<delete>

Discussion of the SES, particularly in the UK.
Ahamty2
Posts: 79
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 2:03 am

Re: SES Origins and Character

Postby Ahamty2 » Mon Nov 02, 2009 10:41 pm

I don’t have a problem with ‘spirituality’ nor Vedanta. I do have a problem with the SES’s interpretation of it all. The ever present danger is when philosophical thought becomes rigid and unbending, which invariably becomes dogma then progresses to some kind of religion. The SES is only really interested in acquiring wealth which leads to power, they are the flip side of the same coin. Wealth begets more wealth, hence, more power in today’s society especially the way the SES entices its wealth with now new ways of acquiring it. I don’t have a problem with the likes of Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and Michel Onfray either. They give another insight to the way some think as well.

I cannot understand why the SES has this obsession with Indian sociology. Its biggest enigma is its caste system which is enshrined in the ancient laws of manu. The majority of its billion population live in dire poverty, where female babies are still murdered so as not to be a burden on their families. The privilege few of higher caste are the wealthy and becoming more wealthy while the others become more poor, where is the justice in this; it is small comfort to the downtrodden that it is their karma and sanskara, which is an easy way of white washing the plight of these people.

Vivekananda was one of many voices to speak out against the caste system of India over one hundred years ago. He declared that India had failed to apply this Vedantic humanism energetically and extensively to solve her own human problems. She had failed to evolve a fully humanist social order, upholding the glory of man, and his freedom, equality and dignity as the Atman. They don’t understand Vedanta nor do they practice it, in India itself. In one of his letters from America he writes and I quote in parts, as it is too long for here:

“No religion on earth preaches the dignity of humanity in such a lofty strain as Hinduism, and no religion on earth treads upon the necks of the poor and the low in such a fashion as Hinduism. The Lord has shown me that religion is not at fault, but it is the Pharisees and the Sadducees in Hinduism, hypocrites, who invent all sorts of engines of tyranny in the shape of Paramarthika (highest truth) and vyavaharika (what is applicable to daily life in the world).......I pity them.... Their sleep is never disturbed. Their nice little brown studies of lives never rudely shocked by the wall of woe, of misery, of degradation, and poverty, that has filled the Indian atmosphere... the result of centuries of oppression. They little dream of the ages of tyranny, mental, moral and physical, that has reduced the image of God (i.e., man, according to Vedanta) to a mere beast of burden, the emblem of the Divine Mother (i.e., woman), to a slave to bear children, and life itself a curse.........
Trust not the so-called rich, they are more dead than alive.........”
(see: Complete Works)

Jo-Anne Morgan
Posts: 64
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 11:23 pm

Re: SES Origins and Character

Postby Jo-Anne Morgan » Mon Nov 02, 2009 11:11 pm

Doesn’t that show that the SES is a cult, no matter if people want to believe that or not.


Yes I'd certainly say so, Ahamty2. Further proof, if further proof were needed, that the SES is definitely a mind control cult.

As you say, they start with the techniques at the very first session in Part 1. The SES is confident in asking people to 'try it out for themselves' because they know in advance that the techniques will deliver the required results. They can then start telling people that the reason for this is that the SES holds the key to 'the Truth'. The pause, 'the Exercise', paying attention to the working surface, all seem to engender a feeling of peace and stillness. The SES tells us that this is the Absolute, the Truth etc. I think it's probably just a way of manipulating the brain to achieve the illusion of stillness. It feels quite nice and gives temporary relief from everyday anxieties but it's ultimately meaningless.

It seems, from experiments that are being carried out on the brain, that we are run by our brains with no real intervention from what we think of as 'I'. One experiment showed that when a person is presented with a choice, the brain has already made the decision 6 seconds before the person thinks he has made the decision. This suggests that the concept of 'free will' doesn't really exist. Another experiment showed that the brain could be tricked into associating the feeling of 'I' with someone else's body which suggests the feeling of 'I' is an illusion as well as the idea of 'free will'.

Is there really any such thing as spirituality at all? It seems to me that we're part of nature like all the other creatures on the planet. We're not special or set apart, we just happen to have developed the ability to reason and communicate which gives us an advantage. All these people who think they're superior, they're just glorified apes like everyone else. I reckon that when we die it's the same as pulling a plug on an electrical appliance. Gone. No more.

stiltrubld
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2009 5:26 pm

Re: SES Origins and Character

Postby stiltrubld » Mon Nov 02, 2009 11:44 pm

Humans are not necessarily superior, animals don't need to try to connect with 'spirituality' - call it what you like - do they? My cat doesn't seem to need to anyway! I wonder if all the fuss is because we have disengaged from nature and separated spirit from material life - separated somthing, become unbalanced anyway. The so-called practices in SES may be heavyhanded, but I would not underestimate the power of this stillness or connection.
Last edited by stiltrubld on Thu May 24, 2012 11:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
SES: 1990 - 2009 London (Female)

Ahamty2
Posts: 79
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 2:03 am

Re: SES Origins and Character

Postby Ahamty2 » Tue Nov 03, 2009 1:46 am

The concept of ‘spirituality’ is very, very subjective, another person may understand it in a more humanist way as being a reflection of our psychological and emotional engagement with the world.

Perhaps all this esoteric view of the human being is what present day genetics sees as part of our DNA and RNA make up. This is the aspect that continues after we die. There is no continuum of the actual person so the afterlife that is referred to, is only a genetic afterlife. There is no ‘free will’ here.

Free commenced this thread with a look at the characters of Gurdjieff, Ouspensky and MacLaren, these three along with many others see themselves as being more superior than other human beings in the sense that they were ‘ more aware’, ‘more awake’, ‘more connected with their inner being’, ’more enlightened’ than those around them and the world at large. Everyone else is asleep, ignoring the will of the absolute, more gross and materialistic ,while they all lived off the welfare of those around them. Isn’t this just another face of power over others, not animals but human beings.

This is just another version of Pavlov’s drooling dogs, the bell rings and the dogs begin to saliva in anticipation of receiving food when the bell tolled, without the dogs having to reason out why they behaved like that. To these so called superior human beings, we are no more than Ivan Pavlov’s dogs.

Tootsie
Posts: 151
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:37 pm

Re: SES Origins and Character

Postby Tootsie » Tue Nov 03, 2009 4:21 am

The best non-duality book I've read is by Jac O'Keeffe. This Irish colleen may lead the reader to the state of stillness, harmony and peace. Check out her website www.jackieokeeffe.com . Her smile tells the seeker where she is at, and she offers clear pointers to that which lies beyond the mind.

User avatar
bonsai
Posts: 322
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 12:08 am
Location: London

Re: SES Origins and Character

Postby bonsai » Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:15 am

Jo-Anne Morgan wrote:It seems, from experiments that are being carried out on the brain, that we are run by our brains with no real intervention from what we think of as 'I'. One experiment showed that when a person is presented with a choice, the brain has already made the decision 6 seconds before the person thinks he has made the decision. This suggests that the concept of 'free will' doesn't really exist. Another experiment showed that the brain could be tricked into associating the feeling of 'I' with someone else's body which suggests the feeling of 'I' is an illusion as well as the idea of 'free will'.


I see you watched Horizon too. An absolutely fantastic programme that asked some real questions. The experiment that showed that the decision to press a random choice of button could be predicted by scanning the brain six seconds before the subject is aware of the choice they are making doesn't necessarily invalidate the concept of free will because it doesn't show the mechanism by which the choice of the two buttons was made. Rather it shows that our awareness in our conscious mind of our choices as been preceeded by other processes and that we are not aware of these. Basically it didn't explain the reason why the particular button was pressed, rather it just showed the choice was being made considerably earlier and not by the mind in the way would like to think.

It is a fantastic experiment that dismisses entirely the idea that our choices are reasoned, discriminated and rational by our conscious mind, which is something the SES likes to propogate.

Also it shows that there is a considerable amount of time prior to our awareness of our own choices which suggests that human beings may be prone to significant manipulation. This is something that is likely to be happening in all walks of life as well as cultish so called philosophy organisations.

The result that decisions are made prior to our conscious awareness knowing rather invalidates the idea that there is anything to be gained by trying to be conscious in the present all the time.

For those that would like to watch the programme, it is still available to watch on the bbc iplayer at http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0 ... ecret_You/

Bonsai

bluegreen
Posts: 95
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 4:42 pm

Re: SES Origins and Character

Postby bluegreen » Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:12 pm

I looked at the website about Jackie O Keefe and was chilled at what appeared to me to be a slow mental breakdown, infused with other possible brain malfunctions for some reason. Poor woman. It has led her into a world which, when she was in her "right mind" she was quite certain was flakey and unscientific. I guess it could happen to any of us. I hope not me. To have this "detachment" imposed on her by it seems to me, failing mental health, is terribly sad. She has no recollection of 6 days spent in an Ashram, and this is seen as evidence of the awakening she was undergoing. I understand that this detachment is something that many people seek in the form of spirituality.

I used to believe in (or want to believe in) God and it made me feel happier to think I was never truly alone, that somebody loved me no matter what, and that death is not the end. However, I couldn't keep fooling myself forever and people like Dawkins, Hitchens etc wrote and said things which felt much more believable to me and much more reverential for the universe and all that is within it, known and unknown.
But atheism is not for the faint hearted. True atheists are a persecuted minority group. You have to let go of those comforting ideas, and you don't get to feel superior about how spiritual you are.
But I do crave the "stillness" that Stilltrubld talks of and I can't find much help to gain a peaceful mind that doesn't wander into strange suppositions made by strange humans. Jac O'Keefe's biography says:
"She developed and delivered holistic programmes that focused on viewing depression as a spiritual awakening rather than a bio-chemical disorder. Using a variety of methodologies, her work had the primary focus of raising consciousness."
Why! Where does she get that from? From her own ideas? Some old guy in a lunghi up a mountain in india? Some book written by men 1000's of years ago?
And this is my problem every time I try to learn some religious or spiritual beliefs. I think "who said it and where did they get it from? How do they know?" And there's never a convincing reply. Oh to be a follower. Someone who thinks "oh that's nice, depression is spiritual awakening not a disease, this woman must be very wise to come up with such a thing. Or she must be a channel for the truth".
Anyway, I'm not ranting I want to be spiritual, but I don't see why this wise man or that person who had a series of unexplained things happening to their mind or body is someone who knows a greater truth than I do.
I do think it's possible that we have lost some senses (ie other than the 5 senses) and connections to nature. These things that animals have not lost. This could be the cause for our unrest, our search. It is possible that with some exercises we could get a tiny piece of that back. But evolution has taken its toll. Our sixth sense has largely gone. In some maybe less so, but unfortunately in me, totally. If there was a spiritual exercise that could be practised to awaken this, I'd be up for trying it. But all these sorts of exercises are made up by people and their experiences of this awakening are subjective and may be just a feeling that it is working because their desire is so strong.
St James Girls School 1977-1981

User avatar
ET
Posts: 194
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:49 am
Location: Gloucestershire
Contact:

Re: SES Origins and Character

Postby ET » Thu Nov 05, 2009 2:43 pm

Hi bluegreen,

I do feel for you in your search for something spiritual. As a fellow atheist who used to be a believer, I know how hard it is to let go of the idea that there is something out there which all of us can tap into if only we knew how.

I no longer believe that there is.

Your last post brought to mind a quote I often think of. I have no idea who wrote it, but I think it tells us all something, and I have found it very helpful in learning to let go:

What is this life
If full of care
We have not time
To stand and stare?


I would add "listen" and "feel" along with stare. This is how I try to find my peaceful mind. It's an attempt to look at life and the world around me and realise how unimportant my problems/worries/stresses really are. This does not make them go away, but it does give me a break and usually some perspective.
I also count my blessings regularly, something I have done since I learned to in my therapy sessions, and which is immensely helpful.

Spirituality comes in many forms, and is not necessarily to do with anything remotely religious.
Pupil at St James Girl's School from 1979-1989, from age 4-14. Parents ex-members of SES.


Return to “General discussion of SES”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 60 guests