One other very important point to note occurred to me:
"... and yes I left Newcastle at one point feeling like a shitty person. The purpose of a spiritual journey is to wake up right? Well, I needed to see that I was being a shitty person at that time and Rinpoche helped me to do that."
Yes the point of a spiritual journey is to wake up.
It is to wake up to the fact that each of us is amazingly wonderful.
Every religion, philosophy and psychology agree on this.
Buddha says: Every sentient being has Buddha-nature.
Jesus said: The kingdom of heaven is within you.
The psychologists say: Having a high sense of self-worth leads to a happy and fulfilled, personal and social life.
The Buddhists say: Samsara and Nirvana are the same.
The Taoists say: The Way is found within.
The Christians say: Be a vessel for God.
They all agree on this because:
(a) When we value ourselves highly as human beings, we treat ourselves, others and our environment with care.
If you value yourself, you can only bring positivity everywhere.
(b) Only by recognising our essential purity are we able to experience the Divine. This is not a theory. It is a direct instruction.
Said the other way: Only people who feel shit about themselves treat other people in shit ways.
Peter Young's teaching is, as you rightly state, is: Wake up, see how shit you are, and spend the rest of your life doing your best to fix it.
Buddhism is: Wake up, see how wonderful you are, and spend the rest of your life doing your best to manifest that.
Do you see the enormous difference arising from the slight twist he made?
Yes, part of seeing how wonderful we are is what psychologists call "integrating the shadow", accepting our dark parts into the light of consciousness.
But it is done from a position of strength: firm confidence on your own light.
Peter Young teaches you to try to do that from a position of weakness: dropped head-first into the deepest darkest shit hole in your psyche he can find.
He then blames you and shouts at you when you fail.
He then says the only way out ... and in fact a "fast track" way out ... is to devote yourself to him more and more.
"I returned to Newcastle again afterwards and felt wonderful."
You were lucky.
I've seen many people leaving Newcastle feeling like shit because of the way Peter Young treated them, and never recovering from it.
I've seen Peter Young make even more people feel so shit about themselves, that they become utterly dependent on him, and losing their entire lives.
That's why telling people they should try it if they want to is more dangerous than it seems.
You assume they will be strong enough to take his cruelty, and deal with it. That's a big assumption.
You also assume Peter Young has the credentials that authorise him to take on people with serious issues and treat them, or develop and guide seekers along a spiritual path.
Where are these credentials?
Did you ever see anything like a credential?
Would you recommended a friend with a medical condition to someone you have no evidence is a doctor, and who you do know uses unusually aggressive methods?
This is what you are doing here, but I know it didn't seem that way to you when you wrote this.
That's why I admire your honesty.
Do you see how the way he has taught you to approach these things is full of assumed superiority?
It's not your fault. It's the trap he puts in a lot of his teaching.
It goes like this:
You dealt with this cruelty, so anyone else should be able to.
If they find they can't deal with it, then they should be able to just walk away, no problem.
That's you position, right?
What you don't say is the assumption you made: If they do have a problem when walking away, then that's their weakness, and tough on them.
This assumption you made is unrealistic as well as not compassionate.
Despite what Peter Young has you believe, and a few people used to think 100 years ago in Western societies, throwing a person into the deep end is not a good way to teach them how to swim.
It is not good because it is not effective.
That's the concrete reason why Buddhism rejects this approach.
All scientific research on learning agrees with this finding.
On a human level, we also all instinctively know this is true.
A normal person wouldn't throw a child into the deep end of a pool in the name of teaching them how to swim.
Only bullies, and those who don't know how to teach, use this method.
This is objective fact, proven to the nth degree, around the world, in all cultures.
The bottom line objective reality fact is: Real Lamas spend very little time shouting at their students. They've known for over 2000 years that it doesn't work.
"... and yes I left Newcastle at one point feeling like a shitty person. The purpose of a spiritual journey is to wake up right? Well, I needed to see that I was being a shitty person at that time and Rinpoche helped me to do that."
Yes the point of a spiritual journey is to wake up.
It is to wake up to the fact that each of us is amazingly wonderful.
Every religion, philosophy and psychology agree on this.
Buddha says: Every sentient being has Buddha-nature.
Jesus said: The kingdom of heaven is within you.
The psychologists say: Having a high sense of self-worth leads to a happy and fulfilled, personal and social life.
The Buddhists say: Samsara and Nirvana are the same.
The Taoists say: The Way is found within.
The Christians say: Be a vessel for God.
They all agree on this because:
(a) When we value ourselves highly as human beings, we treat ourselves, others and our environment with care.
If you value yourself, you can only bring positivity everywhere.
(b) Only by recognising our essential purity are we able to experience the Divine. This is not a theory. It is a direct instruction.
Said the other way: Only people who feel shit about themselves treat other people in shit ways.
Peter Young's teaching is, as you rightly state, is: Wake up, see how shit you are, and spend the rest of your life doing your best to fix it.
Buddhism is: Wake up, see how wonderful you are, and spend the rest of your life doing your best to manifest that.
Do you see the enormous difference arising from the slight twist he made?
Yes, part of seeing how wonderful we are is what psychologists call "integrating the shadow", accepting our dark parts into the light of consciousness.
But it is done from a position of strength: firm confidence on your own light.
Peter Young teaches you to try to do that from a position of weakness: dropped head-first into the deepest darkest shit hole in your psyche he can find.
He then blames you and shouts at you when you fail.
He then says the only way out ... and in fact a "fast track" way out ... is to devote yourself to him more and more.
"I returned to Newcastle again afterwards and felt wonderful."
You were lucky.
I've seen many people leaving Newcastle feeling like shit because of the way Peter Young treated them, and never recovering from it.
I've seen Peter Young make even more people feel so shit about themselves, that they become utterly dependent on him, and losing their entire lives.
That's why telling people they should try it if they want to is more dangerous than it seems.
You assume they will be strong enough to take his cruelty, and deal with it. That's a big assumption.
You also assume Peter Young has the credentials that authorise him to take on people with serious issues and treat them, or develop and guide seekers along a spiritual path.
Where are these credentials?
Did you ever see anything like a credential?
Would you recommended a friend with a medical condition to someone you have no evidence is a doctor, and who you do know uses unusually aggressive methods?
This is what you are doing here, but I know it didn't seem that way to you when you wrote this.
That's why I admire your honesty.
Do you see how the way he has taught you to approach these things is full of assumed superiority?
It's not your fault. It's the trap he puts in a lot of his teaching.
It goes like this:
You dealt with this cruelty, so anyone else should be able to.
If they find they can't deal with it, then they should be able to just walk away, no problem.
That's you position, right?
What you don't say is the assumption you made: If they do have a problem when walking away, then that's their weakness, and tough on them.
This assumption you made is unrealistic as well as not compassionate.
Despite what Peter Young has you believe, and a few people used to think 100 years ago in Western societies, throwing a person into the deep end is not a good way to teach them how to swim.
It is not good because it is not effective.
That's the concrete reason why Buddhism rejects this approach.
All scientific research on learning agrees with this finding.
On a human level, we also all instinctively know this is true.
A normal person wouldn't throw a child into the deep end of a pool in the name of teaching them how to swim.
Only bullies, and those who don't know how to teach, use this method.
This is objective fact, proven to the nth degree, around the world, in all cultures.
The bottom line objective reality fact is: Real Lamas spend very little time shouting at their students. They've known for over 2000 years that it doesn't work.