27 sept. 2011 à 19 h 56 min #123
More on Gurdjieff
Lords of the left-hand path: A history of spiritual dissent – Stephen E Flowers:
Editorial Review wrote:
This is an extensive study of Left-Hand Path individuals and groups from ancient times to modern movements such as the Church of Satan and the Temple of Set – both of which have individual chapters in the book. Ancient paths include the Egyptian cult of Set, Hinduism, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, the Yezidis, Neoplatonists and the Greeks, the Germanics, the Slavs, the Assassins, Dualist sects, the Faustian path, the Hellfire Club, de Sade, Marx and the sinister aspects of Bolshevism.
A whole chapter is devoted to Hitler and Himmler and the occult practices of Nazism. Other modern individuals analyzed include Blavatsky, Gurdjieff, Crowley, Spare, Gregorius and Gerald Gardner.
Georgi Ivanovich Gurdjieff – Knight of the Supremacy of the Will – Sir Hassein, K.Tr.:
Gurdjieff was a Left-Hand Path (LHP) Initiate. All who claim otherwise have never finished reading Beelzebub’s Tales.
Three Dangerous Magi: Osho, Gurdjieff, Crowley – P. T. Mistlberger:
Osho, Gurdjieff, and Crowley were all entirely occupied with healing the inner fragmentation of the person. To tackle this problem they, on occasion, moved deeply into exploring the Left Hand path and accordingly ended up using many approaches that addressed the repressed, shadow part of the mind.
Cult Education Forum – Re: Gurdjieff groups in the SF Bay Area – mid-seventies
You might want to do some research on Michael Aquino as well. He took over Anton LaVey’s Satanic church in San Francisco and founded the Temple of Set
in Marin. Interestingly, several Gurdjieff books are on that organization’s reading list. Aquino was also a high ranking officer in the U.S. Navy and at least partly responsible for the abuse of children in mind control experiments at the San Francisco Presidio, which was exposed in the news in the later 1970s.
I know of at least one Gurdjieff/Subud group that is connected to an area Satanic group.
Wikipedia: George Gurdjieff
Pauwels claims Karl Haushofer, the father of geopolitics whose protegee was Deputy Reich Führer Rudolf Hess, as one of the real « seekers after truth » described by Gurdjieff.
But what is woman, says Gurdjieff, Just nothing but man’s handkerchief. I need a new one every day, Let others for the washing pay.
The Dark Halls of Fourth Way Encounters…Gurdjieff, Hess, Hitler, Haushofer, Crowley, Rasputin
G. I. Gurdjieff, (architect of the Fourth Way), was fast becoming famous at a time when there was a focus on leaders around the world. He escaped the revolution in Russia when Rasputin was the Machiavellian dark figure on the scene of Russian mysticism and political intrigue. Gurdjieff later was accused of being a tsarist agent named Lamas Dordjieff as well as other rumors which had his personage as a close confidante of Karl Haushofer, the mentor of Rudolf Hess, and linking him to the creation of the Nazi party.
Gurdjieff & Stalin
“There are rumours that Hitler was acquainted with this doctrine of Gurdjieff. Essentially this idea of a man as a machine is the foundation of any totalitarian regime. Gurdjieff is the inspiration of totalitarianism. He is a guru of totalitarianism, despite the fact that he himself was not interested in politics.”
Mikushevich talks about Karl Haushofer and his geopolitical views because “he was acquainted with the experiences of Gurdjieff in Tibet. They tried to discover the true Aryan race in Tibet, and in the faces of Tibetans to find features of Nordic people.” Mikushevich refers to Haushofer, who was a member of the Thule Society, as “a student of Gurdjieff.”
Sufism and the Way of Blame
J. G. Bennett was convinced that Gurdjieff’s greatest influence came from a group of proto-Naqshbandis in Central Asia, a brotherhood later verified by HasanŞuşud as the Khwajagan, or Masters.
HasanŞuşud, a rather enigmatic Sufi in Istanbul, had disguised his former affiliation with the Naqshbandiyya and with another group that referred to itself as the Nuriyya-Malamatiyya (in Turkish, Nuriyye-Melamiyye). He had revealed that he had a rather low opinion of Gurdjieff as a « thief of the tradition. » It is hard to tell which tradition Şuşud was referring to, although he probably meant the Khwajagan or the malamatiyya, or both of them comingled together.
A common element that tied together Gurdjieff, the Shah family, Bennett, and Şuşud was that all of them referred to the Masters of Central Asia. All of them also posited that the Khwajagan had functioned as a rather elite group within greater Sufism; yet all of them, with the exception of Şuşud, seem to have deviated from the central teachings of Sufism, which emphasized the nothingness of human beings next to God. Instead, the followers of Gurdjieff, Bennett, and Idries Shah would all continue to promote a form of occult elitism that emphasized a hidden hierarchy in Sufism composed of superhumans who operated beyond, behind, or outside of normative Sufism and Islam. And this idea was inimical to the original teachings of the Khwajagan.
The late Annemarie Schimmel spoke for a lot of people in the academy, amongst the Orders and the solitaries of the Sufi universe when she asserted in her MYSTICAL DIMENSIONS OF ISLAM that students of Sufism would do well to take Idries Shah (and by extension Gurdjieff and Bennett) with modest grains of salt – as neither one of these names are authentic representatives of the Tradition. JG Bennett is especially problematic since he was an agent of British intelligence (a spy for MI6) whose involvement with Idries Shah and Sufism really had more to do with Anglo-European colonialist/imperialist adventurism and geostrategic designs on Eurasia than the Tradition itself.
However as Columbia University Professor Hamid Dabashi has pointed out, Islamophobia and Anti-Semitism are species of the same thing.
Sufism and the Way of Blame: Hidden Sources of a Sacred Psychology – Yannis Toussulis Ph.D
Amazon review wrote:
The first section discusses the impact of several men who introduced Sufi (or quasi-Sufi) ideas into the West: Hazrat Inayat Khan, Idries Shah, Gurdjieff, and John G. Bennett.
On a Spaceship with Beelzebub: By a Grandson of Gurdjieff
Editorial Review wrote:
Spiritual « schools » of most any kind are nonsense; all development is self-development, and the kinds of methods used in what is left of the Gurdjieff organizations are merely self-deception and self-projection, often nearly on the scale of psychoanalysis and organized religion. If one reads between the lines in this very well-written and honest book, this becomes more than apparent in the behavior of pseudo-gurus like Stavely and Pentland – and contrary to some reports the descriptions in this book ring true, not just of those individuals but all those who set themselves up as « mystical authorities », including Gurdjieff himself. The only flaw the book has is that Kheridan never seems to realize that it isn’t just his teachers that are limited, but the whole enterprise of spiritual search through dedication to such imaginary « masters ».
The Gurdjieff Work – Kathleen Riordan Speeth
Amazon review wrote:
Writers of spiritual philosophy could learn a lot about communciating their ideas by reading this slender, marvelously clear document. The author distills an enormous amount of complex material in a brief, accurate, and wholly understandable format. Don’t let anyone tell you that complex ideas necessitate complex language. When someone really understands a subject, he is generally able to speak about it simply. And this author provides a beautiful case in point.
Amazon review wrote:
This book is unrivalled as the clearest presentation of Gurdjieffian mythos, ethos & logos. For anyone seeking transparent elucidation of the « work », this is the best starting point. Instead of meandering through the ponderous & subjective musings of Nicoll, Bennet, Orage and Ouspensky, here you got in a nutshell:
1.GIG’s cosmology: a highly original ( this is an understatement ) variant of Neoplatonist emanationism combined with Blavatskyan planes/worlds; all set in a pseudoscientific lingo using ordinary chemical symbols ( Carbon, Oxygen, etc.) in a bizarre quasi-alchemical setting.
2.GIG’s psychology: a modern-day gnosticism without « divine spark ». His famous « centres » ( physical/vital, emotional, intellectual ) are old Platonic & Thomist archaic psychology recast in a deceptively « oriental » mode- in fact, Gurdjieffian esoteric physiology is Western ( his centres having little in common with chakras ), while the entire raison for the « work » is Eastern: in essence, this is activation & empowering of the already existent, but numb & deluded jiva ( Tantric tradition ), spiritual seed ( Valentinian gnosticism ) or vijnana ( Vajrayana Buddhism ). GIG’s emphasis on non-existence of « I » is just a pedagogic trick.
3. And, last: it was GIG who has brought enneagram to the West. This ancient Hermetic symbol, serving primarily as a glyph delineating stages of alchemical transmutation of a psyche, has become, due to hilarious unpredictable New Age ravings, a sort of universal bestseller on the pop-psychological supermarket.
What to say at the end ? Read it- it’s a truly delightful mystery story on the search of the miraculous.
The Gurdjieff Con – Debriefing the Gurdjieff work
More on Mouravieff
Taking With the Left Hand: Enneagram Craze, People of the Bookmark, & The Mouravieff « Phenomenon » – William Patrick Patterson
Editorial Review wrote:
A lucid and compelling account of conflict and charlatanism surrounding the Gurdjieff Work, one of the most important alternative spiritual movements of our day. The first book to explore one of the taboo subjects of our time—spiritual theft, distortion and appropriation—Patterson details and documents how a principal symbol of the teaching has been stolen and commercialized by the so-called enneagram community; how Robert Burton, founder of the Fellowship of Friends, distorted the teaching; and how Mouravieff, a Russian esotericist, plagiarized and appropriated it.
Amazon Review wrote:
In our society so many people want the quick lesson for transformation so that they can begin ‘teaching’ for either power or money or both. The greed and arrogance of some people mixes with the suggestibility of others for disastrous results.
Secondly, I am glad because through these three examples Patterson discusses the broader issues of esotericism. He shows how « esoteric ideas and practices are powerful in themselves, and when introduced into secular life they will necessarily be taken over by the ego and used for its own glorification and the domination of others. »
Amazon Review wrote:
During the late 1960′s, a number people successfully presented themselves as teachers or « gurus » of the Gurdjieff « work. » They themselves had not studied with Gurdjieff or anyone in the direct line of transmission of this teaching, but a number of newly published books had begun to appear and this material gave them an intellectual framework from which they could operate.
Capitalizing on the vitality of Gurdjieff’s teaching, and the new thirst for eastern spiritual ideas (but without having themselves received any proper training), these « faux » teachers propagated a faulty version of the teaching and stole some of its ideas to invent their own pseudo spiritual path. Unfortunately, they often developed a significant following of students, who mistakenly thought they were studying genuine material.
In Taking with the Left Hand, author William Patterson offers a detailed and clear account of these spiritual thefts and deceptions, focusing particularly on the misuse of the enneagram for explaining personality types, the « faux » teacher Robert Burton and the Fellowship of Friends, and the wholesale appropriation of Gurdjieff’s teaching by one B. P. Mouravieff, who argued that it was the « esoteric » tradition of the Eastern Church.
- was also a con man and plagiarist, which explains the Cassiopaea cult’s attraction to his « teachings » as well, together with other left-hand-path cults.
The dark legacy of Carlos Castaneda
De Mille also uncovered numerous instances of plagiarism. « When don Juan opens his mouth, » he wrote, « the words of particular writers come out. » His 1980 compilation, « The Don Juan Papers, » includes a 47-page glossary of quotations from don Juan and their sources, ranging from Wittgenstein and C.S. Lewis to papers in obscure anthropology journals.
In one example, de Mille first quotes a passage by a mystic, Yogi Ramacharaka: « The Human Aura is seen by the psychic observer as a luminous cloud, egg-shaped, streaked by fine lines like stiff bristles standing out in all directions. » In « A Separate Reality, » a « man looks like a human egg of circulating fibers. And his arms and legs are like luminous bristles bursting out in all directions. » The accumulation of such instances leads de Mille to conclude that « Carlos’s adventures originated not in the Sonoran desert but in the library at UCLA. »
Among anthropologists, there’s no longer a debate. Professor William W. Kelly, chairman of Yale’s anthropology department, told me, « I doubt you’ll find an anthropologist of my generation who regards Castaneda as anything but a clever con man. It was a hoax, and surely don Juan never existed as anything like the figure of his books. Perhaps to many it is an amusing footnote to the gullibility of naive scholars, although to me it remains a disturbing and unforgivable breach of ethics. »
Aspiring warriors, say Jennings, Wallace and Ward, were urged to cut off all contact with their past lives, as don Juan had instructed Carlos to do, and as Castaneda had done by cutting off his wife and adopted son. « He was telling us how to get out of family obligations, » Jennings told me. « Being in one-on-one relationships would hold you back from the path. Castaneda was telling us how to get out of commitments with family, down to small points like how to avoid hugging your parents directly. » Jennings estimates that during his four years with the group, between 75 and 100 people were told to cut off their families. He doesn’t know how many did. (Left-hand-path: path of separation, as all cults do)
The Don Juan Papers: Further Castaneda Controversies – Richard de Mille
Amazon review wrote:
In this excellently written, occasionally very funny book, DeMille exposes what he calls « the greatest anthropological hoax since the Piltdown Man. » While reading Castaneda’s early books, I sometimes wondered why his Yaqui sorcerer sounded at times like a Taoist and at others like Martin Heidegger. Now I understand.
« The Don Juan Papers » is Richard Demille’s scholarly and fascinating debunking of Carlos Castaneda’s popular series of cult bestsellers about his apprenticeship to Yaqui sorcerer, Don Juan Matus. Demille makes convincing argument that these books are in fact « fiction », rather than anthropological « non-fiction ».
Carlos Castaneda: Academic Opportunism and the Psychedelic Sixties – Jay Courtney Fikes
Amazon review wrote:
Yes, Castaneda’s mystical system works for many people. However, I think it is important for people to realize the inconsistencies in his system and what actual Native American shamanic systems are. I do not believe this book was meant to denounce people who follow Castenada’s mystical system, instead it was meant to denounce his unprofessional academic behaviour. It is important for scientists to report the truth about their research, and this book goes into how Castaneda was dishonest with the academic community. The people giving this book one star remind me of the fundamentalist types who denounce anyone who says that the history in the bible isn’t 100% accurate.
Amazon review wrote:
A lot of con artists are brilliant. A lot of professional Magicians are gifted con artists. After all, a con artist is striving to persuade you to suspend your disbelief, so that they may profit by it. But what do YOU get out of it? A con artist like Carlos Castaneda is the lowest of the low. He harnasses the energy of real spiritual curiosity and sends it down a worthless, blind, dead end road. If you buy into a fraction of his nonsense, you will have ever so much more difficulty climbing your way back out and regaining your discriminitive perception. Castaneda was a dangerous liar and fraud. Read his works as cautionary tales – but they offer no spiritual insights of any validity. There are other true, real, and authentic spiritual traditions that you may study if you are a serious student of Wisdom. Of course, there is simply no denying anything to people who want to believe. For your own sake – become sceptical. Don’t be a victim. Why would you seek POWER in the first place.
Most spiritual traditions teach self knowledge, divine reality, compassion, wisdom, personal transformation and spiritual fulfillment. Are those goals not infinitley more worthy than POWER? Power to do: what, exactly? Fly? Move between dimensions? Turn into an animal. Amaze your family and fool your friends? These things are more meaningful than loving, caring relationships with other people – and peace with yourself? Was Castenada a loving, caring person? Ask those associates that were closest to him. I am trying to be a good shepherd here, for all you little lambs that have wandered into the valley of the shadow of Death. Believe me when I tell you: there are wolves who want to devour you.
Amazon review wrote:
Anthropologist Jay Fikes adds his voice to those exposing the deceptions of Carlos Castaneda, such as Richard deMille. Castaneda has played a big role in the packaging of the shaman and selling him to those New Agers who seek exotic experience. Any real insights of « Don Juan » have been taken from esoteric and occult tradition. Only the neophyte would find Don Juan to be original or profound. Castaneda, among others, is in the business of turning shamanic experience into a consumer product to be sold in the market place.
The true shaman works for the benefit of his people. He does not seek kicks or strange experiences for their own sake, as do would-be Anglo « shamans ». Fikes is concerned that people like Castaneda who distort Native cultures cause harm to those cultures. In their misguided attempts to experience Native ways, some New Agers have disrupted Native people and put in jeopardy their traditional values and way of life. Fikes calls for New Agers to respect Native people. Unlike Castaneda, Fikes has done genuine fieldwork among the Huichol people in Mexico, and he presents some of his findings, particularly in relation to the peyote hunt. The lesson of Castaneda is that you can’t base truth on half truths and deception, no matter how appealing it is on a superficial level.10 oct. 2011 à 13 h 23 min #423
Sorcerer’s Apprentice: My Life with Carlos Castaneda – Amy Wallace:
Carolyn See, author of Making a Literary Life wrote:
Amy Wallace expertly maps the territory where mysticism merges into insanity, or perhaps the unmarked land between screwball comedy and terrifying tragedy. I can’t recall a stranger, sadder narrative than this.
George R.R. Martin, author of A Game of Thrones wrote:
Truth hurts … and so does Sorcerer’s Apprentice. Amy Wallace’s harrowing account of her years as Carlos Castaneda’s lover and disciple is a cautionary tale for our times, the story of a woman whose search for meaning took her to the brink, and damned near cost her everything. In this painfully honest memoir, she takes us deep inside the Castaneda cult and shows us the mind games, ego trips, and petty cruelties that wore the guise of wisdom. ‘Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!’ the Wizard once tried to tell Dorothy. Amy Wallace has ripped the curtain down, and laid the wizard bare for all to see.