Posts Tagged ‘gurus’

Osho and Bhagwan

Posted: 10/04/2018 by zandtao in Freedom, Insight, Struggle

I am not a fan of Osho. I examined his work several years ago (1 and 2), and I have no reason to change. There are great teachers around for whom there isn’t doubt such as the Buddha, Eckhart Tolle, why take the risk of teachers who present questions about ego.

When I criticised Osho I was not using his history as Bhagwan because I was unable to be certain enough of what I was reading. There was a recent Netflix documentary series, “Wild Wild Country” (6 hours plus of fascination), that gave me sufficient certainty, and there is much that documentary brings into question.

I am not a fan of “following gurus”. In the Kalama sutta the Buddha spoke of not believing him, learn for yourself. I believe the Guru tradition asks followers to trust the Guru completely, I don’t have objections to many Guru’s teachings but I try to learn for myself. I also understand that a Guru has a responsibility for all those s/he teaches. When I look at this documentary series I am always asking when did the Bhagwan take responsibility?

I have the feeling that the series is well researched and accurate, but it is the media so I can never be sure. My first question is why did the community go to Oregon, why did they leave Poona, India, in the first place? The documentary suggests there were doubts about the Bhagwan when he left Poona the first time. But why the inimical community of Oregon?

Was it respectful to establish such a spiritual community in a US backwoods traditional Christian community as Antelope, Oregon? As the US worships the power of the buck, by their terms it was legitimate but I don’t think so. Where should they establish a commune? Don’t know, a very different question.

My interpretation of the series was that there were no doubts that the Oregonians escalated the issues, and then the US legal apparatus continued the escalation. Firstly the Oregonians attacked the community on the land use issue, the response of taking over Antelope was based on this. And then there was the bombing of the hotel that led to arming the Rajneesh community. I have no doubts who were the aggressors. But then the responses – no excuses, especially from a Guru.

The whole documentary was absolutely fascinating. I was alive during all of that and yet I knew none of it.

What struck me so strongly is the love these Sannyasins had, but wisdom – I don’t know, wisdom seemed not to be valued. I rarely meet spiritual people where I live, but those I do are ex-Bhagwans. They have some sense of being lost, perhaps because they never broke the chord of Guru following, I don’t see them as “complete” – one was clearly disturbed. If I had gone East to the Bhagwan just after my upheaval – just starting on the path (never crossed my mind then), I could imagine I would have been completely enraptured as well. A frightening thought, and a warning about such a powerful Guru. I will not pick up an Osho book, I would not know where he would be sucking me the wrong way.

During the documentary there was a movie shown the Christian Oregonians, the sexual practices frightened them. This movie, Ashram in Poona, can be found here 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.

I found this movie frightening, throughout I was thinking they were playing with stuff that should come out naturally over time. It is the same feeling I have about LSD and, I think, ayahuasca; it jumps the gun. But this approach was definitely directed spiritually – so risky. Sure there is energy, sure there are emotional blocks, this is part of life and we must find ways of releasing them. But we …. If it is a technique, if it is laying-on of hands (transmission?) then maybe we aren’t ready, aren’t equipped. How many of those Sannyasins were sorted, were able to cope with life? Was the rest of their life just dependent on the Bhagwan experience and that they were always harking back to it rather than moving forward?

In the documentary there was an old white Oregonian saying that the Rajneeshis were just looking for God. Well it’s the same thing. But is the way the restrictive Christian right have found God in America any better? At least the Bhagwan wasn’t funding global war or attacking women.

I have to point at something which is so important in teaching – sila – moral integrity, the backbone of any teaching must be sila. Especially when people are coming from western societies this sila is so important, as the West doesn’t necessarily provide any. Immediately the Oregonians would say the Rajneeshis have no sila because of sexual misconduct (one of the 5 precepts) – their view of the promiscuity. I am unwilling to comment on this because although it appears there was sexual misconduct it does not appear that their sexual conduct was hurting them. But I don’t know. The ex-Bhagwans I know are open to question concerning sexual desire – many expats are in Thailand in the game of mutual exploitation of younger women. The Rajneeshis in Oregon seemed genuinely happy amongst themselves, this does not indicate misconduct. But I wasn’t there, I don’t know.

But definitely spirituality requires a moral backbone – sila, and from what I have seen Osho offered none. That is sufficient for me not to go near Osho’s teachings given so many other alternatives. Energy without sila is dangerous.

<– Previous Post “Mindful consuming” “Treatise Milestone”Next Post –>

Books:- Treatise, Wai Zandtao Scifi, Matriellez Education.

Blogs:- Ginsukapaapdee, Mandtao, Matriellez.

Anatta in Buddhisms?

Posted: 20/07/2013 by zandtao in Buddhadasa
Tags: , , , ,

Investigating anatta in Buddhisms ….more on Buddhadasa page

Blogs:- Zandtao, Mandtao, Matriellez.

Inelia – maybe?

Posted: 03/07/2013 by zandtao in ONE planet
Tags: ,

Inelia Benz?

Yes, she is still confusing me. Here is the clip again:-

I have not managed to stay awake through the whole clip yet – nothing special in that, but as I was watching I caught a very disturbing image of her in my clock face. Disturbing enough to make me feel there is something wrong.

But what? I haven’t come to terms with that yet. The first thing that strikes me is that she suggests that she is solving the world’s problems. But she can only do this with the acceptance of the people – “free will” at some level but not conscious apparently. This might well mean something genuine to some people – Lightworkers?, but to me it brings concerns. My main concern is that of inducing apathy:-

“Hey Inelia will save me, I don’t have to do anything; and if it’s not Inelia then there are all these other aliens who will help. Man I want that help, this world sucks – pass the spliff.”

What is meant to happen is that we, individually, must try to take control of our own lives. The tentacles of the ruling elite – superrich – Rothschilds weave their way into every aspect of life, the dream they weave enslaving many throughout the world, waking from this is the duty of all yet the apathy of most. That waking cannot occur without making an effort even if the consequences of that effort are not always immediately obvious. Does Inelia encourage this individual responsibility? I have to say yes. Towards the end of the clip she speaks of fear, we individually must overcome the fear that is created by the elite’s tentacles. But the mind is lazy and will choose the free “Inelia will do it” ride.

She also seems to be promoting Gaia, I talk of ONE planet, shouldn’t I be happy? Here is a group meditation for enhancing Gaia’s energy:-

What is the effect of such meditations? Does it take energy away from the more difficult and perhaps more important individual journey? I don’t know, any thoughts?

So I am left confused. I met someone who believes that energy might be a way of defeating this super-rich. I don’t know but I tend to think not. Focussing on our own Paths, improving our own strength to be compassionate within our own communities – even using existing genuine democratic structures and communities (communes), isn’t that where our energy needs to go? People especially those who have used mind-expanding drugs perhaps see solutions elsewhere, but isn’t the real solution in the nitty-gritty where we have to learn to control our own selves hoping eventually to work towards no-self? Inelia feels like a shortcut that maybe would take longer because of abdication of responsibility; but I have to say …. maybe?

Blogs:- Zandtao, Mandtao, Matriellez.

Kamma et al.

Posted: 30/06/2013 by zandtao in Insight, ONE planet
Tags: , , ,

Well I am confused and already tired from answering emails but I want to explore this. In meditation little came up when I was thinking about it.

A friend asked me to look into Inelia Benz, I watched, fell asleep and woke up for a good bit near the end:-

I watched her again, and each time I watch it is intriguing but my position hasn’t changed. The bit I woke up for is still the best bit for me.

Following Tan Ajaan I tend to reject what I have to believe in, and Inelia is talking of much that requires belief – at least for me. I began to look further to find that Bill Ryan, the interviewer, is touting her for various trainings. They have a website Ascension 101, in which you can pay a $100 for training in Ascension. I met Ascension before with Openhands, and Chris Bourne made an interesting movie called “Five Gateways” – discussed here. I also had an interesting dialogue with him about sila – moral integrity, I think it is particularly important that any form of spirituality directed to the West has a strong moral component as western mores are extremely slack. But there was a lot in the Ascension movie I liked.

Then I watched “David Icke – was he right?”, (I have discussed him before):-

He was a pin-up sportscaster who suddenly appeared on tv talking “rubbish”. As in the Wogan interview featured in the channel 5 programme he was ridiculed, and sadly from the prog his family also suffered because of this ridicule. His books sold, I think, I remember him for the marketing of his “belief that he was God” and his belief in aliens; I also remember there were many Icke jokes. At no time did I see anything of his clear analysis of destruction on the planet by the financial elite.

To fully accept Inelia and David requires a belief in aliens, and I don’t like beliefs. Belief in aliens is worse. There is no reason to believe aliens don’t exist, there’s no reason to believe that aliens don’t have an impact on this planet, but there is no reason to believe it either – for most there is only belief. But blaming our troubles on aliens is not accepting that humanity is responsible for the appalling things that go on on this earth. The Rothschilds are responsible for much death and destruction as a consequence of their manipulations for profit (download this). Can human greed be responsible for so much death? Sadly I think so, it is not necessary to have aliens to be responsible for this.

One other aspect of concern when people are asked to believe, and that is mental proliferation or unwarranted imagination. If there is no belief and that we must experience then we have so much more control of our minds. We don’t have to believe all the rubbish in the media if we only accept what we know is true. Mind expansion is not necessarily a good thing. We grow up in a culture that represses the mind, it teaches us a dream of ignorance that we need to break through. Both Inelia and David talk about this. But is an ever-expanding mind a good thing? There is talk of oneness and experiencing this oneness, and by experiencing this oneness we can create so much. But if we are not centred and humble then can we be “not-self”? If our minds expand and yet in those minds we have ego, does that ego not expand as well? Does self not expand? Inelia teaches a mind expansion meditation:-

Is this not dangerous? I have done such meditation and it is exhilarating but it did nothing for “not-self”. The “bread and butter” stuff is needed. Maybe as well, maybe instead?

I apologise for saying this but David Icke could be called David Oik. His figure is not the shape of a healthy man, he guzzles beer, came from a football background, I suspect his morality, and he does not present the image of a spiritual man. He got angry with the police for not moving on – defending his liberties, his fame probably saved him from arrest; this anger was not spiritually endearing. He is simply one of the lads. Yet we are asked to accept that one of the lads can give prognostications about aliens. In the tv prog some of his forecasts came true, but aliens? Now you could say I am hung up on aliens, but how many people would dismiss what both have to say just because a belief in aliens is required? To be honest it makes no sense to me that David Icke was given this knowledge. But he was, and to be fair to him he has delivered this knowledge taking the knocks with it.

Both are matter-of-fact about their knowledge and both say “take it or leave it” – even when David was being ridiculed by Wogan in the tv prog. So where does all of this bring me? Simple, I don’t understand. I think of this as Kamma. It is the Kamma of Nature to decide what we do and it is up to us to follow. It is not my kamma to be David Icke, and I could imagine he would not want my life. Inelia believes it is her kamma to raise the level of the vibrations of the planet, and it is her understanding that she has effected change for the better. Her way of effecting change is not mine, but who is to say she is wrong? Kamma can say, I can’t.

Addendum 1/7/13

The highest vibration is compassion. We can all be compassionate, no necessity for belief, no striving for the paranormal – compassion.

Blogs:- Zandtao, Mandtao, Matriellez.


Posted: 20/06/2013 by zandtao in Insight
Tags: , , , , ,

Blogs:- Zandtao, Mandtao, Matriellez.

Adyashanti 2 – Meditation

Posted: 16/06/2013 by zandtao in Buddhadasa
Tags: , , , ,

Adyashanti is helping me think more on Tan Ajaan. Meditation ….more on Buddhadasa page

Blogs:- Zandtao, Mandtao, Matriellez.


Posted: 09/06/2013 by zandtao in Insight, ONE planet
Tags: , , ,

The other morning I woke up full of kilesa, my mind, being full of this self-induced kilesa, started proliferating criticising Chogyam Trungpa, Bhagwan and the like – I had just watched the movie about Chogyam Trungpa (see comment). Strangely enough not during meditation I was able to sit back and see this for the mind proliferating. Being critical is important, but in what way?

This is part of “exploring the khandha sankhara” – the mental formation of criticism. So when is criticism not-self? The criticial faculty is there to discern the presence of self, help destroy the self help with the non-attachment of self. Self-criticism.

Does it have a role where I was using it – criticising others? This has been an arrogance that I have had to deal with, as an angry young man I was always too free with the criticism. I can remember horrendous discussions with a friend which always ended in my frustration and losing my temper. Seeing and telling, whether I was right or not, was not the order of the day but my arrogance persisted. Now when I meet him I shut up, I don’t say anything unless asked – and it works in a way we don’t argue and I am frustrated.

And this holding back counsel is an important reason for not proliferating with criticism. Why let your mind wander and criticise someone else? What good can it do? One can never be sure of being correct but even if you are where does it lead you if you can’t say? Frustration – dukkha. If someone is genuinely open to criticism – discerning self, you can maybe help but it is doubtful – they of course have their own critical faculty and if they wanted to use it they would.

I have an arrogance about my Path – someone once called me a “right f—er” when I was younger and being more openly criticial. This is another clear example of realising the Path and yet still being self. It reminds me of the hours I used to spend walking – coast paths etc. On these holidays I would leave the school behind and find somewhere just ot walk. To begin with my mind would be all over the place, criticising, proliferating, and then I would start proper walking, thumb and second finger touching, watching where I put my feet – a bit like walking meditation only I picked it up from Castaneda somewhere. My mind was walking – not proliferating, in Nature we follow our Path.


Posted: 11/05/2013 by zandtao in Buddhadasa, Insight, ONE planet
Tags: , , , ,

I call myself a Buddhist but do I believe in Buddhism? …. more on Buddhadasa page

UG – Natural State

Posted: 10/05/2013 by zandtao in Buddhadasa, Insight, ONE planet
Tags: , , ,

This is a name I have seen but not looked at, however I downloaded “The Mystique of Enlightenment” from Holybooks

“I discovered for myself and by myself that there is no self to realize — that’s the realization I am talking about. It comes as a shattering blow. It hits you like a thunderbolt. You have invested everything in one basket, self-realization, and, in the end, suddenly you discover that there is no self to discover, no self to realize — and you say to yourself “What the hell have I been doing all my life?!” That blasts you.” This is what UG calls the Natural State, is there a problem with this?

“I don’t give a hoot for a sixth-century-BC Buddha, let alone all the other claimants we have in our midst. They are a bunch of exploiters, thriving on the gullibility of the people. There is no power outside of man. Man has created God out of fear. So the problem is fear and not God.” Can anyone say this?

Exploiters thriving on gullibility, how can anyone say that? I cannot know whether Buddha was enlightened, I have not met him, I have not been inside his head, and I don’t know whether there is enlightenment. Can UG possibly qualify to meet these 3 criteria? Same goes for his condemnation of others.

I don’t know the man but it reads like a niche, an approach of difference. In some ways I can understand that. What are blogs like this about? Different people describing their understandings in the hope that sharing brings understanding for others. UG has done all kinds of stuff in the spiritual world. When I read what he has done I can understand some of his frustration (only some I am not him). He has spent his life searching for enlightenment based on a family of theosophy, student with J (Krishnamurti), and all kinds of stuff that did not give him an answer. Then he discovers for himself that there is no self to realise, that has to be hard.

I understand that that is what the Buddha taught, at least according to Tan Ajaan that is what the Buddha taught. When I listened to Adyashanti – “What is Enlightenment?” Torrent here , he describes perception without ego. Isn’t this OK? It does seem that the search for enlightenment is the problem, and not the teachings. Perception without ego is a short statement but it says an awful lot and I would suggest that it is even harder to do. Anatta (Pali for no self) says a lot but it is hard to do. Upadana (not clinging to I or mine) says a lot but it is hard to do. Where’s the search? Where is the miracle cure?

UG describes a “calamity”, and I think of the various “hitting bottoms” that I have come across – Eckhart Tolle, Neale Donald Walsch, Paul Garrigan, my own …. How different are they? Intensity, mine was not as intense as the others although it felt powerful at the time – upheaval of life. What happened to me? I grew up with a middle-class background, and I was pushed into academia and a life of getting a job. I always remember at uni people asking what their ambition was, and I said I would be happy with a house, a wife and kids – to much ridicule. Of the people there I am probably the only person who has never been anywhere near that. My head was full of constructs and expectations, and they had nothing to do with Nature, the Natural State, anatta. In uni confrontation was never forced, it was easy. I go to work and there there was confrontation. I had to do stuff to earn money that I didn’t want to do. My first job was a bit interesting and the job had a good social life (appealing to my growing alcohol addiction) – even though I never did my job well. Then I went to Sevenoaks which was all about “a house, a wife and kids”, and I just sank lower and lower until in the end I just gave up and blew it out. Hit bottom.

Now that kind of chanelled expectation is nothing compared to the budding UG. He appears to have been forced into a life of expectations and search for enlightenment. He appears to have had his mind filled with so many things and not internalised them. Rejecting all of this he ran away from those expectations, and eventually it all hit him and he had his calamity reaching the Natural State. Yet he describes it all as non-causal, but is that so? I don’t know, I’m not him – not inside his head.

But his is not a life that does not fit the “hitting bottom” pattern – it is just that his is more extreme. Because the conflict in him was more extreme it would seem natural that the hitting bottom would also be more extreme, but the process is the same – isn’t it? The power of his calamity has got to appear far more intense than my limited experience but process-wise how different is it? More importantly how different is it for others?

If he had never picked up a book that discussed anatta, perceiving without ego, or whatever he read, if he had never had 7 years with J, would he have ever learned about no-self? Just because he resisted the internalisation of it for so long does not mean that it was not a consequence of his study in some way.

Doesn’t this all boil down to horses for courses? Tan Ajaan was famed when young and spent his life in Thailand in a monastery, he is lucid about no-self, claims he is a slave to the Buddha and gets his understanding from the suttas. He does not condemn anyone, but talks of truth in all religions. UG has his upbringing and background and condemns. What about others? I know little about what I do write about, I know much less about what I don’t write about, but it just seems to be different strokes. If it is anatta, isnt that enough? Tan Ajaan’s journey appears a lot more peaceful.

Process is important, what is the process? Insight. Somehow inside, all these ideas and belief systems are grappled with, and then eventually out of the other end comes perception without ego. I don’t know Zen koans but isn’t the koan process that concepts confuse the intellect leading to understanding – gateless gates, (pathless paths, truthless truths – I made these up I don’t know koans). Is the process the form of the koan or the process of disengaging the intellectual mind so that the Natural State of Insight comes out? How this happens can be easy or hard? We are all different, yet we are ONE with no-self. Process.


Here is a description of the aftermath of the process by Jack Kornfeld:-

“From Jack Kornfield’s ‘After the Ecstasy, the Laundry’:

It was early in my spiritual life. I had gone to a few meditation classes. Now I was lying quietly, in solitude, resting after so much time thinking, wondering. My mind was in the clearest, most open state. It also felt charged, alive, yet absolutely still as well. I had not known such a balance of alertness and ease was possible. I picked up an old Buddhist text and read a few lines:
“Although the One Mind is, it has no existence. In its true state, Mind is naked, immaculate, being of the Voidness, transparent, timeless, uncompounded; not realizable as a separate thing, but as the unity of all things, yet not composed of them. Arising of themselves and being naturally free like the clouds in the sky, all that appears fades away… The whole of the World and Nirvana as an inseparable unity are one’s own mind.”
Everything I knew of the world shattered open. I could not say what was left, for there was nothing of myself at all. There was that which is here before the sense of self ever existed. I knew once and for all that there is no self, that any sense of self is an illusion. We are empty like a dream, a play of mind. Gradually some of the world came back, though in many ways my sense of it had changed completely. I had no idea how I was supposed to live anymore. For weeks I walked around in a kind of lightness and shock.”

I like his title, whatever he had opened up he still has to get back to the laundry. Doing things – good stuff.