To a question on ‘sacrifice’
Time to never again trust a guru: the whole phenomenon was bad enough in general, but with the addition of sufism, Gurdjieff and now the Crowleyan occult added into the mix the whole gamer requires extreme caution.
At all points be in emergency mode: trust, surrender, spiritual authority/obedience, go out the window. The general real mccoy will look after itself.
Gold has never divulged his tactics here, but years later people who were uncareful around him suspect the use of some ‘ritual sacrifice’. What a horror. ‘
None of these people have any spiritual authority. Act according, on the defensive from the start.
It is always time for ‘disciples’ of the Gurdjieff phantom to recall their surrender, and be prepared to move on in a new life to something new. Those who are unknown to that now astral entity are safe and should slip away. Those in the spotlight should consider the dangers of invultuation and break free forthwith. They owe nothing to a dead ghost, and should forestall what clearly has happened to Ouspensky in his next life (in America): an endless battle to break free from the Gurdjieff capture and enslavement of ‘disciples’ over many lives. Break free now and declare your autonomy.
It is worth seeing Django and reflecting on the need for masters to use cruelty to enforce obedience. A similar situation pervades the guru/dead guru realm (I might exempt Indian ‘gurus': everyone is too aware of what’s going on for all that)_
Ouspensky seems,by report to have spent the last thirty years fighting off the G entity and Gold. What a nightmare.
The danger of soul formation is crystallization in an era now past, one reason so many new age leaders are obsessed with the ‘new age’ being an anti-modern revolt: to keep the rules of the past from passing away. But the gesture is futile.
I hope Ouspensky can free himself here: it is not totally hard: once an astral entity comes to one’s attention it can be dismiss. You can also simply declare your will: there is absolutely no surrender beyond lives to dead gurus, who are mostly hungry ghosts, and actually hungry (for life blood, shriek)
There is nothing these dead beings can do, really: you can’t make a person born in modernity play by the rules of earlier civilizations.
The Ouspensky situation has come to the attention of other beings who won’t stand for this nonsense, so the G entity must back off, hopefully.
In the final analysis the Gurdjieff work is a tale of a ‘meditation in action’ exercise, a lot of historical fairytales about esotericism, mostly without facts, and a series of methods mentioned but too esoteric to be described. The whole teaching is almost completely made up bullshit, like the idiocy over the enneagram.
So take you ‘meditation in action’ freebie and move on. Better yet, find a hundred better versions in the public domain which won’t cost you your life in overcharges.
The first post above may have spoiled the second. The issue was not surrender here, although the point made as correct: those who surrender can end up being attacked by the groupies who preach surrender to others.
My point, which was spontaneous, was to suggest how your own life may have its own scenarios of almost-meditation. The one recounted about Penn Station is too complex to understand.
Any way the paths of surrender are not a religious obligation, are exploited by agencies who borrow the idea for exploitation, and the whole game was done in by Feuerbach et al who were prepared to be finished with all these questions. These raw situations might be relived via an explicit mindfulness.
11.09.14 at 6:33 am · Edit
Assuming “Turiya” is the “enlightened” state. From the Mandukya Upanishad, it is (Nisargadatta describes it in exactly the same way. Ramana describes his “enlightenment” a few steps below…the “I am” state):
“The fourth is the superconscious state called Turiya, neither inward nor outward, neither conscious nor unconscious, beyond the senses and the intellect. It is the stateless state, in which there is none other than Brahman – One, without a second. Brahman is the supreme goal of life. It is infinite peace and love. Realize Brahman!
From the Buddhist perspective, it most emphatically is not:
4. Nevasañña-nasaññayatana: being absorbed in a feeling that occurs in the mind, that isn’t awareness exactly, but neither is it non-awareness; i.e., there is awareness, but with no thinking, no focusing of awareness on what it knows.
These four formless absorptions are merely resting places for the mind, because they are states that the mind enters, stays in, and leaves. They are by nature unstable and inconstant, so we shouldn’t rest content simply at this level. We have to go back and forth through the various levels many times so as to realize that they’re only stages of enforced tranquillity.
11.09.14 at 6:42 am · Edit
Interestingly, Meher Baba describes “Enlightenment” in exactly the same way as Nisargadatta and the Mandukya:
“Thus, the most-original Beyond-Beyond state of God is that
state where one can only say: God-Is eternally; and that in this
most-original state, God is neither infinitely nor finitely conscious,
nor unconscious, of Self or of His own state of Infinitude. In this
state, God is also neither conscious nor unconscious of Illusion
11.09.14 at 7:12 am · Edit
Comparing Nisaragadatta and Meher Baba
“One who is Parabrahman does not know whether he is or is not.”
” This pure essence (Zat-al-Baht) i s
not aware of anything, even of itself.”
http://aeon.co/magazine/society/did-zen-philosophy-create-the-kamikaze/Did Zen philosophy create the kamikaze? – Christopher Harding – Aeon
We have already discussed this issue here many times: the issue is that of buddhism and fascism, not Zen buddhism.
What was this post about? It was from one side a simple way to point to a manifold of situations that can bring mindfulness out of its purported abduction by neoliberal economy. Mindfulness to improve business efficiency is a slow death for the practice.
But the situation indicated would be impossible to replicate, and that’s not needed anyway.
It is also a good example of ‘total surrender’ and the kind of situation that only a spiritual guru could create. Watch out, that doesn’t quite mean what it says.
People who surrender totally too often do so with respect to ‘gurus’ (either hidden, or out of the presence) who exploit a golden opportunity for some kind of experiment, exploitation, sadism in the name of some spurious concept, etc… So, watch out: surrender gives the right to someone to commit murder. NOT SO, but if both sides think so, the damage can be done. Don’t panic, the perp will end up in boomerang eventually.
You learn the hard way that surrender is a dangerous and very bogus concept peddled by groupies trying to suck up to a teacher and unaware of the reality. Not even Milerepa seems to have gotten the point. The reason: he had access to his guru who couldn’t act too far out of bounds.
The sad thing here is that those who really surrender can wake up to a criminal behind the veil and end up being condemned for not surrendering.
The whole game is shot. The reason is that surrender means losing consciousness, not gaining it. And the people who do surrender end up condemned by those can’t surrender but imagine their great spiritual humility.
Meanwhile the Penn Station exercise is actually useful to think about, but impossible to imitate. And it wasn’t a game of mindfulness but a calamity on the ‘path of the fakir’, or sufi beggar. You have no buddies from sufis or any refuge, and the result can simply be a dead loss as the creepy hidden sheiks try to rip off a victim.
Moral: you are on your own, don’t play surrender games preached by groupie disciples.
I think all this in part the impoverished methods of sufis. Real gurus don’t need to sermonize surrender and do what they can do with dispatch.
Meanwhile this was an unexpected way to ‘meditate’ or just observe the real action of capitalism, and led to a deeper study of capitalist critique.
So surrender means surrendering surrender.
After reading this article I would certainly stop doing mindfulness immediately, perhaps to be mindful of the social disintegration of mindfulness technique promotion. What is the nature of the sudden problem here?
Scroll down for a post reinventing meditation: the Link Walk exercise: it is a fuzzy near-meditation designed to get you in the vicinity of meditation over a 12/24 period. If the instructions don’t strike you as easy, skip it. Invent your own. But note the act of will is something different. (Osho speaks of ‘choiceless awareness’. I don’t know if there is a connection).
The issue of mindfulness is a leaf out of a larger deck of issues: what is consciousness and why do we start to equivocate consciousness in our own minds: (mechanical consciousness, self-consciousness). What is the spectrum of consciousness and why do yogis speak of a fourth (Turiya) beyond these equivocations (or if you prefer the basic list, sleep/dream, consciousness, self-consciousness …
Mindfulness has no place in this list, or is that wrong? it is a case of being in state 2, consciousness, and trying by an act of will (attention) to either create or mimic state 3, the best of luck tactics of aspiring buddhists. This aspiration should be prefaced with the full complement of buddhist disguises: renouncing the world, begging for food, wandering naked/or not through samsara.
A mindfulness exercise (or simply a exercise without meditation, I am not a spiritual teacher of meditation) you might try if you live in new york and can’t abandon samsara for the forest is to live in Penn station for a month, not money: find a place to sleep where you won’t get arrested, stay clean, eat of the ample feast of trash cans in the main concourses (you can stay drunk the whole time, if you wish, with the endless half-empty bottles of liquor, not quite mindfulness), keep a low profile, and don’t look like a homeless person. (when I did this I gained weight). You can walk through Manhattan during the day (and within hours find changes of clothing). This raises the question of what causes events to happen: if you will to do this, or it happens because you are broke in a bad economy, there is an important difference: the homeless should be taught to ‘pay attention’ in such situations. But sheer survival without losing your mind is a basic form of attentive self-awareness. It may no longer be possible to spend a night in Penn station: agents have become very aware of transients. Back in the seventies the simplest way to sleep safely in Penn Station was out in the open, just outside the main gate, or in cold weather, inside in some discoverable spot). Safe, because constantly observed by passersby.
Homeless people can survive such situations. Be careful, ‘homebodies’ may not be able to do this, as an act of will.
If you have no money in New York this ‘exercise’, during winter, takes on concrete meaning: Penn station is heated in winter, It is not an act of will to be thrust into this situation.)
This example shows that meditation is not a cosmetic for ‘consciousness’ but the study of psychological states, hopefully in situations the organism has not yet made routine. What is at the root of this kaleidoscope. It doesn’t have to be a mindfulness exercise, but another 24 hour near-meditation exercise. But a mindfullness technique might actually make such an experience easy.
This article refers to some confused split off from the mainstream Tibetan Buddhism.
The question of a critique of Tibetan Buddhism has been tackled here. The issues are difficult. My more immediate concern is for issues and groups that I have been entangled with, and a full review of the New Age movement could start from that.
We can raise a few questions in this post. Since Robert Thurman is the author of the article let us forward our challenge to the ‘cabal’ of jewish gurus. Thurman would be exempt: the Tibetan buddhist system is so controlled that a malevolent jewish pseudo-guru would be exposed fairly quickly. Or so I suppose. Is the TB system honest?
Here’s a test for the Tibetans who brag a lot about their spiritual powers.
We have discussed the question of EJ Gold here many times. As a kind of ‘elder’ (once) in the G movement (you didn’t know that!) I can pull rank for what it’s worth on the monster from Booklyn and I have often thought to request Gold to step down from his phony sufi sheik routine. It is one of the longest running episodes of a ‘jewish sufi’ mafia that has tried to expropriate Gurdjieff, mask crime behind ‘work’ PR, exploit individuals via telepathic mindfuck, experimentation, and attempts to ‘screw total’ various victims in the name of ‘sacrifice’, the higher divine necessity of making innocent gentile dupes ‘food for god’. The list is long, and for sheer viciousness the Gold caper is grotesque. I think that even the ‘G spirit’ is set to terminate this phony school.
Please,if you are a newcomer to the New Age movement, and/or the world of Ouspensky, stear clear from Mr. Gold. He has no authority from any source, peddles made up credentials as a sufis without a single validation of any kind. This man is almost as hard on jews, I bet, as gentiles, but in the end these jews are first and foremost covenental jews who believe they have a special relationship with god and that gentiles are inferior, and fair game for ritual sacrifice black magic. Gosh knows what other horrors lurk in the minds of jewish psychos armed with Aleister Crowley and determined to take over the Gurdjieff legacy.
Tracking down the reincarnation of Ouspensy to fuck his brains out to ensure control of the G legacy is not the least of the quota of evil deeds/
If the Tibetan buddhists are so clever they might be able to pass some judgment on these remarks, as braggart occultists of long standing.
How about it, Mr. Dalai Lama?
We have commented on the dangers of future passage for buddhism, hinduism, or santana dharma: the ‘new age’ effect ‘upside misunderstood’ thinks the ‘new age’ is really the ‘old age’ of Axial antiquity.
The suspected passing of buddhism leaves a void: many attempts will be made to concoct hinduistic successors but they won’t work.
The only one I know is the Osho stream. The vigorous massive number of new age combinations, notwithstanding.
Indian primordial religion is mysterious and is the more so since the Vedic ‘interpolation’ confused the issues. It doesn’t spring clearly from any of the major religious streams of world history. The reason for that, as Danielou suggested, is that the first proximate if not absolute source is the Neolithic. Danielou suggested a parallel in Shaivism and the cult of Dionysus in the West. We can hardly conclude anything. But I don’t think that is the end of the matter.
But the Indian religious heritage could be overwhelmed by modernization, chaotification, and pass into oblivion. However, it seems to have survived two major age transitions already (2000 BCE, the Axial Age), so we can’t be sure of anything. Indian religion can’t take the law of caste as integral hinduism into a new age period. Nonetheless the vigor of the decayed but robust core hinduism has many alternate forms that can form a new basis. But the case of buddhism is unique: it is shot out of a canon during the Axial period.
If my historical model is correct, that won’t happen again: we are already two centuries from the modern transition and still little but proliferation. But the moral here is that the macro effect I talk about doesn’t usually repeat itself. So we may be left to try and sustain it in general society. Osho alone has attempted something on the scale of buddhism, but it doesn’t have the massive momentum the Axial effect had on its emergence (giving it a full 2400 creative run). This is why ‘new age figures’ get into postmodern fits. In vain: the basic format of modernity is the constricting model. But is that really an objection? Buddhism at its start must remind us of the butterfly effect. A small cotery of beggars amplified into something vast.
The new age movement is a recursion of antiquity as a way to create seeds for the future: don’t confuse that with a viable futurity into the far future. The transmission will run out of steam, and idle until a new future is found. But the key lies in the essential simplicity of the original vision, which comes to us in pieces. But it is not hard: ancient man discovered higher states of consciousness sometime in the Paleolithic and the Big Bang of yoga was on its way. Why worry: the current generation has produced a self-sustaining set of yoga/buddha cults. But these will ensure the survival of something ancient, no more. The massive transformations of buddhism require a larger framework and energy (and I am not even a buddhist). The problem is that we don’t know how it happened: what is the real history: we end up imitating phantoms in our minds, and that effort trips on itself and dies out.
I criticize Harris, but he represents an almost mathematical motion to try, and fail, to solve this problem: throw meditation into the realm of neuroscience, and delete everything else. But it won’t really work.
Still, who knows: buddhism wasn’t so far from its cousins, yoga and jain paths, almost the same as that of buddhism. It simply replicated the legacy in a new and original formation.
The passage is already there: these paths are all commercial venues. Gautama, and his sangha, lest we forget, were beggars who lived on the fringe of society. We are already a long way from that.
Consider the primordial power of the original vision glimpsed in the religious forms of yogic hinduism.
After all the confusion over the Osho question, I revert to my starting point: Osho world as a corpus of material useful for leftists in a New Age world where they are not really welcome.
Reading Nisargadatta’s book: I am that….
I am slightly stunned by his distinction of awareness and consciousness.
It resonates immediately although my take on this was hard to figure…
I need to slow down for a day, and it could be useful to look at the multiple issues involved in the idea of postcapitalism.
The question of the ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’ needs a careful study: start with Draper’s short work
The issue of evolution is a hard one for the left but there is no going back here, and Descent of Man Revisited is a novel approach to ‘debriefing Darwinism’.
The older website eonic-effect.net has a lot of so-called ‘net-books’ using older technology (Publisher 2000, seemed revolutionary at the time) to generate a quickie book format.
The issue of epigenetics is controversial but the question of capitalism’s effect on man’s psychology is source of alarm. We can see the Ayn Rand progeny coming into existence, the Night of the Living 2.0…
The issue of dialectic is problematical: my critiques of Zizek and dialectical materialism makes simple point: we can explore dialectic, but we can’t make it an overriding ‘master science’. That really won’t work.
Red Fortyeight Group: epigenetics and the debriefing of social darwinist distortions of population genetics
The second generation books from Osho presses are open to critique. Here this is in my view outrageous. I thought I had once read all of Osho’s books, but clearly not. But there was no such book at this titled ‘Astrology’. This book was manufactured with some passages from a very early work in the early seventies under a totally different title. Osho often proceeded dialectically with many subjects and here he found a way to examine Sumerian cosmology, which degenerated into Chaldean ‘astrology’ as we know it today. (the history is complex). The issue at hand is therefore Sumerian cosmology. Many writers, including myself, with a refusal to take astrology seriously stumble onto the fascinating early cosmology of the Sumerians. It is this that Osho tries to describe. It is one of a thousand passing thoughts pro and con in his works.
I am puzzled the Osho field would extract the original material and print it under the title ‘Astrology’. That is totally misleading and aimed at what? Business with the flood of people confused by astrology under a new age rubric. Astrology is a good way to ruin such a movement. The mere sight of this book with repel tens of thousands from ever approaching. And i am prompting to be done with the whole question.