Jed McKenna

[ButterflyWoman]

I keep getting what appears to be synchronicity suggestions regarding the books of Jed McKenna. So I did some research and it seems that Jed McKenna is possible a fictional person (well, a pen name, anyway; I can live with that), and there are some very negative reviews of his books.

Has anyone here read them? Apparently there's a trilogy on the topic of enlightenment? What can you tell me about the books of the probably pseudononymous Jed McKenna?

[Ouroboros]

The negative reviews are one reason I haven't gotten the books yet. I'm still planning on getting them eventually, but they're not super high on my list.

I think Tom's read all three of the books in the trilogy, so I'm sure he'll have some input on this.

[ButterflyWoman]

Doing a search of these forums now, but I'm still interested in this discussion, which should prove to be more direct. Most of the references I'm finding are sort of woven into other conversations.

[Tom]

Yes, Jed McKenna is probably a completely fictional character in the same sense for example that Captain Kirk is a fictional character and William Shatner writes Star Trek novels featuring him. In this case we don't get to see the William Shatner behind the Jed McKenna. There are a lot of people who have strong negative reactions to him. There are even people who have strong positive initial reactions to him. I had a negative reaction at first. Jed's first book pissed me off and scared the hell out of me. Then I realized I loved the book and I read it again to try to get the same feelings back. I felt like I had approached a bottomless pit and backed away and I wanted to go there again to just jump, but it didn't work that way. The second book was a lot lighter, and it cleared up a few things I didn't understand. The third book was again challenging, and in a way that I hadn't anticipated. It was supposed to bring the trilogy "full circle". I found it truly did complete the trilogy, though, and I also read it more than once. I'd say that I've had two main teachers above all others in my life. One was Jed and the other I know "in person".

[ButterflyWoman]

Wow, that sounds good. :)

I'm not fussed by someone using a pseudonym. There are plenty of reasons to use a pen name, it's not a big deal. Some people do seem to take exception to it for some reason, though (I know if I ever wrote books, I'd certainly use a pen name!).

[Korpo]

As far as I understand it is not just a pen name, but also the main character is fictional? (Sorry, that's what I got out of the "William Shatner/Captain Kirk" thing...)

Oliver

[ButterflyWoman]

It appears to be fiction, but it's hard to say for sure. There's apparently a lot of speculation as to who "Jed McKenna" really is (he says it doesn't matter who he is, because he doesn't exist, anyway, which makes sense to me).

I think it's that the author, whomever it might be, wanted to tell stories with deeper meaning. I'm quite intrigued by the concept, actually. I found this:

http://ezinearticles.com/?expert=Jed_McKenna

Interesting reading.

[CFTraveler]

Well, that made me not like him.

[ButterflyWoman]

What did? The articles? Or that he's probably fictional?

[CFTraveler]

The attitude of the author.

[Korpo]

http://ezinearticles.com/?expert=Jed_McKenna

The movies list is not very good. The comments certainly are not helpful.

Some of the movies are quite good, some seem to be selected quite at random. Listing "Total Recall" made me laugh. :)

Oliver

[ButterflyWoman]

I like Total Recall as a metaphor, actually. Your memories are all you have left of pretty much everything. It's how you know who you are. Your memories define that which you are (in a material sense; obviously the True Self is not defined by the memories of a single lifetime). There's also the theme that you can be whomever you want to be, no matter what your past is. So it works for me. :)

[Korpo]

http://ezinearticles.com/?Spirituality: ... a&id=13244 (http://ezinearticles.com/?Spirituality:-Blues-for-Buddha&id=13244)

The article about Buddhism is ... what exactly? Beyond that it is bashing Buddhism without properly spelling things out there's nothing in there. I think this guy is spreading the spiritual "junkfood" he is accusing Buddhism of.

Oliver

[Korpo]

I like Total Recall as a metaphor, actually. Your memories are all you have left of pretty much everything. It's how you know who you are. Your memories define that which you are (in a material sense; obviously the True Self is not defined by the memories of a single lifetime). There's also the theme that you can be whomever you want to be, no matter what your past is. So it works for me. :)

I actually felt like watching it again recently, until I remembered what the movie is actually like. It's like you take the ideas of a better movie and drop it in what it became.

Oliver

[Tom]

Personally after studying Buddhism since 1989 and meeting lots of Buddhists over the years, joining in 1997, and receiving initiation in 200? (not sure, 2002 maybe?) I have to agree with Jed about Buddhism, too. The problem isn't what Buddha taught; it is the behavior of most Buddhists. I have met plenty of Buddhists who were really messed up individuals. In fact, although I still say "Buddhist" when people ask what I am, they are the reason I don't mean it the way I used to.

[Korpo]

To the outside observer, much of Buddhist knowledge and practice seems focused on spiritual self-improvement. This, too, is hard to speak against... except within the context of awakening from delusion. Then it's easy.

There is no such thing as true self, so any pursuit geared toward its aggrandizement, betterment, upliftment, elevation, evolution, glorification, salvation, etc, is utter folly. How much more so any endeavor undertaken merely to increase one's own happiness or contentment or, I'm embarrassed to even say it, bliss?

Makes me want to quote you, OW, when quoting "A Fish named Wanda": "What kind of Buddhism is this, Otto?"

Theravada for example, and the Pali canon, surely do not teach about a "true self." States of rapture or bliss are not the goal, but to be recognised as states that arise and fall away, and therefore constitute nothing permanent. But maybe this is only meant to be a critique of Mahayana and the concept of "Buddha self"?

I cannot remember that pursuing bliss is a goal of any Buddhist sect. So what is this guy writing about and does he know?

I remember specifically a sutra where the Buddha lists all kinds of subtle mind states and spiritual achievements wise men claimed to have achieved, and how that exactly does not constitute enlightenment and what is to be done.


Personally after studying Buddhism since 1989 and meeting lots of Buddhists over the years, joining in 1997, and receiving initiation in 200? (not sure, 2002 maybe?) I have to agree with Jed about Buddhism, too. The problem isn't what Buddha taught; it is the behavior of most Buddhists. I have met plenty of Buddhists who were really messed up individuals. In fact, although I still say "Buddhist" when people ask what I am, they are the reason I don't mean it the way I used to.

He is not saying that the actual Buddhists are the problem. He says, Buddhism itself is the problem. He is saying stuff like the Four Noble Truths or the practice of Metta is the problem. He is saying the teachings themselves are wrong.

There is an awful lot of Buddhists I don't like, personally. I just try to discern Buddhism from misguided followers. I doubt any spiritual teaching would survive that test, actually.

Oliver

[ariesr]

I've read the first and third books of the trilogy and enjoyed them.

Partly, because the theme that comes from the books is one I had subscribed too in my earlier years. i.e. the reality that he portrays, It may be one that most spiritual people would not want to even consider.

Interesting he pov on enlightenment, what is it exactly? And why are so few people out there enlightened? Does the high failure rate not say anything?

And Zen, he says that Zen in it's early form was worth paying attention to before it became widepsread.

Also, it makes me think, and still does from time to time. I will have to re-read them.

[ButterflyWoman]

Makes me want to quote you, OW, when quoting "A Fish named Wanda": "What kind of Buddhism is this, Otto?"
:lol:


He is not saying that the actual Buddhists are the problem. He says, Buddhism itself is the problem.
Well, I've said the same about organised Christianity from time to time.


There is an awful lot of Buddhists I don't like, personally. I just try to discern Buddhism from misguided followers. I doubt any spiritual teaching would survive that test, actually.
Substitute the word "Christian" for "Buddhist" and I've said the same thing.


Also, it makes me think, and still does from time to time.
Yes, that's what I'm mostly getting from the things I read about what people say about this particular author. He most definitely IS controversial, and I have yet to see even one person who said they agreed with everything he wrote (in fact, even people who liked the books said they didn't agree with everything in them), but controversy rattles cages, and perhaps that's the point? (I don't know, I'm just guessing.)

[Tom]

Either you find his books work for you or you don't, but the point is to do the math for yourself as the saying goes. Jed offers a technique and by the time I was done reading his third book I felt I understood what he was really getting at. More importantly, I have used the technique. It was something that I had been doing even as a small kid, but I was better able to direct the process after reading Jed's books.

[ButterflyWoman]

After yet another nudge toward Jed McKenna from yet another source, I went to Amazon and ordered all three books. I'll let you know how it goes. ;)

[ButterflyWoman]

Just finished the first book. Wow. :shock:

I wasn't shocked, upset, offended, bothered, annoyed, or otherwise rattled, but that's not to say I wasn't deeply moved and profoundly affected. I even dreamed about this book, which means I was taking it in on a very, very deep level.

I did pick up a few interesting nuggets of wisdom that resonate with me. And I had a big, big realisation, which is that I've already done a lot of the hard work. It's been a really quirky path, to be sure, but I'm a really quirky person, so it's not that surprising. But the thing about seeing that you don't really exist (which, I might add, at least three people tried to talk me out of, including the man who is now my husband, because he thought I was slipping into some kind of serious depression), the mental breakdown, the thing with shining the light of reason on the lies and b***sh** you've got in your head, and, oh, a lot of other stuff mentioned in the book, hey, been there and done that. And then I took a few years' break (seriously) and had some babies and then it started up again in a different way (this time with a lot of physical manifestations that appear to be finally resolving themselves, although that's not mentioned in the book, especially). And now I'm here, wherever here is. And pretty soon, I'm going to be elsewhere, even though, really, I've always been there, I just have taken a long time to figure it all out.

Wow. Cool. What a damned cool book.

I don't care if it's fiction or part fiction or a fictionalised story based on someone's real life observations or what. I don't care if there are some contradictions. I loved, loved, loved this book. It was a great read and I'm so glad the Universe kept putting Jed McKenna in my path.

How I'll feel about the second book is unknown at this time, of course, but the first one, just WOW. Damned. Good. Book.

[Tom]

The second book is the "fun" one. I had only the first and second book to read and re-read for years and it was fine that way, as I had a lot to learn from them. As Jed pointed out a lot of people read his first book and mistake the most important things for being optional. Even so, I thought I really had everything down by the time I got my hands on his third book. It was the best one yet, but it was also his most challenging book of the trilogy. I had to read it a couple of times - and I am still looking forward to the CD / MP3 version and possibly even the pdf with the bonus material.

[ButterflyWoman]

I'm about halfway through the second book. I really can't put these books down once I pick them up. I stayed up WAY later than I should have, reading.

Now I'm going to have to read Moby-Dick. :shock: (Note for those unfamiliar with the books: the author feels that Moby-Dick is actually a metaphor for spiritual awakening and explains why, it's quite fascinating.)

[ButterflyWoman]

Finished the second book, "Spiritually Incorrect Enlightenment". Promptly had an existential crisis (okay, not really a crisis, just was presented with a very deep puzzle which I've yet to solve; perhaps the third book will help me solve it).

I can see why the Universe kept putting "Jed McKenna" in my path!

I must say, I'm really relieved to see that I've actually already done all the hard work, the "Spiritual Autolysis" as Jed calls it. I did it not knowing what the hell it was, of course, or having any framework. I had the experience of really knowing and seeing that "I" don't exist, I did the whole "live in a cave" thing (actually, it was an apartment in a not very nice neighborhood, but I would go days or even weeks without setting foot outside). My "writing" was on the net, on a long-defunct website, in the ephemeral commands of Unix ytalk and that nearly extinct kind of social shared environment known as a "talker" (cross between a MUD and a chat room). I spewed out megabytes of "stuff" that I had in my head. Memories, beliefs, thoughts of all kinds, opinions, you name it. I did that. Didn't even have a damned clue what I was doing, but I did it, guided by some inner demon or angel that was making sure it got done and that I more or less survived it, except that I didn't, because I lost everything that was important to me and I essentially died, to be reborn. Ta dah. So much of this book made me just nod an nod and nod, because I recognised it. I know the process. Lived it. It killed me. Here I am writing about it. Call me Ishmael. ;)

Whew. I'm starting to see that the last ten years or so has been about figuring out that I really AM reborn, I really AM "someone else" and that the someone is actually no one at all, in the best possible way. Man, oh, man.

I don't know who the author of these books is. It's clear that "Jed McKenna" is a composite or a fictionalised character, in any event. He's a character in a story, just as we all are. I'm fine with that. That's how we understand things, with stories, with metaphors. Doesn't matter of there's a "real" person, because, point blank, there isn't. :)

Wow. I'm totally blown away by these books so far. Totally. Blown. Away. I understand the controversy now, too. The people who hate these books are the ones who just don't get it, or who don't want to get it, or who are not ready to get it. No worries, if they want to stay asleep or hit the snooze bar, it's cool. Really. There is no point. You can wake up, or not, whatever. It's not a big deal. I grok.

Just starting the third book. Not sure what to expect this time. I wonder how far away it'll blow me....

[Ouroboros]

Ah, how interesting. While reading your last update to this, I had a thought. Maybe I'm afraid of awakening because I misunderstand it. So, perhaps you can help me out here.

As I've heard it, this is how I've constructed my view of what it's like to be "awake." You have lost almost all of your ego, and only enough remains to allow you to function and interact with others. You have no true individuality, because individuality is apparently an ego-driven construct. You have no likes or dislikes, so there is little to motivate you to actually do or change anything. You have a lot of creative power, but without an ego to drive it with wants, you have no reason to use it. If wants are the realm of ego, than you have no want to experience something in particular. Unlimited creative potential with no need or reason to create.

Am I missing something here? Am I totally misinterpreting the awakened state?

Or, hehe...even better, am I wasting my time trying to figure out what it's like, so I can decide whether or not I should keep going? If so, that's fine too. I'll keep going.

I think I'm reaching a place of strength on which to stand. If I have to face the death of Fantasy, if I have to watch my deepest held wants die forever...so be it. It's time to toss the dice. I'm actually really itching to get those Jed McKenna books now, and the Adyashanti one. If it's as horrible to experience as I keep hearing...then I can use that to my advantage. It should be interesting to see how deep the suffering can go...will I be able to take it? I'll never know if I don't try. If I go mad, so be it. It's not like it matters in the grand scheme of things anyways. Whether I succeed or fail has no bearing on anything anyways, except my temporal existence. If the highest price I can pay is death and madness, well that's fine. That's a price I'm willing to pay for Truth. The only thing I'll have to watch out for using this kind of approach is not getting addicted to the pain. Who knows? Maybe if I'm prepared to be hurt, it'll make it hurt less!

I'm tired of having fears. I don't think they can hold me back anymore, spiritually. I'll pay any price for Truth.

[ButterflyWoman]

As I've heard it, this is how I've constructed my view of what it's like to be "awake." You have lost almost all of your ego, and only enough remains to allow you to function and interact with others.
I wouldn't say "lost". I mean, I did go through a period where I had almost no functioning ego, but it didn't last very long before something started to be built up again.

What I'm currently experiencing is a lessening of my attachment to my ego and all my "stuff" (thoughts, memories, ideas, opinions, etc. etc.). I still have them. I just don't think they're "me". They're only "mine" because I happen to be the point of view that sees them as being that way. I can take them or leave them, use them or not, whatever. They can be useful, or not, but they're not "me".

I do still have an ego-self. And she's a real drama queen, too. :roll: :wink:


You have no true individuality, because individuality is apparently an ego-driven construct.
Eeeuuwww. That'd be BORING! What, like some sort of automaton?


You have no likes or dislikes
People still have likes and dislikes, or at least, things toward which they gravitate and things which repel them. And the ego remains, with all of its likes and dislikes. And with some things, like food, you still have your tastebuds, you know. I can't imagine any amount of spiritual awakening that would make me like liver. *shudder*


so there is little to motivate you to actually do or change anything.
LOL! Well, I have experienced that, but the truth is, I'm not a very motivated person to begin with. Never have been. Never wanted to be anything when I grew up, and I still don't.

In my case, the "motivation" thing is complex. I have traditionally motivated myself with fear. Take that away, I have no motivation. I'm also finding that when everything is copascetic and cool, it's hard to have strong opinions about things. You know, "Do you want to go here or go there?" They both seem equally fine to me. Hard to decide.

I think (haven't entirely experienced yet) that the trick is that when you no longer use the ego-motivated stuff to get things done, you have to learn to rely on the Universe, itself, to guide you. Instead of "deciding" things, you let synchronicity and the flow of life, the universe, and everything show you what to do and how to do it. Admittedly, I'm not very good at this. Yet.


Unlimited creative potential with no need or reason to create.
As long as you exist in the Dreamstate, you will have need and reason to create. We create constantly, all the time. That doesn't stop because we stop thinking of the collection of junk that is our ego as who we are.


Am I missing something here? Am I totally misinterpreting the awakened state?
Yes, and yes. :) And it sounds to me like you're afraid of a lot of things, mostly that you're afraid that if you let go of the collection of (mostly useless) stuff that you cobbled together to create your false self, you'll turn into some sort of robot.

For what it's worth, I had that, too. I went through that a few weeks ago. I explained it to my very unmystical husband who said, "Well, I don't know what you've been reading, but that doesn't sound right."


If I have to face the death of Fantasy, if I have to watch my deepest held wants die forever...so be it.
Yes, I had to face that, too. More than once, in fact (my path has been extremely quirky). You get to the point where continuing to live a lie is more unthinkable than all the "stuff" you think you might "lose", and you let go. My direct experience is always that you don't ever lose anything you actually needed or even anything that you really wanted. Sometimes it can look that way for a while, but it sorts itself out and you find you really are better off without it, or that there was something a thousand times better just waiting for you to let go of the cobbled-together junk you kept holding on to.


If it's as horrible to experience as I keep hearing...then I can use that to my advantage.
Look, these books might scare the hell out of you. Keep going, anyway. Okay, the Adyashanti one won't scare you, but McKenna's might. Just let it scare you. Let the dissonance rattle inside your mind until something cracks open and you can see through the crack.


Maybe if I'm prepared to be hurt, it'll make it hurt less!
Biggest trick here is not to fight it. Don't struggle against it, no matter what "it" may be. Embrace the pain. It's the opposite of everything we normally think and do... which is why it works. ;)

[Ouroboros]

Am I missing something here? Am I totally misinterpreting the awakened state?
Yes, and yes. :) And it sounds to me like you're afraid of a lot of things, mostly that you're afraid that if you let go of the collection of (mostly useless) stuff that you cobbled together to create your false self, you'll turn into some sort of robot.

Well, at least I know I'm seeing it wrong. :P And yes, I am afraid of awakening being some terribly boring existence where all drive and motivation is gone, and there is only mindless observation with no creative will driving it. I'm afraid that awakening will mean an end to having fun and playing, because I can't understand the concept of having fun without an "I" to be having it with. I'll finish responding after I get home, since now my shift is up. :P

[CFTraveler]

... I just wanted to tell you as someone who has the t-shirt, that the pain or fear is short lived, because once you realize that it's all a creation, you realize you are free to create once you get to the core. And you can have fun, not because of the 'I' that may or not be there, but because you don't care if there is one.

[Ouroboros]

... I just wanted to tell you as someone who has the t-shirt, that the pain or fear is short lived, because once you realize that it's all a creation, you realize you are free to create once you get to the core. And you can have fun, not because of the 'I' that may or not be there, but because you don't care if there is one.

Well that's pretty cool. So all I gotta do is get to the core. It's funny...I think a minor shift occurred sometime last night. All I'm doing now is awaiting realization. I'm awaiting that experience that brings me to the core.

[ButterflyWoman]

I started (yet another) "awakening" thread, for what it's worth. Go see if there's anything there that tickles your fancy:

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=14579 (http://forums.astraldynamics.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=14579)

[ButterflyWoman]

Just finished the third book. It's a sort of "recap and wind down" piece. I found it to be more slowly paced than the first two books, and while I did pick up a lot of good stuff from the book (including, again, the rather comforting understanding that I've done most or all of the "hard work" already, though I did it really idiosyncratically), it didn't rock me the way the second one did. (Rather like the first Star Wars trilogy, really. The middle one was the best, most interesting, etc.)

Good trilogy of books. I expect to re-read them at some point, certainly. I'd recommend them, as well.