Page 1 of 1

The Myth of "Enlightened Society"

Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2019 7:13 am
by Tara
I started reading, “Red Shambhala: Magic, Prophecy, and Geopolitics in the Heart of Asia, by Andrei Znamenski, and I came across this paragraph in the preface:
Red Shambhala is the first book in English that recounts the story of political and spiritual seekers from the West and the East, who used Tibetan Buddhist prophecies to promote their spiritual, social, and geopolitical agendas and schemes. These were people of different persuasions and backgrounds: lamas (Ja-Lama and Agvan Dorzhiev), a painter-Theosophist (Nicholas Roerich), a Bolshevik secret police cryptographer (Gleb Bokii), an occult writer with leftist leanings (Alexander Barchenko), Bolshevik diplomats and revolutionaries (Georgy Chicherin, Boris Shumatsky) along with their indigenous fellow-travelers (Elbek-Dorji Rinchino, Sergei Borisov, and Choibalsan), and the rightwing fanatic "Bloody White Baron" Roman von Ungern-Sternberg. Despite their different backgrounds and loyalties, they shared the same totalitarian temptation -- the faith in ultimate solutions. They were on the quest for what one of them (Bokii) defined as the search for the source of absolute good and absolute evil. All of them were true believers, idealists who dreamed about engineering a perfect free-of-social-vice society based on collective living and controlled by enlightened spiritual or ideological masters (an emperor, the Bolshevik Party, the Great White Brotherhood, a reincarnated deity) who would guide people on the "correct" path. Healthy skepticism and moderation, rare commodities at that time anyway, never visited the minds of the individuals I profile in this book. In this sense, they were true children of their time -- an age of extremes that gave birth to totalitarian society.
These spiritually-inspired, politically-inclined seekers may have been "children of their time," but they wouldn't feel out of place today, when a new generation has become intoxicated with the Shambhala myth. In any age, there are utopian fanatics. Shambhala followers, unlike other Tibetan Buddhists, look forward to an enlightened society on earth. This distinguishes them from other Tibetan Buddhists, particularly Nyingmas, who study Vajrayana as a philosophy, a path to enlightenment, and don't expect to transform earthly reality or establish an "Enlightened Society."

Shambhala people are -– let’s face it -– “a little” crazy. What makes them think that any of the rest of us want what they want, which is some marauding Buddhist army killing everyone they think is evil and establishing control under some “Shambhala” king? You can see their totalitarian mindset, in how they push their vision as the only possible vision for Buddhists -– and everyone else -- of the future. Are they going to listen to people who say “no” to their plan? They seem more interested in telling us that that’s just the way it’s going to be.

And what a funny coincidence between the communist ideas of Shambhala and Communism proper? Having studied the Nazis intensively for almost 20 years now, Shambhala followers remind me of Hitler’s SS: partying up a storm while they think they’re going to take over the world. Such arrogance and hubris, such secret joy in oppression. Where did they get the idea that this Shambhala idea was “Buddhist” and much less even “good”? I suspect they’ve never even questioned it for what it really is. Somehow, they just got swept up in the ecstasy of the idea that they were going to rule the world.

Re: The Myth of "Enlightened Society"

Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2019 12:27 am
by Tara
Are the lamas not responsible for Tibet being the way it was? Were they not the elites of their culture? Did they not determine what would and would not happen in Tibet? Are they not responsible for the poverty and ignorance of the people? Here is a typical picture of Tibetans, which everyone will recognize as true:

The Tashilumpho monastery, headquarters of the Panchen Lama, 1910s.

Is this a result of the greatest psychological and religious understanding on the planet?

If so, I don't want any of it for me or my children or anyone else and their children.

So maybe everyone should just forget about Tibet being the standard for anything except "primitive." And free their minds of this silly, false, shangri-la idea of Tibet. We have the proof now. They can't push this myth on us anymore, without us pushing back. The only reason our elites love the Tibetan lamas is because they were so controlling and authoritarian, and of course our elites love that. Look at how they get the so-called "smartest and brightest" to start bowing and scraping to any ignorant Tibetan who comes along, like Sogyal "Rinpoche." He was nothing when he came here. I saw him in the very beginning, and he was absolutely nothing. He was not a lama. He is a complete charlatan who gave himself the title of "lama." Is that not power you would want to use?!!! The fruit of complete Pavlovian conditioning?

But why should we go backwards and lose the few gains we've managed to extract by force from our elites? I'm sure if anyone thinks about it for very long, they won't want to lose whatever small freedoms we have to think what we want and be free from at least overt slavery.

Tibet in 1938 before the Chinese took it over

Re: The Myth of "Enlightened Society"

Posted: Mon Aug 26, 2019 9:58 pm
by Tara
Is the selling of Marpa House a good example of "enlightened society"? Is taking 40 dharma students' "enlightened society" apartments away from them a good example of "enlightened society"? For that matter, Is rape and sexual abuse, orgies, drunkenness, drug-taking "enlightened society"? Is a chaotic spiritual life -- any spiritual-psychological-psychoanalytical "tradition" will do -- enlightened society"? This isn't even a good normal life, much less "enlightened society."

It's proved at this point that Shambhala people know absolutely nothing about how to build an "enlightened society," that they actually have a completely twisted view of what "enlightened society" is, and should not be allowed anywhere near a table constituted for the purpose of building an "enlightened society," and so should definitely at this point let go of their pride of thinking they know how to build one. They don't even know how to complain. There were only two comments on the Denver Post article about the sale of Marpa House when I posted my comment. Apparently, everybody is too scared to make a peep. Their samaya might get them! Yeah, those big bad protectors are going to come and squash you like a bug. Take my advice, because this is what I did when those big bad protectors came around threatening me: I stood up tall and screamed at them to "Get the fuck out and never come back!" And they never did. All you need to do is stand up for yourself.

There was a lot of strange cruelty that happened in the process of selling Marpa House. This guy John Kirkland, the developer who bought the place, went out of his way to inflict cruelty on the group of residents who in their drunken delusions thought they might be able to buy Marpa House. He reminded me of someone sent from Black Cube, the Israeli intelligence group sent out by Weinstein to infiltrate and spy on his accusers. In my mind, he seems to be acting as an agent of cruelty for Shambhala as he tricked them into thinking that he was going to help them protect their homes against Shambhala's financial crisis, but instead he just gained their trust and received all their confidential info, and used it for his own benefit.

Then he stabs the knife in deeper with his cruel comments that he assumed everyone at Marpa House who was trying to keep their homes had only the organization's best benefit in mind, and should shut up since they received the benefit of Shambhala's "subsidized housing" for years. He pretends that the group's offer to Shambhala to pay 4.2 million to keep their homes didn't mean a thing, as if they were there as a front group for Shambhala to jack up the price as high as possible with a false offer, so that he'd have to give an extra 700 grand, pretending he didn't believe a word they said as to their true intention to actually buy it. Then he talked about how "honored" he was to do the deal with Shambhala, and how he was going to fix the huge mess they had made by turning the house Tibetan -- a mess made not only to the house but also to the neighborhood -- by returning it to the pristine condition it was in in the 1920s (what was "pristine" in the 1920's?). And he pretended to be flummoxed at people's claims of betrayal after he approached them with the offer to give them money for their plan, invited them to dinner, brought bottles of wine, sent email, and measured the house -- all for them.

He seems to be warning the Marpa house residents: "shut up and be obedient to your organization." It's a strange message to be coming from a developer. He sounds more like a vindictive insider to me, or someone sent to thwart plans of slaves escaping from their masters.

How is it that people who supposedly practiced awareness out the ass didn't notice the disconnect between what was actually happening in Shambhala throughout the years and the idea of "enlightened society"? Was their view so off to begin with? They thought a world of slaves and masters and drugs, alcohol and sex were "enlightened society?" Could they really have such a degraded Crowleyian view? What was wrong with these people? And then they have the nerve to call themselves "teachers"! And go on and on about "sanity" and "basic goodness". What would they know about it? They don't even know what's right and what's wrong.