with Publishers of a Satirical 
New Age Magazine

3.2.2000

Hi Guys,

I have read a report on the back page of the local paper that in your recent satirical magazine, ‘none of the content was intended to be a piss-take of Osho’ but your ‘targets were the parasitic gurus/teachers who try to identify themselves or their teachings with him, while still playing it ‘safe’ – unlike Osho himself who spoke spontaneously and openly, regardless of the consequences.’ I take it that this was a gross misquote as the statement contains several obvious factual errors – In the magazine you targeted Isaac Shapiro and Antoinette Varner, to name two that come to mind, both of whom have no association or identification with Mohan Rajneesh aka Osho.

‘While still playing it ‘safe’ – unlike Osho himself who spoke spontaneously and openly, regardless of the consequences’ is also factually wrong. Both of the above Gurus speak spontaneously, as in not reading from notes, and openly, as in to those who pay to sit and hear their words – exactly as did Mr. Rajneesh.

It is obvious from the first point that if your intention was to target Gurus who claim a different God-man as their Master, then you are indulging in one of the most dangerous and potentially seditious forms of satire – religious persecution. Those who loudly and publicly proclaim that ‘my God is the only God and all other Gods are false Gods’ are those who actively perpetuate the tradition of religious bigotry that has caused all the religious wars, crusades, tortures, persecutions, perversions, repression, recriminations, prejudices, retributions, pogroms, etc.

I take it you were misquoted but you may well consider publicly correcting the statement lest the New Age religions all too rapidly fall into the trap of the Old Age religions. The forming of fighting schisms and sub-schisms is the inevitable result of all religious belief but you may not want to be identified with those who actively promote religious conflict.

This same religious conflict inexorably leads to religious wars, crusades, tortures, persecutions, perversions, repression, recriminations, prejudices, retributions, pogroms, etc.

As for the second point, I can only assume that ‘regardless of the consequences’ is a reference to the drastic consequences that Mr. Rajneesh’s spontaneous and open speaking bought on himself and his followers at the Ranch in Oregon. Certainly his most un-‘safe’ comments were his virulent condemnations of Christians while staying in America and his ‘waving a red flag at a bull’ resulted in him fleeing the country leaving his followers behind to face the National Guard. Rajneeshees conveniently forget that he spoke ‘openly’ in terms that would be regarded by most as blatantly derogatory of others’ religious beliefs.

You may remember Mr. Rajneesh’s raging against the Christians at the time but as a reminder I’ll quote him –

‘More blood has been shed by the Christians than by anybody else; more wars have been fought by Christians than by anybody else. People have been massacred, butchered, burned alive by Christians!’ Quote from the Pune-sanctioned book – ‘Hellbent for Enlightenment’. Rosemary Hamilton. White Cloud Press. Oregon. 1998.

Outrages like these, combined with poisonings, buggings, arson, vote stacking, etc. caused a situation where armed conflict became a distinct and very real possibility. There were a number of police and FBI investigations under way and the National Guard was reportedly on stand-by. Both sides were armed and ready. Rajneeshees were well armed and deliberately invited the press in to show off their weapons and training. In the end, Rajneesh flew the coup, so the situation was diffused, but it shook many people’s faith to the point that many dropped Sannyas, became disillusioned or ‘watered down’ their faith to a more ‘safe’, and less fervent level.

But I take it that you were misquoted, or I have misinterpreted what was meant by the quote. Surely you are not condoning one religion riling against another to the point where virulent feelings, or even armed conflict, are the inevitable result? The recent issue of the other Rajneeshee magazine in town contained an oblique reference to Christians in its editorial piece and, as such, it is obvious that much Rajneeshee-Christian ill-will still exists even today, many years after Rajneesh’s anti-Christian tirades.

It would also seem irresponsible to add to this intolerance a new ill-will – to promote conflict between Rajneeshees and the other New Age religious groups by giving the impression that you are deliberate ‘targeting’ those who follow different religious Masters, and promoting an ‘unsafe’ style of ‘spontaneous, open speaking’ that is derogatory of others’ spiritual belief to the point where it provokes conflict and hostility.

What tweaks my interest in your current plight is the fact that I recently wrote an article for the other Rajneeshee magazine lampooning spiritual belief, God-men and Gurus. Being an actualist* and, as such, a thorough-going atheist, I was ridiculing all and every spiritual belief, not trumpeting that ‘my’ God is the only God and all other Gods are false Gods, as the Local paper quote implies you were doing with your magazine.

Perhaps, in the interest of local ‘inter-spiritual harmony and good-will’, you may consider correcting the facts and the disturbing impression that is evident in the quote of the local paper. Left uncorrected, the local paper quote leaves the impression that Rajneeshees are a self-centred, bigoted, elitist and intolerant lot, which I am sure was not your intention.

Cheers ... ... Peter.

* For definition of actualism see AF Library, Actualism

10.2.2000

To Publisher No 1

The Oxford Dictionary defines sarcasm as ‘a bitter or wounding expression or remark, a taunt’, and ridicule as ‘Subjection to mocking and dismissive language or behaviour; the action or practice of ridiculing a person or thing; mockery, derision.’

I have assessed my post to you and cannot see any sarcasm in it at all. Any ridicule in my writing is directed towards Eastern religious belief, which is in itself ridiculous by nature. There was no ridicule directed at you personally, rather I clearly pointed out that I understood that you had either been misquoted or, at worst, had not fully considered your response to the comments that you had obviously received about Byron Satsang.

My ridicule is always directed at those who would call themselves God-men or God-women for they are clearly suffering from extreme delusions of grandeur. The followers of the Deluded Ones are merely followers, and the reason I sometimes am moved to write to them is to point to the fact that there is now a third alternative available to either staying ‘normal’ or becoming ‘spiritual’.

In writing to you I was merely pointing to the fact that your self-professed sarcasm could easily be seen as selective vindictive religious intolerance – i.e. ‘a bitter or wounding remark’ directed at someone else’s beliefs.

As I said in my previous post, my intolerance is of all religions, both Western and Eastern, and it is the true-believers of all faiths who feel offended by my remarks.

*

Yes I was a Rajneeshee for some 17 years. I have written of the incident that heralded the beginning of the end for me, in a book I wrote ...

One night in discourse, suddenly the absurdity of worshipping an empty chair on a podium, with thousands of other people all dressed in white robes, struck me like a thunderbolt. As I looked around, I had a brief flash of some sort of spiritual ‘Klu Klux Klan’. ‘Has my life really come to this?’ – I remember thinking. It was never to be the same again for me, although the final parting was to take a while. It also became increasingly evident that I was actually witnessing the formation of a Religion. Rajneesh had, of course, put the organization in place before he died, but one further incident made it crystal clear... Peter’s Journal, ‘Spiritual Search’

As for ‘cynical disillusioned’, I have had this charge levelled at me countless times. Below is a typical exchange from the Sannyas mailing list before I was cyber-executed from the list for being too heretical and iconoclastic ...

When I first became a Rajneeshee, I was attracted by two things –

• The promise of what I would call peace of mind – the permanent cessation of the endless self-centred churning thoughts and emotions in me.
• The promise of peace on earth – the emergence of a ‘new man’, such as would bring an end to war, pollution, poverty, repression, violence and sorrow on this fair planet.

Now these promises were never made ... only made up by you, and in your dreaming you chose to believe them.

I think you will find books on the New Man, Rajneesh’s vision for Humanity, etc. are still available but, given that the visions have failed to materialize, the books may well they may ‘be out of print’. These promised visions are certainly not favoured topics of conversation since the collapse of Rajneeshpuram.

Peter, this comment does not address the issue of you perceiving promises that were never made and as a result of your perception the resentment you now seem to project.

I have neither resentment nor gratitude towards Osho. To have been a part of such a spiritual movement around a living Enlightened One and be witness to the eventual formation of a religion on his death has been extraordinarily useful in understanding the whole meta-physical spiritual world.

Yes I have read the books you speak of, and they are not a defence nor an explanation for your having perceived promises that were never made. ALWAYS the ranch experience was described as an ‘Experiment to provoke God’. There are never any promises or guarantees when experimenting with the unknown.

I can only say what it meant for me – I was looking for peace of mind for myself and for peace on the planet. And I see that the Sannyas experiment failed, not only for me, but for thousands of others. I know of many people who have yet to recover from the Ranch experience or for whom the enthusiasm for change or challenge has simply withered away. What are your goals in life and in being a Sannyasin? What is it that you are seeking in life?

Perhaps you still could find some benefit in taking responsibility for choice of action. No one forced you to believe anything. You made choices. You looked for and found what didn’t exist.

Of course I was a Sannyasin willingly. It was, at the time, the best game to play in town. Along with thousands of other Westerners, I was seduced by the exotic East and it’s religions. I thought that the solution for me, and solution to the mess that is human interaction on the planet, was to be found there. But I was wrong, and it took quite an effort to admit it.

The Mind is an awesome resource.

Whereas human intelligence, freed of all of the social conditioning (particularly the belief in God or some form of afterlife and immortality) and the animal instinctual passions is capable of such clarity and common sense that it has to be experienced to be appreciated. Such is the functioning of a brain so freed that I am capable of understanding the whole of the Human Condition of malice and sorrow for I am outside of it as I no longer dwell in the ‘normal’ world or in the ‘spiritual’ world. The mind, when freed of belief and affectation, is capable of immense clarity.

As for your notion that the experiment failed, I see no possible way you could know that, as the experiment continues even if it is only with me.

I have written in detail of my experiences and why the spiritual path failed, not only for me, but for millions of others down the ages, but you stubbornly refuse to want to read anything of my story. What you do with your life is your business, after all, it is your life. I say that as a fact. And it is so perfect that it is that way. I am simply offering a third alternative for anyone who has doubts about the spiritual path, its workings and its results.

Are you covering up your feelings of failing by projecting them on to everyone else? Does this help you to feel less?

No. I have spent some18 months ridding myself of the feelings that ensue from the instinctual passions such that the need to either repress them or express them never arises. I can’t tell you how good it is to be free of the remorseless and fickle emotional churnings and thoughts generated by the psychological and psychic ‘self’.

For the rest of your discourse, sales pitch, what ever it is... you certainly make being a Sannyasin...no you never said Sannyasin, did you? You make being a Rajneeshee sound repulsive and I guess being one could be! (depending on the dreamer)

Being a follower or believer in Osho is no more or less ‘repulsive’ than believing in any other God or God-man. The major trouble with believing in Gods is that people gather in groups to strengthen their belief and then fight and feud with other groups as to whose God is speaking the Truth, whose God is Right, whose God is the Best, whose God is the Only God, and this results in all the religious wars, persecutions, repressions, retributions, cleansings, pogroms, tortures, suppressions, etc. So my comments are not personally directed at Osho or Sannyasins, but are about the whole spiritual world. It is because I spent 15 years as a devoted full-on Rajneeshee that I can write as an authority on that particular Eastern religion. Peter to Mailing List C

P.S. These exchanges with Rajneeshees make fascinating reading should you be at all interested in exploring spiritual belief.

Your statement – ‘which is not to say your comments are not without validity’ makes little sense to me. Judging something as valid or invalid is a subjective evaluation that is most often applied in the form ‘what you are saying has some validity, but I believe ...’ What about examining and evaluating a comment on the basis of whether it is factual and sensible. Is it a statement of fact and does it make sense, or is it silly?

Most people live their lives on the basis of feelings, imagination, hope and belief and stubbornly ignore facts and sensibility. My exchanges on the Sannyas Mailing List offer ample evidence of the stubborn hold that fervent belief and impassioned feelings have on human beings. Hiding behind, and wallowing in, spiritual belief makes any sensible consideration and discussion of facts an impossibility, and forestalls any consideration of the third alternative that is now available to remaining ‘normal’ or becoming ‘spiritual’.

One of the reasons I was moved to write to you was that your magazine seemed to indicate a willingness on your part to question spiritual belief, but it is now evident to me that it was simply written in sarcastic style and was aimed at deriding the beliefs of others who are not part of your religion.

It is an impossibility to engage in a discussion about facts – what works and what doesn’t work and why – with those who fervently believe something to be true and desperately uphold it to be the Truth. But if someone is sufficiently motivated and willing to take stock of their lives and examine what has worked and what hasn’t, then a sensible and dispassionate investigation of facts of spiritual belief is possible.

12.2.2000

To Publisher No 1

The Oxford Dictionary defines sarcasm as ‘a bitter or wounding expression or remark, a taunt’, and ridicule as ‘Subjection to mocking and dismissive language or behaviour; the action or practice of ridiculing a person or thing; mockery, derision’.

I always try to be precise with the words I use and consequently I use the dictionary meaning. Words are the only accurate method of communication we human beings have. Trying to intuit or feel what the other is feeling, thinking or meaning is a hopeless system fraught with conflict, confusion and ambiguity.

*

Yes I was a Rajneeshee for some 17 years. I have written of the incident that heralded the beginning of the end for me, in a book I wrote ... ‘One night in discourse, suddenly the absurdity of worshipping an empty chair on a podium, with thousands of other people all dressed in white robes, struck me like a thunderbolt.’ <Snip>

Do you mean to say you ‘walk the middle path’ – as in between the bizarre and serious and more fun and deeper? Or is life somewhere between bizarre religion and irreverence? I have got no idea what you mean at all. Do you find certain aspects of the religious group you belong to bizarre and, if so, why, or are you not concerned? I am interested as to why you don’t care? You asked me at the end of the post as to why I care? I am curious as to how you cannot care?

*

‘As I looked around, I had a brief flash of some sort of spiritual ‘Klu Klux Klan’. ‘Has my life really come to this?’ – I remember thinking. It was never to be the same again for me, although the final parting was to take a while. It also became increasingly evident that I was actually witnessing the formation of a Religion. Rajneesh had, of course, put the organization in place before he died, but one further incident made it crystal clear...’

When I was a teenager I figured out that the idea of a of a white-bearded God sitting on a cloud and overseeing all this was pretty silly to me. And as for sending his Son down so he could do a few miracles, start a Religion, be nailed to a cross, and after a few days go back up to sit alongside Dad and see how it works out...!! I remember as a child clearly thinking, if there was a God, how come he made the mess in the first place, and if he was responsible for this mess, why the hell didn’t he just come down and sort it out! Later, of course, it became clear – someone would probably crucify him again for creating this much suffering and then letting it go on for so long! When I saw in Pune that I had simply swapped Western religion for Eastern religion I was appalled, and this was particularly obvious after Rajneesh died. I found that I could no longer live a lie and I eventually came to see the photos of Rajneesh on the walls of my friends’ houses as no different than the statuettes of Jesus nailed to a cross that I had seen on the walls of Catholic friends’ houses as a youth.

When you say ‘ridicule of the inner circle’, I did not notice any in your magazine but there was some ridicule of Rajneesh’s words, and as such, of Rajneesh Himself.

*

As for ‘cynical disillusioned’, I have had this charge levelled at me countless times. Below is a typical exchange from the Sannyas mailing list before I was cyber-executed from the list for being too heretical and iconoclastic ... <Snip>

That’s a pretty clear statement. You never thought for one second that the New Man was going to happen and you never thought for one second that peace on earth would ever happen. And you don’t want to talk about or debate about peace on earth. It keeps up the 100% record of Sannyasins who are either in denial or don’t care.

What I find fascinating is a movement that was supposedly altruistic and caring has degenerated into a self-centred social club totally lacking in any direction or motive apart from self-fulfillment – both as a group and as individuals. No wonder peace on earth forever remains an unfulfilled dream. Peace on earth is literally sacrificed at the altar of dead God-men.

*

Your statement – ‘which is not to say your comments are not without validity’ makes little sense to me. Judging something as valid or invalid is a subjective evaluation that is most often applied in the form ‘what you are saying has some validity, but I believe ...’ What about examining and evaluating a comment on the basis of whether it is factual and sensible. Is it a statement of fact and does it make sense, or is it silly?

My general observation, as in ‘most often’, has proved a touch inaccurate in your case. What you seem to do is, whenever you begrudgingly acknowledge the validity of something I have written, you then say ‘So what, it doesn’t mean anything to me, or it doesn’t apply to me’. You are obviously not a firm believer otherwise you would defend your belief against what you would perceive as attacks on it. You appear to be following the currently fashionable ‘ordinary spirituality’ school that preaches that one should be unconcerned about, and therefore disconnected from, everything.

*

Most people live their lives on the basis of feelings, imagination, hope and belief and stubbornly ignore facts and sensibility. My exchanges on the Sannyas Mailing List offer ample evidence of the stubborn hold that fervent belief and impassioned feelings have on human beings. Hiding behind, and wallowing in, spiritual belief makes any sensible consideration and discussion of facts an impossibility, and forestalls any consideration of the third alternative that is now available to remaining ‘normal’ or becoming ‘spiritual’.

Are you for real? A ‘factual belief’ is a contradiction in terms – a gross distortion of words, an insane inanity.

fact – What has really happened or is the case; truth; reality: in fact rather than theory, the fact of the matter is; something known to have happened; a truth known by actual experience or observation: scientists work with facts. Oxford Dictionary

A discerning eye and ear is needed in order to ascertain what is fact and what is merely theory, postulation, concept, commonly agreed, belief, assumption, speculation, imagination, myth, wisdom, real or true. It is easy to see when one knows how to look. Without having to interpret through one’s own belief system – an otherwise intelligent person is thus blind to the obvious – all facts are self-evidently clear. Start with a fact – a verifiable, objective actuality – as the base. Use it as a touch-stone to test the actuality of whatever ‘truth’ one suspects to be a belief. Separate out facts from fiction; find out which part is demonstrably a fact. Anything else is fiction, an illusion.

Any belief is nonsensical. By its very nature a belief is not factually true ... otherwise it would not need to be believed to be true. A fact is obvious; it is out in the open, freely available for all to see as being true. To believe something to be true is to accept on trust that it is so. A fact does not have to be accepted on trust – a fact is candidly so. A fact is patently true, manifestly clear. A fact is what is ascertained sensately and thus demonstrably true. A fact has actual verity, whereas a belief requires synthetic credence. It is a fact that I, as this body, am mortal. I will die in due course ... this heart will stop beating, these lungs will cease breathing, this brain will quit thinking.

Herein lies the clue to ascertain why this fancy has persisted: a feeling is not a fact. Feelings have led humankind astray for millennia, without ever being questioned as to whether they are the correct tool for determining the truth of a matter. Feelings are held to be sacrosanct; they are given a credibility they do not deserve. They are seen to be the final arbiter in a contentious issue: ‘It’s a gut-feeling’, or ‘My intuition is never wrong’, or ‘It feels right’, and so on. Thought, shackled by emotion and passion, can not operate with the clarity it is capable of. Surely, to experience what is factual is of far greater import than any conclusion arrived at by thought or feeling – no matter how highly refined the thought or fanatically felt the feeling.

To experience the factuality of the ending of ‘being’ whilst this body is still breathing is of the utmost importance, if one is to penetrate into the ‘Mystery of Life’ and discover the ultimate fulfilment ... here on earth. To come upon a fact, all that is fiction must be stripped away. All Sacred Cows must be mercilessly exposed to the most extreme scrutiny, nothing or no-one being exempt from critical examination. Common usage has blurred the distinction betwixt fact and belief so much so that anyone using sufficient sophistry can get away with anything at all and still be considered wise these days.

Religious teaching brainwashes people into believing nonsense instead of observing facts and actuality. For most people seeing a fact means betraying their belief ... thus they are rendered incapable of seeing it. One of the ways of ascertaining whether a ‘truth’ is a belief or a fact is that a belief demands loyalty; you give allegiance to it and to the group that espouses it. If you have more than one belief it causes difficulty, as your loyalties can be torn apart. You can feel chaotic, not knowing which belief is ‘true’. It makes you very insecure ... at moments like that you wish that there were one person who could tell you what to do and what not to do ... what to believe and what not to believe. You desire some Big Daddy or Big Mummy to tell you what is ‘Right’ and what is ‘Wrong’.

Most people try to resolve their different beliefs through compromise. Two people, holding on to their own beliefs, will get into an argument, a fight. They are separate. One is always trying to get the other to believe in their own belief through manipulation and persuasion ... and by giving or withholding love. The one who is stronger, the most adept in this, wins the other over. As neither can stand separation, they will grab any means to come together – even if this means mutual concessions, or the swapping of one’s belief for the other’s. Seeing that both beliefs are irrelevant, by virtue of the fact that they are beliefs anyway, they can dissolve completely. Then there is nothing to resolve, the problem itself is eliminated. Hence a permanent lack of conflict. With the absence of belief there is no more power battles over whose belief is ‘Right’. Separation is no more ... equity prevails. The result is actual intimacy between autonomous individuals.

Just because something is an experience in common, it is not necessarily factual. If something is communally experienced it is said to be objective and it is automatically implied to be true. If one is said to be objective it is taken as an accolade; whereas by being subjective, one is said to be prone to bias, to error. If no-one was bold enough to say that the accepted ‘truth’ is a mistake, then the sun would still be revolving around the earth! In the face of public opinion, one needs to be bold to question the collective wisdom and find out for oneself the fact of the matter. One of the best ways of doing this is to see that something held to be true is not working. Instead of vainly trying to make it work through intellectual dishonesty, one takes stock and applies lateral thinking. One needs to be audacious to proceed where no-one has gone before – and trail-blazers are often castigated for their effrontery. Fancy being ridiculed or ostracized for ascertaining the facticity of something ... for establishing a fact.

The criterion of a fact is that it works, it produces results. An insight is seeing the fact. When one sees the fact there is action ... and this action is the actualizing of the insight so that one’s personality is changed, irrevocably. AF Glossary

*

Are you on some strong medication or something?

*

One of the reasons I was moved to write to you was that your magazine seemed to indicate a willingness on your part to question spiritual belief, but it is now evident to me that it was simply written in sarcastic style and was aimed at deriding the beliefs of others who are not part of your religion.

And yet you were reported in the local paper as saying,

‘none of the content was intended to be a piss-take of Osho’

but your

‘targets were the parasitic gurus/teachers who try to identify themselves or their teachings with him, while still playing it ‘safe’ – unlike Osho himself who spoke spontaneously and openly, regardless of the consequences’.

And yet now you say you served it up to both sides. It is you who keeps shifting position on what you believe you wrote. When I read your magazine originally I thought you were serving it to both sides which is why I was surprised to see your retraction and denial in the local paper. It is precisely because you clearly stated that you were targeting ‘the other Guru/teachers’ that I was moved to write to say in doing so you were in danger of coming across as a religiously-intolerant bigot which was clearly not your intention. These are the facts as I see them unless you change the goal posts tomorrow.

*

It is an impossibility to engage in a discussion about facts – what works and what doesn’t work and why – with those who fervently believe something to be true and desperately uphold it to be the Truth. But if someone is sufficiently motivated and willing to take stock of their lives and examine what has worked and what hasn’t, then a sensible and dispassionate investigation of facts of spiritual belief is possible.

That’s a fairly clear statement. If you’re not motivated by anything why do you go to all the effort of producing your magazine in order to write sarcastically about your spiritual beliefs and the spiritual beliefs of others? What is your motivation? In my spiritual years I was often suspicious of spiritual beliefs but I was always careful not to indulge in cynicism. I always thought if I got cynical about what I was doing in life I was definitely on the wrong track. But I did play a few tricks and indulged in some harmless rebellion from time to time when the opportunity arose.

I remember after the Ranch I was living in a seaside town that had a small Rajneesh centre. Rooms were available providing various people a chance to offer sessions in past lives, tarot, astrology, psychic readings and other divinations. A friend and I would often look at the notice board, fascinated at the ever-increasing variety on offer. One day we decided, as a prank, to place a fictitious advertisement in the community newsletter offering ‘Capology – the Ancient Tibetan Art of Knee-cap Reading’. It went on to describe that the knees are a critical junction point for the flow of ‘Quong energy’. We also offered half price to pensioners and amputees! We gave the telephone number of the local Concerned Christians, a cult-busting group, which had occasionally given Rajneeshees a hard time. We thought nothing more of it until the editor of the newsletter bailed us up one day to tell us that the Concerned Christians had rung up to complain that they had had so many phone calls, and how come? Which made me think, even then, that people will believe anything.

It just took me a while to admit to the fact that I was as gullible as everyone else.

*

Three pieces of writing may answer your curiosity as to why I write, and why I care –

University days were filled with a wonderful optimism and naivety as the sixties’ youth revolution gathered momentum. We were going to change the world! Socialism, peace, love, sexual freedom, environmentalism – anything was possible to have or to change.

I marched to stop the Vietnam war, I poster-pasted to save the forests, I grooved to the Rolling Stones in Hyde Park in London, I hung around in Amsterdam, I travelled to the East, I became politically and socially concerned and involved. I’ve thought about these times during the last twelve months – what happened to the dreams, the enthusiasm of those times? Remember John Lennon singing ‘Imagine’ or ‘Give Peace a Chance’, or watching Woodstock? We were going to change the world! And then it all started to fade a bit – I got rather lost in the daily business of wife, two kids and two cars. And then, when that crashed, I was off to the East with thousands of others, seduced and fired up by the promise of a New Man, Peace, Love, Utopia and an end to my personal suffering. In fact, the whole of the revolution of the sixties was simply sucked into the mystery, confusion and ‘mindlessness’ of the Eastern religions.

Of course spiritualism failed – there was nothing new in it at all, now that I look back. How could the solution lie in the past? There would have been peace and happiness in the world by now if it worked – it has had at least 3000 years to prove itself. So when the social revolution and the promised spiritual solution failed, I was back in ‘comfortably numb’ normal, but I couldn’t rest there – that naivety was still burning within me, that refusal to accept that this was all there was to life. I am amazed to see that so many people of my generation have reverted to ‘comfortably numb’ – have lost their naivety. Surely the purpose in life is to be the best I can – to be the best possible. Peter’s Journal, ‘Peace’

*

At this stage it may be useful to state my motives for writing. As I watch television, read newspapers, listen to people and observe the relationships of men and women around me, I see sorrow – sadness, piquancy, despair, resignation and the bitter-sweetness of love; and malice – vindictiveness, sarcasm, revenge, innuendo, gossip, jealousy, violence and hate. Nowhere do I see delight, contentment, satisfaction, benevolence, consensus and co-operation. Nor do I see any men and women living together in peace and harmony. So I thought my story could be useful to anyone who, like me, hadn’t given up yet, but who could see they had ‘nothing left to lose’ in trying something new. Peter’s Journal, ‘Foreword’

*

I’m not driven to proselytize or save the planet – it’s just that somewhere there may be another Peter or Vineeto who would risk trying something new. I was, after all, lost, lonely, frightened and very, very cunning – the only difference is that I chose to admit it. I accepted responsibility for actively contributing to the endemic violence and suffering. And I wanted to change. I knew, as everybody else does, that something was wrong. Why when I had everything I wanted, wasn’t I happy? And why, despite my best efforts, did I hurt other people? And why did the tried and true methods to find happiness – religion and spirituality – fail again and again? So in the end it simply meant going off down a new track – trying something new. I literally had ‘nothing left to lose’ except more and more of the same second rate life – and then I’d die. Peter’s Journal, ‘Evolution’

As I copied the above it struck me yet again that the Eastern philosophy and religion makes ‘not caring’ and ‘being disconnected’ into a sacred virtue, for they preach that this actual, physical world is an illusion – so why should any spiritual believer care about peace on earth?

Methinks we are a world apart – you are into the traditional Eastern religious morals and ethics and I am into the third alternative – actualism.

*

Thanks, but I’ll pass. The editorial policy of your magazine seems a little too confused and changeable for my taste.

14.2.2000

To Publisher No 1

Well, it seems that this conversation has come to an end. I can see that you are a firm believer in, and practitioner of, Eastern religion and philosophy and, as such, are not interested in exploring an alternative. Fair enough. It is good to be full-on into something that makes you ‘happier, less serious, more fun and deeper’, as you said.

For me, my doubts simply accumulated to the point that it felt like I was living a lie and I had to get out. As I said, we are a world apart, which is why any further communication is pointless.

Cheers ... ... Peter.

As a farewell, I’ll leave you with a piece I wrote about my experiences with the ‘Inner Circle’ that you might find interesting –

I was doing a bit of casual ‘worship’ in the architect’s office one day towards the end of my stay when we were all asked to come up with some ideas for a new bedroom for Rajneesh. Within a week I found myself working in the inner compound where he lived, converting the original open meeting hall into a huge glass and Italian marble circular bedroom. What an opportunity! So when my visa expired, I went back home, sold a house I had purchased with others, and returned within three months. The project took almost two years, and I worked daily in his house, gaining many insights into the inner workings around Rajneesh himself. I met him twice, very briefly, which was quite a rare event as, apart from discourse, he spent his whole time isolated in his room. My impression of him was that he was on ‘another planet’, but that was what I expected anyway. The last time I saw him was when we had finished his room, and he looked very fragile and weak.

The room was completed and he moved in for a week, and then went back to his old bedroom. I was then offered a job overseeing the building developments in the ashram, with the lure of becoming a Resident – free food, rent paid and other appropriate privileges of rank. I worked closely with the leaders of the ashram, sometimes travelling to Bombay on business, but I became increasingly uncomfortable with the level of politicking and scheming – to put it plainly, power-tripping and ingratiating behaviour. I guess I thought things just ‘happened’ around Rajneesh, but to see this cesspool of power, plotting and intrigue below the surface reminded me of the failure of the Ranch. It came to a head at one particular meeting when suddenly I could see the whole hidden agenda operating beneath the surface. It became glaringly obvious: here was power and corruption again, but this time done by highly skilled ‘operators’, not amateurs. Whether the motive be Good or Evil, Right or Wrong, I simply saw power as power over someone else. And, of course, it had the authority of Rajneesh behind it, which was curious given that he had denied being the power and authority behind the goings-on at the Ranch.

So I did the only thing I could to maintain my integrity: I quit. Peter’s Journal, ‘Spiritual Search’

15.2.2000

To Publisher No 1

Well, it seems that this conversation has come to an end. I can see that you are a firm believer in, and practitioner of, Eastern religion and philosophy and, as such, are not interested in exploring an alternative. Fair enough. It is good to be full-on into something that makes you ‘happier, less serious, more fun and deeper’, as you said.

Which must make you a rebel without a cause, or a rebel for rebellion’s sake, or a fighter for ... Which is perhaps where your taunt of ‘chicken’ comes from. It reeks of schoolboy playground fights. Personally I have given up fighting. I decided long ago that there are enough fights and wars in the world without me contributing more malice. This is peace on earth in action.

Personally, I always used to check them out and see if there was any factual basis in what they were saying. If there was, I would assess my actions and make any necessary adjustments so as to not cause offence to others, or take offence from what others did or said. This is peace on earth in action.

Not at all. I’ve simply heard all these comments before. Vineeto and I spent about 4 months corresponding to the Sannyas Mailing List before we were cyber-executed and all of the correspondence is on the Actual Freedom Web-site. I find it a waste of my time and yours to respond to comments that I have answered before many, many times. Your comments were based on no knowledge, or reading, of what I am on about and, as such, your comments are purely thoughtless knee-jerk reactions. If you’re not interested enough to read, then I’m not interested enough to reply to you. If you’re interested, then I’m interested. Otherwise any conversation becomes a pointless battle and I long ago gave up battling others.

I thought you might be interested in an alternative to Eastern religion and philosophy, but I was wrong.

Indeed it is. I wrote it for others who may be sufficiently dissatisfied and disgruntled with Eastern religion to be interested in something that was down-to-earth and non-spiritual. I also wrote it for myself in order to make sense of life. Any writing is a process of clarification for oneself as well as a means of communication to others. That’s why I enjoy writing.

No. In fact I didn’t like myself the way I was, nor my life the way it was. This burning dissatisfaction with ‘who’ I was proved to be the very reason I inquired about Actual Freedom in the first place. ‘Getting on with life’ was always a poor, second-rate choice for me. My life was always searched for genuine freedom, peace and happiness and I was never content until I found it.

*

For me, my doubts simply accumulated to the point that it felt like I was living a lie and I had to get out. As I said, we are a world apart, which is why any further communication is pointless.

No. But I have a very good working knowledge of Eastern religions and Eastern philosophy, whereas you know nothing of Actual Freedom, therefore any communication is pointless. You simply see me as attacking your beliefs – and therefore attacking you – and you get defensive, therefore for you this is a battle. Personally, as an actualist, I find all belief silly, which is why I rely on facts, therefore any communication about your belief system is pointless. If you want to be stubbornly recalcitrant about your religion that’s your business but then to expect me to continue writing smacks of belligerence.

Having no beliefs to defend, I have no reason, or desire, to attack.

As I said above, this is a playground taunt from one who wants to fight to one who doesn’t want to fight. I lost all interest – and instinctual urge – to fight a good while ago. I have found genuine freedom, peace and happiness.

I take it when you say I have a ‘mechanistic mind’, and I ‘lack courage and imagination’, that this is not a judgement on your part. Personally I find judgement very useful and necessary – how else does one determine what is silly and what is sensible. Spiritual people do it all the time by judging things as good or bad, right or wrong. They simply use Eastern religious and New Dark Age morals and ethics which are but a variation on the Christian one’s that many of them rejected or rebelled against in their youth.

As for your judgement, I have a mind freed of impassioned emotion – instinctual fear, aggression, nurture and desire. As such, I have no passion for fighting, which you see as lack of courage, and I don’t suffer from fanciful dreaming or fervent belief, which you see as lack of imagination. We live in different worlds – I live in the actual world, you live in the spiritual world.

Fair enough. This loyal faith is exactly why the inner circle has the power it does.

The loyal faithful personal relationship that Catholics have with Christ is exactly why the Pope is given the power he has over the faithful. The Pope (and Rome) only has power because Catholics give Him the power.

Realizing this fact is why I quit from the power structure in Pune. I had too much integrity to actually give someone else power over me. To willingly give someone else power over me and then to spend my life riling against it seemed to me to be the height of stupidity.

So, now you object to the fact that I have written a book! Thou art clasping at straws to denigrate me. Would you have me silenced if you were ‘the controller of those who wrote books’. There are literally thousands of Eastern religious New Dark Age books and there are only two written by actualists and you ask ‘why is your opinion so important to you that you have to write a book?’ Not so long ago we would have been more than cyber executed for our iconoclastic, heretical stance against all religion but thanks to the Net we now have an outlet which is thus far free of, and secure from, those who would silence us.

As for ‘catharsis’ – I’ve already posted quite a bit about my motives for writing but you either don’t read what I have written, or chose to ignore it for whatever reason.

Once again, this is the reason I wrote a book, and why it was so vitally important to write. It’s from the introduction –

As I sit on the balcony of our small flat contemplating life, I am moved to start writing my story. The urge has been welling in me over the last few months, so I’m now making a start. There is now ample time, given that I have all but retired, to reflect on the sense I have made of life.

Indeed, that has been the innate drive in my life: to make sense of this mad world that I found myself living in. The insanities of endless wars, conflict, arguments, sadness, despair, failed hopes and dreams seems endemic. And worse still, as I gradually forced myself to admit, I was as mad, and as bad, as everyone else. I had tried all of the solutions that Humanity offered in order to be happy, but in the end they made no sense and haven’t worked to sort out the mess. But I have now done it, and the results are stunning, to say the least, and this is my story. It is a story not only of an adventurous journey, but of a final contented arrival.

I find myself, these days, both happy and harmless in that sorrow and malice have disappeared from my life. Gone now is the continuous neurosis of the relentless self-concerned thoughts spinning in my head with their resulting churning emotions and feelings. A calm stillness pervades within and without. It is now a delight to be alive. And I have also achieved what was a driving ambition since ‘adulthood’: I am now experiencing living with a woman in complete peace and harmony with its accompanying sexual delight – the icing on the cake, if you like. I can now look back on a life well lived, complete in itself and free of any emotional scars as I troll through my memories.

So I’m writing to tell the story of how it is possible for any man and woman to live in peace and harmony, for indeed my companion and I are anybody – very ordinary, mortal human beings. Of course, it has only been possible because I have rid myself of malice and sorrow. By following a simple process, alluded to in this book, it is now possible for any human being to free themselves of malice and sorrow, should they so desire. Therefore, it is possible for any man and woman to live in peace and harmony. It is then obvious that all humans can live in peace and harmony on this lush, verdant planet. Should they so desire.

However, nobody but me could rid myself of malice and sorrow – no spiritual, social or political ideal, no ‘God’, energy or karma, and it involved no belief, surrender, trust, faith or hope. I had to do it for myself, by myself, and I had to make it the most important thing in my life. But I do acknowledge serendipity, and it was surely serendipitous to meet Richard and Devika on a warm, summer evening in January 1997.

It started off as a slightly awkward social evening but as it continued it proved to be profound for me. I do not remember a great deal of the post-dinner conversation, but a few things stick in my memory.

‘Everyone has got it 180 degrees wrong,’ Richard said at one stage. I was starting to have some doubts about Enlightenment, and that ‘crack in the door’ was enough for me to reply, ‘Really? – I’ll think about that for a bit’.

‘The only danger is you might become Enlightened,’ said Richard about the experimental method he had devised to eliminate the ‘self’ – that psychological entity that is the root of sorrow and malice and that dwells within all human beings.

‘It is possible for a man and a woman to live together twenty-four hours a day in peace and harmony, totally enjoying each other’s company, and the sex is great,’ said Devika.

Now I was really interested!

‘I was Enlightened for eleven years before I managed to break free from the delusion that I was God,’ said Richard. My brain went into gridlock, but this sounded like an interesting path to investigate, particularly considering what Devika had said about living together. Little did I know that the first statement was to lead to nearly a year of examining every belief I had taken on as to what it is to be a human being on this planet, and to reject every one of them as silly! And little did I know that I was also to prove Devika’s statement as a fact in my life.

And needless to say, I have managed to avoid becoming Enlightened, or indeed any form of Guru-ship. Peter’s Journal, ‘Introduction’

As I said, we are worlds apart and, as such, any attempt at a meaningful communication is pointless.

15.2.2000

To Publisher No 2

I presume these teachers are at the Osho Centres with the agreement of the those running the Centres, and as a Rajneeshee, it would seem that your beef should be with your fellow Sannyasins, who welcome them into the centres and not those using the facilities. It’s like inviting someone into your lounge room and then other members of the family berating them for intruding.

I always find it interesting that Rajneesh spoke glowingly of many other Masters, including Ramana Maharshi, and said he was of the same ilk and spoke the same message, yet if anyone speaks of Rajneesh in the same inclusive terms the cries of foul are heard loud and clear. In other words, when it suited him, Rajneesh included himself in the Eastern religious tradition, yet your words and actions seek to exclude others who would associate with, include, or speak glowingly of Him. No matter how loudly you protest, this could appear to others to be a version of ‘My God is the Only God and all other Gods are false Gods’ – or false Gurus, in this case.

If you re-read what I said, you will see that I never questioned your motives but only pointed to the dangerous impression you may very well be creating.

Again a policy such as this can create the impression in the larger spiritual community of this area that Sannyasins are exclusive, elitist, isolationist and more superior than others. I realize that the exclusion of other teachers from Sannyas facilities is the official policy of the Inner Circle in Pune and I am also aware that it is a policy of some controversy among the Rajneeshees community, but to publicly blame the guest-Gurus is surely to aim one’s barbs at the wrong target.

Ninety percent of the first edition that I read was aimed at lampooning the Gurus and teachings of non-Sannyasins. If the magazine was ‘intended mainly for the Sannyasin community’ then surely it should have been better passed from hand to hand amongst Rajneeshees only so that the followers of these Gurus and teachers did not feel singled out and selectively targeted. After all, you were reported on the back page of the local paper as saying that in your recent satirical magazine,

‘none of the content was intended to be a piss-take of Osho’ but your ‘targets were the parasitic gurus/teachers who try to identify themselves or their teachings with him, while still playing it ‘safe’ – unlike Osho himself who spoke spontaneously and openly, regardless of the consequences.’

Can you not see that those people so ‘targeted’ may well feel persecuted?

Words such as ‘target’ and ‘fair game’ imply a hunt – chase, give chase, pursue, stalk, track, trail, follow, shadow, hunt down, hound; Oxford Dictionary. Could it not be that those people ‘targeted’ as ‘fair game’ feel hunted?

Precisely the point that I have been trying to make. What you say can be interpreted in many ways. Since my initial post you have qualified your statement by saying ‘ they’re fair game ’ which does narrow the range of interpretation quite significantly.

I find this astounding as the man has hundreds of books, tapes and videos detailing his teachings, dreams, vision, philosophy and religion. As a follower of Rajneesh surely you would make it your business to find out what and who you are following.

In the first edition of your magazine there was an Osho statement deriding Mother Theresa, a Catholic soon-to-be saint. To publish this particular quote in a magazine targeted at those not of the Rajneeshee faith could well be seen as offensive by many Christians – or did it not occur to you? The comments in the body of the magazine appear to denigrate the teachers and followers of the Ramana Maharshi religion and are made by those claiming to be Sannyasins. Like it or not, the Rajneesh religion – and therefore Rajneesh himself – is implicated by association to these apparently derogatory comments in your magazine.

It always appeared to me that the ‘Inner Circle’ was doing its best to rope in the loose cannons and instil discipline, loyalty, and faith into Sannyasins, in order to make Rajneeshism more mainstream and respectable.

I’ve got no idea whether you have a ‘plight’ or not.

I would assume you believe Mr. Rajneesh was a God-man, not a mortal flesh and blood human being – someone who declared he was ‘Never born, Never died, Only visited this planet’, as is chiselled on his tomb. You ‘also think that if anyone wants to associate with the ‘Sannyas’ network, they’re fair game’, which, as I have repeatedly said, can be interpreted by others as a targeted attack on their religion. Nowhere have I said what you are doing is not okay, I was merely pointing out the inherent feeling of persecution that could well be perceived by those so targeted. I am not making a moral or ethical judgement, I am simply stating the facts of the situation.

As I have said, I am an actualist and, as such, a thorough-going atheist. I have no spiritual / religious belief of any kind. To me all metaphysical belief is puerile nonsense – ancient drivel, twaddle and all religion, be it Western or Eastern, is but institutionalized insanity. Because I have no spiritual belief, I ridicule all spiritual belief and don’t selectively target any particular religion – I am intolerant of all religions.

The reason I am concerned about religious tolerance and conflict is that I see that all the so-called New Age religions are rapidly and inevitably going the way of the mainstream religions. The forming of fighting schisms and sub-schisms is the inevitable result of all religious belief and leads to religious conflict. This same religious conflict inexorably leads to religious wars, crusades, tortures, persecutions, perversions, repression, recriminations, prejudices, retributions, pogroms, etc.

You may have also noticed that the only reason the principle and ideal of religious tolerance exists is because of the inevitable and on-going conflict and strife between various spiritual/religious groups and even within individual groups themselves.

Curiously, your stated aim can be seen to be in direct support of the Inner Circle’s policy of excluding ‘other’ spiritual teachers from Rajneesh Centres. This tacit support of the Inner Circle’s policies does seem to be in contradiction of ‘the ridicule of the Inner Circle’ that [Publisher No. 1] mentions was included in the second edition of the magazine. I have not seen the second edition but I take it that your ridicule of the Inner Circle does not include this particular ruling.

As for your aims in producing your magazine you said above –

‘I did the magazine for many reasons, but mostly for fun. I also think that if anyone wants to associate with the ‘Sannyas’ network, they’re fair game’

and in your statement in the local paper you said that your

‘targets were the parasitic gurus/teachers who try to identify themselves or their teachings with him’.

Now, all of a sudden, we have a new and primary target that the magazine was aimed at –

‘the (perceived) gullibility of sannyasins’.

As I said to [Publisher No. 1] when he asked if I’d like to write something for your magazine – ‘The editorial policy of your magazine seems a little too confused and changeable for my taste.’

What I said was

‘the local paper quote leaves the impression that Rajneeshees are a self-centred, bigoted, elitist and intolerant lot, which I am sure was not your intention’.

From where I stand, in the actual world, anyone who believes in God is plainly silly and does so for ultimately self-centred reasons and anyone who believes themselves to be God-on-Earth is suffering from extreme Delusions of Grandeur. The master-disciple system is rotten to the very core. It is not that I think this is so, it is a fact, and one does not have to delve back into history to see the inevitable results of the master-disciple system in action. All of the religious wars, crusades, tortures, persecutions, perversions, repression, recriminations, prejudices, retributions, pogroms, etc. that have been, and are still on-going, are the direct legacy of the master-disciple system. This appalling carnage will not cease unless human beings wean themselves off the ancient fairy-tale belief in Gods, God-men and life-after death.

At one time I had many friends who were Sannyasins, as I was, and most were very sincere and totally dedicated in their search for freedom, peace and happiness. As I have said before, at the time Sannyas was the best game to play. I now see a watering down of this search amongst many Sannyasins to the point were many are ‘happy and content’ exactly as they are, with no desire for change. I think this is evidenced by the fact that many are attracted by the teachings that ‘you are already That – all you have to do is realize It’.

To me this is a sorry and lamentable demise of a movement that began in the fervour of 60’s and that was going to change the world and bring peace to this fair planet. This passionate search for freedom, peace and happiness has degenerated into an utterly self-centred fashionable New Dark Age spiritualism that cares not a fig about peace on earth. The current image of Sannyasins in the wider community is that they at the forefront of this self-centredness and are deliberately turning away from the original spirit that was around in the ‘early days’.

Perhaps this just makes me an old fogie but I, for one, still remain vitally interested in actual peace on earth.

A bit I wrote for the Introduction to Actual Freedom may be relevant –

The human search for freedom has been a search for freedom from the rigid shackles of one’s instilled social identity and the search for peace and happiness has been a search for a means of finally bringing an end to both personal and global malice and sorrow.

The shamans and priests have commandeered this innate search with the promise of an ultimate peace and happiness in a mythical ‘life-after-death’ should one bow down to and worship a particular God and follow a particular teaching. This seductive promise of immortality for one’s ‘self’ or soul is a powerful lure that is passionately fuelled by the basic fear that underlies the innate survival instinct – the fear of death.

The Eastern religions further add the possibility of becoming a God-man whilst on earth – a position of ultimate power and authority over others that is irresistibly appealing for many – and the resulting enslavery inherent in the master-disciple system is the very antithesis of freedom. The search for a ‘spiritual’ freedom, peace and happiness, based on ancient superstition and metaphysical ‘other-worldly’ beliefs, has been on-going for thousands of years and has now had its day.

It’s time for a pragmatic and practical approach to finding a genuine and actual freedom from the Human Condition in total. A freedom from ancient belief and spiritual superstition. A freedom from the necessity of forever attempting to obey pious morals and follow unliveable ethics in order to keep one’s instinctual passions under control. And, finally, a freedom from the instinctual animal instinctual passions themselves – a freedom from the instinctual passions of fear, aggression, nurture and desire.

It’s now time to get to the very root of the real problem on earth – that ancient, hoary and persistent belief that ‘you can’t change human nature’.  Introduction to Actual Freedom, ‘Actual Freedom’

Sannyas has become yet another ‘old time religion’ and peace on earth is sacrificed yet again. As you can see, I am more concerned about the content and consequences of the Sannyas message than the image of Sannyasins. That’s why I write – purely and simply to say to anyone who is discontent with the spiritual path that there is a now a third alternative available to remaining ‘normal’ or becoming ‘spiritual.

The reason I wrote to you guys was to warn you of the apparent perception of intolerance towards other religions in your magazine. But you don’t seem to see what I see, so I see no point in continuing to flog a dead horse.

Actualism Homepage

Freedom from the Human Condition – Happy and Harmless

Peter’s Text © The Actual Freedom Trust