03.30.11

Caldwell answered?

Posted in Uncategorized at 11:52 am

The comment by Christopher Caldwell is of interest, but I think we have handled this question: scroll down for the challenge to Caldwell posted already.
I could be wrong, but I watched the progression of gurus in the late sixties and seventies, and his approach, despite issues, was unique and highly simple/transparent. The energy was remarkable. I think that his effort was a success, the reason so much effort was made to destroy him, an effort that has nearly succeeded.
I was never a member there, so my view is partially objective. In any case, the disinformation is under suspicion after twenty years of success, and I think that the questions can be reopened and some use made of what is left.
It is obvious that the Andrew Cohen/Ken Wilbur attempt to substitute and take over the seventies legacies is a total failure. Time to move on.
The problems that arose in the Rajneesh American venture are still a mystery, but the general tenor of his work remains. That is why the main attacks on him are suspicious and turn out to be bogus.

Rajneesh strongly recommended Gurdjieff people to look at his work. He warned correctly that nothing would come of it. He praised Gurdjieff to the skies, at the start, then became suspicious and denounced him, up to a point. He called Gudjieff a huge failure as a guru/.

03.29.11

Anirvan review

Posted in Uncategorized at 12:30 pm

Review of Anirvan’s To Live Within (with Lizelle Reymond)

I reviewed this book at Amazon, but I have recently heard that, as with Ouspensky, a disillusion has set in with the post-Anirvan, whereever he is now (ditto Ouspensky): These two men are a caution against the induced propaganda for Gurdjieff by beginners whose effusions are then used for promotion (Anirvan’s book was very influential in the seventies). Anirvan makes some mistakes which we can discuss here. But basically he is applying his experience with an unnamed Indian guru to Gurdjieff under the delusion that ‘samkhya’ as he knew it applied to Gurdjieff’s teaching.

Thirty years of EJ Gold voodoo was enough!!

Posted in Uncategorized at 11:42 am

Thirty years is a long time!
People who attack me are generally outsiders who know nothing beyond what they read in Ouspensky, and don’t seem to grasp the reality, which Gurdjieff more than indicated by warning that he was a devil. You are NOT required to think much of someone who is a devil.
As for EJ Gold he is almost worse, because he has no teaching at all, parasitically uses Ouspensky to attract victims and in general uses a stand up comedy routine to hide his lack of any intelligence.

He also gave a warning, back in the seventies, his mafia rap when he said he would select certain people for mafia contract treatment, ie. would try to kill them using black magic.. in the name of the work, but in reality as a sufi at the time warned me, to ‘consume’ the essence of victims driven to insanity.
It didn’t work for me!!!!
Those who think the guru/surrender game with a teaching is what is going on with him should reflect on the reason someone who endured thirty years of Gold’s style of attempted assassination would be constantly wary, without let up, day after day, year after year.

Most people would simply die of shock to know the reality behind the really stinking sufi bullshit out front.

Asshole here should be grateful the ‘work’ gang ignores them.

I was once told by a sufi type to go see a movie called Jeremiah Johnson (a forgettable, but not uncharming Robert Redford movie of the seventies), about a mountain man who lived in the Rockies and had to be constantly vigilant to survive endless Indian warriors out to get his scalp). There was no point at which the danger would pass, or any resolution of the mindless danger. The astral passage is like that, a field of demons, and in that morass gangsters like Gold and Gurdjieff. The point is that there is no point at which you can say enough, let’s do something else. Like Jeremiah Johnson the ‘threat’ was costant twentyfour hours a day forever.

The idea of the ‘work’ is a joke so sick I have to wonder.

Comment from Caldwell

Posted in Uncategorized at 11:30 am

Comment from Caldwell: sorry for delay in seeing it (many comments with more than two links end in spam box, and wait a week for me to find them)

Christopher Calder
meditation-handbook.50webs.com/
calderhouse@yahoo.com
67.206.161.226 2011/03/24 at 12:06 am
Nemo,

Hi.

I am responding here to your “Challenge to Christopher Calder” post on another web page, which is now locked. My comments about Rajneesh are at least very partially relevant to GeorgeGurdjieff as well. The confusion comes when people start beliving there is something “spiritual” in the world. Please see below. This was also posted on the Sanyass News site.
——————–

People are free to believe anything they want to believe, and many people want to believe some very silly things.

Anthony Thompson brags that he is a “scholar” and an “expert” on Rajneesh-Osho, but Anthony never even met Rajneesh face to face, only viewed him from a distance. Does going to a Rolling Stones concert make you an expert on Mick Jagger? Anthony’s words are so full of misstatements of fact and illogical assertions that he is hardly worth responding to. Just one example: Anthony falsely claims that I state that Osho’s death was caused by nitrous oxide use. I, nor anyone I know has ever said that, only that Osho’s well documented drug use contributed to his dementia, not to his death. There are no legitimate medical uses for nitrous oxide other than for anesthesia. Osho inhaled nitrous oxide for months on end, a fact that his own dentist, Devageet, has publicly admitted. Osho loved nitrous oxide so much he had nitrous oxide tanks and spigots installed by his bed at the Oregon Commune, a fact verified by the police, the press, and various political leaders who were given tours of the ranch after Osho fled his own commune to avoid being arrested. Anthony contradicts himself right and left, and he dismisses first hand observations of Osho by people who actually knew Osho and who lived with him for years. Anthony is a very confused Osho enthusiast interested in covering up the truth, not in finding the truth.

Devageet is like Anthony in that he admits Osho’s drug use on occasion and then denies it on other occasions. He can’t keep his story straight or rational. Both men use bizarre excuses for Osho’s drug habit. On one occasion Anthony insinuated that Osho’s drug use was OK because he could “tolerate” the drugs. Is that a sane argument? Obviously, Osho could not handle the drugs any more than Charlie Sheen. Devageet once told me that Osho was not addicted, but Osho’s “body needed it” (the nitrous oxide). No one needs nitrous oxide unless they are being operated on, and no operation lasts for months or takes place in a bedroom.

Devageet gives courses on past lives, but Anthony denies reincarnation. Osho’s entire teaching was based on reincarnation, so Anthony is enamored with a guru whose teachings he does not even believe in. Anthony goes to great length to deny Osho’s sexual relations with his own disciples, an effort that makes no sense at all given that Osho publicly bragged to the U.S. media that he had sex with “hundreds” of women. Both Anthony and Devageet have serious arguments within themselves. They do not need me to argue with, because their own inner conflicts are enough for anyone to deal with.

The simple fact is that all religion is a hoax, and all gurus are false. Life is proven to be a cellular, biological based phenomena, not a spiritual phenomena. Mysticism and religion are soothing myths created by human brain cells to help lessen our fear of death. A common problem is that people are fooled by cosmic consciousness. I was fooled in my youth by this grand and pleasurable phenomena just like so many others. Cosmic consciousness is a completely natural, ordinary and inevitable human brain event, not a “spiritual” or other-worldly experience, and it is absolutely unrelated to intelligence, wisdom, honesty, and virtue. There is only one world, and all that we see, feel, and know is in our brains, not in our souls, because there is no soul. When you meditate, the only thing you will ever find is more and more brain cells. All of the religious and “spiritual” experiences you may have had are products of your own imagination, superimposed on top of the natural phenomena of cosmic consciousness. You read a mystical book and then your brain creates an experience to fit the myths detailed in the book. You can have a “spiritual experience” from taking peyote, but how can taking a drug awaken a spirit? It cannot because there are no spirits, only brains.

Rajneesh was born with a highly unusual brain. He had tremendous psychic (brain) energy, but no “spiritual energy” because there is no such thing. What he was had nothing to do with past lives because there are no past lives. His rare DNA made him “enlightened,” not any great effort in meditation. Consciousness is just a physical brain function, and the quantity of consciousness you have is largely dictated by your genetic code. You can enhance your consciousness through meditation methods in the same way you can enhance your muscles through exercise, but no amount of effort can turn a man with ordinary DNA into a Buddha. Buddhas are born out of dumb luck, not created by great effort, and their existence can be predicted by the laws of probability.

Meditating is a safe and healthy way to get high, but nothing more. The problem comes when people lie about meditation in order to turn it into a business. Those who claim to be perfect masters who gained enlightenment from past life effort are deceiving their own disciples. Rajneesh-Osho was a self-deluded man with an old-school Indian brain that believed in all the ancient Hindu and Buddhist religious myths. His cosmic consciousness did not make him smarter, more wise, or more egoless than anyone else. All of the so-called “enlightened ones” had and have fully functional egos, many much bigger than normal. Ego is absolutely essential to human life, but Rajneesh was a extreme narcissist who had far more egoism than he needed just to survive. A human without an ego would be like a computer without an operating system, dead and useless. Imagine trying to build an autonomous robot capable of fending for itself without an ego function. It would be impossible. The machine needs something inside it that cares if it lives or dies, that gives it motivation to act in its own self-interest. That thing inside us that cares is the “ego.” Just because the ego function becomes hidden and is taken off your desktop display (your consciousness) does not mean that it is gone. Meher Baba, another “enlightened” Indian, was even more egotistical than Rajneesh. Both men were fooled by the essential ego function that had become hidden and even enlarged through meditation. Meditation pushes the ego function off your desktop display, making it a hidden, stealth program. Our brains are computers that operate both in analogue and digital fashion. Our DNA, which creates our bodies and our brains, is a naturally created digital code. Nature is pretty smart to build these organic, living machines we call humans.

I rarely think about Rajneesh or any of my former gurus these days because they are all dead and gone. I am concerned about our nation’s latest false guru, Barack Obama, who is leading our country in entirely the wrong direction in regards to energy and agricultural policy.

See “The Renewable Energy Disaster” at: http://renewable.50webs.com/

Every day enough men, women, and children die of malnutrition and related illness to create an unbroken chain of corpses over 24 miles long. What is most important now is the security and affordability of our food supply and the availability of affordable, clean energy, not religious leaders who are irrelevant to our struggle to survive on this planet in a sustainable way. Meditation is a highly enjoyable hobby, but we would be wise not to make it into a religion. Our survival on this planet requires thoughtfulness and critical thinking, not blind obedience to any spaced-out guru, living or dead.

You can find all of my nonprofit, amateur editorials at:

http://meditation-handbook.50webs.com/

Cheers, Christopher Calder

Nemo,

Hi.

I am responding here to your “Challenge to Christopher Calder” post on another web page, which is now locked. My comments about Rajneesh are at least very partially relevant to GeorgeGurdjieff as well. The confusion comes when people start beliving there is something “spiritual” in the world. Please see below. This was also posted on the Sanyass News site.
——————–

People are free to believe anything they want to believe, and many people want to believe some very silly things.

Anthony Thompson brags that he is a “scholar” and an “expert” on Rajneesh-Osho, but Anthony never even met Rajneesh face to face, only viewed him from a distance. Does going to a Rolling Stones concert make you an expert on Mick Jagger? Anthony’s words are so full of misstatements of fact and illogical assertions that he is hardly worth responding to. Just one example: Anthony falsely claims that I state that Osho’s death was caused by nitrous oxide use. I, nor anyone I know has ever said that, only that Osho’s well documented drug use contributed to his dementia, not to his death. There are no legitimate medical uses for nitrous oxide other than for anesthesia. Osho inhaled nitrous oxide for months on end, a fact that his own dentist, Devageet, has publicly admitted. Osho loved nitrous oxide so much he had nitrous oxide tanks and spigots installed by his bed at the Oregon Commune, a fact verified by the police, the press, and various political leaders who were given tours of the ranch after Osho fled his own commune to avoid being arrested. Anthony contradicts himself right and left, and he dismisses first hand observations of Osho by people who actually knew Osho and who lived with him for years. Anthony is a very confused Osho enthusiast interested in covering up the truth, not in finding the truth.

Devageet is like Anthony in that he admits Osho’s drug use on occasion and then denies it on other occasions. He can’t keep his story straight or rational. Both men use bizarre excuses for Osho’s drug habit. On one occasion Anthony insinuated that Osho’s drug use was OK because he could “tolerate” the drugs. Is that a sane argument? Obviously, Osho could not handle the drugs any more than Charlie Sheen. Devageet once told me that Osho was not addicted, but Osho’s “body needed it” (the nitrous oxide). No one needs nitrous oxide unless they are being operated on, and no operation lasts for months or takes place in a bedroom.

Devageet gives courses on past lives, but Anthony denies reincarnation. Osho’s entire teaching was based on reincarnation, so Anthony is enamored with a guru whose teachings he does not even believe in. Anthony goes to great length to deny Osho’s sexual relations with his own disciples, an effort that makes no sense at all given that Osho publicly bragged to the U.S. media that he had sex with “hundreds” of women. Both Anthony and Devageet have serious arguments within themselves. They do not need me to argue with, because their own inner conflicts are enough for anyone to deal with.

The simple fact is that all religion is a hoax, and all gurus are false. Life is proven to be a cellular, biological based phenomena, not a spiritual phenomena. Mysticism and religion are soothing myths created by human brain cells to help lessen our fear of death. A common problem is that people are fooled by cosmic consciousness. I was fooled in my youth by this grand and pleasurable phenomena just like so many others. Cosmic consciousness is a completely natural, ordinary and inevitable human brain event, not a “spiritual” or other-worldly experience, and it is absolutely unrelated to intelligence, wisdom, honesty, and virtue. There is only one world, and all that we see, feel, and know is in our brains, not in our souls, because there is no soul. When you meditate, the only thing you will ever find is more and more brain cells. All of the religious and “spiritual” experiences you may have had are products of your own imagination, superimposed on top of the natural phenomena of cosmic consciousness. You read a mystical book and then your brain creates an experience to fit the myths detailed in the book. You can have a “spiritual experience” from taking peyote, but how can taking a drug awaken a spirit? It cannot because there are no spirits, only brains.

Rajneesh was born with a highly unusual brain. He had tremendous psychic (brain) energy, but no “spiritual energy” because there is no such thing. What he was had nothing to do with past lives because there are no past lives. His rare DNA made him “enlightened,” not any great effort in meditation. Consciousness is just a physical brain function, and the quantity of consciousness you have is largely dictated by your genetic code. You can enhance your consciousness through meditation methods in the same way you can enhance your muscles through exercise, but no amount of effort can turn a man with ordinary DNA into a Buddha. Buddhas are born out of dumb luck, not created by great effort, and their existence can be predicted by the laws of probability.

Meditating is a safe and healthy way to get high, but nothing more. The problem comes when people lie about meditation in order to turn it into a business. Those who claim to be perfect masters who gained enlightenment from past life effort are deceiving their own disciples. Rajneesh-Osho was a self-deluded man with an old-school Indian brain that believed in all the ancient Hindu and Buddhist religious myths. His cosmic consciousness did not make him smarter, more wise, or more egoless than anyone else. All of the so-called “enlightened ones” had and have fully functional egos, many much bigger than normal. Ego is absolutely essential to human life, but Rajneesh was a extreme narcissist who had far more egoism than he needed just to survive. A human without an ego would be like a computer without an operating system, dead and useless. Imagine trying to build an autonomous robot capable of fending for itself without an ego function. It would be impossible. The machine needs something inside it that cares if it lives or dies, that gives it motivation to act in its own self-interest. That thing inside us that cares is the “ego.” Just because the ego function becomes hidden and is taken off your desktop display (your consciousness) does not mean that it is gone. Meher Baba, another “enlightened” Indian, was even more egotistical than Rajneesh. Both men were fooled by the essential ego function that had become hidden and even enlarged through meditation. Meditation pushes the ego function off your desktop display, making it a hidden, stealth program. Our brains are computers that operate both in analogue and digital fashion. Our DNA, which creates our bodies and our brains, is a naturally created digital code. Nature is pretty smart to build these organic, living machines we call humans.

I rarely think about Rajneesh or any of my former gurus these days because they are all dead and gone. I am concerned about our nation’s latest false guru, Barack Obama, who is leading our country in entirely the wrong direction in regards to energy and agricultural policy.

See “The Renewable Energy Disaster” at: http://renewable.50webs.com/

Every day enough men, women, and children die of malnutrition and related illness to create an unbroken chain of corpses over 24 miles long. What is most important now is the security and affordability of our food supply and the availability of affordable, clean energy, not religious leaders who are irrelevant to our struggle to survive on this planet in a sustainable way. Meditation is a highly enjoyable hobby, but we would be wise not to make it into a religion. Our survival on this planet requires thoughtfulness and critical thinking, not blind obedience to any spaced-out guru, living or dead.

You can find all of my nonprofit, amateur editorials at:

http://meditation-handbook.50webs.com/

Cheers, Christopher Calder
Christopher Calder
http://meditation-handbook.50webs.com/

1

Replies to Gurdjieff assholes

Posted in Uncategorized at 11:26 am

http://www.gurdjieff-con.net/2011/02/28/booknotes-communism-and-zen-fire-zen-wind/comment-page-1/#comment-36988

Your attempt to figure me out tries too hard, it is not hard, and has nothing to do with Gurdjieff’s book, which I have never completed reading, a piece of badly written junk which conceals a dangerous agenda visible elsewhere in the history the G-movement.

The problem with the G legacy is not clear to front office dummies, fanclub groupies and the general run of Gurdjieff assholes who never have any contact with what is really going on.

The persistence here springs from the danger that Gurdjieff’s teaching represents. It is like the operation underway now in the USA from Bush onwards: the destruction of democratic freedom, and the creation of an absolute athority over disciples that can richly profit from spiritual cannibalism. Gurdjieff wants to do to religion what the right now wants to do to the economy: reduce all the gains of free men and make the market supreme.
The quite different context of Gurdjieff, especially, but there are many others, is to undermine modernity, etc, etc…
You have no case defending Gurdjieff or attacking his critics once you see that nothing less than the recreation of slavery in a new civilization….
You have to fight back, and do that for a long time.
Clear?

Tibet and dalai lama

Posted in Uncategorized at 11:17 am

Tibet’s Quiet Revolution
Pico Iyer
http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2011/mar/19/tibets-quiet-revolution/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NYRblog&utm_content=NYRblog+CID_e7b18495235c317a71b615d273492f6c&utm_source=Email+marketing+software&utm_term=Tibets+Quiet+Revolution
AP Photo/Ashwini Bhatia

Tibetan Buddhist nuns, holding their mandatory “Green Book” as proof of identity, waiting to vote in the last Tibetan prime ministerial election, Dharamsala, India, June 3, 2006

It’s been startling to witness mass demonstrations in countries across the Middle East for freedom from autocracy, while, in the Tibetan community, a die-hard champion of “people power” tries to dethrone himself and his people keep asking him to stay on. Again and again the Dalai Lama (who tends to be more radical and less romantic than most of his followers) has sought to find ways to give up power, and his community has sought to find ways to ensure he can’t. It could be said that almost the only time Tibetans don’t listen to the Dalai Lama is when he tells them they shouldn’t listen to him. Now, on the eve of an important election for Tibet’s government-in-exile, he has announced he is relinquishing formal political authority entirely—and the Tibetan government has accepted his decision, even as the move has alarmed many around the world and struck some as the end of an era.

In truth, the Dalai Lama’s statement was merely a continuation—and a stronger expression—of what he has been saying for years: that political leadership for the Tibetan people (in exile at least) belongs with the democratically elected government-in-exile he has so painstakingly set up over decades in Dharamsala, in India (elections for a new prime minister are to be held March 20); that he will function only as a “senior advisor,” helping to oversee the transition to a post-Dalai Lama era; and, most important, that the spiritual and temporal sides of Tibetan rule will at last be separate. As he noted in the speech that mentioned his “retirement”—his annual state-of-the-nation address, in effect, delivered on March 10, the anniversary of the 1959 Tibetan uprising against the People’s Republic of China and a frequent day of protest—he has believed, since childhood, that church and state should not be one and that the fate of Tibet should be in the hands of all Tibetans.

Democracy, as the Dalai Lama sees it, is perfectly in tune with the Buddha’s central principles of self-rule and responsibility; it is one of the features of the wider world that long-isolated Tibet can and should now learn from; and it only stands to reason that the voices of all Tibetans be more important than that of just one—a logic that appeals to the scientist and the natural Everyman in him. Besides, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama will be 76 this July and the Dalai Lama institution cannot function as it did now that Tibet’s exiled leaders are separated from the 98 percent of Tibetans—some six million people—who live within the People’s Republic of China in circumstances of general repression and deprivation of political rights. Beijing has already “banned” reincarnations without government approval and all but announced that the finding of a “Fifteenth Dalai Lama” will lie under its jurisdiction as soon as the current, fourteenth, Dalai Lama dies.

Almost from the moment he arrived in Indian exile in 1959, the Dalai Lama drew up new constitutions for Tibetans both within Tibet and outside it, with one clause (over his people’s protests) allowing for the impeachment of a Dalai Lama, if necessary. Since then, he has carefully overseen a steady devolution of authority, setting up in Dharamsala first a parliament, then an elected Cabinet and, since 2001, a popularly elected prime minister (or Kalon Tripa, as Tibetans call it). In both the elections held so far—in 2001 and in 2006—the runaway winner has been the gentle monk Samdhong Rinpoche, whose Gandhian principles clearly meet with the Dalai Lama’s approval.

The Dalai Lama has constantly urged the Tibetan prime minister—and other government officials—to represent the political face of Tibet around the world, but none of them, of course (in a tiny exile community that numbers only 150,000 or so) possesses his natural charisma or standing in the eyes of the world. In that regard, Tibet as much as China has been a victim of the current Dalai Lama’s unusual charm and authority. And the many members of the Tibetan Youth Congress have traditionally presented a kind of loyal opposition, calling for a more forceful stance toward Beijing than the forbearance that the exile government, following the Dalai Lama, has always recommended.

But as exile Tibetans, especially in the West, see the urgency of gathering their resources now instead of waiting for the Dalai Lama’s death, there are indications that the exile government may get more involved in some of the official discussions with Beijing, which heretofore have mostly lain in the hands of the Dalai Lama’s representatives. The Dalai Lama’s hope, clearly, is that with each passing season, his exile government will be more and more of a self-sufficient body (chosen by Tibetans from around the world). In the run-up to the March 20 election for a new prime minister, there has been an extensive and eagerly contested campaign, with 17 candidates (among them three women) now whittled down to three finalists. Two of the three, Tenzin Namgyal Tethong, 62, and Tashi Wangdi, 64, are decades-long veterans of the Dalai Lama’s government-in-exile and the third (and current favorite) is Lobsang Sangay, 43, a Fulbright Scholar who holds a doctorate from Harvard Law School and has been more open to calls for Tibetan “self-determination,” a subject the Dalai Lama has avoided but that is popular with more radical members of the younger exile generation. (Sangay’s dissertation, in fact, was on the very subject of democracy and the Tibetan government-in-exile.)

Responding for the first time with energy and evident excitement to their new opportunities, exiled Tibetans have held debates among the candidates, in New York and Washington and Toronto and elsewhere; flashy websites have been set up, with tributes to the candidates (“Kasur Tashi Wangdi is like Dumbledore from the Harry Potter series”); and none of the final candidates is a monk. (The Tibetan Charter calls for a maximum of two terms for any prime minister, so Samdhong Ripoche, beloved of elderly Tibetans, is stepping down). Democracy has come to neighboring Bhutan—after its king likewise imposed it on a reluctant populace four years ago—and it is showing signs of arriving in Nepal. The Dalai Lama clearly feels that the process can wait no longer and that he must push his people into full self-governance, at a time when he’s around and can, if necessary, offer encouragement and the fruits of his experience.

It’s easy to understand why Tibetans have clung for so long to the Dalai Lama’s leadership as if to their sense of themselves. He’s the only ruler most of them have known, for seventy-one years now, and pretty much the only Tibetan who can recall dealing with India’s founding statesman, Pandit Nehru, and spending a year traveling around China and talking to Mao Zedong. He is one of the last remaining symbols of the Tibet that existed for three hundred years, until the Chinese crossed Tibet’s eastern border sixty years ago. And, of course, for Tibetans the Dalai Lama is regarded as an incarnation of Chenrezig, their god of compassion, and few devout believers are likely to listen to a political candidate—even one they have elected—over a god.

Yet the Dalai Lama’s gift as a political leader has always arisen from his no-nonsense pragmatism and his monastic habit of looking to the long-term (in part, of course, because he’s never been hostage to electoral cycles, even as he’s no mere ceremonial monarch). When he tells the world that his concern is not with the Dalai Lama but with the welfare of Tibetans, he’s being characteristically precise: this Dalai Lama may not last many decades longer and, as he often stresses, the Dalai Lama institution may have outlived its usefulness. But Tibetans are going to be around for a long time, one hopes, and unless they have some experience at governing themselves, they will not begin to be effective even if those currently in exile can one day return to Tibet.

Spiritually, of course, the Dalai Lama can never retire, and can no more renounce his incarnation than any one of us can try to erase his blood or his DNA. So long as he’s around, it’s hard to imagine any Tibetan prime minister overruling him (though, of course, more and more Tibetans have been agitating for a more forceful, even confrontational approach to the deadlock with Beijing, criticizing his “Middle Way” policy even if they never criticize the man). But it’s part of his clear-headedness to see and acknowledge that political leadership may require a very different kind of training from the spiritual kind, and the conflation of the two can make for confusion. When I said to him—three years ago—that to some of us it seemed refreshing to have someone with a monk’s larger vision and moral clarity in the realm of politics, he acknowledged that it could work well, but in principle should not be encouraged.

One of the curious aspects of this global Dalai Lama’s life is that his every political statement is usually addressed to many audiences at once, not least the 6 million Tibetans in Tibet he can barely meet and the government in Beijing that he has not been able to see face-to-face. In announcing his “retirement” ten days before Sunday’s election, he was telling fellow Tibetans to seize the moment, and he was reminding the Chinese government that however much it tries to hijack or neutralize the Dalai Lama institution, political leadership among at least exiled Tibetans will remain firmly out of reach, in Dharamsala. He managed to be, in equal measure, a parent telling his charges, “I’m leaving soon (so start taking care of everything yourselves)”; and a seasoned strategist telling those who distrust him in Beijing, “If you think I’m a threat to you, or an obstruction to better relations with Tibetans, I’ll relinquish all my official power right now. Will you talk more productively to us now?”

China is never likely to worry very much about a government-in-exile in an Indian hill station representing only 2 percent of Tibetans. But the Dalai Lama’s official relinquishing of political leadership was one way of underlining to Beijing that the Tibetan problem will not go away when he dies, and that there will still be Tibetans pressing for a (probably peaceful, negotiated) settlement to the issue, to counter the more confrontational firebrands often featured in the press. Meanwhile, those in Tibet itself continue to wait for the most basic human rights, transparency and real democracy to come to them from Beijing. On March 16th, according to a report from Dharamsala, a 21-year-old Tibet monk in Sichuan Province set himself fatally alight in his monastery, both to protest Chinese rule and, perhaps, to try to spark uprisings akin to the ones seen recently in Egypt and Tunisia.

March 19, 2011 1 a.m.

more at site

03.23.11

Osho versus Gurdjieff

Posted in Uncategorized at 12:46 pm

http://www.gurdjieff-con.net/2011/02/28/booknotes-communism-and-zen-fire-zen-wind/comment-page-1/#comment-36979

Your statement is without merit, and shows in any case the way in which Gurdjieff’s lies are very attractive to many suckers.
It is now almost a century since Gurdjieff met Ouspensky, and what is the result? Zero, a hoarde of confused people who have no spiritual practice, no inkling of a school, with predators like EJ Gold concocting fake schools to exploit confused beginners.
To be sure, there is every possibility of hidden ways leading from the exit doors near about the Gurdjieff ‘turd’ rotting in its historical place. Perhaps it all leads to some brand of sufism. I can’t comment on the labyrinth of Sufism, and its endless bum steers. If there is a path in all that morass, I would be glad to know what it is. There is a sufi something, I passed just by it, and have commented on the ‘soul’ game that some few seekers in sufi land find, usually to no avail. But for almost everyone, the disinformation is total and fills them with a life of–well, nothing much.

It is worth looking at a figure like Oscar Ichazo: that was the now or never moment to create a second stage of the Gurdjieff movement, but the operators blew it, as can be seen by the way they fumbled on the enneagon (after the equally confused enneagram): a close look shows that noone understood a thing about Gurdjieff, and I doubt if Gurdjieff himself undersood. The problem is that everything is secret, everything is therefore a muddle, and nothing can be started, let alone finished.
But let’s face it: Rumi was not enlightened, did not know what the term meant. Instead we have this rock star celebrity consciousness overflowing in a moment of–what? This is mephistopheles, not Buddha, at work.
Monotheism is pervaded by the demonic, making life difficult for those in search of a path. The reason is that monotheism was historically a kind of defense against the demonic for large cultural populations. But the result is like a tetanus shot: it uses the poison to combat the poison. This is the reason the whole game is so contradictory and baffling, and, indeed, Gurdjieff’s sense of the demonic may have been a veiled warning of the reality of ‘esoteric Xtianity’.
Gurdjiff is confusing and hard to deal with: he never presented his real teaching, only junk for suckers in the exoteric vein. So I can’t really judge what he never revealed.
By contrast Osho created a meditation milieu in a summary of the greater Indian tradition, and that is a practical context that will soon flower with a stream of Buddhas.
The Gurdjieff scheme, please note, never even mentions the term ‘enlightenment’ and is a confusing scheme in which people lose their bearings and turn in circles. Success cases in the Gurdjieff vein are the rare indivicual who is zapped by hidden agents to perform various devious schemes. There are no real pupils nor is there any real ‘path’. By contrast, as Osho noted, the real tradition is self-development in the path to enlightenment as cononically depicted by Buddhism (learning from Jainism), and indicated by Osho who spoke sometimes of neo-Buddhism. His initiative was not the ultimate millennium, but it is a cornucopia of ancient methods, a starting point for individials to focus on what is possible. Nothing like it exists in either Gurdjieffianity or Sufism. It is all smoke and mirrors, and Machiavellian spiritual politics. If the Gurdjieff path ever produces an enlightened man, let me know, and I will retract my statements.
In general the issue is not Osho versus Gurdjieff, but the larger frameworks of the Indic tradition versus the confusing world of gnostic monotheism, whose historical action is stupendous, but whose effect on individuals tends to be contracting. That Gurdjieff and Sufis shoud quietly purloin from the Indic tradition to give the appearance of a path inside the ranks of monotheistic robotics simply shows the poverty of method in those traditions.

The issue of ‘will’

Posted in Uncategorized at 12:31 pm

http://darwiniana.com/2011/03/23/the-will-of-god/

03.15.11

Judaism/Xtianity and the ruin of monotheism

Posted in Uncategorized at 12:13 pm

http://darwiniana.com/2011/03/07/judaismxtianity-and-the-ruin-of-monotheism/
This indictment should include ‘Hinduism’. However, the issue of Hinduism is one of distortion: the reality of the Indian tradition proceeds beneath the surface. Part of the problem with Judaism/Xtianity is that they are Axial Age productions, very recent, while the Indic tradition is almost primordial

The problem of the future will be the ‘wiseacred’ muddle of false religions remorphed from real traditions. The Gurdjieff tradition, so-called, and probably Sufism as a whole, clearly show this character! Caveat emptor!

03.11.11

The fascist postmodern gurdjieff strategy bears fruit

Posted in Uncategorized at 11:19 am

The Plan to Steal Everything and Sell the People into Slavery
Wisconsin Death Trip
By MICHAEL HUDSON and JEFFREY SOMMERS
New Agers tend to be idealistic liberals, including the Gudjieff idiots who are devoted to what they don’t understand. The destruction of modern liberties was seeded long ago by the fascist gurus. Be prepared to fight back.

Assholes like Andrew Cohen have to answer to their ‘postmodern’ game plan.

http://www.counterpunch.org/hudson03112011.html
On Wednesday evening, in a veritable Night of the Long Knives, Wisconsin’s integrity was brutally murdered on the floor of the state Capitol in Madison. On 9 March, integrity and trust built up over a century was obliterated as Wisconsin state senators quickly reversed course and cleaved its budget “repair bill” in half. Financial items require a quorum, thus, collective bargaining was split off from the budget repair bill and voted on separately so as to permit its being voted on now. Even so, this still broke the state’s open meeting law requiring 24 hours’ notice to ensure transparency. Instead, the Wisconsin senate Republicans pulled out this new legislation without advance notice and began voting, leaving only a stunned Democratic legislator, Peter Barca, to read the open meeting law out loud to prevent the senators from voting. The senate voted over his objections anyway.
Read the rest of this entry »

03.10.11

Dalai Lama resigns

Posted in Uncategorized at 6:33 am


Dalai Lama Will Give Up Political Role In Tibetan Government-In-Exile

It is perhaps late in the day for this: but the gesture is significant. Still, we don’t really know who the Dalai Lama is, and we have cited the material from the online book Shadow of the Dalai Lama. This book should be repudiated as a leftist smear job, but then we should turn around and ask some hard questions about Tibet and its history. The Dalai Lama is probably the last to know, and his imitation Gandhian non-violence has failed completely, as it is failing with Gadafi.

His stance shows he is unaware of the hidden strain we suspect of esoteric Buddhist fascism. Or else he sees a small piece of it, unaware of the deeper reality about which most Tibetans are innocent.
The institution of the Dalai Lama has been abandoned by its ghostly creators, leaving its agents baffled and confused about how to proceed. The Dalai Lama has suspected as much and hinted he should be the last in the line. I think he is probably right. The Tibetan establishment doesn’t seem to understand anymore how this Lama politics worked: not surprising, since government by ghosts is hard to pull off! The need for people who can understand it is hard to fulfill. It would seem that the tour de force of figures in the bardo state controlling Tibet via the Lamas had moments of reality. Evidently the system has suffered chaotification.

DHARMSALA, India — The Dalai Lama says he will give up his political role in Tibet’s government-in-exile, shifting that power to an elected representative.

The Tibetan spiritual leader has long said he wanted the elected government-in-exile based in this Indian hill town to have more power.

He says in a Thursday speech he would soon be proposing amendments to the exile constitution “reflecting my decision to devolve my formal authority to the elected leader.”

——————————-
An older commentary from 2008 from Deepak Chopra:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/deepak-chopra/tibet-isnt-a-buddhist-lit_b_94541.html
As the violence in Tibet has continued, the Dalai Lama issued a stern statement that he could not align himself with insurrection in his home country. Buddhism rests on several pillars, one of which is nonviolence. Tibet quickly became a kind of Buddhist litmus test. How much pain and oppression can you stand and still exhibit loving kindness and compassion? I wonder if that’s really fair. The Tibetans face a political crisis that should be met with political action. Whatever that action turns out to be, nobody should be seen as a good or bad Buddhist, anymore than defending your house from an intruder tests whether a Christian is living by the precepts of Jesus.

In India, where Gandhi preached nonviolence, or Ahimsa, he confronted a decaying British empire that was forced to give up its vast holdings. Historical luck was on his side, and as a result of Gandhi’s pacifism, India gained its independence. The Dalai Lama, however, has had historical misfortune to contend with. The Chinese are an expanding empire, and their ingrained racism allows them to overrun the “inferior” native Tibetans without any moral qualms. Will pacifism work in this situation? A better question might be, Would anything work? It’s not as though the Beijing regime can be defeated by force, either. One recalls that Gandhi combined pacifism with resistance, whereas the Tibetans up to now have sunk into an inert pacifism that could lead to their cultural extinction.

No doubt the entire conflict, now half a century old, is entangled in religion and other interwoven ingredients: Communist ideology, fantasies of restoring Chinese glory days, and much else. But Buddha, like Jesus, didn’t start a religion. He was concerned with how to live in the world, and being entangled in the world’s pain and confusion is an eternal dilemma. It didn’t need ruthless bureaucrats in China. Over the centuries, failed crops, endemic disease, and poverty have been quite capable of bringing suffering. It would be superficial to say that Buddha and Jesus arrived at the same remedy — to be in the world but not of it — yet nobody needs to pass that test, either.

What Buddha and Jesus undoubtedly had in common was a sense that another realm of existence transcends the material world. Buddhists are asked to consider how to reach that realm. There are no dictates (as far as my limited knowledge goes) to engage the world and solve its tortured dilemmas. Indeed, Buddha is famous for teaching that such solutions don’t exist. It is futile to apply Buddhism to a political crisis — or to the subprime mortgage debacle, for that matter — because wrestling with the material world never leads to freedom, fulfillment, or peace.

Someone may protest that the Dalai Lama is being an exemplary Buddhist in maintaining such perfect equanimity, and I completely agree. But he has achieved his level of consciousness for himself. This is a case where virtue must be its own reward. The world looks on and admires the Dalai Lama; it doesn’t change for him. My intention isn’t to give any Tibetan Buddhist advice, or to adopt a position superior to anyone else’s. It just strikes me that Tibet shouldn’t be a litmus test for religious purity while an entire people are slowly ground to dust. Nor should the peaceful countenance of the Dalai Lama become an excuse for the rest of us to stand by and do nothing, as if that proves how virtuous we are.

03.03.11

Satan, lies, and Gurdjieff devils

Posted in Uncategorized at 10:50 am

http://www.gurdjieff-con.net/2011/02/09/gurdjieff-and-the-erosion-of-trust/comment-page-1/#comment-36930

It is not surprising that Gurdjieff idiots should defend the the Gurdjieff Con, but the real source of lies is Gurdjieff himself. And his imitator Gold is even worse. Machiavellians usually lie to further some agenda, but Gold lies all the time. Almost everything, everything, he says is deliberate untruth, exaggeration, or sly hyped baloney