SYDA policy changes.
Narada 1
a whole new wave of people leaving SYDA. Especially people like Stuart, who
said went to SYDA to avoid being lonely and looking for people to chew the fat
with, and S, who said his main problem with SYDA was hearing all the Hindu
mumbo-jumbo all the time. Because, as we seen from Bongo's post about what
Gurumayi said; she doesn't like the way her Ashram has become a tourist trap,
and she made it very clear she want to reassert the original Hindu traditions
SYDA started out with. So, to get rid of people like Stuart, who wants to hang
out at SYDA just to have someone to gab with, Gurumayi says being silent will
be more of an issue at SYDA now, because how can one realize the Inner Self
when one is being distracted by insistent gabbing. Or as Stuart says,
<<I did find lots of fun people to hang out with during my 5 years at the
ashram. Every day, there was plenty of time to hang out & chew the fat with
real friendly people. Maybe this is something that most people get from living
in a college dorm (I only went to college for a year). As best I recall, it did
keep me amused & happy, & I indeed wasn't lonely.>>
Bongo also said Gurumayi forcefully said that some people will not be happy
with her policy about silence being observed here, but she is the one in
charge, it is her Ashram, and she doesn't care to have people chewing the fat
in her Ashram, because how can one achieve the goals of SYDA when they are only
paying attention to "chewing the fat?" (Using Stuarts words) I notice that
Stuart also said he did not finish college either, I can only assume he was
more interested in "chewing the fat" there too then in achieving a degree in
something. I am a little surprised Stuart isn't on a campaign against college
life since he was a failure there too. But in any case, now we understand why
Stuart is here...to chew the fat will the other losers.
We should also be seeing a lot more people who hang out at SYDA but are not
interested in Hinduism like S is too.
I am looking forward to a whole new phase of anti-SYDA BS.
If SYDA was a cult, and Gurumayi was as interested in money as the anti-SYDA
hate cult says she is, then she would love to have her Ashram be a tourist trap
so she could soak up all those tourist dollars. But she says no, that is not
what she is about. Even Gurumayi is learning from her own experiences of
running an Ashram and she trusts her experience enough to base her newest
policy changes upon them. Gurumayi now seems to be more discriminate about
those people who are really sincere with the SYDA path from those like Stuart
or S who just want to hang out there and get in the way of the sincere yogis.
Pleasant dreams,
Narada
S235108
In article <19990728165246...@ng-fm1.aol.com>, nar...@aol.com
wrote:
>If SYDA was a cult, and Gurumayi was as interested in money....
This reminds me of the song in WIZARD OF OZ, "If I only had a brain."
If the above poster only had a brain he wouldn't be writing about SY and GM,
topics which he has absolutely NO experience of. Remember folks, this bogey
never has ben involved with SY. Odd that he should be here so consistently,
isn't it?
If he only had a brain!
**********************235108*****************
“When dealing with others who are less certain,
simply having certainty gives dominance.”
(p.80 from THE GURU PAPERS )
Narada 1
<<This reminds me of the song in WIZARD OF OZ, "If I only had a brain." If the
above poster only had a brain he wouldn't be writing about SY and GM, topics
which he has absolutely NO experience of. Remember folks, this bogey never has
ben involved with SY. Odd that he should be here so consistently, isn't it? If
he only had a brain!>>
Notice how the subject is changed when the topic cannot be refuted. In case
you forgot the topic was:
I said,
<<If SYDA was a cult, and Gurumayi was as interested in money as the anti-SYDA
hate cult says she is, then she would love to have her Ashram be a tourist trap
so she could soak up all those tourist dollars. But she says no, that is not
what she is about.>>
So S was projecting when he was complaining about a lack of intelligence on my
part for no matter what S says about my person, the above will still be true.
I did not bring these policy changes to these boards, Bongo did. So, as I
pointed out before, S is short for stupid for thinking calling me names will
change the self evident facts of discussion. I only pointed out how these
policy changes would discourage the likes of S and Stuart from hanging out at
SYDA when they had no interest in what SYDA was all about. I, on the other
hand, am interested in what SYDA is all about, which is why I pointed out that
what Bongo said Gurumayi said contradicts what these people are saying about
how Gurumayi and SYDA is set up just to fleece people from their money.
Gurumayi said she dose not want SYDA to be a tourist trap, that's not what she
is about. And if you like I can get an exact quote from Bongo's post about
that.
Narada
S235108
In article <19990729162532...@ng-cc1.aol.com>, nar...@aol.com
wrote:
><<If SYDA was a cult, and Gurumayi was as interested in money as the anti-SYDA
>hate cult says she is, then she would love to have her Ashram be a tourist
>trap
>so she could soak up all those tourist dollars. But she says no, that
>is not
>what she is about.
Since when is what "she says" the truth of what she does? I've been there and
this character posting above hasn't. He's never been involved in SY or with SY
gurus.
This is a nut case just geting his jollies by hanging around with real veterans
of the SY cult. Go troll some other group, Scarecrow!
"Gee, if I only had a brain!"
Narada 1
<<Since when is what "she says" the truth of what she does? I've been there and
this character posting above hasn't. He's never been involved in SY or with SY
gurus. This is a nut case just geting his jollies by hanging around with real
veterans of the SY cult. Go troll some other group, Scarecrow! "Gee, if I only
had a brain!">>
I said, no matter what S says about my person, the above will still be true. I
did not bring these policy changes to these boards, Bongo did. And not only
has Bongo been there, he still is there and you are not S.
So, as I pointed out before, S is short for stupid for thinking calling me
names will change the self evident facts of discussion. I only pointed out how
these policy changes would discourage the likes of S and Stuart from hanging
out at SYDA when they had no interest in what SYDA was all about. I, on the
other hand, am interested in what SYDA is all about, which is why I pointed out
that what Bongo said Gurumayi said contradicts what these people are saying
about how Gurumayi and SYDA is set up just to fleece people from their money.
Gurumayi said she dose not want SYDA to be a tourist trap, that's not what she
is about. And if you like I can get an exact quote from Bongo's post about
that.
Further more, this character S has abundantly criticized SYDA for believing in
the most basic Hindu concepts, such as bliss being the nature of our inner
being, SYDA use of gurus, testing our beliefs by our experiences, in short
criticizing a Hindu organization for believing in Hinduism and says the main
reason he left was because he didn't want to hear anymore Hindu mumbo-jumbo. S
even admitted that after all the time he spent at SYDA, he still had never
witnessed any "hard facts" of abuses. Now, after S has his credibility shot to
hell from being caught lying time and again, he says he has the truth. Ha!
Plus, a "hard fact" S fails to mention, the facts of what Gurumayi said was
brought to this board by current members of SYDA. I only repeated them, you've
heard the expression of, why attack the messenger when all he did was brought
the message? Just because Gurumayi has now changed the policies to discourage
the likes of you and Stuart from hanging around SYDA is not my fault. I notice
when Bongo brought these facts up you said nothing to him about the validity of
them. So I ask, if you accepted them then, then hows come you don't accept
them now when I only repeated what Bongo said? Is it because Bongo is there
and you are not? Huh?
Narada
Bongo Zulu
> I've been there and this character posting
> above hasn't. He's never been involved in
> SY or with SY gurus. This is a nut case
> just geting his jollies by hanging around
> with real veterans of the SY cult. Go troll
> some other group, Scarecrow!
> "Gee, if I only had a brain!"
>
> **********************235108*****************
S235108,
You seem obsessed with whether Narada was or wasn't in Siddha Yoga, rather than
the thrust of his observations. One doesn't have to be a participant (or a
veteran) to have a point of view.
I have read posts of your comrades embracing people who had never set foot in
Siddha Yoga, as long as they had a negative view of it. I suppose that's ok.
Bongo
S235108
In article <19990729211139...@ng-cd1.aol.com>,
bong...@aol.comatose wrote:
>I have read posts of your comrades embracing people who had never set foot
>in
>Siddha Yoga, as long as they had a negative view of it. I suppose that's
>ok.
>
>Bongo
Would you care to be specific? Are you just blowing smoke? Exactly who are my
"comrades?" Which people, "had never set foot
>in
>Siddha Yoga, as long as they had a negative view of it?" Are you kidding? What
do you think would motivate someone to hang around here who had "never set foot
in (it)" as Narada hasn't? Why are you still sniffing around this "infidel"
territory?
S235108
In article <19990729175104...@ngol04.aol.com>, s23...@aol.com
wrote:
>Since when is what "she says" the truth of what she does? I've been there
>and
>this character posting above hasn't. He's never been involved in SY or
>with SY
>gurus.
>This is a nut case just geting his jollies by hanging around with real
>veterans
>of the SY cult. Go troll some other group, Scarecrow!
>"Gee, if I only had a brain!"
>Since when is what "she says" the truth of what she does?
>Since when is what "she says" the truth of what she does?
>Since when is what "she says" the truth of what she does?
xs10sual
>>Since when is what "she says" the truth of what she does?
>>Since when is what "she says" the truth of what she does?
YOU CAN SAY THAT AGAIN!!!! oh...you did! THANKS, S1!
Bongo Zulu
> Would you care to be specific? Are you just blowing smoke?
> Exactly who are my "comrades?" Which people, "had never
> set foot in Siddha Yoga, as long as they had a negative view of it?" > Are
you kidding? What do you think would motivate someone to
> hang around here who had "never set foot in (it)" as Narada hasn't?
> Why are you still sniffing around this "infidel" territory?
S235108,
The few names that I can remember from reading a bit of the OneList are Jan
Groenveld (sp?), Junia, and a person who followed Swami Chetananda (maybe her
name is Cmyk, I'm not certain, but you would surely know since you live there).
I'm sure there are others.
I'm not sniffing around here, I am merely pointing out your bogus groupthink.
Now that I have succeeded in irking you, you will probably launch one of your
patented insults in my direction, and your friends (Xs10sual or Andy) will
respond in agreement.
Anyone reading this will know that you and your friends are flawed in your
criticism. *You* are the ones blowing smoke because you have no arguments.
The word infidel was used in jest, but it seems to have hit a nerve with you,
such is your obsession with Gurumayi. You miss her and Siddha Yoga so much, I
mean 18 years there was a long time. Maybe you should go for a visit and see
how much it has changed now that people like the ones on the OneList have been
weeded out.
In service,
Bongo
S235108
In article <19990730181009...@ng-fc1.aol.com>,
bong...@aol.comatose wrote:
>In service,
>Bongo
"In service?" Is this what you imagine to be service? Why don't you help in the
dish room?
>such is your obsession with Gurumayi. You miss her and Siddha Yoga so >much,
I
>mean 18 years there was a long time. Maybe you should go for a visit and >see
>how much it has changed now that people like the ones on the OneList >have
been
>weeded out.
You can go on being an infant with Gurumayi as your authoritarian mother if you
wish, but I have graduated from Siddha Yoga and its limited view of life.
Inviting me back to the old cult to see how it's changed? IT HASN'T CHANGED AT
ALL. It's still a top-down hierarchy; a totalitarian dictatorship; a spiritual
nursery school.
By the way, I have no "arguments." I DO have good reason to move away from the
lies and obfuscations. You may read more about these lies and obfuscations on
the following site:
http://www.cyberpass.net/truth/
You'll find many stories written by former devotees, an eyewitness account (by
a swami) of Baba having sexual relations with a devotee ('lies' example) and
many other interesting stories which present SY in a more balanced way than you
might hear at your local center or ashram.
You might also read THE NEW YORKER magazine article. I'll forward it to you or
to anyone who e-mails me and asks for it. Perhaps it's time to reproduce it
here, for all to read (in case they missed it.)
By the way, I am also here in "service," but to what I believe to be the truth.
To someone who is not INVESTED in continuing to believe the Siddha Yoga
mythology your purpose in being here is clear: you are a SY toady; you're
trying to counteract the truth which people are realizing about SY and
Gurumayi; you're trying to control the damage that SY has done to itself by
expecting people to go on being infantilized...endlessly, without growth,
without ever being acknowledged and respected as being adults.
You only make sense to other devotees. You are like the 'pod people' in the
movie, "Invasion of the Body Snatchers." You're the bad guy to a normal
non-cult person. Did you know that? You're like the Hari Krishnas recruiting at
the airport; you're like the Moonies geting married on 34th Street. You're
pathetic! I am trying to talk sense to you. I want to help you grow up and take
responsibility for yourself and your own spiritual development. Gurumayi wants
to keep you. She is holding your soul and you let her.
She'll never let you go. You'll always be wrong. You'll always be a baby.
I like babies but I don't let them define reality for me the way you try to do.
You act like a baby; you report the goings on from GSP through your baby eyes.
I think of you and your friends here as innocent babies.
S235108
>The few names that I can remember from reading a bit of the OneList are
>Jan
>Groenveld (sp?), Junia, and a person who followed Swami Chetananda (maybe
>her
>name is Cmyk, I'm not certain, but you would surely know since you live
>there).
> I'm sure there are others.
The common bond among the above posters to the e-mail list is that these
people are cult survivors too. Are you implying that Narada is involved in some
other "Eastern" type cult, similar to Siddha Yoga?
Siddha Yoga is a cult. Gurumayi is the cult personality whom everyone in the
cult obeys. It is not a democracy, it's not even close. No one can
disagree...it's even written in the Guru Gita. The rule is: Fear the guru;
Follow the guru's command, or else! The "guru" I now follow commands from
within me, not from Malti Shetty.
By the way, Chetananda was a SY swami and is a "cousin" (to SY )cult leader.
Jan, I believe is a cult-emergence support person.
S235108
>Maybe you should go for a visit and see
>how much it has changed now that people like the ones on the OneList have
>been
>weeded out.
The Onelist: Leaving Siddha Yoga is a subscribe only e-mail list which anyone
can subscribe to. It is moderated to keep out the hard-core
cult followers of Gurumayi. They can read but they can't spread their
cult gospel on this special interest list. The "special interest" is SY cult
survival and support. If one dosen't believe there is a SY cult, why would one
want to contribute there anyway...except to "serve" one's master, Gurumayi? Let
those people go to the Dharma Cafe or any number of other
MODERATED SY interest sites where other cult followers can enjoy their common
superiority to us "ordinary" human beings.
You can find a list of PRO-CULT, PRO-Sidha Yoga sites at:
http://www.cyberpass.net/truth/
Thank you for the opportunity to state my position. For instructions on how to
subscribe to Onelist LSY, go to Onelist site and input LSY. If you have
problems geting there, e-mail me and I will post more specific instructions.
NaturalESO
why would one
want to contribute there anyway...except to "serve" one's master, Gurumayi? >>
S235108 - more of your either/or black/white thinking? There is more than your
two possibilities. Getting beyond black/white thinking is a step away from
thinking like a cult member (in your case, a member of the LSY Onelist cult).
S235108
In article <19990731151812...@ng-bj1.aol.com>, natur...@aol.com
wrote:
>S235108 - more of your either/or black/white thinking? There is more than
>your
>two possibilities. Getting beyond black/white thinking is a step away from
>thinking like a cult member (in your case, a member of the LSY Onelist
>cult).
And what is "your case?" Who do you serve by telling people to "move on?"
Say, once again...didn't you used to post as "Thsistired?" Your cult-cult-cult
line of crap is exactly the same as Thsistired's. So you don't do any "black
and white thinking," huh? Just like Siddha Yoga, if someone dosen't follow YOUR
LINE of bull then he's a "member of the LSY Onelist cult."
Stick to your web page if you're going to act like a control freak. It's clear
to anyone reading here that SY is a cult and anyone speaking against it is
labeled "cult" by you just to take the edge off the harsh reality and attempt
to confuse and obfuscate the truth.
S235108
>bong...@aol.comatose wrote:
>>such is your obsession with Gurumayi. You miss her and Siddha Yoga so
>>much,
>I
>>mean 18 years there was a long time. Maybe you should go for a visit and
>>see
>>how much it has changed now that people like the ones on the OneList >have
>been
>>weeded out.
S235108 responded:
Above from "Mr. Guru Papers."
(It's a good book. I hope all of you SY devotees read it and reflect on the
dynamic of your infantile ways and your peculiar relationship to
your authority figure, Gurumayi.)
NaturalESO
glad you asked . . . .
------------------
I found eight marks of a mind control cult by Robert J. Lifton. I was amazed
how exactly the Onelist LSY e-mail list has these marks. You can only go so far
in cyberspace, otherwise the Onelist would be even more of a total cult than it
is. Notice how each of the eight characteristics of a cult is found on the
Leaving Siddha Yoga Onelist:
1. Milieu control (Onelist is privately controled & moderated, even though
free, objective moderation of standard Netiquette, such as AOL, are available.)
2. Mystical manipulation (The Onelist is a black hole, and what it sucks in is
never supposed to come out: notice the principal members have been in this
online cult for at least six years! Anyone objecting to the Onelist, that
eventually leaves it, is labeled crazy and sick. But if you stay and play
along, you become one of the chosen few that understands the inner mysteries of
the "truth" about SY. This tactic manipulates Onelist cult members into
believing that the shortcut truth, sanity, all that is good, comes from the
healing power of the Onelist cult. They see how "bad" things happen to people
that rock the boat, and this discourages independent thinking.)
3. Demand for purity. ("Why are you here, if you don't want the Onelist's
generous offer of help?" The world is depicted by the Onelist as black and
white, polarized, over-simplified. A zero-tolerance policy for any retention of
old habits of thinking. Many taboos, enforced by gang attacks, moderation, etc.
The Onelist motto: love it or leave it.)
4. The cult of confession. (The highest ritual of the Onelist cultist is to
"tell their story". A special insider status goes to those who put their story
on the "Leaving Siddha Yoga" website. In the Onelist, there is a tendency to
derive pleasure from self-degradation through confession and perpetual
victimhood. All must confess their past before each other regularly, creating
an intense kind of ONENESS within the group. This private knowledge is used
against cult members if they start getting critical of the Onelist cult, or
decide to leave.)
5. The sacred science. (The Onelist ideology becomes the ultimate moral vision
for the ordering of human existence. The ideology is too sacred to call into
question, and a reverence is demanded for the taboos and codes, as if the rules
are so obvious that only an idiot would want them defined. Yet notice the
Onelist has never come forward to answer basic questions about their policy of
moderation even though they have been asked many times.)
6. Loading the language. (The Onelisters are past masters of using
thought-terminating cliches, expressions or words that are designed to end the
conversation or controversy. "We are all familiar with the use of the cliches
"capitalist" and "imperialist" as used by antiwar demonstrators in the 60's.
Such cliches are easily memorized and readily expressed. They are called the
language of non-thought, since the discussion is terminated, not allowing
further consideration." The favorite cliches of the Onelisters are smear
slogans. Their favorites are to call someone a "defender of a child molester",
a "sevite sent from the ashram", or "Baskar". This last one is so inbred that
only Onelisters know what it means, which shows you how far from reality they
have gotten.)
7. Doctrine over person. (This is the essence of the Onelist. Human experience
is subordinated to Onelist doctrine, no matter how profound or contradictory
such experiences seem. We all had different experiences in SY, and many of us
stayed for years because of them. Not every memory we had could possibly be
false. But the Onelist demands that personal histories are altered to fit their
doctrinal logic. The Onelist member is only valuable insomuch as they conform
and cater to the role models of the cult. If you are faithful to the cult, you
can count on their emotional support. But if you take an independent stance,
you will be either humiliated into conformity or discarded. Common-sense
perceptions are disregarded if they are hostile to the Onelist cult's
ideology.)
8. Dispensing of existence. (The Onelist cult decides who has the right to
exist and who does not. Tekgal is a clear example of someone they decided
"should not exist". The principal members decide what is accurate and what is
biased. People can be cut off and outsiders can be dismissed, for they are not
"fit to exist.")
Bongo Zulu
> "In service?" Is this what you imagine to be service?
> Why don't you help in the dish room?
Dear Mr. Guru Papers (S235108),
Thank you for the sarcasm. You don't seem to have any oroginal thoughts, but
drift between insulting posters who you don't agree with and quoting the Guru
Papers.
Can you define, IN YOUR OWN WORDS, what constitutes a cult. So far you have
only quoted others. Do you have any thoughts of your own. I mean for eighteen
years you followed the Guru Gita, and for a few years now you have been
following the Guru Papers. I'd like to read the S235108 Papers for a change.
> You can go on being an infant with Gurumayi as your
> authoritarian mother if you wish, but I have graduated
> from Siddha Yoga and its limited view of life. Inviting
> me back to the old cult to see how it's changed?
> IT HASN'T CHANGED AT ALL. (clip - boring, repititious drivel)
You don't know me at all. See how quickly you reach conclusions about someone.
You are indulging in Cult Groupthink, a typical OneList mode of thinking.
> By the way, I am also here in "service," but to what I believe to be the
truth. (clip - boring, repititious drivel)
Yes, what you "believe" being the operative word. Why don't you let others
beileve what they want to, instead of forcefeeding them with your sour grapes,
loser, dogma. Maybe your agenda wasn't fulfilled by your stay in Siddha Yoga,
so now you must vindicate yourself, give meaning to your wasted years, by
trying to derail other people's Sadhana. Try doing positive things instead,
you will be surprised how well your life will become. I wish you well. Please
send more negativities my way, you still need to get rid of a lot more. I will
gladly absorb it all.
> You only make sense to other devotees. You are like the 'pod
> people' in the movie, "Invasion of the Body Snatchers."
> (clip - more insults)
> You're pathetic!
S235108, I think you have lost any powers of reasoning, so you indulge in
belittling people. What's the matter, have you run out of quotes from the Guru
Papers?
> **********************235108*****************
> “When dealing with others who are less certain,
> simply having certainty gives dominance.”
> (p.80 from THE GURU PAPERS )
As I stated before, do you have any original thoughts of your own, or do you
feel important by quoting other people's writings? (Besides, if you apply the
logic of this quote, all your nonsense begins to make sense, because all you
have is a pushy sense of certainty.)
In service,
Bongo
Bongo Zulu
> The common bond among the above posters to the e-mail
> list is that these people are cult survivors too. Are you
> implying that Narada is involved in some other "Eastern"
> type cult, similar to Siddha Yoga? (clip - rubbish)
Dear Mr. Guru Papers (S235108),
Now you sound like the loser you really are. Don't you see your error? With
Narada you were adamant that the sole criterion for posting here was that one
had to have been in Siddha Yoga, but when confronted with the truth you
suddenly change the rules to fit your game. A truly honorable approach to
life. No wonder they threw you out of Siddha Yoga.
Narada has every right to post his wisdom here. If truth is written, does it
matter which vessel delivers it? Are you the self-appointed gate-keeper here?
In service,
Bongo
Bongo Zulu
> The Onelist: Leaving Siddha Yoga is a subscribe only
> e-mail list which anyone can subscribe to. It is
> moderated to keep out the hard-core cult followers
> of Gurumayi. (clip - ramblings of a madman)
Who is the guru of the OneList cult who makes such decisions for the well-being
of humanity?
Bongo
S235108
In article <19990801173503...@ng-cs1.aol.com>,
bong...@aol.comatose wrote:
>Who is the guru of the OneList cult who makes such decisions for the
well-being
>of humanity?
Who made Gurumayi a "saint?" Who appointed you "infidel" watcher?
S235108
In article <19990801173101...@ng-cs1.aol.com>,
bong...@aol.comatose wrote:
>Are you the self-appointed gate-keeper here?
What's it to you, cult creature!
S235108
In article <19990801172629...@ng-cs1.aol.com>,
bong...@aol.comatose wrote:
>Dear Mr. Guru Papers (S235108),
Yes Vik, It's Mr. Guru Papers! How did you guess? Have you read the book?
Don't tell your master. She wouldn't like it. Remember how they sent people out
to to the Sullivan County library to tear pages out of THE NEW YORKER article
about SY, Gurumayi and George Afif? Remember how they bought up all of the
copies of that issue for miles around the ashram?
Careful, they'll have to buy up all of the Guru Papers books.
Try reading the book and you'll discover why it's OK to be called, "Mr. Guru
Papers." Funny how a cult Zombie, a self-appointed, crazy, boot-licking, big
toe- kissing guru-groupie like you would acuse someone of not being original!
Try defining God for yourself instead of joining the SY Corporation.
By the way, please don't try to kiss my big toe.
Anyone interested in reading some quotes from GURU PAPERS, I'll reproduce them
here.
S235108
In article <19990801074724...@ng-bj1.aol.com>, natur...@aol.com
wrote:
> People can be cut off and outsiders can be dismissed, for they are not
>"fit to exist.")
Gee, how can one do that? You mean I can push a button and you'll cease "to
exist?" That's pretty scary. How do those bad people do that? I hope SY doesn't
hear about this: they might stop letting me post on their site!
S235108
>Dear Mr. Guru Papers (S235108),
The quotes below are dedicated to bong...@aol.comatose:
QUOTES FROM THE BOOK: THE GURU PAPERS: Masks of Authoritarian Power
by Kramer & Alstad 1993 Frog LTD (385 pages) P.1 of 4
“Are gurus...filling deep needs and thus inadvertently pointing to trouble
spots and lacks in the fabric of our culture, as well as revealing the depth of
our conditioning to want authorities and mistrust ourselves?”(p.32)
“...Behind much of the appeal of such authorities lies the primitive and
essentially childish hope of an external and magical answer to the existential
problems and fears around living and dying. The guru/disciple relationship is a
formal structure of extreme authoritarianism. It thus offers a quintessential
exemplar of control and surrender, displaying mechanical processes that
reinforce predilections toward submission.”(p.32)
“THE GURU PAPERS critiques the guru/disciple liaison because it is a clear-cut
example of the old, no longer appropriate paradigm of spiritual authority. It
is not that we doubt that some who are considered gurus have deeper insights
than their followers. Yet even with the best intentions, assuming the role of
spiritual authority for others sets in motion a system of interaction that is
mechanical, predictable, and contains the essence of corruption. Another
purpose of this book is to show that corruption is not simply the failure or
weakness of a specific individual, but is structurally built into any
authoritarian relationship, and less obviously, any renunciate morality.”(p.35)
“...Asserting that one human being fundamentally knows what’s best for another
is authoritarian. If this is accepted, it sets up a chain of inevitable
relational patterns that are detrimental to all players of the game.”(p.36)
“Many recent scandals have shown that those who have wielded such power
routinely abuse it. It is often assumed that this is because somehow the wrong
person was given more credibility than deserved. We wish to demonstrate that
the corruption of so-called spiritual power does not simply occur because the
wrong person is in power. Rather, this occurs whenever a role or structure
bestows power through images of infallibility or moral superiority. The fault
then does not lie in a given leader’s shortcomings, but rather in the structure
itself, through defining one person as more pure and spiritual, and thus
superior to others.”(p.43)
“Now through media images, leaders of all sorts can charismatically control far
more people than ever before, without having any personal connection with
them”(p.43)
“The need to appear right when presenting oneself as a spiritual knower is
greater than in any other arena because knowing is what makes one essentially
different from seekers. Admitting any fallibility not only removes one from
that exalted place, but makes it difficult to compete with other presumed
knowers who do claim infallibility.”(p.47)
QUOTES FROM THE BOOK: THE GURU PAPERS: Masks of Authoritarian Power
by Kramer & Alstad 1993 Frog LTD (385 pages) P.2 of 4
“The ostensible reason for fostering surrender is it detaches followers from
certain deep conditionings presumed to be obstacles on the spiritual path. But
it does not detach them from one of the most insidious and powerful
conditionings of all- the predilection to look for an authority that one can
trust more than oneself.” (p.50)
“A number of gurus have made statements to the effect that disobedience or
disrespect
of the guru has...severe negative spiritual consequences...One even said that
such disrespect can bring thousands of lifetimes of pain and suffering.
Whatever else is involved, it should be obvious that fear and threats are being
used here for control.”(p.67)
“When magic lies at the base of authority, no matter how elevated the people
appear, they are engaged in perhaps the oldest ploy of authoritarian mind
control.” (p.68)
“To maintain mental control it is necessary to undermine self-trust. This is
insidiously done by removing the ways people can build trust in
themselves.”(p.73)
“The guru can reverse any challenge or criticism by saying, ‘It’s your problem;
your ego is getting in the way.’ He, of course has no ego.”(p.74)
“Cults need a continuous stream of recruits and potential converts to reinforce
the belief that they’re “where it’s at”- the vanguard of spirituality on the
planet.”(78)
“What most proselytizing groups face is how to sell their beliefs without
appearing to do so. Recruiting is therefore always done in the name of helping
or doing some kind of good....to care about others is to get them to
join.”(p.79)
“When dealing with others who are less certain, simply having certainty gives
dominance.” (p.80)
“When the popularity and power of the group plateaus and then begins to
wane...the apocalyptic phase enters and the party is over...”(p.80)
“The attitude of benign superiority toward outsiders characteristic of the
expansionistic phase dramatically shifts when the group turns apocalyptic. It
is the outsiders who will receive the brunt of whatever cataclysm the guru
claims will come.” (p.81)
“The glorification of work always involves improving the leader’s property (
the commune or ashram), increasing his wealth, or some grandiose
project.”(p.82)
“The potential for violence and abuse in an authoritarian cult is always there,
not only because whatever the leader says goes, but also because outsiders are
made into “the Other,” which has always been used to justify violence.”(p.83)
QUOTES FROM THE BOOK: THE GURU PAPERS: Masks of Authoritarian Power
by Kramer & Alstad 1993 Frog LTD (385 pages) P.3 of 4
“Both gurus and disciples use hierarchical relationships for power. Everyone on
the hierarchy gets their feelings of power and specialness from where they are
positioned.” (p.85)
“authoritarian hierarchies are propped up with an authoritarian worldview and
morality. No matter their stated rationale, their main purpose always becomes
self-perpetuation,
which inevitably corrupts them.” (p.86)
“People are especially vulnerable to charismatic leaders during times of crisis
or major life change. Most often those who enter into this kind of
authoritarian group are having problems bringing meaning, human connection, and
good feelings into their lives, all of which become instantly available upon
joining.”(p.87)
“...proselytizing and advertising are cut from the same cloth. The enormous
attention given to appearance leads to a concern for packaging rather than
what’s inside the package.”(p.88)
“Gurus do give special attention to those with wealth or power; having
celebrities in one’s entourage increases coffers, influence, and
membership.”(p.89)
“In the realm of sexuality, the two prevalent ways control is exerted are
through promulgating either celibacy or promiscuity...both serve the same
function: they minimize the possibilities of people bonding deeply with each
other, thus reducing factors that compete with the guru for attention.” (p.92)
“Celibacy does allow one to maintain a certain kind of control of one’s energy
and emotions. It also conforms with images of purity. Therefore, it is far
easier for a guru to gain and maintain power if he is celibate - or pretends to
be.”(p.92)
“Gurus who preach celibacy while secretly engaging in sexuality present sex as
an esoteric initiation ritual or advanced spiritual exercise that must be kept
hidden...
But it is the lie, not the sex, that’s the real issue. The lie indicates the
guru’s entire persona is a lie, that his image as selfless and beyond ego is a
core deception.”(p.95)
“The standards of purity necessary for the role of guru must bring unconscious
repression and filtering mechanisms that ensure deceit and hypocrisy around
self-interest,”(p.106)
Being a guru “...creates a feedback-proof system where the guru always needs
to be right and cannot be shown to be wrong - which is where learning comes
from.” (p.107)
QUOTES FROM THE BOOK: THE GURU PAPERS: Masks of Authoritarian Power
by Kramer & Alstad 1993 Frog LTD (385 pages)
P.4 of 4
“Why would even the most realized of beings want people to become reliant on
his wisdom instead of their own?” (p.108)
“The myriad scandals around sex, money, and power that have tainted so many
gurus are not surprising, given the structural corruptibility of the role.”
(p.113)
The...”guru role makes it extremely difficult to escape the traps of power -
the ultimate trap being in the end, gurus lose their humanity.” (p.114)
Quotes from the chapter, “Healing Crippled Self-Trust”
“...The ex-disciple’s world has turned on its head: What the guru and group
presented as unconditional love was conditional upon accepting their authority;
the egoless guru was found to be on a manipulative, even crass, power trip. For
people who surrendered totally to a guru and thus experienced passion more
deeply than ever before, seeing “The emperor wears no clothes” can be
devastating. So it’s no wonder people have tremendous resistance to anything
that causes them to doubt the veracity of the authority.” (p.152)
“The most extreme form of mental control occurs when the authority is trusted
completely and becomes the center of one’s identity. Sadly, society and parents
insidiously put out messages from childhood on that others know what’s best.
Many people are deeply conditioned to expect and hope some outside agency,
power or person will solve their problems. Letting go of expectations or even
wanting this is difficult, partially because what one is left with is oneself
and all of one’s limitations.”(p.154)
“True healing can be accelerated by understanding the deep mechanisms of what
happened, and of authoritarian dynamics in general. Then people can be more
confident they won’t be taken in again.”(p.154)
Andy Comanda
referring to Vickram Patel
>...cult Zombie, a self-appointed, crazy, boot-licking, big
> toe- kissing guru-groupie
I would add to that, sweat, bathwater and urine lapping dog.
Stuart Resnick
> For instructions on how to
> subscribe to Onelist LSY, go to Onelist site and input LSY. If you have
> problems geting there, e-mail me and I will post more specific instructions.
Or see http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/8331/lsymain.html
Stuart
sres...@slip.net
http://www.slip.net/~sresnick/mypage.shtml
NaturalESO
By trying to twist his words around (without realizing they were his words) you
are just showing that you have no objectivity. You thought they were my words,
and that colored your judgment.
<<In article <19990801074724...@ng-bj1.aol.com>, natur...@aol.com
wrote:
> People can be cut off and outsiders can be dismissed, for they are not
>"fit to exist.")
Gee, how can one do that? You mean I can push a button and you'll cease "to
exist?" That's pretty scary. How do those bad people do that? I hope SY doesn't
hear about this: they might stop letting me post on their site!
**********************235108*****************
=
Jane Weaver
I'm a newbie, trying to distinguish between brain-washing and addiction.
I'm wondering if most people who *need* to "recover" from anything are those
with addictive personalities (or more open to brain-washing themselves when
exposed to practices)? My aunt was a religious fanatic (fundamental
Baptist), and her whole life was the church. I would say she demonstrated
addictive behavior. I have a friend who joined a Baptist church, and when
her minister told her to separate from all non-believers, she ended our
friendship in order to comply. She also jumped into Wicca as a teenager
with the same fervor (now Wicca is a "cult," while her new church is God's
true church).
It seems like some people can come, stay a long time, and leave religious
movements as a result of perceived changes in their spiritual needs, while
others seem to feel they've escaped something that they now have to warn
others about (I've met self-proclaimed "recovering" Catholics and Baptists,
too). I suspect that they may have had a similar experience in any group of
believers on a particular path.
I find it especially interesting since my family has a history of addiction,
and when they accept something, they seem to then defend it violently, and
when they reject something, they do it just as violently. I notice that
they also refer to any group they disagree with a "cult," rather than using
the dictionary definition of the term (which puts most, but not all,
religions that I'm aware of in that category).
I'm curious as to what people here think, since Baba's teachings certainly
strike me as being very useful in one's spiritual growth (but I've only read
and seen videotapes of his work).
Thanks!
--Jane
NaturalESO <natur...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19990731151812...@ng-bj1.aol.com...
> From: s23...@aol.com (S235108) <<If one dosen't believe there is a SY
cult,
> why would one
> want to contribute there anyway...except to "serve" one's master,
Gurumayi? >>
> ---------
WokDok
yoga with a set of needs, and some of them were met and some of them weren't.
And at the same time I became aware that siddha yoga wasn't just a little less
perfect than I had hoped, but a lot less! The awareness that it wasn't filling
my needs along with the realization that it wasn't that great a place to be
involved with came about at the same time. So I ended up getting less involved
with siddha yoga, but I didn't do any radical about-face. I still remained the
same person and just found other things that continued my self improvement. I
don't have any problem saying that siddha yoga helped me improve in some ways.
In other ways it stunted my development. But there really isn't anything I
would want to warn someone else about because the manner in which it helped or
hurt me was really specific to the kind of person I am, and a result of the
personal reasons I got into it. I never saw any big crimes so I don't have
anything to alarm people with, anyway.
You are right, there are certain kinds of people who just get totally into
something and when they aren't into it they turn around and hate it completely
and everything turns into an all or nothing situation. It's more what you are
going to see at the extremes. I don't think everyone has to go through life
making these 180 degree turns over and over again. I cannot handle a lot of
violent living and swinging back and forth is not what works for me, so when I
enter in something I am not going to be going in it all the way and getting rid
of everything else to begin with, so if I decide to leave it later on I am not
going to have the violent need to reject it and go around warning everyone
about it.
You mention that people like to do this whole thing of calling anything you
don't like a cult. That reminds me of how the news is these days. If someone
has an affair, the news people are going to exaggerate everything and make
everything as bad and sensational as possible just to get attention. When
people get really outrageous it is probably just a good way to get attention
and turn whatever is being talked about into an emergency. Attention-getting
helps boost the news ratings, but you start to wonder where reality is. The
whole world is not serial killers and guests on Jerry Springer, but if you
believe all the media hype you are going to think so. Maybe siddha yoga would
be an emergency if everything else in the world was perfect, but there are so
many things wrong that we have a milliion emergencies happening at once, and so
I don't think that everyone is going to drop everything and look at siddha yoga
as a terrible thing that is going to wreck the world.
I was watching the tv the other day and they were saying there was something
like over ten thousand religious groups in America that are bad problems, and
what are we going to do about them. That was on Pat Robertson Christian tv, and
you may like him, but my impression of him is that he is one of these fanatics
that wants to make everything exaggerated. If you want to call everything a
cult, then it is going to be easy to find ten thousand cults and make
everything sound worse and worse. Anyway, I guess if people just keep their
wits about them, that probably will do a lot more good than all of us trying to
scare each other.
If I got food poisoning from McDonald's, I probably would go around and tell
everyone I got food poisoning from it, and I guess I would go through an
extreme period and then look like one of these people. But after a while it
balances out and I wouldn't be so caught up in worrying about McDonald's, and I
might even go there to eat again after a while. Bad experiences are out there
and are just part of life, and sometimes it is just our own tendency that gets
us sucked into things that are going to hurt us really badly, even when it
doesn't hurt someone else as much. I've got to spend energy to look at what my
tendency is that sucks me into the bad situations. In the end, warning people
is one thing, but what made all the difference for me was looking at my own
tendencies and needs. You really hit the nail on the head. All the different
opinions people have about siddha yoga have a place because they probably fit
the needs of each person when they got involved with it.
Jane Weaver
WokDok <wok...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19990906142537...@ng-fi1.aol.com...
<snip -- discussion of SY>
Thanks for your thoughtful reply. I suspect that a lot of people get a
great deal of value from SY. I certainly think there is a lot of wisdom to
be found in the teachings. I suspect that many of those who have since
turned against it derived some value from it at one point, or they wouldn't
have put so much of themselves into it.
--Jane
RandomStu
>I'm a newbie, trying to distinguish between brain-washing
and
>addiction. I'm wondering if most people who *need* to
"recover" from
>anything are those with addictive personalities (or more
open to
>brain-washing themselves when exposed to practices)?
Hi, Jane. "Brain-washing" & "addiction" are both pretty
fuzzy concepts,
so I don't use those words much. I think that everyone has
suffering in
life, & everyone looks for *some* way to deal with it,
whether it's
religion, alcohol, work, romance, etc, etc. I wouldn't be so
surprised
if, for instance, there were some type of correlation
between the
tendency of someone to go overboard with drug use at some
point in life,
& later to go overboard with a group like SYDA.
>It seems like some people can come, stay a long time, and
leave
>religious movements as a result of perceived changes in
their spiritual
>needs, while others seem to feel they've escaped something
that they
>now have to warn others about (I've met self-proclaimed
"recovering"
>Catholics and Baptists, too). I suspect that they may have
had a
>similar experience in any group of believers on a
particular path.
When I entered Siddha Yoga, I was told that to really get
something out
of meditation, I needed to follow the Guru. But in the years
since then,
I've learned through experience that there's no problem at
all
practicing meditation *without* following a Guru, or
believing in any
religous speculation, or looking for magic. I think that
I've learned
something, & I feel fine about telling other people about my
SYDA
experience in case it might help them make their own
decisions. If other
people still want to surrender their lives to Gurumayi or
some other
supposedly higher being, that's their choice, no problem.
But I don't
see how it can *hurt* for me to present my view that
following such a
person is a bad idea.
>I'm curious as to what people here think, since Baba's
teachings
>certainly strike me as being very useful in one's spiritual
growth (but
>I've only read and seen videotapes of his work).
I don't see how you can talk about "Baba's teachings." I
mean, he said
so many different things: some helpful, some bullshit. Sure,
it's useful
to learn meditation, & Baba (along with 1,000s of other
teachers) helped
motivate some people to try it. He also presented himself as
a perfect
being, which I don't see as useful to anyone.
Stuart
sres...@slip.net
http://www.slip.net/~sresnick/mypage.shtml
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
sres...@slip.net
Stuart
sres...@slip.net
http://www.slip.net/~sresnick/mypage.shtml
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.