cloud recluse

Ive been feeling fairly passive lately,but this has got the fires going again This person was actually tested on Australian tv several years ago.She actually attempted to go without ANY food or water,& in a few days was looking VERY ill indeed.She kept at it & started to become incoherent,as well as gaunt,withered ,pale etc. Eventually,the test was stopped when the tv show was told they would be legally liable for her impending collapse. The topic had come up after a few deaths connected with her books. She IS NOT an immortal,she eats & drinks on a daily basis(but only because she enjoys it,she claims,not because she needs to).But it would seem that she actually believes herself to be such!!!! SHE IS DELUDED.and the absolute confidence of the deluded can be quite compelling. I defy ANYONE to come up with proof that she has acheived this VERY testable,VERY tangible,easily verified state of being. Yours with joyful belligerence,Cloud

I know this isnt directly about astral Projection,but could you elaborate on this point? Im quite intruiged regards,Cloud.

Freeform,sorry for taking so long to reply to your post.It hasnt been from lack of interest.Actually,Ive been feeling a bit down recently & havent felt up to much discussion So i will try & make this breif. Im trying for a model that doesnt neglect the very real & valid motives that can go into a relationship that later becomes cultic.Its not just monkey scrambling.People can enter a cult motivated by a desire for commitment to something of consequence,looking for people who show vision & authenticity.The stereotypical image of the cultist as simply "weak" is simply unfair,they often have considerable sincerity & passion,& cant find its equivalent in mainstream institutions,& can you really blame them there???And a lot of the blunders they make are latent in traditional Eastern forms anyhow.The greater scrutiny the West tends to subject its figureheads to is exposing the problems in many traditional eastern forms that the "weak cultist" was following in good faith!! And psedoGurus themselves can be VERY complex charachters, initially showing valid attainments & siddhi. So Im looking to clarify the risks of disciplship to a western audience,without dismissing the real potential. The other reason for starting this thread was simply that a Baghwan debate seemed to be starting on a thread that was distracting from DanC's request for info.This then made me wonder if two seperate threads were in order.Its just that Rajneesh is such a juicy example of spiritual corruption as well as simpler monkey scrambles. I feel pretty crappy right now,& arent up to going into any more detail,but would be perfectly happy to pick it all up again at some later time ,if it is something people would be interested in discussing. Regards,Cloud. Ooooohhhh yeah.But a complex creep.A lot of his writing can be quite evocative,if you can stomach the undercurrent of mindless obedience he is trying to inculcate.

Sean,your timing is excellent! Im quite overheated (again) at the moment ,and this is very soothing stuff. I cant see myself meeting Adyashanti in person anytime soon,but I find myself trusting his words.This may sound kind of stupid,but I dont actually do that very much,often to my own detriment I suspect. Regards,Cloud

Fair enough,but personally these arent just assumptions from a distance (though in the case of Rajneesh,it is admittedly limited ). Certainly ,the question of the effective student is part & parcel of the whole thing,but an effective student always has a discriminating eye in regards to the teacher,including in that their own immediate experience but also the experience of others.It would be wasteful to expect any new seeker to be reinventing the wheel. I want to make it clear that Im looking for broadly applicable themes,as well as the specific example of Rajneesh.This is where I agree with Freeform up to a point,I just feel the dynamics he is proposing arent sufficient in & of themselves.though they are certainly part of it. The guru question is one that wont go away any time soon,& I think any of us claiming an interst in spirituality have some responsibility to others to make a contribution to it. Rajneesh is particularly relevant because he wasnt JUST a conman,he had been through some transformative experience at one point.This throws more subtle factors in,& his phenomena continues to unfold! VERY pertinent stuff,an excellent opportunity. But perhaps I should seperate the issues of Rajneesh in particular,& guru-disciple mechanics in general? Is that want people here would rather see ? Im starting to wonder if my 'Baghwan bashing" is delaying the actual debate I myself have become interested in Want do people want,a Rajneesh expose',or a student-teacher discussion/ Im starting to wonder if they should be seperate posts? Regards,Cloud

I dont see why only one map,reducing the phenomen to pack hierarchy,is valid,& anything else is a refusal to learn something new. Sociobiology is nothing new to me,& its evidently inadequate to fully represent many situations,let alone explain or predict them. I mean ,is this what your saying?Its sociobilogy or its nothing? Any other perspective is merely a map.but your sociobiological map is innately "True"?I will apologise now if Ive misinterpreted you,but that seems to be what youve just said I am trying something new,something more inclusive & accurate in both explanation & prediction than sociobiology.

No,just that its inadequate for analysing this very particular situation,that of a religious cult.

Talking about pack animal hierarchies certainly touches on part of it,but its not even remotely adequate for fully describing and predicting this kind of system.You are not going far enough.Its not simply a pack of domesticated primates submittting to an alpha male.Theres a lot more involved.There are the very particular desires of the disciples to install the image of the guru into themselves as a new source of life-energy.Theres the energetic barrenness of the guru,requiring feeding from a continual stream of disciples.Theres a lot more than JUST raw control/submission trips going on. So I AM interested in how it works,but talking about it ONLY in terms of hierarchy is insufficient.Utterly necessary,dont get me wrong,but still insufficient.If we ONLY look at it from that perspective,I think we miss out on some crucial ,defining mechanisms.Its not really giving you the WHY of they pack,or what is INSPIRING that eager submission. Your totally right to say its a pack,but your not getting the full nature of the pack,its missing crucial ingredients. Do you see,Im not denying what your saying as such,but it HAS to taken a bit deeper,or you miss the real driving dynamics."Just" an animal pack IS NOT ENOUGH. So I suppose Im actually juggling two topics.The culpability of Rajneesh as an individual ( and there aint NO WAY Im getting into some kind of freewill/predestination thing with you baby ),and the mechanics of the system in general.Rajneesh is a good case here because his is a complex one.Otherwise Id just go look at some monkeys

Once again,I would have to strongly disagree with you here.From very early in his childhood,he was allready practicing manipulation in the place of intimacy.He was grooming himself to be a guru from VERy early one,deliberately managing the whole process carefull & skillfully. True it took on its own life & entrapped him,as it has done to many others.But he still had the choice to walk away intact & with plentiful resources to fall back on.He deliberately destroyed that possibility for many of his students.

Actually,I agree wholeheartedly with this as a general principle.But I dont think it applies to Rajneesh.He didnt have unexpected temptations thrust upon him.He went looking for it from the very start in India!!And while he had gone through some intense experiences,I wouldnt call him Enlightened.He started out as a deliberate manipulator from the very start.It wasnt an accidental side-effect. Check out a few of the expose's that have been published.Its quite monstrous what he did!! He used many different categories of vulnerable people from the very start,for various different reasons,not just sex (he was actually a bit impotent,& his tantric technique consisted of jumping on top & thrusting away in the missionary position for a few minutes) and money. Its not so much "emotional" for me that he didnt live up too his advertising.Its more that he used spirituality as a destructive con game quite deliberately,& so many people fell for it.This may sound morbid,but I find it fascinating (for want of a better word) & very instructive.Morally repulsive,sure,but VERY VERY instructive.I would actually say that he WASNT just a man,he was an EXCEPTIONAL man,but in a very poisinous direction

I must disagree with you here.Rajneesh displayed marked tendencies in this direction from childhood onwards.The manipulative & deceptive aspects of his teaching wernt an aberrance that came later.They were deliberate from the very start,though initially more subtle that their later forms. Regrettably,you probably have a point here though Now this is what Im really interested in.The system as a whole,what produces it.Sure Rajneesh was deliberately trying to create such a system,by why did so many intelligent people go for it,especially when it became so overtly Orwellian?Now he definetly WAS trying to control the crowd,but it took on alife of its own. Fair enough,but if they lay claim to some kind of succesion from him (IF),then they have a responsibility to come clean about the TOTALITY of his legacy.

Exactly! The question then becomes one of clarifying that middle ground to make it more accesible & clarifying the downside of the guru-disciple relationship so that seekers can be more readily aware of it without dismissing spirituality in itself.Now this of course doesnt guarantee anything,but it could certainly improve the situation. Now I dont know how accurate my own perception is here,but I think that the spiritual newcomer still comes up against two outworn positions among fellow seekers.There is the blind obedience-antiintellectual trip in various forms,then youve got the 1980's style "cult-busting" deprogrmmer material in which all gurus & new religious movements are possesed of almost demonic powers of instant brainwashing for evil purposes.The latter usuallly carries the assumption that spiritual seekers who become enmeshed in a cultic relationship to a teacher can ONLY be motivated by fear & stupidity,as opposed to a very real desire for a spirituality of purpose,consequence & tangible comitment. I think its time for a more realistic take on the matter . Any relationship between human beings has a potential downside,and perfectly sincere human beings can make dreadful mistakes,gurus included.Spirituality can bring out the best in us,but its just as likely to bring out the worst,and we have to have some degree of preperadness for that,AT LEAST to the extent of being able to acknowledge it when it starts to happen. To that end,I want to pick apart the downside,& high profile critters like Mohan Chandra Rajneesh are excelent material. So,let me hear it! WHY does the toxic side occur ? WHY the mixed up gurus as well as the deliberately fraudulent ones ? WHY are some seekers so eager to worship & fearful of doubt,especially seekers with quite intelligent backgrounds? What are the mechanics of all this ?No one here seems to really deny the situation,but I want to hear WHY it occurs!! I have my own opinions,but I want to hear others!There must be more to it than 'It happens,be careful"!! GIVE ME THE WHY. Regards,Cloud

Dont get me wrong,I have nothing but gratitude for the legitimate teachers I have encountered.What Im getting at here is the egregiously corrupt ones! Why do they emerge & why are they followed.Im quite serious.I think its an issue that has yet to be satisfactorily resolved in our spiritual culture,and full on sociopathic types like Rajneesh provide an excellent case study. I suppose on the emotional side I am admittedly both puzzled & frustrated by the same sad scenarios recurring again & again.Some progress in the area would be gratifying.But we still seem to alternate between shocking naivete & equally unrealistic cynicism in our approach to spirituality.With Rajneesh we not only have the phenomenon of his life ,we also have the current repackaging & rewriting of his life by his succesors,trying to elevate him into some noble figurehead in order to legitimate their own claims. I have no problem with legitimate gurus!!!! But the pseudo-guru phenomenon is alive & well & taking its toll on a spiritually naieve ,yet sincere, community.I think this warrants considerable attention.The deathtoll amongst the Orange People wasnt as high as Jonestown,but the same essential mechanisms were in place.AND IT ALL SEEMS SO AVOIDABLE,if it can just be clarified & presented as a general caution on the path.

i suppose its Baghwans life & his development into a pseudoguru that I find most instructive.Then theres also the question of why so many followed him into the cults darker phases.I mean its understandable enough when you see a charming,compelling,eloquent orator siting western existentialists as much as eastern sources,& advocating sex & celebration as a path open to all.But what about when hes set up an "ashram" in Oregon more like a concentration camp,patrolled by heavily armed guards,in which constant gruelling manual labour with inadequate nutrition & sleep has replaced yoga,and the theme of spiritual surrender to Baghwan has now become economic surrender and outright worship! What kept these peoplle hooked ??!! What is the mechanism of the false guru & the gullible disciple? A lots been written about disciples,but why does someone WANT guru status,& why do they often collapse when its withdrawn?There are motivations here way beyond usual greed. As a rule,it seems that pseudogurus start of as quite isolated children,unhappy in that isolation,and are driven by a desire to blot that fear out rather than face it.They seem to be seekers of immunity from life,but in a very extreme form.Now,they often go on to experience severe emotional crisis that precipitate dramatic breakthrough/breakdown crises,out of which they emerge with a vision of the world & themselves treasured not so much for its accuracy,but for its defence value against their internal terror. Then they set about trying to surround themselves with people who will reflect that image back to them,help them keep their terror hidden,reinforce their self-image to them.Being a psychlogically dishonest stance,this paves the way for further deception of self & other. B seems to have started as a disturbed but gifted youth,badly affected by the death of a close relative when young.He then resolved never to be emotionally vulnerable again,to fortify himself from loss & emotion.In a country of mystics,it was esay to experiment with altered states of consciousness in which his pain was anaesthetized.But he was also attracted to quarrel & pranks (some quite cruel) and fascinated by hypnosis and psychological manipulation of both individuals & large groups. Eventually he goes through an immense mental crisis,& comes out the other side as high as a kite! And his sense of vulnerability SEEMS dissolved,as well as moral obligation & emotional connection to others,something he was never comfortable with anyhow. Now he sets up as a radical anti-guru,a great attention getter in India,and soon attracts a following.His presence is mesmerising,and he really seems to have picked up a capacity for subtle influence on the enerrgy feilds of others.Unfortunately,all his neurosis are still intact,waiting to reemerge overtly when the afterglow of his "Enlightenment"wears off.But their less overt influences on his ego are allready colouring his message. So the stage is set for a big fall.Allready ,a crucial part of his message is the abandoning of critical faculties & complete trust in him personally.And he is by no means a well rounded person,or even particularly mature.So while he is delivering a message of celebration that is very healing for many people,its allready intertwined with a system of disempowerment & obedience in thought as well as deed. As the power & money accumulate,and less & less people are willing to provide critical feedback,things become cultish.Furthermore,as the "Afterglow" starts to wear off,his fears return into awareness intact,and drugs begin to look very attractive, At this point,I think he probably could have said "I was mistaken,Im not Enlightened as such" & people still would have been interested in what he had to offer ( other Teachers have done the same).But he lacked the maturity to deal with himself as much as he lacked the compassion to respect others.He wound up hiding behind the same corrupt religious forms he had so violently denigrated.The rest is history.

We are also free to deny the destructive aspect of things we are egoically attached to,but that wont stop them doing damage to the innocent & vulnerable. The point of this thread is that Baghwan was a particularly high-profile influential figure (on the spiritual scene that is,he largely ignored the wellbeing of the world.As "the Rich mans Guru",he didnt feel poor people had spiritual opportunities).This makes him particularly relevant to discussing the unfortunate legacy of the guru cult & its internal mechanics,which is what I really want to get into here. This is Baghwans usefulness.NOT his popularising of a lot of 60s style therapy-yoga combo's,hes neither the first to do this nor probably the last.Rather he is an excellent cautionary example & case study of how spirituality becomes sick. Here is a guy whos started off paying lip service to freedom from political oppression & corrupt spiritual establishments,and wound up running an armed concentration camp-style enclave while obsessing with money & self-image.WHY? To what extent was it a problem inherent in the forms of spirituality,& to what extent was it Baghwans own ego? This is what I really want to get into here.Lets unfold the guru-disciple thing! Regards Cloud.

As has been pointed out,everyones fallible,everybody makes mistakes.Also,students may villify teachers instead of confronting their own limitations. I couldnt agree more. BUT teachers do have a EXCEPTIONAL obligation compared to students.They are in an undeniable position of power over the student,they "have" the teaching,the instruction the students seeks. If they are going to be an effective teacher,the role they are explicitly assenting to,THEY MUST exemplify that teaching,and acknowledge their responsibilities. So students can be arseholes,but you look to the teacher to exemplify the teaching.The teachers responsibilty is far greater,and its incredibly naieve to think otherwise.This still applies to schools that de-emphasise the teachers status.EVEN MORE SO really,as the dynamic largely remains intact,just less visible. Definetely teachers WILL be flawed,but it does NOT have to be a tragic flaw if the teacher can acknowledge their own humanity!! THE AVERAGE PERSON IN THE STREET CAN ACKNOWLEDGE THIS,AND OFTEN DOES SO !!! Any cso-called "Guru" should be able to do far better!! Personally I have had a number of teachers,all flawed,all mature enough to admit it,& all effective in their teaching.Despite comong from cultural backgrounds that generate the guru-cult,they themselves never succumbed to this. So no,not all teachers are tragic in their flaws,just the money-grubbing power hungry ones that try to put themselves above criticism( usually by disabling their students thinking capacities). It seems true enough that there were many good therapists in Baghwans cult,but B didnt necessarily come up with the methods himself.These people were 'alternative' therapist before they got there!And a lot of them found his transpersonal references inspiring,pointing them in a new direction.All good stuff in itself.BUT THEY ARE NOT OSHOS METHODS.Tinkering about with bodywork & encounter groups is something that has been going on for ages.Baghwan provided a forum totake it futher,sometimes resulting in radical breakthroughs,sometimes in broken limbs & pack-rapes!He himself didnt particularly care,as long as he got rich!

Ok,it looks like it really is time for a Rajneesh thread.I myself am surprised that any body still takes the old fraud seriously,though I do acknowledge his eloquence & the possibility of some psychic capacities (at least earlier in his career).But I thought the guy had been fairly well exposed by now as a malicious nut?Perhaps not.

Does anyone actually know anything abpout these "Dragons of Justice" crowd?Any background,any "dirt" Are they all self-taught (which I dont necessarily object to per se) or do they have a verifiable lineage?That sort of thing. Regards,Cloud.

Ian,if you are really interested,you MUST MUST MUST read "THE GOLDEN GURU:THE STRANGE JOURNEY OF BHAGWAN SHREE RAJNEESH" by James.S.Gordon.Personally,I think it is simply the best,most balanced account of the whole business. Gordon was a shrink who was involved with the cult for about 13 years,seeing a lot of value in its initial form,but having a lot of nagging reservations as well.His analysis of the strenghts and flaws of "Oshos" charachter is excellent for coming up with your own analysis of the strengths and flaws of the philosophy. Yes,I would scorn both the man & his teachings! Though admittedly I do get rather heated over theses things I agree that some of his heavily edited writing has its good points,but its basically a set up for a guru cult.His overall approach consisted of inducing temporary bliss states,imprinting people with his image in that state,and preaching a philososophy designed to voluntarily deactivate their capacities for critical thought. Quite frankly,no real difference between him & the Born-again Christian fundamentalist techniques of programming!! Do you want details,coz I will happily pick the whole thing apart Regards,Cloud Pilgrim,it aint just the sexual abuse that is Fucked Up with Oshit.Your holding back man! I think conspiracy to murder,persecution of the elderly for political gain & the massive,brutal power trip of the whole thing should be trumpeted from the rooftops in "spiritual" circles. Since the sociopathic old sod carked it,his disciples have been doing the typical True Believer rewrite of his life & portraying this manipulative tyrant as some kind of noble "rebel". You are being too merciful Should this become a seperate thread.The creeps material is still out there & being heavily marketed.I think its relevant to expose this particular farce,& hes a classic case of the "guru-syndrome". Regards,Cloud.

Intruiging stuff Trunk.Its particularly important for Western students to get the cultural context in which an approach initially emerges. I get the very strong impression that zazen itself has definite chi cultivation consequences.I mean the cultivation of Hara MUST constitute energetic work,surely! The energetic consequences only seem to be presented in terms of a spiritual tool,not a "personal" therapy.Would it be fair to say that while Hara provides a support to Inquiry,its not undertaken to improve a "self"?But its still an energetic phenomena,yes?no? Is this borne out by your experience at all?I myself have only done Vippasana as a formal practice,in terms of being trained by a teacher,and am only going by what I have read of zazen. Regards,Cloud

Can you recall the title on that one?

So would it be fair to say that Zen,being ostensibly "Buddhist",has more of the salvific imperative of an institutionalised religion,with attaining Nirvana becoming a moral obligation,while Daoism is happier to play around in the subtler energetic aspects of phenomena (ie,Chi ) until the desire to Awaken kicks in of its own accord? Now ,thats not to say that Chi cultivation from initially dualistic motivations wont still interrupt the usual ego programs in and of itself,but more that the Daoists see Awakening as far less of an imperative than orthodox Buddhists. Having said all that,I personally suspect Zen is really Daoism repackaged to survive in a new context,and the practice of Zazen is DEFINETELY a chi cultivation technique,amongst other things.But does anyone else out there think that,in terms of orthodoxy,Buddhism makes awakening an imperative whereas Daoism does not? Would be interested in Bum feedback on this one Regards,Cloud.

Oh man,that is beautiful

DanC,you might want to check out SAMADHI:SELF DEVELOPMENT IN ZEN,SWORDSMANSHIP,AND PSYCHOTHERAPY by Mike Sayama.While Chi is not the books main emphasis,it points out that a balanced chi flow allows for smoother intergration of Awakening into the personal bodymind.Of course,chi cultivation in itself does not guarantee Awakening,but the Inquiry into ego,to go really deep & become effective,seems to be more likely if some degree of cultivation has allready taken place.Ones psyche is somehow more "receptive" to Inquiry. Sayama draws attention to the case of Hakuin Ekaku who combined Daoist circulation techniques with ardous Sitting to Awaken,and the Hara practice of Zen is definetely a basic cultivation technique without which Inquiry may never be stabilized(in the average individual at least). Anyhow,it would seem that chi cultivation both prepares one for the deep Inquiry that Awakens,and also for the subsequent intergration of that Enlightenment back into the everyday bodymind.BUT none of this is to say one cannot Awaken without chi,chi just makes it a lot "easier",for want of a better word.I suppose it just that Zen is extremely wary of any practice that might take precedence over Sitting & Inquiry,and one can certainly develop an "energy-miser" approach to cultivation ,and thus recreate another ego-image around ones practice. As far as I can see,Emptiness makes room for a more blanced chi,and chi stabilises your day-to-day expression of Emptiness. I also may have missed the point alltogether. Regards,Cloud

intruiging looking stuff.Anybody got any background on these guys,are they authentic?