Every Willing Hand: Community, Economy and Employment

Image

Shamcher’s book, Every Willing Hand, is now released and available at amazon!  Find it at  http://every-willing-hand.shamcher.com

Authored by Shamcher Bryn Beorse
Introduction by Carol Sill 

Through Every Willing Hand we glimpse an extraordinary worldview, a simultaneous multiverse of intimate interconnection. A contemporary mystic, Shamcher Beorse views this vast scene through a lens of economics and full employment.

He reveals artfully interwoven themes that all work together to show a complex picture of the forces and influences at play, including visualization, intuition and meditation. Shamcher had great compassion for those who are “half awake in the body of humanity,” and he worked tirelessly to expand horizons for all individuals and communities. 

In one glance the book reflects innumerable facets of our social communities and individual aspirations, all in the context of the need for social reform. Where does he suggest this reform comes from? Not from a revolution in the streets to restore or establish fair and equal opportunity, but from an implemented program ensuring full employment for all who want it.

ISBN/EAN13:0978348540 / 9780978348540
Page Count:168
Binding Type:US Trade Paper
Trim Size:6″ x 9″
Color:Black and White

 

Teachers, Successors

From various correspondence:

You opened your eyes and let me look into your mind and beyond to your heart and soul.  A “thank you” is too feeble to express my feeling.  Didn’t you give me glimpse of The ONLY BEING?

And “manners” – are signs of the heart.

Please forgive me when, like that sufi in one of Idries Shah’s stories, I tell some people what they want to hear, because, as this sufi explained, “I am not his teacher, so I just support his belief in his own way, which is all he can take.”

In the West, discipleship are not and cannot be exactly as in the East.  Pir-O-Murshid learned this gradually, painfully, but at last perfectly.   There will always be different degrees of discipleship, not merely “mureeds and true mureeds” but a million finely distinguishable degrees.

No “successor” is a copy of the predecessor.

You have no slightest obligation to admire or approve what one pir thinks or does, not, for that matter do you need to criticise him, but, like me, you see the flame from within your own heart and so you can storm ahead and work and suffer all kinds of people, the devoted pir–worshippers , the equally devoted God–worshippers who see no “pir”.

(Click here for a random post from somewhere else in this blog.)

To SAM: Master is a Disciple’s Word

21 April 66

My dear SAM,

Thank you for letters. It is always interesting to read you and your worries. You know more about sufi history and status than most, and a lot of other movements. The consequence of such knowledge has often been, apart from the blessings — a great dependence on these scripts and persons. Even Rumi was liable. He also went into complaints, about the lack of peoples’ attention to his cries in the wilderness and such. All the pamphlets have had such weaknesses, though of different shades. Hazrat Inayat was one of the greatest, freest, to whom the title of Pir-O-Murshid was a deep understatement, simply funny.

You know that, however funny or entertaining criticism of others may be meant, and may seem, it always detracts from your spiritual affluence. Hazrat Inayat was often listening to complaint about his disciples — Fatha Engle and others. He smiled, distantly, patiently explained to the complainer that Fatha and others were chosen children of God, they “acted according to their nature”, what more could one expect? The same, of course, is true of Allan Watts and all your other detractors. Your up and fight-em is against Jesus advice “resist not evil.” It is that simple. But Jesus did not always live according to it.

An enlightened man is not really enlightened. The world is a funny, sometimes cruel play. Do you expect anything from or of the world? Don’t. Do you look up to special people? Look up to all, but not so that you blind yourself to the challenge that you (and I) must do better than all of them. “Master” is a disciple’s word. To us it does not exist.

You ask what is the connection between Vilayat and Musharaff. Do you want to know? You are asking the right person. I alone wrote to Ali Khan one year before Vilayat made his claim and broke — that it was up to him, Ali, to embrace Vilayat before this happened. Ali answered arrogantly, ignorantly, that “It is not for the mureeds to talk about Hazard lnayat’s family.” I then went to Geneva and faced Ali directly, told him a few things that impressed him, but the schism continued — as it must. But to really tell you the “connection” requires at least face-to-face talk with you. Not for writing. By all means continue your elegant acquisition of knowledge about religious and mystical men — but be not too impressed with any of them. Know that you and I can do better. Must do better. Be glad for what the world offers, but expect nothing.
Salam aleikum,

Shamcher

(Click here for a random post from somewhere else in this blog.)

Space Has All the Qualities You Need

Space has all the qualities, all the treasures you need. Figure the sweet life of space (which is yourself) rush from the farthest end of space toward and through the length of your body, from toes to head and then off again to the farthest end of space in the other direction. This a line or slender body. Then repeat, then have you whole body shrink to just a point, stay there awhile and then expand to the entire reach of the universe in all directions. You are a mighty ball, beyond all dimensions. Contract again. You will have absorbed all the powers and wisdom and grace of the universe. Many details of knowledge will still escape you, but that does not matter any longer. You are free — and noble. Our so-called civilization imagines that we know or ought to know, and should run to some “teacher” who is supposed to know if we don’t. All wrong. Wisdom (not knowledge) is pressing in from all sides and we ignore it seeking fabled, non-existing “knowledge” from imagined (dangerous) teachers.

(Click here for another random posting from this blog.)

Edmonton Declaration 1978

Concerning the Edmonton Sufis’ Declaration
By Carol Sill

During the split between the Order and SIRS, Shamcher sent me this Declaration, telling me it was from me, and that we were to send it out to all Sufis. He gave me the names and addresses of many I did not know, and then pushed this Declaration whenever and wherever possible. No one knew that he had written it, and even with me he insisted that I had done it. This is what it said:

We the undersigned Sufis of Edmonton, in the province of Alberta in Canada, reached the Sufi world through the message of Hazrat Inayat Khan.
We are a nucleus of the Brotherhood of all beings united in the ONLY BEING – humans, animals, plants, bacteria; all other beings, including the events appearing as bodies or objects on the earth, in the solar system, the galaxies – the entire universe.
We are members of the Sufi Order headed by Pir Vilayat Khan, and accept as equal members all of this order and respect the tenets of that order at all times. Pir Vilayat was the initiator of some of us. We equally are members of the Federation of Sufi Groups formed under the friendship-guidance of Hidayat Khan and all members of these groups are members with equal rights accepted by us. We equally are members of SIRS based in San Francisco and established by Murshid Samuel Lewis, now headed by Moineddin Jablonski, and all members of this organization are accepted equally with us.
We are members of and accept the members of each and every Sufi group in the world, every religious group, every group of any other character; every individual, of any type, human, animal, plant, mineral, or, in terms of modern physics – events. All these form the brotherhood in the fatherhood of God.
All titles, all ideas, all structures of any mind are respected and honored by us, though not held sacred. Only ONE is sacred: THE ONLY BEING.

( then it is signed by 17 of us – some who are still very much involved in the sufi effort.)

Comments on this decaration poured in to us, and to him. Here he comments on two responses:
“Thanks for mailing me the Declaration. Once you become a really sensitive Receiver of Vibrations, though, how do you filter out the “bad” and allow only the “good” to pass through?”
Shamcher: You accept all as they are, then let your own influence play. How long does that take? No matter.
“Your message put into declaration the feelings of “One single Brotherhood in the fatherhood of God” that we also feel.”
Shamcher: This is the answer for the individual sufi. Whatever or however this can be embodied in an organisation such as the Sufi Order depends of course on circumstances which only the official of that organisation can know.

Comment:
I wish that I were finding the sense of more unity which you mentioned in your letter to friends, but I am still coming across many people who are either totally confused by the present situation or are vehemently taking sides. The confusion one can understand, but antagonistic side-taking is more difficult to deal with. Found a quote from “the Message” papers by Hazrat Inayat Khan that I felt worth sending to you. This particular section is entitled “Private Lecture for Mureeds and Friends” given in Brussels, December 17, 1923, notes taken by Madame Graeffe. “It is a great pity that religions, whether in the East or West, have their own creeds and Church. When it comes to brotherhood they say: ‘We have our brotherhood, you have yours’. Each thinks: they have their own brotherhood, But the way to look at it is as one brotherhood. Therefore the work of the Sufi Movement is not to create a Sufi Brotherhood. It is not a brotherhood, but a means to create a brotherhood, it is working for human brotherhood.”

30 January 1978

Dear ___,
Your quote from Inayat Khan in your letter of January 4 (which I received today) shows that your have found the sense of unity. Another and more exuberant expression of the same is the Edmonton Sufis’ declaration, which should be enough for any one to see and find the sense of unity.
Inayat Khan publicly dissociated himself from a “murshida” appointed, by himself, who had disturbed the sense of unity. Inayat Khan repeatedly told stories of how even Prophets had failed, as for example in his story about Kidr and Moses. So why do people look transfixed at “leaders” and forget to look at plain people like the ones from Edmonton?
Sam Lewis wrote me letters containing the most ridiculous accusations of sufis he had never seen. Yet, his heart was mostly good. Only when you look sternly at “leaders” do you see division, and you see division among others who also look sternly and expectantly at “leaders”. But “leaders” are not leaders in that sense. Before you have learned dependence on yourself alone and on whoever you find who represents unity, whether they are “leaders” or floor-sweepers, you can find no “unity”.

Love and devotion,
Shamcher

(Shamcher adds this comment: How lucky for all of us that the Edmonton group chose to talk rather than keep “silence” which is the advice of so many “mystics”. Or should Inayat Khan, Sam Lewis, and Jesus have kept silent rather than talking? Or, can you see gold where it appears? Hierarchies are games, which, rightly understood and used, have a purpose, but which most often are not rightly understood or used.)

Many of his letters dealt with this issue, using the Declaration of the Edmonton Sufis as a point of dialogue.

1 February 1978
Dear G.,
Thank you very much for your letter of 26 January. You are perfectly right in your characterization of the non-hierarchial attitude of the International Federation. In a sense I am the initiator of this organization. I realised these things from my 25 years. Today, at 81, I have seen how, not only philosophical-religious organizations but also whole nations, their “civil service”, their hierarchical working places, businesses, departments are destroyed by the hierarchial systems. You are right and you and I are ahead of most of the other members of this organizations.
It is essential, furthermore, that a close contact is maintained with those who have not yet discovered or realized this. This is where the Edmonton Sufis declaration beautifully and timely comes in. It does not break with anybody. It certainly does not accept any hierarchy but manages to keep their mouths shut on that particular issue in order to serve its very special purpose. Its message has cheered and enlightened people all across the sufi community. Their particular declaration was not issued by you or your federation. And perhaps could not be, at this time. It was issued by the Edmonton Sufis, for a purpose completely in accord with you spiritually, yet fulfilling another and as important function in its own way and manner. If you don’t see this yet, please do not answer yet, until you have meditated upon it in the light of Inayat Khan or, as he would say, in the light of God, for he was the most humble of prophets, who even wrote about Kidr, whom the prophet Moses tried to follow but Moses was not wise enough. So Inayat Khan even admitted that a prophet may be wrong. And he repeatedly corrected his own “murshidas” in front of all of us, one time Murshida Green, when she said something wrong to me, (I did not tell him, he knew.)
Of course, I would like to see a copy of your rules, as also the Edmonton group will, and since your organization now requires me to get that from the D. I shall ask them, even though I knew you before I knew the D., I know you better than I know the D., but they have humbly asked my forgiveness for throwing me out of their “Movement” after having had me conduct all their universal services every Sunday — by now, as you know, they have themselves left the “movement”.
Hidayat Khan and I are in deep communication with each other. If in the future you should again doubt my understanding of or loyalty to yours and his federation, please ask Hidayat.
Love,
Shamcher

(Click here for a random post from somewhere else in this blog.)

God, Spiritual Balance, Groups

From An Interview with Shamcher Bryn Beorse

J=Jelaluddin Boru, S=Shamcher

J: The Sufi path is supposed to be the path of direct experience. To me this means the acquiring of a sense of presence: the presence of God within you, the presence of God coming through your teachers within you, an awareness of the presence of your soul.
S: When you use the word “god” you have to be careful. For instance, many so called ‘great’ mystics say, “God told me this from the other side.” So whenever they hear a voice from the other side it’s God? Well, what kind of God is that?! Sometimes it is a very immature spirit that is trying to get back to this world because this is the only one he understands, and so he will come back to anyone that will listen. These people who are always going around saying that they are in direct contact with God are not the real mystics… What an inadequate expression of God!

J: Perhaps they have made a “god” of the object of their obsessive desire.
S: Yes! That’s why even the word “god” can be misused and is misused. I saw an advertisement in the newspaper once of someone who said, “I talk to God”. Well, isn’t that wonderful, I thought, so do I…
*
J: Superstition, Shamcher, I see as a craving for a higher sense of order significance in one’s life. And I see it arising after a long period of time where one has lacked that kind of meaning and sense of higher significance. So when one suddenly gets a glimpse one seizes on it and says “yes, this is explaining my whole life”…
S: This is what I would call the high form of superstition. The low form is when one has all types of negative interference, and thoughts that tomorrow the world is going to end and you’re going to go to hell.
It is a positive sort of superstition when you feel the urge to expand because you think that you have found a solution to everything. You may get caught up in this, but usually after awhile you finally see that you don’t really know it yet, and then finally you come to the point to where you say, “Well, I don’t know it yet, but it doesn’t matter, I am beginning.” And this is beautiful because you are listening now instead of making assumptions. From that point on you have no superstitions anymore, or at least not serious ones…
A very common form of this superstition is when people read about karma and reincarnation. “Oh yes, now I understand everything!” But each of us understands the concepts of karma and reincarnation in a different way. lnayat Khan was very careful to explain–in a sense explain away–the ideas of reincarnation and karma to us. He said that what most people think of reincarnation is not you, not yourself that was reincarnating, but the mind stuff… Look at Buddha, His whole life was to try and get us away from the idea of karma and reincarnation, so we would not have to be born again here.
*
J: ls the Soul subject to states of obsession?
S: No. The soul is supreme and is always as it is. It is only that the soul forgets itself in the mind that is subject to superstition or obsession.
Of course very few people really live in the soul or remember the soul.
*
J: Shamcher, Inayat Khan stressed moderation in the undertaking of spiritual disciplines, didn’t he?
S: Yes, I could give you an example of what he meant from my worldly experience. . . .
In the dunes near Oceano in California there lived a man who was an abstract painter. He was a recluse and his occupation very well fitted his life. He lived about a mile from me, and whenever I would come walking past he would say, “O, Bryn, Bryn, come in.” And then he would talk for an hour without interruption because he hadn’t mastered the art of being alone and was rather desperate for company. He had exaggerated to himself his ability to live in solitude and now he had to have these outlets. He talked and talked and he would even say things like, “You know that Moon Mullins next door is running up and down the beach stealing all my lumber.” It wasn’t his lumber of course. This shows his unbalance. And the danger of being alone when you are not really capable of it. So many do this. Run up to the Himalayas or something…
I almost succumbed to this in 1959. I was in the Himalayas and I found myself walking up along a streamlet. The water was fresh and fresher the higher I went, and it was so beautiful and easy that I did even feel myself moving after awhile. And I began to think that this was the place that I should spend the rest of my life. Then, just as I was thinking this, I saw a cave, you know, one of those caves where you’d expect a saint to be looking out from the opening. So I said to myself “Oh, this is exactly where I should stay, but how am I to get in?” And then I discovered by climbing higher that there was a way of getting in.
It was really dark. And as I was feeling around I felt something soft that went GRRR-GRRRRR, and then I felt again and it went GRRRRWHHAHHHHHHWHAHHH
and l got out of there.
Later on I looked at this bear, for that’s what it was I think, as something pushed by Inayat Khan to tell me to get out of there and get out in world again. So I went back to the world and began once again to fight for OTECs…
Before this, you see, I had been fighting rather in vain for OTECS. And had had an experience where I was talking to Prime Minister Nehru and a room full of scientists, where I felt that they were listening, and were interested, but that nothing would come of it so I might just as well go on retreat.
But then I got thrown out of that cave. And before I knew it, all of America was talking OTEC, and I was in the middle of it, so there were some very good reasons why I couldn’t just sit in solitude…

J: Didn’t a yogi once tell Pir Vilayat that the holy men in the Himalayas were a dying race because the way for us now is to stay in the world?
S: Yes. They are a dying race because the world is now ripe to take care of itself. It doesn’t need saints sitting back there keeping us in touch. And this is coming! You see young people everywhere, and many old people too, who have become aware of the need for balance in the spiritual realities, of the need for a balance that will make them much more than simply the heirs of religious traditions.
One time the Dalai Lama said that a certain Trappist monk was the only person from the West that he knew of that could meditate, but you see it coming among all the young people around us now, so there is a direct contact with what I would call the stream of the universe among them or at least some of them.
*
J: I understand that Inayat Khan talked about a sort of progression among the Spiritual masters and that since the time of Mohammed, the message that he completed, there is no longer any necessity to use a go-between for enlightenment.
S: Yes. Except that when you say the word “master”: Inayat Khan never used that expression about any human being. And he was the first to say that he was not a master. He would always say, “There is only One master, the spirit of guidance that leads every soul to its destination.” So I become offended when I hear people talk of Inayat as a “master”, of course, though he may have been in a sense the greatest one for us.
I really don’t like this word “master”.
*
J: What is the spiritual path?
S: If one would be facetious one would say that there is no such thing. But if one is kind, and accepts it, one would say that in the line of Inayat Khan, it is annihilation of the false ego.
This annihilation of the false ego is much different and bigger task than is usually realized. For some it may take a million years. Others may seem almost as if they are born with it. Some people work really hard at it and never seem to succeed, and then they’ve apparently got it, until the next day when they haven’t got it anymore!
You know, humans are so crazy sometimes they really succeed! The funny thing is, many times it is the less you try, the better you do. All life is for this purpose, whether one calls it a spiritual path or not. The difference between the other paths and what we call the “spiritual” path is that the spiritual path has an element of knowing and conscious seeking. But then again, for some people, it may not be such a good thing to be conscious of it…

J: So what’s the point of joining any spiritual path or order?
S: So why join an order if you feel like that?

J: No Shamcher, I’m only asking a question.
S: There is every point and no point at all. The person who doesn’t join may be every bit as wise. One follows an impulse, and that impulse is the best one can do at the time.
I know people who are, in a sense, more conversant with sufi attitudes and ways than many of the sufis, yet who would find it a horror to join the group. Others join, of course, and are very successful because they join, so there is no attempt at a general rule here. I myself have always been in doubt about groups: “Should I join or should I perhaps not join?” And after I have joined: “Should I stay in or get out?”
It doesn’t really matter! But sometimes I have felt like I was cheating the people who were not in the group but were trying so hard to get in, while I who was in the group wasn’t really sure that I wanted to be there, so was perhaps giving the wrong impression ..
But then I would decide that to leave would be wrong against all the people who were still in who would wonder, “Why does he leave us now?”

J: It sometimes can be really frightening to have only God and yourself to depend on…
S: Personally I don’t see any difference. I am very happy alone, and I have often felt that I joined with Inayat Khan not to receive comfort from him but for what I could contribute to his movement. Not that he personally needed anything…
One time Inayat was approached by a man who said that he liked his message very much but that he couldn’t join the organization because he had to be free. And Inayat answered him, “Well, I think I am free and yet I am in the organization, but I don’t think you are so free because you are afraid of organizations.”
So if you are afraid to join or not to join, you are not free. If you join as a matter of your own free will, join with the thought that you are doing so because you want to help its cause. Because if you join with the idea that it is going to give you comfort you may be extremely disappointed, because it may not give you comfort. You shouldn’t want anything from the organization. About this you shouldn’t care…

J: But you think it’s all right not to join and just to depend on your own being?

S: Yes. It is quite all right just to depend on your own being. God, to me at least, is all the comfort one ever needs, and more. And I don’t take comfort from anyone else.

(Click here for a random post from somewhere else in this blog.)

Balance

From An Interview with Shamcher Bryn Beorse

J=Jelaluddin Boru, S=Shamcher

J: Let’s talk about balance, Shamcher.
S: Yes. Hazrat Inayat Khan often said that “the message for today is balance”. And he meant that in many ways. For example the balance between heart and mind. This kind of balance emanates from yourself and not from adventuresome spirits on the other side.
He also meant by this balancing your being in the world with your work on yourself. Some people think that they can’t do anything for the world until they have perfected their work on themselves. Well, there is no way of perfecting yourself except through working in the world. That’s why we are here. If you don’t want to work in the world before you have perfected yourself, you might just as well have remained outside it. You didn’t have to be born. To me, this has become more and more clear the longer I live. You work on yourself by achieving the little things in your home, your face [?] among your coworkers etc. And yet so many teachers today are telling pupils to take long vacations or retreats and so on. In Inayat’s time we had a summer school which was like a vacation, but apart from that we had no retreats.
But I must admit at this point that when I was younger–around 18 or 19- (this was before I met Inayat Khan) I was a student at the university and very, very busy and suddenly I thought, “I can’t stand it anymore, I must go.” And so I put on my skis (I didn’t want any transportation–no buses or trains for me!), and walked into the mountains towards a white beautiful one I saw far, far away. These were the Trolheimin mountains, which means ‘home of the trolls…’
Anyway it took me weeks, and some would say later, “You went into the mountains in the wintertime? You must be crazy!” And in a sense I might have been crazy…
A dog came along who had the same kind of urge that I was having, and I saw this and tried to push him back but he kept with me anyway. And then we had a terrific snowstorm, and we had to go against it for days and days, usually not knowing whether we were going up hill or downhill the storm was so strong. Finally one day I thought to myself- “I can’t last anymore…Let me just go over to those rocks and lie down.”
(It is known to the people of those parts that it is very dangerous to go to sleep in a snowstorm in the mountains but I had no thought of this, none at all.) Anyway, I went to the rocks, but they turned out not to be rocks. I fell down and stood before a little door, and there was a cabin there. I knocked on the cabin door and heard bare feet running over the stone floor, and then the door was opened, and I was invited inside and slept in the hayloft. In the morning we had a beautiful breakfast of goat’s milk and things and so I said, “Now what should I pay you?” And they laughed and said they couldn’t use my money up there anyway, and they never went down into town, not for the last ten years when they first came up from the valley. But they said that I could pay them 25 cents if I wanted to feel that I had paid them something…
And so after tramping around in the mountains I returned to civilization, first sign of it being the smell of coffee. Though all the impressions of civilization are thrust at you again, you are a different person. For two or three weeks, I was what the sages call enlightened, that is, nothing affected me. Before this, when I looked at women, I would say, “How can I stand not coming very much closer to her?” But now there was no such question inside me… I enjoyed her beauty, she meant nothing more to me, everything in life was in calm balance. I needed this for my balance at that time, and maybe many people do need it, and I think they should obey the urge when it comes.
It is by knowing when I should go to the mountains or the beach, that all my life I have stayed not in good balance but fair balance all the time. But the balance that is required to root up your earthly desires, comes from looking at your person as something that you are not too much concerned about.
Later in life this came to me, and I realized that this person is not really “Mr. so and so”…
And through this I have gradually come to discover the numerous agents of the body that keep it in shape, and became friendly with them instead of opposing them. It is through this that you become a master of yourself and have balance. Everything is an attitude of the mind, and this “mind” that I am talking about of course is the mind and heart.

J: Shamcher, if disease is, as you say, an attitude of mind, why then are not all people who have faith and want to be healed, healed?
S: I have never met a person, including myself, who has faith in the complete sense. It is something one can develop but faith doesn’t mean to say “I believe in God”; that is not faith, that is not balance. The balance is to flow with the universal process…

J: Obsession in a sense is when one can’t tear himself away from the sense of physical pain of the body, or at least this is a good metaphor for it. . .
S: Yes, it is very difficult when you have physical pain. The war was a great test of that. Some were tortured, and it is worse in a sense when a person is imposing the pain, but some people even used this to help them develop. There was a person in Norway who was repeatedly tortured by the Nazis and knew he would be tortured again. And when I asked him how he could stand it he said, “There comes a point when all these things don’t matter to you.” “But the pain,” I said. And he answered me that half of the pain was the fear of death…
“I don’t fear death anymore so there is only half the pain. It is bearable. And I now know only one thing, I will never give out a name or anything else they want of me.”
What do you think of this man? I don’t know if he was a Sufi, but that is the kind of balance that is required.

J: A tremendous sense of balance! He had been at the extremes, and learned not to fear them. Perhaps we can say that such extreme things are very useful, in that when one returns from them your balance is so deep, because you have felt what it is like to be at the poles…
S: That is very true. There is of course not a single thing in this life which does not have a purpose and which does not help the soul in its development. Even the wildest kinds of obsessions, even those states of the mind that may cause you to be put in a hospital, are useful. Many psychiatrists say these days that they are not only useful, they are in a sense superior to ordinary experience, in what they help you become afterwards. They are looking at them insofar as they bring you to mystical balance…
Obsession, like everything else in life, helps the community and the individual advance and to realize the need for balance. For example schizophrenics and depressed maniacs, they are supposed to be so bad, but they are often actually helping themselves and those around them to reach the state of mystical balance by taking another path.
One time a friend of mine was in a hospital, and I heard a group of psychiatrists talking. They were talking about a physicist who had come in and told them, “You know, this table isn’t really a fixed table. I put my hand on it and I feel the sub-atomic particles running down from my hand meeting the particles running up from the table. And some interpret this as a calm solid surface but it really isn’t.” And these psychiatrists were laughing at this poor physicist for being off his mind! He was actually explaining the truth, but they didn’t realize it. He had ‘schizophrenia’ they said.
It is the same in the case of many others.
Fortunately it is realized now by many psychiatrists that schizophrenics have reached another end of the balance and together with what is called his ‘sane’ state, which is not so sane, he is working towards a new balance.
*
Excuse me, I was thinking of another question you asked me, the one about faith. Well, do we mean ‘faith’ in the sense that a person will visit a dear saints’ burial place and get in touch with him through the body that is left there? A lot of saints and sages in the past have left their bodies in a place where people can come. I don’t know why. . .
There is not much connection between a saint’s consciousness and the body that he has left. There is oftentimes a much better connection with a young mureed who has never seen the saint or the Body. And this running back to the burial place is not contributing too much to our development towards balance, though it is very popular nowadays. . . It is a looking back into the past, a long past expression of a teacher that you have come beyond. When I was in India, I visited Inayat’s burial place for only one reason: I knew that everyone would ask me when I came back if I had visited it. Only for that reason. It is not through the place that one contacts him. It is just like going to some rock where people know where a great saint has been, or you go to a place on the beach where he has left his footsteps and touch them, or you have a photograph…
Remember the story of Inayat Khan giving me his photograph? The moment when he sensed my reaction is a great example of balance. For he realized at once that there was something else that I should do.
There is not one path that everyone should follow. Everyone has his specific path, and everyone should be following that or finding out what it is, for that is what will bring him fastest into a state of balance.
This is why you can’t ask another, even some ‘great master’, to tell you what you should do.

J: Balance always emanates from the inner planes, and not from external authority, be it a ‘master’ or anything?
S: Right. Exactly! As Buddha says in his farewell address: “Look to the Light within yourself, look at no other person or teacher or connection outside of yourself!”

J: Speaking of Buddha, what is the ‘middle path’?
That is the path of balance.

(Click here for a random post from somewhere else in this blog.)

Karma

From An Interview with Shamcher Bryn Beorse

J=Jelaluddin Boru, S=Shamcher

J: Fritjof Capra, in the “Tao of Physics”, says in one place that we are trapped in our own conceptual framework, and that when we transcend words and explanations we obtain liberation and break the bonds of karma.
S: The idea of karma is connected with the so-called dogma of cause and effect. In the West this has been developed in science through Isaac Newton, and for a long time scientists believed that everything contained the laws of cause and effect, but recently a small group of physicists have begun to realize that this is not so.
When you explain things you are bound to use language. And in language you are using something that is based partly on cause and effect and many other dogmas. When you realize this truth you become like some people of the East, and of the West too, who say, ‘It can’t be explained’. The best you can do is sort of run around it and speak of it in metaphors, and hope that people will get to it through that. Language uses the law of cause and effect, which is the same thing as karma. When you transcend it, other law become applicable…
Physics hasn’t been able to tell us which laws these are yet, but it has discovered that all these concepts and dogmas and so called natural laws were never really laws at all, they were only our own ideas.

J: And to break out of this trap is to go inward, the silence?
S: Silence yes, but especially a realization that your ideas of cause and effect and karma are nothing more than conceptual structures of your mind which have been used for the purpose of instruction but are not “final truths”. They have been used by your mind as instruments of attainment. And in using your mind it appears that it has become bound to your civilization’s concepts of how to understand life, but when you begin to see from the point of view of Tao that it really hasn’t been…
Which doesn’t mean that you are suddenly enlightened and can see everything. But it is the first step. To see that everything you’ve thought is not necessarily so…
It is interesting today that some physicists are seeing that, just as the ancient sages did. And in a sense just as clearly, but in another sense not as clearly. They are complaining, for example, that they don’t have the capacity to visualize in the fourth dimension as they believe the ancients did. And perhaps some of them did, but there certainly must have been great discrepancies also in the manner in which they realized this. We needn’t think that these people suddenly came into a complete understanding of everything. Some saints’ understanding was better than others, but there is no area in which everything is understood by someone.

J: Does this fit in with the idea that some people have that there has to be a form to believe in God?
S: Yes, or rather they like to have a form. But some people are very simple and don’t need that ever. This is not a matter of intellectual achievement. Some highly intellectual people still live with forms, and not only don’t understand but actually have a contempt for the present no-form concepts.

J: Another thing which Capra says: “The void gives birth to an infinite variety of form, which it sustains and then eventually reabsorbs.”
S: This is another way of expressing the ancient concept of Brahma coming into existence in the world and then withdrawing again so nothing exists. And then he comes into the world again and then withdraws again…A great rhythm, and each period, called in the ancient mythology a Kalpa…

J: Is this contrary to the theory of relativity, or the “big-bang” theory of creation held by some scientists?
S: No, There are at least two possibilities connected with the theory of relativity. One is that the world is continually and forever expanding; the other is that it expands and then contracts, and then expands again. And this is the same as the ancient sages believe in, and let us say that it is the same as I believe in.

J: It sounds like breathing!
S: Yes, breathing is exactly the same thing. You expand when you breathe out and things scatter, and then you breathe in and you contract. This is true on the other planes of existence, that is correct. And then with your last breath, it is only the last breath of the physical body, you continue to breathe with your subtler bodies…

J: How can I know this is true if I haven’t experienced it?
S: There is no need to. You shouldn’t believe in something before you have discovered it. For the time being, the healthiest thing to say is: “I reserve judgment.” Some people have become convinced from books, sometimes so much so that they don’t want it anymore and begin to fight it, like the man who said to Jesus: “I believe, I believe, please help my un-belief!” That is one of the preliminary stages, and it is healthier in a sense and more balanced. When you come to look at something you should say- “I don’t know this but I will find out, or I may find out.”

(Click here for a random post from somewhere else in this blog.)

Mediums

From An Interview with Shamcher Bryn Beorse

J=Jelaluddin Boru, S=Shamcher

J: Have you heard of David Spangler?
S: I read a recent article by him in The Message, and I thought that was pretty good.

J: Do you know that he claims to have direct contact with beings, or a being, that is trying to bring about the “new age” on this planet?
S: So many people these days claim to have direct contact. As soon as you try to express the contact, everything becomes tilted with one’s own stupid personality. So, for instance, 50,000 initiates claim to have contact with lnayat Khan. This is true, but because everyone is different everyone interprets what they feel a little differently. They are entitled to this, but not to go around and say ‘I have the contact’, as if it were the only one… Which is not to say anything against David Spangler. If he said this it was probably as a sort of approximate statement. Nobody correctly represents another being, whether in another world or even here. Like when someone comes and says he is representing President Carter, he is lying if he says that he is speaking on the president’s behalf. He may not know he is lying when he does this, but it is so nevertheless. How can he represent him when he can’t react the same way that Carter would?
It is the same way with spiritual beings…
Another example of this was Edgar Cayce. who also thought he had direct contact. He had to go into trance, and then he transferred something, yes, he transferred beautiful messages from the other side and maybe the fact that he was in a trance kept out some of the tilting towards personality that usually goes on, so parts of them were accurate. However, he made all kinds of predictions also about things of which he had no idea, and which were completely false. This is the trouble with people who “channel.” They forget that their inspiration is always colored by their own particular experience and tilted to their own ideas.

J: Do you think that some mediums are better than others though?
S: Yes, and I’ve spoken about Eileen Garrett. The most famous are not the best.

J: How about Jane Roberts who wrote “Seth Speaks”.
S: Oh no, that’s very tilted.

J: But what was it she was hearing? Didn’t things come through her?
S: Of course they came through her, and through her picked up all kinds of mistakes and idiosyncrasies.

J: It seems to me that what you are saying is that the only way to keep your balance and also be in touch with the other side is to do it in silent meditation, for as soon as you try and articulate it, it is interfered with.
S: True.

J: ls this because in that particularly beautiful kind of silence there is no voice there attaching importance. Like your ego is there saying: ‘Well, what benefit can I get out of this?”
S: Yes, yes.
*
J: What do you mean by co-creation?
S: Simply, when a friend of mine works on a solar device and I work on OTEC. On a deeper level, when the same ideas are being worked on by Trimble, Heronomus and myself simultaneously. God doesn’t make anything directly, he does it through people: that’s co-creation.

J: The future is fluid…
S: Yes, that’s right.

(Click here for a random post from somewhere else in this blog.)

Obsession

From An Interview with Shamcher Bryn Beorse

J=Jelaluddin Boru, S=Shamcher
J: The condition that Inayat Khan refers to as obsession:

“The course of some people who are apt to understand
the Message of God as the message of the mediums. They
understand the Message the same way they understand an
obsession; a man who is obsessed with a philosopher begins
to speak philosophy, and when his obsession is gone he can
no longer talk about it. It is true, that persons who are
in this condition will speak most intelligently on philosophy
and metaphysics in the time that they are obsessed. But then,
when the obsession is gone, they are just like a horse without
a rider; when they speak they are not themselves. This kind of
thing has nothing to do with the prophetic message. God does
not take hold of a certain body in order to give his message
to the world. This is to be distinctly understood…”

S: Inayat Khan spent the last four hours of his time talking to us about mediums, and explaining that many mediums have contact with spirits, but which spirits? There is so much cheating and confusion on the other side… Genuine teachers speak to their pupils directly if they want to make contact after they have left their body. Nevertheless, we have the incident that happened after Inayat’s death, where four of his closest disciples came forth with messages from him they “received” through mediums.
I know of a Turkish psychiatrist who travelled the world looking for people with psychic gifts. You know what she found? That the professional soothsayers, mediums and predicters had practically no ability but there were all kinds of gifted people among doctors, nurses, teachers and ordinary working people. But these people knew enough to keep their powers hidden…
As far as the prophetic message is involved, this is an admonition to help us remember that contact with the other side means nothing. It may even be dangerous, since there are all kinds of communication that are destructive.

J: That has triggered two thoughts: would you say that mediums are sort of dead to the possibility of making the future; and can we connect this idea of obsession, i.e. the entrance of something from the other side, with the kind of obsession that is the rigid adherence to a conceptual framework?
S: Most mediums, and so many mystics who “predict the future”, instead of helping to be creators of it are dead to it. And it is a pity that we listen so much to them and that they get so much space in the papers as opposed to those who are really trying to do something.
Let us take the area of engineering and physics with which I am acquainted. When a man has created something, that thing, and his opinion of it, weighs more than a thousand bureaucrats who pronounce judgment as to whether it is good or bad. How can they know anything about it? And yet it is the bureaucrats and the president, or whomever, who gets listened to, as if they know more than the man who has spent years and years doing the research, even sometimes when the researcher is backed by his university, or many universities across the country. It is the scientists who can judge on the basis of the sciences, and their opinion should weigh more than 1,000 bureaucrats, but such is not the case… I know of one case where seven major universities and four research departments of industrial companies recommended that a certain thing be done, and yet nothing happened because we had to wait for someone from the office of technical assessment, or some congressman, or the president’s energy czar to come and tell us whether it was really any good!
This is the same kind of obsession, on another plane, that Inayat Khan was speaking about. Some are obsessed with voices from the other side, some are obsessed with the bureaucracy or the government. Both are dependent on an external authority that has been chosen on the flimsiest excuse… Consider the way it works with research, for example. The University sends in a request saying “we need such and such an amount of money to complete our research.” It goes to Bert Lance or some other budget director, and he, on the basis of completely inadequate experience decides what should and should not be researched. And he complains that if everyone got his way with research, we would have ten times as big a budget for research projects. Well, that’s excellent, that’s just what we need! It is research and investigation that will bring us out of our inflation because then we would be actively doing [words missing here].
The true economists can explain this. But we listen to the economic opinion of a congressman who has arranged for his salary to increase in correspondence with the inflation, though it is exactly these increases that are causing the inflation. “Oh, he can’t live on $43,000; he must have $58,000!” But we who live on less than $10,000 wonder about these wonderful economic experts who are so stupid they couldn’t get by when they were making only $43,000…
And this is just an illustration of a principle expressed in our society. There are many cases that are the same, because there is nothing in the society that is not sacred, which is not as relevant to our spiritual development as the things spoken about by “spiritual people”…
*
J: Shamcher, I feel we’re approaching something here that is an important part of where I want this book to go. To understand that obsession is something much more than simply giving too much authority to beings from the other side. That we are also “obsessed” when we give that power away to people on this side…
S: Yes. Like in the example of the congressmen and the energy people etc. When we give absolute authority to any “expert” we are obsessed in a sense.

J: I don’t think this covers what I mean, but we can return to it. Will you talk about how we are to understand the difference between an intuition that is growing more powerful as we walk on the spiritual path, and the presence of beings from the other side in our consciousness? I don’t personally find this very easy. Sometimes, because I am using another part of the mind than the one usually associated with the ego part when I am using my intuition, it almost seems that I am hearing voices, or receiving instructions…
S: You must very carefully judge here yourself. Don’t be afraid to do this. Many people don’t judge, even many sufis, and they will say to themselves, “Oh, I had a vision while I was meditating, so that must be right.”
It isn’t always right.
A vision may be a spirit that is very eager to come in, or it may be simply a thought of your own that is interfering with your intuition. There is no way to tell this except by exercising your own powers of judgment. If you go running off to other people to tell you about your own spirit then you are weakening your powers every time you listen to such a person. Remember Buddha’s farewell address…
This gets a little bit difficult when you think about your teacher. But remember, the teacher is not someone who should tell you what to do. If he does tell you what to do then he is not a teacher. A teacher is one who helps you evolve and awaken your own latent powers of judgment and decision.

J: Well, Shamcher, I must say that things are not always like that within the Sufi Orders that I know. And oftentimes I see a greater interest in finding someone to act as an authority then actual self investigation…
S: Yes, well this natural, and it is only the people who expect Sufis to suddenly be angels who are disappointed. One should not be concerned with all the apparent conflict within the sufi order, but rather be encouraged by how much real service there is. For example, this conflict between SIRS and the Sufi Order is of minor importance in my view. I am more concerned with all these people we’ve been talking about who are running to soothsayers and people outside for help…

J: Do you feel that one should not seek help then, from the beings of the other side?
S: Yes, its not to be sought. It will come of itself at the right time and then you will act on it. For example, Pir Vilayat came to me once and said, “I meditated on my father and he indicated to me that I was doing a wrong by not believing in the ranks and titles; if I follow that line I will destroy the order and there will just be little flowers here and there instead of a concentrated order.” And he may be right or wrong but he’d had the feeling that this had come from his father, something very understandable, that a man who was trying to spread the message of his father would want to be led by his father.

J: Do you think that he was really in communication with his father?
S: Yes! Everybody is, everybody who has ever been initiated is in communication with Inayat Khan. In fact, Inayat once said: “People who have never seen me, who will be born after I’ve left, may often be in closer contact with me than you people who have known my person, because you will confuse me with my physical person…”

J: When one uses his intuition, sometimes it is hard to distinguish between spiritual guidance and the guidance that has been set up by the vibratory field of Inayat Khan and his teachings.
S: There is no distinction. There is definitely a set of vibrations that have been set in motion by Inayat Khan and his pupils… And anyone can tune into these.
But there is one thing that I will say about questions of this type.
All these things are subtle, and you can’t get a sudden easy answer, you have to discover the answer gradually for yourself. And then you may discover it to complete satisfaction, many have done that… But it is a gradual process, and so you shouldn’t feel discouraged if you are not entirely clear about it now.
It is not clear in any language, but it can become clear to you…

J: Isn’t it possible that you will need a human guide before you begin to tune in to these subtler vibrations?
S: I don’t think so. Others may feel this, but I definitely believe not. Rabindranath Tagore said in one of his poems that they had told him that he had to go through this gate or that gate or follow this leader to become close to God, but then God had grace on him and led him to Himself without any guide…

J: Well, it seems to me that you’re acting as a guide when you tell us not to follow guides!
S: No, what I say here is not for the purpose of guiding you. I express what I feel because I have been asked to, and one may or may not listen to that as they wish. That is not the same as guidance. The purpose is very important…

J: Back to obsessions: do you sometimes pick up on others’ pain and sorrows?
S: Yes, that is very possible. Inayat Khan did that all the time. And when that happens you have the right to notice it and not engage in it thereby ridding yourself of it, or you decide that that is a delightful feeling and go about discovering it more deeply.

J: Do people sometimes make you take on these feelings?
S: No. Some people have superstitions about these types of influences. They say, “This man is a vampire, he takes all my powers!” Well, I say to these people that if anyone is taking your powers its your own damn fault! No one can take your powers if you don’t let them, and besides, it is not that he has taken your power, it is that you have emptied yourself of it to him for some reason.

J: I feel this is a crucial point. Obsession is always volitional, and if the obsession is of the type where spirits enter, it is because we have invited them in, wouldn’t you say?
S: Right.

J: Is there a difference between obsession and possession?
S: Obsession applies to things of the earth as well as things of the inner plane. For example, it may mean obsession with an idea, or obsession with the authority of the worldly hierarchies, such as when we spoke of bureaucrats and the congress etc., as well as the other kind of obsession which means to be obsessed by a spirit. But possession as far as I understand it refers only to that instance where a spirit has possessed you.

J: This is what I was trying to get at once before, Shamcher. The more subtle side of obsession that deals with ideas and things rather than dealings with the other side. An example of what I’m thinking of could be the way an artist can become obsessed with his art, a poet can become obsessed with the need to make poetry, or a person can become obsessed with sex or romantic love. We can go on and on. Obsession with drugs, obsession with one particular teacher… The common factor seems to be that they are rigidities that thwart enlightenment. And yet they are, I believe, a necessary part of the process by which we learn, so they are a sort of positive obsession which are our perhaps best opportunities if we can only look at them in the right way… (answered somewhere else)

(Click here for a random post from somewhere else in this blog.)