17.05.10
Review: Confession of a Buddhist atheist
I review Batchelor’s book: Confession of a Buddhist atheist
This review owes something to our discussion of Danielou’s history of Indian spirituality.
16.05.10
Post on Eagleton’s On Evil, vs the (contra-)Gurdjieff perspective here
Radical evil and Eagleton’s On Evil
I noted that this blog is in many ways about all this, and the question of evil in Gurdjieffianity is complicated by the wilful evils perped by the various ‘villaiins’, among them now the case of E.J. Gold.
Students and travellers need to be wary in the extreme they do not become victims in the experiments in evil perped by these shit heads passed off as gurus.
Tread warily. We will try to approach this again here, in some kine of reasonable fashion. But Gurdjieff’s statements about evil are not adequate in any way, nor do they have an objective status.
11.05.10
Last and first men…
Last and first men, or first and last men? homo erectus to homo sapiens?
After religion fizzles…
After Religion Fizzles, You’re Stuck With Kant
A post on Hedges’ article today, “After Religion Fizzles, We’re Stuck with Nietzsche”
I bring in the Gurdjieff con at the end of the discussion.
Tibetan ghostocracy
Jim Buck said,
09.05.10 at 10:50 am ·http://web.archive.org/web/20021220183452/http://www.tibet.com/Status/bruno.html
Dr Bruno Beger’s memoirs of Tibet
The Status of Independence of Tibet in 1938/39 according to the travel reports (memoirs)
by Dr. Bruno Beger
After having travelled twice for research purposes via China to Eastern Tibet with the Brook-Dolan Expedition in 1931/32 and from 1934 to 1936, Dr. Ernst Shaefer planned a German expedition to Tibet of his own in 1937. He was particularly interested in a highly integrated expedition, covering such aspects as the soil, the plants, the animal and the human beings. For this purpose he was in search of suitable expedition members.
The connection of WWII era Tibet and the 14th Dalai Lama with the Nazis is perhaps overplayed.
MBFM had a good post on the reactionary character of Tibetan political culture.
But the leftist critique of Tibet is threatens to backfire: I cannot see anything in the way of improvement in Chinese Communist totalitarianism. Tibet at its most reactionary could hardly be worse than the massive semi-genocidal ethnicide of the Chinese in Tibet. This is a cowboys and Indians saga in which the Han Chinese are displacing Tibetans in an economic boondogle.
It is most unfortunate that the Tibetans lost their independence and the chance to modernize on their own terms. They even have a democratic parliament in exile.
But the question of Tibetan religion/politics is destined to fester because it is incomprehensible to most, even if they are Buddhist.
Unless you can consider the reality of the ‘Bardo’, the spirit world falsely so named perhaps, it is hard to make sense of the Lamaist tradition. Tibet is, or was, absolutely unique in the way, as I must guess, disembodied agents of the ‘sangha’ play chess with living chose lamas. This complexity is beyond easy understanding, and I wonder if Tibetans understand it.
MBFM at Darwiniana
Comment on Karmapa article in Newsweek (from Darwiniana)
mybrainisafleamarket is our invaluable researcher and commenter at The Gurdjieff Con blog, and you can read his many posts/comments by entering the tag MBFM, or the longer ‘mybrainisafleamarket’ in the search box. He has uncovered a whole bunch of stuff on gurus and everything else New Age.
My interest in Karmapa is direct, despite my suspicious wariness here, because I vividly remember the old Karmapa from the seventies. I don’t buy into this game of reincarnates one way or the other, but there is no doubt something strange is at work here. In any case, this new Karmapa is almost grown up, and has a hard act to follow. I can only hope he can resurrect the intelligence of the older Karmapa.
mybrainisafleamarket said,
May 7, 2010 at 11:31 am ·
Suggestion for a research project:Get a first edition of Harrers Seven Years in Tibet. Study the photos. (That early edition had 40 pages of photographs–stunning, btw)
The first edition had an amazing photo of cavalry in ancient armor in a ceremonial parade, carrying war trophies captured long ago from Muslim invaders.
And that 1955 book shows the young 14th Dalai Lama inside an ornate
pavilion on horseback, with a splendid retinue. Those photos are evocative of a lost world–and a very, very hierarchical world.And that world was brutal. This early edition of Harrers book gives a photo of monks who served as police officers, armed with heavy staves.
And a photo of two persons in rags with begging bowls and shackles on their ankles had the caption that on Buddhas Birthday in Lhasa, prisoners were allowed out on the streets to beg.
A later edition, printed for larger circulation had fewer photos, but included one that the 1954/44 edition did not have–a photo of a tomb of an earlier Dalai Lama with an estimated ton of gold used to decorate it–says so in the caption.
Pre-1949 Lhasa was a brutal place. It wasnt a Shangrila paradise of chirping birds and rainbows for all.
That gold adorning the tomb came from heavy taxes on the serfs. And Harrer wrote that among the tasks he did in Lhasa was to correspond on behalf of wealthy locals with dealers in Europe. The Tibetans wanted Harrers help in arrangings shipments from Europe of….amber, pearls, furs.
It all reminds me of life in and around the Romanov court just before the Bolshevik Revolution.
I attended a couple of days lecture by the DL and appreciated it. But I never forget that he is in the situation of a Romanov in exile.
The way to gain an empire or regain one that is lost is first to colonize people’s imaginations–that is to establish the legitimacy of one’s claim.
Its one thing to do this in the realm of secular power politics.
But when religious practice gets entangled in power politics…then it his hard to hold a priest/king to account if he is also a politician.
I am horrified to see what cover ups the Vatican has perpetrated. But at least a reigning pontiff faces some accountability from the media and there are venues where reform minded Roman Catholics can discuss their concerns and speak out.
We do not yet have that in relation to the exiled monarchs and barons of the Tibetan Diaspora.
If one must practice Buddhadharma, I personally advise selecting a dharma center that 1) doesnt court media attention and whose teachers find ways to be accessible but avoid the celebrity marketing circuit 2) remains mindful of the Buddhist ethical precepts and 3) whose funds remain local and 4) hierarchy justifies its existence by supporting a practice environment accessible to all, and where no special favor is given to the rich or famous.
And where those who are weighed down by adversity, who are older or who struggle with chronic ailments get as much care from the practice teachers as those who happen to be young and beautiful, famous or rich..or all the above.
———————————My comment
nemo said,May 7, 2010 at 3:18 pm · Edit
Here is my comment on the original post, with a link to the early edition at Amazon.
nemo said,
May 7, 2010 at 3:05 pm ·
Fascinating comment, i will upgrade it to post level, but here is an Amazon link to what I suspect is the first edition you refer to, for anyone with $129!http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/0874779030/sr=/qid=/ref=olp_pg_collectible?ie=UTF8&coliid=&startIndex=0&me=&qid=&sr=&seller=&colid=&condition=collectible
signed by the author.
nemo said,
May 7, 2010 at 3:21 pm ·
Excellent commentary by MBFM on Tibet. These critiques from Parenti, for example, are often uncomprehending of the reality of Buddhism as they focus on the reality of Tibetan politics.Keep in mind that when Buddhists were all slaughtered and driven out of India they became desperate, and resolved to not get extinguished and the character of early Buddhist innocence disappeared, except on the surface, as a kind of religious geoplitics took hold, fairly well described in its decline by MBFM.
The lamas themselves don’t seem to understand their own situation, as far as I can tell, and the whole strange ghostocracy is having a hard time with modern liberalism.
More on Washpost article, and Hindutva
Interesting, and feel free to speak your mind here. However, my experience as a devoted student of Indian religion is that the tradition has too many confusions to be viable. And that I have to abandon it, because I can’t use it. that’s not bias, but frustrated interest.
I can’t argue with people who think the Code of Manu is a sacred tradition justfiying Brahmanism and the law of caste. I just pull up stakes and move on, sad that the great tradition of Indian religion has been corrupted.
That puts the whole thing at risk. Indic religionists need to consider their position, and do some radical thinking about their tradition and its confusions.
Fussing over Hindutva is the recipe for the destruction of that tradition.
I can’t quite evaluate Rajneesh, especially his endgame, but his basic position very clearly addressed these issues, from a man born on Jain terrain with no Hindu baggage but an immense respect for the real Indic stream of religion predating most probably the red herrings injected into the mix by the Indo-European concoctions of Vedism.
Sujay Rao Mandavilli said,
07.05.10 at 12:22 am ·
Hindutva tactics:I am posting this because I am convinced all of us are truth seekers. Otherwise, I wouldn’t have wasted my time.
(a) Most people who beleive in ‘Hindutva’ (within inverted commas) theories are innocent. The Colonial- Marxist school of Indology is
primarily responsible for the mess, they haven’t changed with the times or connected with the people.
(b) Even those who propound ‘Hindutva’ (within inverted commas) theories are innocent. The colonial- marxist school of Indology is primarily responsible, they haven’t changed with the times or connected with the people. The ICHR is now synonymous with senility (like anything else to do with Marxism always is). However, all other government departments have turned a new leaf since 1991.
(c) There are however some dangerous people using this chaos and confusion to create havoc
the 19th century school of Indology cannot last beyond a decade – most optimistic estimate. But what will take its place? That’s what scares me to death. Will this be like a collapse of the USSR, a much smaller verion perhaps? It will have large implications though, but most won’t
even ‘understand’ what is ‘happening’!Hindutva tactics
1.Shouting out against a myth, an obsolete or a half-imaginary theory
i.e The Aryan Invasion theory (which should have been abandoned before it actually was- or at least the fact that it was abandoned should have been communicated properly)2. The obsession with whether the “Aryans” came from inside out outside India – this is irrelavant to history because identities keep on changing every 30 years or so. Such people are not interested in history but in politics. The “Aryans” migrated to Iran and other parts of the world as well, nobody creates a hue and cry there. Current research supports the idea that they came in small numbers and the transfer of power from the Harappans to the “Aryans” happened due to a series of Acculturations and internal movements
3. Not interested in history: The history of the Gangetic plains was and is being researched by Non-Hindutvavaadis, Pargiter, Smith, Rau, Witzel and now myself. Hindutvaavadis
will not be interested in history because it will conflict with their ideology.4. Not interested in what is “theirs”,(whatever that means) Everything which is not “theirs” should be “theirs”
5. Introducing a crude “is “mine” older” or “is “theirs” older” competition
.i.e Vedic is pre-IVC theory.6. Using the services of foreigners who cannot understand the complexity
of Indian culture to promote Hindutva.7. Equating a sect of Hinduism with the whole of Hinduism and equating
it again with the whole of India.8. Using the perceived weaknesses and irrationlity of Marxist ideology
as an excuse for promoting the Hinduvta movement9. Using Dravidian nationalism as an excuse to
promote Hindutva (‘They misused history and so can I’)10. Using the fact that current approaches to Indology are considered to
be hopelessly obsolete to their full advantage11. Taking full advantage of the fact that the man in the street
cannot understand or will not be interested in understanding the complexity of the Aryan problem and using his historical naivety to their advantage.
But ultimately Hindtva (misuse) of history is more dangerous in the long-term than the Babri Masjid demolition or the Godhra massacre. The fact that a majority of people don’t understand what the Aryan problem is doesn’t make it less dangerous!
Therefore only a few people who can understand what they are upto must expose them12. Indian Hindutva agents posing as Europeans
13. Indian Hindutva agents posing as Pakistani MuslimsTheir strategy has been so successful that many Americans, Europeans (some of them older) and even Pakistani muslims
now implicitly beleive them!!14. Not interested in the ‘Indus script’ – strictly outside their purview (Exception: (pseudo)-decipherment(s))
I will still say
(a) Very few people are interested in History
(b) Even fewer would opt for history as a career, much less in a developing country like India where people are driven by economic compulsions
(c) But issues such as this have far-reaching implications not just for India but for the rest of the world.There are fundamental differences between Egypt , Mesopotamia and India . Egypt , Mesopotamia are Islamic countries which don’t even encourage their pre-ISLAMIC past (!!!!) . In India , religion which comprises of Mythology or mythologized history is intertwined and inseparable
with daily life. IF Indians don’t get what they want from mainstream sources, they are in the control of people like Rajaram.That is it! That is what has happened .. and is threatens not just India but the rest of humanity, in a way. Most people who believe in Hindutva are innocent. But that is what makes it all the more dangerous. (!)Almost everybody in India today thinks Rajaram et all are correct. WHY?
Is there something seriously wrong with the education system here .. YES .. there is !!What could be the reason?
(a) There are many unresolved issues in Indian history
(b) Marxist Historians did not make an attempt to understand underlying problems / invest in research
(c) Western Indologists did not make an attempt to connect with IndiansWait for the impending catastrophe. We fear for India and its future. The world may well sink with it.
Sujay Rao Mandavilli
06.05.10
Bjerragaard
mybrainisafleamarket said,
06.05.10 at 8:23 am ·
Ah…Bjerragaard was himself interested in these matters. So there was, definately a theosophical and masonic community of interest going on in New York at that time–accounting for the ankh and ourobouros symbols carved into the house decorations at Nyack.http://www.google.com/search?q=Bjerregaard+esotericism&spell=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&source=hp&btnG=Search
From the citations there are a H.A. Bjerregaard whom Blavatsky quotes
in her book Secret Doctrine“There is one remarkable characteristic about this Monadic Essence in that every monad acts as a faithful reflector of the impresses made upon it by every other. In the words of H.A. Bjerregaard, whom H.P.B. quotes in The Secret Doctrine (I, 630-31), “every monad is a living mirror of the Universe within its own sphere….In every monad, therefore, the adept may read everything, even the future. Every monad or Elemental is a looking-glass that can speak.””
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:NwgnzDmbpn8J:http://www.teosofia.com/Mumbai/7202pilgrims.html+Bjerregaard+esotericism&hl=en&ct=clnk
and there is a CHA Bjerragaard–hard to tell if these are two different persons with the same surname or whether Helena got the initials wrong.
This quotation on Sufism by CHA Bjerragaard is from 1898. Helena Blavatsky and her male companion had left the US in 1879, but she could have continued to read material published after that date, so long as someone mailed it to her.
CHA Bjerragaard wrote
“Perhaps the simplest statement is this: Sufism is Theosophy from the standpoint of Mohammedanism.”
http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/path/v01n02p41_sufism.htm
So, there was already an active Theosophical scene in New York and a librarian who was also a theosophist would have served a valuable function as part of the referral network..and as one who created contributions to the literature.
James Webb makes a very strong case in his book on Gurdjieff (The Harmonious Circle) that Gurdjieff got much of his material from the very plentiful literature on Theosophy, which had become available in large quanities in Tsarist Russia…and Webb carefully traces sources and quotes correspondances between gurdjeiffs material and sources in earlier Theosophical literature.
So when Gurdjieff (and his successors) went to the West, all they would have needed to do was visit communities with a sufficient, pre-existing interest in Theosophy and such an audience would be pre-conditioned to hunger for ’sources’ and new gurus and masters…prepared by Blavatsky’s tall tales of white brotherhoods and ascended masters.
Feeling singled out for a unique destiny is the biggest seduction there is. And a nice, cozy group of seekers is a very tempting comfort in a world made increasingly hectic, anonymous and harsh by changing society, economic pressures, etc.
Bernard family and sufi connections
More on Bernard family
mybrainisafleamarket said,
06.05.10 at 8:05 am ·As if all this isnt enough…the Bernard family had a Sufi connection and another family tie to Mary Baker Eddy.
Andrew Rawlinson writes:
“Inayat Khan went to Britain, which then became the focus of the Sufi Order.
“However, he had already established his universal Sufism among a small number of American followers. One of them, C.Bjerragaard, who was librarian of the New York Public Library**, published a book entitled ‘The Inner Life and the Tao Teh King’ in 1912 – just a year after Agueli’s article on Islam and Taoism in La Gnose (a Traditionalist journal). This is a good example of the relationship between these two forms of Sufism: following parallel tracks but never meeting.
**(Am mentioning this in case Bjerragarrd may later be established as an important member of an early 20th century referral network in the New York/Eastern seaboard area–who better than a libarian? MBFM)
‘Inayat Khan stayed in Britain for eight years. In 1913, he married Ora Baker, an American who was the half-sister of Pierre Bernard/Oom the Omnipotent and also distantly related to Mary Baker Eddy, the founder of Christian Science; she was henceforth known as Amina Begum Inayat Khan.
‘In 1914, Hazrat Inayat Khan published his first book, ‘A Sufi Message of Spiritual Liberty’ – the first book in a Western language written by a Sufi (but an innovative universalist Sufi, remember). And in 1915, he started a magazine, ‘The Sufi’, in London – again, the first of its kind. (Agueli was publishing articles on Sufism in periodicals like ‘Il Convito’ and ‘La Gnose’ at this time – but both of them were Traditionalist rather than specifically Sufi.) ”
http://web.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journal/diskus/rawlinson.html