--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Although I am sure this will be hard to relate to for some... > > I got a lot of peace from the article in the Skeptical Inquirer > in 89 or 90 that compared these personality traits [Narcissistic > Personality Disorder] with popular gurus.
I think it's a valid way to see many of the teachers in today's spiritual world, and possibly in the whole history of spirituality. It's not the most *flattering* way to see them, and so of course the True Believers are going to react to the non-flattering-ness of it and not be able to see how *accurate* the description of NPD is when applied to most spiritual teachers. But I think it's a *very* valuable way of looking at things. > I know this seemed horrible to people who may view him as a "real" > messiah... For what it's worth, Curtis, I see all "real" Messiahs as suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder as well. The fact that they became more famous than other people who suffered from the same fantasies doesn't mean that they're not fantasies. > ...but for me it gave me some insight for compassion for > Maharishi. It helped me understand how he operated the way he did, > and even the odd feeling he would give off when I interacted with > him. It explained how he could use and discard people as he unfolded > his "mission." I don't see this as a putdown. It is an alternate > explanation to the idea that he proposed that he was the most > important human in history. And a far more realistic one. :-) The reaction of most of the world to news of the death of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi is, "Who?" > Why would someone believe such a thing > about themselves? I think we're seeing it here on this group. There are quite a few people here whose way of reacting to grief at the loss of their teacher is to GET INTO ARGUMENTS. Why? So they can declare themselves "right" about something, and try to assert themselves as "more right" than someone else, and get other people to focus on them. It's how they have consistently reacted for years here. What I'm suggesting is that this tendency was learned from their teacher, Maharishi. Everything always came down to *him* as the ultimate authority, *him* as the person who "knows the truth." How could a bunch of students, having seen this in their teacher for over 40 years, not pick up on the trait themselves? > Either he was or he was not, but it requires an > explanation. At least it did for me. For me as well. > So for me he remains a fascinating guy with > or without this disorder. As, for me, does Rama, Dr. Frederick Lenz, another spiritual teacher whom I would class as being a *classic* example of Narcissistic Personality Disorder. The whole role of the "guru" as proposed by many if not most spiritual traditions, IMO, has been a process of putting Narcissistic Personality Disorder up on a pedestal and glorifying it, as if it were a good thing. > One piece of evidence I submit that perhaps he was > mislead about the power of his teaching are the > closest people to him that he left behind, presumably > his most advanced pupils. Indeed. There is not a single person among them who is going to be remembered by history in five years, much less 100. > I think we have a pretty good idea that his optimism > about his programs exceeded his results. > > Or is that just me being negative on King Tony and Bevan? I don't think so. Of course, that could just be *me* being negative. :-) I've been around the spiritual smorgasbord a bit, and have looked at and interacted with a LOT of different spiritual trips. I would have to say that the *primary* characteristic of a TMer (as opposed to seekers in other traditions) is that tendency to believe and announce, "We know the truth and no one else does." This is a trait you do NOT find in other trad- itions as much as you find it in members of the TMO. And I think it's related to Narcissistic Personality Disorder. *That* set of personality traits describes very accurately how Maharishi related to the world and to his students for forty years. *That* set of personality traits describes how many of the students themselves have come to act. *That* set of traits is IMO the "legacy" of the TMO, almost more than the TM technique. Just my opinion...
