Darwiniana

History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

Richard comment, genetics, UG Krishnamurti, and some thoughts on ‘exporting buddhism’

July 11th, 2011 · 2 Comments

Richard has a interesting comment on my suggestion of a genetic component to Indian success at meditation.
The whole discussion in the West tends to be useless if there are no successes, and in the current cultural desert, there won’t be any successes, and everyone will end up frustrated.
I also mentioned the case of UG Krishnamurti (not the ‘Krishnamurti’ you have probably heard of).
I think that genetic issues should remain entirely open, and they might intrigue scientists into trying to enquire into such questions.
But at the same time we haven’t exhausted possible other explanations, and such other approaches might warn us that if buddhism and enlightenment traditions are to be viable in the modern world, and in the West, the obstacles in the way need to be probed. I will try to comment further here over time (and already have). Part of the problem is that people are subjected in the West to ‘cross-programming’ that leaves them confused. A main culprit, in a way worse even than the confusing take of scientism, is the Xtian backdrop, which is entirely antagonistic to the path of enlightenment, and whose invisible dimensions tend to thwart and undermine all efforts by beginners. This occult dimension of monotheistic culture makes the whole effort difficult. Monotheism is a gnostic totalitarain control system, now being challenged by ‘secularism’ which has no grasp of what it is dealing with, and the result will be—well, who knows. But the Xtian system doesn’t allow enlightenment: it only deals with cultural cattle. Thus, embarking on buddhist meditation is generally a waste of time.
In general we see in both Tibet and Japan the way that buddhism adapted itself to external cultures, for better or for worse. But in India we see a much more efficient situation where the culture and the spiritual practice are in tune and the result is that practioners don’t end up being schizophrenic. Another issue is solid vegetarianism. The issue is settled from the beginning, as per the most ancient Jain traditions. Here even buddhism hurt itself by its compromises. And in the west, forget it. You will make a thousand enemies if you even try. Not so true any more as compared with the seventies, so maybe there is hope here. But doing buddhism vegetarian style in American hamburger culture is never going to work.
Patience, patience. The situation is developing, and I am not preaching despair. But there is a long list of such issues that are probably more significant than the speculative one of genetics.
In general, as a final point (for today), the Indian consciousness has all the components of a spiritual path embedded in its thought and language, while people outside that world have to struggle to understand basic terms, and rarely succeed: look at our attempt to discuss meditation.
But I have hope that over the next few centuries the world will finally learn from the Indian tradition, and learn how to really reseed that (not graft!, you can’t graft) lore in their own situations. But as with sufism the attempt can succeed, but for a hidden few who recycle monotheism for the masses while they exploit the Indian tradition in secret behind disguises.
That phenomenon is already visible in something like Ron Hubbard’s Scientology, which is an example of the way adaptating spiritual traditions (to the downtown Los Angeles mentality of the 1950’s) can work/backfire, you decide. I am no fan of scientology, but its take on spirituality sold like hot cakes in the context that Hubbard exploited so cruelly, for such avaricious purposes. The idea and use of an e-meter and the mystique of science really took off among some sincere, but gullible, seekers. Like science fiction, and the superman comics, it was a hit, for a while. Is this nuts?
So, the way forward is not exactly clear, but I think, at least, that the obstacles to doing an improved buddhism in diverse cultures, and actually having some successes in a real lineage (not bodhissatvas) is hope for the future. But the other alternative is that buddhism will be destroyed (by people like Sam Harris) and freelancers like Ron Hubbard will move into the void. And more subtle con artists like E.J. Gold will also flourish there, people not even aware of his corrupt pseudo-teaching.
Finally, the hidden world of the esotericisms of the rosicrucians and freemasons is the cultural garbage also in the way, but they indicate an aspect of the hidden Xtian world that collides with and destroys all simpler efforts to achieve realization in the west. Look at someone like Aleister Crowley: these demonic gangster types (and Gold is a typical example) will make a sport of destroying anyone who achieves any success in buddhism. It is a sport. Look at the sex scandals in the gurus of the seventies. The point was clear in Gurdjieff, who was at least honest in confessing his demonic character.
Why is the West, and sufism, stuck forever in this racket?
All that makes progress almost insuperable.
I am sorry to be so hard on Xtianity: it is a great system of ‘redemptive action’, with a glorious past, and a not so understandable future. It tends to cycle downward to the lowest common denominator, but what it could be, or could have been, is another question. But if you call out for help, you get a seat in the lifeboat. No more, no less. So you are ‘saved’, note the pun. Maybe you also collect interest, but I doubt it.

Many might protest that capitalist market culture is more likely to upend religious efforts than Xtianity. True!

nemo
64.12.117.69 Submitted on 2011/07/10 at 1:21 pm | In reply to Richard.
Will comment again tomorrow. The funniest case was the UG Khrishnamurti, who really tried hard to escape the whole game, denounced gurus and enlightenment, but fell into what he refused to admit was enlightenment (or something close).

It is not an impossible thing at all, when we consider, for example, the way in which milk drinking (and its mutations) occurred in the Neolithic perriod (??). Indians have been immersed in this for millennia, and something fishy seems to have occurred somewhere along the line.

Will comment again tomorrow. The funniest case was the UG Khrishnamurti, who really tried hard to escape the whole game, denounced gurus and enlightenment, but fell into what he refused to admit was enlightenment (or something close).

It is not an impossible thing at all, when we consider, for example, the way in which milk drinking (and its mutations) occurred in the Neolithic perriod (??). Indians have been immersed in this for millennia, and something fishy seems to have occurred somewhere along the line.
nemonemini@aol.com
nemo
http://history-and-evolution.com
1
ApproveUnapprove | Reply | Quick Edit | Edit | History | Spam | Trash More on ‘secular buddhism’
4 #
Richard
rmbr117@yahoo.com
207.138.47.153 Submitted on 2011/07/10 at 1:01 pm
“I sometimes wonder if a genetic change hasn’t occured here in the very long legacy of Indian relgion, faciliatating the states of samadhi that token the realm of the enlightened. ”

I often wonder the same thing. It seems as if they just fall into these “states” without effort.

“I sometimes wonder if a genetic change hasn’t occured here in the very long legacy of Indian relgion, faciliatating the states of samadhi that token the realm of the enlightened. ”

I often wonder the same thing. It seems as if they just fall into these “states” without effort.
Richard
1

Tags: General

2 responses so far ↓

Leave a Comment