My remarks on my not being a spiritual teacher produced a suggestion that I should on the contrary take up that role. The thought is interesting, at least.
Let me point out a problem at step one: OK, there I am a spiritual teacher with a flock of disciples. What’s next? This is not India. Instead we have an endless and futile occult war of wannabees trying to reach the pinnacle of who knows what, Rosicrucian top-dog.
Whatever the case, to be specific, people like E.J. Gold would try to destroy any challenge to their monopoly by mindfucking the disciples and blaming it on the guru in question. He would certainly try it on me.
I could not ensure the safety of anyone who chose to work in that sphere. It is worth studying the New Age movement and its scandals. These are often engineered to destroy spiritual figures. I think the fate of Muktananda must be the most goulish case, after that of Da Free John.
A Western spiritual group is a hard thing to pull off, and those who succeed have some protection of some kind. I don’t have any and have endured and survived the black magic of multiple ‘enemies’ I didn’t know I had. It is no laughing matter, and would spread out sooner or later to students and disciples. Actually, what’s the problem: a slightly discreet assembly keeping a low profile, would be unobservable to the villains here. Their supposed occultism is mostly rubbish. Without the power of remote viewing they can’t really do much except spew hate into a void. Charles Tart in his End of Materialism depicts the case of the US dot.gov trying to figure out remote viewing. He stated the issues were under research by the US covert agencies, and that he couldn’t violate government secrecy by saying what they had found out. That’s interesting, despite the fact that I would brand Tart a traitor to the New Age movement for not divulging government secrets here. We need to know what the governmnent knows and when it knew it. The key to much mischief is remote viewing. Many occultis sell their souls to the devil for occult powers, but discover too late it didn’t include remote viewing. Without that key power most of you attempted murder via spells and curses is a shot in the dark. So I think Tart is lost to officialdom here. I think we can conclude, however, that the government couldn’t figure it out.
But we do have outstanding mysteries: what was the level of knowledge of ‘mind control’ as suggested by hints about the MKULTRA research? We don’t know and much of it was destroyed.
I think this is what happened with the Oregon Commune. Enlightened sages don’t study occult subjects, and can be vulnerable to unexpected attacks. And their disciples can be sitting ducks. I think we must have seen something like this in the collapse of that experiment. When the chief disciple goes off, and we see an attempted bioterrorist incident, you have to wonder, the bad odor of false-flag occultism begins to become a stench.
I think Osho realized the danger and retreated to India where a old harmony resurfaced very quickly.
I have been trying for the last two years to find some way to consider the Osho legacy as a resource for leftist groups. But at this point, given that the only response has been from a Gurdjieff student trying to squeeze him in, with no response of any kind from Osho people, my idea is clearly unrealistic. So I must move on.
The women, the ma’s, in the movement need a jolt. Osho created something unique in spiritual life, ancient or modern, an ashram with a female structure of guidance, if not control.
I think that something is awry there. Any initiative from a male is resented and ignored. But women in the age of women’s liberation are suddenly confronted with a challenge this is hard to understand.
Anyway, the reality is sinking in that an initiative for the future can’t happen in the ashram itself. So the whole thing is down the drain and we start over.
I would feel lessf frustrated if I could exchange one email with a sannyasin. Impossible. The verdict is clear, and perhaps on me.
I am a blind man with the elephant as to India, its politics, and can’t distinguish Hindutva from Hindu from…
But I have generated a number of insights into Indian history which need to be grounded in something more specific.
In any case this drift to the right needs to be challenged with some real insight into Indian religion and history.
The controversy over Doniger’s book on Hinduism brought home the way that outside critics of India frequently get the whole story wrong. Distinguishing between Buddhist and Hindu spiritual traditions is tricky, and most of the outside perspectives can’t get it straight. Hinduism is almost beyond the pale for many such, but the issue is not so simple. Hinduism has been corrupted by a number of confusions, and now is generating a fundamentalist brand. But the larger tradition is a puzzle to be solved on the way to some kind of Hindu Reformation. The great spiritual tradition is cluttered with a host of confusions and the whole tradition could have a better future if they were sorted out. Grafting the legacy onto monotheism seemed a no-brainer at many points, but isn’t the answer. The political critiques of rightwing Hindutva are par for the course and the corruption of Hinduism by misplaced history (e.g. the AIT/OIT debate) has further confused the tradition. But there is a hidden vitality in the overall constellation of Indian religion and finding some way to the future is essential. As the Buddhist battery runs low and then fades out, a wistful look at prime Hindu nonsense, from sacred monkeys to elephant gurus, begins to suggest something is missing from our take on rationalist Buddhism. The future was once pegged to the revolution of Buddhism, but that failed, and we barely see Buddhism as a factor in Indian religion. The whole universe of discourse is hopelessly confusing in its vastness, and the corrupted elements from the Aryan phase are threatening to poison the whole spectrum. Hinduism can’t continue in the confusion of the caste system. But this kind of thinking from outsiders fails to grasp that no such thing really exists anymore, save in fragmented pieces. So it is not even clear what one is talking about. The secularist fingerwaggers can’t figure out what they are wagging at. But some solution to these kinds of issues is essential to a renewed future.
In any case the Axial Age shows the way an ancient tradition could regenerate itself for a new cycle. That’s the puzzle that confuses: Buddhism was the renewal, and the source refused to renew, and simply floated onward into modernity, to confront Buddhism again as a journey taken, and finished. But the modern world has done something different. Ironically the late Enlightenment (period of Schopenhauer, Herder) spawned an immense first phase of the New Age movement, and the rediscovery of Buddhism has exploded in the modern world. But the outstanding elements of this type are not exactly poised to easily produce a similar kind of succession that we see in the Axial period. It is no accident we see figures such as Osho/Rajneesh reset the clock with a transparent traditional and at the same time futuristic version of the ancient legacy. But the larger system needs to reckon with the issue of its historical transformations, and the challenge of Buddhism to produce a transformed Santana Dharma. But that initiative failed in the middle of its huge global success and is problematical. But it is significant to consider the things that Buddhism got right: it emerges streamlined with none of the complications of the Vedic graft onto the original strain. It echoes the primordial source of Jainism and yogic sadhana which we now suspect predate the Vedic grafting. Out of blue in the Axial framework and timeperiod we see the Upanishads appearing to show a confusing transformation of the legacy into proto_Hindu format, but signaling the core of the primordial tradition. Next to this we see the Jain sequence climax in Mahavir and stop and then pass into Buddhism, with a Jain succession as a popular religion, without its teertankers. This dynamics is the kind of thing my historical model exposes to light, without really understanding what it is seeing.
Our metahistorical study exposes a clear and really spectacular design, one pegged to the ‘eonic’ timing we see in the overall pattern of world history. It is all quite amazing, but the outcome has proven less successful in realizing what we suspect was the original design.
But the point here is to see, without getting into a prejudice against Hinduism, that the ‘stream’ of Indian religion was able to spawn a sidewinder lineage in its first born, Buddhism, now sadly alienated in the minds of many Indians. Whatever the case the unity of the overall design seems lost to everyone. The key issue here is that the larger dynamic, complex beyond our easy grasp, is forced to replace tradition with ‘modernization’ and the tricky recycling of older religions in secular situations. The results, unfortunately, are tinned meat, and don’t match the prodigious cosmic energy behind buddhism. So the solution must require understanding the limits of the possible in the flood of globalization which can only commercialize the ancient tradition. There are solutions here, but I wouldn’t be able to find them. My main contact with India is via Youtube, and what I see is fantastic, lover the elephant gurus, but so not sufficient to offer free advice. The key to the future remains to be found. Osho found one bridge form past to future. But that is already sliding into the past as a neo-buddhist publicity stunt. It contains many of the needed keys, but the overall situation is complex.
What we can forget in all this is that the Hindu core has a mysterious vitality and is still carries a kind of hidden fire. But the overall legacy is at risk at this point. Unless it is the innovations of Osho, completely detached from the Hindu problematic, and promoting a revamped neo-buddhism none the less observant of the vaster field of Hinduism.
But original field of Hinduism, so castigated by modern secularists, is a kind of superrich mulch heap and contains the fertile seeds that seem lost now in its various derivations.
This is really a question: does Buddhism contain the seeds of its future successor. We can see that it probably doesn’t. It will transpose just as Jainism did into a popular religion of nostalgia as we seen in Jainism after Mahavir. The successor will restart with new coordinates. It is a puzzling phenomenon, exposed at once by my ‘eonic’ timing analysis. Buddhism seems to be following that path as a religion of householders. Its extra-social world renouncers and wandering mendicants has been left behind and we see a kind of samsaric cult of ancient buddhas, a nostalgia club, now buttressed by the obscure sidewinder in Tibetan Buddhism.
This beautiful puzzle is also an ominous labyrinth in which one can lose one’s way. In the nonce neoliberalism, globalization, and Hindu fundamentalism/nationalism we see a nexus that won’t drive the future. But that’s just the problem. It might well drive the future and drive out the real live core. At one and the same time there is a mysterious broader core that can provide the yeast for a new cycle of religious continuity. Osho’s prophetic trial shows one way to that future, but we can’t easily see the way to proceed. The reason, to me, in my study of historical dynamics, is obvious: the core modern transformation was displaced to Western Eurasia, and everything ended up being jumpstarted to a Westernized format which cannot process the Indian complexity. So the guardians of this legacy are in trouble, because the large-scale slingshot that sent Buddhism out of the staring gate is absent in the modern case. But let me point out that the modern transition almost instantly produced or reproduced the core tradition: consider the transcendental idealism of Schopenhauer, instantly reccyling the core psychology. So it is not true that the modern rational Enlightenment is hostile to the Upanishadic psychology.
But the next best thing shows the way that Hinduism/Buddhism have shown a remarkable expansion in the context of modernity. So this secondary effect offers the promise and the opportunity of a second coming. But the dynamic perceived here offers no guarantee of success, especially in such a complex and confusion universe of religions. We are tempted to recycle the Buddhist model, but this sidewinder is not going to spawn a successor, unless, as with Osho’s work, the result breaks old habits and allows creative regeneration.
So we stop here, with a challenge to core ‘Hindus’ to survive the secularist destroyers, the economic havoc, and the reactionary trend as in Hindutva. This would require something ten times smarter than what Gautama produced. But whatever the case, the basic format of Buddhism shows the stripping away of endocentric religion in the expansion of gaze to a universal group.
So this hopeless confusion of Hinduism remains the core vital hearth for a new root stock. The solution requires the genius of a buddha, and yet with an insight into the core Santana Dharma carried by Hinduism, too often beyond the grasp of the endocentric religionists who are still thinking in terms of what must have been the Neolithic sendoff of primordial ‘Shaivism’, from which the traditions springs.
Shivapuri Baba is another of the amazing mystery sages of moden India, with an almost incredible bio.
I am getting signals next to those from Anirvan that a lot of spirits are ditching their conservative pasts and responding and moving to influence a crisis moment, evidently on the left.
Shivapuri Baba is an incredible figure almost lost to history, and an example of the way some of the greatest realized men in India simply pass beyond without any real teaching phase. Luckily J.G.Bennett came to know of him and wrote a book about him. I shudder to think how many realized sages have simply disappeared in the Himalayan mists.
Anyway, from what I can judge from his bio: his incredible sadhana started in the nineteenth century, his prior life a kind of upper class bourgeois life, and he came to the attention of Gurdjieff and opened toward that legacy, via Bennett. But many such are on the move now, beyond the reactionary legacy of Gurdjieff sufis feeding all the forces of reaction in a crisis. They were never realiable conservatives and probably gave it no thought.
Someone has pointed out that I couldn’t possibly not be a spiritual teacher. I protest that in the US that has no real cultural context. The whole game is going to drift into oblivion.
I have too frazzled by decades of occult victimization to play a public role.
Plus I was a teacher in a previous life. There is no repetition there.
I have, fortunately, no public persona, or public expectation of relationship. I was so mindfucked by sufis that I lived in the streets for ten years. I ate out of garbage cans for so long I lost my teeth. I used to be able to discourse very well. But with cheap dentures I can’t talk very well. That makes the guru game marginal in my case. Still, a darshan where disciples puked might be an innovation. Still want me for a teacher? Better surrender buster.
I can add further details here, if you like. And the sufi way is down the tubes. I think sufism should be scrapped.
But it raises a question: how can anyone be a teacher in the wake of Osho? Is the game like the Jain sequence of 24 teertankers, or a dictatorship of one buddhas for the next age period.
I would rather steer clear of this question.
I think that we are passing beyond the guru game. So there is no hope for the guru ashram format. Spiritual method needs to drop the spiritual surrender ritual. It is bullshit and the gateway to exploitation. The ‘path’ starts with Kantian autonomy.
We need to move the New Age movement to …being a New Age movement. The communist modernity was a new age movement. Can new agers recreate their work in that contezxt?
Everything that comes before 1500 is ancient history. It may well have have a future rebirth/realization, but it is prejudged as liable to be a carrier of demonic forms. Hinduism is so confusing I don’t even know what to say about it. It will have to take care of itself. Buddhism has cleared turned demonic. Ditto sufism. Xtianity is going over its Niagara falls. I have suggested a Munzerian communist Xtianity.
So what is the path? What am I supposed to be teacher of? The enneagram? It’s bullshit, but the honchos there will get past bullshit by spiritual surrender to the esoteric wisdom of the ancient gnostics. I don’t see anything in the Gurdjieff corpus of any value that can’t be obtained from mindfulness exercises. Almost the whole of Gurdjieffiana is useless fabrication. It is true however that the were many ancient teachings. We can’t judge those in the same breath as Gurdjieff.
Bennett has a lot of stuff that could serve as a spiritual means. But if you follow the deeper_d group (I am incidentally banned from that group, why I don’t know) you can see how Bennett’s work has been given away to Gurdjieff, his whole project turned into a doorway to Gurdjieff control. Down the tubes for most of it. But there is a samkhya legacy in Gurdjieff that Bennett makes obvious, and which should not be allowed to be wiseacred by Gurdjieff mythology.
As we can see these issues are hardly worth bothering with. Real teachers don’t peddle the esoteric junk in Ouspensky, whose account is so mesmerizing because it is a piece of journalism, not an exposition via a sutra. It is a flash in the pan.
I think I have a viable path in the creation of a form of communism that is a of exoteric (post-) religion/secularism that can be based on a simple western cultural thematic of modernity, with some history of the core of the meta-buddhist path to enlightenment. It is so simple you might miss it, the virtual church of the Holy Brick, depicted in the preface to Last and First Men.
We have moved through some dangerous terrain here, and I think we need to proceed with caution, in some new direction.
I need to at least point out that I am not a spiritual teacher, and need to warn some readers of the confusions here. You can see a lot deeper than most, even spiritual teachers, and still not be at a point of playing that role. One I never intended, but which has been recently thrust upon me as a successor project to my work on world history.
As a non-teacher I have lost twenty years of ‘meditation time’ for work involving other issues of intellectual study, and am way behind in that field. I am not really even in the amateur zone here. But such things are not measured in units of Zendo time, and the study of history has its own ‘path to enlightenment’, with a small ‘e’, but still nothing to be rejected out of hand. Ten years of homeless wandering in the West and living like a hobo counts as ‘living death time’ in bardo terms, meditation or not, a method beloved by sufi teachers ‘die before you die’, etc, previously referred to here as the ‘biggest bums in history’. I meant that, and the ‘living death time’ as meditation is dubious in retrospect, if attempted murder was the intent, but who knows, the sufis aren’t bad blokes, however little they think of me. Decent chaps on the whole.
Modern society needs help on the issue of evolution, and it seems I was delegated to that task, along with many others. The result sank like a stone in the resulting cultural sphere, but the real result is achieved, however fuzzy the result.
And just at the point of trying to reenter the new age field of meditation I have been ‘recommended’ to attempt a successor task to my historical studies: an attempt to cast the legacy of the ‘communist idea’ (and marxism itself, perhaps) into a new key, with the new tool of historical analysis, and its take on revolution and modernity, pace the economics of capitalism.
Whatever the case, I am not a spiritual teacher, and am not indulging in some form of ‘crazy wisdom teaching’. In fact, I think that my indirect job as a ‘teacher’, spiritual or not, was to remind the ‘new age movement’ not to be an old age movement, and to challenge the postmodern attempts to destroy modernity. In the process the signs of a new gestation of religion, or post-religion in secular society are becoming increasingly obvious.
One issue here is to expose the perceived problems with the Gurdjieff legacy, and we can return to that in a conclusion to this blog’s first mission statement.
We need to change gears here and move in a new direction. We have already brought in the work of Adhkyashanti, and can bring in the enigmatic and fascinating work of Eckhart Tolle, plus a few other figures from India.
Since we are out on a limb, we can indulge one last ‘completely tasteless’ discussion of the so-called ‘Jewish question’. Modern culture is in real trouble on these issues, so we need not apologize, but will anyway. The issue of a Jewish conspiracy was, ironically, self-destroyed at birth in the notorious Protocols era, but the larger question has never gone away, because there really are spiritual conspiracies, Xtianity seems to have four or five, Buddha a really solid one, Islam, you be the judge…So it is not surprising if there seems to be a ‘Jewish conspiracy’. A close look shows, however, that the idea cannot be proven, or shown to be consistent with a larger picture. But in the nonce we can see that Judaism and Xtianity have created a malformation in modern secular culture, notwithstanding the way the Reformation created what seemed like a resolution of the place of religion in modern life: the theocratic empire was dismantled, Xtianity blended with modernity, modern politics, and, ugh, modern capitalism, etc…
But the issue of a Jewish conspiracy emerged later in a way that has never been clarified. We should briefly consider one scenario, rendered completely vulgar and self-refuting, a tacit reminder that a real effort to make the case would fail but still poison the minds of latent antisemites. That’s already the case since the place of Jews in modern life is creating paranoia, between the effects of modern meritocracy, Israel, and the rest of it, as in our discussion yesterday of the way New Age movements are in a curious flux, and funk, here. People are suddenly aware that the official philosemitic story isn’t quite right.
Anyway, the version here is simply told in one paragraph, and there are many versions, none of which work. Unfortunately the idea of mainstream monotheism no longer works either.
So, as we examine the Old Testament we see an alternate reality peeking out from behind the text, a text itself a composite of different realities: a semitic polytheism, a Canaanite spiritual power, and ‘half-baked’ (literally) ‘Jehovah’ on the way to becoming a ‘one god’, but still an almost de-paganized local ‘god’ connected with a pair of cultures, Israel/Judah.
No reckoning of this mysterious circumstance has ever been laid out. And there is a very dubious but partly convincing version consisting of a genuine spiritual power connected with ‘Semites’ and generating an Axial Age transition, never quite successful to a new monotheism.
But here the whole question shifts into hallucination. Have we proposed paganism, monotheism, or a hybrid? Is our monotheism really a proto-secular rationalization of pagan divinities, now thought to be phantoms. But the ‘Israelites’ knew better. They knew some form of ‘god’ was at work, and in retrospect we see the misleading evidence that spiritual power had invultuated a whole people and like the Nietzschean superman this entity of the ‘god realm’ really was proceeded to a Napoleonic conquest to be realized after millennia of gestation. The strategy involved the war against the highly intelligent Indo-Europeans, and the search for their secret, finally found in the diaspora (the destruction of Israel being the ‘ace in the hole’ for this fanatic being who needed a deterritorialized ‘spiritual rabble’ to flow out into the Roman Empire) as the Israelites now ‘Jews’ spread across Europe and either in the blends of the Caucasus regions (as noted by Koestler) or the obvious Germanic/Yiddish connection the creation of new population group with a mixed semitic/aryan basis, and, the key, a potential high-intelligence core rapidly supercharged with the persecutions provoked against the Jews by this ferocious god intent on using induced natural selection to create a super-smart group, one able to master the new sciences of modern physics, and that key to geopolitical strategy, the child of the new ‘Einstein Jews’, the bomb. The tour de force off retaking Israel was of course the next key step…The realization of this plan in the coup d’etat taking hold of the American Government was one key in the master plan….etc… We don’t need to complete this farcical tale to realize that it touches on something real, we know no what, and this nexus, or spectrum of different versions, lurks in the unconscious.
The most obvious problem with this story is that it is not consistent on the issues of religious history. But, and here is the catch, it makes more sense of the data, isolated from its ultimate falsification, than ordinary ‘monotheism’ which actually makes no sense, never did, and makes out of a Canaanite god, a potentially viable concept, a metaphysical phantom, the ‘one god’. The latter may well be the ultimate truth of the matter, but the history suggests a manufactured cover story, serving the purpose of some other kind of entity, we know not what. The idea of a ‘pagan god’, like the god realm in Buddhism, is a pretty tall order of spiritual fiction, but attested to by most traditions, until the concept of the one god confused everyone. Let me hasten to add that this is not an atheist sentiment, the charge against the ‘one god’ abstraction being a critique of the confusions of early pagans turned ‘monotheists’, not of the unknown reality itself. There is another chord to this dissonance, the IHVH lore, which suggests some unknown esoteric understanding beyond theology of the ‘one god’, too soon frittered away in theological mythology, the new instant idolatry of so-called ‘monotheism’ rapidly morphing into the forms of ‘pop religion’ so resonant of the pagan versions.
The problem with our instant myth is that after clarifying some issues, it burns out in its own falsification. It does not square with the full range of evidence, quite obviously. But it exposes our doubts about monotheism, but the latter is not really coherent. We are left with a question in the rubble of the hallucinated Jewish conspiracy: what was really going on here in the emergence of monotheism, both before and during/after the Axial Age?
It makes much more sense to think that our ‘semitic god’ entity, no such thing, but still an unknown spiritual power, embarked on the creation of a world religion, and suffered the complication of two religions in parallel, a unique but dangerous experiment, at the end of which we find two ‘Judeo-Aryan’ population groups macro-evolved to blend, and in the process dissolve into the realm of modern secular futures.
This is a much better tale, but what is the truth of the matter: nothing suddenly makes sense, theistic or atheistic views. Just what was going on here, and how do we deal with the unnerving suspicion this spiritual power to induce idiot Xtians to persecute their “jewish” buddies in an experiment of artificial natural selection to create a new Aryan-Semitic then ‘universal global’ population upgrade.
We can see that our grotesque ‘first tale’ as to a conspiracy self-destructs but takes down the conventional Xtian and also the secular interpretations. we are left with a strange mystery whose final grotesque distortion was the Holocaust. But the latter makes no sense in any versions and is an enigma that complicates and confuses the core tale we suspect.
I think the much simpler understanding, already adopted by millions of Jews/Xtians, is of a spiritual history still unknown to us, and metaphysically beyond reach. But it seems obvious there are multiple conspiracies here from multiple religions, and we can’t sort them out.
We can at least suspect the problem with our paranoia, where there is no inherent problem. But we must be wary of theistic thinking, even as we are suddenly wary of their atheistic resolutions.
We are still left with the remnants of the different ‘stories/conspiracies’ and the suddenly tragic inability of secularists to deal with the false outcomes of the larger legacy, among them the abortive and hopelessly confusing modern ‘Israel’. We cannot condone that geopolitical power-grab, but we cannot resolve the issues either, in a context where versions of our first hallucinated conspiracy story emerges all over again.
I think, in any case, that, barring a really stupid obsession with an illusory ‘Israel of the mind’, whatever the reality, the ‘new age’ effect will increasingly undermine false ambitions and that the fading away of Judeo-Xtianity will clip the horror stories at their start.
But one must plead here, the ‘story of Israel’ has no final future, and the whole game armed with nuclear weapons and predatory geopolitics is no better than the anti-semitic conspiracy theory which is now regestating in the unconscious of many extra-Judaic people.
We are like with a reminder that we have no stable theory of ‘god’, religious or secular, and are liable to miscalculation.
I should inject, reluctantly, since it can promptly lead to even worse nonsense, the suggestion of J.G. Bennett that we are really dealing with trace evidence of the ‘demiurgic powers’ of cosmic and solar life. We can cautiously refer to that ‘escape hatch’ for an exit into a relative degree of sanity on questions that are completely incoherent at this point.
You may note how I omitted a reference to Islam in the previous post. It was not intentional, but was perhaps a fear of referring to it directly, in my habit of skewering sufis instead. In any case, Islam one begins to suspect was the result among many other things of the kind of disgust I expressed in the last post. Surveying the wreckage of their great Judeo-Christian experiment in monotheism, two religions at war when the intent surely was one, the disgust of the gnostic powers with religion must have far surpassed mine and the attempt in the middle of the new era to start over must have fueled a kind of desperation that we see in the explosive appearance of a third monotheism.
I will leave it at that, mindful that I haven’t, ironically, included Islam in my list of ugly religions. One must note with sadness that within a few generations the split between Sunnis and Shiites emerged out of nowhere to create a new analog confusion. So what is our judgment on Islam, given the record of religions in failure up to that time. We can defer on that, but nervously mindful that spiritual powers can despair of you, and their remedy may no longer bother to satisfy the demands that religions be ‘cute’ like Judaism and Christianity.
We have tried to be consistently anti-antisemitic here, often stepping into and then stepping back from an antisemitic quicksand pit. And this has alienated a lot of closet Jewish non-fans, if not antisemites. But the question remains, why were certain spiritual powers so fanatically antisemitic, if in fact there are such powers? I really don’t know, but what I suspect is connected to the evidence we see of a contradiction in motion of the Judaic and Christian realizations.
I have often wondered, but the one answer that lingers is that Judaism ended up unwittingly the most ugly religious confusion of them all, and the dark gnostic powers plotted its destruction from the start. I don’t know. But what I suspect is that in trying to create a world religion of monotheism, spiritual equality, and unified religious culture, the experiment unexpectedly created covenental Judaism and the unexpected claim that Jews had a special relation to God. This seed of confusion led to the runaway trainwreck of Judaism and Xtianity both, and the frantic effort to start over with Islam. That is in part unfair to Jews: covenental Judaism was surely an esoteric strategy to motivate a group of nearly hopeless case Canaanites (remember that child sacrifice of the pagan milieu) to generate a new religious movement in which their tribal context was the only way to get the job rolling. Note that Israelitism was not a universal religion, but a state theocracy. We need hardly go any further. One of the horrors of monotheism finds its seeds at the very start, almost before it had begun. But after two thousand years, we see that covenental Judaism was a successful strategy, if you are a complete pig about religion, and the result is a dominance of those pigs with high IQ’s playing evolutionary sweepstakes in the wreckage of the original attempt to create a universal religion. This, i suspect, is what drove those gnostic powers to an absolute fury of revenge, itself the endgame of a cycle of religion in the realization that the ‘devil’ had beaten them hands down, absolutely.
Who knows, that’s my suspicion, not my view, but I would suggest that the exclusivist claims of some Jews, if they still exist anywhere outside of Brooklyn, is fated, if we are lucky, to float out the window as a paper airplane. Make a note of it for the future, wrong approach, mon vieu.
Reading this blog must bring home to many the sheer repulsive ugliness of human religion. Everywhere you turn the field of religion seems to have produced something grotesque. There seems to be no direction in which you can turn to find something with remaining sanity. And it is not just a lack of awareness. It is more, a kind of disgusting spiritual filth, barring none, Christian, Judaic, sufi, Moslem, Hindu, Buddhist.
The New Age movement is approaching the point of no return, as spiritual shit.
But I think there is a new competition to produce something worse, and the case of the New Atheists seems to be in the running, even as they have sensed our judgment and begin to move away in revulsion. There could be a secular solution, but the onset of darwinism, scientism, and the rest of it is going to spoil the hidden strength of secularism. I think the solution is still obtainable and was foreseen in the Enlightenment, despite the incomplete narrowness of its achievement. The issues are simple: monotheism resolves to a Kantian reserve, and the religions of liberation, e.g. buddhism, resolve to the study and reflection on human consciousness. There is no need anymore to separate the secular and the religious. But, unfortunately, the opportunity there is likely to be corrupted by a false view of science.
In any case, to all the new age gurus out there (the term refers as well to sufi/Xtain priesthoods), your contribution to religious shit has been noticed. The resolution follows.
I think Mother Nature played a trick on Western modernity: the emergence of rational humanism became called the “Enlightenment”, a remarkable pun, that will drive the Modern Enlightenment to recast itself in a new form. Modernity has, of course, been wrecked by its first born, capitalism, and the resolution there remains to be seen.
Last and First Men will be out soon and will no doubt double the people in the new age movement who hate me. But the ‘esoteric left’ is real, although we can not easily pinpoint anything specific there.
The book attempts to bring ‘evolutionary thinking’ and religious issues of the future together. The question of ‘spiritual evolution’, however, has been the source of much confusion. I have tried to challenge the frequent misuse of the term ‘spiritual evolution’. On the other hand, I may have gone too far there. It is really unclear what place ‘new age spiritual practices’ could have in the future evolution of man. The question of evolution is much larger, and not within human manipulations. But just on that point I may have been too narrow. The slow motion shift from ‘macro’ to ‘micro’ is a feature of my historical model and can’t be ruled out. But the real original evolution of man is misunderstood by nearly all schools of thought. I can only point to the flawed but suggestive model of J.G. Bennett (probably a lot of posts on that here, from before) which carefully distinguished what he called the ‘hyperzoic’ from the realm of planetary nature. In the process ‘consciousness’ became a ‘cosmic energy’ and the evolution of man was given a design argument–with his demiurgic powers being the original guides for homo erectus/sapiens. This account is on too much speculative ground to really be trustworthy, but it tried to solve the problem in a new way. To say that ‘consciousness’ (he really meant ‘self-consciousness’) is a cosmic energy solves many problems, but only in the context of Bennett’s larger framework, which is ricketty in the end, and doomed to collapse. But the gist of his insight is food for thought.
Anyway, it thus becomes a question of what contribution the effort of ‘self-consciousness’, meditation in action so to speak, or ‘real consciousness/not mechanical’ can have to the evolution of man. New Agers by and large have not gotten it right. The potential to ‘real consciousness’ was there in the original emergence of homo sapiens, and doesn’t need to re-evolve. Becoming a realized or enlightened being with ‘real’ consciousness is not evolution: the potential for that was already there. But, still, the full scope of the question remains unsolved.
must stop here for the moment
To shovel dirt over the last post, some links to a lot of interesting stuff: jewish new age
We are moving into a new age of spirituality, so the obsessive concerns over religious issues are usually misguided and retrograde
I had a post a while back, last week or so, about the place of Jews in many New Age movements. I took it down, but I find that the ‘damage is done’ with even a short duration of a post, so I am better off keeping it online. It is obvious from Sufi orgs in the US and in Tibetan Buddhism that Jewish trusties are taking over those movements. The original people don’t seem to grasp what they are doing. This is a dangerous way to think, but the question should be faced, because it is suddenly obvious that most New Age groups are becoming a waste of time for most Gentiles. They are canon fodder in a larger game.
The previous post should enlarge this discussion. The intent is deliberate in some circles: recreate the law of caste with Jews and Brahmins and quietly remorph the new age movement in that direction. Hard to believe, and by far the majority of new age groups would never stoop to such nonsense. And the world of Tibetan Buddhism could never, at least in the open, violate the fundamentals of spiritual equality.
The issue is important for me, but not so much for the majority of new agers. I am not an antisemite, which is almost a miracle after my experience in the new age movement. But the issues that animate antisemites are being reborn in the way that ‘Jewish trusties’. But if you hand these movements over to Jews and give them some occult power as a bribe to support the tradition you effectively abort your legacy. I am puzzled this could ever happen. But it did happen with the Jewish sufis I encountered, and being in the range of target practice for these ‘trustie occultists’ doesn’t suggest new age loving care.
In fact, I don’t think the problem is worth trying to solve, the more so since it is at its core, originally, a simple issue of meritocracy, inviting people of Jewish talents to contribute. Jews need an exit strategy, and these groups have helped many reorient themselves.
I merely note that being the victim of occult mischief ambiguated by a Jewish front for sufis, i.e. or a sufi front for Jews, is quite unsportsmanlike, especially if the trusties have been bought to, note the stark paradox, be Jewish nazis. This is quite deadly. Who is trying to kill me? Jews or sufis. Blame it on the Jews. This is tasteless stuff, but it is the only explanation I can think of for the emergence of Jewish nazis.
Still one more dragon lair to avoid. For me, then, the issue of sufism is over. For the reasons given. But laugh it off. Things in dry rot fall into the ground by themselves.
Anyway, this issue and perhaps this post is typical of antisemitic fussiness that gets obsessed with Jews. I don’t think the problem has a solution. or needs one. But nota bene that some Jews see this as an opportunity, and it is also true that covert agencies abet this process. The whole new age sphere is going to end by being controlled by Mossad and the CIA. With the Tibetans, then, it is getting to be a waste of time for Gentiles, no? And the CIA connection in the war on terror, via trusties like Stephen Seagal, well, why worry, who cares. Tibetan Buddhism is a dead duck anyway. But don’t get killed by Jewish trusties with Tibetan occultism on loan.
We can sense what kind of mischief, what kind of collisions between Jewish and German occultists in the early nineteenth century contributed to the birth of implacable antisemitism made worse.
Anyway, this is another ‘antisemitic feint’. The hidden occult fascists perk up when they find a new potential antisemite in action and you come to their attention. Some of them Tibetan figures of some kind. The bilge in the early part of this post should constitute a good attempt, save that they are on to me, and this trick no longer works.
Paul, I am not a nice guy at this point. Also, relating with you constitutes ‘fraternizing with fascists’. I am a communinist. Communists shoot fascists.I in fact don’t shoot people, and certainly wouldn’t bother in your case, and since this blog is called The Gurdjieff Con, I have to make it OK for Gurdjieff walk-ins to do their thing. But..
But you don’t get it. This is the second time an attempt to consider Osho in the context of the left results in a Gurdjieff groupie rushing in to fix the connection between the two. I am increasingly realizing that Osho’s sphere would never get to stand on its own, and any leftists in a configuration of that type would be walking into quicksand.
That’s a pity. Osho’s work is an immense field of use to many in the secular sphere starving for some way to consider spiritual issues. But am I being forced to the conclusion here that any attempt to use Osho by such people will subject them to some really bad vibes, and it gets a lot worse.
I have also received a private communication from an Osho follower (there was a similar comment here in the open, scroll down) saying that the Osho initiative is over, and most of his ‘sannyasins’ have moved on, and wouldn’t want to see a continuation, leastwise by leftists.
I have to leave it there. But the attempt to create a hybrid of Osho, Crowley, and Gurdjieff is a recipe for disaster, or, in a greater likelihood, a new low in the New Age idiot syndrome. On the other hand fussing over such things is probably a waste of time. I read recently an article about kids eating dirt. It actually improved their immune systems. Don’t take my word for it. Research it via Google. Getting fucked over in the sufi, Gurdjieff, crowley, occult (and now wiccan) fields may constitute ‘learning the hard way’, if your essential self survives to find a real path, but mostly likely with the Gurdjieff field and the demonic phantoms surrounding Crowley you will be the victim of ‘devils taking early profits’ and you will end up a dead being with no essence. A human shell. I don’t know. Is that paranoia?
Anyway, I see no real point in beating a dead horse. The question of Osho has to gestate further, and it is obviously not up to me. But people who can handle these issues are going to be rare.
Anyway, Paul, understand my point. Fraternizing with fascists is not a possibility. Let me remind you of what you may not believe but what you represent, and how strangers might see you. Ouspensky with advanced reactionary idiocy wrote a book on the ‘future evolution of man’ in which he tried to recast the Code of Manu, the law of caste as a spiritual approach to the issue of class: recast humanity according to castes and they can ‘evolve’ between lives to a higher caste, controlled by the equivalent of a class of brahmins.
Is that your take on the New Age movement? If it is, then I am fraternizing with a fascist. If not, then what the flying fuck are you doing calling yourself a Gurdjieffian. To be fair, that was too much even for Gurdjieff, who buried some criticisms of that in his Beelz— But it is obvious that this kind of sufism will be an upperclass monopoly in hiding with outer nobodies like you spreading the word to the outer world. Scary, eh? Not far from the facts. I think that the esoteric world in the vein of Gurdjieff, or figures like him with a larger spiritual circle, have long since sold themselves to capitalist elites, plus others, using them to destroy modern democracy. I don’t know. I think Gurdjieff sensed that operation as he left Russia and took stock of the politics of Europe. I suspect he spotted the rise of fascism for what it was. It is hard to work it out. But it is important to understand that the Code of Manu is total bullshit. It never even had a place in real Indian spirituality. It was the grafting of Indo-European culture that produced that anomalous distortion/abortion of the original tradition.
It is clear from Buddhism, which never conceived of such a thing and transmitted a faithful caste-free sadhana inherited from the real Santana Dharma.
This is a difficult issue for many. Poor Krishnamurti, a brahmin, realized he was in a hopeless position and cursed his situation.
Consider how many of the gurus in the field are brahmins.
In any case, for a western movement related to sufism to retransmit that grotesque legacy via a Russian reactionary from the era of the Tsars is downright lurid. So, I ask again, what the flying fuck and you doing with such people.
My point is clear. Marxists denounce spiritual fakers for being class representatives in disguise. In the case of Ouspensky they didn’t bother with a disguise. I find it hard to believe we will go down that route. But consider how much effort was wasted on postmodernist imitations by new agers to fight modernity in the name of spiritual evolution. And it is all bullshit.
Osho’s world thus represents something for the future that was free from that. If we are persuaded to pass on from him we will navigate backwards to the same old crud.
I just made a statement about the ‘non-dual’ in the previous post. I rarely consider the matter. I meant that i often observe ‘non-dual’ thinking that I find dubious. But I can’t resolve the issues there with any confidence.
Beware of trying to ‘figure it out’. It doesn’t seem to work. Normal thought will try to use ‘dialectic’ of some kind to resolve opposites. But that is still in the realm of logic.
Frequently confused are two things:
the dialectic, i.e. a statement proposition and its negation, with a ‘debate’ trying to resolve the ‘contradiction.
triadic thinking that ‘transcends’ a pair of opposites via a third term. The latter is the source of considerable hogwash. Who knows?
They seem the same, but maybe not.
Neither of the above is ever satisfactorily resolved in discussions of non-duality.
People like Gurdjieff, or his students, have confused the issue by confusing the first and the second. i don’t know of anyway to solve the confusion save by the intervention of a spiritual power that can do it for you. People often sense the resolution of a ‘triad’ proceeding as an insight from their unconscious. Who knows?
Some disastrous errors are possible: people who decide to do something evil to transcend good and evil. That one is parodied in Nietzsche who must have enjoyed watching people break their neck here. There is no non-dual resolution of the resulting jail time.
The logical issues of triads and dialectics as representative of the non-dual show obvious contradictions. How not! It is not logical. You need a fast exit from thinking your way to the non-dual: What is the opposite to non-dual thinking? Realizing that there is no duality to transcend.
Reread that: there is no duality to transcend. And then its negation. This nutty contradiction shows that no way exists to think your way to the non-dual, although a non-dual consciousness will no doubt generate its own thoughts.
You are better off realizing that non-duality may represent a new state of consciousness, but that otherwise life in its wisdom is beyond non-dual separations.
Stand by and meditate on nature: its non-duality is real: you can perhaps ‘see’ it in action.
The works of Osho often went through a mysterious slow motion ‘dialectic’, from one thing to its opposite. Try it that way, without a metaphysics of the non-dual.