Baghwan bashing

[freeform]

I think its an issue that has yet to be satisfactorily resolved in our spiritual culture,and full on sociopathic types like Rajneesh provide an excellent case study.

 

I really dont think he was that sociopathic... if you take the average guy off the street and place him in a situation that gave him as much power, I think he would ultimately behave in the same way.

 

You cant think of the dude just as himself having this following - him and his following is a single system... a kind of yin and yang. I think it's naive to think that he controlled the whole crowd, I think the crowd and him played a sort of game with each other, he provided the stimulus (yang) and his crow accepted it with open arms (yin) and provided him with a subtel impulse... they got what they need and he got what he needed. it's just that as a system it did not propel either end towards higher levels of spirituality...

 

but it may be the case that some indivduals acted as a whole system themselves and took what they needed from him and developed along their own path... and perhaps these are the successfull people plato's talking about?

[sean]

Yup. Enlightenment doesn't make you superhuman. Imagine being from a different culture and suddenly having huge groups of Americans (including attractive women) treating you like you are a god while simultaneously trying to manipulate you for what they imagine as "spiritual power" ... with endless variations of games including those involving money and sex. It's enough to make almost anyone go crazy. I think the better modern gurus understand the deterioriating power that an unhealthy group of student seekers can have even on the most awakened consciousness and maintain more appropriate boundaries.

 

And really, in the case of long-term, voluntary (key words, long-term and voluntary) relationship with someone who is mistreating you, WTF are you doing there? IMO in this case you are as suspect as the "persecutor". If you didn't manifest an Osho to manipulate you, you'd have manifested a crappy wife or something to do the same thing. At least Osho could teach you some Yoga.

 

 

Sean

[Peregrino]

Aaaah! Preying on the homeless and mentally ill goes far beyond mistreating otherwise healthy people with a low sense of self-worth and a high degree of masochism. Like the children, those severely damaged adults are "choice disabled," and I don't accept that they "manifested" some deep desire for abuse, nor can I ever defend any leader or organization that has so many *unwilling* victims. And the yoga just ain't worth it!

[cloud recluse]

I really dont think he was that sociopathic...

....

 

I must disagree with you here.Rajneesh displayed marked tendencies in this direction from childhood onwards.The manipulative & deceptive aspects of his teaching wernt an aberrance that came later.They were deliberate from the very start,though initially more subtle that their later forms.

 

... if you take the average guy off the street and place him in a situation that gave him as much power, I think he would ultimately behave in the same way.

 

 

Regrettably,you probably have a point here though

 

 

You cant think of the dude just as himself having this following - him and his following is a single system... a kind of yin and yang. I think it's naive to think that he controlled the whole crowd, I think the crowd and him played a sort of game with each other, he provided the stimulus (yang) and his crow accepted it with open arms (yin) and provided him with a subtel impulse... they got what they need and he got what he needed. it's just that as a system it did not propel either end towards higher levels of spirituality...

 

 

Now this is what Im really interested in.The system as a whole,what produces it.Sure Rajneesh was deliberately trying to create such a system,by why did so many intelligent people go for it,especially when it became so overtly Orwellian?Now he definetly WAS trying to control the crowd,but it took on alife of its own.

 

 

 

but it may be the case that some indivduals acted as a whole system themselves and took what they needed from him and developed along their own path... and perhaps these are the successfull people plato's talking about?

 

Fair enough,but if they lay claim to some kind of succesion from him (IF),then they have a responsibility to come clean about the TOTALITY of his legacy.

[freeform]

Aaaah! Preying on the homeless and mentally ill goes far beyond mistreating otherwise healthy people with a low sense of self-worth and a high degree of masochism. Like the children, those severely damaged adults are "choice disabled," and I don't accept that they "manifested" some deep desire for abuse, nor can I ever defend any leader or organization that has so many *unwilling* victims. And the yoga just ain't worth it!

 

what did he do to the homless and mentally ill? somehow that group doesn't seem like a great source of sex and money.

 

Again the point is, you can't take little bits out of a context... like taking a wing mirror off a Ferrari and deciding the merits of the car. The fact is the ferrari, the owner, and the enviroment it's in is a single system yes you can separate it into parts, but you wont possibly get the whole story.

 

I'm not excusing Osho for what he's done... I'm just pointing out that if you want to find out what happened and how it happened you need to study the whole system (and the other systems it interconnects with). Admitedly I've no emotion invested in this discussion... I've only ever read a few quotes of stuff he said - seemed ok... and that's it. I think the emotional charge for others comes from the fact that he was advertising himself as a sipritual man, but was... just a man.

 

An inbalance of power makes people tyranical... it's been tested in many different studies... it's just what happens... and guess what - our whole world functions on a bedrock of inbalanced power! so how can you be so surprised when Osho starts mistreating his 'students', when soldiers start mentaly torturing prisoners, when lions at the head of the pride kill the young cubs? We're mamals, and we behave like mamals! It's 'natural'... Some of us become 'the universe' and behave like 'the universe'... but that's very rare...

[cloud recluse]

Yup. Enlightenment doesn't make you superhuman. Imagine being from a different culture and suddenly having huge groups of Americans (including attractive women) treating you like you are a god while simultaneously trying to manipulate you for what they imagine as "spiritual power" ... with endless variations of games including those involving money and sex. It's enough to make almost anyone go crazy. I think the better modern gurus understand the deterioriating power that an unhealthy group of student seekers can have even on the most awakened consciousness and maintain more appropriate boundaries.

 

 

Actually,I agree wholeheartedly with this as a general principle.But I dont think it applies to Rajneesh.He didnt have unexpected temptations thrust upon him.He went looking for it from the very start in India!!And while he had gone through some intense experiences,I wouldnt call him Enlightened.He started out as a deliberate manipulator from the very start.It wasnt an accidental side-effect.

 

what did he do to the homless and mentally ill? somehow that group doesn't seem like a great source of sex and money.

 

 

Check out a few of the expose's that have been published.Its quite monstrous what he did!! He used many different categories of vulnerable people from the very start,for various different reasons,not just sex (he was actually a bit impotent,& his tantric technique consisted of jumping on top & thrusting away in the missionary position for a few minutes) and money.

 

.. I think the emotional charge for others comes from the fact that he was advertising himself as a sipritual man, but was... just a man.

 

 

Its not so much "emotional" for me that he didnt live up too his advertising.Its more that he used spirituality as a destructive con game quite deliberately,& so many people fell for it.This may sound morbid,but I find it fascinating (for want of a better word) & very instructive.Morally repulsive,sure,but VERY VERY instructive.I would actually say that he WASNT just a man,he was an EXCEPTIONAL man,but in a very poisinous direction

Edited July 13, 2006 by cloud recluse

[freeform]

Now this is what Im really interested in.The system as a whole,what produces it.Sure Rajneesh was deliberately trying to create such a system,by why did so many intelligent people go for it,especially when it became so overtly Orwellian?Now he definetly WAS trying to control the crowd,but it took on alife of its own.

 

I dont think he was trying to create such a system.... By system I'm talking about an objective process... as objective as I can get. Like 'mind' and 'body' are only linguistic separations, and I'm suggesting 'Osho' and 'his followers' are only linguistic separations - because they form one, whole system!

 

To understand it you need to understand animal behaviour... and you already do - you're an animal... "intelligence" has very little to do with 'behaviour'... you can make logical, intelligent reasons for wiping out an entire race of people... but in the end the behaviour that actually occured was the behaviour of an animal...

 

With every animal pack you have power... power works in terms of rewards and punishments... the power structure works in terms of domination and submission. You cant have domination without submission, and you cant have punishment without rewards... and you cant have osho without his followers - do you follow my line of thought?

 

If he wants to dominate, then others want to submit... they might not think they're submitting - but then I've already mentioned about 'thinking' and 'intelligence' - it makes us forget we're animals. The rewards - punishments duality is perhaps the reason he has some merit in some people's eyes... if he was to dominate - he would have to reward people with spiritual insights, that may actually have been very helpfull... but he also had to punish...

[cloud recluse]

I dont think he was trying to create such a system.... By system I'm talking about an objective process... as objective as I can get. Like 'mind' and 'body' are only linguistic separations, and I'm suggesting 'Osho' and 'his followers' are only linguistic separations - because they form one, whole system!..

 

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

[freeform]

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

 

Cloud - you're missing my point... I believe you when you say he had manipulation in his blood from a young age (and all pack animals do to a certain extent!) and I dont doubt that.... what I'm pointing to is the "Osho and followrs" system! You need to take a step back from this and see it as "A dominant animal and his pack" type view... that's the only way you can understand the dynamics. This is only if you're interested in how something like this happens, otherwise this is just a discussion that gets emotional energy moving... which is fine, but you said you're interested in how it all works...

 

There is no manipulator without the manipulated!

 

[edit]

Oh and when you say he was activly trying to create such a cult, it implies some kind of free will... or at least a range of choices... I'd suggest that very few people have true free will.

Edited July 13, 2006 by freeform

[cloud recluse]

Cloud - you're missing my point... I believe you when you say he had manipulation in his blood from a young age (and all pack animals do to a certain extent!) and I dont doubt that.... what I'm pointing to is the "Osho and followrs" system! You need to take a step back from this and see it as "A dominant animal and his pack" type view... that's the only way you can understand the dynamics. This is only if you're interested in how something like this happens, otherwise this is just a discussion that gets emotional energy moving... which is fine, but you said you're interested in how it all works...

 

 

Talking about pack animal hierarchies certainly touches on part of it,but its not even remotely adequate for fully describing and predicting this kind of system.You are not going far enough.Its not simply a pack of domesticated primates submittting to an alpha male.Theres a lot more involved.There are the very particular desires of the disciples to install the image of the guru into themselves as a new source of life-energy.Theres the energetic barrenness of the guru,requiring feeding from a continual stream of disciples.Theres a lot more than JUST raw control/submission trips going on.

 

So I AM interested in how it works,but talking about it ONLY in terms of hierarchy is insufficient.Utterly necessary,dont get me wrong,but still insufficient.If we ONLY look at it from that perspective,I think we miss out on some crucial ,defining mechanisms.Its not really giving you the WHY of they pack,or what is INSPIRING that eager submission.

Your totally right to say its a pack,but your not getting the full nature of the pack,its missing crucial ingredients.

Do you see,Im not denying what your saying as such,but it HAS to taken a bit deeper,or you miss the real driving dynamics."Just" an animal pack IS NOT ENOUGH.

 

So I suppose Im actually juggling two topics.The culpability of Rajneesh as an individual ( and there aint NO WAY Im getting into some kind of freewill/predestination thing with you baby ),and the mechanics of the system in general.Rajneesh is a good case here because his is a complex one.Otherwise Id just go look at some monkeys

[freeform]

I really think that the social dynamics of pack animals plays a huge role in this. You say it's not just pack hierarchy... but 'just' implies that pack hierarchy is not one of the most significant parts of our life.

 

Where do you live? How do you know you live there? What nationality are you? Where do you buy your food? where do they get your food? Who grows your food? Where did you buy your computer? why didn't you buy a different computer? How did you afford the computer and the food? who gave you the money? How did they get the money?

 

Everything from agriculture to commerce, to the economy, to any kind of politics is based on pack hierarchy... We as humans tend to create artificial borders, genres, and separations in things... So 'spirituality' is such a division... spirituality is like an area, many alpha-spiritualists control parts of 'spirituality' - different people get drawn towards different packs within spirituality... and at the time it seems osho was a big super-alpha spiritualist, people felt his strength, and thus drew energy from it (why else do people submit?).

 

Yes you probably could go 'deeper'... but in those depths you would only find yourself. "Why?" tends to lead people into their own inner map of the world - which is good if that's what you want... but you're suggesting you want to learn something new about this - something outside your current map - no? We could take the guy apart all day - but in the end isn't that 'just' bitching?

 

oh and btw - you're reading the ramblings of a monkey right now!

[cloud recluse]

I really think that the social dynamics of pack animals plays a huge role in this. You say it's not just pack hierarchy... but 'just' implies that pack hierarchy is not one of the most significant parts of our life.

 

 

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

[cloud recluse]

 

Yes you probably could go 'deeper'... but in those depths you would only find yourself. "Why?" tends to lead people into their own inner map of the world - which is good if that's what you want... but you're suggesting you want to learn something new about this - something outside your current map - no? We could take the guy apart all day - but in the end isn't that 'just' bitching?

 

 

I dont see why only one map,reducing the phenomen to pack hierarchy,is valid,& anything else is a refusal to learn something new. Sociobiology is nothing new to me,& its evidently inadequate to fully represent many situations,let alone explain or predict them.

 

I mean ,is this what your saying?Its sociobilogy or its nothing? Any other perspective is merely a map.but your sociobiological map is innately "True"?I will apologise now if Ive misinterpreted you,but that seems to be what youve just said

 

I am trying something new,something more inclusive & accurate in both explanation & prediction than sociobiology.

[Trunk]

I don't think that someone would get a good understanding of this topic without being in several groups one's self (of course choosing as wisely as you can) and then interviewing people (plural) who've been in whatever group you're interested in clarifying. The rest is just assumptions from a distance.

 

And then, to what purpose???

That you maybe have a better understanding of something that you never wanted to participate in anyway?

 

Seems a more productive topic would be how to be an effective student in a viable group & teacher-student relationship.

[cloud recluse]

I don't think that someone would get a good understanding of this topic without being in several groups one's self (of course choosing as wisely as you can) and then interviewing people (plural) who've been in whatever group you're interested in clarifying. The rest is just assumptions from a distance.

 

And then, to what purpose???

That you maybe have a better understanding of something that you never wanted to participate in anyway?

 

Seems a more productive topic would be how to be an effective student in a viable group & teacher-student relationship.

 

Fair enough,but personally these arent just assumptions from a distance (though in the case of Rajneesh,it is admittedly limited ).

 

Certainly ,the question of the effective student is part & parcel of the whole thing,but an effective student always has a discriminating eye in regards to the teacher,including in that their own immediate experience but also the experience of others.It would be wasteful to expect any new seeker to be reinventing the wheel.

I want to make it clear that Im looking for broadly applicable themes,as well as the specific example of Rajneesh.This is where I agree with Freeform up to a point,I just feel the dynamics he is proposing arent sufficient in & of themselves.though they are certainly part of it.

The guru question is one that wont go away any time soon,& I think any of us claiming an interst in spirituality have some responsibility to others to make a contribution to it.

 

Rajneesh is particularly relevant because he wasnt JUST a conman,he had been through some transformative experience at one point.This throws more subtle factors in,& his phenomena continues to unfold! VERY pertinent stuff,an excellent opportunity.

 

But perhaps I should seperate the issues of Rajneesh in particular,& guru-disciple mechanics in general? Is that want people here would rather see ? Im starting to wonder if my 'Baghwan bashing" is delaying the actual debate I myself have become interested in

 

Want do people want,a Rajneesh expose',or a student-teacher discussion/ Im starting to wonder if they should be seperate posts?

 

Regards,Cloud

[freeform]

I mean ,is this what your saying?Its sociobilogy or its nothing? Any other perspective is merely a map.but your sociobiological map is innately "True"?I will apologise now if Ive misinterpreted you,but that seems to be what youve just said

 

Your apology is totally accepted

 

I think you've probably read enough of my ramblings to know that your interpretation of what I said is rather shallow.

 

I'm suggesting a map that covers a lot of ground... covers the topic in a more objective way (i.e. taking into account the systemic nature of cults)... it's obviously not the only map, and it's obviously not 'the one and only true map'... the reason that I suggested this particular one is that when I look at the subject from your point of view (or at least my interpretation of your point of view) I feel myself getting emotionaly involved in the whole thing... and to be honest imo an emotional consideration of this is not going to help you or me or anyone learn anything new.

 

so what do you really want to get from this? I still don't understand.

[Peregrino]

I feel myself getting emotionaly involved in the whole thing... and to be honest imo an emotional consideration of this is not going to help you or me or anyone learn anything new.

 

 

I don't think the influence of emotion is necessarily bad, and can certainly even be good if it drives you to a new understanding. Lots of scientific discoveries were made by driven, emotional people--think of the passion of Kekule that inspired his discovery of the Benzene ring in a dream. As my most man William Blake says, "A tear is an intellectual thing"--which is to say that it reflects the state of one's cognitive processes, and not necessarily in a bad way.

 

Emotional reactions to the Bhagwan--both pro and con--are certainly inspiring a most informative discussion here. I still have the emotional reaction that the guy was a creep, but I will try to keep in mind that at least pieces of what he taught could have had merit.

Edited July 17, 2006 by Peregrino

[cloud recluse]

Your apology is totally accepted

 

I think you've probably read enough of my ramblings to know that your interpretation of what I said is rather shallow.

 

I'm suggesting a map that covers a lot of ground... covers the topic in a more objective way (i.e. taking into account the systemic nature of cults)... it's obviously not the only map, and it's obviously not 'the one and only true map'... the reason that I suggested this particular one is that when I look at the subject from your point of view (or at least my interpretation of your point of view) I feel myself getting emotionaly involved in the whole thing... and to be honest imo an emotional consideration of this is not going to help you or me or anyone learn anything new.

 

so what do you really want to get from this? I still don't understand.

 

Freeform,sorry for taking so long to reply to your post.It hasnt been from lack of interest.Actually,Ive been feeling a bit down recently & havent felt up to much discussion So i will try & make this breif.

 

Im trying for a model that doesnt neglect the very real & valid motives that can go into a relationship that later becomes cultic.Its not just monkey scrambling.People can enter a cult motivated by a desire for commitment to something of consequence,looking for people who show vision & authenticity.The stereotypical image of the cultist as simply "weak" is simply unfair,they often have considerable sincerity & passion,& cant find its equivalent in mainstream institutions,& can you really blame them there???And a lot of the blunders they make are latent in traditional Eastern forms anyhow.The greater scrutiny the West tends to subject its figureheads to is exposing the problems in many traditional eastern forms that the "weak cultist" was following in good faith!!

 

And psedoGurus themselves can be VERY complex charachters, initially showing valid attainments & siddhi.

So Im looking to clarify the risks of disciplship to a western audience,without dismissing the real potential.

 

The other reason for starting this thread was simply that a Baghwan debate seemed to be starting on a thread that was distracting from DanC's request for info.This then made me wonder if two seperate threads were in order.Its just that Rajneesh is such a juicy example of spiritual corruption as well as simpler monkey scrambles.

 

I feel pretty crappy right now,& arent up to going into any more detail,but would be perfectly happy to pick it all up again at some later time ,if it is something people would be interested in discussing.

 

Regards,Cloud.

 

 

... I still have the emotional reaction that the guy was a creep..

 

Ooooohhhh yeah.But a complex creep.A lot of his writing can be quite evocative,if you can stomach the undercurrent of mindless obedience he is trying to inculcate.

[freeform]

Freeform,sorry for taking so long to reply to your post.It hasnt been from lack of interest.Actually,Ive been feeling a bit down recently & havent felt up to much discussion So i will try & make this breif.

 

Sorry to hear you're not feeling too great. If I remember correctly you're a southern hemisphere'er. In which case it's probably winter. It's a great time to get into contact with those darker parts of yourself that make you feel down. Because those parts of you need to be loved and accepted too - however they make you feel, they've always had the highest of intentions for you! They're just trying to help you in a misguided sort of way - so pay attention to them!

 

I hope this doesn't look like unsoliceted advice - it actually rather nicely fits in with the topic. I think that guru types often start believing their own hype (and the hype of the students) and they tend to push those darker parts of themselves further down, believing they've already got over the ego-games they create. This is dangerous, because the further these parts are pushed the more they come out in unconcious external behaviour. If you push your constant urge to control down deep and then think that you're not even subject to that problem any longer it will come out in your everey day behaviour and you wont even notice!!

 

anyway,

 

I really hope you get the most from your phase of feeling crappy, and come out the other end a little bit more complete, purer and sexier to boot!

[Peregrino]

That's right, Cloud-- animo (take heart)! I know that a "dark night of the soul" can seem long a gruelling, but it can also be *very* fortifying in the end.

 

Just keep in mind that your Cloud-covered wisdom always shines brightly when you beam it down on these threads--take it from the Pilgrim!

[cloud recluse]

Freeform & Pilgrim,

Big Thanx for your sentiments here.Still a bit flat im afraid,but more inclined to communicate now,& am actually feeling a TINY bit sexier

 

So,is this a thread anyones actually interested in.I was trying to do 2 things with it.Inform people about Mohan Chandra Rajneesh,as that topic was beginning to clutter up another thread,but more specifically use Rajneesh as an example of the pseudoGuru syndrome in one of its more complex forms,as I think that can be a particularly valuable & constructive debate.

 

But the question is,is anyone actually interested in either of theses topics at the moment?

 

If not,Id rather let it drop

Regards,Cloud.

[Peregrino]

Glad to hear from you again, Cloud! I think just focusing on the Guru Syndrome (whether or not the Guru is "pseudo") would be most fruitful. As it stands, I don't have much to say myself as I'm still recovering from the nightmare of a transatlantic flight from Paris and all the TLC that "Homeland Security" entails!

 

Take care,

the frazzled Pilgrim

[SifuPhil]

Cloud-

 

As a newbie here and not part of any "group effort", I'll state that for selfish reasons, whichever way you go with this thread would be fine with me - it's the type of discussion I'm used to and was expecting here.

 

Just as a quick thought re: why people would be attracted to a "guru" - witness the relatively-recent phenomena of Wikipedia worship...

 

...citing a source that is often in error and is interpreted by many in many different ways as an end-all, be-all authority...

 

...while the "true" gurus (research papers, original sources) lie fallow because they're not "sexy" enough, easily accessed or easily digested.

 

Any points in common with guru-worship that you can see there, or am I just hallucinating again?

[cloud recluse]

... Wikipedia worship...

 

...citing a source that is often in error and is interpreted by many in many different ways as an end-all, be-all authority...

 

...while the "true" gurus (research papers, original sources) lie fallow because they're not "sexy" enough, easily accessed or easily digested.

 

 

Sifu-

 

I think youve pretty much explained Wikipedia worship right there!! But thats a thing that seems to smack of simple human laziness to me.

 

The thing that Im ranting about on this thread is a bit more "subtle".Im pondering the topic of how the Teacher-Student relationship,a thing often born (initially) of a genuine passion for truth & transcendence of ego,turns into a mutual betrayal of some very basic day-to-day truths and a creation of ego-positions NARROWER than those started off with.

 

In this Im not just looking at the obvious frauds though.Im interested how sincere practitioners of apparently genuine traditions take some seriously fucked up turns.AND IM NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT DISCIPLES.What makes a pseudoguru as well!Why the need to collect disciples & kill off their critical faculties,the critical faculties of otherwise sincere & dedicated people,people really willing to commit to a worthwhile cause,the type of people who could really take you somwhere in mutual collaboration if you could only resist the temptation to subtly manipulate & exploit them!

 

What kind of inner poverty produces a pseudoguru!And how do legitimate transpersonal experiences get appropriated by the ego & translated into disturbing forms.What are the points of vulnerability in the spiritual process,can they be identified & anticipated.Everyone,EVERYONE,will fuck up to one degree or another,but we dont have to reinvent the wheel.We can actually learn from the tragedies of others without going through them ourselves,at least to the same extent.The error & terror of a Jonestown may seem obvious,but the subtle seeds of it are in every human ego,EVERY HUMAN EGO,in less apparent forms.

 

You may not end up drinking Kool-Aid or castrating yourself,but you can still be subject to a needless,avoidable bitterness or a trauma that freezes your ability to learn & feel(I dont believe everyone can learn from any event,some are so horrifically painful that they freeze us up,they are inimical to human growth,"evil" if you like).This is stuff we should be able to spot a mile away!We shouldnt have to repeat it all the frigging time!

 

On that lighthearted note,Im going to bed!

 

Regards,Cloud-on-too-much-sleep-deprivation-Recluse

Edited August 19, 2006 by cloud recluse

[SifuPhil]

Dear Stratocumulus Hermit :

 

But thats a thing that seems to smack of simple human laziness to me.

As perhaps is the idea that any outside source can give you enlightenment...

 

The thing that Im ranting about on this thread is a bit more "subtle".Im pondering the topic of how the Teacher-Student relationship...

aka Wikipedia / "researcher" relationship...

 

...a thing often born (initially) of a genuine passion for truth & transcendence of ego...

"I GOTTA' get this paper done tonight - I'll fail the course if I don't!"...

 

...turns into a mutual betrayal of some very basic day-to-day truths...

Wikipedia expects to be a source of knowledge, but fails among those who realize what true sources are; the "seeker" of that knowledge is betrayed in that they read not the words of a learned body, but a consensus of jackals.

 

...and a creation of ego-positions NARROWER than those started off with.

Wikipedia thought to be great - they are less than that.

"Seekers" thought to become knowledgeable - they gained falsehood.

 

There - now that I've expelled my vitriol against the great god Wiki...LOL...

 

What makes a pseudoguru as well!Why the need to collect disciples & kill off their critical faculties,the critical faculties of otherwise sincere & dedicated people,people really willing to commit to a worthwhile cause,the type of people who could really take you somwhere in mutual collaboration if you could only resist the temptation to subtly manipulate & exploit them!

The human creature is a tragically flawed piece of meat...their sub-animal instincts, bred into them and refined over thousands of years, have brought most of them to the point where, if you dangle a promise of power in front of their eyes; if you grant them a few thousand willing "slaves" to hang on their every word and gesture; If you say you will give them a title - they will run roughshod over their own mothers to grasp that brass ring, and damned be those who try to stand in their way!

 

What kind of inner poverty produces a pseudoguru!

As I said above, I believe it is breeding and genetics.

 

What are the points of vulnerability in the spiritual process,can they be identified & anticipated.

For me, it appears that it is the desire to buy into the cult life; the "need" to "receive knowledge" from a father/mother/god figure; the basically weak position of any supplicant; and the everlasting idea that enlightenment comes from without, not within.

 

A favorite movie of mine - "Circle of Iron" - featured a man on a quest to gain all the world's enlightenment from a legendary Book of Knowledge. In the end, after multiple fights and horrific encounters, he discovered the book's pages were made of mirrors. As he looked upon them, first in astonishment and then in amusement, the Guardian of the Book intoned,

 

"The Seekers fight to come here, year after year, at great cost to themselves and their loved ones...and when they finally fling the Book open in blazing expectation of finding the answers to all their questions...

 

What do they find?....themselves.

 

There IS no "Book"...no enlightenment, outside yourself"

 

 

...

the subtle seeds of it are in every human ego,EVERY HUMAN EGO,in less apparent forms.

Of course! But unless you pick and choose your battles very carefully, you'll find yourself fatigued before your time. Not saying this isn't a worthy battle - I think it is. So, discovering WHAT it is that drives them to the false gurus seems a very logical place to start...

 

This is stuff we should be able to spot a mile away!We shouldnt have to repeat it all the frigging time!

A peculiar trait amongst the human species - they rarely learn their history, so are doomed to repeat it...