|
Peter’s Correspondence on Mailing List C Correspondent No 12
PETER: Hi, Just a few words, although most people seem to insist we somehow communicate without them ... RESPONDENT: It seems to me, you think you’re the only one who has a wonderful relationship. I have been having a great time living with my lover for the last four years, but I don’t believe I’m alone in this... but perhaps it is just you and me; PETER: Good to hear it. In my experience, and by observation of others, it is an extremely rare thing. Of course, there is no love between Vineeto and I, we threw that out 18 months ago. We set our aim higher, and aimed for peace, harmony, equity and actual intimacy (the direct experience of the other – free of any affectation at all) for 24 hours a day, every day. RESPONDENT: It seems to me, you think you’re the only one who sees the misery in the world? To me and most people I know, this is totally obvious. PETER: Not only did I see it in the world, I saw and acknowledged both misery and violence in me. I also saw that the only one I could change was me, and that everyone else was simply trying to change everybody else. This was the turning point for me. I then had both intent and direction as to my searching ‘within’ that was lacking in the ‘spiritual search’. My aim in life then became to be happy and harmless. RESPONDENT: It seems to me, you think there are answers or solutions to all the world’s problems? PETER: There are no answers to the world’s problems. I am only pointing out that there is an answer that will make you happy and harmless. All the old solutions, and their ‘New Age’ re-runs, have failed to bring an end to wars, misery and suffering. Of course as more and more people become free of the Human Condition the world will change, but I don’t expect to see significant change before I die. But a few others will have become actually free. Those who want it, that is. RESPONDENT: Dude, you and everyone will awaken when it’s their time. I heard Osho say ... the fruit drops from the tree the moment it is ripe. PETER: I got tired of waiting for some mythical Existence or God to do it. I was also running out of time as I saw it. I took the bull by the horns and decided to make freedom my total focus. RESPONDENT: Do you believe you have these answers? It’s simple... love is the answer, and don’t hurt each other anymore... duh. PETER: If love is the answer, how come it hasn’t worked, and if it hasn’t worked why do we still advertise it as ‘the’ solution. If it was on sale as a product the makers would have been sued for misrepresentation centuries ago. All parents, teachers, priests, gurus, pacifists, moralists, ethicists, humanitarians say, ‘let’s don’t hurt each other’ but we still do. Maybe, just maybe, it is time to try something else. Maybe the problem lies within each of us and that is also where the solution lies. This would mean that the only person who can fix me up is me. It is radical I know, but maybe, just maybe, it is worthwhile a moment or two of reflection. RESPONDENT: Do you think you’re the best guru ever? PETER: No. If you had read anything of what I have written, you would have realised I regard Guru-ship as a demeaning profession, both for the disciple and He/She who swans around demanding trust, surrender and worship by others. The whole rotten set up has had its day. It was so good to get out of it and regain my will that I had surrendered. P.S. What I found with Richard was a mentor, a guide, an expert on the Human Condition – and a fellow human being. RESPONDENT: Osho is alive in me, I’m no longer searching for outside assistance, and frankly ... if you’re looking for followers I wouldn’t think this list is where you’d find them. PETER: No. I am most definitely not looking for followers. It would be both an imposition on the other and on me which does us both no good. However, having escaped from the Human Condition, I am able to write of my experience, and this will be of use to others who wish to travel this way. This is exactly why I wrote my journal, and why I am replying to you. It is such good fun, and I am experimenting with a new e-mail format. I think it might be easier to follow. RESPONDENT: Unless you are in competition with Osho ... perhaps your ego was wounded by something he said, and this is your attempt to prove your worth to yourself. PETER: No. I set my sights higher than merely being Enlightened when I met Richard. Nothing Osho said has been of any use to me – like most others it was the Energy at the time that was the attraction. He could have been talking about anything (as he did anyway – Hinduism, Buddhism, Sufism, Taoism, etc...) and I wouldn’t have cared. As for worth – I have none, also no use, purpose, value, reason, mission, meaning, significance, importance ... Nor am I humble, for another human being to be free of the Human Condition is an event of profound evolutionary significance, and I applaud the fellow who started all this business almost 2 years ago. But he certainly is not me as I am now.
PETER: It’s good to chat to you again. I do like it that you are willing to discuss these matters despite the fact that all that what we are saying is diametrically opposite to the current beliefs and concepts Humanity has held to be ‘true’ for millennia. So here we go, says he, curious as to where this will go. Isn’t it fascinating to sit at the keyboard, open up a mail, and not know what is going to come out. It’s such a thrilling and fascinating business being a reflective sensate human being – * PETER: As there is not a spiritual bone or spirit entity in this body I’ll pass on the spiritual bit. As for arrogance, as I have written many times before I regard it as the height of arrogance to call oneself God and have others as fawning disciples ‘loving’ and worshipping you. That this sick system has prevailed for so long, and has been revered as The Solution to the human dilemma begs the question – Why? RESPONDENT: I wondered the same. Yet if you open to the reality that there are different folks, needing different strokes... it becomes apparent that there are any number of paths to climb a mountain, skin a cat, etc. PETER: So far, one has had two choices only – to remain normal or become Divine. There are indeed many paths and methods available and increasingly proposed to become Divine and in the last 20-30 years many westerners, myself included, turned away from the western idea of waiting for death until Heaven was available and sought the ‘Divine while alive’ option offered by Eastern religion. What I am talking about, however, is a completely new option of becoming free of both normal self and Divine Self – a third alternative. RESPONDENT: The path of the devotee is a reality to many, and my perception is that probably just as many reach this way as any other. AND, I agree that most don’t awaken. PETER: If by reach you mean become Enlightened, the figure I have heard quoted is 0.0001% of devotees. Ken Wilber in ‘What is Enlightenment’ magazine RESPONDENT: But so what? What’s your problem with the world AS IT IS? PETER: Well for me it hit me like a ton of bricks one day when I realised that the spiritual path is not a new thing – millions if not billions of Easterners have painstakingly and diligently practiced meditation, witnessing, watching, retreating from the real world, etc. for thousands of years with so few ‘reaching’ and no tangible, actual change in the the Human Condition for the rest – humans are still firmly in the grip of malice and sorrow. The problem with the world AS IT IS is that humans still fight horrendous wars 160,000,000 killed in wars this century alone and the proffered hallowed solutions are a mere fantasy escape from this reality. RESPONDENT: When I was in the first stages of awakening, as perhaps you are, PETER: No, I have had a few of these awakenings and there was still a ‘me’ there, except I became a Grand ‘ME’ – I was Love, Existence and I were one and the same. RESPONDENT: I was trying to convince everyone of what I saw as the truth. PETER: I never got that far as I realized that if I kept on with pursuing my ‘awakenings’ that I would end up Enlightened and it was happening at a time that I was starting to have more than a few reservations about Enlightenment as a career path. In short, I didn’t like their lifestyles, I didn’t like how they were with their women, and I didn’t like the whole worship, God-men bit. I’m not being facetious, as you probably see it – it is how I saw it. It was at the time when I was deciding what I wanted to do with my life, and when I met Richard and he said you can become happy and harmless, actually free of any malice and sorrow whatsoever, in the market place, on earth, right now, right here – I took up the offer – and it worked. RESPONDENT: I was in a way right, but I was trying to change the world. This arrogance is actually hurtful as it is not accepting. PETER: Yes, it is such a strong instinctual pull to go for the Glamour, Glory and Glitz of being the Saviour of mankind. I battled with it for months on the path to Actual Freedom and I wrote about it in my journal, the God chapter, if you are interested. As for change the world – their are 5.8 billion people currently and what an impossible task. I turned it around 180 degrees and focused my entire efforts and energies on changing me – the only one I could change and the only one I was vitally interested in. After all I have to live my life, if I am not happy now, then I have something to look at, something to do, something to dig in to, something to change. I made my being happy and harmless the most important thing in my life. As for accepting others the other remarkable thing is that I now like my fellow human beings, I neither fear them or feel aggression towards them. I wish them well in life. And I offer my experiences and expertise, with neither humility nor arrogance, to anybody who writes to me. RESPONDENT: I began to realize that people awaken in their time, that learning only happens thru living, and there are no shortcuts. PETER: As I said, others are not my concern as to what they do with their lives, my happiness depends on no one else. But if someone writes I am delighted to talk of my favourite subjects. RESPONDENT: When you really get Osho, you get the joke ... that seriousness is the problem. PETER: I just decided as nothing else was working after 17 years on the spiritual path I would give something else a whirl. Sincere, honest, obsessed, serious – yes, at the time since it was my life and my happiness I was concerned. These days its not at all serious, this business of being a human being. I just need to make sure I have enough money for my simple needs – rent, food, and a computer mainly. I sold my car and bought a computer thinking it would be cheaper, but hmmm... Each day I awake, knowing I will have a perfect day and knowing that the only essential thing is to eat. A sense of well being that is palpable is my constant experience, on top of which I get to do cute things like write to you. Life was meant to be easy, simple, direct, obvious, sensate, delightful, harmonious, ever fresh each moment... * PETER: And to respond to Mr. Unknown – (He gets around a bit on this list – I went to the local New-Age bookshop but they said he was unknown there as well. I guess he is well known around the world in all the other bookshops as being unknown as well.) RESPONDENT:
PETER: There is that diving ‘inside’ for a bit of ‘emoting’ again. The trouble is that even if you find the feelings of Good or God or Love in there, it is but a temporary fix and does nothing at all to cure the dis-ease of the Human Condition. For the 0.0001% of seekers who manage Enlightenment (that of the permanent kind, not the modern ‘got it one day and lost it the next’ or ‘I already am, I just need to realise it’ variety) then one becomes fully deluded. Even of this crew, many report a ‘leakage’ or occasional anger or sadness. RESPONDENT: Now, with these statements, this is where you lose credibility with anyone who sees, or has glimpsed REALITY. PETER: Credibility means ‘believable, worthy of belief, trustworthy’, and if I have a point to make it is to stop believing what others say. It is imperative to find out the facts rather than merely believe, to sort out what is silly and what is sensible rather than merely accept what others say is right and wrong, good or bad, if one is to be actually free of the Human Condition in it’s entirety. RESPONDENT: And show yourself for nothing but a perfectionist, a judgmental asleep one at that! PETER: It’s a good thing I gave no credibility to the Mother of all beliefs – ‘No one’s perfect’, ‘life’s a bitch’, and ‘you can’t change Human Nature’. What helped to crack this one was that it was okay to call yourself God, and then have other people worshipping you? It is a strange world we find ourselves in, and it is good to make sense of this nonsense. RESPONDENT: If you don’t understand this poem, you just don’t get it. PETER: I do understand the poem, its perfectly clear that it points to getting nourishment from one’s soul, retreating from the real world into the spiritual world of the soul. Maybe, just maybe, it is you who do not get what I am saying. It took me about 6 months of pride-demolishing, scary investigation, contemplation and ‘self’-demolishing realizations before I was able to get it, and even then the work was not over, as I dug deeper and deeper. But it does end. The search does stop – the train does arrive at the station – as I am fond of saying. Well I’ve enjoyed it again, it’s such a pleasure to write of something that requires no belief, imagination or affectation. Something that is actual, tangible and available right now – the actual purity and perfection of the physical universe, right now, right here, happening at this very moment. And of how to get here...
PETER: And to respond to Mr. Unknown – (He gets around a bit on this list – I went to the local New-Age bookshop but they said he was unknown there as well. I guess he is well known around the world in all the other bookshops as being unknown as well.) RESPONDENT:
PETER: There is that diving ‘inside’ for a bit of ‘emoting’ again. The trouble is that even if you find the feelings of Good or God or Love in there, it is but a temporary fix and does nothing at all to cure the dis-ease of the Human Condition. For the .0001% of seekers who manage Enlightenment (that of the permanent kind, not the modern ‘got it one day and lost it the next’ or ‘I already am, I just need to realise it’ variety) then one becomes fully deluded. Even of this crew, many report a ‘leakage’ of ‘occasional’ anger or sadness. RESPONDENT: Now, with these statements, this is where you lose credibility with anyone who sees, or has glimpsed REALITY. PETER: Credibility means ‘believable, worthy of belief, trustworthy’, and if I have a point to make it is to stop believing what others say. It is imperative to find out the facts rather than merely believe, to sort out what is silly and what is sensible rather than merely accept what others say is right and wrong, good or bad, if one is to be actually free of the Human Condition in it’s entirety. RESPONDENT: Hello!!!!!!! I said YOU LOSE CREDIBILITY, meaning that you show us that you don’t get the meaning of the poem. PETER: Okay, since you have credibility, and have glimpsed REALITY, and I don’t get the meaning of the poem – enlighten me as to the meaning. What does it mean for you, and where am I wrong in my interpretation? At least then we will have something to discuss.
RESPONDENT No 17: I have enjoyed your writings. But only one thing has been questionable to me. Its about being disciple of Osho. As far as I have understood, you seem to had been a disciple of him to get something, Enlightenment, actual freedom, or anything you can call. It sounds a kind of bargain to me. It is very strange compared with my experience of being a disciple of him. PETER: You wrote to No 17 regarding his questioning of my discipleship compared to his – RESPONDENT: Yes, very well said. Good insight! PETER: I took it as a valid question rather than an insight. It is a standard rebuttal of what I am saying and I have heard it often from others. It falls into that ‘you just weren’t a good enough disciple, or you’re just a disgruntled ex-disciple’ category ... yet it was a valid question, well put. I wrote of my experiences and insights, as a disciple of Rajneesh, in my journal precisely to make my experiences clear to any others, should they be interested. What I find is that people seem to object first ... before even bothering to find out what they are objecting to ... rather than dare to even take that step. I do welcome scrutiny, but it is good if it is based on a sharing of experiences. What does being a disciple mean to you, what did you expect to get out of it? ... have you ‘got’ what you were searching for ...? Then we can have a discussion, if you are interested. Otherwise it’s just ‘point scoring’ and ‘taking sides’ type stuff ... which can be fun ... but a little senseless.
RESPONDENT: There is such a space as no-mind. I sometimes like to refer to it as real energy. In my experience, no-mind has two poles, male and female. In my male energy, I experience no-mind as silence...meditation. In my female energy, I experience heart energy ... love. And all, without cross-dressing ;-) To me, the poem in question celebrates no-mind. PETER: I agree with your interpretation of the poem, this is indeed what underlies all Eastern spirituality and philosophy. It is the very foundation upon which all the temples, ashrams and monasteries are built. No-mind means an unquestioning trust and faith in the Ancient texts. This calls for the setting aside of intelligent thinking and common sense in order to not only believe in God but to arrive at the state whereby you believe yourself to be God (or Realized or That, or Awakened or whatever other term ...). What a massive ego-trip if ever there was one. Do you honestly believe that this earth is some sort of horrible place that we humans have been sent to in order to suffer and fight with each other endlessly, and that the ‘chosen few’ will gain Immortality and be whisked away to a better place after death? That we are alien visitors sent to some cosmic penal colony? Yes, the East certainly celebrates and demands ‘no-mind’, for when exposed to the bright light of awareness, the Ancient Texts are clearly seen as fairy tales. For me, way back then, I wanted to believe because the only alternative to giving up the ‘spiritual’ was to go back to ‘normal’. In the end I could no longer live a lie when I saw that Eastern Spirituality was no more than Eastern Religion, when I saw I had got ‘out of the frying pan into the fire’. It was only when I serendipitously met Richard that I started to even begin to dismantle my spiritual beliefs – despite the many times I had of ‘bleed throughs’ of good old fashioned doubt and scepticism. Those ‘doubts’ were in fact the native intelligence and common sense that operates in this brain of this body, and is hidden in the brain of every human. As such, everybody is capable of becoming free of the Human Condition – if they stop believing. Without the belief in God, our destiny is in our hands. Bugger God’s will ... what has he/she done for us humans anyway...?
RESPONDENT: Peter, what you are describing here, between your excessive discursive pronouncements is simply... taking responsibility for one’s feelings. And I know, it is not popular, widely accomplished, frightening, etc, etc,... BUT IT IS HARDLY NEW!!!! New for you obviously. PETER: It is a good opportunity to examine that hoary old platitude ‘taking responsibility for one’s feelings’. I always wondered what was at the core of it? What it really meant? Let’s stick to some practical personal examples – those that concern the actual world of people, things and events. I had a number of relationships with women in my life that all degenerated to the point where neither I, nor my partner, were happy. I saw that my feelings, be they jealousy, anger, sullen withdrawal, resentment or whatever, were not only making me unhappy, they were directly causing my companion to be unhappy. And that further, on many occasions the feelings I had towards her were malicious (albeit psychically conveyed). To ‘feel’ anger towards someone is to be malicious – one does not have to resort to physical or verbal violence. When I began to realise this I was so horrified that I withdrew from relationships altogether. It was only when I met Richard that I decided to do something about my feelings and emotions. Eliminate them entirely so not only could I live happily – free of sorrow, but that I could live 24 hrs. a day with someone else and not cause unhappiness in other – free of malice. In my work, if I made a mistake I would admit the mistake, endeavour to fix it, and then make sure I didn’t do it again. With a feeling such as anger, there was nothing I could do to fix it afterwards, except do my damnedest to make sure I didn’t get angry again, ever, in the same situation. And then, when I saw anger again in another situation I would do exactly the same thing. My aim was to eliminate anger in me. It was useless to say sorry, beg forgiveness, and sheer hypocrisy to say ‘I take responsibility for it’ and then not do all I can not to have it happen again. Many spiritual people even claim their right to be angry, and insist on ‘loving’ themselves for it rather than feel the guilt that usually follows. The other classic is to claim the ‘right’ to be angry back – enshrined in the ‘normal’ world as Justice, or defending one’s right. The claim of ‘taking responsibility for one’s feelings’ has to be seen for the cop-out it is, if one is to be serious about becoming free of malice and sorrow, and if one at all cares about one’s fellow human beings. By neither expressing or repressing, having a sincere intent to experience the purity and perfection as evidenced in a PCE, a pure consciousness experience, it is now possible to eliminate both sorrow and malice from one’s life to the point where they are virtually non-existent. I say this from personal experience not theory. Then, and only then, is it possible that a final self-immolation will occur – (of both ego and soul). RESPONDENT: Owning one’s reactions, seeing them, totally experiencing them, feeling them totally, getting over them, meditating on them, going inside, gaining insight, feeling free, awakening, becoming conscious, etc, etc,... however you want to say these things... are on the path to REALLY WAKING UP... where you get this poem. PETER: All your pontifical protestations do nothing to change the fact that the Eastern spiritual tradition firmly points to transcending one’s feelings, turning away from the physical world as it is and aiming for an altered state of consciousness (ASC). This altered state of consciousness is a mere delusion whereby one thinks one is God, Love, Eternal, Awakened, Timeless and Immortal. The delusion is that one totally identifies as ‘being the soul’ and thereby completely denies the physical body. (‘I am not the body’ is a constant theme) – hence the self, in a blinding insight Realizes (that one is God – which one really suspected all along) From this lofty position One then ‘feels’ sad for others – upheld as the noble trait of Compassion. As for the theory of transcendence of feelings that we discussed the other day, I’ll leave you with a bit of the Dalai Lama – from a ‘What is Enlightenment’ magazine interview – ‘... according to Buddhism, all our efforts ultimately should go to training or shaping our minds. Emotions such as hatred or strong attachment are destructive and harmful – we call them ‘negative emotions.’ So how can we reduce these negative emotions? Not through prayer, not through physical exercise, but through training of mind. Through training of mind we try to increase the opposite qualities. When genuine compassion, infinite compassion, or unbiased compassion is increased, hatred is reduced. When equanimity is increased, attachment is reduced. All of these destructive emotions are based on ignorance, and the opposite, or antidote, of ignorance is enlightenment. This is why it is very important to analyze the world of the mind and find out what its basic nature is. What are the different categories of mind? Which minds are destructive? Which minds are constructive? and so on. Once we have analyzed all these questions, then we should try to control our minds by adding more good and removing the bad. Some modern scholars describe Buddhism as a ‘science of mind’ for this very reason’. Interesting, is it not? Personally, I think no-mind is was probably developed as concept by the disciples of Eastern Religions given that they could not make any sense of anything that is said or written. When I re-read any of them today I am totally bewildered.
PETER: Nice to talk to you again. I seem to be running out of people to talk to. I do understand that in challenging the belief in a God and an afterlife cuts to the quick of our-‘selves’. Without a belief in something better somewhere else, or a safe, peaceful inner space, an open-eyed look at the real world is appalling and depressing. Without God and the Good, we would have the Devil and the bad. But for me, the spiritual world did not fit quite right – there were always doubts – always something that did not quite jell. * PETER: What does being a disciple mean to you, what did you expect to get out of it? ... have you ‘got’ what you were searching for ...? RESPONDENT: I feel I had three masters before Osho. I say feel because the relationship was not so clearly defined. In each case, I found myself attracted to that person, having realizing I had something to learn. And I can truthfully say that I did not know what I was going to learn. Early on my path, I learned that the more I saw truth, the less depressed, the more peaceful and joyful I became. Before Osho I felt a kind of enlightenment ... perhaps of the kind you sense, Peter. I did not know my heart, but I knew how to process energy. I could transform any feeling in my body, any sensation ... into a transcendental conscious state. And I remember [group leader] Amitabh shocking me out of doing it in the first 5 minutes of the first group I did. He said I was killing myself. I immediately saw his point, and through trusting Osho and his group leaders, I relaxed my efforts. I didn’t see any change for some time, but eventually I woke to a ‘higher’ place. For me the key word is trust. And I see this word much misunderstood. PETER: I found the book ‘Collisions with the Infinite’ quite interesting, for here was a woman who, after abandoning years of intensive meditation practice, had a profound perception-altering experience. It appears she lost some personal sense of self, and lived for several years in a barren no-man’s land. Gradually after trying psychiatric help, she was taken under the wing of the spiritual fraternity and soon ... Bingo! ... what appears to have been a full emergence into an Altered State of Consciousness (ASC) whereby she realized her Divinity and Immortality. The interesting thing for me was the influence that her spiritual guides and confidants had on her experiences. What if there was another path apart from becoming God and Immortal? What if there was a way to become actually free of malice and sorrow and live as a flesh and blood human being, happy and harmless? How many would choose it and abandon the hope of Oneness, and especially of immortality? For one, it would mean that when the body died that was it – finito, kaput, the end, no more, extinction, oblivion. And secondly, to experience this Actual Freedom one would have to actively pursue ‘self’-immolation. For me, once I found out about it, dug into it, remembered a peak experience, it activated a sincere intent in me – a burning desire that we humans find a way to live together in peace and harmony on the magical fairy tale like, paradisiacal planet. As I explored into things in the spiritual world, I eventually realised that the only reason I needed to trust was that I kept having these feelings of doubt. If I had no doubt, if I was absolutely certain, if it was obvious and factual – then I had no need to trust, trust then is irrelevant. Once I saw the role trust played as the guardian and defender of beliefs, I was then able to investigate the doubts to see how valid they were. To really begin to challenge my beliefs which required trust, faith and hope to sustain – to ‘prop up’ as it were. Of course, then the feelings of guilt, being a traitor, being ungrateful, etc. come up, but what to do. For me, once there was a crack in the door I couldn’t keep from peeking further. Just some notes on trust – dictionary meaning in italics
So, it’s goodnight from me – good to swap stories.
RESPONDENT: Peter, you asked me a question, I answered you, and instead of responding to me, you set off on your rap. Are you aware you do this? And if what you were doing was trying to impress me with your understanding of the word trust, I must tell you that you failed. Trust is beyond thought, beyond beliefs, beyond ego, beyond your conception of sensation. PETER: Yes, I do rather respond with enthusiasm, verve and vigour. I delight in the fact that, at last, we humans can have an unfettered conversation about life, the universe and what it is to be a human being. To question the Ancient Wisdom of the past, to swap stories and information about what we have found out in our investigations. When I first met Richard, I quickly realised I had merely scratched the surface about exploring these matters, and he was an inspiration to go further and really dig in. I was amazed at the extent of his knowledge of the Human Condition and set out to learn more from him and to make my own investigations to verify the facts. This is not as some Guru-disciple thing – it is simply that he knew more than I did about the subject, and when he said he was happy and harmless I closely scrutinized his life and, over 24 months, have found not a glitch, not a quiver. There is indeed no psychological and psychic entity that dwells in him. As such he is the universe experiencing itself as a human being – most definitely not a God or a Guru. Perfectly delightful and harmless – free of malice and sorrow. I know, you just think I am off one of my raves again, but I am directly and intimately talking to you. I am telling you my story, ‘sharing’ my experiences, being ‘open’ about my life. That was exactly why I wrote my journal, why I write on the this list and will respond to anyone’s comments. We are all doing this business of being a human being for the first time – me included. The only significant difference between me and you is that you believe in an after-life, a ‘somewhere else’ apart from this physical actual world. And I am standing and living in this actual world saying it is all right – it is as delightful, pure and perfect as we all intrinsically know it is. I re-read my last response to you and saw that I ‘responded’ to the statement that ‘for me the key word is trust’. So I went on to describe the sense I made of trust. To try to ‘impress you with my understanding’ was not the point at all. As what I am saying is shocking to all, how could it be ‘impressive’ in the sense of ‘favourably influence’ But I do try and impress – as in ‘impart facts and information’ – anyone who is willing to listen about a new down-to-earth Actual Freedom. A freedom from the Human Condition of malice and sorrow. If you do not see my reply to you as a response, then fine. We can always talk about other things – there are many other subjects to talk about other than trust – if you like.
PETER to No 30: I know you addressed this to Vineeto, but since I was mentioned, I feel like replying. <SNIP> RESPONDENT: If you identify with the watcher, as Vineeto points out, then you are deceived. You are caught in the trick of the mind that splits itself... one part is you watching the other part. But both are your mind! Only when you get this insight, that the watcher is a thought, can you let it all go. Then, there is a real watcher, a witnessing that isn’t thought, only pure awareness. PETER: I see, we now have a ‘real watcher’ while others claim their ‘watcher’ isn’t a ‘watcher’ but a ‘witness’. ‘Who’s watching the watchkeeper’s watcher while the watchkeeper’s watcher watches his watch?’ To be a watcher, or a witness, is to watch oneself living life. Why remain a watcher – why not live life? such as there is no difference between you doing it and it happening. Why withdraw into an inner world when this physical universe is such a magical event, all happening this very moment. A simple walk on the beach reveals an ocean ebbing and flowing with the tide and rippling with waves. A sky of such a delicious blue and an unfathomable infinite depth. A sun of such intense penetrating warmth that it surprises me every time. Air that I often seem to be ‘swimming’ in, breezes that ripple the hair on my skin. Air that is sometimes laden with moisture, other times lively and fresh. And it is drawn into the lungs and you don’t know where the air stops and the lungs begin Or the smells on the air,... nature’s bouquets. The potency of the frangipani, the incisiveness of eucalypt, the smell of the ocean. Senses on stalks ... Alive. Or the delight of sitting in my chair, typing these words – two fingered with thumb on the space-bar – giving a ‘twang’ every now again. There was another one ... or four... The soft lighting, the sound of the TV in the background and of crickets outside ... Oh dear. I’ve been off on one of my raves again... Just a thought I had about watching.
PETER: So, it’s one more time again for you – RESPONDENT: OK, one more time with feeling. Perhaps we can get somewhere here. (Progress on the road to nowhere.) PETER: If you are trying to ‘change my mind’, get me to ‘see the light’, show me where I have got it wrong, then – it is indeed the road to no-where. As Galileo is reported to have said to the Pope when hauled before him for contradicting the Bible – ‘Okay Mr. Pope, but even if I do say that I am wrong and the sun does go around the earth it won’t change the fact that the earth goes around the sun.’ The facts are that in Ancient times primitive humans believed the sky was another world inhabited by strange objects – the Sun, Moon, Planets and Stars. They gave them names and worshipped them as Gods, prayed to them and offered them gifts. Soon particular tribe members took over the roles of shamans, the representatives of the God’s on earth. The God’s were split into Good and Evil and anyone in a fit of rage or depression was said to be possessed by Evil and the power of the Good spirits was evoked. Of course, now in 1999, we know that the source of sorrow and malice in humans is but the instinctual program of fear and aggression. In a valiant but ultimately doomed attempt we have called on the instincts of nurture and desire as a balancing act. The Good to do battle with the Bad. Indeed, all does pretty well, as we now have a sophisticated system of moral and ethical rules, backed up by police, prisons and armies to keep the violence to ‘acceptable’ levels. This still leaves the feelings of fear and sorrow rampant, and as a succour to this we still turn to the spiritual world of Gods and good spirits – we get to feel Good and appease the Gods on the side and with the promise of a better life after death thrown in for good measure. It was the best on offer up till now. But there is a way out of this washing machine of neurotic thoughts and churning emotions that avoids the inanities of believing in good and bad spirits, Gods and Demons. Become free of malice and sorrow – snip the problem off at the roots – our instinctual program and our self. I am curious as to why you keep trying to convince me that I am saying the same thing as you are when plainly I am not? I never had a great deal of trouble with the idea that there could be something new. It seemed obvious and it explained a lot of things that were wrong in the spiritual world. * PETER: To be a watcher, or a witness, is to watch oneself living life. RESPONDENT: No 12 here: This is where you go wrong! Witness is a transcendental state, no self, no identification to a self, no self to watch, and no thought. To me, it is from ‘knowing’ this space, that my experience of living life is momentary. PETER: It’s all a bit like the Pope and Galileo. If you insist on having a conversation on the basis of you’re right and I’m wrong we will get no-where really quickly. So now, what you are proposing is that your watcher, who was really the witnesser, and who became the Real watcher, is now the transcendental, non-identified, un-watchable, no-thought, of one-mind, space – with a male and a female side to it. Why do you keep insisting that the entity that ‘feels’ – who you ‘feel’ yourself to be – should stay in existence? It just means that you are going to be forever on a see-saw of emotions – sorrow, depression, sadness, boredom, excitement, frantic, blissful. Up again and down again, keeping the lid on, aiming to be good, aiming to get out of it by any way possible – alcohol, drugs, meditation, Realization. Why not get rid of the churning emotions and instinctual urges and enjoy an actual personal peace 24 hours a day for the rest of your life – free of the feelings of sorrow and malice. It takes a bit of effort at the start to get rid of them but their elimination is permanent. I remember clearly thinking at one stage, near the end of the journey, what a relief it was not to keep up an identity any longer, trying to be good, trying to fit in. It was all an effort and so tiring, so exhausting. To be free of malice and sorrow I am free to be here as me, this flesh and blood body – no longer racked by churning thoughts and emotions. For me back two years ago the two major things that stood in the road of my freedom were the feelings of fear and pride. I just figured it was silly to let such paltry feelings run my life. I wanted to be free of them, for ‘my’ feelings were ruining my life – spoiling my happiness and causing me to inflict them on other equally inflicted people around me. RESPONDENT: To quote Osho on this point:
PETER: Ah! I see you still want to compare what I am talking about with what the mystics say. The mystics all talk of an ethereal mystical world, the inner world of feeling peace and feeling God. They knew something was wrong with us human beings, but their solution was to attain an altered state of consciousness (ASC) such that the identity shifts from being a mortal, lost, lonely frightened and very, very cunning ‘self’ to become the ‘Self’ – Realizing that it is God and Immortal. The ASC only got rid of half the problem, the ego, and the soul is free to run amok such that they believe they are God and that they are immortal. It would all be okay except others believe them, and proceed to worship them as Gods ... and yet another Religion is born. What I am talking of is the actual world, where flesh and blood mortal human beings live, here, now, on this planet. What I am offering is information about a down-to-earth freedom from self-centred neurosis and churning feelings and instinctual drives. Not some flight of fantasy – there are no spirits in the actual world, they all dwell in the spiritual world. So, to the quote – Looks good on the surface – if you don’t think about what he is really saying – but dig in a bit ...
I am not given a moment – it is always here. I can either be here in this moment, as this flesh and blood body or ‘I’ can be somewhere else, ‘off’ replaying or rehearsing some scene, worrying about what someone else is thinking, feeling sad, lonely, deep in my ‘inner’ world or cut off altogether in an altered state of consciousness. For ‘I’ am anywhere but here, now.
I guess this is a ‘no-mind’ piece of Wisdom – but even the scientists are running a fantasy about parallel universes and they guess that then you could have two moments. I always see the parallel universes in a stack like a pile of plates on God’s dinner table.
There is this whole secret bit running and the biggest secret is that the ‘Truth that cannot be spoken’. The secret is actually no secret at all – it is that by achieving an altered state of consciousness one gets to feel like God and one imagines oneself to be immortal. In the actual world there are no mystical secrets – they are seen plainly as the fairy tales they are.
Yes indeed, there is no grander feeling than to feel like God, to have a feeling of Oneness with it all, one feels as big as the universe. You are so ‘totally in it’ because it is all your own creation. If the physical world is an illusion then you are ‘totally in’ an illusionary moment in an illusionary world. The author is, after all, on record as saying he was an alien on earth and just a visitor. Me, I am an earthling, made of the same stuff, ageing and mortal. The mystics can never know the actual world. It’s so good that it is 1999 and serendipitous that I met Richard and got free of all these nonsensical mystical beliefs. To prove that it is possible to change Human Nature ... That there is – ‘something new under the sun’. If you are interested, the Evolution chapter talks about this and has an answer to the question ‘why me?’ that I ran for a while. Gee – there’s a lot of words again ... another rave, hey. All just to say – ‘step out of the real world into the actual world and leave your ‘self’ (and ‘Self’) behind.’
PETER: I see that I scored a side-mention in your post to Vineeto, so I thought I would comment – RESPONDENT to Vineeto: I have perceived your care, which with pure love is compassion by the way, in most of your posts. So my next question is, How did you get stuck with a head-fucker like Peter? ;-) Love ... PETER: Simple. Within weeks of meeting Richard I was challenged by the obvious fact that unless
I could live with a woman in peace and harmony 24 hrs a day, every day, then life was indeed a sick joke. If I couldn’t live with one other
person in peace and harmony, how could I expect there ever to be peace on earth. So I propositioned Vineeto and asked her if she was interested
– which she was. I have posted the story before, but in case you were practicing the Sw. Deleeto ‘no-mind’ deletion-meditation at the time,
the story is told in I assume from the above that you are also saying that you find my posts lacking in compassion. Given that compassion is ‘Participation in another’s suffering; fellow-feeling, sympathy. Pity, inclining one to show mercy or give aid. Sorrowful emotion, grief’ you are right. When one has eliminated sorrow in oneself it is then an impossibility to share it with others. To uphold compassion – an agreement that we all must suffer together – as a Noble ‘set-in-concrete’ feeling is to forever condemn Humanity to suffering. I simply stepped out of the whole mutually-agreed scenario that says ‘life wasn’t meant to be easy, you only grow through suffering, no pain – no gain, you can’t change Human Nature, etc.’ I could only manage this by fully experiencing the range and depths of human feelings and emotions, by not ‘turning away’, by neither repressing nor expressing, but looking with open eyes at the Human Condition and acknowledging the facts. This then evinced an action such that the only option open was to do what I could about the appalling situation we humans find ourselves in on the planet. That action was to do all that was possible to actually eliminate malice and sorrow in me. With the elimination of malice, the need for love is extinguished to reveal what is intrinsic in the actual world – benevolence. With the elimination of sorrow, the need for compassion is extinguished to reveal what is intrinsic in the actual world – delight. To comment on your not caring for the term harmless, as you indicated to Vineeto – RESPONDENT to Vineeto: And as for the term harmless, I don’t care for the implications of powerlessness that I hear in this word. Reminds me of an image of an impotent over-the-hill codger. PETER: The manifestations of power in the ‘real’ world are obvious to most – money, political power, sexual power, emotionally-wielded power, physically-wielded power. In the spiritual world there is an ultimate power and that power is God – in whatever manifestation one believes in. Just a reminder for those who have trouble with words and meanings – ‘God:
So one could clearly say that to be God is the ultimate power in the spirit-ual world. To be ‘at One with God’ is a pretty good achievement as well, as the distinction between you and God is tantalisingly vague. The drive to Enlightenment – to become a God-man – is clearly a drive to power. What more power can one have as a human than to be a God-man? What more authority than to be treated as a God by one’s fellow human beings? In the East, achieving Enlightenment is to reach the pinnacle of power and authority. My personal observations from my spiritual days throw some more light on this fascinating subject –
There is no power in the actual world – it exists only in the alien entity within humans that desperately fears and fights, seeking psychic or physical power over others, firstly as a means of survival, and then as the will to power and dominance. In the spiritual world one either aims for the power of God for oneself – Enlightenment, Teacher, Healer, etc., or one surrenders one’s power to a God as a follower or disciple in return for his love and protection. The God then becomes more powerful because he has a bigger group around him and yet another religion is born... Actual Freedom is the elimination of the very ‘me’ who seeks power over others, it cuts the very root of the whole problem that has plagued Humanity for tens of thousands of years. Then you get to be a happy and harmless ‘old codger’ like me, with a delightful sex-life.
RESPONDENT: Peter, Are you saying you were on the ranch for 5 years? PETER: I am surprised you are still reading my posts – another case of ‘once again with feeling’? I cut the end off my story for the sake of brevity, so I will take the opportunity to post it now. I spent the Ranch years in a Rajneesh commune, visiting the Ranch each year with one 2-month stay and one 4-month stay. My story is very clear if you read my journal, but I’m very happy to post it to you bit by bit ...
You didn’t comment on what was the main point of the story – a disciple’s willingness to kill and be killed for the love of his Master. How do you stand on this? What were you willing to do if the National Guard came over the hill? I guess it is relevant to your ideals of pure-love and trust. I usually dislike hypothetical questions but this situation was very real and evidently only days away from happening, according to some reports.
RESPONDENT: Peter, Are you saying you were on the ranch for 5 years? PETER: I spent the Ranch years in a Rajneesh commune, visiting the Ranch each year with one 2-month stay and one 4-month stay. RESPONDENT: Yet in an earlier post you said this, Peter.
A slight exaggeration to convince the world you know what you’re talking about? PETER: I see you are still busy with this point – Methinks you are grasping at straws. For months I have been posting stories about my experiences, placing links to my journal, telling everyone that I have written a journal, stating as clearly as possible my history. If you had bothered to read you would have discovered that my Sannyas experience is very clearly laid out. The section before, and the very next section after, in my journal clearly states that I was not on the ranch all the time. There were many more Sannyasins around the world in communes for whom those 5 years were ‘a time of continual ‘worship’ and excitement, being part of this great experiment, and there was little time for, or emphasis on, therapy or meditation’. Not an exaggeration but a common experience for thousands I assume. It is an exaggeration to assume that only those ‘Resident’ on the Ranch had the vision, shared the experiences and felt the feelings I talk about. As I said the main point of the story is relevant to all Sannyasins at the time – with a gun, without a gun, on the front line, or watching on from elsewhere in the world. * PETER: You didn’t comment on what was the main point of the story – a disciple’s willingness to kill and be killed for the love of his Master. How do you stand on this? What were you willing to do if the National Guard came over the hill? I guess it is relevant to your ideals of pure-love and trust. RESPONDENT: Putting words in others mouths to make your points is malicious, shame on you, Peter, your mind will stop at nothing to prove yourself right. You are ridiculous! hahahahaha PETER: I did put the question quite bluntly, but haven’t you ever wondered what it is that causes us human beings to fight and kill each other for love of Country or love of God? I don’t see at all that I ‘put words in your mouth’. It is your stated position, as it was mine at the time of the Ranch. If you are one of those who would not have killed or been killed then fair enough. Maybe I was the only one who loved Him enough, after all.
RESPONDENT: Busy? Just pointing out how you attempt to deceive, confuse, and how you now evade by making yourself the same as ‘There were many more Sannyasins around the world in communes for whom those 5 years’ ..., but you, you Peter did not worship for 5 years. Period. If you had you might have realized what the ranch was really about. However, in this regard you do have lots of company. Many Sannyasins didn’t get what the ranch was about. They merely saw the next lesson for them. To have an overview that is true, a genuine perspective of what Osho was doing there, you would have to be near his level of consciousness, and I’m afraid that is quite a stretch for you. PETER: Being a down-to-earth sort of ‘old chap’ and a bit naïve to boot – I believed it was about a New Man, a city to challenge the world, a new way of living and working together, a new way of being together as human beings. A city of higher consciousness than the rest of the world. A city free of crime, a city of love. But as you say that I am only one of the many who ‘didn’t get what the ranch was about’, perhaps you can tell me what the Ranch was really about? What is the true overview as you see it? * PETER: There were many more Sannyasins around the world in communes for whom those 5 years were ‘a time of continual ‘worship’ and excitement, being part of this great experiment, and there was little time for, or emphasis on, therapy or meditation’. Not an exaggeration but a common experience for thousands I assume. It is an exaggeration to assume that only those ‘Resident’ on the Ranch had the vision, shared the experiences and felt the feelings I talk about. As I said the main point of the story is relevant to all Sannyasins at the time – with a gun, without a gun, on the front line, or watching on from elsewhere in the world. RESPONDENT: So, do you really want my answer here? Well I’ll write it for everyone else, who doesn’t trash these posts, because I don’t feel you’ll hear it, but what the heck, I’ve got plenty of time. PETER: I would like to know – it is almost impossible to find anyone who is willing to clearly talk about those times. And I have got plenty of time as well. RESPONDENT: BTW, I used to be an officer on the National Guard, and I know the military mentality or lack of same very well. PETER: I have never done military service, just spiritual service, so you are one up on me there. RESPONDENT: It is true that the ranch was a very dangerous place. I know, but I wonder if you know why? PETER: Was it because both sides were armed, and both sides were convinced they were ‘right,’ and were convinced that the other side was ‘wrong’? Just a guess, but that is the basis of most wars, conflicts, ethnic cleansings, sectarian violence, disputes, troubles, etc. in the world. RESPONDENT: First of all, I had no ‘stated position’. Where do you get this stuff? Pure love and trust has got to do with killing for the master? How you try and confuse everything. PETER: This gets a bit silly here. Are you saying you have not written about your valuing pure love and trust? The reason that I probably would have killed or died for Rajneesh was out of ‘love’ for him and because I put my ‘trust’ in him. We are usually willing to kill in order to protect those we love – be they kin, kind or leader, and further, would often sacrifice our own life in order that they may live. This is a common reaction – a direct product of our instinctual programming. This is all very straightforward and basic stuff. RESPONDENT: Perhaps you are this confused? Probably you are, but you don’t realize your problem, so there’s no helping you. What a waste, surrounded by gurus, and therapists from all over the world and you don’t get you have a problem. PETER: It’s that old hoary adage ... you need to do some groups, Swami! Well here’s a bit on that subject –
And now you will tell me that I missed the point of doing groups, that I didn’t get ‘it’. What I did get was that we all have the same problems, the same issues – that we all suffer from the Human Condition – and this was useful in that I was then able to not take my own problems so seriously, or so personally. It was a crack in the door to getting free of the Human Condition in me – I stopped being so ego-centric in that I didn’t take everything so ‘personally’ anymore. Nor did I resort to denial, or dis-association. By neither suppressing or expressing I was able to begin to investigate my feelings, emotions and instincts in the light of bare awareness. RESPONDENT: Where was I, oh yes, would I kill for the master? Well I didn’t have a weapon (that’s what we army guys called pistols and rifles), but if I did and they came shooting to kill all of us, which I’m sure they would have done if Osho hadn’t found a safe way to get us all out safely, you can bet your sweet bippy I would have loved to shoot it out. Why not? What’s wrong with it? PETER: I just watched a TV program on war and it highlighted the main causes of warfare as territorial, religious and ideological. Territorial conflicts are perhaps understandable, but religious wars over whose God is the only God defy sanity. And ideological wars are equally inane as both sides always believe they are right and the other is wrong. Whatever the reason, it is always one group against another group. RESPONDENT: Do you get that everyone must leave this body? PETER: No, when I die, I die, for I am this body. There is nothing to ‘leave this body’. RESPONDENT: Now if you have a preference I can understand it. BTW, what is your preferred way of dying? PETER: I think painlessly, and before I am too decrepit to click a remote control or a mouse. RESPONDENT: You have something against war, I know. PETER: It does seem an appalling waste of life, a gross suffering, that within a so-called intelligent species continuous and horrendous wars are fought over imaginary Gods and silly principles. Being ‘against war’ was such a motivation for me in the 70’s when I marched for Peace, and later when I took Sannyas with its ideal of a New Man. RESPONDENT: Anyway, I do understand what causes people to kill each other. It is called identification or ego, and I’m afraid Gurdjieff said it way before you Peter. Sorry to tell you this, old boy. PETER: I take it that you deleted To get rid of the ‘ego’ only, is to let the feelings and passions run rampant, such that one will readily and willingly kill for ‘love’ of country, God or leader and one will readily sacrifice or surrender one’s life for country, God or leader. Almost all killing is a passionate affair, unless one practices dis-association that is, and then it simply becomes a mindless affair. If one is willing to die as a self-sacrifice, hoping for some mythical after-life paradise, it makes eminent sense to sacrifice one’s ‘self’ for peace in this paradise, on earth, here, now.
PETER: Being a down-to-earth sort of ‘old chap’ and a bit naïve to boot – I believed it was about a New Man, a city to challenge the world, a new way of living and working together, a new way of being together as human beings. A city of higher consciousness than the rest of the world. A city free of crime, a city of love. But as you say I am only one of the many who ‘didn’t get what the ranch was about’, perhaps you can tell me what the Ranch was really about? What is the true overview as you see it? RESPONDENT: I am rather down to earth also, but I am rarely naïve growing up in New York City, rather I am innocent when I am. Unlike you who ‘believed’ the ranch was about the things you mentioned, I saw that it was indeed about these things and more. It was to create a Mecca, a magnetic force to bring all open people to Osho. PETER: Okay, so whereas I merely ‘believed’ what the ranch was about, you ‘know’ and you ‘see’ due to your higher level of consciousness. It does rather strain my neck a bit, as I am forced to forever look ‘up’ to your level. It does make discussion, on the basis of us being two human beings, more than a bit difficult. RESPONDENT: It is true that the ranch was a very dangerous place. I know, but I wonder if you know why? PETER: Was it because both sides were armed, and both sides were convinced they were ‘right,’ and were convinced that the other side was ‘wrong’? Just a guess, but that is the basis of most wars, conflicts, ethnic cleansings, sectarian violence, disputes, troubles, etc. in the world. RESPONDENT: No, the ranch was a very dangerous place because of the potential to be a Mecca of consciousness. Were it to succeed, it would have been a gigantic embarrassment to all religious and political leaders. PETER: I guess we at least agree on the fact that it failed. None of the many similar experiments that have occurred throughout history have succeeded and most have either imploded, died a disreputable death, or dawdled to extinction. The Ranch died when Rajneesh flew out. RESPONDENT: Osho would have proved that they were 3rd rate mentalities. There is no way, in my view, that those in power would permit the ranch to reach its potential. They would have simply dropped nerve gas on us, and then thrown cool-aid packages around the place, and 99.99% of the people in the world would believe that Jonestown repeated itself. PETER: I seem to remember that the Ranch imploded from internal strife, corruption, violence, deception, and deceit rather than from military intervention. Seems to me you are being a bit hypothetical here – something I was accused of when I stated that I probably would have killed for the ‘love’ of my Master. * PETER: It’s that old hoary adage ... you need to do some groups, Swami! Well here’s a bit on that subject –
What I did get was that we all have the same problems, the same issues – that we all suffer from the Human Condition – and this was useful in that I was then able to not take my own problems so seriously, or so personally. It was a crack in the door to getting free of the Human Condition in me – I stopped being so ego-centric in that I didn’t take everything so ‘personally’ anymore. Nor did I resort to denial, or dis-association. By neither suppressing or expressing I was able to begin to investigate my feelings, emotions and instincts in the light of bare awareness. RESPONDENT: So, you did get quite a bit from groups and being with Osho. PETER: No, you are putting words into my mouth again. The only thing that I got out of doing groups was that I saw we humans all have the same problems – that none of us is unique, special, individual or on different levels of consciousness. The rest, as I have said, was a mere scraping around on the surface.
... As in the current disputes in Poona, where only ‘those in power’ are at fault. As for my time with Osho, I have said it before in a post to No 27 –
RESPONDENT: Where was I, oh yes, would I kill for the master? Well I didn’t have a weapon (that’s what we army guys called pistols and rifles), but if I did and they came shooting to kill all of us, which I’m sure they would have done if Osho hadn’t found a safe way to get us all out safely, you can bet your sweet bippy I would have loved to shoot it out. Why not? What’s wrong with it? * PETER: I just watched a TV program on war and it highlighted the main causes of warfare as territorial, religious and ideological. Territorial conflicts are perhaps understandable, but religious wars fought over whose God is the only God defy sanity. And ideological wars are equally inane as both sides always believe they are right and the other is wrong. Whatever the reason, it was is always one group against another group. RESPONDENT: So, what’s the problem? This is how it is on Earth right now. To quote Doris Lessing, ‘This planet is allergic to the truth. PETER: That you don’t see the problem, obviously relates to your being on a higher level of consciousness. The only higher level of consciousness that exists in the spiritual world is the level of Divine delusion that one can imagine and sustain. To be Enlightened is the ultimate altered state of consciousness whereby one is convinced one is God or at one with God, a sort of ‘God and I are best mates’ scenario. As for ‘That is how it is on Earth right now’ you should have added ‘and that is how it always will be’ – according to Ancient Wisdom. As for Doris Lessing, she also wrote – ‘We are all of us made by war, twisted and warped by war, but we seem to forget it.’ Then in the 70’s and 80’s she got in to Sufi Mysticism and ‘evolution of consciousness’ theories. She then wrote cosmic fantasies, dreamscapes, and science fiction and she turned away from the concerns of war. She indeed seemed ‘to forget it’ herself in her later years. RESPONDENT: Do you get that everyone must leave this body? PETER: No, when I die, I die, for I am this body. There is nothing to ‘leave this body’. RESPONDENT: You’re in for a very rude awakening I’m afraid. PETER: Ah, no doubt you see me in some sort of Sannyas hell. Will I be there with all the Christians, National Guards and Ronald Reagan? Will the Buddhists of Nanking be there or will they be with Buddha in the Buddha-heaven? A few moral and ethical problems posed by the concept of heaven and hell? Ah, I’ve got it! I will obviously be continuously re-incarnated as an Indian rickshaw driver in Pune, so I can perpetually suffer at the hands of those of ‘higher consciousness’. RESPONDENT: You have something against war, I know. PETER: It does seem an appalling waste of life, a gross suffering, that within a so-called intelligent species, continuous and horrendous wars are fought over imaginary Gods and silly principles. Being ‘against war’ was a motivation for me in the 70’s when I marched for peace, and later when I took Sannyas with its ideal of a New Man. RESPONDENT: The ideal thing is your projection as far as the new man is concerned. The ideal is a mind trip that is responsible for most suffering. PETER: I agree, following and believing in ideals has always ended in suffering. One’s hopes are inevitably crushed. Far better to go with something practical that works. RESPONDENT: And war is not a waste, it is only suffering that awakens anybody, so from this heightened perspective, it serves. And it’s not like they aren’t going to die anyway ;-) PETER: I’m speechless as to this wisdom ... I know it entrenched in both Eastern and Western Religions but when it is wheeled out as the final definitive defence as to the ‘need’ to continue the wars, rapes, murders, tortures, suicides, despair and human suffering, it still astounds me. ‘It is meant to be because it is God’s will’. Given that God doesn’t exist, it is but an insidious belief – that there is such a thing as Evil, and that suffering exists solely in order that those with a ‘higher consciousness’ can look ‘down’ on the rest with compassion. RESPONDENT: Anyway, I do understand what causes people to kill each other. It is called identification or ego, and I’m afraid Gurdjieff said it way before you Peter. Sorry to tell you this, old boy. PETER: I take it that you deleted the post on the Zen Wars where the dis-identification of the spiritual path is discussed at reasonable length. A reading of history will reveal that many wars have been fought at the selfish whim of political, religious and tribal leaders, often against any handy enemy, as a means of enhancing the leaders’ own power, authority and greatness. Those who follow these leaders do so as a means of enhancing their own power, authority and greatness as a member of a stronger group. And on, and on, and on it goes. One group against another group. RESPONDENT: Of course. Power crazed leaders create the wars. And their asleep followers follow. PETER: So the Zen Enlightened masters who supported the Nanking massacre were power crazed leaders and their asleep followers merely following? But Sannyasins who were willing to kill for their master are somehow different? Because it was to establish a ‘Mecca of higher consciousness’ against ‘3rd rate mentalities’? Sounds not very different to the ‘Zen at War’ review I posted –
* PETER: To get rid of the ‘ego’ only, is to let the feelings and passions run rampant, such that one will readily and willingly kill for ‘love’ of country, God or leader and one will readily sacrifice or surrender one’s life for country, God or leader. RESPONDENT: You would have to drop your ego to know that you are incorrect here. It is only ego that kills, ego being the identification to something other than what one is. Nobody identifies with what one is, simply a human being. They identify with football teams, etc. PETER: Oh, boy. Now you are saying that no-one identifies with what they are – simply a human being. But you are claiming a higher level of consciousness – doesn’t sound like ‘simply a human being’ to me. And Rajneesh proclaimed himself a God-man, hardly your ‘simple human being’. Your twisting and turning and distortion of facts and words in order to fit your scenario is quite astounding. Are you trying to ‘clip on’ a bit of Actual Freedom on to your philosophical and spiritual views perchance? A few have already tried with ego-deflating results. * PETER: Almost all killing is a passionate affair, unless one practices dis-association, and then it simply becomes a mindless affair. If one is willing to die as a self-sacrifice, hoping for some mythical after-life paradise, it makes eminent sense to sacrifice one’s ‘self’ for peace in this paradise, on earth, here, now. RESPONDENT: And again, so what? The world is the way it is, and nobody learns anything from anyone else. PETER: And yet we take the Ancients literally at their word – believing everything they are supposed to have said, fervently ‘learning’ away. Our total learning has come from the Ancient Ones, merely regurgitated by the current generation of priests and Gurus. For me, it was serendipitous to have come across Richard and learn all I could from a man who had been Enlightened and seen through the delusion it is. Who refused to stop until he had unravelled the Human Condition in its entirety. Who refused to accept that the world is the way it is and that it will always be that way – that you can’t change Human Nature. ‘Why not?’ was the question he asked. Not a trace of Ancient Wisdom. Not a trace of surrender. No sitting at the feet. No trusting. No blindly following. No believing. RESPONDENT: It is all from experience. Life is to be lived, not thought about. PETER: What an appalling scenario. If one doesn’t think for oneself one just ends up following and believing everyone else. The ability to think and reflect is the essential ability of the human species. To think otherwise is to be gullible in the extreme. RESPONDENT: A mystery to be lived, were Osho’s words, I remember. PETER: To the mystic, life has to always remain a mystery, for what they peddle is mystical, imaginary and ethereal. They, in fact, vehemently oppose any attempt to make sense of life, to apply intelligent and reflective thought on the subject. They actively discourage looking at the facts and instead encourage belief, fantasy, imagination and intuitive feeling. To an actualist, the solving of the mystery is the journey and adventure of a lifetime. The actual world that one emerges into far exceeds any imaginary and ethereal mystical realms.
Peter’s Text ©The Actual Freedom Trust: 1997-. All Rights Reserved.
Disclaimer |
