Posted in Uncategorized at 6:08 am

After my Thurman challenge I have to be fair, and the Tibetans are mostly harmless and inert boddhisattwas, and move to a critique of the concealed but maybe worse case of Osho who behind the sweet buddha lies a total authoritarian who takes control of those who will let him and assumes the right to psychological dictatorship with the unconscious. I see now the way he has been trying to screw me completely. And I have let it happen, despite a lot of ambivalence here. This is a betrayal for most as this will turn out as they lose their autonomy and hence their path to enlightenment. What’s going on? A large scale cultural movement?
To be clear, we can say no better of the Jesus realm, the Mohammed realm, well…
But Osho has to be vulnerable here to challenge, because he opens the way to challenge. In any case, I must for myself fight back to exit from the realm of this super control freak who is also ill served by his many enemies who have accelerated an attempt to make me his critic. The confusion on this point is a highly frustrating state of affairs. But that game won’t work any more.
I had a thought there was a measure of respect towards me, but I got suspicious, a strange voice…”I don’t need you for revenge against Ouspensky…”… I suddenly get the point. A strange animus against Ouspensky….

Another issue: is this a case of screwing a leftist? In the case of Osho the answer should be no: he made a clear gesture toward some kind of support for ‘leftist’ people in a period of crisis, the obvious catch being that he must control that if it impinges on his world.
But overall the last year since the publication of Last and First Men, with its neo-communist views, the evidence shows a concealed set of attacks on those grounds, and this is reflected in my ‘insane’ confusion over the three way system of murder. Clearly these reactionaries are going to target leftists. The reactionary world of India could do little else.

The issue can’t be solved because the ‘right to murder: pass judgment over the life of individuals’ is an implicit assumption never quite stated in public and inherited like an albatross around the neck of the guru world. On those grounds it will pass away…

We have never addressed the issue of a communist society as a non-theocratic ‘open’ society that won’t attempt to top down all these questions….!



Posted in Uncategorized at 11:34 am


Thurman pressed into referee…and questions for that fart the Dalai Lama, beyond the Adolf HItler question…does the Tibetan hierarchy indulge spiritual cannibalism and use its adherents as food?

Posted in Uncategorized at 10:31 am


Lest I be called antisemtic I will call on Robert Thurman of jewish VIP Tibetan fame (a previous effort I appealed to Jack Kornfield, no response) to consider this charge against Gold, and whether the exploitation via the ‘spiritual cannibalism’ racket is fair!

Your move Bob….Let’s hear from you on the subject of spiritual ripoff in the guru circuit! Do gurus ‘consume’ the ‘essence’ of disciples (without their consent?)? Is Gold guilty of ripping off gentiles dupes, unsuspecting of the Gurdjeiff racket? Is there any way to offer reparations from the Jewish community? Or counseling or some means to warn, forestall, and police a figure like Gold???
Mr. Thurman, I am sorry: but be wary of the option of not answering…

Please, no black magic from the various ‘warrior’ assholes in the Tibetan outfit. They constantly brag of this. Anyone like me who thinks the Dalai Lama a fart is open to the visceral reactions of these curious characters…I hope you are not one of them…In any case be wary of trying such things on me…

Boycotting (jewish) new age gurus after Gold…

Posted in Uncategorized at 9:55 am

The rapacity of the Gold attempt to take over the Gurdjieff work (extending to trying to track down and destroy RB Ouspenksy) (he never once gave any reference or credentials for any contact with Sufis, Gurdjieff movements, or any other legacy) is a warning about jews especially in particular and gentiles in general in the context of Gurdjieff and more generally the new age movement as a while. Gurdjieff made public the (bullshit) esoteric regime of ‘essence consuming’ and ripping off ‘conscious’ energies from unsuspecting dupes sold on the idea of total absolute obedience. As usual he must have figured gentiles were stupid enough for him to get away with it, and then chalk it off as a lesson in ‘suggestibility’.

You do not owe these gurus anything. Do not trust them. After Gold jews will start to take for granted their ‘rights’ over the Gurdjieff work, and their right to indulge in the ‘spiritual food’ racket.

Don’t submit to this regime, and call out anyone who plays leader here. Gurdjieff brought into existence a new form of malevolent spirituality, one without credentials. Figures like Gold (as with any racket) are attracted to the game and their relation to hidden sufis we never met is another danger zone.

Sufis have shown themselves to be a corrupt mafia. The game should be over… Tibetans buddhists as Chogyam Trungpa openly confessed are part of this racket. Stay away from Tibetan Buddhism: it offers absolutely nothing but the chance to oblivion via the racket called the boddissatwa path, a form of gallows humor apparently…



Posted in Uncategorized at 11:08 am


I recommend leaving/staying away from the Gurdjieff movement (ditto for sufism)

Posted in Uncategorized at 7:37 am

The world of Gurdjieff is dangerous. People with propensities to evil are looking for passive and eager dupes who are liable to fall under the spell of people who may perform dangerous unconscious hypnosis captures and you could end up the drone of people you never see again. The whole realm of occult sufism operates via fronts and you will never meet the real perps. You will be dependent on people outside of this with some occult capacity taking a risk to warn/liberate you. Don’t count on it.


A quick debriefing of the absurdities in the ISOM account…

Posted in Uncategorized at 11:04 am

In a Moscow Cafe
Ouspensky’s In Search of the Miraculous is the standard, now classic, description of the author’s encounter with the figure Gurdjieff. Let us note that in the final analysis Ouspensky is performing an act of journalism, not, as such, a description of a spiritual path. It is hardly inappropriate to challenge this point, but the general tenor of Ouspensky’s account, concluding with an ambiguous suggestion of a parting of ways, is descriptive and historical, against the remarkable backdrop of the Russian revolution. Ouspensky promptly distances himself at the end of this work.
Ouspensky’s ISOM is one of the most successful promotions of a spiritual subject in the literature of the modern New Age movement. It is therefore a near tragedy that its author was swiftly sidelined, accused of non-surrender even as he was excluded from the veiled aspect of Gurdjieff’s activities. Gurdjieff had a habit of svengali treatment of intellectuals able to promote his teachings and the restriction of these intellectuals to the exoteric advertsing department was one of the key weaknesses, in the end, of the whole teaching.
The opening of ISOM raises the issue of the spiritual search, abroad, and at home. And it makes the point that Ouspensky’s searches in India and Ceylon were somehow doomed and that what he sought was to be found close at hand, ‘at home’. Since this is a frequent refrain of later sufi writers like Idries Shah we should suspect this was somehow a ploy on the part of Gudjieff to refocus attention on some broader that the ‘generalized buddhism’ that focuses on India and the terrain of buddhism.
But in retrospect this is misleading. Surveying the past generation of the accelerating New Age proliferations, we can see that the spiritualities of India and buddhism have proven far more fertile in their success with students. If Ouspensky had stayed in India he might have been an enlightened sage by now, instead of the fruitless wild goose chase of the ‘work’ and troubled rebirth with nothing gained. And there are many examples even in Ouspensky’s generation, such as the early students of Ramana Maharsi, who became realized men forthwith. So the emphasis of Gurdjieff on some rule of ‘spirituality’ at home is misleading. No doubt it is true that hidden sages lurk in many places, but esoteric obscurity is not a recommendation for confused seekers. The clarity of buddhism, for example, is far more constructive. And it is not loaded with the misleading innuendoes of Faust receiving spiritual instructions and powers from Mephisopheles. This factor is very much a part of the world of Gurdjieff.
Ouspensky’s ‘search for the miraculous’ was in many ways the flawed reasoning behind his failure to achieve spiritual realization. It is a good cover term for the kind of hidden sufi brands of spirituality, but it is a very narrow vision, too close to mere occultism, that seeks out the miraculous. No doubt this is a preoccupation of Christians struggling with the New Testament and its focus on miracles. In the end, however, it is a good token of what Ouspensky came across, the rare ‘paths of the will’ that stand so obscurely behind outer sufism, and which renounced in the ‘paths of being’ of the great paths of yoga and buddhism. So perhaps Ouspensky’s starting idea was not so far off: he was to enter the strangely ominous world of shadow sufis with their demonic cast. Read the rest of this entry »

Gurdjieff tossing in towel…

Posted in Uncategorized at 10:53 am

The time has come to move beyond the Gurdjieff spiritual movement. It is being abandoned by the ‘G entity’ himself, was never really accepted by sufis, and has become a darkside menace to all who stumble into it. The sharks who prey on the unsuspecting are increasing in number, figures like Gold, and the Aleister Crowley gangs are starting to intersect with all of it.

I hope to produce a debriefing of the whole material, and the first thing is to realize that apart from the Romance of the Fourth Way generated by Ouspensky’s ISOM, the work is a nebulous pseudopath with not real references. Sufis have never heard of it. Buddhists scratch their head. Noone knows what it is, a century after Gurudjieff met Ouspensky. People spout passages form ISOM, but they don’t amount to beans. Noone can point to such a ‘path’ in any period before Gurdjieff. After, everyone prattles as they knew…

The riddle of human evolution

Posted in Uncategorized at 10:46 am


Booknotes/review: A New Buddhist Path: Enlightenment, Evolution, and Ethics in the Modern World

Posted in Uncategorized at 10:45 am



For me it is actually unsafe to be anywhere near new age gurus…

Posted in Uncategorized at 9:32 am



It took me a while to figure out that new age gurus wished to actually kill me for the above two posts, and the reactionary anti-modernism of nearly all of them, with Osho an exception, sort of, has planted its own self-destruct for the whole movement.

The whole thing is stupid but it has a considerable hidden promotion. How could two historians as brain dead as Spengler and Toynbee ever get any traction? They are cryptic ideologists of the fascist attack on modernity: no coincidence here with Spengler, but who had the good sense to see through Hitler. But Spengler’s concealed ideology was grist for the mill of the generation of the Nazis because it fueled the sense that whole of modernity should be overcome. This stupid thinking is clearly evident still in Tibetan Buddhism.

I didn’t realize how much concealed flack I was taking with WHEE but I think every new ager should read it. To base spirituality on anti-modernism is completely stupid.

This kind of stupidity is a reminder that I have no future in the new age movement, not even in the Osho field. Every time I begin to show some progress I get another blast of hate. It is a stupid perspective. Have these people ever really looked at the men of antiquity outside of the great guru cults? This whole perspective is stupid and will undermine the whole new age game…

Toynbee and Spengler, and new age antimodernism

Posted in Uncategorized at 9:16 am



Warned to stay away from the Osho field

Posted in Uncategorized at 2:37 pm

I have always had a different spiritual power in the background of my work, and I am hearing: the need to stay clear of the Osho field, which will not allow any independent view of history such as mine, which is a gift I cannot give up to some guru. I cannot surrender autonomy to a buddhas field or let my work fall under the control of buddhist powers: the risk of setting leftists up to get hurt is too great. I am stunned to consider that this field would attempt to destroy my other work.

So I must stand back and move: I have made my point. The Osho field has an immense potential for an perspective on buddhadharmas for these groups. We have established this point. But the virulence in my case is sudden bizarre…
It is only a matter of time before outsiders would succumb to droid fascism of the buddhist variety. So I must stand back, take back any ‘surrender’, and try to find a way to mediate the resources of the Osho and other fields.

OZEN rajneesh speaks – where is osho ?

Posted in Uncategorized at 6:57 am

Visions of a ghostseer…(a book by Kant)

Posted in Uncategorized at 6:55 am

It is hard for me to separate the many different overlaid ‘ghosts’ that attempt to invade/impersonate dead gurus, so feel free to disregard my posts that suggest otherwise. I am not a sannyasin, have a lot of enemies who …etc: we have been over this before, the the three-way+ etc of collated,…what?
I have so many enemies that it is hard to conclude the nature of the non-events in the spirit mystery sphere…