Where is Peter Ralston wrong?

[aurum]

If you can't learn from Ralston, who can you learn from?

You might as well throw every teacher in the trash at that point.

[Wilhelm44]

7 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Yes, would be good. Or anyone who knows Ralston ontology 

If God has infinite power, then God can Will anything into existence instantaneously.

Leo made a cool video on that, don't remember the title though.

Yeah man, Ralston had a significant influence on Leo, so might be worth it to investigate further.

Here's a video by one of his students which you might enjoy.

 

[Breakingthewall]

14 minutes ago, aurum said:

If you can't learn from Ralston, who can you learn from?

You might as well throw every teacher in the trash at that point.

That's not the point. Any teacher is incomplete, Rumi is incomplete, but Rumi is not wrong in his foundation

[aurum]

Just now, Breakingthewall said:

but Rumi is not wrong in his foundation

Neither is Ralston.

[Breakingthewall]

13 minutes ago, aurum said:

Neither is Ralston.

I'd say he's wrong because he's limited. It's easy to follow his mental process. If you delve into yourself, you'll eventually see that everything that is is awareness, so reality is awareness. No, it's the other way around; awareness is a manifestation of reality. 

Edited July 1 by Breakingthewall

[Princess Arabia]

36 minutes ago, Javfly33 said:

So if you are enlightened if a kid is being bitten by a Rottweiler you shouldn't do anything because you are conscious the kid is a duality or whatever? 🤣

 

@Terell Kirby I guess it depends on what you mean by consciousness. The feeling of being conscious? Reality? There are different things. Because when you go to sleep the feeling of being conscious is not there. 

What you speak of and your question doesn't align with what I said. Misunderstanding on your part. 

[Princess Arabia]

37 minutes ago, AION said:

He wasn’t coming with arguments against Ralston in the first place so I had to choice to pound into him. If he comes with arguments against Ralston I’m happy to address it. 

Yes he was, it is you who wasn't coming with arguments for your disagreements with what he was saying other than telling him what state you think he was stating his disagreements from and saying one who disagrees with Ralston is ungrounded. 

[AION]

3 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

Yes he was, it is you who wasn't coming with arguments for your disagreements with what he was saying other than telling him what state you think he was stating his disagreements from and saying one who disagrees with Ralston is ungrounded. 

What was his arguments against Ralston?

[Javfly33]

11 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

What you speak of and your question doesn't align with what I said. Misunderstanding on your part. 

Who says being enlightened means there is no one to teach?

 

44 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

 

 

[Wilhelm44]

20 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

I'd say he's wrong because he's limited. It's easy to follow his mental process. If you delve into yourself, you'll eventually see that everything that is is awareness, so reality is awareness. No, it's the other way around; awareness is a manifestation of reality. 

You are saying that awareness is a manifestation of reality. That is the materialist view. Ralston is correct, reality is awareness. When have you ever been aware of anything outside of your awareness ?

[Breakingthewall]

20 minutes ago, Wilhelm44 said:

You are saying that awareness is a manifestation of reality. That is the materialist view. Ralston is correct, reality is awareness. When have you ever been aware of anything outside of your awareness ?

I'm a manifestation of the reality, that means that I'm the reality in a relational form, I'm unlimited as a reality but I'm not the only possibility that can exist, then saying that kind of assessment is just a limited perspective 

Edited July 1 by Breakingthewall

[Wilhelm44]

25 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

I'm a manifestation of the reality, that means that I'm the reality in a relational form, I'm unlimited as a reality but I'm not the only possibility that can exist, then saying that kind of assessment is just a limited perspective 

In your direct experience right now, what are you ?

[RawJudah]

He’s absolutely brilliant. He makes it sound so ridiculously simple too, which helps. I’ve listened to a few of his podcasts and the way he talks about everything so casually but it’s so deep at the same time is amazing. He can laugh at stuff normal people cannot. 

[kbone]

When 'actually' communicating, there's always going to be a certain degree of 'negotiation of meaning'. Sometimes people use different words to refer to the same thing. Furthermore, a lot of the pointing used to 'teach' can only be understood within the depths of one's Zone of Proximal Development (Vygotsky). Disclaimer: I haven't watched the vids, but I have a purddy good idea of where a decent chunk of the miscommunication, misunderstandings, and/or preferences show up. It's been going on for, historically, thousands of years. Rehashing the the Sufi tale...

______

A Persian, a Turk, an Arab and a Greek were traveling to a distant land when they began arguing over how to spend the single coin they possessed among themselves. All four craved food, but the Persian wanted to spend the coin on angur; the Turk, on uzum; the Arab, on inab; and the Greek, on stafil. The argument became heated as each man insisted on having what he desired.

A linguist passing by overheard their quarrel. “Give the coin to me,” he said. “I undertake to satisfy the desires of all of you.”

Taking the coin, the linguist went to a nearby shop and bought four small bunches of grapes. He then returned to the men and gave them each a bunch.

“This is my angur!” cried the Persian. “But this is what I call uzum,” replied the Turk. “You have bought me my inab,” the Arab said. “No! This in my language is stafil.”

All of a sudden, the men realized that what each of them had desired was in fact the same thing, only they did not know how to express themselves to each other.

_______

Here are some key ways grapes and wine are used in Sufi symbolism: (from AI in the Sky)

Spiritual Transformation/Purification: The process of turning grapes into wine, through fermentation, symbolizes the spiritual journey and the purification that comes from actively progressing along the Sufi path.

Divine Intoxication/Ecstasy: Wine represents the spiritual rapture or divine intoxication experienced in love and connection with God. This ecstatic state is a metaphorical "spiritual" experience.

Hidden Truth: The symbolic use of wine can also serve as a way to convey profound spiritual truths in a way that is not always easily understood by those who are not prepared for these experiences, potentially preventing unintended side effects or "divine madness".

Unity of Religions: Grapes can also represent the common essence or underlying truth shared by different religions, even if their outward practices differ.

 

In the end, only Truth (call it what you will) will set one free. Of course, by the time it is apprehended and the mind is fully informed and integrated, it will have rolled over and crushed a majority (if not all) of whatever 'truths and/or perceived facts' one hold's dear. But no worries, the clarity of what appears in/as one's life will make it worthwhile. Welp, at least that's how this mind appreciates it. It is what it is.

[kbone]

Most people will begin by seeking something 'else', because they want some thing, life, circumstance, state, etc that is better than what they think they have now. It's mostly self-help and placing the idealized person on the altar, praying for what they want to be. If that's the case for anyone, so be it; but just be honest with your self and take full responsibility. After all, your supposed best thinking got you to exactly where you are right now.

Only a few will open up enough to allow what they are actually seeking to emerge.

[Jodistrict]

I think Peter Ralston’s books have a lot of valuable information.  His ability to articulate self identity and the deconstruction process is amazing.   I think for many it is more profitable to read his teachings than most of the snake oil salesmen non-duality teachers regurgitating dogma they have probably not experienced themselves or speaking from states of disassociation.

One thing Ralston may be missing is that he is not a psychotherapist.  I think most of us really need a form of effective psychotherapy to decondition emotional damage done to us as children before we can even attempt awakening.

Here is an example of a psychotherapy approach that is spirituality informed and addresses the root problems to decondition the mind.

Unlocking the Emotional Brain

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1032139129/?coliid=I177N3JQEKYX97&colid=13EUWLGDUZI1U&psc=1&ref_=list_c_wl_lv_ov_lig_dp_it_im

In conclusion, Ralston doesn’t have a complete path, but is useful if part of a tool kit.  The other thing is you have to actually pick out some of his teachings and actively practice.  Just reading a book doesn’t provide any value.  Criticism based on just reading is not useful or convincing.

 

 

 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

5 hours ago, Princess Arabia said:

 

@AIONYou can't ask for people's genuine opinions and criticisms of Ralston then turn around and criticize them for doing so and by calling them angry and judging why they're criticizing Ralston. Seems like you're judging the judgers after asking to judge. Criticizing the crticizers after asking for criticisms. Speaking on their points and disagreeing with what they have to say is one thing, but attacking them for responding to your post is another. Just saying.

This. It is a pattern of behaviour with Aion. I'm not sure why he gets so attached to ideas. The attachment runs so deep he takes critiques of ideas quite personally and gets emotional. 

Unfortunately it won't be an open discussion platform for him unless he can become less attached. Involved 100%, but not attached. It's the next phase of growth for him.

It's good he posting though, as the friction and debate help him grow (as with us all).

Edited July 1 by Natasha Tori Maru

[AION]

@Natasha Tori Maru we are all emotional about something. I bet I can find topics you are emotional about. It’s not about the emotional or not it’s about being open. And she hasn’t provided any good counter arguments so I will stand my ground. To be honest, I don’t even think she read Ralston. She is just here for the beef. 

Edited July 1 by AION

[Natasha Tori Maru]

4 minutes ago, AION said:

@Natasha Tori Maru we are all emotional about something. I bet I can find topics you are emotional about. It’s not about the emotional or not it’s about being open. And she hasn’t provided any good counter arguments so I will stand my ground. To be honest, I don’t even think she read Ralston. She is just here for the beef. 

I agree with this. 

To be clear I do not agree with breaking the wall.

It is more pointing out Aion is becoming really charged up, and he need not be. 

I get emotionally charged up from conversations here all the time. But I try to consciously attack the argument. Aion needs to focus on attacking the argument.

[Breakingthewall]

3 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Is there one spiritual teacher you're not paranoid about?

I think Rumi, Ibn Arabi, more or less tao te quing, Christianity from a certain perspective, a certain type of Buddhism (rare) that does not operate from denial, Leo in its origins promised, then he deviated a bit because some basic mistake that closes very similar than the Ralston mistake, ram dass and adyashanty have good intentions, like emotional openness, although I see clear limitation, maybe thisdell but not sure. I don't know, maharsi seems that he operates from openenss but when he explains sounds limited, maybe he had a strange mind and can't explain good...well he said that he enlightened a cow, I don't know. The point is clear: absence of limitation is a must. 

3 hours ago, AION said:

He wasn’t coming with arguments against Ralston in the first place so I had to choice to pound into him. If he comes with arguments against Ralston I’m happy to address it. 

My first message was too idiotic, agree, but after that I tried to do better. I was watching some videos before writing and the Ralston way to explain seem very wrong too me,  that's why