The question of creating civilizations seems to be emerging from the Osho mentation. I think that this may have been the interest in me, via my WHEE with the issue of the evolution/revolution of civilizations…
It is an interesting question: we have data showing the enigmatic creation of cultural forms by Gautama, but we don’t really have the facts. How did Tibet turn into a reactionary formation. What is the place of an enlightened buddha in relation to history and the seeding of cultures. I think the buddhas must have discovered the difficulties here, and that there is something beyond their reckoning and ‘will’ to the future: do they still have the latter?
We are beset with the riddle of Xtianity and Islam. They both took over large regions of the planet, created a new form of civilization and endured over the majority of an age period. Islam is especially treacherous: we can’t easily get at the facts. And the hidden sector of sufism makes analysis almost impossible.
I will bet that Osho somewho the Ghost is trying to figure all this. At this point the Osho Commune, however brilliant, suddenly begins to demand some hard questions. What would be the result of ‘Osho Commune’ expanding to a cultural level? I am sure Jesus/Christ and Mohammed must have thought they had the answers, but the results of what you create ideally ends with a very realistic outcome!
It would be nice to know what the nature of enlightened Gautama’s influence was on his own succession. How do we explain the long term trend to the right we suspect in buddhism? Is the charge of endgame fascism in the collapse of buddhism in the nineteenth century correct. Whence Osho’s charge that it was buddhists who created Hitler.
I think it is a sudden revelation that the Osho entity is dealing in civilizations at this point…A close look shows this was always true. I think on a sideline footnote that his higher consciousness in death must have discovered the Nietzsche trap (which I tried to point to). Nietzche wrecked a whole civilization. Good to be wary.
The issue is complex indeed. There is a need for the development of supermind, but this seems to move past Enlightened, which drops the mind. Small wonder the history of religion is a set of trainwrecks.
I am left wondering from this article if I wasn’t being kidnapped for ‘info and tactics’ on civilization construction. That’s a remarkable symptom of future prospects, perhaps… Such a task requires caution! And fewer crooks…
Can even enlightened gurus manage this? One mistake and the creation of a new hell is underway…
But this leaves the question of the place of earlier ‘buddhism/jain’ experiments in history, and the relation of Mahayana to Xtianity and the latter to the issues of the Roman Empire.
The Osho/buddhism legacies will have a problem with the modern transition and its reversal of tendency beyond religion.
The previous post seems a bit alarmist. Perhaps, but I doubt it. In fact I think the new age movement of the last generation is going to shift gears: at the point that a group of people called gurus, with no differentiation between sufi, buddhist, hindu, or other ‘brands’, is said, tacitly (?!), to have the power of life and death in the name of surremder, exposes itself as using witchcraft to control, punish, kill, or simply torment for fun, the s0-called movement is over. At one point the issue, for some, never stated in public was a postmodern attack on modernity and democracy to create a kind of premodern authoritarian spirituality, with a fascist political option concealed in some of these groups.
The whole game is shot.
A spiritual seeker should never feed the surrender game at this point. The relationship of guru and disciple has never functioned through ‘surrender’ and is a function of respectful audition, no more. Seekers turned passive in the presence of a guru almost never reach enlightenment and need a ‘counsel for self-defense’ from outside coaches to help them maintain the vital autonomy needed for a spiritual path.
I think the whole game was wrecked by figures like Gurdjieff who, nevertheless, were outside the core esoteric fascism of the nineteenth century leading to the occult fascist movements.
Followers of Gurdjieff don’t see the damage he has done, with monkey-see monkey-do imitators like Gold, in undermining the possibility even of Xtianity. You can’t have an Xtian church when you suspect (probably unjustly) that Jesus was a Gurdjieff occultist and fascist.
I think that the sufi case is the most insidious, because it has no public definition, operates on rumor, conceals svengali type occultists with malevolent intent, and seeds the world of Islam with witchcraft, mafia occult wars and murders, and a generally psychotic style of forcing suckers into madness.
We need to be done with. And sufi themselves can accomplish this in part by giving the public accurate knowledge of their movement, its history, and downfall. No more lies. Or outsiders will move to destroy the movement.
We can’t exempt Osho here. There is an obscure entity in the death realm that is representing that once vibrant figure and we have no way to really deal with that. So the Osho is basically over, excepting many who with a closer connection to the story can for a foreshortened future still interact with the now dead figure.
Osho brought the guru/ashram game to the threshold of a new future, but stopped short and in the end left behind a very traditional ashram, one with a financial angle that is inconsistent with the real legacy.
I am done with the Osho context. I have no other choice, having been subjected to a strange persecution which I now think ‘impersonation’ from the astral plane. This is nuts, and terminates at once any further interaction with the ‘dead guru’ zone in this case.
This is ridiculous, and shows perhaps why the traditional legacies have all degenerated into near bedlam.
The idea that avowed cannibals like Gurdjieff are going to overturn modernity and lead us back to exploitation in the name of esoteric wisdom is an increasing sick note.
The new age movement is going to die if all its entrant seekers end up getting ripped off by the vampire effect. The predator sufis as we have named some here will pick off sannyasins at their leisure, but they will be hampered by the refusal of surrender. Osho created a very treacherous universe, with almost every form of ‘path’ included, including sufistic vampires. The dangers of sufis is that moslems consider it right to torment atheists, or non-believers. You can’t exempt sufis here.
It helps to remember that dead gurus are dead and can’t help. Spirits of the dead will come unsought to offer spiritual assistance. Not even worth considering.
A spiritual path is done alone, with classic information and indications. Consider the outcome of the Osho commune: a great start for tens of thousands. Now on your own.
I say this because the world of gurus sets up thousands to be victims of concealed corrupt spirituality.
Buddhism is in principle the core source of information, but its status at this point is very unclear.
You are forced to enter an ashram with a dead guru twenty-five hundred years old. Hopeless. Skip being a frozen buddhist.
And the ‘boddhisattwas’ will sabotage your path to make you enter the Mahayana.
I think a small core of Osho/Gautama plus a number of teachings in the ‘santana dharma’ mainline. plus historical study. The rest is a vampire game of predators. We have named a few here from the ‘sufi’ world, a degenerate mafia of malevolent persons.\
Keep in mind that the ‘Gurdjieff work’ has a hidden clause to appropriate all your spiritual energies. Work on self is not the work, OK. That means you get nothing, go nowhere, agree to be a slave, and generate energies for really sordir sheiks somewhere you won’t find.
keep in mind that Gautama introduced thousands to the path, in a far away land of India, with no newspaper, new age movement, sufi vampires. The job was done before the world even learned of his work, centuries later.
The enigma of consciousness
January 25th, 2015 ·
Why can’t the world’s greatest minds solve the mystery of consciousness?
Philosophers and scientists have been at war for decades over the question of what makes human beings more than complex robots
The figure Gurdjieff was once asked this question and he replied that scientists can’t find ‘consciousness’ because it isn’t there. This was a play on two forms of consciousness, one often called ‘self-consciousness’. That the latter is the ‘real consciousness’ is a point lost on many who have not explored the realm of meditation.
There is something very remote about this ‘real consciousness’ next to the mechanical character of ordinary awareness. The answer to the question then is that consciousness is complex and we con’t experience/observe its larger manifestation because it is beyond us.
/’/Note: we can take the suggestion of people like J.G.Bennett who call ‘consciousness’ a ‘cosmic energy’, in a system of principles more or less controversial but which raise the issue of whether man ever ‘evolved’ his consciousness, or whether it is an inherent aspect of nature that he must learn to ‘tune into’. The model of Bennett is problematical, but it suggests the obvious reason we can’t control or observe the reality of consciousness.
I think I should stand back and withdraw or caution my Osho recommendation (for leftists): the basic framework left by Osho is an invaluable resource, but the question remains whether the left can make any use of it. But my judgment has been the object of unconscious influences, so that means an objectivity compromised. The issue of autonomy remains in the red zone with these cultic associations.
I am not a sannyasin and I can’t see how a leftist is going to hybridize with a new age cult. But the larger face of Osho is a transmission of India’ legacy in one of the few forms that isn’t radically anti-modern and reactionary. It ought to be the object of some study.
But our remarks on spiritual surrender point to the danger here.
There is something to be said for doing Osho anyway: this is the only legacy that even remotely touches on radical issues. But the svengali effect of a dead guru is of no use to radicals. Still, the basic core shows a way to a future of religious critique via a set of potentials ‘paths’. But this teaching is a step to the reinvention of ‘buddhism of the future’. Its relevance to a global movement is the demand to study the history of religion, and the way the ‘new age’ is spawning movements like Osho’s.
We can’t erase all that with historical materialism.
These dead gurus will try to rig posts like this, so we should be wary of cloned advertisements.
I have to withdraw here because my opinions have lost their objectivity. Enough already of this question.
The guru disciple model won’t work for revolutionaries. But it doesn’t need to: the gateway to the ur-buddhist legacy, or sanatana dharma has a useful set of materials in the Osho direction.
A simple stealth visit or study could be enough. Reactionary yogis who think the law of caste is a religious requirement just might try to blow the brains out of leftists. Stay away from all of it. There is a core Osho/Rajneesh set of materials that could be of great help.
The danger to leftists in a culture of reactionary spiritualities is considerable. I think that the left needs to create its own spiritual legacy, but that is a perilous path and would produce bad results. Historical materialism was a tortoise shell of protection, but that won’t work anymore.
The overall idea is and remains a good idea. The left needs to study world religion at this point. So proceed at your own risk.
I restored two dubious posts re: the Osho question. I need to pass on here: I have overstayed my welcome in this sphere. But every time I move away I end up back in the same confusion. I think those who preach surrender should read the post on will. They will be so terrified they will never go near a guru again. Invultuation of the will by dead entities (dead gurus) is dangerous and can lead to psychological self-destruction. I am suspicious of a lot of cases, all of a sudden. Osho the ghost, which is probably a sufi having fun discrediting Osho is making me sick.
The sad reality is that casualties are discarded: very bad for business. If that’s true of Osho disneylant fuck the lot of you.
We already know this but always have to make exceptions. This game was charming but I am getting sick of it. I fear the spiritual domain is afraid the Osho circle is going to fade away. That’ their own fault for making it such a commercial venture. They want a sacrifice from outside free of charge to fix their business. Please, spare me. The price of admission is a total lobotomy.
I think that it is obvious I am not the right person here, and can’t establish any line of communication with sannyasins. So at that point leave me alone.
I think that the predatory attacks on outside intellectuals to rescue the situation is completely wrong in principle. And it is a good way to completely waste someone who has built up over many lives somekind of spiritual core. To simply rip that off to make a fake buddha figurehead is a really scary. Dead gurus are monsters. I can’t help here. People simply don’t relate to me at all. So that’s that.
The post on ‘will’ and its study is too remote for most here: but, make no mistake, those who learn the hard way that ‘surrender’ is dangerous are ignored by the groupies near the guru who have to look plusplus in public and are left alone with shallow ‘surrender’.
A whole new game is needed. Surrender is a road to disaster.
One of the ironies of the new age movement is the way it cripples thought with its surreptitious anti-modernism, its anti-democratic conspiracy to control ‘will’ via surrender, which finally makes consciousness mechanical in its manner of guru/ashram marashalling of people. A contradiction: then consciousness leads away from these tinpot dictators.
Breaking out of the ‘new age’ movement can be an excellent re-start to the ‘path of enlightenment’ which can start (no other choice) with its mirror image, the path of will: movement through history with or without an aim, project, or goal.
The archaic gurus here wish to destroy autonomy and replace that with zombie discipleship. There most disciples just disappear in the feasts of these cannibals, guru, or, worse, sufi. The archaic buddhism devolution into fascism becomes a thing of the past, whatever its remaining threat to modernity.
I can’t exempt the Osho Commune here, and there are obvious indications of its remaining ties to the spirituality of the past. My Osho project was a ‘serious joke’ designed to ensnare me in the Osho field in a sacrifice of autonomy. Osho didn’t much like me, so much for the project.
The modern world has shown few signs of comprehending antiquity and its religions, but it is not antagonistic one way or the other. The attempts to create a narrow secularism based on scientism will fail, but the many efforts to fight the modern age with reactionary restorations is going to fail, has failed already.
The path of surrender is degenerate and in fact actually dangerous to the real seeker. The fascist realm of archaic buddhism, sufism, gurdjieffianity, is a failing beast, close to dying forever.
The realm of gurdjieff is especially dangerous because it is a trap to create slaves of the ‘work’ who lose their autonomy, spiritual freedom, and become pawns in the mindset of medieval islam and its strange cast of thought. Say goodbye to all that asap. We have heard enough of the Idries Shah advertising for the oulala ultra conscious sufism. I have yet to see an exemplar. In the nonce I was always marked for murder for ideas of freedom.
Don’t be afraid of these gurus and sheiks. Spit in their faces: they may try to kill you or enslave your will, but as the game enters consciousness it fails for them: it must be a dark manipulation of ‘orcs’ by the ‘dark lords’. These assumes you have never ‘surrendered’ that analog to the billion year contract of Ron Hubbard. If so you must fight your way out of slavery. Chances are the gurus do not grasp the method of real slavery in the unconscious. If you have been caught, the escape comes slowly through the repair of your autonomy.
The victims of Gurdjieff are especially pathetic. Gurdjieff made it plain: you will be tortured until you willingly agree to be a slave. Make you way from this demon forthwith, and be suspicion figures like Osho became intrigued by Gurdjieff and may start to ape his logic.
Even poor modernity is a better field for a ‘new buddhism’ than the old. It is time to create a new path to consciousness and enlightenment for a new era beyond the Axial Age.
I have to force a ‘goodbye’ to my failed Osho project. I feel like I am constantly returned to this even though I can’t do anything further.
One problem is the ‘master game’ applied to trying to get free from masters. A communist project requires an entire recreation of the guru/teaching game.
Osho discussed the issue of ‘masters’ and ‘teachers’, citing Gurdjieff. From the last few years (mostly wasted) I have realized that Osho was set on some kind of similar action in the ‘master game’ genre, and the ‘dictatorship of the buddhas’.
Osho doesn’t respect the individual’s freedom, and I think that the shallow appeal of ‘communism’ is the context of neo-authoritarian system.
Perhaps I am wrong, but in case you are completely sick of me (speaking to sannyasins) I have tried to walk away, in vain. But now I have to make it stick.
It is pointless to keep harassing me with the master bullshit syndrome if I can’t even have a relationship to the commune. In any case, it should have been obvious that a commercial venture can’t work as a radical form of neo-buddhist radicalism.
I leave it there: could some sannyasins take a hint and pick up from where I left off? It seems the invisible realms of these ‘masters’ and dead buddhas are desperate. They need someone with my talents to do a fix on the rapidly sinking Osho project/commune.
Review some of my points and consider what to do.
But to me the master game is ugly and the ‘dictatorship of the buddhas’ is not a realistic project.
I have to be done with masters.
Over and out….
It is time for the New Age Movement to enter the modern world and start over on the issues of buddhism, yoga, monotheism (Xtianity, Islam), and gurus.
It is helpful to declare your exit from the ‘New Age’ movement: a funny thing happens, all the concealed/tacit conventions of ancient spirituality are suddenly void. A good example is the term ‘new age’ itself. That new age is phony: it really means the modern new age is a monster and the revival of ancient culture will solve the problem. It is not true and won’t happen.
Once you declare something as simple as that you are outside the whole crypto-fascist reactionary anti-modern obsession of religious traditionalists.
I think that the question of gurus is about to slide into oblivion. There was a concealed fantasy among reactionaries that if submission/surrender to gurus could be concealed behind ‘yoga comeons’ the modern mind could be manipulated to move backwards. That inananity is now sliding over the falls, gone.
We need a new form of ‘new age’ activity that isn’t dependent on gurus, and turned into the exercise of the student’s autonomy.
There are a lot of issues here, but I think that all these groups have to start over and consider the implications of modernity. In the short term most of this stuff is going to die of commercial overdosing.
People are so shocked at the critique of Gurdjieff here. But that, to me, is naivete. The surface makes sense, self-remembering as a mindfulness movement of the early twentieth century. But Gurdjieff exposed himself as a devil, and Ouspensky had taken note, years before. I think that seekers in the clutches of this devil have a problem, and they need to solve it by moving on. No use waking up in a future life trying to figure out if you are enslaved by a demon guru in a previous life. All the former students of Gurdjieff will be lucky is they even ever realize what happened to them. If you have approached the Work zone, but are still a faceless person in a crowd you still have time to slip away. Do it. Your future as a peculiar Faust here is limited to ‘slave’ and ‘total surrender’ Meher Baba spoke in terms of killing people if the guru orders it. That’s naive. Mere murder. The path of a total devil is far worse than that. And many have begun to wonder if any of this, not necessarily from Gjeff, was the way the Nazi movement came about. It is hard to avoid the suspicion that occult demonology was at work here, people like Gjeff being on the fringes, but sudden aware of the awful truth of what was happening. In a coming age we will have to find out the truth of that. But first you must never surrender you will to such demons.