difficult as i would for one want to know and why....

not fair if he is a fraud and people pay lot of money to him.oh he is deceased?

also i wouldnt want to buy his books if he is a fraud.

Amethystfairy:)

Dear Venetian,

I agree with your question about whether it is right to expose fraud if people have been inspired by the fiction? If we take the da Vinci Code, there are those who take it as truth, and ignore the book's cover which clearly states that it is a novel. That book has caused a great degree of interest in spiritual and other matters. It has IMHO done a lot of good, but it has a percentage of pure fiction.

Fiction is fiction. However, fraud is fraud and, if done for personal gain at the expense of others, it is wrong.

I know that you are loathe to name names, but do the letters MH relate in any way?

With love and light,
Sue.

I know that you are loathe to name names, but do the letters MH relate in any way?

Is that a sue de nymn? 🙂 But no, they don't, to me. However I can't play 20 questions! 🙂 The one I haven't named ... maybe in the end I and another person would do a serious article on him, but it'll have to be a good and fully-referenced article by the two of us. It won't be happening yet, if it ever does.

I can name someone who isn't very well-known at all, but I did buy one of her books. I think she's done two. This isn't based on "research" of any kind - just my opinion. And she's not well-known anyway. Some years back I was buying almost every book going on Nature Spirits or elementals. There are some excellent ones. This genre goes right back to medieval times, and is picked up early in the 19th century by Theosophical authors who were clairvoyant and investigated the subject. Then the famous books on Findhorn came out in the 1960s/70s. So a genre I find of interest was created.

But Tanis Halliwell brought a book out of her experiences with leprechauns, in the 1990s. Sorry, Tanis, but I can see right through it as I'm sure many can. It doesn't read at all genuine. You used, IMHO, a fictitious framework - of what a leprechaun told you - upon which to hang an array of New Age and spiritual teachings. The teachings are OK, but you passed off the thing as being your actual encounters while in retreat in Ireland ... and I for one think you are having a laugh. (When's the promised Vol. 2 coming out? Aren't you short of cash yet? :cool:)

V

I think names should be named! So long as you can give reasons or references to back up why you doubt a person's teachings or experience, then let people decide for themselves whether or not there is truth and value (sometimes, even made-up accounts can carry value if the lesson is true). There is so much new age guff out there these days, I think injecting a healthy dose of doubt to get people thinking for themselves is sometimes a kindness... 'it is good to be open-minded, but not so open-minded that your brains fall out'!

I'm starting this thread as an off-shoot from a quite different thread it began on, at

There are some authors of spiritual or inspirational stories said to be their own true experiences, their own actual lives, whom a bit of research has thrown up major doubts about. Carlos Castaneda, Lobsang Rampa, others I can think of, and one I'm even loathe to name due to the number of people whom I know take his books as a canon of their absolute truth.

Does it matter that these books may not be true, though they are claimed to be? Is the practise deeply dishonest as an attempt to make money or fame? Or are the claims of fakery incorrect, and the stories are true after all? Or maybe it doesn't really matter?

I've put this on the spirituality forum as IMHO it's a spiritual problem re the morality of the authors, and that the books are spiritual or metaphysical 'manuals' people have accepted as being deep truth.

Edit to add: I'm holding off on naming someone else who's been just about completely exposed as fraudulent. (TBH most on HP won't have heard of him, don't worry, but he was very famous and had many followers in his day.) When people are inspired by people like this or Castaneda, is it right to expose truth about them, or does this harm a faith that people have placed in them, and may need?

V

I have not the slightest hesitation in saying that fraudsters need to be named. No amount of faith in them is ever deserved and those who have invested trust in them need to be able to understand why this trust is misplaced.

In another of the 'spooks' forums to which I contribute regularly there is a similar situation but the individual(s) (high-profile and very well known) who are generating considerable concern are regularly invited to give their side of the picture and to respond to questions.

Perhaps it's not necessary to tell you that the individual(s) refuse to respond to the invitation other than in a venomous fashion.

We are always counselled that we should 'test the spirit' but that principle is not well-accepted by certain mere mortals.

You can draw your own conclusions why....

I think any author that makes claims or points fingers as if they are factual and true - especially if they are to impact on peoples or indeed affect how something is percieved by the people ...then they should be exposed if guilty of any kind of sophistry.
Just look at the collective damage that self-promotionalist and compulsive liar Norma Khouri managed to achieve with her 'honour killing' book - "Forbidden Love"... Yuk!
Turns out she's married, has children that she ain't interested in, has aledgedly ripped off the life savings of a little old lady that trusted her (to the tune of $500k) and now has to live in some sheltered home... Yet Norma continues to breeze through life telling her porkies 😡

.

Articles of faith

I'm completely for information being available. This isn't just about deliberate concoctions of fanciful tales sprinkled with wisdom but about the real thing as well.

This isn't just about specific authors it's about whole sets of beliefs. For example the historical analysis of how the idea of transference of merit developed in Buddhist history. Merit is immensely important in holding together Buddhist societies yet the whole idea of transference of merit evolved several hundred years after the historical Buddha's death. I wonder what the Buddha would have said?

What about reincarnated Lama's: Recently HHDL was shown a photograph of the 13th Dalai Lama with "Of course your Holiness will recognise your previous reincarnation." HHDL responded: "Oh I don't know about that. Quite a different personality!"

We have to ask ourselves some very deep questions about the things that we put faith in. Why do we feel the need to do so? Why do we do this when so many problems arise out of theses articles of faith? Is it right to disabuse people of their articles of faith? Is there more to the meaning of these irrational beliefs than meets the eye?

Norbu

Hi Norbu,

You said:

"This isn't just about specific authors it's about whole sets of beliefs. For example the historical analysis of how the idea of transference of merit developed in Buddhist history. Merit is immensely important in holding together Buddhist societies yet the whole idea of transference of merit evolved several hundred years after the historical Buddha's death. I wonder what the Buddha would have said?"

The idea of wishing one's own merit from good deeds to be transfered to others instead of oneself, is simply a method for increasing selfless compassion in the person who wishes that to happen. Personally I don't think the Buddha would have objected to that, but there's not much point in me speculating - because he isn't here any more. In any case I think his teachings weren't written down for a considerable time after his death -maybe around 200 to 400 years , not sure of the exact figures without looking it up, but it was quite a long time....everything was passed on by word of mouth to begin with.

Elen

P.S. Regarding HH's comment about his previous incarnation, that which is thought to continue to rebirth isn't anything to do with appearance or outer personality anyway.

You said :"We have to ask ourselves some very deep questions about the things that we put faith in. Why do we feel the need to do so? Why do we do this when so many problems arise out of theses articles of faith? Is it right to disabuse people of their articles of faith? Is there more to the meaning of these irrational beliefs than meets the eye?"

With regards to my own faith, I don't see it as being irrational....and what is 'rational' anyway? Just someone else's subjective personal beliefs/outlook on life.

Clarification

The idea of wishing one's own merit from good deeds to be transfered to others instead of oneself, is simply a method for increasing selfless compassion in the person who wishes that to happen. Personally I don't think the Buddha would have objected to that, but there's not much point in me speculating - because he isn't here any more. In any case I think his teachings weren't written down for a considerable time after his death -maybe around 200 to 400 years , not sure of the exact figures without looking it up, but it was quite a long time....everything was passed on by word of mouth to begin with.

Hi Elen,

I'm sorry for the confusion in using the term "transference of merit." I wasn't thinking of the Tibetan context for the term.

I'd refer you to How Buddhism Began, Richard F Gombrich. The philological and textual analysis is academically highly respected. Professor Gombrich identifies the source of the idea; that by giving to the Sangha merit would be gained enabling a better rebirth, and how this arose several hundred years after the Buddha's birth. This idea then became a pillar of south east asian Buddhist societies and is often, I would argue, abused by monks taking money from less than wholesome sources. Not only this but money given to gain merit may well be spent on lavish monuments in the midst of societies racked by poverty.

Norbu

Hi Norbu,

"I'd refer you to How Buddhism Began, Richard F Gombrich. The philological and textual analysis is academically highly respected. Professor Gombrich identifies the source of the idea; that by giving to the Sangha merit would be gained enabling a better rebirth, and how this arose several hundred years after the Buddha's birth. This idea then became a pillar of south east asian Buddhist societies and is often, I would argue, abused by monks taking money from less than wholesome sources. Not only this but money given to gain merit may well be spent on lavish monuments in the midst of societies racked by poverty."

Oh I see, it wasn't very clear in your other post. I haven't read the book, I believe I read one of his father's art history books a long time ago.

Elen

Valid cognition

....and what is 'rational' anyway? Just someone else's subjective personal beliefs/outlook on life.

Dear Elen,

There has to be more to it than mere opinion based on subjective personal beliefs. Surely, if there were not some kind of transpersonal truth there would be no Dharma and the writings of Carlos Castneda would have the same validity as the Sutras.

Indian Buddhist philosophers carefully examine the basis for valid cognition. If there were no transpersonal truth then there would be no meaning to awakening and there would be no value in following the eight-fold path. Surely speaking the truth is important and, as HHDL often states, where scientific investigation shows that Buddhist beliefs are incorrect, scientific truth should be accepted.

Now I'm not saying that there is any scientific analysis that shows that reincarnation or the existence of subtle mind are false beliefs for I don't think there is any way of testing these beliefs scientifically. According to Indian Mahayana Buddhist philosophers, these beliefs are examples of the category of valid cognition that should be taken as being truth on the evidence given by those who are recognised as being highly accomplished practitioners.

It is just that often truth charisma and power are mixed for various reasons and I contend that we are all better off if there is a careful examination of where the boundaries of these things lie. We only need to look at the way the way the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth has been used for all sorts of unholy reasons.

I am not advocating throwing the baby out with the bathwater! What I am saying is lets take a long hard look so that others don't become disillusioned by finding wisdom mixed with manipulation and then throw out with the bathwater with the baby.

Norbu

Valid cognition

Dear Norbu,

What we think of as 'truth' and 'reality' varies according to our individual perception, and according to our personal development on the path at that particular instant.
Doesn't science also present us with conceptual models of reality ?
As for 'transpersonal truth' - maybe its beyond 'this' and 'that'.
I agree that we need to thoroughly investigate charismatic speakers who become powerful, some of us can be easily impressed by nonsense, but at the same time, an open mind is very useful too.
Time for me to go now, I'm still a bit woozy from a bug that's going round this area, thanks for the chat.

Elen

Just as an afterthought,

"The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it."

(Terry Pratchett)

Sweet dreams,
Elen

I am not advocating throwing the baby out with the bathwater! What I am saying is lets take a long hard look so that others don't become disillusioned by finding wisdom mixed with manipulation and then throw out with the bathwater with the baby.

So, if this happened, would you then take the "wisdom" that you did find but then leave the "manipulation." and move on?

But if there is wisdom how is there manipulation as well?
And do you then say well I liked that bit ( wisdom ) but I don't agree with that part ( manipulation ) ?

Is it a bit like when you are reading a book and there are some words in it that you really really like and some others that you don't?

Is that a sue de nymn? 🙂 But no, they don't, to me. However I can't play 20 questions! 🙂

Dear V,

No, it wasn't cryptic nor the start of 20 questions. (Are you as old as I am that you can remember that radio programme?!!).

Having studied Shamanic practices with Stephen Mulhearn who studied with Sandra Ingerman who I understand learned from Michael Harner who refers to Castaneda... the whole chain was in doubt when I read your words. MH in my post is Michael Harner.

After I posted, I reread MH's excellent work, The Way of the Shaman, to find him saying, "The books of Carlos Castaneda, regardless of the questions that have been raised regarding their degree of fictionalization [sic], have performed the valuable service of introducing many Westerners to the adventure and excitement of shamanism and to some of the legitimate principles involved."

Harmer's words are very valid on this thread, when he says that, regardless of some probable fiction, some books have performed a valuable service of introducing people to a subject. In addition, I think that we are talking about the pecentage of the book which is fiction (or poetic licence?) and whether it is done to embellish the book or whether it is done to to defraud.

With love and light,
Sue

Hi again Sue,

IMHO there are a few authors of this kind whose books, it could be argued, have done good by getting people interested in a worthy subject. But again if you look at what can be gleaned of their original intent, it wasn't to do good, but just to achieve wealth or, in the case of Castaneda's first book, it began, it seems, with the attempt to get a PhD on-the-easy - maybe that and money combined. So sometimes good intent may not be there (I know it isn't in the case of others), but good, strangely, seems to come of it.

However, that's probably still no reason not to expose fraud, otherwise we'd have millions of people believing in this or that fantasy which just simply isn't true - just as science-fiction author Hubbard wrote books and created Scientology from them.

V

So, if this happened, would you then take the "wisdom" that you did find but then leave the "manipulation." and move on?

But if there is wisdom how is there manipulation as well?
And do you then say well I liked that bit ( wisdom ) but I don't agree with that part ( manipulation ) ?

Is it a bit like when you are reading a book and there are some words in it that you really really like and some others that you don't?

Is religion merely the opium of the people or is there wisdom to be found in the catacombs of religious institutions? Truth is powerful and those who seek power will use it to build institutions. Many seek the reassurance of an authority and agents of authority, more or less benignly exploit this for the purposes of preserving the teachings. This process often leads to the creation of articles of faith that are adhered to as objects of truth yet these objectifications of truth eventually become tired and dead yet these objects remain to be the pillars of the institution. When times change we see the emptiness of these objects of faith and are apt to loose sight of the truth that they once held.

We should learn from our mistakes. We should try not to hold to fast to the objects of faith for sooner or later they will become devalued. In the end, we need to find faith without objects of faith.

The more we are aware of this the less likely we are to become disillusioned and loose faith. Therefore don't be afraid to break the image in which truth is portrayed; "kill the Buddha when you see him!"

Norbu

Norbu...
thank you.

Today feels like one of those days when I ask to get rid of those things I don't need any more.

I walked along the beach earlier and saw the movement of the waves.
For this today I am thankful and thank you for your words.

The truth of falsehoood

Having studied Shamanic practices with Stephen Mulhearn who studied with Sandra Ingerman who I understand learned from Michael Harner who refers to Castaneda... the whole chain was in doubt when I read your words. MH in my post is Michael Harner.

Hi, you will find Casteneda quoted all over the place by some very respectable authors. There is after all great wisdom to be found in fairy tales. And a tale would not interest if it didn't have any wisdom. Look at J K Rowling's books for example! The only difference is that Casteneda built stories fom various sources including his own imagination and (I assume his own thoughtful) contemplation and then claimed they were a biographical account of events he experienced as an apprentice to Don Juan and Don Genaro.

As with all stories of wisdom, whether they come from variously authentic or fraudulent sources, we must look at them carefully to not be taken in by the falsehoods that may package wisdom. For there are falsehoods in the most perfect system; these falsehoods may only be our own projections but our desire for meaning and our opening up as a result of hearing wisdom is fertile ground for false prophets and charlatans to ply their trade.

In fact, it is my suspicion that the true Guru will use our neediness as a tool to trap us into devotion. The true guru will exploit our projection onto him for the purpose of our own development until the point at which he can abandon us to our own resources of wisdom. Whereas the false guru will maintain the relationship as long as possible to maintain the relationship as it brings power and resources offered in devotion to the teacher and the institution he represents.

Norbu

In fact, it is my suspicion that the true Guru will use our neediness as a tool to trap us into devotion. The true guru will exploit our projection onto him for the purpose of our own development until the point at which he can abandon us to our own resources of wisdom.

I do see what you're getting at here, Norbu. Just for the record, however, in my experience anyone I'd recognise as a 'true Guru' (and yes, it could be another thread) directs you toward your own inner Divinity and the true, unrealised nature of yourself, from Day 1. Of course, it's natural to love a more God-Realised being, but IME they nevertheless tell you from Day 1 not to 'worship' them, but that you can become all that they are, and then proceed to tell how.

BTW, as I mentioned in the thread this one came out of, the 'how' was one of the great frustrations in my late teens when I believed in the reality of Don Juan, etc. Carlos writes all the books, but you start to realise that he doesn't go into any real detail about how different outcomes or experiences and changes are arrived at. I found that the books never told you what to do. Of course, he couldn't tell us, could he? 😎

V

The best instructions

BTW, as I mentioned in the thread this one came out of, the 'how' was one of the great frustrations in my late teens when I believed in the reality of Don Juan, etc. Carlos writes all the books, but you start to realise that he doesn't go into any real detail about how different outcomes or experiences and changes are arrived at. I found that the books never told you what to do. Of course, he couldn't tell us, could he? 😎

Even the best instructions are hard to fathom 😉

Norbu