|
|
|
|
|
Websites |
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
includes the following: |
includes both False and Genuine Gurus and Teachers |
includes the following: |
||
|
(Ego + Desire + Samskaras) |
(Desire + Samskaras) |
(Samskaras) |
||
Around 2000 or so, on an Adi Da forum, reference to an online copy of Sri Aurobindo's letter on the Intermediate Zone on the Kheper website was cited as a possible explanation for both the guru's powers and his strange behaviour. The discussion has long since been deleted.
More recently, in January 2005, "XD", an ex-devotee of Adi Da, cited Brunton and suggested his explanation of the "Intermediate Zone" as an explanation for the guru's strange behaviour. Discussion has appeared on several Daist and ex-Daist forums concerning this e.g link link link
When I first heard of the association of Da with the Intermediate Zone as described by Sri Aurobindo, I didn't give it much credence, as I still considered Da an authentically enlightened and liberated being. Later, as I cam to know more about Da's abusive behaviour I become more cynical, and felt that the concept of the Intermediate Zone may indeed be a useful explanation of the paradox of a teacher who confers such spiritual experiences in their devotees, but at the same time abuses others. I commented and elaborated on this phenomenon of the "abusive guru" in part 2b of 
a long essay (a critique of Ken Wilber from an Aurobindonian perspective) that I finished in June 2006 and which was published on Frank Visser's Integral World website. Building on XD's original interpretation of Da, and using Wilber's friend Andrew Cohen as a case-study, I argued there (as well as on this website) that all gurus that confer these experiences but are at the same time abusive are in fact trapped in the Intermediate Zone. More recently (in Nov 2006) I had a powerful experience with Gangaji through whom I received a transmission of Sri Ramana's Light. This provided a first-hand experience of the Intermediate Zone, and revealed that an Intermediate Zone Guru does not have to be abusive; in fact I argue that Gangaji is an extremely spiritual and selfless teacher. But controversy over Gangaji's support of her husband Eli, who had a long term sexually exploitative relationship with a young female disciple, again raised the spectre of abuse, and, on the other side of the coin, showed as well how quick people are to judge and shadow project.
It is worth pointing out that Sri Aurobindo was not in his original letter critiqing gurus. His concern was with Sadhaks undertaking his yoga, who might mistake a partial experience or half light for the real thing. But his letter - as with so much of his work - goes beyond the immediate subject he was addressing to the wider spiritual and physical world.
If you are involved in any sort of spiritual practice or journey, or with any spiritual teachers or spiritual practice, there is no way to avoid the danger of the Intermediate zone. Both your own most profound transpersonal experiences, and even more so the experiences of your guru, if you happen to sit at the feet pof one, will be conditioned by this reality. Therefore it behoves the spiritual aspirant, and indeed the esotericist in general, to carefully study and consider what Sri Aurobindo has written in this very profound and important missive.
The Intermediate Zone is a region of profound transpersonal experiences that go far beyond the ordinary surface consciousness, This experience may be either temporarary or constant. People who have experienced these states, and revceived the vast influx of knowledge, love, selflessness, breaking down of barriers between self and others, expansion oif being, inflation, etc consider themselves enlightened, and are considered so by their devotees, who are attracted to the magnetic charisma that seems to accompany their experience(s).
All of these experiences pertains to any of a number of possible states of enlightenment or pseudoenlightenment. that, although emanating ultimately from the Supreme, and although far beyond ordinary consciousness, have been filtered through the Intermediate Zone which provides a dangerously beguilling, highly persuasive, and narcissistically loaded distortion of the Absolute, instead of the Absolute in its purity. This is a mixed light in which it is impossible to tell truth from falsehood. The same Light and revelation and power, the very same Light, can both heal and harm, both convey enlightenment and even liberation and yet feed the ego. It depends on the state of the transmitter (the guru), and the state of the reciever (the devotee)
In the menu at the top of this page I have represented the Intermediate Zone as a transitional region between the two primary states of Ignorance/samsara and Enlightenment/liberation. I have here used Indian (Vedantic, Buddhist, etc) terminology and concepts because to me these are the clearest. But one could without much difficulty translate them into other frameworks; e.g. Sufi, Kabbalistic, Christian mystic, Theosophical, Hermetic, etc.
The first member of each pair refers to the cognitive (epistemological) aspect, which also determines the ontological state of the individual. So Ignorance or Avidya, lack of insight into the nature of the Absolute has an ontological, metaphysical effect on the nature of the individual; i.e. it contracts the being from a state of openness and at-one-ment with the infinite and universal, to a state of small and impotent ego-self. Realisation of the nature of the Absolute, Enlightenment in other words, has the opposite effect, by removing the boundaries and barriers between the finite self and the All, it allows for spontaneity, joy, expansion, openness, and freedom.
The state of Ignorance is called Samsara, which means that the finite self goes around and around, propelled by the force of its own blind actions, helpless to do anything about its fate. The state of Enlightenment is called Liberation, and means total freedom, a freedom that comes about not through the activity of the separate self but by surrendering to the Supreme, which is ultimately one's own essential nature in any case.
Between these two poles, these two Truths, of Absolute and Relative, there is a state where there is Enlightenment (or at least degrees of insight, awakening, and enlightenment), but one still resides in the state of Samsara, because of the activity of the ego and its desires, and because of samskaras or habit-tendencies from earlier in one's life and from past lives.
It is this transitional region or state or series of states that constitutes the Intermediate Zone.
In my understanding, by far the bulk of charismatic gurus and spiritual teachers that are around in the world today (and no doubt in past historical periods too) that claim to be enlightened are actually at one of these transitional stages; this is where their inspiration, their power, their insights and their charisma derive from. It is highly misleading to simply explain them away or dismiss them as con-artists or self-deluded, as many critics and sceptics believe. This ignores the very real transpersonal experiences that for example devotees have, and that it can be assumed the gurus and teachers themselves have. Most of them are in fact totally sincere in their statements and experiences; even the ones who are abusive towards their devotees. But conversely the naive New Age view that they are all enlightened masters is equally misleading. Very very few spiritual teachers could be considered authentic satgurus. This is not to deny that there are still many that, although not actually liberated, are still genuine
Because of the Intermediate Zone's power to puff up the tiny human ego, usually through identification with a fascinator, or even a lesser nonphysical entity, many Intermediate Zone gurus suffer from extreme narcissism and delusions of godhood, which leads to them quickly becoming dysfunctional and abusive on the interpersonal level, and exploiting their devotees for their own lower desires and fantasies.
This is not to say that all Intermediate Zone gurus are like this. There are also those who are awakened to their inner divinity, which prevents them from acting in a negative manner. Or they may have be in touch with an inner beauty and sensitivity and/or detachment and discrimination that they don't let themselves be caught up in fantasies of power and exploitation. In other cases such individuals don't want set themselves up as "gurus" and teachers, because they realise they still have a long way to go. They may serve as quiet and humble friends and mentors, gurus in an informal sense of a spiritual friend who has advanced a bit further along the path than oneself, but they would have no interest in attracting a large following, and certainly would never claim to be enlightened.
Thus, to say that a teacher or mastre or guru is at the level of the Intermediate Zone doesn't mean that what they say is deceptive, their behaviour abusive, etc. It is probably more likely that it is just a smaller number of bad apples giving the rest a negative reputation by association.
I have met in person or at least had darshan/satsang with four gurus, each of which is very different. Three of them would seem to fit the description of Intermediate Zone, while a fourth may or may not be.
The first was Sathya Sai Baba, a world-famous guru with a following of millions in India, who has since been exposed as a serial sex abuser. I myself have never had any bad experiences from Sai Baba. I travelled to India to see him a quarter of a century ago (in 1982 or thereabouts), and it was a great experience. At darshan he didn't seem to walk, he seemed to glide in a quite uncanny way. Several times our eyes met as his gaze passed over the crowd and it was a powerful sort of electric experience. My later experiences with him has been on an astral level, including a couple of meetings in dreams, and one genuine remote healing that cannot be explained in physicalistic terms. I was never attracted to his teachings, which I found banal and flat, watered down pop-Hinduism. Neither did I fit in with his following, which consisted of typical Hindus and churchy Westerners. I did many years ago have a couple of Western friends who were Sai Baba devotees, but in the West at least the organisation and teaching comes across as simplistic and rather like an exoteric Christian youth camp or study group. My belief in Sai Baba as an avatar, and accepting as literal fact the myths and folklore built up around him, was a combination of immature wishful thinking and wanting to belive in a "Santa Claus" type god figure, and genuine astral connection, perhaps on the Intermediate zone level. The first thing that disillusioned me was the allegations of sexual abuse that are extensive than that of any other absuive guru. The second thing was the behaviour of certain highly abusive devotees such as Gerald Moreno, who unfortunately I got to know quite well (I would rather that I didn't, but certainly I have learned a lot from him about how the "abusive devotee" works). That such people can be associated with Sai Baba proves that he is not what he claims, because no genuine teacher or avatar would tolerate this without speaking out against such abuses. Were it not for these two things, I would still consider Sai Baba a genuine teacher. Yet paradoxically, this same guru who has sexually molested so many of his male disciples, is also associated with enlightening spiritual experiences, healings and so on the subtle level. That is the paradox of the Intermediate zone.
The second was Barry Long, who I heard at a talk, and afterwards went up and spoke to him briefly, many many years ago. The Ligbt and Love I felt from him was amazing, and for a very long time I considered him a genuine Enlightened being (just as I thought Da Free John was, until I heard about his abusive behaviour). Nevertheless, I was never attracted to following him, nor was there any connection or resonance on the subtlke levels, such as I felt with Sai Baba. Barry Long's teachings are more interesting and subtle than Sai Baba's. He seemed at the time to have a sensitivity to women and an awareness of the unfairness and injustice of woman's position and oppression in a male society. However there seem to be some controversies around him, due to his "neo-Tantric" position. I don't know enough about him to speak at length on this, but no longer consider him a fully enlightened being.
The third, around 1988, was Swami Krishna, a Tantric Guru who at the time lived just down the road from me, and had gathered around him a local following of naive and gullible adoring Western devotees, from whom he received a large amount of both money and sex. My feeling is that he was a nice and decent if somewhat egotistic guy, who simply did not realise the way he is exploitating his followers. Like a much more powerful guru, Papaji, Swamiji genuinely doesn't seem to understand the Western mindset and the spiritual weakness of westerners. He had an amazing presence about him, it was a buzz that produced a sort of "high". It is likely that his devotees fed on this, and he likewise took advantage of them fnancially and sexually, resulting in a relationship that could not be spiritually beneficial to either party. I only heard one of his talks, and apart from one moment of genuine humility there was nothing in his teachings that stuck in my mind, the same old watered down pop Hinduism, albeit of an Osho Rajneeshi highly sexualised tone. Nevertheless he did take a liking to me, and remembered me from when I had seen him some 8 or 9 years previously at La Trobe University. He also seemed drunk afterwards at the dinner at his center. So very much a Trungpa/Osho type figure. The buzz I felt in his presence did not continue after I left, there was nothing in his teachings that attracted me, nothing in his words that indicated development of the level of other intermediate zone gurus like Da Free John, Barry Long, or Muktananda. I found the massive donations he asked from his devotees, and his own claims of sadguru-hood, to be off-putting. He may be not so much Intermediate Zone as Subtle-level ordinary consciousness. Nevertheless I am including him here as a "borderline" example, he could equally be considered Intermediate Zone or non-intermediate zone. All this was some 19 years ago, but he is still around (see link), although no longer in Melbourne.
One guru that I heard talk (about this same time) and came away convinced that he had no spiritua,l experience was Guru Maharaji (before he became Prem Rawat). Nevertheless his devotees, including a friend who later set himself up as a guru, came away full of emotional high. So maybe Maharaji did have power, but I wasn't receptive to it. Or maybe they were just like born-again Christians and other emotionalistic cults. Really, it is very difficult to tell. But for now I am classifying Maharaji as ordinary consciousness. His case does show that just because a guru is worshipped doesn't mean they are at the level of the intermediate zone.
The most recent intermediate zone guru I met, in November 2006, was Gangaji, who I have already referred to. Although I only saw her recently, and briefly (sitting right near the front for two darshans) the experience I received was profound. What I received from her was a transmission of Sri Ramana's Light. I don't know if anyone else there got that; many devotees did seem blissed out, but it was more in adoration of Gangaji herself. Gangaji comes across as a genuinbely humble person, full of Light, very loving and selfless, tecahing a simple Advaitin message, a sort of update for the westrener of Ramana's talks. From my own expertiences, I cannot and will not say a bad word about her, and consider her an exemplarary teacher. Unfortunately her forgiveness of and support for husband Eli, who had a long term exploitative sexual affair with a young female discple behind her back, has caused a lot of hostility towards her among disillusioned ex-devotees and gru-critics in general. My feeling is that Gangaji is without doubt an Intermediate Zone guru who has had a level of transcendent realisation. Apart from certain questions regarding the cost of her retreats, she has not been involved in any exploitation of devotees; indeed the person I saw had nothing but love to give for those poeple who came up on stage with her.
When working on these pages I have very tentatively divided the Intermediate Zone into three gradations, on the basis of the levels that various gurus would seem to be at, and comparing mixed realisation gurus with those that seem to be the real deal. Hoever, these pages are due for revision, since some may be just mental speculation. What I wrote is:
The Early/Lower/Near Intermediate Zone or IZ-a for short. This stage is characterised by transpersonal and enlightened experiences, but these are accompanied by Egotism, Desire, and subconscious Samskaras. A person at this level may be possessed of amazing charisma. There may be all sorts of occult experience or siddhis, or there may be none at all. It is assumed that more people are at this stage then the following ones. However those with discrimination can see that they have not yet reached the goal, even if their experiences and realisations are profound. Hence only egotists set themselves up as gurus at this level, hence the large number of abusive gurus from the lower Intermediate Zone
The Middle Intermediate Zone or IZ-b for short. This stage is also characterised by transpersonal and enlightened experiences, charisma, and so on, but Egotism in the sense of attachment to sense of self and getting upset if people criticise you has dropped away, being replaced by selfless love. There is however still desire and subconscious Samskaras, and there may be narcissistic inflation and delusionism through identification of the individual revelation with some deity or attractor
Late/Higher/Far Intermediate Zone or IZ-c for short. This stage is also characterised by perhaps even more profound transpersonal and enlightened experiences, charisma, and so on, but desire has dropped away, and only some samskaras or subtle tendencies remain. A person at this level can be considered very close to the stage of sadguru, although they are not yet a sadguru. This stage appears to be much rarer than the preceding one.
Another way of subdividing the Intermediate Zone is into Gross, Subtle, Causal, and Transcendent. These are levels of being that are not limited only to the Intermediate Zone of course. But at this level they take on a whole new dimension. Thus gurus and spiritual teachers and masters can be categorised according to the level of consciousness and being in which they abide, with a further category of Integral for those who encompass and can equally move through all the levels.
Basically the descriptions are:
Gross Intermediate Zone - Tantric and Taoist bodily realisations, experiences, and transmutation, experiences of the subtle body, kundalini, ch'i, chakras, healing, etc
Subtle Intermediate Zone - experiences of occult forces and phenomena on the subtle planes, remote healing, meeting with deities, dream experiences, astral experiences.
Causal Intermediate Zone - experiences of deep meditative states, nondual states that are formless, deep samadhi, subtle archetypal realities.
Transcendent Intermediate Zone - experiences of the transcendent Absolute or abiding in the Supreme. The nondual teaching; Advaitin or Mahayanist realisation , not in words but in actual practice and fact, formless or else equally beyond form and formless.
 |
 |
 |
 |
