[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Turq, You must be very lonely. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: Now why would anyone want to leave after such a warm welcome. Your effect is working, Turquoise I was attempting open, civil discourse and you showed yourself with one post. As did you. ONE person pokes a little fun at you for being pompous, and you scream for the moderators. Good start, dude.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
The insult was in the contemptuous, mocking tone. Read it and you'll see. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, it must have been a sacrifice to leave the silence of the Himalayas to end up being insulted by people like you. Yeah, Maharishi was a big fan of feedback from his teachers. In fact he was quite an avid contributor to FFL before his death. Always one to read the dissenting opinion that Maharishi... So let me get this straight. My grave insult was to question that Maharishi preferred shitting outside (which I did in North India myself and saw my breath as I did so, and I was way South of the mountains in Delhi) to dropping a duce in a golden toilet INSIDE. And the insult is to question that his life was a sacrifice. becoming a rock star jet-setting guru who could hang out with anyone from any field for his 15 minutes of fame that he glommed off of the Beatles? That he would have preferred to sit on a rock and dig how cosmic he was without the legions of blond chicks who worshiped him as a God? You've got your insult meter set setting on Victorian Woman. You might want to loosen that up a tad. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: It was a sacrifice of life to leave the Himalayas. But necessary to bring about this new, golden age for mankind. - Maharishi, Boppard, Germany, 1982 Funny how religious dudes speak about their sacrifices while amassing huge wealth. It is part of their story. And we are supposed to believe that he preferred living without indoor plumbing to the golden throne? Or that he, unlike any of the rest of us, didn't gain more meaning in his life by going out, meeting people and laying his rap on them. He was so fulfilled sitting on his butt in the mountains that he didn't gain more joy for his life by becoming a teacher? Or that his nature completely changed after 13 years of running around for Guru Dev, and he would be perfectly happy sitting on a rock in the mountains? He loved creating his own myths didn't he? Here is my take: The guy was always a very active guy. He fell into a 2 year depression funk after his life partner died, and after feeling better went back to being a super active guy building his own empire and delighting in micromanaging every detail. He had as much chance of sitting on his butt in the mountains as The Donald. Well, it must have been a sacrifice to leave the silence of the Himalayas to end up being insulted by people like you.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Turq, I posted in response to you invitation Re: What would FFL be without its most strident voices? In that post you wrote Now's your chance, you lurkers. Go for it. If there are subjects you've always wanted to introcuces but were afraid to because you knew they'd be turned into arguements within two replies, now's your opportunity to give vioce or sound of keyboard clicking) to them... So what's out there to discuss without someone trying their best to turn the discussion into arguements? You then proceeded to jump on POST #1. I was communicating, and you contentious. This post of yours dares to analyze my motivations - WHICH YOU COULD NEVER UNDERSTAND IN YOUR LIFETIME. Stop lying your bear traps in hopes of finding a keyboard fight. You need validation of your nonsensical life. Stay lost, but don't even think that I would join you, loser. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: Turquoise the reason that I asked that you not send posts to my mame is because I find you to be angry, sad and lacking social behavior. Be alone for a while, it will be better. Learn a little honesty, dude. The reason you asked me not to send you posts (an impossibility unless you explicitly block them, which is your right), is that I got in your face and called you on your authoritarian bullshit. You seem to have expected people to react to old retreads of Maharishi-isms as if they were wise. Many of us got over that a long, long time ago. What we react to well is someone having synthesized their experience well enough to describe it in new (read not boring and condescending) ways, and as what it is -- *their* experience, not a template for anyone else's. I can tell that you really believe that what you said above was said for my own good. What I'm telling you is similarly for your own good. Wake up a bit and look around and actually *see* who you are inter- facing with on this forum and you might become a valuable member of it. Continue to treat us as TM students you can brush away with a prepared answer and we'll continue to laugh at you. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: John, I received this post Dan, you're aware that Knapp is a long-time, ferocious critic of TM, right? I seriously doubt he has any intention of trying to reform the TMO. What he's looking for is material he can use to make the TMO look as bad as possible (and not incidentally bolster his counseling business). Some of us have known him electronically for many years and don't trust him any further than we could throw him, if he came within reach. Someone's not being honerable here, so I think I'd better be protective of Janet. She's a friend of 40 years, and more open-hearted than most. When you get your posting limit restored, please do not reply. And, with all due respect, go fuck yourself and the dog you rode in on. If you're going to panic and call for Daddy or the moderators to come and save you from big, bad, sarcastic Sal poking fun at you for being clueless, and then believe the first slander you read from the first person who posts it, puhleeeze go back to lurkdom. This is a forum for those who want to speak their minds about TM, the TM movement, Maha- rishi, and other forms of trashy fiction. We LIKE being able to speak our minds, especially after being not able to within the TM movement for decades. What we DON'T like as much is for some clue- less newb to come roaring in posting trite Maharishisez cliches that everyone here knows by heart and that most of us rejected decades ago and then getting pissy because someone pokes a little fun at him for acting like a dweeb. Judy will tell you I am less than honorable, too. Stick around long enough, and she'll say it about you as well. It's just what she DOES. But if it helps to get you off your dweeb soapbox and speed your silly ass either back to lurkdom or to some more balanced type of dialogue, I'm not honorable, either, so you probably won't want me to reply, either. For the record, I also eat small children and have been known to piss on self- righteous dweebs in public. Be warned, and wear your waders.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Turq, Your small-minded parochial attitudes are evident with every word that you type. Can you control yourself? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John M. Knapp, LMSW jmknapp53@ wrote: Of course not. But I have no interest in the politics of destruction. I am interested in reform in the TM Movement. Which is the topic I posted on. Can you tell me why you're not interested in discussing TM Reform? You've posted numerous times you have things you take the Movement to task for. Could you turn that around to a positive agenda? What would you like to see the TM Movement do? We have it in our power to create a better, more positive, more spiritual organization -- if we so choose. With all due respect -- and unlike Judy I *do* respect what you're trying to do -- I think you are naive if you believe that we (outsiders) can ever positively affect the TM movement. I also believe that they (the insiders) cannot stop the juggernaut that out-of-control hubris has created. Weren't you *paying attention* during all those years on a.m.t. and later at FFL? To convince someone that they should change, they have to first become convinced that they *should* change, that there is something (anything) off-kilter with the way that they're doing things now. I am not convinced that the powers that be in the TM movement can possibly be so convinced. Their whole *lives* have been structured in ignoring what the outside world thinks of them. They have all done things that were questionable, and many of them have done things that were patently illegal, for no better reason than that their spiritual teacher told them to. That spiritual teacher was unwavering up to his death as to what they should do in his absence. Do you think that can be *changed*? I, for one, do not. It would take the imposition of some outside force to shake people whose beliefs are that strong and cause them to change their current path and take another. That said, one of the only things I can think of that could sufficiently *apply* such an outside force is bankruptcy. And I see that as a strong possibility. I think it's only a matter of time until those who were *nominally* left in charge of the TM movement discover that they cannot find the money. They'll search -- quietly, without tell- ing anyone that they are searching frantically -- and they won't find a trace of it anywhere. It will have disappeared into a black hole in India. No one will take the fall for this, or be blamed for extorting the money, because the powers that be will still be in the mindset of protecting our own, and protecting the image of the movement. And so it's likely IMO that within a decade, the Rajas will find themselves at the helm of a move- ment that does not have the capital to continue moving. *At that point*, and in my opinion not before, they might be open to changing a few things. But I don't see it happening before then. The points you proposed, John, make sense to some- one who CARES what the rank and file thinks of them. My assessment of the Rajas and the Bevans (there *has* to be more than one of him inside that blubberous carcass :-)) is that they barely con- sider the rank and file of the TM movement *human*, much less people they have to look good for. They Just Don't Care. They are RIGHT, and they know that they're RIGHT, and that's that. Isn't that a more interesting thing to consider than discrediting all the people here you don't agree with? Judy has no CHOICE but to attempt to discredit the people here she doesn't agree with, John. She can't come up with any arguments to make her POV look sane or rational; therefore she HAS to attempt to make those who don't buy it look insane and irrational. She won't ever address the suggestions you brought up because to do so she would have to admit that they might be *needed*. And while she may claim that she is not a TB, it's simply not true. So she does on a daily basis what TBs do -- she clings to beliefs that she is afraid to challenge, and she demonizes those who do challenge them. It's like Time itself, one of those forces of nature you can count on. Time is not gonna stop ticking anytime soon. And IMO it *will* stop ticking before Judy admits in public that the belief system she sold out to decades ago is flawed and badly in need of repair. She cannot bring herself to do this. As far as I can tell, it's some kind of twisted sense of honor for her. In my opinion, of course, which could be wrong. Those are nine words that you will probably never see at the end of a Judy Stein post. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Turq, I posted in response to you invitation Re: What would FFL be without its most strident voices? In that post you wrote Now's your chance, you lurkers. Go for it. If there are subjects you've always wanted to introcuces but were afraid to because you knew they'd be turned into arguements within two replies, now's your opportunity to give vioce or sound of keyboard clicking) to them... So what's out there to discuss without someone trying their best to turn the discussion into arguements? You then proceeded to jump on POST #1. I was communicating, and you contentious. Not true. I found your first post merely boring and a parroting of old TM dogma, and thus not deserving of a response. I did not reply to you until several posts later, after Sal had responded satirically to your pompous boringness and YOU had reacted to that by trying to start a crusade to moderate Fairfield Life. This post of yours dares to analyze my motivations - WHICH YOU COULD NEVER UNDERSTAND IN YOUR LIFETIME. Despite the normally-arrogant (for a TMer) way you chose to phrase the above sentence, I don't think that your motivations were terribly difficult to understand at all. You posted something that you thought people would respond to as if it was as wise as you felt it to be. Instead of that happening, ONE (count them, one) person responded with humor and sarcasm to the pompousness of your post. YOU then went a little crazy trying to turn FFL into a moderated forum where people like yourself could post without fear of being made fun of. I *still* hadn't posted, until you started to get insistent and a little abusive in your call for fascist admin- istration of FFL to make it over in your own image. You didn't get the subtle hints that people were giving you, so I figured it was time someone stopped trying to be subtle and told you the truth. So THEN I lit into your ass. I do not regret it. It seems to have brought out who you really are in these followup posts. That is, an arrogant little prick who considers anyone who doesn't agree with him and who doesn't find the things he says wise to be so far beneath him evolutionally that he believes that they could not possibly understand his motivations in their lifetime. Welcome to Fairfield Life, Dan. You'll fit right in here. There are a number of others who have a similarly insane and elitist view of who and what they are, vs. what the other posters who laugh at them think they are. :-) Stop lying your bear traps in hopes of finding a keyboard fight. You need validation of your nonsensical life. Stay lost, but don't even think that I would join you, loser. Any trap I may have lain you walked into ALL BY YOURSELF, dude. When I finally replied to your authoritarian bullshit, I purposefully went a little over the top to see how you'd respond, figuring that that would cut to the chase and tempt you to reveal who and what you really are more quickly. Worked like a charm. You're an authoritarian and elitist little pissant who wants to have everything run the way you want it to run. Welcome to FFL, where that is Not Gonna Happen in *your* lifetime. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: Turquoise the reason that I asked that you not send posts to my mame is because I find you to be angry, sad and lacking social behavior. Be alone for a while, it will be better. Learn a little honesty, dude. The reason you asked me not to send you posts (an impossibility unless you explicitly block them, which is your right), is that I got in your face and called you on your authoritarian bullshit. You seem to have expected people to react to old retreads of Maharishi-isms as if they were wise. Many of us got over that a long, long time ago. What we react to well is someone having synthesized their experience well enough to describe it in new (read not boring and condescending) ways, and as what it is -- *their* experience, not a template for anyone else's. I can tell that you really believe that what you said above was said for my own good. What I'm telling you is similarly for your own good. Wake up a bit and look around and actually *see* who you are inter- facing with on this forum and you might become a valuable member of it. Continue to treat us as TM students you can brush away with a prepared answer and we'll continue to laugh at you. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: John, I received this post Dan, you're aware that Knapp is a long-time, ferocious critic of TM, right? I seriously doubt he has any intention of
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Thank you for confiming that you are a sorry old man, worthless. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: Turq, I posted in response to you invitation Re: What would FFL be without its most strident voices? In that post you wrote Now's your chance, you lurkers. Go for it. If there are subjects you've always wanted to introcuces but were afraid to because you knew they'd be turned into arguements within two replies, now's your opportunity to give vioce or sound of keyboard clicking) to them... So what's out there to discuss without someone trying their best to turn the discussion into arguements? You then proceeded to jump on POST #1. I was communicating, and you contentious. Not true. I found your first post merely boring and a parroting of old TM dogma, and thus not deserving of a response. I did not reply to you until several posts later, after Sal had responded satirically to your pompous boringness and YOU had reacted to that by trying to start a crusade to moderate Fairfield Life. This post of yours dares to analyze my motivations - WHICH YOU COULD NEVER UNDERSTAND IN YOUR LIFETIME. Despite the normally-arrogant (for a TMer) way you chose to phrase the above sentence, I don't think that your motivations were terribly difficult to understand at all. You posted something that you thought people would respond to as if it was as wise as you felt it to be. Instead of that happening, ONE (count them, one) person responded with humor and sarcasm to the pompousness of your post. YOU then went a little crazy trying to turn FFL into a moderated forum where people like yourself could post without fear of being made fun of. I *still* hadn't posted, until you started to get insistent and a little abusive in your call for fascist admin- istration of FFL to make it over in your own image. You didn't get the subtle hints that people were giving you, so I figured it was time someone stopped trying to be subtle and told you the truth. So THEN I lit into your ass. I do not regret it. It seems to have brought out who you really are in these followup posts. That is, an arrogant little prick who considers anyone who doesn't agree with him and who doesn't find the things he says wise to be so far beneath him evolutionally that he believes that they could not possibly understand his motivations in their lifetime. Welcome to Fairfield Life, Dan. You'll fit right in here. There are a number of others who have a similarly insane and elitist view of who and what they are, vs. what the other posters who laugh at them think they are. :-) Stop lying your bear traps in hopes of finding a keyboard fight. You need validation of your nonsensical life. Stay lost, but don't even think that I would join you, loser. Any trap I may have lain you walked into ALL BY YOURSELF, dude. When I finally replied to your authoritarian bullshit, I purposefully went a little over the top to see how you'd respond, figuring that that would cut to the chase and tempt you to reveal who and what you really are more quickly. Worked like a charm. You're an authoritarian and elitist little pissant who wants to have everything run the way you want it to run. Welcome to FFL, where that is Not Gonna Happen in *your* lifetime. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: Turquoise the reason that I asked that you not send posts to my mame is because I find you to be angry, sad and lacking social behavior. Be alone for a while, it will be better. Learn a little honesty, dude. The reason you asked me not to send you posts (an impossibility unless you explicitly block them, which is your right), is that I got in your face and called you on your authoritarian bullshit. You seem to have expected people to react to old retreads of Maharishi-isms as if they were wise. Many of us got over that a long, long time ago. What we react to well is someone having synthesized their experience well enough to describe it in new (read not boring and condescending) ways, and as what it is -- *their* experience, not a template for anyone else's. I can tell that you really believe that what you said above was said for my own good. What I'm telling you is similarly for your own good. Wake up a bit and look around and actually *see* who you are inter- facing with on this forum and you might become a valuable member of it. Continue to treat us as TM students you can brush away with a prepared answer and we'll continue to laugh at you. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: ---
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Being an avid contibuter to FFL does not make one spiritual. M encouraged people to find themselves, not complain about the effort. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, it must have been a sacrifice to leave the silence of the Himalayas to end up being insulted by people like you. Yeah, Maharishi was a big fan of feedback from his teachers. In fact he was quite an avid contributor to FFL before his death. Always one to read the dissenting opinion that Maharishi... So let me get this straight. My grave insult was to question that Maharishi preferred shitting outside (which I did in North India myself and saw my breath as I did so, and I was way South of the mountains in Delhi) to dropping a duce in a golden toilet INSIDE. And the insult is to question that his life was a sacrifice. becoming a rock star jet-setting guru who could hang out with anyone from any field for his 15 minutes of fame that he glommed off of the Beatles? That he would have preferred to sit on a rock and dig how cosmic he was without the legions of blond chicks who worshiped him as a God? You've got your insult meter set setting on Victorian Woman. You might want to loosen that up a tad. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: It was a sacrifice of life to leave the Himalayas. But necessary to bring about this new, golden age for mankind. - Maharishi, Boppard, Germany, 1982 Funny how religious dudes speak about their sacrifices while amassing huge wealth. It is part of their story. And we are supposed to believe that he preferred living without indoor plumbing to the golden throne? Or that he, unlike any of the rest of us, didn't gain more meaning in his life by going out, meeting people and laying his rap on them. He was so fulfilled sitting on his butt in the mountains that he didn't gain more joy for his life by becoming a teacher? Or that his nature completely changed after 13 years of running around for Guru Dev, and he would be perfectly happy sitting on a rock in the mountains? He loved creating his own myths didn't he? Here is my take: The guy was always a very active guy. He fell into a 2 year depression funk after his life partner died, and after feeling better went back to being a super active guy building his own empire and delighting in micromanaging every detail. He had as much chance of sitting on his butt in the mountains as The Donald. Well, it must have been a sacrifice to leave the silence of the Himalayas to end up being insulted by people like you.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thank you for confiming that you are a sorry old man, worthless. Put up or shut up. Post something you consider of worth. See how many here also consider it to be of worth. That's what an adult would do. A child would simply whine about not being paid enough attention to and not being treated with respect *he has not yet earned*, and lash out angrily. I'm sorry, but THAT seems to me to be what you are doing. I'm really trying to help you a little here, dude. On THIS forum, one gets respect by EARNING it, not by feeling as if he is entitled to it. If you feel that you have something of worth to contribute, post away. I can pretty much guarantee you that the response you get here to what you post will determine what worth the posters on this forum feel that it has. How much worth YOU consider it to have really doesn't enter into the equation. This process is called living in the real world. Welcome to it. I understand that it may be a new experience for you, and a little scary at first, but as many here can tell you, it'll be beneficial in the long run. If I were you I'd start with trying to post something ORIGINAL, something that everyone here hasn't heard on tapes or read in books a thousand times. We appreciate originality here, even if it doesn't agree with our own philosophy or way of seeing things. Really. You can do it if you try. Turn off the parrot recordings in your head and try to find some- thing original in there about spiritual prac- tice or about life or hell, about the last great movie you saw or the last great book you read. I think you'll find that there will be people here -- including myself -- who will respond positively to that. Continuing to whine only gets you perceived as a whiner.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Turq, You repeadedly request that I live in the real world, yet never respond to my request that you provide your whereabouts. You put nothing real up, just noise. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: Thank you for confiming that you are a sorry old man, worthless. Put up or shut up. Post something you consider of worth. See how many here also consider it to be of worth. That's what an adult would do. A child would simply whine about not being paid enough attention to and not being treated with respect *he has not yet earned*, and lash out angrily. I'm sorry, but THAT seems to me to be what you are doing. I'm really trying to help you a little here, dude. On THIS forum, one gets respect by EARNING it, not by feeling as if he is entitled to it. If you feel that you have something of worth to contribute, post away. I can pretty much guarantee you that the response you get here to what you post will determine what worth the posters on this forum feel that it has. How much worth YOU consider it to have really doesn't enter into the equation. This process is called living in the real world. Welcome to it. I understand that it may be a new experience for you, and a little scary at first, but as many here can tell you, it'll be beneficial in the long run. If I were you I'd start with trying to post something ORIGINAL, something that everyone here hasn't heard on tapes or read in books a thousand times. We appreciate originality here, even if it doesn't agree with our own philosophy or way of seeing things. Really. You can do it if you try. Turn off the parrot recordings in your head and try to find some- thing original in there about spiritual prac- tice or about life or hell, about the last great movie you saw or the last great book you read. I think you'll find that there will be people here -- including myself -- who will respond positively to that. Continuing to whine only gets you perceived as a whiner.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Being an avid contibuter to FFL does not make one spiritual. Get off your high horse, Dan. Who established any standard for 'spirituality' here... you? M encouraged people to find themselves, not complain about the effort. What does that have to do with peoples' freedom to post their views here? Maybe you should review your position, Dan. This forum isn't a forum to promote TM, the TMO or Maharishi. It's an unmoderated discussion forum, not an advocacy forum. Readers are rightfully going to slam you for acting the way you are acting.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The insult was in the contemptuous, mocking tone. Read it and you'll see. I was mocking the POV that he didn't have human motives for his life. The myth that somehow we was not a human like you and me with discernible motives for getting rich and famous. That he didn't love his work and extremely active life doing what he wanted every minute of every day. That it was a sacrifice for him to live according to his extremely active nature. That he would have preferred to live as a Vedic hobo. Treating Maharishi as an interesting human involves seeing him outside the mythology he tried to spin around himself and his followers tried to embellish even more. Attempting to make him into something more than human insults all of humanity. But whatever my POV, we can be sure that Maharishi was never subjected to it. The only people he interacted with in his last decades were fully entrenched in his own grandiose self perception that he was the most important human to ever walk the earth. Even a hint that this wasn't your POV around him would result in banishment from OZ. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Well, it must have been a sacrifice to leave the silence of the Himalayas to end up being insulted by people like you. Yeah, Maharishi was a big fan of feedback from his teachers. In fact he was quite an avid contributor to FFL before his death. Always one to read the dissenting opinion that Maharishi... So let me get this straight. My grave insult was to question that Maharishi preferred shitting outside (which I did in North India myself and saw my breath as I did so, and I was way South of the mountains in Delhi) to dropping a duce in a golden toilet INSIDE. And the insult is to question that his life was a sacrifice. becoming a rock star jet-setting guru who could hang out with anyone from any field for his 15 minutes of fame that he glommed off of the Beatles? That he would have preferred to sit on a rock and dig how cosmic he was without the legions of blond chicks who worshiped him as a God? You've got your insult meter set setting on Victorian Woman. You might want to loosen that up a tad. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: It was a sacrifice of life to leave the Himalayas. But necessary to bring about this new, golden age for mankind. - Maharishi, Boppard, Germany, 1982 Funny how religious dudes speak about their sacrifices while amassing huge wealth. It is part of their story. And we are supposed to believe that he preferred living without indoor plumbing to the golden throne? Or that he, unlike any of the rest of us, didn't gain more meaning in his life by going out, meeting people and laying his rap on them. He was so fulfilled sitting on his butt in the mountains that he didn't gain more joy for his life by becoming a teacher? Or that his nature completely changed after 13 years of running around for Guru Dev, and he would be perfectly happy sitting on a rock in the mountains? He loved creating his own myths didn't he? Here is my take: The guy was always a very active guy. He fell into a 2 year depression funk after his life partner died, and after feeling better went back to being a super active guy building his own empire and delighting in micromanaging every detail. He had as much chance of sitting on his butt in the mountains as The Donald. Well, it must have been a sacrifice to leave the silence of the Himalayas to end up being insulted by people like you.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
On Jun 23, 2008, at 8:15 AM, danfriedman2002 wrote: Being an avid contibuter to FFL does not make one spiritual. M encouraged people to find themselves, not complain about the effort. Yeah, I remember it well, dan, from Lecture 243: Find yourselves, dudes! Don't listen to anyone else other than your own hearts. You know what it is you want, now go out there and get it! And don't say I never gave you good advice. Actually MMY put out there (usually through surrogates) just the opposite, strongly encouraging (to put it mildly) people to either follow his program...or else. Nothing else was allowed, not even questions that might indicate all was not going according to plan. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Your first observation is supported by a talk that Jerry Jarvis had given; explaining that MMY was a human person, like the rest of us. What was admirable, Jerry said, is what that one human person had become and achieved. As to the second. I think advanced age normally makes a person want the comfort of people who aren't at war with you. I expect I'll feel that same (although not acheieve the potential in observation #1, above). --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: The insult was in the contemptuous, mocking tone. Read it and you'll see. I was mocking the POV that he didn't have human motives for his life. The myth that somehow we was not a human like you and me with discernible motives for getting rich and famous. That he didn't love his work and extremely active life doing what he wanted every minute of every day. That it was a sacrifice for him to live according to his extremely active nature. That he would have preferred to live as a Vedic hobo. Treating Maharishi as an interesting human involves seeing him outside the mythology he tried to spin around himself and his followers tried to embellish even more. Attempting to make him into something more than human insults all of humanity. But whatever my POV, we can be sure that Maharishi was never subjected to it. The only people he interacted with in his last decades were fully entrenched in his own grandiose self perception that he was the most important human to ever walk the earth. Even a hint that this wasn't your POV around him would result in banishment from OZ. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Well, it must have been a sacrifice to leave the silence of the Himalayas to end up being insulted by people like you. Yeah, Maharishi was a big fan of feedback from his teachers. In fact he was quite an avid contributor to FFL before his death. Always one to read the dissenting opinion that Maharishi... So let me get this straight. My grave insult was to question that Maharishi preferred shitting outside (which I did in North India myself and saw my breath as I did so, and I was way South of the mountains in Delhi) to dropping a duce in a golden toilet INSIDE. And the insult is to question that his life was a sacrifice. becoming a rock star jet-setting guru who could hang out with anyone from any field for his 15 minutes of fame that he glommed off of the Beatles? That he would have preferred to sit on a rock and dig how cosmic he was without the legions of blond chicks who worshiped him as a God? You've got your insult meter set setting on Victorian Woman. You might want to loosen that up a tad. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: It was a sacrifice of life to leave the Himalayas. But necessary to bring about this new, golden age for mankind. - Maharishi, Boppard, Germany, 1982 Funny how religious dudes speak about their sacrifices while amassing huge wealth. It is part of their story. And we are supposed to believe that he preferred living without indoor plumbing to the golden throne? Or that he, unlike any of the rest of us, didn't gain more meaning in his life by going out, meeting people and laying his rap on them. He was so fulfilled sitting on his butt in the mountains that he didn't gain more joy for his life by becoming a teacher? Or that his nature completely changed after 13 years of running around for Guru Dev, and he would be perfectly happy sitting on a rock in the mountains? He loved creating his own myths didn't he? Here is my take: The guy was always a very active guy. He fell into a 2 year depression funk after his life partner died, and after feeling better went back to being a super active guy building his own empire and delighting in micromanaging every detail. He had as much chance of sitting on his butt in the mountains as The Donald. Well, it must have been a sacrifice to leave the silence of the Himalayas to end up being insulted by people like you.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Sal, What you describe has just not been my experience. I'm wondering if the staking out of opposing positions on this forum is creating two schools of thought; each of which demands constant affililiation from supporters of their respective position. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jun 23, 2008, at 8:15 AM, danfriedman2002 wrote: Being an avid contibuter to FFL does not make one spiritual. M encouraged people to find themselves, not complain about the effort. Yeah, I remember it well, dan, from Lecture 243: Find yourselves, dudes! Don't listen to anyone else other than your own hearts. You know what it is you want, now go out there and get it! And don't say I never gave you good advice. Actually MMY put out there (usually through surrogates) just the opposite, strongly encouraging (to put it mildly) people to either follow his program...or else. Nothing else was allowed, not even questions that might indicate all was not going according to plan. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
too mcu noise, i'll respond to content. now were we discussing spitituality? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: Being an avid contibuter to FFL does not make one spiritual. Get off your high horse, Dan. Who established any standard for 'spirituality' here... you? M encouraged people to find themselves, not complain about the effort. What does that have to do with peoples' freedom to post their views here? Maybe you should review your position, Dan. This forum isn't a forum to promote TM, the TMO or Maharishi. It's an unmoderated discussion forum, not an advocacy forum. Readers are rightfully going to slam you for acting the way you are acting.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: too mcu noise, i'll respond to content. now were we discussing spitituality? Becoming incoherent doesn't help your POV, Dan. You expect a coherent response to that? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: Being an avid contibuter to FFL does not make one spiritual. Get off your high horse, Dan. Who established any standard for 'spirituality' here... you? M encouraged people to find themselves, not complain about the effort. What does that have to do with peoples' freedom to post their views here? Maybe you should review your position, Dan. This forum isn't a forum to promote TM, the TMO or Maharishi. It's an unmoderated discussion forum, not an advocacy forum. Readers are rightfully going to slam you for acting the way you are acting.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
From reading your post, it was evident to me that you are incoherent. Just trying to speak in the way that you're processing. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: too mcu noise, i'll respond to content. now were we discussing spitituality? Becoming incoherent doesn't help your POV, Dan. You expect a coherent response to that? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: Being an avid contibuter to FFL does not make one spiritual. Get off your high horse, Dan. Who established any standard for 'spirituality' here... you? M encouraged people to find themselves, not complain about the effort. What does that have to do with peoples' freedom to post their views here? Maybe you should review your position, Dan. This forum isn't a forum to promote TM, the TMO or Maharishi. It's an unmoderated discussion forum, not an advocacy forum. Readers are rightfully going to slam you for acting the way you are acting.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From reading your post, it was evident to me that you are incoherent. Just trying to speak in the way that you're processing. Another true believer apologist with transparent defense mechanisms. Lovely. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: too mcu noise, i'll respond to content. now were we discussing spitituality? Becoming incoherent doesn't help your POV, Dan. You expect a coherent response to that? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: Being an avid contibuter to FFL does not make one spiritual. Get off your high horse, Dan. Who established any standard for 'spirituality' here... you? M encouraged people to find themselves, not complain about the effort. What does that have to do with peoples' freedom to post their views here? Maybe you should review your position, Dan. This forum isn't a forum to promote TM, the TMO or Maharishi. It's an unmoderated discussion forum, not an advocacy forum. Readers are rightfully going to slam you for acting the way you are acting.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Dear Do: Clearly you cannot relate with categorizing people into pre-defined groups. That's the developmental stage of a five year old. Please advance before responding. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: From reading your post, it was evident to me that you are incoherent. Just trying to speak in the way that you're processing. Another true believer apologist with transparent defense mechanisms. Lovely. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: too mcu noise, i'll respond to content. now were we discussing spitituality? Becoming incoherent doesn't help your POV, Dan. You expect a coherent response to that? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: Being an avid contibuter to FFL does not make one spiritual. Get off your high horse, Dan. Who established any standard for 'spirituality' here... you? M encouraged people to find themselves, not complain about the effort. What does that have to do with peoples' freedom to post their views here? Maybe you should review your position, Dan. This forum isn't a forum to promote TM, the TMO or Maharishi. It's an unmoderated discussion forum, not an advocacy forum. Readers are rightfully going to slam you for acting the way you are acting.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
On Jun 23, 2008, at 9:19 AM, danfriedman2002 wrote: Your first observation is supported by a talk that Jerry Jarvis had given; explaining that MMY was a human person, like the rest of us. Jerry actually needed to *explain* this, Dan? What was admirable, Jerry said, is what that one human person had become and achieved. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Sal, Read the post below: What was admirable, Jerry said, is what that one human person had become and achieved. what Jerry was indicating was that growth from where we were to what we wanted to become, is possible. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jun 23, 2008, at 9:19 AM, danfriedman2002 wrote: Your first observation is supported by a talk that Jerry Jarvis had given; explaining that MMY was a human person, like the rest of us. Jerry actually needed to *explain* this, Dan? What was admirable, Jerry said, is what that one human person had become and achieved. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John M. Knapp, LMSW [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It was half that, and half of those were in response to Knapp's attempts to trash *me*. Judy, I went out of my way to NOT trash you. And I think that everyone here noticed that. You were studious in trying to avoid confront- ation with her, and to avoid replying in kind. In fact, you consistently tried to steer her back to the topic, while she consistently tried to steer the conversation away from it, and to focus it on trashing your reputation. I DID disagree with some of what you said. That is not the same as attacking you. Whereas what Judy did, from the moment that a newbie took what you posted seriously, as if it had come from a human being, was to trash you and attempt to portray you as less than one. If you can point out any of my comments that made you feel victimized, I'd be happy to apologize. Any comments in the present, that is. :-) Here is a fairly recent Judyquote. Compare and contrast it to her treatment of John Knapp, who in my opinion did NOT attack her. (Before she screams bloody murder and accuses me of 'misrepresenting' her, the two ellipses below are for deletions of the words 'about Hillary' to make the quote more general.) What I've said ... is that one needs to seek out alternative views for the sake of balance (when it comes to opinions). As to facts, in most cases it's possible to determine whether what are presented as facts ... are accurate by consulting other sources; and if the facts remain uncertain, at least one knows there are competing claims, and hopefully what the case is for each of them. What's *not OK* is to read only one side and swallow it whole. All that John did was to present an alternative viewpoint, the VERY thing that Judy said that she and other critical-thinking people SHOULD search out. To date, she has not addressed even one substantial remark from his point of view; all that she has done is attempt to smear his reputation. I'm sorry to dredge up the Judywars again, but this is classic. She cannot even PRETEND that she had any intent other than to dissuade a newbie from considering a different point of view on the TMO, *BY* smearing the author of that claim. This is Just What Judy Does. If I may close with another of her quotes, I shall allow that quote stand as a critique of her performance in the last two days vs. John Knapp's: Sometimes it can even be seen from the start who is an empty suit and who has real substance.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Kenny H It is obvious that Barry does go out of his way to be bait you and it is beyond me to fathom why a chronologically grown person would do this. It's like teasing one's sister. Fun in a way. If either one of them refused to respond to the other, the feud would fizzle out. Sadly, not true. Last week, *as I said I would* (because she went over the posting limit for the second time in a month and refused to take her well-deserved week-long 'timeout'), I did not reply to any of her posts, or comment on her directly, except in my last post of the week, after she had begun to shamelessly attack John Knapp *for making a subdued and valuable post*. In contrast, Judy found quite a few occasions to trash me during the week. She has actually *stated* on this forum, many times, that she will continue to do so, whether I reply to her or not. From my side, I don't think that the old battle- axe really deserves much in terms of direct replies from me, but *just as she claims to do*, I will speak up when she savages someone else here unfairly, out of spite and anger and because of old grudges she cannot drop, and out of being a tried and true TM True Believer who has come to believe that it is not only OK to attempt to destroy the reputation of what she calls an anti-TMer, but that it is her solemn duty to do so. After all, someone could have their minds poisoned by hearing another point of view, right? Or IS that right? Again, here's how the old battle-axe described the proper way to learn about things: What I've said ... is that one needs to seek out alternative views for the sake of balance (when it comes to opinions). As to facts, in most cases it's possible to determine whether what are presented as facts ... are accurate by consulting other sources; and if the facts remain uncertain, at least one knows there are competing claims, and hopefully what the case is for each of them. What's *not OK* is to read only one side and swallow it whole. And yet, when someone like John DOES present an alternative view, she goes out of her way to smear him, using the very tactics she claimed were despicable when applied to Hillary Clinton. And at the same time, she claims that doing so has nothing to do with HER being a TM TB. Yeah, right. To Ken, and Rick, and others, I'll really TRY to keep my interactions with this insane bitch to a minimum, but she really IS an insane bitch.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
On Jun 21, 2008, at 2:22 PM, John M. Knapp, LMSW wrote: Hi, TurquiseB, You may be right about the TM leaders. They may or may not change. But bigger organizations than the tiny TM movement have been changed from within. The Reformation changed the Christian church. Mahayana changed the face of Buddhism. Even the modern Catholic Church is grudgingly making some changes in the face of their laity's outrage. What I enjoyed about your list was not that the TMO would ever consider actually doing these suggestions, that would be a snowball's chance in hell. Instead they are valuable pointers for people leaving the TMO for what to look for in terms of honesty and integrity in any new spiritual or self-help org.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
But here's an example of your attempts to trash me, just FYI: I may be wrong, Judy, but it seems when people disagree with your own views re TM, you attack them with disparaging labels -- ignoring the substance of what they have to say? And then there was your nitwit question, What is your reason for posting to a thread you are not interested in discussing? Judy, I fail to see how either of your examples of my words are attacks on you. Naturally, if they caused you pain, I regret and apologize for that. They are both stated respectfully. Neither calls you names, questions your integrity, defames, or slanders you. They aren't even harsh in tone. It does seem that you hear any form of disagreement with your views as an attack. And feel therefore justified in your hurtful speech, such as labeling my question as nitwit. If I'm mistaken could you better explain your sense that my statements are attacks? I do experience your attacks as vicious, unprovoked, and apparently meant to inflict pain - - filled with rage, name calling, character assassination, etc. Perhaps I'm mistaken or too sensitive. It would be a personal favor if you or others could set me right if I'm mistaken. There are unpleasant names for people who enjoy inflicting pain on others. I'm sure you are aware of them. If others see Judy's speech as I do, can anyone help me square Judy's hurtfulness with those spiritual values the Maharishi *did* teach? He wasn't big on charity, but he did teach the suturas friendliness, compassion, happiness as the first, and perhaps most important, TM-Sidhis. Perhaps Judy has some positive agenda I've missed. But I'm not aware of it. I'd appreciate being enlightened. J.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
What I enjoyed about your list was not that the TMO would ever consider actually doing these suggestions, that would be a snowball's chance in hell. Instead they are valuable pointers for people leaving the TMO for what to look for in terms of honesty and integrity in any new spiritual or self-help org. Hi, Vaj, Good to hear from you. If I had any hidden agenda, I suppose this was an unstated purpose of my post. As I said, I'm not willing to settle for less from any spiritual organization, but it the Catholic Church, your local guru, or Scientology. Thanks for bringing this background purpose of mine to the forefront. J.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John M. Knapp, LMSW [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But here's an example of your attempts to trash me, just FYI: I may be wrong, Judy, but it seems when people disagree with your own views re TM, you attack them with disparaging labels -- ignoring the substance of what they have to say? And then there was your nitwit question, What is your reason for posting to a thread you are not interested in discussing? Judy, I fail to see how either of your examples of my words are attacks on you. Naturally, if they caused you pain, I regret and apologize for that. They are both stated respectfully. Neither calls you names, questions your integrity, defames, or slanders you. They aren't even harsh in tone. Compare them, for example, to the tone and content of Judy's *first* post concerning John, the one he replied to politely and in a non-attacking manner: Dan, you're aware that Knapp is a long-time, ferocious critic of TM, right? I seriously doubt he has any intention of trying to reform the TMO. What he's looking for is material he can use to make the TMO look as bad as possible (and not incidentally bolster his counseling business). Some of us have known him electronically for many years and don't trust him any further than we could throw him, if he came within reach. Note the scare quotes around counseling. Note the LMSW designation after John's name. Not ONLY is Judy's first post an attack, it's verging on the legal definition of libel; she is bringing into question John's ability to do something he is licensed to do, as a profession. One wonders how Judy would react to a similar post suggesting her hidden motives and untrustworthiness, and relating them to her profession as an editor, advising people not to trust her with their edit jobs because of those hidden motives and lack of trustworthiness. It does seem that you hear any form of disagreement with your views as an attack. Yes, it does seem that way. And feel therefore justified in your hurtful speech, such as labeling my question as nitwit. Forget nitwit. Focus instead on the fact that Judy has the credentials of a...uh...freelance editor, and is making insinuations about the capabilities of a licensed social worker, based upon knowing him electronically. One is reminded of her insinuations about the Christian bigot (her term) agenda that she sees in Mel Gibson's movie Apocalypto...which she has never seen. Perhaps she knew the movie electronically. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Those who are already aware that Barry compulsively and repeatedly lies about me (most everyone here, I suspect) should feel free to skip this post. I'm combining Barry's two most recent posts in a single response rather than waste a post of my own. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John M. Knapp, LMSW jmknapp53@ wrote: It was half that, and half of those were in response to Knapp's attempts to trash *me*. Judy, I went out of my way to NOT trash you. And I think that everyone here noticed that. I provided examples. You were studious in trying to avoid confront- ation with her, and to avoid replying in kind. Bullcrap. In fact, you consistently tried to steer her back to the topic, while she consistently tried to steer the conversation away from it, and to focus it on trashing your reputation. Lie. No, I didn't try to steer the conversation away from it. I said explicitly that I wasn't interested, several times. It was John who kept trying to steer *me* into a conversation I had made it clear I had no intention of engaging in. Barry knows this. I DID disagree with some of what you said. That is not the same as attacking you. Whereas what Judy did, from the moment that a newbie took what you posted seriously, as if it had come from a human being, was to trash you and attempt to portray you as less than one. Lie. Never have I suggested that John was anything other than a human being. What I *have* said--and stand by, and have documented--is that he is an *untrustworthy* human being. Barry knows this. Here is a fairly recent Judyquote. Compare and contrast it to her treatment of John Knapp, who in my opinion did NOT attack her. (Before she screams bloody murder and accuses me of 'misrepresenting' her, the two ellipses below are for deletions of the words 'about Hillary' to make the quote more general.) What I've said ... is that one needs to seek out alternative views for the sake of balance (when it comes to opinions). As to facts, in most cases it's possible to determine whether what are presented as facts ... are accurate by consulting other sources; and if the facts remain uncertain, at least one knows there are competing claims, and hopefully what the case is for each of them. What's *not OK* is to read only one side and swallow it whole. All that John did was to present an alternative viewpoint, the VERY thing that Judy said that she and other critical-thinking people SHOULD search out. An alternative viewpoint *to what*? What's the viewpoint that John's is an alternative to? Barry has no idea. He didn't bother to think through what he was saying; he just thought it sounded good. Whether it actually makes sense is not important. To date, she has not addressed even one substantial remark from his point of view; all that she has done is attempt to smear his reputation. Actually, what I've done is point out what his reputation *is* among those who have had extended encounters with him. I'm sorry to dredge up the Judywars again, but this is classic. She cannot even PRETEND that she had any intent other than to dissuade a newbie from considering a different point of view on the TMO, Again: What is the point of view that John's is allegedly different *from*? As I said to Ruth: There's nothing wrong with what he says; it's who's saying it--this *particular* former TM teacher--and what his motives are. We have ample reason not to take what he says at face value. There's a history here you aren't aware of. I stand by that statement. Barry knows I made it, so his statement above is a lie. snip If I may close with another of her quotes, I shall allow that quote stand as a critique of her performance in the last two days vs. John Knapp's: Sometimes it can even be seen from the start who is an empty suit and who has real substance. That's with regard to political candidates, as Barry knows. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Sadly, not true. Last week, *as I said I would* (because she went over the posting limit for the second time in a month and refused to take her well-deserved week-long 'timeout') Lie. As Barry knows, there's no way to refuse to take a timeout. Rick decided against giving me one, so if Barry has any complaints, he needs to take it up with Rick. , I did not reply to any of her posts, or comment on her directly, except in my last post of the week, after she had begun to shamelessly attack John Knapp *for making a subdued and valuable post*. Lie. As Barry knows, that isn't why I attacked John. snip I will speak up when she savages someone else here unfairly, out of spite and anger and because of old grudges she cannot drop, and out of being a tried and true TM True Believer who has come to believe that it is not only OK to attempt to
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John M. Knapp, LMSW [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But here's an example of your attempts to trash me, just FYI: I may be wrong, Judy, but it seems when people disagree with your own views re TM, you attack them with disparaging labels -- ignoring the substance of what they have to say? And then there was your nitwit question, What is your reason for posting to a thread you are not interested in discussing? Judy, I fail to see how either of your examples of my words are attacks on you. I'll just let that admitted failure speak for itself. Naturally, if they caused you pain, I regret and apologize for that. I believe I already explained that attacks by those for whom I have no respect do not cause me pain.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
I believe I already explained that attacks by those for whom I have no respect do not cause me pain. Judy, I know next to nothing about you. I only know your writings. And I believe it's virtually impossible to know a person on the basis of their writings or public actions. But it is difficult for me to understand the virulence of your rage and hurtful lashing out on this forum, on this topic, in any other way than your response to pain of some kind. In my mind, this does not excuse acting out. We all have a right to our feelings. But we all also bear responsibility for our actions. J. P.S. It has been difficult to keep the focus on the topic of this discussion. So I'm thinking I'll take a poster's advice and upload the original file in the hopes it will spark on-topic discussion at some future date.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John M. Knapp, LMSW [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip But it is difficult for me to understand the virulence of your rage and hurtful lashing out on this forum, on this topic, in any other way than your response to pain of some kind. Let me put it this way: Unfair and mendacious attacks on other people that cause *them* pain cause *me* pain.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Let me put it this way: Unfair and mendacious attacks on other people that cause *them* pain cause *me* pain. Okay, I'm still at a loss to understand your apparent rage and evident lashing out. Using your yardstick, can you point me toward an unfair and mendacious attack I've made on you or other people? Preferably in the posts you have attacked me for recently, but I would appreciate it if your citation took place in, say, the last decade. But use your best judgement. I will naturally apologize for any pain I caused at any time in the past. And no matter what the cause of your pain, no matter how justified you feel, I still feel you are responsible for your hurtful actions. Doubly so because you espouse and recommend a *spiritual* teaching. Do you disagree? J.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Not going to continue this, John. You know what my beefs are with you. And you can bag the little lectures. I don't give any credence to advice from people for whom I have no respect either. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John M. Knapp, LMSW [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Let me put it this way: Unfair and mendacious attacks on other people that cause *them* pain cause *me* pain. Okay, I'm still at a loss to understand your apparent rage and evident lashing out. Using your yardstick, can you point me toward an unfair and mendacious attack I've made on you or other people? Preferably in the posts you have attacked me for recently, but I would appreciate it if your citation took place in, say, the last decade. But use your best judgement. I will naturally apologize for any pain I caused at any time in the past. And no matter what the cause of your pain, no matter how justified you feel, I still feel you are responsible for your hurtful actions. Doubly so because you espouse and recommend a *spiritual* teaching. Do you disagree? J.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John M. Knapp, LMSW [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [Vaj wrote:] What I enjoyed about your list was not that the TMO would ever consider actually doing these suggestions, that would be a snowball's chance in hell. Instead they are valuable pointers for people leaving the TMO for what to look for in terms of honesty and integrity in any new spiritual or self-help org. If I had any hidden agenda, I suppose this was an unstated purpose of my post. As I said, I'm not willing to settle for less from any spiritual organization, but it the Catholic Church, your local guru, or Scientology. Thanks for bringing this background purpose of mine to the forefront. I said earlier--to great disdain from Barry and John-- that I didn't think John's intention in posting his list was to inspire folks to think about how the TMO might be reformed. It appears I was correct. I said in another post that I thought his intention was to pose a stark contrast to the TMO by listing the characteristics of an ideal organization. That certainly would be a useful tool in his therapy sessions with clients who had left the TMO but were still uncertain as to whether they'd done the right thing. It might even be a useful tool in acquiring new clients from among those who lurk on FFL, especially if he can get the regulars to complain about how far the TMO is from meeting these ideals, hopefully with horrible examples. I don't think it's any accident that John has repeatedly pressured folks here to discuss his list. He gave it a good shot, but he doesn't seem to have gathered enough useful responses to make it worth his time, so he's uploaded the list to the Files section. Anybody want to bet how long he'll hang around now?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John M. Knapp, LMSW And I believe it's virtually impossible to know a person on the basis of their writings or public actions. Quite true. However that doesn't stop many on FFL in conducting in-depth diagnosis of many perceived inner ailments. Perhaps those so engaged cannot help but see via light shining from themselves.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John M. Knapp, LMSW [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: He wasn't big on charity, but he did teach the suturas friendliness, compassion, happiness as the first, and perhaps most important, TM-Sidhis. I beg your pardon ! Maharishi's life was one big charity from beginning to end. He sacrified His whole life for mankind to create the gloriuous future we are about to enjoy. It was a sacrifice of life to leave the Himalayas. But necessary to bring about this new, golden age for mankind. - Maharishi, Boppard, Germany, 1982
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
I beg your pardon ! Maharishi's life was one big charity from beginning to end. He sacrified His whole life for mankind to create the gloriuous future we are about to enjoy. It was a sacrifice of life to leave the Himalayas. But necessary to bring about this new, golden age for mankind. - Maharishi, Boppard, Germany, 1982 Hmm, we seriously disagree on this point. What did he give up? Sacrifice entails giving up something for something else -- typically a greater good. The Maharishi may or may not have achieved a glorious future. Time will tell, I imagine. But he did very well for himself and his family materially. I do not know of another failed physicist who ran an empire worth billions. And enjoyed every material comfort in his life. Wait! There is Bill Gates. But his isn't a spiritual empire. Are you aware of one of humanity's many great spiritual voices who made material success a main point of his career? Jesus? Buddha? Mohammed? Confucius? There are Christian preachers who teach that material success is a sign of spiritual attainment. There may be others. But I'm not aware that any of them are considered great spiritual leaders by a significant portion of humanity. J.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Judy, Your thinking appears black/white. I said *an* unstated purpose, not my only purpose, was to offer an implicit comparison for involvement in other spiritual organizations. My main purpose was as I stated to talk about reform in the TM Movement. As, I can't help but repeat, I've been talking about for 13 years. Sometimes, Judy, I think you cherry pick minor points -- that you seem to misunderstand -- to make a grand case. I also think you may overestimate your power. I can't think of anything you might say that would cause me not to hang around. (Although my time is limited, so I can't promise I'll be as involved as I have been for the last couple of days.) You *project* a number of motivations that I might have. I've experienced this in the past from you and have observed you do this frequently with others here and elsewhere. I'm wondering if you can distinguish between your opinions and projections and the validity of someone else's view of the truth? I am not attempting to get clients here. Generally, my clients come from referrals and google searches. Only a couple of times have people reached out to me from TM-Free Blog, for instance. To my knowledge, the Group posts are not searchable by Google. I am not attempting to get hits on my websites here. Good thing! I've only seen two hits that originated from here in my webstats in the last couple of days. (I can't really see how that would benefit me anyway. Advertising revenue is about $20/month. Covers the cost of running the sites.) I *am* attempting to discuss reform in the TM movement. And what *your* frequent posts on this topic achieve is keeping the topic floating near the top of the list on the message and front pages of this group. So, many people are seeing the original post and the points I make. That's fine by me. J. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John M. Knapp, LMSW jmknapp53@ wrote: [Vaj wrote:] What I enjoyed about your list was not that the TMO would ever consider actually doing these suggestions, that would be a snowball's chance in hell. Instead they are valuable pointers for people leaving the TMO for what to look for in terms of honesty and integrity in any new spiritual or self-help org. If I had any hidden agenda, I suppose this was an unstated purpose of my post. As I said, I'm not willing to settle for less from any spiritual organization, but it the Catholic Church, your local guru, or Scientology. Thanks for bringing this background purpose of mine to the forefront. I said earlier--to great disdain from Barry and John-- that I didn't think John's intention in posting his list was to inspire folks to think about how the TMO might be reformed. It appears I was correct. I said in another post that I thought his intention was to pose a stark contrast to the TMO by listing the characteristics of an ideal organization. That certainly would be a useful tool in his therapy sessions with clients who had left the TMO but were still uncertain as to whether they'd done the right thing. It might even be a useful tool in acquiring new clients from among those who lurk on FFL, especially if he can get the regulars to complain about how far the TMO is from meeting these ideals, hopefully with horrible examples. I don't think it's any accident that John has repeatedly pressured folks here to discuss his list. He gave it a good shot, but he doesn't seem to have gathered enough useful responses to make it worth his time, so he's uploaded the list to the Files section. Anybody want to bet how long he'll hang around now?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John M. Knapp, LMSW [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip I also think you may overestimate your power. I can't think of anything you might say that would cause me not to hang around. Classic Honest John. As he knows, I said nothing whatsoever to suggest or hint or imply that I thought anything I said would cause him not to hang around. He made that up so those who didn't remember what I *did* say would think that's what I had claimed. I said explicitly why I bet he wouldn't hang around: He didn't get the kind of responses he was hoping for to his list of TMO reforms. He isn't a regular poster here. He drops in every once in a while when there's something on his agenda he wants to accomplish. He's very one-pointed that way. He'll make a little small talk for cover, but that's not why he shows up. He always has a purpose in mind. He claims he's been interested in TMO reform for 13 years. Why did he suddenly decide only now that he wanted to discuss it with us?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
It was a sacrifice of life to leave the Himalayas. But necessary to bring about this new, golden age for mankind. - Maharishi, Boppard, Germany, 1982 Funny how religious dudes speak about their sacrifices while amassing huge wealth. It is part of their story. And we are supposed to believe that he preferred living without indoor plumbing to the golden throne? Or that he, unlike any of the rest of us, didn't gain more meaning in his life by going out, meeting people and laying his rap on them. He was so fulfilled sitting on his butt in the mountains that he didn't gain more joy for his life by becoming a teacher? Or that his nature completely changed after 13 years of running around for Guru Dev, and he would be perfectly happy sitting on a rock in the mountains? He loved creating his own myths didn't he? Here is my take: The guy was always a very active guy. He fell into a 2 year depression funk after his life partner died, and after feeling better went back to being a super active guy building his own empire and delighting in micromanaging every detail. He had as much chance of sitting on his butt in the mountains as The Donald. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John M. Knapp, LMSW jmknapp53@ wrote: He wasn't big on charity, but he did teach the suturas friendliness, compassion, happiness as the first, and perhaps most important, TM-Sidhis. I beg your pardon ! Maharishi's life was one big charity from beginning to end. He sacrified His whole life for mankind to create the gloriuous future we are about to enjoy. It was a sacrifice of life to leave the Himalayas. But necessary to bring about this new, golden age for mankind. - Maharishi, Boppard, Germany, 1982
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It was a sacrifice of life to leave the Himalayas. But necessary to bring about this new, golden age for mankind. - Maharishi, Boppard, Germany, 1982 Funny how religious dudes speak about their sacrifices while amassing huge wealth. It is part of their story. And we are supposed to believe that he preferred living without indoor plumbing to the golden throne? Or that he, unlike any of the rest of us, didn't gain more meaning in his life by going out, meeting people and laying his rap on them. He was so fulfilled sitting on his butt in the mountains that he didn't gain more joy for his life by becoming a teacher? Or that his nature completely changed after 13 years of running around for Guru Dev, and he would be perfectly happy sitting on a rock in the mountains? He loved creating his own myths didn't he? Here is my take: The guy was always a very active guy. He fell into a 2 year depression funk after his life partner died, and after feeling better went back to being a super active guy building his own empire and delighting in micromanaging every detail. He had as much chance of sitting on his butt in the mountains as The Donald. Well, note that he did set up one of his major world centers quite near Cedar Rapids -- the sin capital of the world. You do the math.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: It was a sacrifice of life to leave the Himalayas. But necessary to bring about this new, golden age for mankind. - Maharishi, Boppard, Germany, 1982 Funny how religious dudes speak about their sacrifices while amassing huge wealth. It is part of their story. And we are supposed to believe that he preferred living without indoor plumbing to the golden throne? Or that he, unlike any of the rest of us, didn't gain more meaning in his life by going out, meeting people and laying his rap on them. He was so fulfilled sitting on his butt in the mountains that he didn't gain more joy for his life by becoming a teacher? Or that his nature completely changed after 13 years of running around for Guru Dev, and he would be perfectly happy sitting on a rock in the mountains? He loved creating his own myths didn't he? Here is my take: The guy was always a very active guy. He fell into a 2 year depression funk after his life partner died, and after feeling better went back to being a super active guy building his own empire and delighting in micromanaging every detail. He had as much chance of sitting on his butt in the mountains as The Donald. Well, it must have been a sacrifice to leave the silence of the Himalayas to end up being insulted by people like you.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Classic Honest John. It appears you are still attempting to inflict pain. Futilely. Scare quotes are so 90s. Can you answer my earlier question, how you square this intention to inflict pain with following a spiritual path? Do you *know* the labels that are applied to people who enjoy inflicting pain? Or those who see conspiracies everywhere? As he knows, I said nothing whatsoever to suggest or hint or imply that I thought anything I said would cause him not to hang around. He made that up so those who didn't remember what I *did* say would think that's what I had claimed. I said explicitly why I bet he wouldn't hang around: He didn't get the kind of responses he was hoping for to his list of TMO reforms. Nah, I read your post too quickly. I guess I misunderstood. Sorry! He isn't a regular poster here. He drops in every once in a while when there's something on his agenda he wants to accomplish. He's very one-pointed that way. He'll make a little small talk for cover, but that's not why he shows up. He always has a purpose in mind. This is all true. I'm not sure what you see as wrong with that. Many people are occasional posters here. Do you take issue with them as well? I did state my agenda up front: to discuss reform of the TM movement. All the side discussions about my character have distracted me somewhat from that purpose, but I've tried to do a good job of always bringing the question up again. The small talk isn't for cover, however. Cover for what? If I were doing something illegal or shameful I might look for cover, I suppose. Do *you* feel I'm doing something illegal or shameful? I don't see any shame in posting here occasionally -- with a purpose in mind. Could you explain what you find wrong with that? Anyway, there is a group of really interesting people here. When I do drop in, I enjoy a little discussion and repartee. Like my quick note to TurquoiseB on science fiction. Whenever I can give props to Philip K. Dick and Alfred Bester I grab the opportunity. As a side note, TurquoiseB and I, back when he used a different handle on the old AMT, crossed swords a number of times. Doesn't keep me from enjoying his cyber company today. It seems we've both changed and grown since then. Thirteen years is a long time. It'd be a shame if we didn't grow and change. Can you tell me some ways that you've grown and changed in the last 13 years? The world isn't black and white. There's almost always something cool about anybody. This is true of the Maharishi and you, I believe. He claims he's been interested in TMO reform for 13 years. Why did he suddenly decide only now that he wanted to discuss it with us? The answer is really simple. I wrote the essay that started this topic last week. I thought it achieved something I hadn't before: looking at the question of reform not from a list of complaints and problems, but rather from a list of positive dreams. Rightly or wrongly, I thought people would be interested. I've posted it on a number of sites, btw. Generally, it's received a warm reception. Which pleases me. Judy, you may remember back when you frequented TM-Free Blog about a year ago, that I did a number of posts based on the strengths perspective. Talking about the strengths of people recovering from cults, of adult children of cult members, and of some other groups. This is a new focus for me. It started with my training as a therapist. It's given me a new, interesting way of looking at these issues. It seems to get warmer feedback than the lists of complaints I have published. I hope this helps explain myself a little better to you. J.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
This is my 50th post, so John, you get to have the last word, until next Friday evening, at least. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John M. Knapp, LMSW [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Do you *know* the labels that are applied to people who enjoy inflicting pain? Have I inflicted pain on you, John? Or are you just trying for the sympathy vote by portraying yourself as a victim and demonizing me as a sadist? I mean, with your therapist credentials and all? I find it interesting that you didn't suggest to Barry (TurquoiseB) that he was a sadist when he was licking your butt by painting me as an insane bitch and a bunch of other insults far worse than anything I've said about you. Or those who see conspiracies everywhere? Where have I suggested a conspiracy, John? I think you do this stuff pretty much on your own. Again, you made that up to make readers think I suggested a conspiracy. So much easier to propose a diagnosis of psychopathology. You know, with your therapist credentials and all. snip Can you tell me some ways that you've grown and changed in the last 13 years? The pertinent one here is that I've become even less tolerant of malicious dishonesty. You had a chance to begin to change my perspective on you by disavowing your 1996 Trancenet Alert campaign and admitting you had deliberately grossly distorted the truth about the third world TM center project, in order to scare the wits out of people who weren't in a position to know what you'd done and increase traffic to your Web site, as well as creating an utterly unjustified picture in the public mind of MMY as a latter-day Jim Jones. That was *inexcusable*, yet you declared here that you weren't at all ashamed of it. My initial comment to Dan was to warn him not to give you any inside information about Janet Hoffmann's current project. Your blithe response to my posting the Trancenet Alert press releases sure does confirm I was right to warn him. snip He claims he's been interested in TMO reform for 13 years. Why did he suddenly decide only now that he wanted to discuss it with us? The answer is really simple. I wrote the essay that started this topic last week. I thought it achieved something I hadn't before: looking at the question of reform not from a list of complaints and problems, but rather from a list of positive dreams. Complaints and problems automatically define their corresponding positive dreams. Complaint: TM charges unreasonable fees. Positive dream: TM should charge fees that are reasonable. This is just now occurring to you??
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is my 50th post, so John, you get to have the last word, until next Friday evening, at least. Okey-doke. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John M. Knapp, LMSW jmknapp53@ wrote: snip Do you *know* the labels that are applied to people who enjoy inflicting pain? Have I inflicted pain on you, John? You are answering a question with a question. Some people might interpret this as an attempt to avoid answering. Even weakness. Yes, you certainly have inflicted pain on me in the past. Not so much recently. You've deeply wounded a number of my friends. I observed statements by you that certainly seem cruel. But you spent volumes in the last couple days questioning my motives. I think it's fair to ask you about yours. My question was very simple. Do you enjoy inflicting pain? The answer is your choice. You could say, No. You could say, Yes. You could say, Maybe so. You could just laugh. I see nothing harmful in the question. I'm looking for information. Or are you just trying for the sympathy vote by portraying yourself as a victim and demonizing me as a sadist? I mean, with your therapist credentials and all? I ask for no sympathy. It is my choice to engage you. Certainly if past history is any predictor, you *will* attempt to inflict pain on me -- and many others who disagree with you. But I think your actions are revelatory. As is your dodging of questions. I do not portray you as a sadist. Only you know your character and motivations. I've stated a number of times I don't believe it's possible to judge these things from a person's writings and public actions. I do treat you with the same caution that I would if I knew for a fact that you enjoyed hurting people. It's just my opinion, but I think this cautious stance would be a wise precaution for anyone dealing with you. At least as you present yourself in forums such as this. I find it interesting that you didn't suggest to Barry (TurquoiseB) that he was a sadist when he was licking your butt by painting me as an insane bitch and a bunch of other insults far worse than anything I've said about you. TurquiseB's actions are his own responsibility. If he inflicted pain on you, it is *your* responsibility to challenge him or choose not to engage him. It's not *my* responsibility to defend or rescue you. Or TurquoiseB. Do you believe you need rescuing? For what it's worth, I don't use language like insane bitch, and I am trying mightily not to trash you or say hurtful things to you. I'm sure I screw up sometimes. Your rage, bitterness, and hurtfulness -- as reflected in your actions -- are pretty overwhelming. I wouldn't be human if I didn't have some feelings under your barrage. And I may act out despite my best intentions. I'd be glad to apologize for any hurtful things I may have said to you. Just point them out. TurquoiseB makes choices I wouldn't make for myself. I would be very surprised if he wouldn't say something similar about me. Doesn't stop me from admiring him for other qualities. Also doesn't stop me from admiring you -- for your intelligence, articulateness, writing ability, loyalty, perseverance, etc. Although you do make choices I wouldn't. The thought for the night: The world's not black or white. I have every right in *my* world to challenge your hurtful actions toward me, however. There's no question that some of your attacks in the last couple of days have bordered on the defamatory or libelous -- as at least one other poster has pointed out. I am taking what I consider a rather gentle road toward challenging your attacks. Or those who see conspiracies everywhere? Where have I suggested a conspiracy, John? I think you do this stuff pretty much on your own. Again, you made that up to make readers think I suggested a conspiracy. So much easier to propose a diagnosis of psychopathology. You know, with your therapist credentials and all. You've jumped to an unwarranted conclusion, in my opinion. I didn't propose a diagnosis. I asked *you* a question. And I didn't do so as a psychotherapist. Because I work in a helping profession doesn't mean I can't challenge your hurtful actions toward me. Priests, doctors, even lowly psychotherapists have a right to challenge hurtful actions. How you respond, what you *feel,* these are your responsibilities. You could say yes, no, or maybe so. You could laugh it off. These are choices *you* make. I don't know you well enough to suggest psychopathology. I do say, quite directly, that your actions and speech are hurtful -- in my opinion. This has been pointed out to you over and over and over again. You choose to continue what looks to many of us as cruelty nonetheless. To ask you, Do you know the unpleasant names this tendency is known by?, is pretty gentle, in my book. Any answer you offer
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John M. Knapp, LMSW [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: . I would like to be proud of the Movement again. If it were to become accountable as a spiritual organization in the ways I outlined, I could imagine wanting to be associated with it again. J. John, this is an open ongoing discussion a lot around here inside outside the movement too. Is a lot of watching to see if the standard of integrity becomes something different from what it has been in the past. Is probably crucial to a success for the TMmovement in the marketplace. They do have a self-made reputation in the world now based in folks' long experience. A lot of people have left in ways evidently not coming back. A lot of folks watch wait to see how the TMmovement may conduct themselves anew. The lack of lustre in dome meditating numbers tells something of this. It is just the way it is. People have a sense of what is fair and they seem to associate with integrity and often likely dis- associate when integrities are lacking. There is a human nature in that aspect of character. The TMmovement evidently lost its integrity. We'll see if they can find it. Though, is wonderfully utopian though what they are up to also in large group meditations. There is an experience in that. I wish them well. To get to where they would like to go, i do suspect that they will have to attend to the aspects of what you offer in these critical points. Thanks for taking the time to bring them to the table here. -Doug in FF --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, guyfawkes91 guyfawkes91@ wrote: This is one of the best posts I've seen on here for a long time. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah, i agree with Guy, Regardless of who they are, these two posts seem some of the more honest forthright criticism of TM and the TM/FF circumstance of this month. Archival in ways: 1) taskcentered no_reply@ wrote: maybe they can dodge the cult label. Be Transparent discuss policies, procedures scandals openly publicize open complaint procedures report public scandals promptly to members, law officials public media allow free information flow fully disclose secrets, especially those that might affect potential members' choice to join fully disclose the group's political legislative involvement fully disclose finances, particularly international finances, with third-party audits create a member-driven task force to set reasonable fees for retreats courses dialogue openly with laity, the press the public Be Accountable publish - and adhere to - a set of ethics publish - and adhere to - all fees donation policies oversee clergy other agents with governing boards if any group agent acts unethically or illegally, take full responsibility Advocate Freedom allow open questioning of the leader's beliefs practices Create a mechanism for modifying beliefs practices create an elective or accountable structure of representation (as in most churches) promote freedom of speech within the group, without reprisals for contrary opinions promote academic freedom for clergy scholars allow access to files/records held on members public individuals advocate freedom to explore our spirituality without shunning or other repercussions avoid use of shame or guilt to control members Provide Member Protections institute safeguards against members devoting damaging amounts of time, money emotional resources to the group Value Respect for Non-Members foster a systemic respect for other spiritual traditions non-members foster a systemic respect for the rule of law, rather than the belief the ends justify the means foster a systemic respect for members' families, whether they are members or not foster a systemic practice of charity support to the less fortunate encourage members to live or socialize with non-group members Provide Informed Consent fully disclose negative side-effects of group's mind-altering or medical techniques undertake real efforts to address heal side-effects accept financial responsibility for members suffering side- effects Imagine a Transcendental Meditation Org that acted with this kind of integrity. That's a spiritual organization I could be proud of. And I'm not willing to accept anything less. From http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/180553 2) TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Turq writes:: With all due respect. snip for brevity It would take the imposition of some outside force to shake people whose beliefs are that strong and cause them to change their current path and take another. That said, one of the
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
On Jun 22, 2008, at 8:57 PM, John M. Knapp, LMSW wrote: The thought for the night: The world's not black or white. I'll add to that: The world's not black or white...unless you have Borderline Personality Disorder, then it appears that way and you react accordingly.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John M. Knapp, LMSW jmknapp53@ wrote: snip I also think you may overestimate your power. I can't think of anything you might say that would cause me not to hang around. Classic Honest John. As he knows, I said nothing whatsoever to suggest or hint or imply that I thought anything I said would cause him not to hang around. He made that up so those who didn't remember what I *did* say would think that's what I had claimed. I said explicitly why I bet he wouldn't hang around: He didn't get the kind of responses he was hoping for to his list of TMO reforms. He isn't a regular poster here. He drops in every once in a while when there's something on his agenda he wants to accomplish. He's very one-pointed that way. He'll make a little small talk for cover, but that's not why he shows up. He always has a purpose in mind. He claims he's been interested in TMO reform for 13 years. Why did he suddenly decide only now that he wanted to discuss it with us? Actually it's classic Judy. It's amazing. I can leave FFL for months (usually related to an unrelenting international travel schedule) but when I look back in, there you are spouting the same tired old crap, calling people who disagree with you liars and pretending to be inside their heads to the degree that you know what they think. (As Barry knows, As John Knows, As Sal Knows...ad nauseum.) I gathered some time ago that you are clueless as to how ridiculous you come off in these exchanges.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--The Rajas have nothing to offer mankind but their advice meditate regularly. Among Rajas, there would be a natural incentive not to say anything at all that's truly creative; lest they risk being labeled a heretic. Those birtday hats are quite valuable, you know!. Wouldn't want them to get de-Raja'd. - In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John M. Knapp, LMSW jmknapp53@ wrote: . I would like to be proud of the Movement again. If it were to become accountable as a spiritual organization in the ways I outlined, I could imagine wanting to be associated with it again. J. John, this is an open ongoing discussion a lot around here inside outside the movement too. Is a lot of watching to see if the standard of integrity becomes something different from what it has been in the past. Is probably crucial to a success for the TMmovement in the marketplace. They do have a self-made reputation in the world now based in folks' long experience. A lot of people have left in ways evidently not coming back. A lot of folks watch wait to see how the TMmovement may conduct themselves anew. The lack of lustre in dome meditating numbers tells something of this. It is just the way it is. People have a sense of what is fair and they seem to associate with integrity and often likely dis- associate when integrities are lacking. There is a human nature in that aspect of character. The TMmovement evidently lost its integrity. We'll see if they can find it. Though, is wonderfully utopian though what they are up to also in large group meditations. There is an experience in that. I wish them well. To get to where they would like to go, i do suspect that they will have to attend to the aspects of what you offer in these critical points. Thanks for taking the time to bring them to the table here. -Doug in FF --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, guyfawkes91 guyfawkes91@ wrote: This is one of the best posts I've seen on here for a long time. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5 dhamiltony2k5@ wrote: Yeah, i agree with Guy, Regardless of who they are, these two posts seem some of the more honest forthright criticism of TM and the TM/FF circumstance of this month. Archival in ways: 1) taskcentered no_reply@ wrote: maybe they can dodge the cult label. Be Transparent discuss policies, procedures scandals openly publicize open complaint procedures report public scandals promptly to members, law officials public media allow free information flow fully disclose secrets, especially those that might affect potential members' choice to join fully disclose the group's political legislative involvement fully disclose finances, particularly international finances, with third-party audits create a member-driven task force to set reasonable fees for retreats courses dialogue openly with laity, the press the public Be Accountable publish - and adhere to - a set of ethics publish - and adhere to - all fees donation policies oversee clergy other agents with governing boards if any group agent acts unethically or illegally, take full responsibility Advocate Freedom allow open questioning of the leader's beliefs practices Create a mechanism for modifying beliefs practices create an elective or accountable structure of representation (as in most churches) promote freedom of speech within the group, without reprisals for contrary opinions promote academic freedom for clergy scholars allow access to files/records held on members public individuals advocate freedom to explore our spirituality without shunning or other repercussions avoid use of shame or guilt to control members Provide Member Protections institute safeguards against members devoting damaging amounts of time, money emotional resources to the group Value Respect for Non-Members foster a systemic respect for other spiritual traditions non-members foster a systemic respect for the rule of law, rather than the belief the ends justify the means foster a systemic respect for members' families, whether they are members or not foster a systemic practice of charity support to the less fortunate encourage members to live or socialize with non-group members Provide Informed Consent fully disclose negative side-effects of group's mind-altering or medical techniques undertake real efforts to address heal side-effects accept financial responsibility for members suffering side- effects Imagine a Transcendental Meditation Org that acted with this kind of integrity.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Well, it must have been a sacrifice to leave the silence of the Himalayas to end up being insulted by people like you. Yeah, Maharishi was a big fan of feedback from his teachers. In fact he was quite an avid contributor to FFL before his death. Always one to read the dissenting opinion that Maharishi... So let me get this straight. My grave insult was to question that Maharishi preferred shitting outside (which I did in North India myself and saw my breath as I did so, and I was way South of the mountains in Delhi) to dropping a duce in a golden toilet INSIDE. And the insult is to question that his life was a sacrifice. becoming a rock star jet-setting guru who could hang out with anyone from any field for his 15 minutes of fame that he glommed off of the Beatles? That he would have preferred to sit on a rock and dig how cosmic he was without the legions of blond chicks who worshiped him as a God? You've got your insult meter set setting on Victorian Woman. You might want to loosen that up a tad. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: It was a sacrifice of life to leave the Himalayas. But necessary to bring about this new, golden age for mankind. - Maharishi, Boppard, Germany, 1982 Funny how religious dudes speak about their sacrifices while amassing huge wealth. It is part of their story. And we are supposed to believe that he preferred living without indoor plumbing to the golden throne? Or that he, unlike any of the rest of us, didn't gain more meaning in his life by going out, meeting people and laying his rap on them. He was so fulfilled sitting on his butt in the mountains that he didn't gain more joy for his life by becoming a teacher? Or that his nature completely changed after 13 years of running around for Guru Dev, and he would be perfectly happy sitting on a rock in the mountains? He loved creating his own myths didn't he? Here is my take: The guy was always a very active guy. He fell into a 2 year depression funk after his life partner died, and after feeling better went back to being a super active guy building his own empire and delighting in micromanaging every detail. He had as much chance of sitting on his butt in the mountains as The Donald. Well, it must have been a sacrifice to leave the silence of the Himalayas to end up being insulted by people like you.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now why would anyone want to leave after such a warm welcome. Your effect is working, Turquoise I was attempting open, civil discourse and you showed yourself with one post. As did you. ONE person pokes a little fun at you for being pompous, and you scream for the moderators. Good start, dude.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Turquoise the reason that I asked that you not send posts to my mame is because I find you to be angry, sad and lacking social behavior. Be alone for a while, it will be better. Learn a little honesty, dude. The reason you asked me not to send you posts (an impossibility unless you explicitly block them, which is your right), is that I got in your face and called you on your authoritarian bullshit. You seem to have expected people to react to old retreads of Maharishi-isms as if they were wise. Many of us got over that a long, long time ago. What we react to well is someone having synthesized their experience well enough to describe it in new (read not boring and condescending) ways, and as what it is -- *their* experience, not a template for anyone else's. I can tell that you really believe that what you said above was said for my own good. What I'm telling you is similarly for your own good. Wake up a bit and look around and actually *see* who you are inter- facing with on this forum and you might become a valuable member of it. Continue to treat us as TM students you can brush away with a prepared answer and we'll continue to laugh at you. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: John, I received this post Dan, you're aware that Knapp is a long-time, ferocious critic of TM, right? I seriously doubt he has any intention of trying to reform the TMO. What he's looking for is material he can use to make the TMO look as bad as possible (and not incidentally bolster his counseling business). Some of us have known him electronically for many years and don't trust him any further than we could throw him, if he came within reach. Someone's not being honerable here, so I think I'd better be protective of Janet. She's a friend of 40 years, and more open-hearted than most. When you get your posting limit restored, please do not reply. And, with all due respect, go fuck yourself and the dog you rode in on. If you're going to panic and call for Daddy or the moderators to come and save you from big, bad, sarcastic Sal poking fun at you for being clueless, and then believe the first slander you read from the first person who posts it, puhleeeze go back to lurkdom. This is a forum for those who want to speak their minds about TM, the TM movement, Maha- rishi, and other forms of trashy fiction. We LIKE being able to speak our minds, especially after being not able to within the TM movement for decades. What we DON'T like as much is for some clue- less newb to come roaring in posting trite Maharishisez cliches that everyone here knows by heart and that most of us rejected decades ago and then getting pissy because someone pokes a little fun at him for acting like a dweeb. Judy will tell you I am less than honorable, too. Stick around long enough, and she'll say it about you as well. It's just what she DOES. But if it helps to get you off your dweeb soapbox and speed your silly ass either back to lurkdom or to some more balanced type of dialogue, I'm not honorable, either, so you probably won't want me to reply, either. For the record, I also eat small children and have been known to piss on self- righteous dweebs in public. Be warned, and wear your waders.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, taskcentered jmknapp53@ wrote: Did you read either the post that starts this thread or the 13-year-old post I linked to? Wow ! A 13 year old post? ! I didn't think the internet had been around that long ! Even worse, Judy, Unc, John and I have been rehashing this stuff for 13 years (at least). Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: Turquoise the reason that I asked that you not send posts to my mame is because I find you to be angry, sad and lacking social behavior. Turq. is known as Old Grumpy by the folks round here. OffWorld Hehe :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: There's a history here you aren't aware of. Thios Fairfield life is way more complex than I'd expected. I'm just a simple boy from Harlem, NY. Can someone fill me in on WHAT'S GOING ON HERE? Dan, Hello Dan, This is (mostly) a place for ex-TM'ers to bash and denounce TM, the TMO and their former Teacher even though they left the Movement perhaps decades ago. The transformative energy of these experiences never seem to leave them as they dwell on this for years and years. The Turq is a good example of this; even though he left the TMO more than thirty - 30 ! - years ago you will still see him coming up with something he finds negative, even after all these years, every singel day here on FFL. Many here claims to have mooved on, but the reality is that they are stuck in the past. As more and more TM'ers are coming forward and saying they are now living the goal of all meditation with TM they are feeling increasingly uneasy suspecting, rightly, that they may have been vasting so many years of their life after stopping TM. Their greatest paranoia these days is that the Purushas now in the Himalayas will return to their countries soon blazing with Brahman. Wishing you all the best, Nablusoss
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, taskcentered jmknapp53@ wrote: Did you read either the post that starts this thread or the 13-year-old post I linked to? Wow ! A 13 year old post? ! I didn't think the internet had been around that long ! Even worse, Judy, Unc, John and I have been rehashing this stuff for 13 years (at least). Lawson http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/180858 OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Clear, but inscrutable. What is your reason for posting to a thread you are not interested in discussing? J.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, taskcentered [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Clear, but inscrutable. What is your reason for posting to a thread you are not interested in discussing? What an odd question. You've already forgotten what you and I were talking about, and that our exchange started with your response to my warning to Dan that you weren't trustworthy and to be careful what he shared with you?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Of course not. But I have no interest in the politics of destruction. I am interested in reform in the TM Movement. Which is the topic I posted on. Can you tell me why you're not interested in discussing TM Reform? You've posted numerous times you have things you take the Movement to task for. Could you turn that around to a positive agenda? What would you like to see the TM Movement do? We have it in our power to create a better, more positive, more spiritual organization -- if we so choose. Isn't that a more interesting thing to consider than discrediting all the people here you don't agree with? J.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John M. Knapp, LMSW [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Of course not. Then your question to me made no sense. But I have no interest in the politics of destruction. Why, how could anyone think such a thing? I am interested in reform in the TM Movement. Which is the topic I posted on. Can you tell me why you're not interested in discussing TM Reform? I'm not interested in discussing it *with you*.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
I'm not interested in discussing it *with you*. You sure seem interested in discussing something. You seem very concerned about my character. Can you point me to one person that felt I personally harmed them? In any way? I've certainly never received such a complaint. There are dozens just on this tiny little forum who feel the were harmed or taken advantage of by the TM Org. Trying to take me down for over a decade, as passionately as you are here on FFL, seems to me like swatting flies with nukes. Even if you are not interested discussing reform with me, you certainly could discuss it with others. That would be a positive agenda. Railing on and on about one guy with a keyboard and Internet access seems rather pointless. J.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John M. Knapp, LMSW [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Trying to take me down for over a decade, as passionately as you are here on FFL, seems to me like swatting flies with nukes. Try contemptuously. It's not the fact that you're a TM critic with a well- publicized Web site and blog who has set yourself up as a go-to guy for the media regarding the TMO that's problematic. It's that you're a *profoundly and maliciously dishonest* TM critic. With regard to reform, it seems to me that if it's ever to occur--which I doubt it will--it can only happen based on an objective view of the TMO rather than on the kind of malignant demonization you and others here traffic in. You're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John M. Knapp, LMSW [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Of course not. But I have no interest in the politics of destruction. I am interested in reform in the TM Movement. Which is the topic I posted on. Can you tell me why you're not interested in discussing TM Reform? You've posted numerous times you have things you take the Movement to task for. Could you turn that around to a positive agenda? What would you like to see the TM Movement do? We have it in our power to create a better, more positive, more spiritual organization -- if we so choose. With all due respect -- and unlike Judy I *do* respect what you're trying to do -- I think you are naive if you believe that we (outsiders) can ever positively affect the TM movement. I also believe that they (the insiders) cannot stop the juggernaut that out-of-control hubris has created. Weren't you *paying attention* during all those years on a.m.t. and later at FFL? To convince someone that they should change, they have to first become convinced that they *should* change, that there is something (anything) off-kilter with the way that they're doing things now. I am not convinced that the powers that be in the TM movement can possibly be so convinced. Their whole *lives* have been structured in ignoring what the outside world thinks of them. They have all done things that were questionable, and many of them have done things that were patently illegal, for no better reason than that their spiritual teacher told them to. That spiritual teacher was unwavering up to his death as to what they should do in his absence. Do you think that can be *changed*? I, for one, do not. It would take the imposition of some outside force to shake people whose beliefs are that strong and cause them to change their current path and take another. That said, one of the only things I can think of that could sufficiently *apply* such an outside force is bankruptcy. And I see that as a strong possibility. I think it's only a matter of time until those who were *nominally* left in charge of the TM movement discover that they cannot find the money. They'll search -- quietly, without tell- ing anyone that they are searching frantically -- and they won't find a trace of it anywhere. It will have disappeared into a black hole in India. No one will take the fall for this, or be blamed for extorting the money, because the powers that be will still be in the mindset of protecting our own, and protecting the image of the movement. And so it's likely IMO that within a decade, the Rajas will find themselves at the helm of a move- ment that does not have the capital to continue moving. *At that point*, and in my opinion not before, they might be open to changing a few things. But I don't see it happening before then. The points you proposed, John, make sense to some- one who CARES what the rank and file thinks of them. My assessment of the Rajas and the Bevans (there *has* to be more than one of him inside that blubberous carcass :-)) is that they barely con- sider the rank and file of the TM movement *human*, much less people they have to look good for. They Just Don't Care. They are RIGHT, and they know that they're RIGHT, and that's that. Isn't that a more interesting thing to consider than discrediting all the people here you don't agree with? Judy has no CHOICE but to attempt to discredit the people here she doesn't agree with, John. She can't come up with any arguments to make her POV look sane or rational; therefore she HAS to attempt to make those who don't buy it look insane and irrational. She won't ever address the suggestions you brought up because to do so she would have to admit that they might be *needed*. And while she may claim that she is not a TB, it's simply not true. So she does on a daily basis what TBs do -- she clings to beliefs that she is afraid to challenge, and she demonizes those who do challenge them. It's like Time itself, one of those forces of nature you can count on. Time is not gonna stop ticking anytime soon. And IMO it *will* stop ticking before Judy admits in public that the belief system she sold out to decades ago is flawed and badly in need of repair. She cannot bring herself to do this. As far as I can tell, it's some kind of twisted sense of honor for her. In my opinion, of course, which could be wrong. Those are nine words that you will probably never see at the end of a Judy Stein post. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Judy has no CHOICE but to attempt to discredit the people here she doesn't agree with, John. She can't come up with any arguments to make her POV look sane or rational; therefore she HAS to attempt to make those who don't buy it look insane and irrational. There he goes again. Why does he keep saying things he must know everybody else knows are lies? She won't ever address the suggestions you brought up because to do so she would have to admit that they might be *needed*. Another lie that everyone who reads my posts knows is a deliberate falsehood. And while she may claim that she is not a TB, it's simply not true. So she does on a daily basis what TBs do -- she clings to beliefs that she is afraid to challenge, and she demonizes those who do challenge them. And another. It's like Time itself, one of those forces of nature you can count on. Time is not gonna stop ticking anytime soon. And IMO it *will* stop ticking before Judy admits in public that the belief system she sold out to decades ago is flawed and badly in need of repair. She cannot bring herself to do this. As far as I can tell, it's some kind of twisted sense of honor for her. In my opinion, of course, which could be wrong. It's wrong. Moreover, it's not even Barry's opinion. He knows better.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Hi, TurquiseB, You may be right about the TM leaders. They may or may not change. But bigger organizations than the tiny TM movement have been changed from within. The Reformation changed the Christian church. Mahayana changed the face of Buddhism. Even the modern Catholic Church is grudgingly making some changes in the face of their laity's outrage. In the end, we are the source of all power within the TM Org. It's our money they're spending. It's our allegiance that gives them the illusion of power. If we withhold those things, the bankruptcy you mention will come all the sooner. Then things will have to change. J. P.S. And no, my agenda is not to bankrupt the TM Org. But if bankruptcy were to occur, it might lead to good things.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John M. Knapp, LMSW [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip In the end, we are the source of all power within the TM Org. It's our money they're spending. It's our allegiance that gives them the illusion of power. Not sure how much of *our* money--those of us on FFL--they're spending, actually. I haven't given the TMO a dime for over a decade. But here's an alternate approach that sounds promising: From The Times of London June 20, 2008 Scientology: the Anonymous protestors The Church of Scientology, notoriously ruthless at crushing its critics, may have met its match. The Times joins a demo by `Anonymous' - the vanguard of a new internet-fuelled radicalism There were signs, if you knew where to look, that the launch of Operation Sea Arrrgh was imminent. In a hundred corners of the internet plots were being plotted; in fancydress shops sales of Guy Fawkes masks were rising and in thousands of dank teenage bedrooms young men and women were making plans to converge on sites around the world, dressed as pirates. Their target was the Church of Scientology - and this was an altogether new way of protesting. It was all so different from how it used to be. For more than a decade, a small group had gathered opposite the Church's London offices to stage lonely demonstrations. Some were former Scientologists, some just angered by an organisation that they claimed split up families, extorted money and employed its followers as slave labour. Leafleting passers-by, explaining themselves to the police and countering - they claimed - the harassment of the Scientologists, they were happy if a dozen turned out. Then, earlier this year, something odd happened. Simultaneously and apparently without warning, in London, Toronto, Sydney, New York and other cities worldwide, young men and women began protesting en masse. They wore strange clothes, spoke their own dialect, distributed cake and operated under the name of Anonymous. They returned the next month - and the month after. Read more at: http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/the_way_we_liv e/article4173635.ece http://tinyurl.com/5bbsab
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip It's like Time itself, one of those forces of nature you can count on. Time is not gonna stop ticking anytime soon. And IMO it *will* stop ticking before Judy admits in public that the belief system she sold out to decades ago is flawed and badly in need of repair. She cannot bring herself to do this. As far as I can tell, it's some kind of twisted sense of honor for her. In my opinion, of course, which could be wrong. It's wrong. Moreover, it's not even Barry's opinion. He knows better. This is like the Ultimate Judy Steinism, and I never cease to be amazed at it. When someone honestly expresses what they believe about her, and it disagrees with what Judy believes about herself, her reaction is to believe that the person is LYING about what they believe. To her, that somehow seems more comforting than that they actually believe what they are saying about her. I actually believe what I said about her above. Judy Stein is in my opinion one of the biggest True Believers I have ever encountered on this planet, and sadder than most, because she cannot admit what she is, even to herself.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip It's like Time itself, one of those forces of nature you can count on. Time is not gonna stop ticking anytime soon. And IMO it *will* stop ticking before Judy admits in public that the belief system she sold out to decades ago is flawed and badly in need of repair. She cannot bring herself to do this. As far as I can tell, it's some kind of twisted sense of honor for her. In my opinion, of course, which could be wrong. It's wrong. Moreover, it's not even Barry's opinion. He knows better. This is like the Ultimate Judy Steinism, and I never cease to be amazed at it. When someone honestly expresses what they believe about her, and it disagrees with what Judy believes about herself, her reaction is to believe that the person is LYING about what they believe. I'm actually giving you the benefit of the doubt here. If you *did* actually believe what you say about me, you'd be dangerously out of touch with reality.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip It's like Time itself, one of those forces of nature you can count on. Time is not gonna stop ticking anytime soon. And IMO it *will* stop ticking before Judy admits in public that the belief system she sold out to decades ago is flawed and badly in need of repair. She cannot bring herself to do this. As far as I can tell, it's some kind of twisted sense of honor for her. In my opinion, of course, which could be wrong. It's wrong. Moreover, it's not even Barry's opinion. He knows better. This is like the Ultimate Judy Steinism, and I never cease to be amazed at it. When someone honestly expresses what they believe about her, and it disagrees with what Judy believes about herself, her reaction is to believe that the person is LYING about what they believe. To her, that somehow seems more comforting than that they actually believe what they are saying about her. I actually believe what I said about her above. Judy Stein is in my opinion one of the biggest True Believers I have ever encountered on this planet, and sadder than most, because she cannot admit what she is, even to herself. Judy may be many things, but she isn't a true believer and I'll tell you why. There is so much anti-TM crap that is published on this newsgroup that a genuine true believer would simply not allow themselves to be exposed to it for more than two or three times. Judy has allowed herself to be exposed to it for years and, as such, simply would not have been able to sustain the veneer of a true believer. Now, she definitely is a believer but it is based not on blind belief -- which is the characteristic that, more than any other, defines a true believer -- but on experience and years of intellectual examination and consideration. And a true believer wouldn't be critical of the TMO, which Judy is from time to time.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Judy may be many things, but she isn't a true believer and I'll tell you why. There is so much anti-TM crap that is published on this newsgroup that a genuine true believer would simply not allow themselves to be exposed to it for more than two or three times. Judy has allowed herself to be exposed to it for years and, as such, simply would not have been able to sustain the veneer of a true believer. Now, she definitely is a believer but it is based not on blind belief -- which is the characteristic that, more than any other, defines a true believer -- but on experience and years of intellectual examination and consideration. And a true believer wouldn't be critical of the TMO, which Judy is from time to time. Thanks, Shemp. Barry really *does* know better. He knows the vast majority of the crap he posts about me isn't true. He doesn't have enough imagination to figure out a way to try to insult me that's actually truthful.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, guyfawkes91 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is one of the best posts I've seen on here for a long time. Yeah, i agree with guy, Regardless of who they are, these two posts seem some of the more honest forthright criticism of TM and the TM/FF circumstance of this month. Archival in ways: 1) taskcentered [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: maybe they can dodge the cult label. Be Transparent discuss policies, procedures scandals openly publicize open complaint procedures report public scandals promptly to members, law officials public media allow free information flow fully disclose secrets, especially those that might affect potential members' choice to join fully disclose the group's political legislative involvement fully disclose finances, particularly international finances, with third-party audits create a member-driven task force to set reasonable fees for retreats courses dialogue openly with laity, the press the public Be Accountable publish - and adhere to - a set of ethics publish - and adhere to - all fees donation policies oversee clergy other agents with governing boards if any group agent acts unethically or illegally, take full responsibility Advocate Freedom allow open questioning of the leader's beliefs practices Create a mechanism for modifying beliefs practices create an elective or accountable structure of representation (as in most churches) promote freedom of speech within the group, without reprisals for contrary opinions promote academic freedom for clergy scholars allow access to files/records held on members public individuals advocate freedom to explore our spirituality without shunning or other repercussions avoid use of shame or guilt to control members Provide Member Protections institute safeguards against members devoting damaging amounts of time, money emotional resources to the group Value Respect for Non-Members foster a systemic respect for other spiritual traditions non-members foster a systemic respect for the rule of law, rather than the belief the ends justify the means foster a systemic respect for members' families, whether they are members or not foster a systemic practice of charity support to the less fortunate encourage members to live or socialize with non-group members Provide Informed Consent fully disclose negative side-effects of group's mind-altering or medical techniques undertake real efforts to address heal side-effects accept financial responsibility for members suffering side- effects Imagine a Transcendental Meditation Org that acted with this kind of integrity. That's a spiritual organization I could be proud of. And I'm not willing to accept anything less. From http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/180553 2) TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Turq writes:: With all due respect. snip for brevity It would take the imposition of some outside force to shake people whose beliefs are that strong and cause them to change their current path and take another. That said, one of the only things I can think of that could sufficiently *apply* such an outside force is bankruptcy. And I see that as a strong possibility. I think it's only a matter of time until those who were *nominally* left in charge of the TM movement discover that they cannot find the money. They'll search -- quietly, without tell- ing anyone that they are searching frantically -- and they won't find a trace of it anywhere. It will have disappeared into a black hole in India. No one will take the fall for this, or be blamed for extorting the money, because the powers that be will still be in the mindset of protecting our own, and protecting the image of the movement. And so it's likely IMO that within a decade, the Rajas will find themselves at the helm of a move- ment that does not have the capital to continue moving. *At that point*, and in my opinion not before, they might be open to changing a few things. But I don't see it happening before then. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/180957 Jai Guru Dev, -Doug in FF
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Judy may be many things, but she isn't a true believer... Shemp, she made over 20 posts in one day for NO OTHER PURPOSE than to trash the reputation of someone she believes is anti-TM (John Knapp). She's actually the one who brought up the term anti-TM with regard to him. She probably doesn't even *disagree* with the suggestions he posted, and has never once dealt with them. But she feels this desperate a need to trash him anyway, ALL DAY. I'm sorry, but that's a True Believer. Worse, a True Believer in denial. She's like a junkie telling her loved ones that she's done with drugs while shooting up in front of them.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Barry really *does* know better. He knows the vast majority of the crap he posts about me isn't true. He doesn't have enough imagination to figure out a way to try to insult me that's actually truthful. It is obvious that Barry does go out of his way to be bait you and it is beyond me to fathom why a chronologically grown person would do this. KH
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: Judy may be many things, but she isn't a true believer... Shemp, she made over 20 posts in one day for NO OTHER PURPOSE than to trash the reputation of someone she believes is anti-TM (John Knapp). She's actually the one who brought up the term anti-TM with regard to him. You really *are* out of touch with reality. It was half that, and half of those were in response to Knapp's attempts to trash *me*. She probably doesn't even *disagree* with the suggestions he posted, and has never once dealt with them. But she feels this desperate a need to trash him anyway, ALL DAY. All *morning*, you mean. I'm sorry, but that's a True Believer. And you really *don't* have any imagination. I made at least as many posts going after M. Dixon for his attempt to suggest Obama was a Muslim awhile back, and I can't stand Obama. I'm a True Believer in telling the truth and being fair, whether it's to Obama or Hillary or MMY or Lawson or myself or whoever is being lied about and/or unfairly accused. That's why I have a tendency to trash you and Vaj and Knapp and Skolnick and M. Dixon when he was still around, even Shemp when he gets out of line. Your mental and emotional capacities are so pinched and stunted you can't comprehend such a thing. Worse, a True Believer in denial. She's like a junkie telling her loved ones that she's done with drugs while shooting up in front of them. You ain't in no position to accuse anybody else of being in denial.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
It was half that, and half of those were in response to Knapp's attempts to trash *me*. Judy, I went out of my way to NOT trash you. I DID disagree with some of what you said. That is not the same as attacking you. If you can point out any of my comments that made you feel victimized, I'd be happy to apologize. J.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kenny H Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2008 9:23 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Barry really *does* know better. He knows the vast majority of the crap he posts about me isn't true. He doesn't have enough imagination to figure out a way to try to insult me that's actually truthful. It is obvious that Barry does go out of his way to be bait you and it is beyond me to fathom why a chronologically grown person would do this. It's like teasing one's sister. Fun in a way. If either one of them refused to respond to the other, the feud would fizzle out.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John M. Knapp, LMSW [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It was half that, and half of those were in response to Knapp's attempts to trash *me*. Judy, I went out of my way to NOT trash you. ROTFL! Good old Honest John! I DID disagree with some of what you said. That is not the same as attacking you. If you can point out any of my comments that made you feel victimized, I'd be happy to apologize. Oh, no need to apologize. I don't feel victimized by attacks from people for whom I have no respect. But here's an example of your attempts to trash me, just FYI: I may be wrong, Judy, but it seems when people disagree with your own views re TM, you attack them with disparaging labels -- ignoring the substance of what they have to say? And then there was your nitwit question, What is your reason for posting to a thread you are not interested in discussing?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: Judy may be many things, but she isn't a true believer... Shemp, she made over 20 posts in one day for NO OTHER PURPOSE than to trash the reputation of someone she believes is anti-TM (John Knapp). She's actually the one who brought up the term anti-TM with regard to him. She probably doesn't even *disagree* with the suggestions he posted, and has never once dealt with them. But she feels this desperate a need to trash him anyway, ALL DAY. I'm sorry, but that's a True Believer. Worse, a True Believer in denial. She's like a junkie telling her loved ones that she's done with drugs while shooting up in front of them. Sounds like the way the two of you post on this forum and amt for the past 12 years. Using your logic that must make YOU a true believer, too...a true believer in the cult of I-can't-stop-trashing-Judy.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Hmmm, Galileo a cultist? I don't think so. Heretic doesn't equal cultist. Having strange or nonmainstream beliefs has nothing to do with being a cult. Every religion looks pretty strange from the outside. Few raise to the level of destructive cult. Personally, I believe meditation is one of Nature's miracles http://KnappFamilyCounseling.com/mostly.html . I'm not surprised there are scientific studies that show it is good -- for most people. Confession can be shown to be good for most people. OTOH, the public shaming and abuse that Scientology uses its confessional ritual for causes trauma. Similarly a little meditation is probably good. The kind of overindulgence that the Maharishi encouraged appears to damage http://knappfamilycounseling.com/tmdangers.html some people. And the constant drumbeat to pay more and more for less and less -- up to $1 million for the videotaped Raja course -- has driven numerous TMers into financial ruin. Cultism has to do with repression, control, and abuse of a group's members -- usually by the cult leader/founder. Is TM a cult? That's for every individual to decide for him or herself. But I fail to see how the Org could not benefit from reform along the lines I suggest. J. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings wrote: They called Galilleo a heritic (ie. cultist)The only way to not be labelled a cult is to continuously and vigorously pursue scientific research under strict methodologies and continue to have them published in respected peer-reviewed scientific journals. Any organization (including any faith based school initiative, or some drug-induced stupor forced onto kids by states or governement, including also the promotion of junk food to kids, and including the promotion of unproven meditation techniques, etc. etc.) that has not hundreds of studies on the positive outcomes published in this way, are at best a cult, at worst criminally fraudulant.Anything other than something based on hundreds of proven studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, is by definition, mythological in its veracity, religiously ignorant in its application, and considered fraudulant in a civilized societyOffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
But I'd like to give the new leaders a few tips on how not to be a cult. In the future,at least. This is one of the best posts I've seen on here for a long time. I think it's a bad reflection on the group that it hasn't generated more support or comments. People here are mostly up their own arses arguing about really miniscule points or issues that the group thinks are important but no one else does. John's post lays out some good points for people to think about and they're issues that affect a lot of the lurkers here. I think the TMO is capable of reform, though it will take a long time and maybe even a generation before the present structure is dumped. These guidelines are simple common sense changes that the TMO needs to make before it has any chance of seeing its better ideas becoming widely accepted.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, guyfawkes91 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But I'd like to give the new leaders a few tips on how not to be a cult. In the future,at least. This is one of the best posts I've seen on here for a long time. I think it's a bad reflection on the group that it hasn't generated more support or comments. People here are mostly up their own arses arguing about really miniscule points or issues that the group thinks are important but no one else does. John's post lays out some good points for people to think about and they're issues that affect a lot of the lurkers here. I think the TMO is capable of reform, though it will take a long time and maybe even a generation before the present structure is dumped. These guidelines are simple common sense changes that the TMO needs to make before it has any chance of seeing its better ideas becoming widely accepted. Your common sense is rubbish. The TMO does not need any silly input from the majority of the people who are living like animals. Their ideas being widely accepted will hopefully never happen simply because the world would blow up. Too much Sattwa too quickly is not a good thing.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , taskcentered [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hmmm, Galileo a cultist? I don't think so. Heretic doesn't equal cultist. To the Catholic Church they were the same thing. An Occultist has the word 'cult' in it, and anyone accused of occultism was a heritic. Galileo was accused of being a heritic and 'of the devil' , yada yada yada. Having strange or nonmainstream beliefs has nothing to do with being a cult. Every religion looks pretty strange from the outside. Few raise to the level of destructive cult. Personally, I believe meditation is one of Nature's miracles http://KnappFamilyCounseling.com/mostly.html http://KnappFamilyCounseling.com/mostly.html . I'm not surprised there are scientific studies that show it is good -- for most people. Confession can be shown to be good for most people. This above statment is cult-like and a fraud. Where is the scientific research published in respected peer-reviewed journals to show this? OTOH, the public shaming and abuse that Scientology uses its confessional ritual for causes trauma. Similarly a little meditation is probably good. The kind of overindulgence that the Maharishi encouraged appears to damage http://knappfamilycounseling.com/tmdangers.html http://knappfamilycounseling.com/tmdangers.html some people. Oh its going to damage the hard rocks of ignorance alright. Make no mistake about it, the power of this transition is going to be very transformational. And the constant drumbeat to pay more and more for less and less -- up to $1 million for the videotaped Raja course A million dollars !Lol, that's only 495,000 thousand British pounds, or 640,000 Euros. The lesson is -- don't take the course unless you have half a million pounds to spare. Maharishi was taking from the rich to give to the poor. Hundreds of thousands learned for free in 3rd world countries. I have a friend in the Far East who learned TM for free, then the Siddhis, and then Governer training -- all paid for by Western contributions. -- has driven numerous TMers into financial ruin. Like who? Name one please. And they are happier people now -- unless they were attached to being rich. Now they are digging gardens and enjoying life. Cultism has to do with repression, control, and abuse of a group's members -- usually by the cult leader/founder. Sounds like you are talking about the US government? Highest percentage of prisoners than any other country...by far. Secret prisons etc. Is TM a cult? That's for every individual to decide for him or herself. But I fail to see how the Org could not benefit from reform along the lines I suggest. I agree with reforms. They are already instituting them. I was surprised how quickly the price of TM dropped after Maharishi was gone, something I have advocated for years. Changes will start to come now and you will see them. In just 50 years Maharishi instituted everything necessay for the next 10,000 years, so it is very misfit to current thinking. The current leader swill simply pull back a little from the things that are a bit too far out. You will see this more and more. Some things that Maharishi advocated that are too far out though, may actually be forced upon the world by circumstances anyway. He advocated re-building the cities for example. Well with current oil crisis and the price of food going up , alot of people are giving up their commute to the city for a simpler life outside the cities, and this trend could continue and the cities will be forced to re-build in a different way in order to survive. Interesting times. OffWorld J. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , off_world_beings wrote: They called Galilleo a heritic (ie. cultist)The only way to not be labelled a cult is to continuously and vigorously pursue scientific research under strict methodologies and continue to have them published in respected peer-reviewed scientific journals. Any organization (including any faith based school initiative, or some drug-induced stupor forced onto kids by states or governement, including also the promotion of junk food to kids, and including the promotion of unproven meditation techniques, etc. etc.) that has not hundreds of studies on the positive outcomes published in this way, are at best a cult, at worst criminally fraudulant.Anything other than something based on hundreds of proven studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, is by definition, mythological in its veracity, religiously ignorant in its application, and considered fraudulant in a civilized societyOffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , guyfawkes91 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But I'd like to give the new leaders a few tips on how not to be a cult. In the future,at least. This is one of the best posts I've seen on here for a long time. I think it's a bad reflection on the group that it hasn't generated more support or comments. People here are mostly up their own arses arguing about really miniscule points or issues that the group thinks are important but no one else does. John's post lays out some good points for people to think about and they're issues that affect a lot of the lurkers here. I think the TMO is capable of reform, though it will take a long time and maybe even a generation before the present structure is dumped. These guidelines are simple common sense changes that the TMO needs to make before it has any chance of seeing its better ideas becoming widely accepted. None of this will matter anyway soon. The planet is either going back to a dark ages chaos soon (and I will be the King -- loved by all the people due to my harsh rule ;-) ...or there is going to be a very powerful transormation of consciousness that is WAY MORE than people just being a bit nicer to each other. The changes will be tumultuous and powerful. Less than 5 years, but probably this year. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Nablusoss1008, Labeling people animals because they do not believe the way you do is a primary symptom of cult thinking http://KnappFamilyCounseling.com/culttales.html . When I was a TM Governor, we used to refer to nonmeditators with disdain. There was even an underlying fear that we might catch some of their stress. We used to call them mud -- after that story the Maharishi told about another monk in the Himalayas. This black/white, us-vs.-them thinking is unhealthy for both us and them. It's one of the primary things I mention need reform in the TM Org. A true spiritual organization advocates respect, care, and concern for all life -- at least human life. It's a measure of just how spiritually bankrupt the TM Org has become that that attitude is prevalent in some quarters. But I believe in the strength and potential of the wonderful people I have known in the Movement. Creative. Intelligent. Spiritual. I believe -- together -- we can create a TM Org we would be proud to be a part of. J. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote:Your common sense is rubbish. The TMO does not need any silly input from the majority of the people who are living like animals. Their ideas being widely accepted will hopefully never happen simply because the world would blow up. Too much Sattwa too quickly is not a good thing.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
JOHN, A TM Governor requesting email suggestions sent directly to you at [EMAIL PROTECTED] non-cults and cults. Why? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, taskcentered [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Give me a moment. I mean to give this post a positive agenda. But it may take a second to get there. I could complain about Transcendental Meditation. But I'd like to give the new leaders a few tips on how not to be a cult. In the future, at least. Heck, science fiction has always been my preferred literature form. This is what I observe. When critics label a group cultic, there's a knee-jerk reaction. The group enters an escalating spiral of defensiveness. First, they claim they are not a cult. They give dozens of reasons why they're just like other religions or groups. They attempt to destroy their critics. They claim critics are disgruntled, criminal, bankrupt, unbalanced -- downright crazy. When these tactics don't work, cults ratchet up repressive isolation of their members and forbid them to read critics. Critics rightly point out these defensive maneuvers make the groups even more cultic than before. Which sets off another round of defensiveness. Once in a great while, modern cults claim they have reformed. Scientology and ISKCON come to mind. I remember opening my apartment door one sunny, Sonoma summer day in 1996 to Gene Ingram's smiling face http://web.tampabay.rr.com/sp/PI.html . Gene's a private investigator best-known for allegedly intimidating critics of his main client, Scientology. He heard I left a startup cult activist foundation. So he thought I might be sympathetic to Scientology's side of the story. Scientology used to have some problems. But it's over. We threw the bad guys out. The good guys won. Gene left me his business card and invited me to Los Angeles for a private tour of Scientology's facilities there - and a private audience with some church bigwigs. Somehow, I never got around to that trip. Gene sadly misjudged my state of mind. Despite his assurances, cultic abuse complaints continue to dog Scientology some 12 years later. Maybe the mainstream media didn't get the memo. Hare Krishnas reform? Same tune, different day with ISKCON's Hare Krishnas http://www.rickross.com/reference/krishna/krishna7.html . Okay. So on to my positive agenda. Not every organization that critics label a cult started out to abuse its members. But without forethought, any organization can become cultic. Look at the problems the Catholic Church faces. So here are a few tips for Nader, Hagelin, and the other new TM leaders. Maybe, just maybe they can dodge the cult label. Be Transparent * discuss policies, procedures scandals openly * publicize open complaint procedures * report public scandals promptly to members, law officials public media * allow free information flow fully disclose secrets, especially those that might affect potential members' choice to join * fully disclose the group's political legislative involvement * fully disclose finances, particularly international finances, with third-party audits * create a member-driven task force to set reasonable fees for retreats courses * dialogue openly with laity, the press the public Be Accountable * publish - and adhere to - a set of ethics * publish - and adhere to - all fees donation policies * oversee clergy other agents with governing boards * if any group agent acts unethically or illegally, take full responsibility Advocate Freedom * allow open questioning of the leader's beliefs practices * Create a mechanism for modifying beliefs practices * create an elective or accountable structure of representation (as in most churches) * promote freedom of speech within the group, without reprisals for contrary opinions * promote academic freedom for clergy scholars * allow access to files/records held on members public individuals * advocate freedom to explore our spirituality without shunning or other repercussions * avoid use of shame or guilt to control members Provide Member Protections * institute safeguards against members devoting damaging amounts of time, money emotional resources to the group Value Respect for Non-Members * foster a systemic respect for other spiritual traditions non-members * foster a systemic respect for the rule of law, rather than the belief the ends justify the means * foster a systemic respect for members' families, whether they are members or not * foster a systemic practice of charity support to the less fortunate * encourage members to live or socialize with non-group members Provide Informed Consent * fully disclose negative side-effects of group's mind-altering or medical techniques * undertake real efforts to address heal side-effects
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, taskcentered [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nablusoss1008, Labeling people animals because they do not believe the way you do is a primary symptom of cult thinking http://KnappFamilyCounseling.com/culttales.html . When I was a TM Governor, we used to refer to nonmeditators with disdain. There was even an underlying fear that we might catch some of their stress. We used to call them mud -- after that story the Maharishi told about another monk in the Himalayas. This black/white, us-vs.-them thinking is unhealthy for both us and them. It's one of the primary things I mention need reform in the TM Org. A true spiritual organization advocates respect, care, and concern for all life -- at least human life. It's a measure of just how spiritually bankrupt the TM Org has become that that attitude is prevalent in some quarters. But I believe in the strength and potential of the wonderful people I have known in the Movement. Creative. Intelligent. Spiritual. I believe -- together -- we can create a TM Org we would be proud to be a part of. J. - -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote:Your common sense is rubbish. The TMO does not need any silly input from the majority of the people who are living like animals. Their ideas being widely accepted will hopefully never happen simply because the world would blow up. Too much Sattwa too quickly is not a good thing. Relax, get a checking
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , guyfawkes91 guyfawkes91@ wrote: But I'd like to give the new leaders a few tips on how not to be a cult. In the future,at least. This is one of the best posts I've seen on here for a long time. I think it's a bad reflection on the group that it hasn't generated more support or comments. People here are mostly up their own arses arguing about really miniscule points or issues that the group thinks are important but no one else does. John's post lays out some good points for people to think about and they're issues that affect a lot of the lurkers here. I think the TMO is capable of reform, though it will take a long time and maybe even a generation before the present structure is dumped. These guidelines are simple common sense changes that the TMO needs to make before it has any chance of seeing its better ideas becoming widely accepted. None of this will matter anyway soon. The planet is either going back to a dark ages chaos soon (and I will be the King -- loved by all the people due to my harsh rule ;-) ...or there is going to be a very powerful transormation of consciousness that is WAY MORE than people just being a bit nicer to each other. The changes will be tumultuous and powerful. Less than 5 years, but probably this year. OffWorld Agreed, but take a look at this : As men look back, by the Master The Master's article for Share International magazine, June 2008 As men look back by the Master , through Benjamin Creme, 23 April 2008 A few years from now, looking back, men will wonder why they hesitated so long in taking the obvious and most natural action: sharing the resources of the world. Experiencing warmly the new stability, the lack of tension, the ease of international co- operation, men will wonder how they could have been so blind to the self-evident, so wilful and destructive to their own best interests for so long. Humanity stands now at the threshold of an entirely new experience in which every global decision and act will be seen to be for the better, as nourishing and sanctifying their lives, and strengthening the bonds of Brotherhood which, up till then, they had ignored and all but forgotten. Gladly, men will now work together for the Common Good, the hatred and distrust of the past put firmly behind them. Thus will a new kinship emerge as Goodwill and Respect, like vitalizing yeast, saturate their awakened lives. Thus, too, in ever strengthening measure, will love and joy embrace and lighten the hearts of men and women everywhere. Alchemy What subtle alchemy can it be that will work this magical transformation in the lives of men? Not alchemy but the divinity which dwells in the hearts of men themselves, evoked and brought forth by the wonder of Maitreya's Love. Sharing, He has said, is divine; the first step into sharing is the first step into your divinity. In man himself lies the full measure of that divinity. Sharing will demonstrate that man is a potential God and is equipped to express the creative Will of his Source. Slowly but surely, that creative Purpose will manifest through men and so direct their actions and decisions. The old lawlessness will wither away and disappear like a faded memory of a distant, childish past. So will it be. Brilliant future We, your elder Brothers, see ever more clearly the outlines of a brilliant future stretching ahead for men; We see the blueprints of a science which would astonish the most fertile and sophisticated minds of today; We see, too, an art whose beauty and creative power has never, as yet, been seen by men. Above all, We recognize that this creative outflow, unprecedented in scope in human history, is the inevitable result of the great inner change through which humanity is passing: learning to live within the Laws of Life. When men see and understand this consciously, as a fact of life, they will take, gladly, the steps which lead directly to Peace and Justice, Freedom and Right Relationship. That first step is called Sharing. With Maitreya, the Lord of Love, and His group of Masters to help and guide, how can men fail to see that Sharing and Right Relationship are the same, have the same impulse: to demonstrate the urge to Unity which underlies our apparent separation, and so reveal the true nature of men as Gods. http://shareintl.org/magazine/SI_current.htm#master
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Say it isn't so (or that you now know better), please: When I was a TM Governor, we used to refer to nonmeditators with disdain. There was even an underlying fear that we might catch some of their stress. We used to call them 'mud' --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, taskcentered [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nablusoss1008, Labeling people animals because they do not believe the way you do is a primary symptom of cult thinking http://KnappFamilyCounseling.com/culttales.html . When I was a TM Governor, we used to refer to nonmeditators with disdain. There was even an underlying fear that we might catch some of their stress. We used to call them mud -- after that story the Maharishi told about another monk in the Himalayas. This black/white, us-vs.-them thinking is unhealthy for both us and them. It's one of the primary things I mention need reform in the TM Org. A true spiritual organization advocates respect, care, and concern for all life -- at least human life. It's a measure of just how spiritually bankrupt the TM Org has become that that attitude is prevalent in some quarters. But I believe in the strength and potential of the wonderful people I have known in the Movement. Creative. Intelligent. Spiritual. I believe -- together -- we can create a TM Org we would be proud to be a part of. J. - -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote:Your common sense is rubbish. The TMO does not need any silly input from the majority of the people who are living like animals. Their ideas being widely accepted will hopefully never happen simply because the world would blow up. Too much Sattwa too quickly is not a good thing.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
M regulary reminded us that we are The Movement and if we see better ways, to change things. John is doing that. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, guyfawkes91 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But I'd like to give the new leaders a few tips on how not to be a cult. In the future,at least. This is one of the best posts I've seen on here for a long time. I think it's a bad reflection on the group that it hasn't generated more support or comments. People here are mostly up their own arses arguing about really miniscule points or issues that the group thinks are important but no one else does. John's post lays out some good points for people to think about and they're issues that affect a lot of the lurkers here. I think the TMO is capable of reform, though it will take a long time and maybe even a generation before the present structure is dumped. These guidelines are simple common sense changes that the TMO needs to make before it has any chance of seeing its better ideas becoming widely accepted.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 wrote: Say it isn't so (or that you now know better), please:Well, it certainly was so. And I try to know better. You might be interested in an article on personal battle with secondary narcissism http://KnappFamilyCounseling.com/2ndnarcissism.html . J.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 wrote: JOHN, A TM Governor requesting email suggestions sent directly to you at [EMAIL PROTECTED] non-cults and cults. Why? Dan, I find I learn the most from commenters and corresponders -- especially negative ones. My posts/articles are meant to be just a staring point for discussion. So any suggestions readers make are a personal favor to me. Also, I now work as a cult recovery counselor. Suggestions may help my clients by expanding their ideas of policies of legitimate organizations. Finally, I have a sincere interest in reforming the TM Movement. I'm interested in collecting as much input as possible for this purpose. I will add any suggestions (with attribution if I'm granted permission) to the permanent home for this article on my professional website (here KnappFamilyCounseling.com/cultsb.html . Thanks for asking! I should have added a note to this effect to my original post. J.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Thanks --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, taskcentered [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 wrote: Say it isn't so (or that you now know better), please:Well, it certainly was so. And I try to know better. You might be interested in an article on personal battle with secondary narcissism http://KnappFamilyCounseling.com/2ndnarcissism.html . J.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
I'll look at KnappFamilyCounseling.com straight away. I too counseled, but in a school setting here in Manhattan. (P.S. Janet Hoffman is doing some great work in Spanish Harlem, if you're interested). --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, taskcentered [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 wrote: JOHN, A TM Governor requesting email suggestions sent directly to you at jmknapp53@ non-cults and cults. Why? Dan, I find I learn the most from commenters and corresponders -- especially negative ones. My posts/articles are meant to be just a staring point for discussion. So any suggestions readers make are a personal favor to me. Also, I now work as a cult recovery counselor. Suggestions may help my clients by expanding their ideas of policies of legitimate organizations. Finally, I have a sincere interest in reforming the TM Movement. I'm interested in collecting as much input as possible for this purpose. I will add any suggestions (with attribution if I'm granted permission) to the permanent home for this article on my professional website (here KnappFamilyCounseling.com/cultsb.html . Thanks for asking! I should have added a note to this effect to my original post. J.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'll look at KnappFamilyCounseling.com straight away. I too counseled, but in a school setting here in Manhattan. (P.S. Janet Hoffman is doing some great work in Spanish Harlem, if you're interested). Hi, Dan, I certainly would be interested in Janet Hoffman's work. Do you know how to contact her -- or find out more? Is there still a 5-post limit on this forum? If so, I think this is my last post for the day. J.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'll look at KnappFamilyCounseling.com straight away. I too counseled, but in a school setting here in Manhattan. (P.S. Janet Hoffman is doing some great work in Spanish Harlem, if you're interested). Dan, you're aware that Knapp is a long-time, ferocious critic of TM, right? I seriously doubt he has any intention of trying to reform the TMO. What he's looking for is material he can use to make the TMO look as bad as possible (and not incidentally bolster his counseling business). Some of us have known him electronically for many years and don't trust him any further than we could throw him, if he came within reach.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
Thank you for your guidance. FFL seems to be a mixed place. I think I'll be doing my sharing in the real world, where I can see who's speaking. Thanks again, Dan --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: I'll look at KnappFamilyCounseling.com straight away. I too counseled, but in a school setting here in Manhattan. (P.S. Janet Hoffman is doing some great work in Spanish Harlem, if you're interested). Dan, you're aware that Knapp is a long-time, ferocious critic of TM, right? I seriously doubt he has any intention of trying to reform the TMO. What he's looking for is material he can use to make the TMO look as bad as possible (and not incidentally bolster his counseling business). Some of us have known him electronically for many years and don't trust him any further than we could throw him, if he came within reach.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thank you for your guidance. FFL seems to be a mixed place. I think I'll be doing my sharing in the real world, where I can see who's speaking. It is a mixed place, but all the more interesting for that. I'm sorry if what I told you has scared you away. I hope you'll reconsider. There are plenty of nice folks here, even though there may be disagreements.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
You're very kind. It feels like I'm creating more confusion and bewilderment than sharing. Might just be a beginner's blunder. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: Thank you for your guidance. FFL seems to be a mixed place. I think I'll be doing my sharing in the real world, where I can see who's speaking. It is a mixed place, but all the more interesting for that. I'm sorry if what I told you has scared you away. I hope you'll reconsider. There are plenty of nice folks here, even though there may be disagreements.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, taskcentered [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So here are a few tips for Nader, Hagelin, and the other new TM leaders. Maybe, just maybe they can dodge the cult label. Be Transparent * discuss policies, procedures scandals openly * publicize open complaint procedures * report public scandals promptly to members, law officials public media * allow free information flow fully disclose secrets, especially those that might affect potential members' choice to join * fully disclose the group's political legislative involvement * fully disclose finances, particularly international finances, with third-party audits * create a member-driven task force to set reasonable fees for retreats courses * dialogue openly with laity, the press the public Be Accountable * publish - and adhere to - a set of ethics * publish - and adhere to - all fees donation policies * oversee clergy other agents with governing boards * if any group agent acts unethically or illegally, take full responsibility Advocate Freedom * allow open questioning of the leader's beliefs practices * Create a mechanism for modifying beliefs practices * create an elective or accountable structure of representation (as in most churches) * promote freedom of speech within the group, without reprisals for contrary opinions * promote academic freedom for clergy scholars * allow access to files/records held on members public individuals * advocate freedom to explore our spirituality without shunning or other repercussions * avoid use of shame or guilt to control members Provide Member Protections * institute safeguards against members devoting damaging amounts of time, money emotional resources to the group Value Respect for Non-Members * foster a systemic respect for other spiritual traditions non-members * foster a systemic respect for the rule of law, rather than the belief the ends justify the means * foster a systemic respect for members' families, whether they are members or not * foster a systemic practice of charity support to the less fortunate * encourage members to live or socialize with non-group members Provide Informed Consent * fully disclose negative side-effects of group's mind-altering or medical techniques * undertake real efforts to address heal side-effects * accept financial responsibility for members suffering side-effects Imagine a Transcendental Meditation Org that acted with this kind of integrity. That's a spiritual organization I could be proud of. And I'm not willing to accept anything less. I'm sure readers will think of more bottom-line policies for successful non-cults. Please feel free to email suggestions directly to me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] John M. Knapp, LMSW Therapist. Counselor. Coach. Former TM Governor. KnappFamilyCounseling.com KnappFamilyCounseling.com/cultsb.html Ah shit. So much for working today. WTF is wrong with what he is saying? Absolutely nothing. What is wrong with a former teacher sharing his point of view on what could make the movement better? But he gets crap from most of you. No wonder some people think TM is a cult. Listen to yourselves.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Memo to New TM Leaders: How NOT to Be a Cult
John, I received this post Dan, you're aware that Knapp is a long-time, ferocious critic of TM, right? I seriously doubt he has any intention of trying to reform the TMO. What he's looking for is material he can use to make the TMO look as bad as possible (and not incidentally bolster his counseling business). Some of us have known him electronically for many years and don't trust him any further than we could throw him, if he came within reach. Someone's not being honerable here, so I think I'd better be protective of Janet. She's a friend of 40 years, and more open- hearted than most. When you get your posting limit restored, please do not reply. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, taskcentered [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, danfriedman2002 danfriedman2002@ wrote: I'll look at KnappFamilyCounseling.com straight away. I too counseled, but in a school setting here in Manhattan. (P.S. Janet Hoffman is doing some great work in Spanish Harlem, if you're interested). Hi, Dan, I certainly would be interested in Janet Hoffman's work. Do you know how to contact her -- or find out more? Is there still a 5-post limit on this forum? If so, I think this is my last post for the day. J.
