We issued this appeal to Mr. Kornfield, but these celebrities can’t be bothered to deal within anything like someone having a problem, or the reality that gurus are a bunch of idiots, and that you can’t have a New Age movement if predatory sufi sadists like E.J. Gold prey on anyone who starts to show signs of progress. Thieves of baraka til the next millennium, I guess.
But the rest of us need to see that you can’t have a movement if the gurus are perps, pervs, spiritual thieves, peddlers of black magic, experimenting on hapless disciples, stopping here with a short list…
So the New Age movement is over, guys. Best get the message.
As we have stated here before, and as Krishnamurti realized, the appearance of figures like Blavatsky and Gurdjieff (both covert agents??) shows the way the movement was confused from the very beginning.
The end of the New Age movement: time for the ‘fuck you, goodbye’ to this saintly guru gang of halfwits, cannibals, powermongers, and outright retards. Osho included
Once you see the cowardice of the reigning gurus on evolution, and many other issues, no doubt, the New Age movement is over for you and you need to disavow all your allegiances in that regard. It may be a salutary moment of reckoning for what was, and could only have geen, a transient phase of world religion. We can’t reconstruct modernity on the basis of gurus and their ashrams. So, at some point we are simply going to get into a contradiction, and be ejected willnilly.
As some noted, there were a lot of posts from last week that I withdrew: they were explosive. I found out the limits of Osho’s field and at one and the same time was attacked by a series of anonymous also-critics (enemies) of Osho. At this point I am no longer on anyone’s side and can’t be relied on to defend anyone in this morass, which shows the New Age movement starting to self-destruct. In fact, the evidence for that was obvious already in the seventies, and people like Da Free John simply created as shortcircuit, even as the dishonesty of the guru world came into thundering obviousness.
Despite my defense of Osho as an exception here, given his relative modernity, my excessively fan-club view of Osho must be pointed out. In any case, I can’t proceed to do anything with his legacy if I can’t even communicate with his sannyasins. And the mismatch between jet set Club Med seekers and communist revolutionaries is a bit stark.
I think Osho is desperate: his legacy won’t survive as a Club Med tantric yoga jetstop.
This review was momentarily frustrating because Descent of Man Revisited was a systematic effort to expose the Darwin paradigm, and to point out the failure of Darwinism on human evolution. I cited Bennett because he understood the problems with Darwinism, and proposed a completely unproven thesis about demiurgic powers on that score. I have a funny sense Bennett is right, but the model of evolution he uses won’t satisfy critics.
At one and the same time, Bennett was clear almost a generation ago that natural selection won’t work as a mechanism of evolution. For this and other reasons he has been ostracized.
To all the gurus out there let us note their hypocrisy on evolution. Almost without exception they got the message that if they critique darwinism they will be hounded out of celebrityville for gurus. All of them, without exception, Osho included, have simply lied about the question.
Buddhists in the US have toes the line out of confused belief, in most cases, showing the weakness of that form of buddhism in decline.
So this review is frustrating. I did a lot of work at my own expense to create a clear debriefing of darwnism and put in a few sections that New Agers could use, with a short reference to Bennett. I got no response whatesoever from New Agers, who are obviously so scared of what happens to Darwin critics that they shut up for good on the subject.
But you can’t propose a serious sadhana that compromises with Darwinism. Period. So almost all these New Age paths are built on a gross set of errors.
Study the material on that point, which is free online at descentofmanrevisted.com
This is an Amazon review of my Descent of Man Revisited, and I am stunned that someone in the New Age movement could actually manage such a horrifically difficult task for the apostles of No Mind.
But it is an idiotic review. I am the first person, outside of cult circles, in the last fifty years to even mention Bennett in general discourse. The simple mention of such a writer would get most professors fired from their jobs.
The point of my book was not to present Bennett, who is mentioned in two textboxes in the text, in a book whose subject is somewhat different. My reward for that is this idiot review.
The text, however, may well be too much for many. I am not a part of the publishing circuit where editors routinely rewrite texts for commercial potential. I can’t risk doing that with my work due to the danger of the conceptual distortion that would arise.
I was reluctant to bother since the New Ager groupies of Bennett will start fussing over any interpretation that isn’t by the book, while outsiders will complete puke up Bennett’s strange combination of of ideas, and his totally conjectural take on human evolution.
Bennett’s book is hardly clearer than mine. I must be one of the few people who have read it in all four volumes, and will the background to see what he is doing. E.g. general relativity. Which is not soundly used, but provocative nonetheless.
That’s the danger of a movement like that of Gurdjieff: the reign of authoritarian dogma is total, and this aura seeps out and perverts the work of Bennett, who is taken as a kind of adjunct to Gurdjieff’s pack of lies.
Actually Bennett showed the way out here and exhibits influences that have nothing to do with Gurdjieff. Separating the two is probably hopeless, as the life work of Bennett goes down the tubes. This review will be a reminder to me that trying to deal with Bennett is going to be a waste of time.
I cited him because his view of human evolution is unique in its speculative daring. But it remains speculative and can’t be put into the category of ‘must believe’ that attends to criminal mafia cult of Gurdjieff.
Bennett is a good reminder to scholars to NEVER trust figures like Gurdjieff, nor prostitute your methods to provide propaganda for that racket. Bennett, pitifully, teetered on the verge of that mistake and the result is that the Dramatic Universe has an inconsistent argument.
Let me note that Bennett’s work was greatly diminished by the many strange things that he lets pass in this book. He makes things up or else gets them from who knows where, and the result is a treacherous minefield.
In this major new work the leading philosopher Slavoj Žižek argues that philosophical materialism has failed to meet the key scientific, theoretical and political challenges of the modern world, from relativity theory and quantum physics to Freudian psychoanalysis and the failure of twentieth-century Communism. To bring materialism up to date, Žižek proposes a new foundation for dialectical materialism. He argues that dialectical materialism is the only true philosophical inheritor of what Hegel designates as the speculative approach of thought – all other forms of materialism fail. In Absolute Recoil, Žižek offers a startling reformulation of the ground and possibilities of contemporary philosophy.
I suspect, but can’t be sure yet, that Zizek is in part reacting to my new Last and First Men which contains a critique of historical materialism, and an indirect challenge to ‘dialectical materialism’. The strategy of the book looks to be bullshit in action: accept the challenge to materialism, but then propose the same old marxist nonsense as the answer: mystification via the promotion of ‘dialectical materialism’. It won’t work anymore, although the Zizek fan club, and the commercial potential of Zizek will give jaded marxism a new boost. The critic of ideology is an ideologist himself. And the terrain of Hegel to Marx/Engels is so easy to jargonize/mystify that almost anything is possible…
You cannot resolve the problems of physics with dialectical materialism.
he New Prime Minister
India’s Dangerous Lurch to the Extreme Right
by GRAHAM PEEBLES
The landslide election earlier this month of Narendra Modi does not bode well for the 800 million or so Indians living in destitution, or the 120 million minority Muslims in the country, or the Adivasi (indigenous) people and Dalit groups sitting on resource-rich land in Orissa, Jharkhand and elsewhere. He may well come from a humble background, but Mr. Modi’s loyalties lie firmly with the corporations of India, not the chai wallahs working the train station at Vadnagar in Gujarat State like his father once did. And certainly not the Adivasi families being forced from their homes to make way for multi national bulldozers, or the marginalized millions on the fringes of India’s cities living in tin shacks with no sanitation or health care, where children play alongside open sewers, and women work on mountains of refuse collecting Chinese plastics for a few rupees a day.
Modi is a far right Hindu Nationalist whose election suggests India is “entering its most sinister period since independence.”[The Guardian] Hindu nationalism is an exclusive club made up of upper-caste Hindus who form the ruling elite; it is of course closed to the devout worshipers from the lower castes. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) openly promotes the ideal of an India run by and for Hindus. It is “quite open about its belief in the Hindu India…where everybody else lives…as second-class citizens.” Modi’s rise to electoral stardom is a “terribly sad thing and something to be ashamed of.” [Arundhati Roy]
His election campaign was the most expensive ever staged in India, funded as all these political games are by the men with the money. The billionaires and millionaires, the rupee resplendent corporations that own India; her sacred putrid rivers; the forests and bauxite rich mountains; the media – print, radio, Television, the schools, hospitals and water ways. Everything of value, catalogued within the business portfolios of a tiny few, whilst the majority starve, defecate in public, are violated, exploited, ignored.
Last and First Men:
1848+: Capitalism, Communism, and the End of History
Review copy selections: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/75650151/LFM_review_copy_selections.pdf
At a time global social crisis the legacy of communism deserves a re-examination freed from its Second Internationale and Bolshevik legacies. Capitalism and communism emerged together at the climax of the modern transition, the first as new form of economic development, the second as a commentary and exit strategy of what were seen from the start as the Faustian comprises veiled in capitalist ideology. The idea of communism was thus always the first and best candidate by definition for the ‘end of history’. In a period of global peril and the delusive actions of capitalist despoilers the idea for a New Communism emerges naturally as a way to explore the true meaning of the ‘end of history’.
From the Introduction
Capitalism was easy. Now comes the hard part. At a time of rising social crisis in the outcome of globalization, the place of capitalism is coming under intense scrutiny. It is ironic, and this has always been so, that at its moment of triumph, everything turns sour with the culture of markets, and its manic style. The defenses of capitalism, beside their mirror image in the debates over communism, have tended to seem irrefutable given the evidence of economic transformation, the mesmerizing ideology of laissez-faire. There the Hegelianized propaganda of the ‘end of history’ has created a powerful set of illusions. But now suddenly the prospect that we are all ‘dead by economy’ changes one’s view of the matter as the point of no return seems to have arrived in the form of the Faustian endgame in the accelerating destruction of the ecological base, and the dire scenarios of global warming. All at once the charge of utopianism, so often applied to the communist idea, flips to capitalism itself.
The ideology of the ‘end of history’ in a finesse using Hegelian historicism disguised behind Nietzschean nihilism and sociological reductionism, with a hidden Social Darwinist diatribe hidden in the charges against the ‘last man’, dealt a teleological ace from the bottom of the deck. But the illusion of capitalist inevitability fades fast once we see that the last men are the monomaniac free marketeers, demented enough to pursue with ‘apres moi’ indifference the destruction of a planet for the last ounce of profit, ‘Who cares? One will be dead before the apocalypse’. The last nemesis of the profit obsession living in the eternal present of capital accumulation is degenerating into a kind of madness, losing contact with reality. One of the most dangerous aspects of the situation is the lunatic unreliability and deception of corrupted and confused economists whose theories we will have to sort out as external amateurs. The experts are in curious Wonderland of theory. We have a strange situation where the most intelligent are confusing themselves with facile delusions erected from calculus. Outsiders are paralyzed by this situation, but must decipher mathematical propaganda alone.
Readers of The Preface to Last and First Men know the warning given to leftists to be wary of sufi mindcontrol methods: getting your enemies to kill each other off.
Using psychics to transmit hate magic behind anonymous or an unsuspecting someone else’s identity.
I had almost given up on the Rajneesh world in the mid to late eighties, but they out of the blue came Osho’s Communism and Zen Fire Zen Wind, a studning sign not all gurus were reactionary stuff animals, and I conceived a project to create bridge between the new age world and communism (the original idea goes back to the seventies).
The idea expanded as I wrote Last and First Men, but now all of a sudden I see I have wasted all my time on this. If I had had the money to visit the ashram in India I would have seen at once that I was wasting my time. What a dreary horror of new age goofs.
As Last and First Men comes out we disassociate with an Osho commercial enterprise and look beyond the format to a remarkable set of symbols for the Indian tradition.
Here’s the online version of Last and First Men: I recommend it to New Agers, in general, and it can help to orient toward the future.
I have finished what I wanted to do, with respect to a new communist project related to an Osho lineage, but the result is no response, not surprising since I am universally hated, so I should move on, leaving the questions raised, questions of value, to be pursued in a meeting of leftists and sanyasins. It seems the Osho commune will sink into neoliberal worlds, it needs a radical bent. There is a chance the whole commune movement will simply disappear.
My gesture provokes hatred, but the deed is done. i think Osho is chasing me away, so I will take the hint. The rest will follow from some new source. But that source confronts a difficult task.
I thus think my suggestion, if its mine, of a Jain like sequence of 24 Buddhas in the buddhafield there remains of profound future value. Leftists might approach this world in quiet perhaps anonymous visitation. They too must reserve their surrender lest they become agent drones of feral ghosts thought to be the holy master. Maybe it is already happening there.
If this required an outsider, the Commune has a problem.
The buddhafield needs someone beside me here, but evidently most are still unable to see the chance. This is a task I cannot perform. I have no further connection with Osho, but note that outsider was needed, very briefly. Sannyasins are missing something.