Comments for waves arising suddenly on a windless ocean

Comment on Critique of Byron Katie by Kristel

Kristel — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:54:12 +0000

I could be wrong but I think that our humanity (aka imperfections) are what tether us to this existence. If BK where not human she would not be here to help us. Complaining that she is ‘human’ is immature. How different is this from blasting ones parents for not being ‘perfect’? Perfection is an idea, a concept that was invented by man and in my humble opinion, a tool that’s too often used to generate guilt in oneself or project it elsewhere. I personally see nothing scary or negative about the idea of radically accepting ‘what is’ from the standpoint that all is exactly as it should be. Only a seriously confused person would use this as an excuse to standby while someone is harmed and do nothing or actually harm someone themselves. I never for one second thought that BC condoned cruelty in any way shape or form. I do not think BK is cold or uncaring. On the contrary I think she teaches detachment with love, compassion and forgiveness. She urges us to focus on ourselves and cease self-torture which can only be done when one accepts responsiblity for ones thoughts, actions and destructive patterns.
It has been my experience that many are addicted to self-pity. Anyone that has an investment in victim mentality is going to poke holes or attack any form of teaching that attempts to correct it. Saying that BK’s work hurts people is stating that these individuals are not responsible for their interpretations. Maybe we should pass a law that warning labels should be stuck on all self-help books that state that the author is not perfect, therefore the contents of the book probably isn’t and that the reader is responsible for sorting this out. What BK writes or says is only as ‘helpful’ or ‘destructive’ as the individuals interpretation of it.

Comment on Critique of Byron Katie Part 2 by josesiem

josesiem — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 12:42:00 +0000

Sharon,
AFIK, there is no mind only school of Theravada Buddhism.
Byron Katie doesn’t claim to be an authority… well, that’s debatable. Her method is fine for ending suffering… her further-reaching conclusions step outsdie of method and into ontology. I’ve read everything that’s out there, even the unpublished material, and it’s clear that she’d fit right in with the advaita and mind-only folks. I’m not saying that’s a problem per se, just pointing out the weak epistemology.

Carl is a friend of mine, so I wouldn’t read too much into his response!

Comment on Critique of Byron Katie Part 2 by Sharon

Sharon — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 10:53:02 +0000

To Carl (a very belated response):

“Though I haven’t read this author you speak of, your analysis seems straight on, and is very interesting.”

Carl, if you haven’t read the author, on what are you basing your evaluation of this analysis as “right on”? Any student of Philosophy 101 will tell you that, at best, you are analyzing second-hand information.

It’s also interesting to note that every critique that can be made of B. Katie’s teaching has been made for centuries of various forms of Buddhism, such as the “mind only” school of Theravada Buddhism. This is not a new debate! ;o)

The Buddha taught: “I teach one thing only: suffering, and the end to its reach.”

I challenge you to study the teachings of Byron Katie (who, by the way, doesn’t claim be an authority. She claims to be a person who knows “what hurts,” and “what doesn’t hurt.” Sounds like someone else I just quoted.)

In the end, a philosophical discussion is interesting, academic, and so much intellectual twiddling.

Take care,

Sharon

Comment on Critique of Byron Katie by Anon Email

Anon Email — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 02:56:45 +0000

Katie encourages us to question our thoughts. So why not question our thoughts about HER? About spiritual teachers and spirituality?

Are you a spiritual junkie? Do you jump from one spiritual teacher to another? When will that end? Will you be doing the same thing all your life? Who are these people that you admire (worship)? Are they really helping?

Have you ever noticed that when you encounter a new teacher, it’s a revelation? Then the zap gradually wanes. It’s like a caffeine hit or something. I think that eventually you find that there are no new teachers, no new revelations they can give you. The revelations become internal – you have to go out on your own.

These are things I’m asking myself. I’ve certainly displayed these behaviours. I feel a time is coming for me to “kill the Buddha”. What does that mean? That everything they say is meaningless – is more to attach to.

Don’t attach too much to these comments!

Comment on Critique of Byron Katie by Oren from israel

Oren from israel — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 09:05:45 +0000

Ok…interesting debate, Now listen, I know the work for about 4 years, this IS might be an effective guide to end suffer of all kind, but, what i didn’t like at katie is that she says that thoughts are the cause for all the suffer in the world for evey humen- that’s a lie, i am sure, because my most suffer did not came from thoughts alone, it comes from a lack of good function in my body, headaches, many kinds of physical pain, the work is just worthless when i tried to atteck physical references at my body, the work is about dealing with thought and beliefs, which can change the mood drastically if your mind will accept the turn around, but to say it will work on everyhumen? every kind of physical pain ? {she said “people don’t know physical pain is always a story of the past” -well of course it is, but when i have an astma attack lets see her doing the work while i am screaming for morphine.}- this is just a LIE to say so, many people who are doing the work and do not procced well feel guilt and disappointment for not experience the “easiest enlightment” katie offered.

To sum up, this is a good tool, NOT FOR ANYONE AND ANY CASE- and she had to say that as well, because this is the true about the work.

Comment on Critique of Byron Katie by mack paul

mack paul — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 03:19:04 +0000

My favorite thing Trungpa said is “disappointment is your greatest friend.” I puzzled over it for years and decided he simply meant that it protects us from arrogance.

Comment on Critique of Byron Katie by becky

becky — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 00:09:55 +0000

I’m a psychotherapist and have been practicing buddhism this way and that for a lot of years. KB’s little 4-step can be a wonderful tool – it’s really in the tradition of cognitive therapy, radicalized by some non-dualistic perspective. I say perspective because, as someone up there notes, she’s an absolutist (and absolutism has a funny way of slithering into nilhilism), and that doesn’t hold philosophical or ethical water. It’s terrific for busting blind judgements and real projections and painful false beliefs. And I now would stop there.
Because it’s dangerous. It might be helpful for an abused person to turn around “He shouldn’t have raped me” and discover “I shouldn’t rape myself (every time i get hooked into obsessive and painful replays)”, but that’s slippery and had better be pretty carefully worked. And “He should have raped me” is a notion that only works at a level where no one needs any 4 step anyway.
I had a horribly childhood-abused PTSD client who spontaneously declared one day, “I don’t want to do the victim thing any more. I wouldn’t be who I am, and I wouldn’t know what I know if it hadn’t happened. It’s incredible. I feel wonderful, it’s somehow just this incredible, insane totally valuable moment of my very own life.” That held. She really got a lot of release with that insight. And I asked her later what she’d do if she came across a man raping a child now. “I’d try to blow his brains out”, said she. So that’s no hesitation, anyway.
It’s also story-bound, that business of finding a way to incorporate suffering into your narrative. Limited, relative. But Katie’s not Nagarjuna, either. I’ve settled (uneasily) with the formulation of an ultimate and a relative reality that appears in some Buddhist schools… Might be framed as “Nothing is inherently and objectively real, it’s a dream, a flash of lightning, a dewdrop, etc. — but hey, tie your horse to a tree.” In this vast seamless perfection it’s also not OK to throw a baby into a flaming pit.
KB covers this problem of right judgement, discernment, discrimination, when she talks about not going into the yard of a biting dog. Reckon one might also shoot that dog if it’s a Nazi running off with baby. But there’s a problem with the biting dog being perfect and perfectly doing its perfect job over in the relative real, which she has to deny. She’s stuck. And she’s charismatic and adored and I believe absolutely sincere, and the money is rolling in, and teachers like this have a wretched tendency to gradually go narcissistic and mad. The stories rolling in now are achingly familiar. Sigh.
In the Bardo realm blissful heaven’s at the top, but you don’t get to stay there, you get blissed and blind and tumble back into hell, which is utter paranoia. This is what happened to Osho I think, and maybe Trungpa. It’s my favorite sad joke – “too much emptiness!” In psychological terms it’s the return of the repressed.
As someone said, it’s a terrific trick and genuinely liberating in one sense. But be careful.

Comment on Critique of Byron Katie by jerry

jerry — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 06:31:53 +0000

Caps below:

1. BK proposes we inquire into and see the unreality of all thought and thought-referents (objects in the world). I HAVEN’T COME ACROSS THIS IN YEARS OF LISTENING AND READING. SHE PROPOSES THAT WE INQUIRE INTO STRESSFUL OR PAINFUL THOUGHTS. IT IS THE belief IN THESE PARTICULAR THOUGHTS THAT IS THE SOURCE OF ALL HUMAN SUFFERING. ON A DEEPER LEVEL, YES, WE MAY SEE THAT ALL IS ILLUSION. BUT AS IN BUDDHISM, THIS VIEW INFORMS ONE WITH AN ALTERNATE VIEW THAT INSPIRES COMPASSION FOR OTHERS WHO ARE STILL HYPNOTIZED BY THE TEMPORAL/MATERIALISTIC WORLD VIEW. This could have disastrous consequences for humanity. One of the things that make us human is our conscience, our sense of right and wrong. DO WE ALL SHARE THIS VIEW OF RIGHT AND WRONG? IF SO THEN WHY DON’T WE AGREE AND GET ALONG? How would we react in the face of evil if we didn’t see it as evil? FEARLESSLY? How can we handle external threats if we deconstructed our beliefs so much that external dangers are not see as “evil” or “dangerous”? WITH COMPOSURE, WITH INSIGHT, COMPASSIONATELY?

She gives the example of a nazi throwing a baby into a flaming pit. This act she says is God. “God is what-is. And until we can accept our baby being destroyed we cannot come to terms with God, with reality” (Paraphrase from Losing the Moon.) YOU SAY PARAPHRASE BUT YOU USE QUOTES. I UNDERSTAND THE FEAR AND EMOTIONAL RESPONSE TO THE STATEMENT BUT I THINK WHAT TYPICALLY IS THE OPERATIVE WORD OF OUTRAGE IS “ACCEPT” -AS IF IT WERE A COMMANDMENT. THIS IS SIMPLE. IF YOU’RE ABLE TO ACCEPT IT, YOU DO AND IF YOU’RE NOT YOU DON’T. IF YOU’RE ABLE, YOU’RE ABLE TO LIVE A LIFE THAT MAY SERVE OTHERS WHO AREN’T “THERE” YET. IF YOU’RE NOT, YOU SUFFER A CRIPPLING PAIN THAT MAKES TWO VICTIMS: THE BABY AND YOU.

What kind of power will this leave us with if we all — or many of us — deconstructed our sense of right, wrong, and justice? MAYBE YOU’D BE LIKE BYRON KATIE, HELPING TO END SUFFERING ON A GLOBAL SCALE. Imagine a scenario with aliens invading and wiping us out. Would we have the moral fortitude and strength to defeat such an enemy if instantly all of our thoughts were met with “Is this true?.. is this really true?… how do I feel when I believe this thought?…” JONAS SALK ONCE SAID THAT IF ALL OF LIFE WAS WIPED OUT EXCEPT MANKIND, WE’D BE DEAD IN 50 YEARS, AND IF MANKIND WAS WIPED OUT ALL OTHER LIFE WOULD FLOURISH IN 50 YEARS. WOULD THE ALIENS BE AN ENEMY OF EARTH OR OF MANKIND? DO YOU KNOW WE WOULD SUFFER IF WE QUESTIONED OUR FEARS ABOUT SUCH A SCENARIO? IF WE FEARED SUCH AN INVASION WHAT WOULD WE DO TO PEACEFUL ALIENS?

How do you think the Muslims swept across the world within 100 years? It was their fundamental beliefs that made them strong; namely that God is with them. WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH A WOMAN WHO RECOMMENDS THAT WE QUESTION STRESSFUL BELIEFS AND THOUGHTS? This is the same reason that Europe now is committing societal suicide. ????
I WISH I HAD TIME TO ADDRESS THE REST. IF YOU’RE FEELING ANXIOUS ABOUT THE WORK OF BYRON KATIE I SUGGEST YOU ASK YOUR FEARS TO WAIT A WHILE AND REALLY TRY AND LISTEN CLOSELY. I KNOW IT CAN SEEM VERY RADICAL BUT THEN HOW COULD A SOLUTION TO SUFFERING BE ANYTHING BUT RADICAL?

Comment on Buddhism and Christianity: a Christian Contemplative Perspective by josesiem

josesiem — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 01:03:00 +0000

“All is One” is most definitely not at the core of Buddhism. It’s this kind of sloppy thinking which leads to so much confusion.

Comment on Buddhism and Christianity: a Christian Contemplative Perspective by Marille

Marille — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 10:55:14 +0000

OUR LORD IS GOD, GOD IS ONE are at the core of Judaism
I AND MY FATHER ARE ONE is at the core of Christianity
ALL IS ONE is at the core of Buddhism.

I AM THAT I AM is at the core of all spiritual teachings.

There is no difference, but the cultural limits of religion.
And boy, did it get misinterpreted ….