Christian ashram

 

Tonight´s robot essay. So I asked ChatGPT about Rupert Sheldrake´s teacher or guru in India, Father Bede Griffiths. Ahem, that´s a strange name for a Hindu guru?! Here is what I found out...

Who was Father Bede Griffiths who had an ashram in India and was the teacher of Rupert Sheldrake?

Father Bede Griffiths (1906–1993) was a British-born Benedictine monk, Christian mystic, and interfaith pioneer who became known for his work integrating Christianity and Hinduism. He spent much of his life in India, where he lived in an ashram and taught a form of Christian Vedānta—a contemplative path combining Christian monasticism with Indian spirituality.

---

🧔 Who Was He?

• Birth name: Alan Richard Griffiths

• Born: 1906, Walton-on-Thames, England

• Died: 1993, Tamil Nadu, India

• Religious background: Raised Anglican, converted to Roman Catholicism in 1931

• Became a Benedictine monk at Prinknash Abbey in England

He was also a student of C.S. Lewis at Oxford and part of the literary Christian intellectual circle there.

---

🌏 His Journey to India

In 1955, Griffiths moved to India, feeling called to explore the mystical and contemplative dimensions of Hinduism. Over time, he increasingly wore ochre robes, adopted the sannyāsin lifestyle, and engaged deeply with Advaita Vedānta, especially as presented by figures like Śaṅkara and Sri Ramana Maharshi.

---

🕉️ The Shantivanam Ashram

• He eventually settled at the Shantivanam Ashram in Tamil Nadu (founded by Fr. Jules Monchanin and Henri Le Saux a.k.a. Abhishiktananda).

• There, he practiced and taught a Christianized version of Vedānta, encouraging a unitive experience of God beyond doctrinal boundaries.

• The ashram emphasized:

  • Silent meditation

  • Chanting both Vedic and Christian scriptures

  • Interfaith dialogue

  • Simple monastic living

🗣️ Griffiths believed that Christ is the fulfillment of Vedānta, not in a missionary or colonial sense, but in a universal mystical sense.

---

🧠 Relationship with Rupert Sheldrake

• Rupert Sheldrake, the biologist known for proposing morphic resonance, met Griffiths in India in the 1980s.

• Sheldrake credits Bede Griffiths as a spiritual mentor and intellectual influence, particularly in helping him see the spiritual and philosophical limitations of materialism.

• They shared an interest in consciousness, mysticism, and breaking down the Western separation between science and spirituality.

---

📘 Key Writings by Bede Griffiths

• The Marriage of East and West

• Return to the Center

• A New Vision of Reality

• The Cosmic Revelation

These works combine Christian theology, Vedāntic philosophy, and Jungian psychology, seeking a universal mystical core in the world's religions.

---

🕊️ His Legacy

• He’s often cited alongside Thomas Merton and Abhishiktananda as a bridge between Eastern and Western contemplative traditions.

• Advocated for interspirituality, a deeper communion among faiths at the mystical level.

• Today, his ashram continues to host seekers of various traditions who explore nondual spirituality through a Christian lens.

---

Would you like a quote from Griffiths or one of his key teachings on integrating Christ and the Self (ātman)?

Who was Fr Jules Monchanin and Henri Le Saux?

Fr Jules Monchanin and Henri Le Saux (also known as Swami Abhishiktananda) were two pioneering Catholic monks and mystics who laid the foundations for interfaith dialogue and Christian–Hindu monastic integration in 20th-century India.

They were the co-founders of the Saccidananda Ashram (later known as Shantivanam) in Tamil Nadu, which became a major center for Christian–Vedantic contemplative life—later continued and expanded by Bede Griffiths.

---

🔹 Father Jules Monchanin (1895–1957)

📖 Background:

• French Catholic priest and theologian

• Deeply drawn to Indian spirituality and mysticism

• Arrived in India in 1939

• Embraced elements of Advaita Vedānta while remaining firmly Trinitarian

🧘 Role in Interfaith Dialogue:

• Wrote under the Indian name "Swami Paramarubyananda" (Swami of the Supreme Spirit)

• Sought to "Hinduize" Christian contemplation, not by syncretism, but by a deep encounter with the Indian tradition

• Emphasized inner transformation, simplicity, and inculturation of Christianity into Indian soil

• He wrote extensively on Christian mysticism and Indian metaphysics

“India is a land of seeking. The Christ we bring must speak to the inner realization India longs for.”

---

🔹 Henri Le Saux / Swami Abhishiktananda (1910–1973)

📖 Background:

• French Benedictine monk

• Came to India in 1948 to join Monchanin

• Adopted the name Swami Abhishiktananda ("bliss of the Anointed One")

• Lived as a Christian sannyāsi, practicing intense Advaitic meditation and Hindu-Christian mystical synthesis

🕉️ Spiritual Path:

• Deeply influenced by Ramana Maharshi and the experience of the Self (Ātman)

• Had powerful nondual mystical experiences, which he struggled to reconcile with traditional Christian dogma

• His writings explore the tension and convergence between Christian mystical experience and Advaita Vedānta

📝 Key Works:

• Saccidananda: A Christian Approach to Advaitic Experience

• The Further Shore

• The Secret of Arunachala

“The depth of the Self is the depth of God. It is there that Christ is born.”

---

🌿 Saccidananda Ashram (Shantivanam)

• Founded in 1950 by Monchanin and Le Saux

• "Saccidananda" = Being–Consciousness–Bliss, a Sanskrit expression for the divine in Advaita Vedānta—and reinterpreted by them as a Christian symbol for the Trinity

• A center of Christian monasticism in Indian form:

  • Wore ochre robes

  • Practiced daily meditation, chanting, and Hindu-style rituals infused with Christian meaning

  • Aimed for a deep encounter between East and West

🕊️ The ashram was later led by Bede Griffiths, who carried their vision forward into a more public and global platform.

---

🪔 Legacy

• Monchanin was the intellectual theologian, cautious and exacting

• Le Saux was the mystic adventurer, willing to plunge deeply into Advaita and let it shake him to the core

• Together, they represent a radical experiment in interreligious encounter, rooted not in comparison, but in lived contemplative experience

Their work helped inspire the Christian Ashram movement, and today they are remembered as spiritual pioneers of interfaith mysticism.

---

Would you like excerpts from their writings or a comparison of their views on Advaita and Christ?

What is the Christian Ashram movement?

The Christian Ashram Movement is a spiritual and monastic initiative that seeks to express Christian faith using the forms, language, and lifestyle of Indian spiritual traditions, especially Hinduism. It emerged in the 20th century as a response to the encounter between Christianity and Indian culture, particularly in the context of monasticism, contemplation, and interreligious dialogue.

---

🕉️ What Is an “Ashram”?

In Hindu tradition, an ashram is a spiritual hermitage or monastery—a place for:

• Simple, disciplined living

• Meditation and prayer

• Study and spiritual guidance

• Renunciation of worldly distractions

The Christian Ashram movement adopts this form while centering the Christian mystical path—particularly contemplative prayer, service, and Christ-centered devotion.

---

🌱 Origins and Influences

🧘 Founded in India in the early-mid 20th century by:

1. Jules Monchanin (Swami Paramarubyananda)

2. Henri Le Saux (Swami Abhishiktananda)

3. Bede Griffiths
   → These three were the core initiators of the Christian Ashram movement.

They believed:

• Christianity could be authentically expressed in Indian spiritual language

• Christ could be experienced through deep Advaitic (nondual) meditation

• Christian monasticism could take Indian forms (robes, names, rituals, diet, silence)

---

✝️ Key Characteristics of Christian Ashrams

Feature	Description
Christ-centered life	Jesus is the center, but interpreted sometimes in mystical or universal terms
Indian lifestyle	Sannyāsa robes, vegetarianism, simplicity, celibacy
Meditation & prayer	Silence, mantra (e.g., "Jesus," "Om Christu"), contemplative practices
Scriptural dialogue	Study of both Bible and Hindu texts (Upanishads, Gita)
Inculturation	Integration of Indian philosophy, music, ritual forms
Interreligious openness	Deep respect for Hindu sages and spiritual paths

---

🏞️ Notable Christian Ashrams

1. Shantivanam Ashram (Tamil Nadu)

• Most well-known Christian ashram

• Founded by Monchanin and Le Saux in 1950

• Later led by Bede Griffiths, who made it internationally known

2. Saccidananda Ashram

• Original name of Shantivanam

• "Sat–Cit–Ananda" (Being–Consciousness–Bliss): interpreted as a Christian symbol for the Trinity

3. Other Ashrams:

• Ashram in Pune founded by Fr. Francis Acharya

• Krupalaya Ashram (Karnataka)

• Jyotiniketan Ashram (Uttar Pradesh)

---

🌍 Global Reach

Although the movement began in India, it has influenced Christian mystics and contemplatives worldwide, especially those involved in:

• Contemplative Christianity

• Interfaith dialogue

• Christian–Hindu comparative spirituality

• Universal Christ theology (e.g., Richard Rohr)

---

💬 Key Themes

Theme	Message
Christ as inner guru	Christ can be encountered as the indwelling divine Self
Inculturation	Christianity must be expressed in native cultural forms
Nondual mysticism	Many ashram leaders embraced Advaita Vedānta alongside Christian faith
Interreligious encounter	Not just tolerance, but mutual transformation and learning
Monastic renewal	Revitalizing Christian monasticism through Indian models

---

🔥 Controversies and Criticism

• Some orthodox Christians saw it as too syncretistic

• Some Hindus were cautious of Christian missionary motives

• Theological tensions: how to reconcile Advaita (nonduality) with Christian personalism

Still, the movement has been widely respected as a genuine and respectful spiritual synthesis, not proselytizing.

---

✨ Legacy

• Inspired interspiritual dialogue long before it became mainstream

• Helped reframe Jesus as a universal teacher and mystic

• Opened new paths for Christian contemplative practice, especially in Asia

---

Would you like a comparison of Christian Ashram spirituality with traditional Benedictine monasticism or modern contemplative practices?

The last rally

 

Look what I found. 

This is a kind of follow up to the robot essay "Better than panpsychism". Rupert Sheldrake and Mark Vernon discusses the strange phenomenon of terminal lucidity in humans *and animals*. It seems dogs and cats also experience "the last rally". The commentary section is worth reading. 

At the end of the video, Sheldrake and Vernon try to wrap everything up by discussing the resurrection of Christ from a somewhat heterodox perspective. 

Actually quite interesting. Thank you, guys, you may have saved my faith!   

Attractors

 

OK, sorry for my recent outbursts, LOL. Here is a conversation featuring Rupert Sheldrake about teleology in nature and the universe. Only listened to about half of it due to other engagements, but I suspect this approach might be...wrong. Too anthropomorphic and anthropocentric? Note also the explicitly "theist" (Christian) biases. Might return to it later. Or I might not!

A new science of angels

 

I know that Rupert Sheldrake is a Christian, but his take on angels in this clip may be too daring even for his Christian brethren...not to mention materialists! Both psychedelic experiences and dream-visions of the Hindu god Ganesha are mentioned in the discussion, alongside more "standard" Christian sources such as Pseudo-Dionysius. 

Note the family likeness to Patrick Harpur, Owen Barfield, Charles Williams, certain forms of Neo-Platonism, and so on.

Note also that Michaelmas is celebrated this Sunday, September 29...

The materialist delusion

 

Iain McGilchrist is a British psychiatrist whose ideas have a family likeness with those of Rupert Sheldrake and Alfred North Whitehead. Indeed, he even calls himself a panentheist! The man covers a lot of ground in the clip above, taped at the UnHerd club in London. UnHerd is a media outlet rightly or wrongly characterized as “conservative” by Wikipedia, and seems to have a vaguely “alternative” orientation. McGilchrist does make implicit attacks on wokeness at several points during his presentation, which perhaps makes him a conservative by some standards. He is also pro-religious, although his exact religious affiliation is never spelled out. He does have a strong sympathy for Buddhism. The audience at the club strikes me as surprisingly multi-ethnic. One of the persons asking the speaker questions have a distinct Swedish accent!  

McGilchrist begins his presentation by discussing the differences between the right and left brain hemispheres. The short story is that the left brain is extremely narrow, focused, reductionist and “abstract”. It sees the world divided into small segments and have strong tendencies to black-and-white thinking. The right brain, by contrast, is more holistic and acts as the “Devil´s advocate”. It understands that the world is a complex system of relations.

An interesting point made by the lecturer is that women are better than men at some *left* brain functions, including language skills. In general, women´s brains are more “balanced”, with a larger overlap between right and left hemispheres when it comes to functioning. By contrast, men have a sharper division between the functions associated with each hemisphere. While most women have relatively similar brains, the differences between various male brains are much larger. From an evolutionary viewpoint, men are more dispensable than women (since they don´t have to take part in the child-rearing process), but precisely for that reason, evolution can experiment more with their brains. McGilchrist doesn´t say it out loud, but I get the impression that he believes geniuses are mostly male for the reasons mentioned.

Ideally, the left brain functions should serve the right brain, but this doesn´t always happen, and it is here that McGilchrist´s ideas about brain science seamlessly morph into Kulturkritik. Every civilization starts out with the right brain in command, but as it matures and later declines, left brain functions come to the fore. This is connected to the bureaucratization, overspecialization and scientism typical of civilizations in the later phases of their development. Community, religion and spirituality are connected to the right brain, which at least implies that atheism is left brain (abstract, narrow, reductionist). McGilchrist also makes a distinction between “reason” and “reasonable”, the former being the current faulty paradigm. I´m not sure if I follow him here, since many woke ideas (such as transgenderism) sound irrational. His point seems to be that schizophrenics are intensely logical, but that this logic when disconnected from a broader context becomes pathological (the “logic” of a pattern-seeking paranoiac who doesn´t see the big picture). It still sounds like a long shot...

McGilchrist is a pessimist in the sense that he doesn´t believe that modern Western civilization will survive. But then, most civilizations only last for a couple of centuries anyway, so why should our be any exception? The solution, such as it is, is to create small communities in which people can yet again become authentic and “right brain”.

The most interesting part of the presentation concerns spirituality. McGilchrist claims that one can “disconnect” one of the brain halves during scientific experiments. When only the left brain is functioning, the test subjects see even animate things as mechanism. Conversely, when only the right brain is functioning, the subjects experience even inanimate things as alive! For instance, the sun is experienced as a living being?! This obviously opens up a lot of other questions germane to spirituality and mysticism. As already mentioned, McGilchrist is pro-religious or perhaps “pro-spiritual” and clearly regards the mystical-spiritual dimension as real in some sense. He is positive towards mindfulness meditation. The idea that one brain hemisphere is “spiritual” or even “animistic” raises the question of what exactly happens during meditation or mystical states. Can certain forms of meditation somehow bypass the left brain? Perhaps unsurprisingly, the speaker is a panpsychist and regards consciousness as an “ontological primitive”. Indeed, he is a kind of “objective idealist” in the sense that he regards matter as a phase of consciousness (just as, say, water vapor is a phase of water). He further makes the intriguing point that humans have a lot of neurons the purpose of which is to *inhibit* the connections between the two brain halves. Indeed, humans have more such inhibitors than other animals. This makes me wonder what would happen if some form of meditation can put the inhibitors to sleep…

Very interesting content! 

Rupert Sheldrake on the hippie trail

 

Rupert Sheldrake talks about his spiritual journey. It turns out that he was on the "hippie trail" in India during the 1970´s. That part of the presentation is *extremely* entertaining!

The talk was held at Cortes Island in Canada, apparently a popular tourist destination. Sheldrake´s description of the religious "diversity" at the island is also quite interesting...

Oh no, Rupert Sheldrake was right

Credit: Jaknouse

From JMG´s discussion threads, somebody called Team10Tim has spotted a *really* weird scientific paper on the web. Could this in fact be evidence for Rupert Sheldrake´s morphogenetic fields? Or perhaps plants can actually *see* their environment?  

>>>Hey hey JMG. I have a fun one for you today. This won’t come as any surprise to you, but I think it is worth posting anyways. 

>>>Boquila trifoliolata is a climbing vine that imitates the leaves of the plant it is climbing, mimicking the host’s leaves in a phenomenon called mimetic polymorphism. Unlike other plants B. Trifoliolata mimics more than one plant. In fact, it mimics the size, shape, color, and even spikes of whatever plant it climbs. The two working theories (because you can’t have an effect without a mechanism silly) are pheromones and gene transference. 

>>>Unfortunately for these theories someone had it climb a plastic plant…and mimicry. In fact, it not only ‘sees’ and ‘copies’ it also gets better with practice, er time, in what looks like (but obviously isn’t and can’t be) perception, self awareness, and memory.

The first link below is to the paper, the second to an old blog post about the same plant, long before the recent research was published. Ironically, it refers to the mimicry as "plastic"! The third is to Wiki.

Boquila trifoliolata mimics leaves of an artificial plastic host plant

Fantastic and plastic mimicry in a tropical vine

Boquila

The real panpsychism

This is a somewhat difficult conversation between Rupert Sheldrake and Mark Vernon. Sheldrake is mostly known for his theory of "morphic resonance" and for being a kind of gadfly extraordinaire in general. I don´t know who Vernon might be, but judging by his bio, he has written an entire book on Owen Barfield! In other words: here we go again...

Judging by the exchange linked to above, both Sheldrake and Vernon see themselves as Christians, but they are fairly heterodox in theological matters. Both find Whitehead´s process philosophy interesting, and somehown tries to interpret the Christian Trinity and the Logos in a process philosophical manner. Sheldrake is also interested in animism and the animistic worldview of ancient pagans and shamans, while Vernon is into Plato. However, his Platonism is not the abstract "mathematical" version often associated with the ancient Greek philosopher, but rather a more animistic-process version, in which the Ideas are real living angelic beings. I was (of course) reminded of Charles Williams´ criticism of abstract Platonizing in the novel "The Place of the Lion". Vernon also interprets the medieval worldview as a kind of Neoplatonist panentheism (pan-en-theism), while Descartes and the Reformation sundered God from the world, making God easier to abolish for the materialists. 

Sheldrake begins the discussion by criticizing something he calls conservative or materialist panpsychism, which he believes is really an attempt to save materialism by attributing a limited degree of psychic ability to all or most matter. The emergence of human consciousness can then be interpreted as "natural" and a difference in degree only, rather than in kind. Presumably, such panpsychism could also see consciousness as simply a function of matter. However, both Sheldrake and Vernon are also critical of idealism, seeing it as too abstract. What could "mind" or "consciousness" even mean outside space and time, where many idealists have a tendency to place it? 

Both contributors feel that time and "process" are somehow fundamental to the way the world works, and also to the way God operates. "Time is an image of eternity". Both space and time emanates from God and are somehow contained in God, being parts of his very nature. 

As already indicated, Sheldrake and Vernon are more robustly animistic than modern panpsychists tend to be confortable with. Sheldrake believes that everything is alive and conscious, from tiny electrons to the sun itself. He even says that this means that the sun somehow *wants* to control the solar system in exactly the way it does in fact do. Electrons are drawn to other particles, perhaps because they actually like each other? Sheldrake explicitly says that this kind of animism could lead to a form of pantheism if generalized to the entire cosmos. 

Although some of the ideas in this "Sheldrake-Vernon Dialogue 64" are a bit too outlandish for my tender skeptical tastes, I admit that I kinda like the free-wheeling format. And yes, I have linked to Sheldrake´s heresies before...

Questions for materialists (and Big Bangers)

Rupert Sheldrake has some questions for materialists and Big Bang believers, principally about dark matter and energy. You know, that invisible ad hoc stuff which is nevertheless scientific cuz reasons. A short clip from YouTube.

Telepathic dogs and process philosophers

Of all alternative thinkers, Rupert Sheldrake seems to be the most controversial and hated, probably because he once was an actual trained scientist before he “fell” and became a vociferous critic of materialism and reductionism, instead favoring a more spiritual perspective, while still trying to conduct scientific research on paranormal phenomena. Sheldrake is a process philosopher or process theologian (compare Alfred North Whitehead and David Ray Griffin), but is mostly known for his idea of “morphic resonance”, which could be interpreted as a kind of spiritual memory within matter, or even a kind of spiritual Lamarckianism. Sheldrake was propelled into the public limelight in 1981 with the book “A New Science of Life”, dubbed “a book for burning” by a particularly incensed critic. The interview linked above was made last year. I have already linked to it once before, but without much comment. Here is a summary of some of Sheldrake´s points.

To Sheldrake, materialism has never been proven but is simply a series of assumptions which are never questioned or even seriously investigated. One such assumption is that the mind is inside the brain, or identical with some brain activity. To Sheldrake, this is philosophically absurd, since it cannot explain how the mind can grasp objects outside the brain. How can we observe a tree, for instance? The mind must be “extended” to do this, but that implies that the mind must be non-material in order to reach outside of itself and somehow envelope the tree. It also implies the possibility of telepathy and other “supernatural” abilities.

Sheldrake argues against the existence of “laws of nature”. This is really a theistic idea, where God is seen as the great law-maker. Rather, the “laws” are habits. They haven´t existed in an unchanging form since the Big Bang. Rather, natural laws evolve, just like everything else. They are “habits” rather than laws, expressing a cosmic memory. This is a form of morphic resonance. One example of changing natural laws is the crystallization rate of newly discovered compounds. The more laboratories attempt to crystallize them, the faster the process becomes – even in laboratories at the other end of the world where no similar experiment has been conducted before! Scientists have natural explanations for this (perhaps tiny fragments of the new compounds find their way into the beards of peripatetic scientists, thereby contaminating the samples), but Sheldrake believes that we are dealing with a genuine “action at a distance” only explicable by morphic resonance. He proposes some empirical experiments to demonstrate the phenomenon. If true, newly formed compounds should have increased melting points as they become more stable, while compounds in nature should always be super-stable.

Biological inheritance isn´t entirely material. How do we go from genes (proteins) to, say, a cuckoo? Scientists simply assume that protein interactions give rise to bodily form or complex behavior, but nobody can explain how this is possible. Once again, the alternative is that a kind of collective memory is in operation. On a more philosophical plane, Sheldrake doesn´t believe that evolution has a single overarching purpose. After all, most living creatures have nothing in particular to do with humans – the many species of beetles, for instance (perhaps a veiled reference to the atheist joke “God loves beetles”). Perhaps the purpose of evolution is diversity and creativity as such? A telos implies consciousness. Sheldrake believes that a pantheist or perhaps panentheist consciousness that constantly evolves underlies the entire cosmos. He and the interviewer then proceed to discuss Thomas Nagel´s book “Mind and Cosmos”, which created a scandal when published, since the self-professed atheist Nagel nevertheless came close to a pantheist position and criticized Darwinism.

Sheldrake has carried out highly controversial experiments with dogs, suggesting that telepathy might be real, in this case telepathic contact between humans and animals (dog-owners and dogs). He also discusses twin studies, and believes that the similarities between identical twins later in life is too great to be readily explained by purely genetic factors. Telepathy or morphic resonance are more likely explanations. A seemingly more crazy idea proposed by Sheldrake is that stars, including the sun, are actually conscious. Of course, if pantheism (or panpsychism) is true, this does seem to follow logically. One form of panpsychism holds that self-organizing systems are conscious. This includes atoms and molecules, but also stars, galaxies and so on. Rocks and machines, on the other hand, are not conscious. In human brains, consciousness is expressed through electric impulses. The sun has incredibly complex patterns of electromagnetism, so why isn´t it conscious? “Integrated information theory” implies that integrated information *is* consciousness, therefore even cosmological phenomena could be conscious. The interview also discusses spiritual practices and psychedelic drugs. Sheldrake has a positive view of the latter. He interprets “spiritual practice” very broadly: sports and relating to animals are forms of such practice.

One thing that struck me when listening to the interview is that Sheldrake often argues in a “populist” or “common sense” manner, something anathema to scientists. “Everyone knows” that telepathy is real, only educated people deny it. That the sun is conscious is accepted in most pagan cultures and by most children. Most traditional cultures viewed the universe as one great organism, which to Sheldrake suggests that perhaps it *is* an organism of sorts. Sheldrake seems to be a “realist” (philosophically speaking) when approaching our immediate sense impressions of the surrounding world. Instead of explaining away the fact that most humans spontaneously think of the world in animistic or organismic terms, he tries to take these immediate impressions seriously. Why do we have them at all? Perhaps they actually express something real? In an unexpected move, Sheldrake interprets the Big Bang in organismic terms and says that gravity might be the anima mundi. The mechanical worldview is anthropocentric since only humans make machines. However, in other lectures available on YouTube, Sheldrake seems to suggest that the Big Bang theory might be entirely wrong…

And yes, I´m really tired right now, which may explain the slightly disjointed character of this post. Anyhow, please listen to the entire interview with Rupert Sheldrake yourselves!

Rupert Sheldrake is The Man

This is the long interview with Rupert Sheldrake, scientific heresiarch extraordinaire and black sheep of biochemistry, apart from also being a process philosopher and therefore a panentheist. In other words...me, on another quantum time line! 

I don´t have the time to write a summary of the interview here and now (I might consider doing it at some later time in another post), but since the conversation speaks for itself, you might as well start listening to it right away... 

Rupert Sheldrake is The Man.

Yes, the sun is conscious. Next question, please!

Scientific heretic extraordinaire Rupert Sheldrake says that the sun could be conscious. Well, why the heck not? Solar Logos, anyone? Note that he references pagan religious traditions when discussing the issue! 

The clip is from a longer interview, which I will link to shortly. Pun unintended.

The real Randi?

Since I just dissed Cyrus Kirkpatrick´s weird content on Hitler (see previous post), it´s time to give the astral devil (or is it deva) his due. Here´s a link to an interesting clip dealing with James Randi, Rupert Sheldrake, and related topics. 

Here is the link to the blog post discussed in the clip:

The not-so-amazing Randi?

On the track of living wonders

My positive review of the Fortean classic "Living Wonders", posted in 2012. 

Four years ago, I wrote a rather negative review of this book, which you can still read at its main product page. I'm too narcissistic to delete it. Besides, its ex cathedra pseudo-scepticism is great fun to read!

I read "Living Wonders. Mysteries and Curiosities of the Animal World" in a Swedish translation as a teenager, and was fascinated by it, but also somewhat repelled by the authors' occultist tendencies. I suppose I must have read it during my transition from young crackpot to responsible pseudo-sceptic. I recently looked through the book again. Sure, it's somewhat "out there" and definitely not something you should show your biology teacher in college, at least not if you want good grades! (Two other absolute no-nos are "Forbidden Archeology" and "Darwin on Trial".) Yet, in their own way, Michell and Richard are right on the spot.

The main section of the book deals with cryptozoology, that never-ending quest for the iconic beasts of our collective imagination: sea-serpents, hairy ape-men, surviving dinosaurs, etc. The authors point out that there are two schools within cryptozoology, the flesh-and-blood school founded by Bernard Heuvelmans and a more mystical school with John Keel as a typical representative. This split is similar to that within ufology between nuts-and-bolts ufologists and those of a more mystical bent (the authors mention Jacques Vallée).

While Michell and Richard are admirably objective in their descriptions of the various factions, their sympathies are clearly with the mystical wing of the movement. They point out that many of the creatures hunted by cryptozoologists are biologically absurd, such as big ape-men living in U.S. prairie states, or lake-monsters observed in local ponds. Physical evidence is always of the "almost but not quite" variety, such as ambivalent footprints or hair samples. This is similar to the physical evidence left behind by UFOs, which includes "UFO nests" on the ground, but never any actual pieces of the supposed space ship itself. Many reports of hidden animals sound paranormal: the creature might be impervious to bullets, have glowing red eyes, or communicate telepathically. Just as "serious" ufologists cannot get rid of the bizarre aspects of their chosen field (including hairy monsters!), cryptozoologists cannot get rid of the occult traits of the animals they are chasing. Cryptozoologists may hunt cryptids, but in return cryptids haunt cryptozoologists.

True to their source of inspiration, the epistemological anarchist Charles Fort, the authors don't claim to have any solutions to the problem. However, they do crack a few suggestions. One is that cryptids are really a kind of thought-forms conjured up by our collective consciousness. This explains both their fleeting nature and their seeming solidity when encountered. Somewhat tongue-in-cheek, Michell and Richards propose that perhaps Bigfoot-hunters could "create" Bigfoot if they chase the beast long and persistently enough. Another speculation has to do with morphic resonance, an idea borrowed from Rupert Sheldrake. Under this scenario, Nature repeats herself rather than create anything fundamentally new. Thus, we shouldn't be surprised if animals long extinct somehow "return from the dead" in a quasi-magical manner.

Well, I told you not to show the book to your teacher!

Other sections of "Living Wonders" deal with animals that are out of place (including the inevitable phantom cats), purported evidence for teleportation, intelligent animals such as Clever Hans, and old superstitions which the writers feel might just be true, such as the weird notion that swallows hibernate at the bottom of lakes during winter (OK, they went over the top with that one).

Whether or not you are a certified, card-carrying Fortean, or just as biology buff with a penchant for the outer edge, "Living Wonders" will make an excellent addition to your private library.