Tom Robbins on Osho/ 1987

Tom Robbins post Ranch essay on Osho (Bhagwan)  hits the nail on the head.

(Tom Robbins, is the famous author of Even Cow Girls get the Blues and eight other novels. He is still alive, must be around 85 years old and lives in Carolina. )

” I’m no disciple of Shree Bhagwan Rajneesh. I am not a disciple of any guru. I am, in fact, not convinced that the Oriental guru system is particularly useful to the evolution of consciousness in the western world (although I’ll be the first to admit that what is most “useful” is not always what is most important.) The very notion of guruhood seems at odds with the aspirations of the passionate individualist that I profess to be, and I’d be only slightly more inclined to entrust my soul to some holy man, however pure, than to a political committee or a psychiatrist.

So, I am no sannyasin. Ah, but i recognize the emerald breeze when it rattles my shutters, and Bhagwan is like a hard, sweet wind, circling the planet, blowing the beanies off of rabbis and popes, scattering the lies on the desks of bureaucrats, stampeding the jackasses in the stables of the powerful, lifting the skirts of the pathologically prudish, and tickling the spiritually dead back to life.

Typhoon Bhagwan is not whistling Dixie. He is not peddling snake oil. He won’t sell you a mandala that will straighten your teeth or teach you a chant that will make you a millionaire. Although he definitely knows which side his bread is Buddha-ed on, he refuses to play by the rules of the spiritual marketplace, a refreshing attitude, in my opinion, and one that stations him in some pretty strong company.

Jesus had his parables, Buddha his sutras, Mohamed his fantasies of the Arabian night. Bhagwan has something more appropriate for a species crippled by greed, fear, ignorance, and superstition: he has cosmic comedy.

What Bhagwan is out to do, it seems to me, is pierce our disguises, shatter our illusions, cure our addictions, and demonstrate the self-limiting and often tragic folly of taking ourselves too seriously. His pathway to ecstasy twist through the topsy-turvy landscape of the Ego as Joke.

Of course, a lot of people don’t get the punchline. (How many, for example, realized that Bhagwan’s ridiculous fleet of Rolls-Royces was one of the greatest spoofs of consumerism ever staged?) But while the jokes may whiz far over their heads, the authorities intuitively sense something dangerous in Bhagwan’s message. Why else would they have singled him out for the kind of malicious persecution they never would have directed at a banana republic dictator or Mafia don? If Ronald Reagan had had his way, this gentle vegetarian would have been crucified on the White House lawn.

The danger they intuit is that in Bhagwan’s words, as in the psychedelic drugs that they suppress with an equally hysterical bias, there is information that, if properly assimilated, can help to set men and women loose from their control. Nothing frightens the state-or its partner in crime, organized religion-so much as the prospect of an informed population thinking for itself and living free.

Freedom is a potent wine, however. Its imbibers can take a long while to adjust to its intoxication. Some, including many sannyasins, never adjust. Patriotic Americans pay gassy lip service to their liberty, but as they’ve demonstrated time and time again, they can’t handle liberty. Whether more than a fistful of Bhagwan’s emulators can handle it has yet to be determined. It likely will take something more eschatologically dramatic than the unorthodox wisdom of a compassionate guru to dislodge most modern earthlings, be they seekers or suckers, from our age’s double helix of corruption and apathy, let alone to facilitate the human animal’s eventual escape from the web of time.

Meanwhile, though,  Bhagwan’s discourses ring a lot truer than most. He has the vision to see through the Big Mask, the guts to express that vision regardless of the consequences, and the love and humor to place it all in warmly mischievous perspective. Moreover, here is one teacher who is honest enough, illuminated enough, alive enough to openly enjoy the physical world while simultaneously pointing out its ubiquitous traps and trickeries. Zorba the Buddha!

Predictably, the journalists who’ve investigated Bhagwan have each and every one been befuddled by his methods, his messages, and the delightful paradoxes that they see only as flaky contradictions. Even many of Rajneesh’s followers end up being confused by him. Well, Jesus left numerous contemporaries, including fellow Jewish reformers and his own disciples, in a comparable state. It goes with the territory, which is why they say in Zen, “The master is always killed on the road.” Frequently he’s killed by those who profess to love him most.

When Rajneeshis misbehave, the media and the public blame Rajneesh. They can’t understand that he doesn’t control them, has, in fact, no intention of ever trying to control them. The very notion of hierarchical control is antithetical to his teachings.

When Bhagwan learns of vile and stupid things done in his name, he only shakes his head and says, “I know they’re crazy, but they have to go through it.” That degree of freedom, that depth of tolerance, is as incomprehensible to the liberal hipster as it is to the rigid square.

And yet, as an outsider who’s been moved, impressed, and entertained by the manner in which Bhagwan has put the fun back in profundity, I know it’s a level of wisdom that we simply must attain if we’re to climb out of the insufferable mess we most aggressive of primates, with out hunger for order and our thirst for power, have made of this splendid world.

Bhagwan: The Most Godless Yet the Most Godly of Men by Dr. George Meredith, 1987

NOTE: When Osho was shown the preceding remarks, he laughed and said that he didn’t believe in Oriental guru systems either. In fact, he disavowed any connection to guruhood, saying that the very notion of a guru-disciple relationship is an affront to human dignity. He explained that since his emphasis had always been on just being oneself, the act of refusing to be anybody’s disciple is precisely what being a disciple of Bhagwan is all about. Bingo!

This entry was posted in News. Bookmark the permalink.

82 Responses to Tom Robbins on Osho/ 1987

  1. madhu dagmar frantzen says:

    Thanks very much, Parmartha,
    What you posted (of a Tom Robbins) as a ´new´ thread topic is quite a GOOD food…like from an ´unexpected corner´…!

    Madhu

  2. satyadeva says:

    One of the very best takes on Osho I’ve come across, from within or outside Sannyas.

    • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

      I wouldn´t say that in general, Satyadeva, but as far es SN/UK is concerned, you might be absolutely right.

  3. shantam prem says:

    From 1987 till 2018…
    2450 years have passed!

  4. shantam prem says:

    If Tom Robbins was as impressed by Osho as bloggers and editors of this site, one could expect at least one remembrance per year!

    I am typing from mobile during midday break during my work. At home I will check whether Tom Robbins is enjoying ripe old age or already living in the same street as Osho.

    MOD:
    NO NEED, Shantam, Tom Robbins IS STILL ALIVE (AS THE INTRO TO THE ARTICLE STATES).

  5. swamishanti says:

    Dear Editor, the book by Dr George Meredith is actually titled, ‘Bhagwan: The Most Godless Yet The Most Godly Man’.
    See list of books at Oshonews: https://www.oshonews.com/books-sannyasins/

    • bob says:

      Here’s an image of the book cover that’s more in focus. This is my book, which I read when it came out, probably around 1987. Hope it posts ok.

  6. Kavita says:

    “He explained that since his emphasis had always been on just being oneself, the act of refusing to be anybody’s disciple is precisely what being a disciple of Bhagwan is all about. Bingo!”

    Thank you, Parmartha, for sharing.

    • shantam prem says:

      Thank you, Parmartha, for sharing a very clever word jargon. Certain kind of smuggy snobbishness fits with the Bhagwan´s followers.

      Most probably, Kavita has this mind, “Heads I win, tails you lose.” Lols.

      P.S:
      Just a little tease, not a philosophical statement.

      • Kavita says:

        No, Dear, it’s more like ‘Chit bhi meri, pat bhi meri’ (in both the cases I win).

        P.S:
        Just a little tease, not a philosophical statement.

  7. Lokesh says:

    Robbins says that Osho said, “The very notion of a guru-disciple relationship is an affront to human dignity.” He probably did.

    Osho also delivered many statements that were contrary to that.
    For example…

    “The relationship between guru and disciple is so intimate… it is like love. The reverence that is felt is like love, but with one difference: love is parallel, and reverence is for one who is above, one who is higher.

    Love creates friendship because the lover and the loved one are on the same level. Reverence too is a kind of love but with a great difference: it is not on the same level; one person is higher. If there is a loving intimacy with the higher personality, reverence is automatically created around a guru. But it is not expected, it is not demanded.”

    Conclusion: Osho said a lot of things.

    • shantam prem says:

      Osho is heard showering praise on Sheela. He is also heard calling her bitch and a waitress. It reminds me one classic joke about Indian astrologers.

      As Indians till a certain time were eager to know about the sex of the unborn baby and there were no ultrasound machines, astrologers were very much asked for such a prediction.
      One pundit astrologer was offering money back guarantee in case proven false.
      His answer was always, “Boy No Girl.”
      In case family with the newborn girl complains, his secretary used to say, “Pundit ji is not wrong. He was right in saying, “Boy No Girl”!”

    • sw. veet (francesco) says:

      “Conclusion: Osho said a lot of things”

      Lokesh, you also say a lot of things, to affirm something or to oppose something else.

      In this case, having to comment on the affectionate and beautiful words for Osho of a writer, even if less famous than you on SN, you do not miss an opportunity to say that Mr. Robbins is naive.

      Instead, you, who are not so naive, you know very well that Osho, yes, he “said a lot of things”, but to a lot of different people.

      If we do not know at least the point of view of those who quote Osho we can not say whether he could be naive, envious or jealous.

      • Lokesh says:

        Veet says, “You do not miss an opportunity to say that Mr. Robbins is naive.”
        Where did I say or imply that, Veet? Your need to be right is such that you think making things up to suit yourself is perfectly correct. A bit transparent, if you ask me. But you won’t ask anyone because you think you are right. Dream on.

        • Arpana says:

          Lokesh accuses Veet Francesco of always needing to be right.

          Lokesh takes the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing to a new level.

          ROTFLMAO.

        • sw. veet (francesco) says:

          I’m sorry if I hurt you, Lokesh, I speak little English.

          But thanks to you I’m learning many adjectives. If you were more transparent I would also know to whom you have addressed the last two, “self-righteous” and “mug”.

    • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

      You say, Lokesh: “Conclusion: Osho said a lot of things”.
      Nobody would deny that. And He – Osho – also stated rightly, that anybody trying to make a dogma out of His words would be booked forward for a mad asylum.

      And again, we can only be in awe about the Truth of such a compassionate insight and warning, can’t we?

      Tom Robbins, in a very mature way, picked up that very insight, in my eyes, and that´s why I feel this author is a most convenient writer of the preface of the book in question.

      I would call Tom a friend of THIS.
      And that´s the reason I loved to read his preface here, on a website which gets so often painfully lost in the minds of ‘quoting-competitors’.

      Madhu

      P.S:
      Did you choose the quote you added, out of one of the ‘Darshan Diaries’, Lokesh? You didn´t mention the source….

  8. shantam prem says:

    Once Osho reached Pune, many of the books had preface written by famous authors, writers and other creative people. I think more than dozen Hindi books had such two, two and half pages introduction.

    When you commission someone to write a preface it is common to use glorifying stanzas!
    Little Irony was telling his sister Maria, “Daddy is a great man?”
    Maria asked, “How do you Know?”
    Irony answered, “I have seen his photo in the newspaper.”

    • sw. veet (francesco) says:

      An accusation that’s a bit generic, Shantam – if I were a writer I would be offended.

      If you needed a preface to your book of astrology, who would you turn to, a naive or an envious writer?

      • shantam prem says:

        When Sannyas movement, brainchild of Osho. and He himself were facing all out onslaught and were being ridiculed, it was very humane to change the course of action and create bridges with the intelligentsia.

        Disciples working in the PR team did a tremendous job to persuade well-known personalities to write prefaces for his books or visit the commune as guest and feel with their own eyes what is happening.

        Osho was really really contented and proud over the new resurrection.

        Master was a pragmatic person. Everyone who creates something has to be pragmatic too. We the bloggers can be very wise, most of us don´t have this energy even to create small coffee shop !

        Many times when I think about Osho´s ‘effortless efforts, I feel peace as master died contented after finishing his creation and seeing it flowered.

        What happens afterwards is not His business.

        • satchit says:

          “Master was a pragmatic person. Everyone who creates something has to be pragmatic too. We the bloggers can be very wise, most of us don´t have this energy even to create small coffee shop !”

          Looks you still miss the ABC, Shantam.
          Adoring someone else and comparing does not lead you anywhere.

          • shantam prem says:

            I miss ABC because I have forgotten to quote this or that.
            I even feel it is crime against nature to quote and refer to this dead or that dead.
            Maybe I am learning XYZ!

    • swamishanti says:

      The book with this preface, ‘Bhagwan:The most Godless Yet the Most Godly Man’, by Dr Amrito aka Devaraj, as well as the books by another sannyasin living in Osho’s household, Maneesha, could not find publishers.

      In the end, they were published by the Rebel publishing house, the Ashram’s own.

      • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

        Thanks for that info (at 11:05 am), Swamishanti, I didn´t know that.

        • swamishanti says:

          That’s ok, Madhu.

          And Maneesha is the lady who used to ask Osho the questions at the beginning of the discourses in Poona 2. Osho would finish the talk with “Ok, Maneesha?”

          And Maneesha dated both Michael Barnett (Somendra) as well as Paul Lowe (Teertha) in the seventies. They both thought that they were enlightened and Osho said that they both weren’t, later in the eighties.

        • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

          And…Swamishanti…a late PS:
          The Rebel (inside -Ashram) publishing House with its fabulous beautiful logo of ´flames´ was probably the very right one after all….

          • swamishanti says:

            Yes, I have to agree, the saying goes, “never judge a book by its cover” but those Rebel flame covers really were beautifull with often quite good contents too. And a photo of the Master on the front.

            Nowadays, the covers are rather plain and grey and for some reason they have removed the photos.

  9. Lokesh says:

    My point is that using something Osho said to back up what you are saying is a pretty weak prop. It is weak because Osho contradicted almost everything he said. In other words, you can say Osho said black is white. Somewhere else you can say Osho said white is black, which is the exact opposite.

    Perhaps Osho was making a point about not taking his words too seriously. One thing he said and never contradicted was that it is more important to listen to the silence between his words. In other words, Osho’s message was more of a non-verbal communication. He used words to take the listener beyond words.

    Nothing makes me cringe more than some self-righteous sannyasin saying, “Osho said” to give credence to what they are saying. It’s a mug’s game.

    • swamishanti says:

      Good point, Lokesh. I have a tape somewhere, ‘Basho`s Pond, which is some instrumental music, and there is an Osho quote inside the sleeve:
      “I am not in my words. I am just around my words. Go on throwing my words away and collecting the nothingness that surrounds my words. Collect that music. Collect that hum.”

    • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

      You say, Lokesh: “My point is that using something Osho said to back up what you are saying is a pretty weak prop.”

      I agree and I disagree here, Lokesh, both…

      And it might take quite some time to discern if someone just misuses a quote to impress others or to shut them down in a chat, not unlike Arpana did quite sometimes here some time ago – or if someone was/is taken by a mystic moment (and its expression, let us say a Master´s quote) and feels the right moment to share that, what he or she just remembers.

      Takes practice to discern what is what and to find out for oneself when a quote is misused – and when not. It’s quite a meditation in itself – as well as for the readers – and for the senders.

      I won´t miss a Lover’s quote here and there, really!

      However, I also liked the recommendation in the UK/SN Chat here, not to quote too much; increasing the awareness not to fall unconscious into a parrot stance.

      Madhu

      • Arpana says:

        I did not use Osho words to shut someone down, Madhu.

        I only ever quoted him because the words meant something to me, words that resonated with my own understanding; and were often a way to say something I would have struggled to say in my own words.

  10. satchit says:

    More Tom Robbins – direct from O-International:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gq7IUM4lCrs

    • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

      Thanks for posting that youtube clip, Satchit, very much enjoyable!

        • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

          No, Satchit, didn´t enjoy that as much as I enjoyed Tom Robbins’s take, to say the least…

          This author of the Sueddeutsche.de just fakes to have a ‘liberal standpoint´ but is not a liberal man; seems to be more closely affiliated to teaching facilitators and in that, especially to those who nowadays are busy again to ´teach´ “Deutsche Werte” (German Values – for the other readers).

          And the very point Tom Robbins made about fundamentalist stances of ALL kinds, including Christianity, Buddhism, Islamist takes etc. this Bavarian wannabe teaching-helper, the Bavarian Review Writer, didn´t touch at all in his review re this Mystic Master Osho.

          But Tom Robbins did so and did it as a contemporary take on the issue (ever again happening, not only in the States and not only some more than thirty years ago). A very essential take in my eyes for young and very young people.

          The Netflix series didn´want to ´teach´, as far as I can see it, and that way, these young guys and their long work on immense doc material is quite an honest one.

          Then, after, one can say, the tourists of mental planes are coming…and commenting, commenting commenting. One does not know yet what comes out of it.

          That´s the best of a ´spring message´ I could deliver here!

          In Bavaria, where I am situated for a very long time meanwhile (and I don´t know about you, Satchit?) any well working spotlight on executed fundamentalisms of ALL kinds is – for me – very much appreciated.

          (The Sueddeutsche.de is – for economic reasons probably (re the latter issues) – not that big a functioning ‘light bulb’ as far as I can see/experienced it – but intellectually it´s one of the better sources, to be fair…(no obvious junk)).

          Madhu

  11. swamishanti says:

    Apparently, all the sannyas facts and figures, including who shagged who, and all the information about everything else about human activities are stored in the Akashic records, and then they can be accessed by the different species of extraterrestials, which then analyse and examine all the materials.

    Let’s hope they are friendly.

    • swami anand anubodh says:

      SS, would you happen to know if the ‘extraterrestrials’ use any kind of ad blocking while accessing the Akashic records?

      • swamishanti says:

        Barry Long and Paul Lowe have had more contact with these beings than I have, but apparently the extraterrestrials that are keeping files on earth people and have interest in studying our lives and even have hidden recordings of our ‘Darshan Diaries’ and records of our sex lives, could broadcast these up on huge screens, even as a kind of entertainment value on different planets, with many people gathered and watching the films on large projector screens at festivals and laughing at us, whilst munching popcorn, a bit like people watching the Netflix series on this planet.

        • swami anand anubodh says:

          SS, I reckon you’ve confused the Akashic records, with Google and Facebook. Just like when you confused Bong with a criminal and announced on SN that he had spent his best years being told to: “pick up that soap!”

          • swamishanti says:

            Well, Bong, mentioned a meditation centre in New Zealand, and then a sannyasin who claims enlightenment and who has been locked up for smuggling replied and said that yes, he knows that centre, and they sounded similar so I thought they might be the same person.

            Then, Bong announced he was a Christian and enlightened, and posted with a very similar name, James Abbott, to a Christian spiritual teacher who was locked up and claims to have found freedom from mind, James Bishop.

            Thus the confusion.

            • satyadeva says:

              Pretty flimsy explanations, SS, you just assumed this and that without checking the facts. Like the ‘Sun’ article you put up today (10.02am)…

              And btw, re your post of 2.31pm, April 14, for the sake of clarity, Barry Long never claimed to have ‘contacted’ “extra-terrestrials” (I have no idea what Paul Lowe said on the topic).

              Again, check your facts before putting out what sounds like a ‘good story’ (with more than a hint of an implicit swipe at sources you apparently haven’t bothered to research, let alone understand).

              P.S:
              I’ll get around to responding to your ‘Lennon’ notes when I’ve some free time next week.

              • swamishanti says:

                Well, it sounds like someone might have got out of the wrong side of bed this morning. By the way, I don’t always google everything before I write – some of it is just from old- fashioned memory.

                I think the ‘Sun’, or one of the other UK tabloids, may have serialised Hugh Milne’s ‘Bhagwan – The God That Failed’ back in the ’80s.

                They love a good scandal, especially if it includes lots of diamond-encrusted watches and sex.

                I don’t agree that it is not a good explanation: Bong did sound like a Maitreya disciple, he talks about the seven bodies and was living in New Zealand, mentions the same small Osho centre as God Dieux.

                God Dieux, like Maitreya, also meditated with Samdarshi and Baba Purnanand – and wrote a very similar book to Maitreya. They both claim, apparently, by the way, that Samdarshi’s daughter is the reincarnation of Vivek.

                Maitreya snorted his ketamine and had conversations with God, and God Dieux smuggled a block of hash and ended up meditating on a box in a Japanese prison.

                And Bong said that he was a Christian and a computer programmer, “James Abbott”. Then there is another Christian, James Bishop, who also happens to be a computer programmer.
                He was in prison. So not so hard so mix them up.

                You talk about Barry Long.
                You say he never spoke to aliens, but then how did he know of their existence? Did he see any saucers?

                Paul Lowe certainly claimed to have been in contact with them from the article I read in ‘Kindred Spirit’, in fact he was chosen to be the leader of a particular group he was leading at that time on Earth.

                • satyadeva says:

                  No, SS, it’s not a question of ‘being in a bad mood’ today (even though I lost on the Grand National yesterday and Arsenal went down this afternoon), I’m just offended by casual suppositions masquerading as what’s true.

                  Your explanations aren’t convincing, they’re parallel to the loose standards of tabloid journalism, well exemplified, as you yourself confirm, by saying, “By the way, I don’t always google everything before I write – some of it is just from old-fashioned memory.” As if anyone’s memory is reliable.

                  You ask how did BL know about “aliens”, thus exposing your ignorance about what he actually said, which was whoever was in the ‘flying saucers’ was “us” (the human race) “in another time”, ie the (presumably) distant future, having discovered how to travel faster than the speed of light, as fast as consciousness itself, science and the hitherto purely ‘mystical’ having finally merged.

                  If you’re really that interested in how he knew all this (which I doubt) then why not take the trouble to find out what he said, rather than making uninformed remarks like any old hack, by reading his book, ‘Origins of Man and the Universe’, which explains this insight in more detail? http://www.barrylong.org/product/Origins+of+Man+and+the+Universe%2C+The

                • swami anand anubodh says:

                  SS, perhaps you should take a timeout and ponder: Why the SETI & Breakthrough Listen projects spend millions each year in the search for extraterrestrials – when all they have to do is speak to Paul Lowe.

    • preetam says:

      Yes, back on planet earth: our society is ‘resulted’ by certain ruling forces. Their Fascism only knows violence and scheming. Which results in even more violence and surrender unto this malicious mind out of a deep fear.

  12. shantam prem says:

    Most of the comments fit with the video of Tom Robbins posted by the cult in 2006: flat, miles long and an inch deep!

    Swamishanti is doing a good job of working at CNN cut and paste department!

  13. Lokesh says:

    Sign of the times.

    • Levina says:

      For those ridiculous prices I could have a holiday in New York or better still, on a Greek island….

    • frank says:

      Wow.
      It`s time to start rooting through the attic and the garden shed, as memorabilia will be next.

      I`ve got one of those badges with Osho`s mugshot on that says `Love Life Laughter` on it -that’s got to worth a few quid.

      My girlfriend is a hoarder and she`s got a box with some Ranch era copies of the Rajneesh Times, stickers, posters and stuff and I think she`s even got an old copy of ‘Here and Now’, Big P`s forerunner to Sannyasnews.

      So, just as soon as Big P secures his prime-time “ultimate reality TV” slot in between ‘Keeping up with the Kardashians’ and ‘Coronation Street’, I`ll stick it on ebay and we`ll be sorted.

      Thanks, Osho, I knew you`d come through for us!

    • Arpana says:

      Worth remembering if the Ranch had been a success in such a way that even Lokesh couldn’t criticise what happened, the ‘Sun; would still have wrItten that.

      Lions hunt. Fish swim. The Sun vomits over everybody.

  14. Parmartha says:

    The Tom Robbins essay about Osho seems to me to be much closer to how I would assess Osho than a lot of the nonsense written.

    I figure that the cosmic joker is a good assessment and one I share. He was not a disciple, and I am. He simply misses the shaktipat.

    Many people, including devotees of all types, are actually seemingly born without humour, and this always gives rise to difficulties.

    • Arpana says:

      Might be useful to try and look at what happened in Oregon from the point of view:
      “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

      To which I would add: carelessness, forgetfulness, laziness and spacing out – the accumulated effects of. (Coupled with, unfortunately, early stage meditation practice, accompanied by “we meditate, we are spiritual and can do no wrong, nothing can go wrong.”).

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor

      • Arpana says:

        I don’t exempt myself from any of this.

        • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

          There exists this extended version, Arpana, re your wiki quote (15 April, 2018 at 1:05 pm):

          ” “Heinlein’s Razor” has since been defined as variations on “Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity, but don’t rule out malice.”

          It´s a pity, isn´t it, that the very wisdom of the fabulous ´STOP!` meditation-exercise of a Master like Gurdjieff obviously didn´t find its way to be practised by more than just a very few humans of some very secluded little groups of ´wannabe’ elite scholars of apparently ancient times?

          On the contrary, ´Discover malice, and rule out even more malice´ seems to be a predominant ´bot-like’ habit these times – wherever.

          Concerned about this!

          Sincerely,

          Madhu

          • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

            P.S:
            And what I tried to point out herewith, that sometimes – maybe more often than rarely – a thoroughly DONE ‘STOP!’ exercise might be much more efficient than endless discussions of fatal strategies of elimination (ruling out) of ´malice´.

            The complete version of that razor quote I referred to is to be found in a book of Peter Singer, where he warns about a situation where ´bots’ go to war. A science fiction stance of a scientist? I´m very unhappy to presume it´s not that fictional any more.

            As above, so below…

            What I love about us humans in investigating our ´humanness´ is that we’re maybe (still) able to investigate our bot-like obsessions, including the hurt inflicting them, which may be the the hidden motivation to perform ´righter than right´ and to go into fatal competitions with that kind of very unfortunate crap.

            This way, missing any ´Peace Train´ waiting at the station for us.

            Do you remember, Arpana, or anybody else here, the way Osho introduced that “STOP!” exercise (in 1987) for quite a while before AND after His lectures in Lao Tzu and then Buddha Hall Auditorium?

            Strong stuff!

            Madhu
            (I´m sorry sometimes that English is not my mother tongue).

    • bob says:

      So, Parmartha, what exactly is this “shaktipat” that you experienced? I have a feeling it’s one of those things that you would preface by saying “It is very, very difficult to put this into words, but…”

      Something that Lokesh might relate to in his Poona 1 darshan days with the master, I would guess. Well, take a shot at it, if you can. I always like to hear first-hand experience explanations of mysterious phenomena. I mean, if you don’t interminably gush on and on about it = have mercy please….

      • sw. veet (francesco) says:

        I did not understand, Bob, if you ask it out of cynicism or bitterness, that is, if you have doubts about the existence of honey or sweetness.

        If I were sure you were not a liar I would ask you if you have recently experienced something so beautiful that you can not find the words to tell it to those who do not give shit to know it.

        • bob says:

          No, Veet, just teasing Big P a little, as he is setting himself to be a step beyond poor Tom Robbins who doesn’t have the “shaktipat” thing in his experience. Nothing more than a little light-hearted playfulness. People tend to get quite serious about their “love” affairs, you know.

          As to beautiful experiences that can’t be expressed in words, they’re everywhere – the world, including mine, is saturated with them. This existence is lousy with miracles, so to speak. Good thing too, I would say – way better than blending beavers on a Saturday morning, thinking that you’re raising the consciousness of the world. Oh, man….

          • sw. veet (francesco) says:

            So also for you, Bob, there is a world, at the same time “lousy with miracles” and “saturated” with “beautiful experiences”.

            I’m not sure that right now someone in the UK recognises your “little light-hearted playfulness” if instead of Shaktipat you asked about Novichok, Polonius or Tony’s invisible weapons.

            Another miracle is to see that this show of magic happens in front of a very hated spectator, with that beaver crushed on his head. What other special effects would they invent in front of a politically correct woman?

            Let’s say that the raising of the consciousness of the world has two kinds of problems, and it is not obvious that one wishes to share the beauty of a rose when the lies of a war prevail.

            • satyadeva says:

              “I’m not sure that right now someone in the UK recognises your “little light-hearted playfulness” if instead of Shaktipat you asked about Novichok, Polonius or Tony’s invisible weapons.”

              Veet, this is a good example of your apparent preoccupation with how dreadful ‘the world’ is, and I wonder if that’s actually true for your own everyday life, or whether it’s just what you enjoy focusing on from the news media (together with imagining you might be able to improve things ‘out there’ – you know, ‘engage in the heroic struggle’ etc. etc?).

              Introducing the dichotomy in the above quote is actually a total ‘red herring’, as the two (“light-hearted playfulness” and “Novichok” etc.) are disconnected, unrelated – unless you decide to wilfully destroy the fun by choosing to allow the other stuff to create an inner disturbance greater than its actual effect upon you deserves.

              Which doesn’t necessarily imply being naive, ‘hiding one’s head in the sand’ about ‘the world’, just that if one is supposedly into ‘spiritual growth’ then surely there are far better things to be involved in than ongoing preoccupations with its evils.

              • frank says:

                Swami Ali says:

                “Parmartha exactly right,this liberalleftist western baboon Robbins know nothing about shaktipat.
                He can come Ozen cocoon buddhafield and my Black Cobras can give him good sustained shaktipat in third eye just like Dhyanraj. Then he know!
                Also I put foot in his ass then Kundalini rise up back and into crown chakra. This I do many time. See many results in Ozen cocoon.
                I Russian,very strong.
                I drink moloko-plus with extra shot of novichok every day for breakfast! This I do ever since 5 year retreat in Chernobyl electroshock hospital.

                Veet,you sound like true disciple with very little mind,you perfect,come to Osho cocom and we finish the job. You already master gibberish meditation although have some hard competition from Madhu. This very good.
                To get away from mind and speak from heart it absolutely necessary to stop making sense.
                You come Acapulco, grow beard ,take shirt off and soon enter Ozen lineage of enlightened ones in 1000 year yuga of superconsciousness!”

                • Arpana says:

                  Frank,

                  How do you know Swami Ali? Is he a denizen of your local?

                • sw. veet (francesco) says:

                  Frank, you’re too old and the effects of the ’76 trip to Kathmandu do not make you reliable for a mission to the Middle East.

                  Relax and enjoy your pension.

              • sw. veet (francesco) says:

                A proposal on the method, Satyadeva.
                Before you are wondering about my critical sense about what the media tell us, could you be wondering about where your English sense of humour about Trump ended up?

                Do not underestimate my playfulness, not even Bob’s.

                Perhaps you would find that in your red herring you try wilfully to exclude my light-hearted playfulness in opposing “Novichok” to “Shaktipat”.

                In fact I am very confident that soon you will show the evidence, in your way, British, of the energy experience you had in presence of BL.

                I only ask you to wait until the 8 pm news, after the bombings it really relaxes me listening to the spiritual goals achieved by wise men like you.

                • satyadeva says:

                  ‘Novichok’ opposing ‘Shaktipat’ – truly hilarious, Veet, you’re a comedian, signor!

                  What good has your apparently extreme concern about any of the world’s ‘evils’ actually achieved? Except waste your time and energy – or give you a feeling of ‘righteousness’ amidst all the soul-searching and condemnation of ‘the enemy’?

                  To give just one example, can you or I do anything to get rid of or even ‘change’ Trump, or Putin & co., or anyone or anything else they control? In your dreams, perhaps.

                  ‘Enjoy’ the 8pm news – but don’t imagine watching all that means anything, or enhances your credentials as a standard-bearer of a so-called ‘new humanity’. Unless you want to sink further into self-delusion.

      • madhu dagmar frantzen says:

        You say, Bob: “I have a feeling it’s one of those things that you would preface by saying “It is very, very difficult to put this into words, but….”

        Yes, Bob, it IS sometimes very, very difficult to find words; it´s as simple as that. Sometimes.

        What helps (to maybe find better words – if any), in my experience of sharing, is if one gets the impression that at the other ´end´, instead of prejudiced ´mind´, an Open-Mind-Listener is situated. So far re the face-to-face sharing.

        A viral chat may not deliver that possibilty by its very implications of ´anonymity´.

        On the other hand, it may deliver – just by chance – the possibility of a growing consciousness re the matter discussed for each and everybody at his or her place somewhere, somewhere…and prove useful that way.

  15. swami anand anubodh says:

    This must be the link to the WWC spoof that Levina tried to post.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ge9cebaVNg

    • Levina says:

      Thanx, Anubodh, I copied and pasted the link, but for mysterious reasons it refused to get stuck!

  16. sw. veet (francesco) says:

    Satyadeva, when you do not put your head in the sand, facing a threat, what do you do? Do you worry if you are wasting your time and energy fighting an enemy who wants to make you more and more a slave?

    If you rebel against the domain’s system of the few in charge on the planet could you ever do it alone with your sense of righteousness or would you try to share that seed?

    Is it so hard to free yourself from that English feeling of quiet desperation?

    Perhaps my only illusion could come from ‘new humanity’ like you, who have been close to such a flame of grace and rebellion, certainly not from my fellow fighters who recite all of Marx and Keynes by heart but know very little about themselves.

    In your eyes, it seems that my fault is witness to a joyous way of organising existence.

    I do not watch the news, especially those that indulge in horror, but the horror that still reaches me does not make my head bow under the sand, I prefer to rebel, along with others, even if not yet everyone knows how beautiful a man can be.

    • satyadeva says:

      Problem is, Veet, that you didn’t make yourself clear earlier. Suggest you do in future.

      • sw. veet (francesco) says:

        How much “earlier”, Satyadeva, since we have been chatting for months?

        Provided that yours is not an attempt to avoid recognizing (as you often reproach Shantam of doing) your inappropriate intrusion while I was giving a taste of Realpolitik to Bob.

        The problem is that you did it dispensing judgments, as usual, although I would have imagined one like you, supposedly into spiritual growth, surely with far better things to be involved in, maybe advaita exercises: neti Osho neti BL, neti Sheela neti Reagan, neti Assad neti May, neti Putin neti Trump…then why me?

        • satyadeva says:

          Veet, by “earlier” I was referring to yesterday (April 16), and I stand by my remarks about lack of clarity.

          As for “dispensing judgments as usual”, what else to do when faced with perceived foolishness? Don’t you yourself act similarly in much of what you write here? Or are you excluded from such a “judgment”?

          You ask, “why me?” – well, I ask, why not you?

          • sw. veet (francesco) says:

            Okay, sorry, Satyadeva, I will not talk to Bob about unclear things anymore.

            • satyadeva says:

              To which disingenuous response I can only advise, it ain’t about what it’s about, it’s about the way that you go about it!

              • sw. veet (francesco) says:

                I will treasure your advice, Satyadeva, after hearing Bob’s opinion.
                Now let me hug you, love.

  17. madhu dagmar frantzen says:

    There is a NEED to keep the level of awareness, Preetam, that we all are connected anyway, be it comfortable or most uncomfortable, to keep it as as high as possible, moment to moment, and again and again, before any sending out the bullies (material or otherwise) of any black-and-white reptile brain reactions.

  18. preetam says:

    But where is the awareness focused on?

  19. madhu dagmar frantzen says:

    That´s a very, very good question, Preetam.

    I don´t know about your experiences, but as far as I am concerned , I always – sometimes sooner, somtimes later – find out, that when I am ´focused´on something, I loose – sometimes deliberately ( if I want to concentrate on a particular task ) – sometimes unconciously (- then I use to say: `I am hooked in an inner-or-outer trap ´) , loosing the quality ,
    I´d call awareness.
    As awareness has no goal , it´s a quality of Being and one of the most beautiful ( also most peaceful ones!) , I know of.

    It´s the Silence in-between words, or in-between music , you can find it in the commitment , to ever again ´visit the space of spaciousness´, out of which anything comes and into that anything goes ; it´s like a very creative ( immaterial ) womb.
    Sometimes it cn happen that you come out of this space of Being with an answer you looked for for a longtime; sometimes, you´re just refreshed and in a mysteriously way – nourished.

    I presume, this must sound probably very ´romantic´and off the ground.
    But it is not.
    Yet it is undefinable.

    However, the moments you´ve lost it, temporarily – or may be apparentely forever- once you´ve tasted that Source of awareness – you´ll miss it, you bet !

    I am unable to answer your very, very good question, Preetam, just maybe able, to say, what awareness is NOT.

    You´ll find out all for yourself.
    Thanks for your questioning.

    Madhu

  20. shantam prem says:

    Honey-like words…
    Good one from Madhu.

  21. preetam says:

    Thanks, Madhu, for your loving reply and understanding.

    From my viewpoint, we are mostly occupied by something outside; even if it is done with concentration – it is outside.

    But basically, Existence finds us because of devotion and respect. That’s why I find a Master helpful, to identify the real treasures on our path and to understand their connections.

    Perhaps Existence, by its grace, will take our hands and from here truth itself teaches. Devotion and respect are such treasures before awareness and love watches itself.