romantic, prefigurative and/or culturally centered type of activity represents only one aspect of the work.

"First paragraph"
There is also the grappling with the- admittedly sometimes sticky- "single issues": Global warming, wars and occupation, the whole long list.

"Second Paragraph"
Through getting to the particulars we must be sure to get at the big picture too: Moving towards a world that is Post-: Hierarchical, Capitalist, Patriarchal,"White" Supremacist, Heteronormative etc. etc.

This is a task for all our lifetimes!

OK - I'm feel there are two very diffrent critters here

The first paragraph is relatively straightforward... what about...?
Tools and approaches for dealing with complex, 'sticky' sometimes called 'wicked' problems in the context of life as an Individual, team and family members and wider organisations / community

(This could include cognitive mapping, Open Space Technology, FutureSearch, unconferences, Dialogue Mapping, Stakeholder Mapping....)

The second paragraph is non-Sensory - and feels qualitatively different.

Please could you do the same rich "if I was making a video this is what you would see and hear"
that maps the conceptual language of
romantic, prefigurative and/or culturally centered type of activity
to the rich sensory language of
making do-it-yourself art, raising babies, distributing free food to all who need, playing music in the park, building community gardens- and meditating in them!, building up squats, standiing in solidarity with the most poor and oppressed

with the conceptual language of
Moving towards a world that is Post-: Hierarchical, Capitalist, Patriarchal,"White" Supremacist, Heteronormative etc. etc.
so it can be turned into the rich sensory language of
**your desrciption here**?

[compared2what?]

"Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now apolitical and/or liberal got more serious, started questioning their own views of the world and got more involved with radical, grassroots movements for deep social change"...

The apolitical strand
A) What about expanding this statement to be three strands?
Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now apolitical
got more oriented to external action,
started questioning their own and others views of the world and
got more involved with radical, grassroots movements for deep social change

The liberal / progressive strand
B) Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now liberal / progressive got more serious, started questioning their own views of the world and got more involved with radical, grassroots movements for deep social change

The conservative (*) strand
C) Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now conservative got more serious, started questioning their own views of the world and got more involved with radical, grassroots movements for deep social change

What these descriptions are lacking, which AD's description had in abundance - is rich sensory detail.

Due to time, I'll just look at A
Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now apolitical
got more oriented to external action,
started questioning their own and others views of the world and
got more involved with radical, grassroots movements
for deep social change

Next Iteration, (incorporating AD's Sensory-Rich description and my expansion ideas)

Wouldn't it be powerful if all the spiritual/New Age people who are now apolitical
got more oriented to making do-it-yourself art, raising babies, distributing free food to all who need, playing music in the park, building community gardens- and meditating in them!, building up squats, standiing in solidarity with the most poor and oppressed;
started questioning their own and others views of the world through learning both creative and design thinking and critical thinking skills and the skills of being a very productive and stress-free person - and got more involved with both creating and growing radical, grassroots movements for deep social change.

Personally, for a first draft, I think that looks , sounds and feels pretty rockin

It's a beautiful vision. And that you were inspired by AD's question to prove his point that way is the highest form of flattery, imo.

Strands "B)" and "C)" might maybe be better expressed if they were modeled on another question, though. Because, as stated, they read as if it was as reasonable to presume that "liberals/progressives" or "conservatives (*)" were NOT involved with radical grassroots movements for deep social change as it is for apolitical New Agers.

And it's not. So that's confusing.

It momentarily threw me a little wrt the liberals in AD's version, too. But only until I got to the word "radical," at which point it became clear that the question was implicitly pro-radical-left, which is what I understand to be AD's political orientation. So it made sense. And there being no more reason for anyone to hide that sort of thing than to spell it out every time, that took care of that.

I like the sound of your utopia. And it's infinities better than anything I could come up with. So if you start a cult any time soon, let me know. I've been feeling just about ready to take the plunge recently.

[MayDay]

[quote

I like the sound of your utopia. And it's infinities better than anything I could come up with. So if you start a cult any time soon, let me know. I've been feeling just about ready to take the plunge recently.[/quote]

http://www.fireflygathering.org/scheduleClasses.asp

I get by with a little help from my friends

[compared2what?]

I like the sound of your utopia. And it's infinities better than anything I could come up with. So if you start a cult any time soon, let me know. I've been feeling just about ready to take the plunge recently.

http://www.fireflygathering.org/scheduleClasses.asp

I get by with a little help from my friends

What a lovely thought. Thank you.

I think I'm looking for something a little more destructively cultish, though. Probably just a mood.