Richard Rose

[Gonzo]

Affinity introduced me again to Richard Rose and "The Albigen Papers". I encountered Rose somewhere earlier. Interesting similarities to Jed McKenna, both giving a nod to Zen, and not to formal Zen, but my favorite, what I prefer to call "essential" Zen.

The bio on Rose on Wikipedia is worth reading, and perhaps Aff will share some of his insights from reading The Papers.

Of interest I find is that both Rose and McKenna advocate the close examination of personal beliefs, and both seem to come to a similar conclusion, that the only real question is the same one Nisargadatta proposed: "Who am I?" McKenna says we end up with "cogito" - I think Maive somewhere mentioned the "cogitot", which sounds like a rather fun joke, but relevant.

[Affinity]

I'm still reading "The Albigen Papers" so I may follow up with you once I've finished. Until then... The approach to truth seeking that Jed presents is similar to what Richard Rose taught. That is, to realize what is false in order to identify the truth. The Albigen system is much more detailed in its thoroughness than the straight to the point approach that Jed illustrated in his three books.


The path to Truth, or Reality, or Essence is very simple:

It requires a Selfish man, an individualist not afraid of
the annihilation of individualism, a fearless man not afraid of
powers within him that are much greater than himself, and a
man of suicidal relentlessness once his commitment is given.

All that is necessary to find the Truth is an unconditional
commitment, -not putting a time upon the commitment nor a
greater value on any other desires or fears. If a person sincerely
makes a commitment he automatically becomes a vector in a
sure direction.

But if we wish to see the commitment become an Absolute
result in this lifetime, we must be conscious of our limited time,
and of ways and means to expedite the realization. All energies
must give priority to the vector. Every hour must be used in a
way to expedite the success.

So that as soon as the general commitment is made,
we should immediately commit our energies which are generally
used for anger or pleasure so that transmutation will bring Intuition.

The voice of Intuition will be our most valuable teacher.
It will furnish all future planning for the campaign. But do not
rest. Make violent efforts but do not disturb the sleepers.

- From "The Direct Mind Experience" by Richard Rose

[Red Heart]

do not disturb the sleepers.

for they will turn and rend you...important safety tip right there...

[Gonzo]

In my opinion both Rose and McKenna are aimed in the right direction. Even so, I have some minor disagreement with some of the statements below. (On the other hand, I'm going to post seperately an excerpt from Rose's bio on Wikipedia which I think is relevant.)

The path to Truth, or Reality, or Essence is very simple:

It requires a Selfish man, an individualist not afraid of
the annihilation of individualism, a fearless man not afraid of
powers within him that are much greater than himself, and a
man of suicidal relentlessness once his commitment is given.

All that is necessary to find the Truth is an unconditional
commitment, -not putting a time upon the commitment nor a
greater value on any other desires or fears. If a person sincerely
makes a commitment he automatically becomes a vector in a
sure direction.

What is the level of this "commitment"? Is there any possibility of taking a "time out" or must one be relentless in the pursuit of spiritual evolution? What happens when you "get drunk and screw"? In the midst of a throw, is anyone concerned with their spirituality? with their commitment? Or are we just talking "some of the time"?

But if we wish to see the commitment become an Absolute
result in this lifetime, we must be conscious of our limited time,
and of ways and means to expedite the realization. All energies
must give priority to the vector. Every hour must be used in a
way to expedite the success.

Which leaves no time for mud, blood and beer, and with which I have an objection. That my time is limited is irrelevant. If I feel inclined to "party", in whatever form that takes, I shall, and usually partying is considered antithetical to spiritual endeavor. I disagree with that notion, however, since I believe the major reason we are in human form is to experience the drama, and spiritual endeavors, for the most part, are boring as hell.

So that as soon as the general commitment is made,
we should immediately commit our energies which are generally
used for anger or pleasure so that transmutation will bring Intuition.

Which brings to mind this Zen quip:

You mustn't take it easy and let the days go by - you must value the time."

I don't deal well with "you mustn't"s, any more than I deal well with "you should"s or "ought"s. In my opinion, intuition will survive both anger and pleasure, since neither have any real effect on it.

The voice of Intuition will be our most valuable teacher.
It will furnish all future planning for the campaign. But do not
rest. Make violent efforts but do not disturb the sleepers.

Indeed. However, the overall, or perhaps the enduring intent is what is relevant since in my opinion we constantly go in and out of spiritual endeavors. Sometimes it's convenient, sometimes its not, but overall the notion is aimed towards spiritual evolution.

And to me, there is no need for violent efforts. On the contrary, I believe the most gentle of efforts are the most rewarding. The nagual, in my opinion, cannot be accessed or appreciated with anything but gentleness.

[Gonzo]

I'm adding my own bolding around statements I think are "right on".

His student John Kent felt Rose's teachings were difficult to
describe, because Rose stressed inner work inherently subjective and
intimate to each individual. They were more about pursuing personal
insight and introspection than a set of specific techniques.[6]
Nonetheless, according to Kent, Rose did formulate a system of
teachings based on his study of other traditions and his own
insights.[7] Kent summarized the core questions in the teachings
as:[8]

1. Who am I (ultimately)?
2. Where did I come from (before birth)?
3. Where am I going (after death)?

Rose recommends a deep investigation of "who" is living and
experiencing: clearly defining self and ego.[9] He also insisted that
a life of activity is meaningless as long as the identity of the actor
is not known. He thought approaching spirituality as a way to find
peace or enhance one's life, which he called "utilitarian," was
foolish. Instead he advocated total dedication to a search for truth —
in particular concerning self and ego — in spite of the personal
consequences.

He used the term "Jacob's Ladder" (image) as a kind of transpersonal
map.[10] Based on that, he then used the terms "Law of the Ladder"[11]
and "Ladder Work" to describe different levels he observed among those
seeking truth. He also believed that one could only effectively help,
or be helped by, others who were on the same or adjacent rungs of the
ladder. He felt "extra-proportional returns" were realized when a
group of people combine their efforts in any endeavor, which he called
the "Contractor's Law".[12]

Rose cautioned against postulating what truth — with respect to self
and ego, for example — should be and then trying to move toward it.
Instead one removes misunderstandings. His working definition of truth
was "a condition from which all untruth has been removed."[13] He used
the phrases "retreat from error"[14] and "reverse vector"[15] to
describe the process of moving away from the most obviously false,
what he called "garbage," which would clarify the thinking and
intuition to a point where more subtle untruth could be
evaluated.[16][17]

He published The Albigen Papers in 1973, which he called a guidebook
for seekers. His theories about the transmutation of energy from the
body through the mind up to what he called the "spiritual
quantum,"[18] were published after that and similar to some recent
theories describing the mind as a force-field. He produced a pamphlet
on a method of meditation involving the dispassionate review of past
traumatic events as a way to overcome psychological problems and to
understand the ego. His book Psychology of the Observer encapsulated
his views on the structure of mind-processes and what he described as
the internal ascent from a personal, conflicted view of the world to a
more Universal perspective.

He was a hypnotist, occasionally giving demonstrations, and said that
understanding hypnotism was a key to understanding the mechanics of
the mind.[citations needed] His criticism of spiritual and New Age
movements often included references to their use of self-hypnotic
methods.[19][20]