Peter Ralston On Jed Mckenna

[joegarland]

From the latest Cheng Hsin newsletter, after a reader asked Ralston his thoughts on McKenna:    

Quote

 

It’s possible he had an enlightenment and tries to communicate it in his particular way, but what troubles me is he seems always to hide. He doesn’t use his image, his audio stuff seems to be done by a hired actor, and he always uses “poetry,” and overly dramatized stories and imagery to make his point. This seems geared more to sales than communication, more of a show or presentation than simple honesty. It leaves his “followers” (and I suspect they are believers, not real contemplators) with tons of imagery but little truth. When he speaks about "nothing" there is no nothing there, but instead devastation and destruction, these are not the same at all. So my question is why is he hiding
and why doesn’t he speak straight and without the drama?

     Of course it doesn't matter if he's real or not, no one is. What matters is the validity and value of the communication. There is no method that leads one to enlightenment, that's a fallacy. There are no steps or pills or rituals or crises that will lead you there. The best you can do is contemplate and be open. The rest is stuck in a world of relativity, which is a completely different domain—although valuable and necessary to study and understand.

     Our communications are not the same. Anyone can use a few similar words, that doesn't mean they're talking about the same experience. I certainly don’t talk about devastation and destruction with so much imagery and drama attached. What would be the point? Read my book Pursuing Consciousness and the difference should be immensely clear. I hear his points but they are buried within the plethora of drama, which I fear will be what sticks with the student rather than the real point, and how could it not since when speaking of nothing he surrounds it with so much somethings!

     I also think the actor-reader is a wrong choice since if Jed is genuine and interested in facilitating he’d read those words very differently and with a much different tone and far less drama; but the actor can’t do that since he’s only reading without genuine experience of what he’s saying, which naturally lends itself to a Macbethian type dark drama. Take a look at his video re: his awakening, what are those images for? What do they serve? And the music? It’s a show, not good facilitation. Unfortunately, most people don't know the difference.

     I suspect that because an enlightenment experience always degrades into a knowing which is subject to mind alteration, this is what has happened for him. And he likely confused phenomena and mental influences with his breakthrough. There is NO light involved in enlightenment, except perhaps as a phenomenon that has nothing to do with consciousness.

     I hope this clarifies a few things usually overlooked when people hear about this kind of work. Not everyone is doing the same thing. All roads don't lead to the same place. In the end it isn't all leading to the same truth. Nor are all the other myths and beliefs that are generated by people who really don't know what they're talking about but like to engage and promote simplistic answers. I'm not saying this is the case here, but like I did say you should judge the communication by what it is doing, not if it's liked or sounds good or is entertaining, etc. Many, many "spiritual" teachers are really just putting on a show, entertaining people with great stories or impressive teachings. This is not facilitation, it is entertainment—and most people prefer it without knowing the difference.

 

I think he nailed what I've been growing to think about McKenna: he's good for the dramatic side of enlightenment, but his understanding of enlightenment is incomplete and faulty.

[Leo Gura]

Yes, it's pretty clear McKenna doesn't give a purely objective description of enlightenment. It's highly dramatized.

But also this has value, as what the ego sometimes needs most IS a dramatization, not a scientific, clinical description.

McKenna's work is designed to light a fire under your ass, to punch you in the gut, to shock you awake.

I do the same thing sometimes with my videos. I sacrifice truth and accuracy for an emotional punch to the gut.

Because if I was truly objective and scientific, I would just come up without emotion and say: "Do whatever you want with your life. Nothing matters. Even truth is meaningless. Any action you take will be eclipsed by the ocean of time and long forgotten. Bye."

But that wouldn't be very helpful to you.

Most people basically have to be hoodwinked into the enlightenment. It's a delicate balance.

In a sense, this is a deep problem about marketing. For marketing to be effective, it has to be a lie. That's the current state of society. No enlightenment teaching is immune to the marketing problem. Because enlightened people want to create more enlightened people. Somehow this shit needs to get marketed. You can't stop it.

So then it becomes a question of... what's the best way to market it?

And there are a thousand different answers.

The Jews, Christians, Hindus, Muslims, Jains, Yogis, Buddhists, all have their own ideas about that. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

Enlightenment is in a very unique position because ANYTHING you say about its necessarily false. So in a sense, the most clinical and scientific description is no more accurate or useful than a story from the Bible. Because like Ralston says above, there is NO WAY! And what that effectively means is... it's up for grabs. People will spin it in their favorite way. And everyone has a different favorite way.

You can read Ralston's book or McKenna's book, and neither one will really help you. Hell! Every minute you're reading a book, you're further from the Truth.

Or both will help you! (If you're wise )

[Neo]

Quote

Every minute you're reading a book, you're further from the Truth.

Really "further from Truth" or just "No nearer"?

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Neo said:

Really "further from Truth" or just "No nearer"?

Depends on how wise you are to start with.

[abrakamowse]

Don't follow any teacher, all of them give "pointers". Listen your intuition and take what you think it helps and discard what doesn't help.

None of them can tell "the truth". What I like about Jed is that he never takes credit for what he teaches and he just point you in certain direction, but it is always "our way" not his way. I don't think he's a bad teacher.

But, that's my opinion.

[aurum]

Ralston is missing the point about McKenna. Writing with dramatization and emotion is part of what makes good writing. That's what human beings respond to. 

Whether or not McKenna is actually enlightened is irrelevant to me. If someone points you in the right direction, that's all the matters.

[abrakamowse]

10 hours ago, aurum said:

Ralston is missing the point about McKenna. Writing with dramatization and emotion is part of what makes good writing. That's what human beings respond to. 

Whether or not McKenna is actually enlightened is irrelevant to me. If someone points you in the right direction, that's all the matters.

Once think that I like about him is that he keep saying that you must be the master of yourself, that you don't need to follow gurus, not even him.

Again, my opinion.

[aurum]

2 hours ago, abrakamowse said:

Once think that I like about him is that he keep saying that you must be the master of yourself, that you don't need to follow gurus, not even him.

Again, my opinion.

 

Definitely. Of course that probably only causes some people to want to follow him as a guru even more.

[abrakamowse]

58 minutes ago, aurum said:

Definitely. Of course that probably only causes some people to want to follow him as a guru even more.

That's true too... No one is perfect.

[theinevitableandi]

I read both mckennas book and peter ralstons books. 

Yes Mckenna is dramatic and sounds dark but it should do the trick and shake you the **ck up !  It shook me so hard ... I felt depressed after reading 3/4 of the book , then i quit reading it .  Ego could not stand it !!! I think it did a great job , to point to what enlightenment is  not and scaring the crap out of me//

Peter Ralstons books really helped me thanks to Leos Previous Enlightenment /Meditation videos  I had been watching. Both are great reads ! 

@Leo Gura Btw your enlightenment videos are really profound / well explained !  Been doing enlightenment/self help for 2 years now and man the breakthroughs  ive had thanks to your videos ,  you CHANGED MY LIFE ! THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU !! You are doing an amazing job at what you do !!! peace! 

 

[TSH Chris]

@Leo Gura

On 19/06/2016 at 9:26 PM, Leo Gura said:

No enlightenment teaching is immune to the marketing problem. Because enlightened people want to create more enlightened people. Somehow this shit needs to get marketed. You can't stop it.

I am new here, thank you for your great teachings.

Do you believe that enlightened people want to create more enlightened people? At the moment I do not feel like that is something I want (to "create" them) I just feel that it will happen as and when people/humanity/the universe is ready and I will do my part in putting pointers out there for people to use if/when they/the universe see fit. Do you think it is my (or anyone's) duty to "market" it?

[99th_monkey]

On 6/23/2016 at 6:22 AM, TSH Chris said:

@Leo Gura

I am new here, thank you for your great teachings.

Do you believe that enlightened people want to create more enlightened people? At the moment I do not feel like that is something I want (to "create" them) I just feel that it will happen as and when people/humanity/the universe is ready and I will do my part in putting pointers out there for people to use if/when they/the universe see fit. Do you think it is my (or anyone's) duty to "market" it?

nice

[99th_monkey]

the thing about jed is that he uses the human condition to speak his message. the video game thing hit me hard when i read it. it was damn near validating because i felt a certain way. 

theres nothing that a body says that is true, its speaking as a body, like i am right now, its a story, its all a representation. so what that jed isnt speaking a scientific story. 

look at the meaning, whats behind it. what it represents, maybe misrepresents. who knows look for yourself.