Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!cis.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!eagle!data.nas.nasa.gov!news
From: ctong@leonardo.rutgers.edu (Chris Tong)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: re: proselytizing
Message-ID: <1991Jun28.015626.9193@nas.nasa.gov>
Date: 28 Jun 91 01:56:26 GMT
Sender: news@nas.nasa.gov
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
Lines: 100
Approved: prabhu@amelia.nas.nasa.gov


I'm new to this group, so perhaps I'm not aware of some stipulation on
the group that posters should not proselytize. But I'm guessing there
is no such explicit stipulation.

So it is very interesting to me to speculate on the source of the
taboo against proselytization in this newsgroup. This taboo is
apparently so powerful, that the one thing everybody agrees on without
question is not to proselytize...

I believe such pervasive taboos (e.g., like taboos on sexuality, on
discussing death, on considering the possibility that the Self could
incarnate in human form, etc.), especially the unconsciously adopted
ones, are just the kinds of things that we who wish to transcend
ourselves need to become more conscious of.

Here are some points I believe are worth considering:

1. Everybody proselytizes, all the time. Everything we say to each
other in this newsgroup is intended to be heard by the other readers,
and to have some kind of impact on them. There are different styles of
communication: some people are more assertive, some less. But all of
us proselytize. The taboo against proselytization is not really so
much a negative moral judgment on the proselytizer (what could
possibly be the basis of such a judgement, after all?) but a
revelation of the fear of the one who might be proselytized to.

2. To me, the taboo against proselytization appears to arise from an
(unconscious but consensual) commitment to a format of communication
that only involves "communication of information". The thing other
newsgroups do. The thing computer scientists specialize in.  There are
at least two things that are ironic, though, considering what THIS
newsgroup is supposedly dedicated to:
a. mere communication of information is just MIND, which is
precisely what everybody here is (presumably) interested in
transcending;
b. merely communicating information (dualistically) separates the mind
from the heart. I would EXPECT someone who is truly and successfully 
practicing a spiritual way of life to have many strongly felt positive
things to say about their way of life, their Guru, etc.   

It seems to me, in short, that the commitment to being a conventional,
materialistic, computer scientist represents a deeper commitment than
Self-realization for many people, despite a lot of talk about
practicing a spiritual life. Genuine practice would inspire in one the
boddhisattva attitude of love of and non-separation from others, and
thus commitment to their realization as well as your own.

In the ancient days, contending sects would openly, freely, and
(com)passionately "proselytize", having public debates between Gurus
in which the loser would become the devotee of the winner. It was most
definitely not mere communication of information. There was nothing
standoff-ish about these events; one's heart and very life was on the
line. And presumably, when they really worked best, the winner would
be transmitting a Revelation to the loser, and that (rather than the
mere verbal argument of the opponent) was the reason for becoming the
winner's devotee.
 
                         ***********

The taboo against proselytization may very well originate from the
fear of being really penetrated by a view other than one's own. But
who is the one that is afraid of being penetrated and wishes to remain
separate?  Surely not the Self! It is the ego!
  
Now and then there does seem to be an encouragement of expressing
one's "own" feelings about spiritual life (instead of one's Guru) in
this newsgroup. But one goes to a Guru because the Guru is wiser than
one's ego. The ego is notorious for its incredible facility at
creating (dualistic) hedges about itself. I would suggest that, just
as the taboo against proselytizing seems to arise from the
materialistic "computer science", anti-religion context in which we
all work, the "express your own feelings" arises from a Western
culture that has glorified the ego (not yet understanding its
limitations), and adolescently rebels against all authority (even True
Authority: true Spiritual Realizers).  Again, there is an irony that
this newsgroup, which discusses ego-transcendence and God-realization,
should sometimes appear to be morely deeply committed to
ego-glorification than ego-transcendence.

                         ***********

But really both of these things are to be expected. We (Self though we
are) are identified with being egos and, more specifically, computer
scientists, MOST of the time, despite occasional experiences of
Something Else. (I believe this is true of most readers.) Despite the
content of our messages, often the very WAY we communicate to each
other reveals our deeper commitment to being an ego. To me, it is very
sobering, and a motivation to really intensify whatever
ego-transcending way of life each of us is practicing.

                         ***********

Wouldn't it be delightful, and freeing, and just like the Self Itself
if our messages to each other could be full of Love and Light and
Inspiration and Revelation (to the extent that words are capable of
transmitting that silently), rather than constituting egoic battering
rams?

Chris