My book The Three Dangerous Magi: Osho, Gurdjieff, Crowley, is available in (some) bookshops this month, and via Amazon. Putting together this book, and watching some of the responses to it, has been interesting. First, I had to choose a title, and hit upon the idea of 'three dangerous wise men' as a sort of comment on the idea of the type of 'prophets' or teachers who appear during dark times, or what in some traditions of the East is known as the Kali Yuga. Of course, the notion that we live in a 'dark time' is matter for profound debate; good arguments can be mounted to prove or disprove this idea. But the main idea of a 'Kali Yuga' teacher is that they specialize in the needs of their time, and in particular, helping people to escape from a prison at night, when there is little light. Such a teacher must know something of prisons -- and of the night -- themselves. They must have an edge to them to awaken people during a time when there are so many ways to remain distracted and asleep.
Needless to say Osho, Gurdjieff, and Crowley were three highly intriguing characters, but what is probably more intriguing is the sort of view arrived at by followers of the three as to their relative merits. Many admirers of Osho approve of his name being mentioned alongside Gurdjieff, as Osho did, after all, admire the man, and even used some of his teachings in his own ashram. But for many of these same people Crowley is too much of a stretch (and some are even offended at his inclusion). Although, when one actually examines the reasons for this, one finds little substance beyond the usual garish and silly perceptions of the man. He is, in my opinion, quite possibly the single-most maligned and misunderstood mystic of modern times. Angel he was not, but nor are any other 'crazy-wisdom' teachers. The main difference in Crowley's case was that he made of his life an open book. So many teachers operate via elaborate subterfuge and deception; this is true even for many of the 'great' teachers who do, in fact, accomplish legitimate and powerful work.
More than one person has questioned why I chose to include Crowley in my study, but what I've found (to this point) is that most of those who cast doubt on my choice understand very little of Crowley and have not gone much further than reading a popular treatment of him (such as, for example, something by Colin Wilson, a fine popular writer who was heavily influenced by John Symonds, Crowley's most hostile biographer; Wilson overall had a somewhat dim view of his gnostic countryman; not altogether surprising -- often the harshest critics are those close to their object of study. For example, in India you will find some of Osho's greatest supporters, as well as his severest critics).
Crowley was, in fact, brilliant, something obvious for any who actually bother to read him. He was also a key figure in the transition from archaic mystic paths to modern pathways. My own further sense with Crowley is that he could easily have been a disciple of Osho had he been born in a different time. (Obviously a thought colored by my own time as a disciple of Osho, though perhaps not a statement that would be appreciated by a Thelemite). Gurdjieff people can, at times, be the most elitist of followers of the three. The Gurdjieff Work is esoteric in the most practical sense, but many involved in it believe it cannot be properly understood unless one's life is committed to it wholeheartedly. I myself spent one year in the Gurdjieff Work (almost 30 years ago), something that does not (according to at least one author who made it his point to inform me) confer upon me the right to write with authority about his Work. Nevertheless there are ample grounds for comparative study of his life and ideas, and like my other two 'dangerous Magi' he contrasts in many fascinating ways with their life trajectories.
A big problem with the so-called spiritual path is blandness. It is a great irony that the idea of the 'path' is fundamentally that of awakening, and yet many who would awaken us in fact put us to sleep. (Try listening to an Eckhart Tolle talk. A wonderful speaker, lucid, simple, to the point, but absolutely tinder dry and superb for insomnia).
Osho, to his everlasting credit, did not put people to sleep, and nor did Gurdjieff or Crowley, for that matter. They were not alone. There have been other teachers who could awaken not just with their ideas, but with the force of their presence as well, and some of these are still around (Lee Lozowick and Andrew Cohen being two good contemporary cases). Such teachers piss people off as much as they inspire, but they don't send us into sweet dreams with warm fuzzies.
Incidentally, the cover of The Three Dangerous Magi contains an alchemical 'secret'. The image appears to be that of the full Moon at night, alongside a tree. (Apt, as Osho, for one, described his awakening as having occurred in the night under a tree; Gurdjieff said humanity was 'food for the Moon', and Crowley wrote a fine novel called Moonchild). However, it is not in fact the Moon. The image is of the Sun (either a sunrise or sunset), with the color filter of the photo cast in dark blue light. And so while appearing to be the Moon, it is in fact the Sun. In many esoteric teachings appearances have equal power and value to substance, because both are ultimately understood to be the same. The Moon is in the Sun, the Sun in the Moon, the mysterious conjunction. Deus est demon inversus. (God and devil are two sides of the same coin). Awakening is, in essence, the Great Work of uniting apparent opposites.
No comments:
Post a Comment