I started to review this book critically but suddenly realized that this subject matter is so totally confused it is impossible to utter a true statement of any kind. We have nothing to use as a yardstick, and the chakra system and the Gurdjieff system don’t compute in any direction.
Why would I get the left to take up the sufi soul question…
The issue of the sufi ‘soul’ question was active in my life decades ago when I briefly encountered the world of E.J.Gold and his circle of ambiguous people, i.e. fascist jews. This didn’t have anything to do with Gold, as far as I know.
My alarm at this situation was made worse when I realized the sufi handlers in the background seemed to be trying to create some fascist jews to use this ‘soul seed’ phenomenon. A very scary situation. As it happened, the jewish leader here seems to have seen insanity in action and retreated from it.
\So there it is: a reactionary right experiment trying to fix some ‘smart’ jews in a fascist stance to operate the ‘soul’ technology. To the extent that I get this situation rightly.
There is a funny law to life: such an abomination will undergo karmic/dialectical reversal and end up in the lap of the left, to the hysterical hatred from the right.
You know I think? I think this ancient spiritual technique is lost to civilization. And I think the demiurgic powers behind this must have moved in to put a stop to all this.
This was about the time I myself intersected with this soul question, in the context of a buttoned down pious western sufi, Reshad Field. I think he sensed what was going on, but I am not sure.
Just about this time I was conned into a kind one on one training situation that suddenly animated this ‘seed’ process as it flushed into the conscious awareness field as a brief higher consciousness experience, a form of spiritual candy, like dope except better. Out of the blue a mysterious Arab appeared for a visit with the girl providing the coaching and to the classic story of Mulla Nasrudin and the theft of his fruit which I had mentioned, he smiled and soon left, and the ‘energy’ of the conscious experience was gone. That was the end of that. The soul seed phenomenon could be flushed out into a state of higher consciousness, highly vulnerable to dissipation, and, with a rogue sufi, ripped off.
It was after this that I began wandering through the streets of Los Angeles muttering to myself so I guess it was important.
But in a way I was lucky: I had seen something remarkable and had learned a strange lesson, and, also, I was freed at once from any obligation to sufis. The sufi experience was over almost as soon as it started, and I was free of it, although such momentary experience of ‘enlightenment’ was vulnerable to mundane manipulations and was only an form of conscious energy and not the real thing.
I don’t think this was the point the the see phenomenon, which should be a background to a lifetime of development. So I remain unclear of what is going on. But I suspect the whole game is shot to hell.
But I am suspicious now of the way that esoteric gangsters have manufactured fascists. So I think the question should be flushed out in the open.
If I am right about demiurgic powers, we should realize they exist in the time-frame of the solar system, and their intersection with man is not on the level of cocktail party gossip: it may be more like looking at man through a microscope between tens of millennia and ordinary human time. It could take a long time to discover one of their experiments had gone awry.
I can’t fill out this picture or be sure of its outlines, but the point here is the left has by a kind of karmic rebound stepped into this quagmire as a result of doing nothing, and it is a question as to how a leftist challenge to rancid reactionary fascist spirituality at the highest level could ever be handled by ‘historical materialists’ oblivious to reality. Better hope the tooth fairy will rush in to give guidance as the xth/umpteenth Internationale sends in its sufi rat patrol.
It may be time to lock historical materialists in a Zen monastery until they can contact reality, and be ready to challenge the fascist core remnant in a number or spiritual constellations.
But the question of spiritual fascism, which I suspect was rampant in response to the Russian revolution through the twenties to thirties, requires careful study by the left, itself not choir of saints.
A new left has to be pretty sophisticated for the future that is coming, and my diatribes against historical materialism are mostly away to make a point. And let us grant that rightists were as afraid of leftists as leftists were of fascists. In a funny way the materialist bent of marxists has protected them, but at some point a broader perspective is needed.
We may be out of time to repair historical materialism. Order a rubberstamp marked ‘Refile under Classical Samkhya’ and the job is done. But actually this is a pretty good example of the gist of histomat and its exposure of ideology and religion.
I attempted to review this book along the lines of one commenter: noting that the chakra system is not appropriate for the Gurdjieff issue. But I suddenly stopped, needing to consider the issue further.
Confusions of chakra system and Gurdjieff’s sufistic system, February 25, 2015
John C. Landon “nemonemini”
This review is from: Higher Being Bodies: A Non-Dualistic Approach to the Fourth Way, With Hope (Paperback)
This book is the victim of a great confusion between the Indic scheme of chakras and an entirely distinct tradition referenced by Gurdjieff and incompletely discussed by him.
Gurdjieff’s discussion of higher being bodies is very indirect and he never discusses the issues of the sufistic ‘soul’ creation process. It seems he must have known of it, but discusses his thought in a theosophical brand of concepts. This book is most sadly off the mark and doesn’t grasp what Gurdjieff was talking about. The review of the book by Patterson has a lot of material on this, along with the comments there:
Soul and sufistic legacies
February 24th, 2015 · 2 Comments
I have been running the Gurdjieff Con blog for many years, but didn’t know of this critique. I will discuss it further over at that blog. But I have often pointed to the many confusions in Gurdjieff’s corpus. Unfortunately it didn’t follow that he was some kind of charlatan. He as a dangerous occult figure for whom the teaching was mostly rubbish dished out to cover the less public part.
I know of absolutely no teaching, including the buddhist, which has gotten spiritual psychology straight. People can reach enlightenment without figuring out how they work, fortunately.
I must interject here my discussion of the ‘soul’ issue in sufism, with a suspicion that this was what Gurdjieff was talking about. If not, it is what the sufis aren’t talking about but which transmits through their schools unspoken, and not often even there.
I have a suspicion people grow ‘souls’ in this manner, none the wiser for the whole cascade of gibberish on these subjects, not least the Theosophical. The structure is almost impossible to figure out, but the sufi world had a way to guide people with the injection of what I called the ‘plexus seed’ phenomenon which takes over the soul question. This method can be applied to congregations who are not experts in spiritual psychology. It suddenly happens to members of a group of students, who usually then disperse. There is no further instruction after that. It is this I suspect Gurdjieff was talking about, indirectly. I am not sure. His disciples don’t seem to know what was meant. Did Gurdjieff?
But he seems to be saying that early Egyptian religion was a source for this. Implying, I think, that this process was present in early Xtianity.
The reality is stark:
We have no traditions that we can reliably point to as expositions of the truth about man. The only safe approach is some form of ‘buddhism 101′, making it clear there is not monopoly here for ‘Gautama buddhists’. The whole tradition springs from primordial Shaivism and then passes into the forms of Jainism which pass into the brilliant recreation of Gautama.
This path does not create a soul, but shows the way beyond the samsaric manifestions. The theosophic whole nine yards can be filed away along with all your other mislaid notes.
Until someone can produce some real answers here I would be wary of the sufi soul game, if you ever run across it. Keep in mind that a real path has to be workable for a sheepherder at the ends of the earth who never attended school. The sufis and early Xtians were able to achieve this.
In any case, as noted, all humans of our species already have ‘souls’ of some kind. This is connected with the basic apparatus of man seen in the accounts like the Tibetan book of the dead where at death the personality is dropped but the basic human passes through the bardo world.
Sufis who enter this process (as I have explained, I intersected briefly with this, but aborted from the process) never see the source. It is not a function controlled by sufi sheiks (as far as I know) but which suddenly appears when that figure seems to think his students ready. The process simply appears and I fear most abort without being able to figure what is happening. Thus the secret protects itself.
The die is cast now. In the next phase of civilization these ancient spiritual technologies will enter the public sphere. In the nonce, stay with the ‘buddhist’ type path. Getting entangled with rogue sufis isn’t worth it.
I was a casualty here, I suspect, but have since recovered and moved toward a yogic type teaching.
Here another confusion arises: the emergence of Mahayana buddhism in concert with the onset of Xtianity.
– See more at: http://darwiniana.com/2015/02/24/soul-and-sufistic-legacies/#sthash.491x5T1W.dpuf
The question of soul is very confused because it is surrounded by disinfo and sharks like Gurdjieff who never quite speak the truth. But he did elect to reveal certain questions in public. We should grant him his nerve to try and communicate hidden traditions, getting them baloxed in the process.
I am unsure if Gurdjieff understood the sufi question of soul, or, if he did, whether this was theoretical without a direct contact with the practice of the plexus seed phenomenon. Idries Shah warned that two identical spiritual groups can exist together under a similar name, one real, the other fake. This dreadful possibility warns us to be wary of Gurdjieff. I see no conclusive evidence he was connected to a real ‘soul creation’ process. Or rather that he didn’t share that with his students, merely issuing public info. None of his students seem to be connected, and surely one of them would have leaked some hints (as I am doing now).
I don’t know. But I find it quite interesting to consider if this in fact was what was first appearing in early Egypt, or Mesopotamia as a whole. This apparently would have been seen in terms of the exotic soul beliefs we see in so many Egyptian artifacts, with no understanding.
What about Greece: they are multiple signs of spiritual schools and Egypt was but a boat ride away.
It is possible this obscure tradition emerged in early Xtianity, dying out later, and then reappeared in Islam. It is possible to apply this teaching to a flock of disciples without their understanding of what is going on.
But in his confusion, as we have discussed it here, about proto-Xtianity in presand Egypt, and this confused with fourth way schools, a dubious concept, may point to an obvious issue: we have tried to suggest the spiritual ferment of the high neolithic after 5500 BCE and pointed to primordial Shaivism in India (with Dionysus in Greece). In this context it is possible there was a similar phenomenon in Egypt (with another question mark about Sumer) and that this was a primordial type of spiritual tradition that later stages a reentry in a new disguise in early Xtianity.
The traditions of yoga and buddhism are open, with clear manuals and practical advice and have produced thousands of enlightened beings. The traditions here of ‘soul’ in the Occident, are nothing but a pain of the neck with almost endless bum steers and mostly the silence of the ages to the ‘exoteric multitude’.
In the ‘sufi’ version, the ‘soul’ question comes with a definite ‘plexus seed process’ sensed as a presence in the lower abdomen and while it can be sensed (a significant fact) it is somehow beyond the manipulations of the will. This is a process that apparently takes over the body apparatus of the individual and from there the soul in some new sense emerges. But the process just happens and comes with no Faq or instructions, and is never the grant of any explicit individual. Most of the time the process aborts, but there seem to be second chances here.
As with my case, people who speak are often those who know least, so the reality of this in the sufi world is unknown.
I have made clear why I chose to abort this process, and I got some ‘advice’ for other sources that during the bardo transition the seed core will be stripped from the body.
There is a great danger in this process given its hidden core of becoming a potted plant in some demonic sufi realm.
It is a dark puzzle, and hard to fathom but it is pretty clear evidence that the ‘soul’ issue is mostly chatter, the reality something dramatically specific.
I think however that this line in the greater traditions of antiquity has been a botch. Look at the fulsome glory of general buddhist (i.e. more than Gautama’s buddhism) traditions. They help people on the way and speak clearly of enlightenment.
This other world is very difficult to understand.
We have said here many times that man as homo sapiens already has a soul, and this is sturdy, but not ultimately immortal ‘forever’, but a basic construct that can serve his search in the space of history and evolution.
It is strange scandal that none of this is open knowledge. But the die is cast now. The reality is being leaked, and the next epoch will likely see some resolution of the physics of these issues.
I suspect, but don’t know, that this process gets confused with kundalini, but they are not the same, and in general all those distinct legacies are in a muddle.
I don’t feel bad about discussing this: the crooks who run this game are not trustworthy and until the reality is made clear without bullshitters like Gurdjieff and most other sufis, it is not worth the aggravation of getting into a ‘me too’ frame of mind. Do something real, to start: meditation in the style of buddhism. I doubt if very many sufis have any contact with this now. The reason my first experience ended in being cleverly sought out by a gang of rogue occultists who were able to coax this process to bleed out in a clever ‘theft of baraka’.
Much later the process tried to return for a second chance, but I refuse to cooperate and will abort the process as soon as possible. If I have not done so already.
This is closer to Mephisto than Buddha, so be glad you are not a part of the process.
But future science will have to deal reckon this in any future evolution of man. The time is not ripe, but surely ripening.
It is time for some foolhardy science jocks to enter this process and try to produce something for the moderns of the future. But you don’t call them, they call you.
I have already given my view of sufis, the biggest bums in spiritual history. Gurdjieff wasn’t the only bloodthirsty devil here.
Gurdjieff shows the dangers of ‘soul creation’ in this sufi sense: you crystallize around the issues of an ancient civilization and then rebound into modernity and are disoriented by the way the future wasn’t according to expectation. Modern civilization is not a decline, democracy isn’t a sin against god, and the the whole aura of the ancient spiritual teacher is grossly inappropriate.
And the issue of Ouspensky is a failure on the standards of antiquity: Gurdjieff was priveledged to deal with an ancient buddhist: Ouspensky seems to have been a venerable old Arhant and was not in the sufi mould at all. Gurdjieff had no right to trash this person just because he wouldn’t submit. Bullshit. Ouspensky should have been a realized buddha in a totally different context and never fallen victim to this sufi gangster peddling a hopeless muddle.
And the problem here is the way Gurdjieff has no standard of truth and simply spins the tale: the fourth way school refers to nothing we can point to in history.
OUspensky deserved better than to be destroyed by Gurdjieff.
The buddhist and sufi way are different: if you crow a soul you block enlightenment, and like Gurdjieff are able to reincarnate, here as a kind of demon. It seems like the way to go, but reality seems bizarre.
Reading Patterson’s book on Gurdjieff I am struck by the naivete, and the failure to see the context. In later years students would discover that Gurdjieff thought the peasants better off under the Tsar, thought slavery should be the norm, and that his ‘disciples’ should also be slaves de facto to the master…And it is worse than that.
To arrive in Russia during a proletarian revolution with this mindset was not only unbecoming in a ‘master’ but a totally reckless throwing down the gauntlet, in a period that would see the fascist reaction to democratic governments.
I think Gurdjieff must have been stupid, as are many monarchs, and provoked his own disconbolulation. It is part of the reactionary mindset that thinks modernity is a mistake and deserves to be taught a lesson. It is little wonder that Ouspensky balked. A teaching like this as he sensed wasn’t checking out. And his instiincts were right, even though he himself was a reactionary superidiot with his book on establishing the Code of Manu.
C’mon guys: this wasn’t the way to do it and I think that Ouspensky was right to refuse and move away. And he was right to think that the ‘fourth way’ (a phantom with some meaning) and the rest of it had to be independent of Gurdjieff: a student here could not be the passive slave of a ‘master’.
These people got asskicked by reality, and the irony is that the ‘teaching’ was actually designed as we can see for men of the future, free men.
Here Osho made one mistake: he said a few good things about Gurdjieff (besides his criticisms). The result is that the G entity is all over the place in the Commune. Unsafe against the onslaughts of attempted take over.
These people are dangerous for westerners steepied in the ideals of freedom: a war with the guru over ‘total surrender’ can break out and the ‘disciple’ is destroyed. This shows the dangers of the guru game in the West.
To be fair Gurdjieff in the 30’s so frustrated he actually contacted the Russian embassy for a visa to return to Russia. He was turned down.
I will try to re-summarize what I know about the ‘higher being body’ question in the book by Patterson. But this is not an easy or safe subject. I have a lot of enemies who attack over and over to try and debilitate me, and it is almost impossible to even work along a meditation path. But at this point ironically it can’t get much worse and is beginning to damp off.
I know very little here but I think the Gurdjieff brand here has failed. As far as I know all the people in the Patterson circuit have been used for decades to reproduce public information, none of them with any real contact with the ‘soul’ question.
The factors of soul in some sense are the birth right of all individuals homo sapiens, but it is not the same as what sufis are doing here. The confusion of the whole subject with demonic individuals undermines confidence in the whole thing, which is entirely masked by disinfo. You don’t want to develop ‘soul’ under the aegis of sufi gangsters. Best to forget it.
The questions of soul for ordinary religions, usually monotheistic, is more or less clear, and yet cluttered with useless beliefs. Clarification there can help. The situation is changing: the ‘secular’ age is trying to translate the core religious content of the monotheisms into a more contemporary format. But noone knows how to do that. The soul has to be the case, it would seem, for a creature as complex as man: his ‘equipment’ partly stands outside of space-time, so the question is, well…elementary, maybe even to Sherlock Homes, Watson who knows…
Gurdjieff’s talk of presand egypt fourth way schools simply doesn’t compute. If what he meant was a Neolithic Egypt cult after the style of parallels like the Shiva cult, etc,…all I can say is maybe.
The term fourth way school is a bungled concept and doesn’t work. Noone can point to one anywhere in history. But the concept was carefully laid out by Ouspensky: it is based on a larger concept of meditation in action that works on body, emotions, intellect, and a ‘fourth’ integrating factor. The definition sounds legit but garbled in transmission.
The Indian example of primordial Shaivism (not the same as the much later ‘Shaivism’ as branch of Hinduism, if you look at the robust images of the ancient ‘still present but’ Shiva ‘religion’ with its profusion images, practices, and hybrid yoga/worship with proto-yogis still embedded in the larger cult it is possible to at least conceive of how neolithic humans could approach a sophisticated version of ‘consciousness transformation’ (i.e. meditation) in long ago eras, and perhaps this even goes back into the Paleolithic. The point is that anyone homo sapiens can reach ‘enlightenment’ even if a technological primitive. And what is indicated by a ‘four term’ meditation is something complicated to figure, but probably easy if the right ‘energy’ is there, even for a person in the neolithic. It appears to be along the lines of a mindfulness technique except somewhat larger in scope. But Grudjieff keeps making things up, and holding back in all cases the practical keys to its use. So the idea of an Egyptian religious cult before the later era of the Pyramids is perfectly possible. But we have no evidence there. In fact the evidence may be so totally abundant as to be obvious, if we knew how to decode the clear outward signs.
Googling Shiva Cult
The famous Shiva seal is to me a strong indication that ‘primordial Shaivism’ predates the Aryan entry into India, but the point has fallen into the black hole of OIT/AIT debates.
The point is important because the core of Indic religion was been rewritten as emerging after the Aryan entry, itself denounced and controversial.
I think Danielou’s point, slightly modified, is useful: Dionysus and Shiva are probably quite distinct, but their historical legacies have a remarkable parallelism, and we see the overlay of indigenous prior spiritual cults with the much later Indo-European cultural religious formats.
One trick here is to demand all these gurus surrender to you. It is so silly it works. Craxy? At this stage it doesn’t matter. Actually as an living buddha in embryo you have the right to do this.
The past two years have gone down the drain in a mealstrom of ‘guru wars’ mostly mental, and in general very destructive if some process is given access to the ‘will’. Westerners can go into a kind of shock here as some process becomes more and more infuriated by claims of autonomy. Don’t give in. It is all fake. There is a huge closet industry of devils impersonating dead gurus. Whatever that means.
Obvious enough if the spell of the guru game snaps. Dead gurus are dangerous. Disavow the whole game, claim some distance and try to orient around some basic texts, e.g. buddhist. But dead Gautama is another ‘image’ for demonic standins. So that also is another throw away. Get the process of study done and then be wary of this collision of worlds.
The surrender game is poorly defined and spread between cultures and languages and can be a dangerous void, especially for westerners who believe in democracy. They can get into a spiral contest of wills that can destroy a life in the one technique known of surrender, same as banging a watch to fix it, or, here, banging a watch to destroy its will, nirvana at last.
Democracy is not allowed, OK? Be done with these ancient phantoms. The whole game must reinvent itself. Meanwhile westerners can be eaten alive before they know what has happened.
Westerners, dealing with dead gurus, forget that freedom and democracy are part of the total surrender package. The whole fascist game needs to go down the tubes.
Time to just junk the whole of these legacies and start over.
Buddhist introductions to the path of enlightenment don’t allow these ancient confusions. So that’s all that’s left. It was designed that way: buddhism was the first great vehicle of India to speak transculturally.
The issue of Osho is irrelevant at this point. He is no exception and is in any case too easily impersonated by entities trying to destroy his teaching.
The demand for work with a living guru is very hard and condemns the majority to the dead zone of imaginary paths. In a global culture a new type of path has to be found.
I should have realized this years ago when I approached Rajneeshpuram on foot in Oregon. A sudden experience of spacelessness was a case of mysterious darshan, but only much later did I realize it had nothing to do with Osho: there is a larger field of some kind.
In any case, the situation as posed in new age literature is hopeless. Another way is needed.
This is a dangerous situation: thousands are being victimized by dead gurus, and the people at the source ashrams are not going to help anyone here. The Osho commune is strictly business at this point and the idea of getting some kind of advice three thousand miles away is a sick joke.
This leaves the sudden question, what about everyone’s dead guru Jesus? Same problem, same station. But the larger world of the Xtian world has a larger circle of protection and generally seems to just put everyone in deep freeze, safe at last?!
You have to wonder if anyone in our species has anything left after the ceaseless plunder of spirits.
In any case claims about ghosts won’t stand up in court. You are classified as crazy, period, if you try to discuss the situation. Behind the outward tales of a few disciples the majority are condemned to confusion.
From now on I brook no quarter with the guru game. Real gurus should be able to warn of this situation.
The problem is insoluble: these outer spirits know their trick: impersonation forces the victim to denounce the guru. And the dead guru can impersonate the the impersonaters and plunder his ‘disciple’ displacing the blame.
I have to wonder how the early buddhist movement and/or the early Xtian communities dealt with this. At this point the Xtian magic circle is defunct.
I added a note here: I almost got sucked into Gurdjieff’s speculations about presand Egypt.
http://history-and-evolution.com/appendix/appendix.htm The appendix to WHEE contains an outline of the model of the eonic or macro effect and may help to see the place of early Egypt in the larger scheme of civilizations. All this is an example of the way speculations can confuse the issue. It is also true that the model is incomplete and the matrix of civilizations is almost empty around 5500 BCE. This prelude is an extension of the core model, and could be wrong. It is at least a reminder that the study of these periods requires some arduous reading in a library with research books on the Neolithic.
Gurdjieff’s material is like much of the older speculations of the type rampant in Blavatsky, and we are still in the realm of the Atlantis faithful.
Note: The idea of an early form of Christianity and/or the fourth way in presand egypt momentarily stopped me from seeing the obvious. The correlation with the significant period ca. 5500 BCE momentarily caught my interest.
But the general model of the macro effect exposes immediately the dubious character of the claim. The stream and sequence analog shows that in the cases we have there is never a transitional effect twice in succession in the same stream. The point should be obvious on other grounds: the period around 5500BCE shows Egypt in a very primitive state. Civilizations were barely into the mastery of pottery (an earlier Neolithic innovation). It would seem that Egypt in the stream and sequence aspect of our model is a completely typical case of a ‘stream’ history developing in a diffusion field (i.e. Mesopotamia, Sumer itself being before its major period after 3000BCE) then suddenly entering a major transitional interval as it becomes an exemplar of the master sequence, in parallel with the also transitional Sumer. A miniature Axial Age. This in the centuries leading up to 3000 BCE. A double transition in succession in Egypt would be a squandering of energy in a system trying to minimax a global integration with two tricks: intermittent sequences generating a mainline and starting at the navel of the Eurasian system, i.e. the middle east, and parallel sidewinders suddenly appearing after a period of early growth in a diffusion field. The state of Egyptian religion prior to 3000 BCE is unclear. This does not prove there wasn’t some early religious phenomenon somewhere early on here. But I don’t see any evidence. However the question of religion in the Neolithic is under suspicion of hiding something that leads to later developments. In the case of India, I claimed that primordial Shaivism, with its side aspects of yogis, begins in the Neolithic. But once again India around 5500 BCE becomes an object of curiosity. But again this zone is still in a stream aspect and will exhibit a transition only millennia later in the Axial Age. So the sources of Shaivism and the form they took, and whether yogis understood what buddhists and later yogis understood are unclear. The attempt to squeeze everything into an Indo-European mould in the period after 2000BCE doesn’t work. WE can easily get a hint or a glimpse if we examine the later cults of Shiva and/or Krishna (probably much later, but who knows?): we see how the practices of yoga can be carried by a very exotic and colorful general religious cult such as we see to this day in India.
I am getting nervous Here: I don’t have enough evidence to discuss India and Egypt around 5500 BCE. But something was happening we don’t see. Danielou, whose speculations require caution, points to this general period or later suggesting that the cult of Shiva and Dionysus were the same originally and spring from a general oikoumene of the period. It would be nice to be able to prove it.
But even if the details are wrong the suggestion that there was a ferment in the mid-Neolithic is highly suggestive.
It is interesting to study the Greek case to get oriented on the often confusing Indian case: in historical times we see the same overlay with the pre-Hellenic cults of Dionysus mixing with the Indo-European brands. The overlay in India is extremely confusing and has led to a great confusion of Vedism and Santana Dharma.