Buddhism in the Axial Age, and the successors
Comment on Buddhism:hinayana/mahayana…
This post contains some significant commentary, and some good links, and I hope we can have more material like this here.
But before going on I would merely interject that at the end of considerable effort, speaking for myself, at the end of the ‘new age’ movement I remain with nothing, no spiritual path, no spiritual life, no trust of any spiritual tradition, disillusion with all gurus, and contempt for the stupidity of many of those who can be trusted. After enduring the sufis I am not going to be any kind of fan of the Buddhists.
Nonetheless, James has a point: Buddhism is in a different category from Islam and Sufism.
A study of the eonic effect might suggest a reason why: the intersection with the eonic sequence, the issue of the Axial Age, etc….
And that would confirm James’ focus on Hinayana and reserve/mistrust of what comes later.
Since this blog is about The Gurdjieff Con it is appropriate thus to point to the Buddhist tradition, which has been more successful that the sufistic (it seems).
That said, all the dangers discovered with Gurdjieffianity can be found in ‘buddhism’ (a vague word), and we should note that the dark side of Gurdjieff is suspciously connected with his travels in Tibet. Tibetan is a very late form of spiritrual high-class ‘garbage’, so that doesn’t necessarily contradict James’ point!