I have to move on and stay away from the Osho zone, although I can’t be sure what is going on. Future sannyasins need to consider how to deal with crossinvultuation of sannyasins by rogue demons like Gurdjieff. That of course is what his enemies want: scare people away. But the danger is real of demonic Osho phantoms interacting with sannyasins.
Don’t graft the two things together, and skip Aleister Crowley.
I am an outsider, so my testimony is up in the air. But the problem remains.
I think sufism is worthless at this point for westerners. The seed plexus phenomenon is unsafe at this point, and flunks security 101: clear statements from honest people about that is going on.
Meanwhile it is important to try and understand your path to enlightenment: it cannot come form a dead buddha giving instructions via the astral plane!
The Osho world seems to lack the ‘refuge’ option in buddhism. But I wouldn’t put much stock in that either.
Put yourself in charge of your ‘path’. Don’t deal in surrender games with dead entities. There can be all sorts of exceptions here, but in general the whole game is insecure.
Tracking down the reincarnation of Ouspensky to eliminate him and take over a monopoly of the so-called ‘work’
As per previous post: the suspicion is that Gold et al. want to track down the reincarnation of Ouspensky and destroy him in order to create his (jewish) monopoly of the ‘work’ franchise, a very lucrative, as it were, form of once sufistic spiritual activity. The spiritual cannibalism factor makes the Ouspensky corpus, one of the greatest success of spiritual advertising ever, a gross temptation. But Ouspensky made it through and is trying to debrief the ‘Gurdjieff Con’.
Didn’t I make it clear already? The sufis are all con artists.
I am suspicious of this Tibetan system re: reincarnation. If the lamas have the powers stated why won’t they help people in need to find out their reincarnations. We have discussed here the way I have been confused with the reincarnation of Ouspenksy and subjected to black magic attacks as if that were true. That is a revealing suggestion of the total lack of ethical behavior in the sufi world.
In general, a worse situation is frequent, I am sure: people reincarnate, some spiritual people find out, and, failing to inform the victim, exploit them without their knowledge.
It would be of great help if the reincarnation of Ouspensky could be found, to stop these monsters from attacking me to take control of the Ouspensky legacy.
http://www.kheper.net/topics/Gurdjieff/Gurdjieff.PDFThis link from one of NK’s comments is helpful.
I have long been critical of the enneagram on mathematical grounds, and this version below is of interest. To me the whole proposition is absurd. It is actually move useful to ditch the enneagram and to consider its simpler version: a sequential logic of seven term systems, and the ‘law of three’. Scientists have struggled for a long time with reality. To challenge all that with unsupported claims for the ‘law of three’ is unacceptable, especially from a con artist like Gurdjieff. Note that the enneagram is innocent of the distinction of rational and irrational numbers. To base a system on the rational numbers (consider 1/7 as a repeating decimal) seems ludicrous as a symbol of universality.
Read the rest of this entry »
A review of one the flood of enneagram books now turning mainstream. Given the fraud behind this new age junk It is important for new agers with some math training to help expose this barren nonsensee from someone too dishonest to care about corrupting public knowledge. Gurdjieff’s brazen invocation of esoteric Christianity makes it easy to exploit gullible Christian believers.
The baseless confusion of the enneagram myth/hype, March 24, 2015
This review is of: The Enneagram: A Christian Perspective (Paperback)
The material left behind on the enneagram remained relatively sidelined for decades until the key to hyping it appeared in the claims of its use for the study of personality types, a very peripheral species of junk science that created the illusion of making sense.
The enneagram is a completely unfounded form of new age symbology that has never received any clarification. It was expounded by Gurdjieff whose manner was to claim something was esoteric, presenting an outer teaching whose secret content is never revealed. This makes critics prone to pause, lest they confuse the outer wrapper with the content in question. The point is that everything said in public about the enneagram is falsely claiming to explicate a subject too esoteric to reveal in public. There is a better explanation here:: con men at work.
This issue has been further confused by the support given by two student Ouspensky and J.G.Bennett. The latter, who should have known better, gave the subject a pass, although he seemed to have been clearly wary of the symbolism.
No clarification of the nonsense of the enneagram has ever been put forth, and the Nashqbandi sufis, who should have attempted clarification, but instead revealingly changed course with another version of this fraud, the enneagon of Oscar Ichazo, who denounced the enneagram as unscientific. This situation should alert scholars of the danger of using this junk thinking. But now we see an increasing flood of bad treatments of the subject, moving to the core of Christianity.
The attraction to Christians arises from the failed attempt to rejustify the question of the Trinity with something supposed to support its confusions.
I think what early Christians were about here was a possible influence of Indic Samkhya in the spread of Jain yogis into the Roman Empire. The Trinity looks like an attempt to recast the original triad of Samkhya as some kind of esoteric mystery in a veiling of the unmanifest. That’s confusing enough once we know that Samkhya was the reference. But its transformation into Christian theology was clearly a distortion of the original meaning.
In any case the quite different enneagram is confusion of seven term and nine term systems, with no explanation for the difference.
In the end the issue is a variant of claims about seven term sequences and the so-called ‘law of three’. This was the original thinking, overhyped into an esoteric doctrine, and matched to the enneagram in an illogical confusion of terms.
I think that theologians should be wary of this fake esoteric lore, and consider the opinion of many spiritual teachers as to the fraud in the whole game. Gurdjieff, the source here, put this question into the esoteric doctrine category, which means that doubters are at risk from some very dangerous occultists. This material should never have gone mainstream and is a front for some very unsavory sufis who know perfectly well the whole subject is baloney.
I think the theological community should pull away from this false lead into the realm of the esoteric.
The law of three and the law of seven are interesting thought experiments, but they have no basis in objective knowledge. Only a devious clutz as retarded as Gurdjieff would have thought it possible to get away with such a piece of bad thinking.
Comment Comment | Permalink
The issue of the soul plexus seed phenomenon is hard to assess. But this blog is forcing some answers. I am hearing that the statements about the Gold school are false: that the whole sufi soul game has retreated from the Gold zone and his followers. Great, I will believe anything when I see it. Trying to give jews special advantages here is something sufis would not do, so we are talking about something else. The Gold school had no control over any of this as such, as per all sufis schools.
A fascist jewish sufi isn’t a promising venue, so I see the logic of ‘confiscation’. But then people who have something to hide will cover their tracks. There is a good chance I have got this question scrambled. But I made a determination to expose the question.
Whatever the case we have done the one thing esoteric gangsters dislike: public revelations.
But I can see that once again the jewish/Xtian boundary is the source of hopeless confusion and mutual suspicion and hatred. Clearly the Islamic/sufi universal category had to be the last refuge of the monotheistic riddle. And I don’t think it has anything to do with monotheism. Someone in this mystery is suggesting taking the ‘secret’ to a communist left: if they can create a serious civilization, sufism will move into it.
Further I am told that my experience of the ‘thieves of baraka’ episode was irrelevant: there is no shortage of the requisite ‘stuff’. In fact my account here has been inconsistent, I have often thought the sufi connection had been restored, despite efforts to dump any further plexus entries. The seed phenomenon pops in and out but I ignore it totally. It is odd: if you seek it, it flees. If you flee from it it seeks you.
The question arises: how become a transmitter.
This is a strange situation that might help to show buddhists and sufis their collision in a phase of globalization. I am at the boundary of two great religious streams, with a question for the future: how will this double heritage find a resolution.
Meanwhile students of Gurdjieff would do better to simply walk away from the Gurdjieff work. It has no connection with the path it is describing and promoting. That takes the cake for cruelty. A reminder once again that spiritual mediated by devils is going to be ‘not as expected’.
I suggest a way to deal with people as ruthless as this: the old story of the man with a million pound note. You can do a lot without actually having the money. if you suspect the reality sooner or later it will have to be revealed to you.
Here the knowledge of what you don’t have is almost as good as what you do have. And you can assist ‘sufis’, 99% of whom have been deceived, to not waste their time… Ditto for the conned Gurdjieff flock.
In general I must suspect that this issue is mediated by demonic entities and is therefore a dangerous game. And the prospect of ‘immortality’ if that means a million years as a devil who never knows his master is not a pleasing prospect.
Buddhism and Indic religion proceed beyond time. Endless existence in time is not really more desirable: there, that word, desire. These things are not commodities for desire.
Osho project down the tubes…demonstration of the two way murder racket..fuck you to Osho and gurus everywhere…
I have spent almost three years going over the Osho question with no result and at this point I have found what I already knew was the catch: guru/disciple relations are on their way out, and certainly won’t work on budding leftists.
But I think my intent was slightly different and the Osho field is a good one for historical materialists to study to as non-disciples.
I just got the demonstration of the two way murder racket of suggesting faces and suggestibles like me. Why stop at two.
Osho would not put a stop to this, so, granted the imagination factor, I am ‘out of here’
Cross invultuation is a novelty to me, for sure.
I think I have to fight my way out of this. It is my fault for thinking any of these people were my friends. And the danger of multiple guru figures creates the absurd sport of dead gurus to ‘hit on’ people and blame their enemies. I cannot quite accuse Osho here, but my time with him is over…
Wouldn’t they all over to make a public demonstration of the ‘non-surrender’ types murdered.
Fuck you to gurus everywhere…
Imagination or not, I think I was in a RFC situation re: the Osho commune and my ‘Osho project’. That done, and imaginary or not I feel now a kind of entrapment in one of the most open buddhafields, with the Osho declaration he had no guru, one nonetheless almost more authoritarian than all the rest. And this situation raises the question of how to deal with ghosts of dead buddhas. The Osho realization field mysteriously moved ‘beyond enlightenment’ and seemed to turn into chaos. Beyond the guru’s death that can get worse, and invultuation by rabid cannibals of the will, and demonic entities masquerading as that guru, make the issue of an autonomous path almost impossible. Dead buddhas don’t strike me as at all helpful. The past year has almost destroyed me, with ego intact, so I am suspicious, and must fight my way out to a safe distance.
I think Osho’s breadth/depth made him unique, along with his simple acceptance of modernity. So what happened?
I think Gautama’s initiative riding on the wave of the Axial Age had a massive boost that is only now beginning to wane. And Gautama had some connection with a larger field that included Xtianity in the later period of the onset of Mahayana. And this seems to have helped the ‘enlightened Gautama’ to calculate his strategy, deferring final enlightenment somewhat later in the new era. But the details of all that are lost, most tragically. Someone who could use the information is helpless here: he can become enlightened, but then simply disappear. He can somehow delay this and be present to an era overall. And in a further complication, we see the way in which the revolutionary Gautama started a war of the neo-brahmins to destroy his movement, and drive his camp from India, to the future of the Tibetan reserve. The great Hinayana field remained, however, throughout. So what was the real Mahayana? Simply grinding out boddhissatwas is pointless: they are helpless and won’t reincarnate as anything, losing the momentum toward enlightenment in the process…. There is thus a lot missing from the record and I suspect figures like Osho are forced to start over in a mystery. Is Osho simply dissolving away? Haven’t the foggiest. But a lot of rogue spirits seem to come in his place.
I am no longer able to resolve the situation and will fight my way out the door to a refuge of some sort.
Dead gurus are dangerous.
I tried to make clear that I have left the new age movement and will truck no further with the anti-democratic anti-modern bias of almost all new age gurus. Gurus and new agers condemning modernity and its own new age are going to either dissipate or end up in the fascist sinkhole left by the estoric ‘masters’ of the nineteenth century. Adolf Hitler couldn’t do it for them, so now they are on astral plane skidrow about to be put in million year jails in the astral asteroid belt. Osho left the impression of being different, but I think it hardly matters.
The whole ‘buddhafield spectrum’ needs to be recast for a new era: Osho paved the way but stopped. I am not his spokesman and confronting the aggressive ‘will destruction’ in the ‘vicinity’ am starting to fight back. So I can’t do much there.
So there is a choice here; living with a ghost buddha for an age to come, or creating something like the progression of 24 teertankers who came before Mahavir.
I have been critical of Cohen’s idea of evolutionary enlightenment, but it may be time to look at it again. But I think that the idea of evolution has confused the new age movement, generally.
My stance has changed for the simple reason that I don’t know if: reincarnation is true, and if so actions in one life can have consequences in the next. Even if this were the case, the result is/is not evolution until we define what that means. And self-evolution, as far as we know can’t produce species evolution, as far as we know.