Why spiritual teachers have it difficult for them

[Greengrass]

Hey all, 

I’ve a genuine question, and I’ve been thinking about this for a while. 
There are so many celebrities out there, who encourage people to worship them, but their merchandise, make posters out of them and also listen and buy as much of their songs / movies. And some celebrities / influential people say that only after they buy X amount of things, will they be able to considered a part of their fan base. 
However, Leo, in his videos, always warns people to not turn his teachings into a religion, or for it to become an ideology, but rather to test his teachings through direct experience. He is aware of the risks of such teachings and let’s his audience know.
not even in Leo’s case, but also Sadh Guru and Jay Sherry etc. - many spiritual and personal development teachers. 
 

but then, you see many celebrities sending messages to young people through their art about overdosing on certain drugs recreationally, chasing money and objectifying women. Yet they are not called out for it, but in fact, encouraged and promoted around the country. 
they do it so outright, yet no one seems to be calling them a ‘cult’ or having ‘harmful teachings’, yet spiritual teachers, even if they make the slightest radical claim, they will rendered a ‘claim’.

I’m not condemning any certain celebrity, they are most likely doing it out of ignorance or simply are in a lower level of consciousness to realise what they are doing, but what do you think is the psychology behind this ?

[PurpleTree]

maybe because of the mass suicides by cults which happened a few times

also i do think that there are powerful people who'd rather have a lot of people ignorant than enlightened <- not saying this is true btw

[Greengrass]

18 minutes ago, PurpleTree said:

maybe because of the mass suicides by cults which happened a few times

also i do think that there are powerful people who'd rather have a lot of people ignorant than enlightened <- not saying this is true btw

I like the point you have about having more people ignorant than enlightened, as it would really breakdown the structure of reality and power and money as we know it, right ?  it could be a subconscious thing from their side too. 
thanks for your input !

[Thought Art]

So much... Ever hear the saying don't talk about politics and religion? ahaha

Also, People simply hold you to a higher standard.

[Moksha]

Spiritual teachers who identify as a spiritual teacher are not true spiritual teachers. 

[PurpleTree]

30 minutes ago, Greengrass said:

I like the point you have about having more people ignorant than enlightened, as it would really breakdown the structure of reality and power and money as we know it, right ?  it could be a subconscious thing from their side too. 
thanks for your input !

well they want you to buy their "stuff" and if you don't need their stuff to be happy then they have a problem  

[Thought Art]

32 minutes ago, Moksha said:

Spiritual teachers who identify as a spiritual teacher are not true spiritual teachers. 

I am not sure about this

[Moksha]

27 minutes ago, Thought Art said:

I am not sure about this

Identity is ego. If someone is truly awake, they see through an omnidirectional lens. Sub Ek...it is all One.

[Thought Art]

@Moksha Yeah, but knowing that doesn't mean you can't 'identify' with your career choice.

[Moksha]

4 minutes ago, Thought Art said:

@Moksha Yeah, but knowing that doesn't mean you can't 'identify' with your career choice.

Identifying with your career choice, or anything else, is egoic. It is not who you actually are. Living lucidly is realizing that ultimately, there is no individual identity. I advocate celebrating the dream, and the character within the dream, while realizing that it is only a dream.

It is the best of both dimensions. You are free to enjoy the dream, without being bound by it.

[Preety_India]

So wait a minute.... 

A yoga instructor can identify as a yoga instructor. 

A martial artist can identify as a martial artist. 

But a spiritual teacher cannot identify as a spiritual teacher? 

This is the ultimate height of bias. 

Have you heard about spiritual healers like shamans and psychics at all? They identity as spiritual healers. 

The Society is in dire need of spiritual teachers and spiritual healers and spiritual leaders and here we are discussing the legitimacy of the title spiritual teacher??? 

No wonder humanity never fails to surprise me. 

 

[SriSriJustinBieber]

Any pure and clear enough teaching offered publicly to an audience that is confused about its path will be either distorted and/or its reputation will be tarnished. This follows the way of free will, that is: you can never infringe on the confusion of those who are enjoying/suffering confusion. You can only help those who wanna be helped. To the others, you may only offer more things to pick from, and for this, your offering must be "randomized" by the universe so to speak.

Edited September 17, 2021 by SriSriJustinBieber

[gettoefl]

everyone has two identities

1. how i market myself

2. how i see myself

how i market myself is not related to how i see myself, the latter is not of interest though it may be important to you at some later point

the only thing you will care about is

what can i do for you today

see 1.

Edited September 17, 2021 by gettoefl

[Moksha]

18 hours ago, Regan said:

I think it's okay to identify as a spiritual teacher as long as one knows it's an identification just for the sake of survival in the relative realm - I know in The Power of Now Eckhart Tolle, after his awakening and having no mental identity, states: "Before I knew it, I had an external identity again. I had become a spiritual teacher"

I agree, and should have clarified what I meant by identification. I was referring to the false identity that some people develop as spiritual teachers, because the role makes them feel special. Having people gathered around them in a circle and nodding at their wisdom only strengthens their ego.

I feel that is why Eckhart Tolle used the term "external identity". He wears teaching like a cloak, which he removes when it is no longer needed. It doesn't define his sense of self:

When I'm with people, I'm a spiritual teacher. That's the function, but it's not my identity. The moment I'm alone, my deepest joy is to be nobody, to relinquish the function of a teacher. It's a temporary function. Let's say I'm seeing a group of people. The moment they leave me, I'm no longer a spiritual teacher. There's no longer any sense of external identity. I simply go into the stillness more deeply. The place that I love most is the stillness. It's not that the stillness is lost when I talk or when I teach because the words arise out of the stillness. But when people leave me, there is only the stillness left. And I love that so much.

A true spiritual teacher speaks from a place of presence, getting out of the way, and allowing Consciousness to communicate through them. They may not even speak at all. Ramana Maharshi is known for sitting in silence with his students, as a primary method of teaching:

Silence is the true upadesa. It is the perfect upadesa. It is suited only for the most advanced seeker. The others are unable to draw full inspiration from it. Therefore, they require words to explain the truth. But truth is beyond words; it does not warrant explanation. All that is possible is to indicate It. How is that to be done?