Question:
<… The rest is not worth arguing. The TMO is a mere shell of itself. In many cities there are no longer operating centers. Attendance at group meditations in LA amount to only a few people (This is a big city). Most yoga schools teach meditation. There is much competition. You can do better these days for your meditation dollar.
Then let’s "agree to disagree" on the rest, and agree that people can indeed do better. –Joe — Joe Kellett (reformed former TM teacher) "Falling Down the TM Rabbit Hole" (How Transcendental Meditation (TM) Really Works, a Critical Opinion): www.suggestibility.org
Response:
Some people may do better and then, some may not, what works for you will not necessary work for others, hence so many roads to the ONE. And of course the right to disagree is always yours 
:):)
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – <… The rest is not worth arguing. The TMO is a mere shell of itself. In many cities there are no longer operating centers. Attendance at group meditations in LA amount to only a few people (This is a big city). Most yoga schools teach meditation. There is much competition. You can do better these days for your meditation dollar. Then let’s "agree to disagree" on the rest, and agree that people can indeed do better. –Joe — Joe Kellett (reformed former TM teacher) "Falling Down the TM Rabbit Hole" (How Transcendental Meditation (TM) Really Works, a Critical Opinion): www.suggestibility.org
Response:
The rest is not worth arguing. The TMO is a mere shell of itself. In many cities there are no longer operating centers. Attendance at group meditations in LA amount to only a few people (This is a big city). Most yoga schools teach meditation. There is much competition. You can do better these days for your meditation dollar. Then let’s "agree to disagree" on the rest, and agree that people can indeed do better. –Joe
I’ll drink to that. — ~Stu
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I just wanted to respond to the TM related parts of your post Joe. Another thing to look for it is the unethical use of psychological influence techniques during recruitment. I question the fact, for example, that the full religious agenda of Transcendental Meditation is not revealed to initiates until they are in a post-trance state, and are therefore possibly unduly susceptible to indoctrination. When taught in the 60 and 70’s His Holiness the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi was very careful about separating the "religious" aspect of meditation from the practice. He tried to give the technique a "scientific" quality, sighting studies and using pseudo scientific jargon to describe the benefits of a meditation practice. This was a way of getting his foot in the door of educational institutions and corporations. It is like bringing a yoga teacher into a corporation at lunch time (This is done were I work). People come to practice yoga, many people do not know that yoga is part of a deeper religious tradition. Is this a yoga agenda? Or Joe’s paranoia? Paranoia? Are folks here on alt.yoga used to the personal-attack tactics traditionally used by TM defenders on TM forums, Stu?
All I am saying is back in the 70’s, you paid the $35. They had a pretty organized program that taught a very subtle meditation technique. It worked for me as I felt anxiety symptoms fall away in a few months. Nail biting, insomnia, anger. At the time when they started talking about Cosmic consciousness and such I thought it was interesting. I certainly did not feel deceived. It was only after years of practice did the theory start to make sense. Today they want really big money for the technique. However I have said it before on this NG: If you can find a rogue teacher or Deepak’s people they will teach you the same thing for less cash. This ubiquitous personal-attack style of dealing with TM critics, often employed by long-term TM practitioners, often amounts to verbal abuse and is another symptom that TM is not what it claims to be. I suspect that you would do better to hide those tactics out here away from the TM forums. Maybe not. You wrap TM in the cloak of "yoga". This is also how Mahesh has fooled people for decades, by dealing only in the *appearances* of spirituality.
TM is a form of yoga. I have found it compatible with other schools of yoga. His Holiness the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi may be selling a bit of snake oil but he really is a genuine monk with a passion for what he has to offer. Marketing is not his strong suit. As for your example yoga teacher, would he claim that he will teach only "stretching exercises", with absolutely *no* spiritual or religious content? Does he deliberately describe his class as just about as "spiritual" as a session with a physical therapist? Then yes, he will be deceiving those who show up if he spends three-quarters of the class promoting the pursuit of Enlightenment and soliciting people for his week-end retreats.
It has been done. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I don’t believe that most yoga teachers do this. If asked, they are likely to be forthcoming that the physical movements that most people think of as "yoga" are merely part of a larger, and very spiritual, system. If people don’t bother to inform themselves about this before showing up for the class, then at least they haven’t been actively deceived by the yoga teacher. The yoga teacher will have behaved ethically. Yet people who take the basic TM course *are* told that it is just a "simple natural relaxation" exercise, definitely *not* a spiritual or religious system. Yet by the end of the 4th meeting (the first being private "initiation") I was told that within 5-8 years (yes!) of doing TM a mere 20 minutes twice a day, I would probably achieve a state called "Cosmic Consciousness" in which all suffering would end, in which I would experience Bliss Consciousness at all times, and in which *all* of my thoughts and actions would be "spontaneously life supporting".
Take a look at TM.org. It is true they emphasis the technique as scientific. And for many it can be. As a practioner it is not necessary to read Patanjali or the Gita to find benefits from the deep relaxation one experiences. That is a far departure from the "simple natural relaxation technique" that the 4-day course was supposed to teach. This was deceptive. When I became a TM teacher (yes, I fell for it),
Why didn’t I fall for it? we resolved this deception with a "mental reservation": "These people aren’t ready to hear the whole story. If we tell these people the literal truth, before they have had a chance to have The Experience, they will perhaps not sign up for the course. Only *after* the have The Experience will they be able to appreciate the spiritual nature of TM. And what we will teach them isn’t *really* mere ’spirituality’ or ‘religion’ at all, it is Highest Truth." I learned this mental reservation from "Maharishi" Mahesh "Yogi" himself during my TM Teacher Training Course. On a taped lecture, he told us that he could not use the "sweet language of spirituality" because the world was not ready for it.
Probably true. Marketing again. The TMO emphasizes the scientific aspects of TM. Teachers are required to cut their hair and wear suits. This is to add an air of legitimacy of the practice to a western audience. The TMO has always been guilty of poor marketing. This may be the reason that yoga has proliferated so quickly in the last 10 years. As westerners have embraced yoga the marketing has become better. Read the yoga journal to see what I mean. Compare their site yogajournal.com to TM.org and note the difference in marketing sophistication. [snip more of the same] The rest is not worth arguing. The TMO is a mere shell of itself. In many cities there are no longer operating centers. Attendance at group meditations in LA amount to only a few people (This is a big city). Most yoga schools teach meditation. There is much competition. You can do better these days for your meditation dollar. — ~Stu
Response:
I just wanted to respond to the TM related parts of your post Joe. Another thing to look for it is the unethical use of psychological influence techniques during recruitment. I question the fact, for example, that the full religious agenda of Transcendental Meditation is not revealed to initiates until they are in a post-trance state, and are therefore possibly unduly susceptible to indoctrination.
When taught in the 60 and 70’s His Holiness the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi was very careful about separating the "religious" aspect of meditation from the practice. He tried to give the technique a "scientific" quality, sighting studies and using pseudo scientific jargon to describe the benefits of a meditation practice. This was a way of getting his foot in the door of educational institutions and corporations. It is like bringing a yoga teacher into a corporation at lunch time (This is done were I work). People come to practice yoga, many people do not know that yoga is part of a deeper religious tradition. Is this a yoga agenda? Or Joe’s paranoia? The Science of Being and the Art of Living, (A TM evergreen) is book that brought many people to TM. It does not hide the Vedic tradition that is the source of TM. This book and many others on TM are quite straight forward and do not hide the traditional background to TM. People who learn TM are no more indoctrinated into a religious tradition than people who practice yoga through out the world. Yoga has spiritual aspects to it that can be incorporated into a students own religion. Although some xtian fundamentalists may take yoga to be a tool of the devil, many people from diverse backgrounds practice yoga with out being indoctrinated. As for TM, my own experience was that I learned the technique and only had contact with TM centers occasionally in the last 28 years of my practice. It is up to the student to decide whether s/he wants to pursue further forms of TM (Advanced techniques or Siddhas) as well as using their herbs, spas, astrologers, courses, retreats or whatever else the organization offers. I have taken very little part in these areas of the TM organization. Many fewer people would start TM if they were given a full opportunity to assess the reality of the teaching before submitting themselves to post-trance indoctrination.
For others on the alt.yoga – you should understand that Joe defines meditation as a hypnotic trance. Once a person is in the trance than the meditation teacher can make suggestions that are then easily followed. His WEB site is worth reading for greater detail. Thus thousands of years of traditional Buddhist and Vedic meditation are merely trance states. The doctrines of non-duelism and such flowing from these traditions followed by believers are the results of post-trance indoctrination. I believe that many of the people here at Alt.yoga are very aware of Patanjali and other doctrines of yoga and would find that the "reality of the teaching" of TM is in concert with this. As traditional yogic philosophy as proliferated over the last 20 years the TM organization has been more candid about its roots. Anyone attending lectures or reading any of their books can clearly see the source of TM. May want to read "Our Holy Tradition" by Lynn Napper an informal history of the Masters of the Sankaracharya Order. This is a book about the holy tradition that is the seed of TM. It is not a "secret book", it is publicly available and certainly does not shelter the religious or spiritual aspects of TM. (As an aside – it is poorly written, there are certainly better books on the subject if anyone is really interested in the Sankaracharya Order.) — ~Stu
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I just wanted to respond to the TM related parts of your post Joe. Another thing to look for it is the unethical use of psychological influence techniques during recruitment. I question the fact, for example, that the full religious agenda of Transcendental Meditation is not revealed to initiates until they are in a post-trance state, and are therefore possibly unduly susceptible to indoctrination. When taught in the 60 and 70’s His Holiness the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi was very careful about separating the "religious" aspect of meditation from the practice. He tried to give the technique a "scientific" quality, sighting studies and using pseudo scientific jargon to describe the benefits of a meditation practice. This was a way of getting his foot in the door of educational institutions and corporations. It is like bringing a yoga teacher into a corporation at lunch time (This is done were I work). People come to practice yoga, many people do not know that yoga is part of a deeper religious tradition. Is this a yoga agenda? Or Joe’s paranoia?
Paranoia? Are folks here on alt.yoga used to the personal-attack tactics traditionally used by TM defenders on TM forums, Stu? This ubiquitous personal-attack style of dealing with TM critics, often employed by long-term TM practitioners, often amounts to verbal abuse and is another symptom that TM is not what it claims to be. I suspect that you would do better to hide those tactics out here away from the TM forums. Maybe not. You wrap TM in the cloak of "yoga". This is also how Mahesh has fooled people for decades, by dealing only in the *appearances* of spirituality. As for your example yoga teacher, would he claim that he will teach only "stretching exercises", with absolutely *no* spiritual or religious content? Does he deliberately describe his class as just about as "spiritual" as a session with a physical therapist? Then yes, he will be deceiving those who show up if he spends three-quarters of the class promoting the pursuit of Enlightenment and soliciting people for his week-end retreats. I don’t believe that most yoga teachers do this. If asked, they are likely to be forthcoming that the physical movements that most people think of as "yoga" are merely part of a larger, and very spiritual, system. If people don’t bother to inform themselves about this before showing up for the class, then at least they haven’t been actively deceived by the yoga teacher. The yoga teacher will have behaved ethically. Yet people who take the basic TM course *are* told that it is just a "simple natural relaxation" exercise, definitely *not* a spiritual or religious system. Yet by the end of the 4th meeting (the first being private "initiation") I was told that within 5-8 years (yes!) of doing TM a mere 20 minutes twice a day, I would probably achieve a state called "Cosmic Consciousness" in which all suffering would end, in which I would experience Bliss Consciousness at all times, and in which *all* of my thoughts and actions would be "spontaneously life supporting". That is a far departure from the "simple natural relaxation technique" that the 4-day course was supposed to teach. This was deceptive. When I became a TM teacher (yes, I fell for it), we resolved this deception with a "mental reservation": "These people aren’t ready to hear the whole story. If we tell these people the literal truth, before they have had a chance to have The Experience, they will perhaps not sign up for the course. Only *after* the have The Experience will they be able to appreciate the spiritual nature of TM. And what we will teach them isn’t *really* mere ’spirituality’ or ‘religion’ at all, it is Highest Truth." I learned this mental reservation from "Maharishi" Mahesh "Yogi" himself during my TM Teacher Training Course. On a taped lecture, he told us that he could not use the "sweet language of spirituality" because the world was not ready for it. A well-meaning deception is still deception. People who sign up for TM don’t know what they’re signing up for. They have a *right* to know what they’re signing up for. If any individual yoga teacher also performs such a consciously deliberate bait-and-switch in order to gather students, the same criticism would apply from my side. My impression, however, is that this practice would be considered unethical by the yoga community as a whole. People who learn TM are no more indoctrinated into a religious tradition than people who practice yoga through out the world.
But potential recruits are told that TM has *no* spiritual aspect. It is the deception I object to, not the mere fact of a religious doctrine. Yoga has spiritual aspects to it that can be incorporated into a students own religion.
Irrelevant to the issue of deception, aka bait-and-switch. Although some xtian fundamentalists may take yoga to be a tool of the devil, many people from diverse backgrounds practice yoga with out being indoctrinated.
Again, it is the ethics of the recruitment process that I focus on. I don’t know of anyone who doesn’t know that yoga is *not* a secular system. Even people who think of it as "stretching exercises" know that it comes from a strong spiritual tradition. People would assume that TM was a spiritual system too, if the TM teachers didn’t actively deny it. We used to work very hard denying it. Potential TM recruits are told that there is no spiritual aspect to what they will be taught. They don’t hear the spiritual doctrine until they are in a post-trance and possibly highly suggestible state. As for TM, my own experience was that I learned the technique and only had contact with TM centers occasionally in the last 28 years of my practice. It is up to the student to decide whether s/he wants to pursue further forms of TM (Advanced techniques or Siddhas) as well as using their herbs, spas, astrologers, courses, retreats or whatever else the organization offers.
To take it to an extreme, it is also up to a Scientologist to decide whether they want to go here <http://www.demon.co.uk/castle/xenu/xenu-11.html. It doesn’t mean that they haven’t been subjected to unethical influence techniques. I have taken very little part in these areas of the TM organization. Many fewer people would start TM if they were given a full opportunity to assess the reality of the teaching before submitting themselves to post-trance indoctrination. For others on the alt.yoga – you should understand that Joe defines meditation as a hypnotic trance. Once a person is in the trance than the meditation teacher can make suggestions that are then easily followed. His WEB site is worth reading for greater detail.
First of all, it is not true that I define the word "meditation" as being identical to "hypnotic trance". That is a strawman argument <http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html. Yes, I do think that *Transcendental* Meditation, *specifically*, is a trance induction technique. Yes, please see the web site. I do *not* think that all meditation techniques are the same. I make no pronouncements about other techniques, because I haven’t practiced any except a Buddhist vipassana in a small way. I find vipassana to be completely different from TM. I do not say that a "trance state" can’t be used for spiritual purposes by an ethical teacher. I don’t know, I am agnostic about that. I *do* know that a trance state can be used for by an *unethical* teacher <http://www.trancenet.org/personal/kellet.shtml. Thus thousands of years of traditional Buddhist and Vedic meditation are merely trance states. The doctrines of non-duelism and such flowing from these traditions followed by believers are the results of post-trance indoctrination.
Nope, straw man argument. I make no judgments about these other techniques. I respect them highly in general. I assume that there are other unethical teachers besides Mahesh, but in general I have high respect for Eastern traditions. For one thing, these other techniques do not teach a "McDonald’s spirituality" of instant gratification. They do not tell people that in the first few seconds of their first TM meditation, they have achieved a spiritual state that members of other disciplines only expect to achieve after years of applying themselves. They do not claim that the highest spiritual states can be achieved by a mere 40 minutes a day of mantra meditation. If you want to find someone who disrespects these other teachings, however, you need look no farther than"Maharishi" Mahesh "Yogi" himself. His arrogant and superior attitude toward *all* other teachings is quite extreme. He states baldly that he teaches the highest spiritual teaching on the planet, and that *all* (*ALL*) other teachings are mere distortions of the TM teaching. I have *much* more respect for other Eastern traditions than Mahesh does. I believe that many of the people here at Alt.yoga are very aware of Patanjali and other doctrines of yoga and would find that the "reality of the teaching" of TM is in concert with this. As traditional yogic philosophy as proliferated over the last 20 years the TM organization has been more candid about its roots. Anyone attending lectures or reading any of their books can clearly see the source of TM.
As teachers we had quite a dance to do to convince people that a non-spiritual teaching could come from a spiritual tradition. But we did it. The people aren’t told that they will be taught spiritual doctrine *only* after they are in a suggestible post-trance state. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – May want to read "Our Holy Tradition" by Lynn Napper an
… read more »
Response:
Church is considered to lack ethics in the current sex abuse case. I’m beginning to think that perhaps you haven’t actually familiarized yourself with the position you are attacking. Anyone who cares to actually read some of the links I gave will discover that the discussion of ethics is very precisely defined. They are all meeting in the Vatican in big numbers. You don’t think there is an ethical problem in the Catholic Church, my goodness
You make a "straw man" argument <http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html. That is, you set up a position that I do not promote, and then criticize it. However, you say nothing about the position that I *do* promote. I doubt, based on your responses, that you have bothered to familiarize yourself with the position that I in fact promote. I hope that the RCC cleans up this horrendous problem with priestly pedophilia. It is, however, a *different* problem than those discussed at: "Cults 101" (http://www.csj.org/infoserv_cult101/cult101.htm). *Both* problems need to be addressed in the world, because *both* problems (among the many others in the world) cause needless and intense human suffering. –Joe — Joe Kellett (reformed former TM teacher) www.suggestibility.org
Response:
interested in exploring this technique, but am a bit wary of the organization… any information as to whether it’s on-the-level, or whether it’s more along the lines of a cult? is it an effective and spiritually beneficial technique? any info would be appreciated… thanks, chris.
Response:
Why do you want to pay so much money for what is essentially just plucking out some basic aspects of traditional meditation. It does not even teach the whole process of proper meditation. you can basically learn proper meditation for free from a competent teacher
: interested in exploring this technique, but am a bit wary of the : organization… any information as to whether it’s on-the-level, or whether : it’s more along the lines of a cult? is it an effective and spiritually : beneficial technique? : : any info would be appreciated… thanks, : chris. : :
Response:
Church is considered to lack ethics in the current sex abuse case. I’m beginning to think that perhaps you haven’t actually familiarized yourself with the position you are attacking. Anyone who cares to actually read some of the links I gave will discover that the discussion of ethics is very precisely defined.
They are all meeting in the Vatican in big numbers. You don’t think there is an ethical problem in the Catholic Church, my goodness
Response:
The whole cult thing and use of words of that effect is truly just a media nonsense Not true.
Well true to some extent in that the media misconstrue and only write usually what is in the interest of infotainment A cult is a group of people with a common belief and generally a leader. It would be hoped that the group operates in an ethical manner especially if they are espousing ethical rhetoric.
Which includes just about every grouping in society that has an ethical basis of some sort. The real culprit as you point out is to do with ethics and the real fight is against the immoralists, which includes many of the capitalists and their own cults
Response:
: interested in exploring this technique, but am a bit wary of the : organization… any information as to whether it’s on-the-level, or whether : it’s more along the lines of a cult?
The answer is both really. A cult is a group of people with a common belief. There could not be an organization that teaches meditation that is not a cult. It is the nature of organizations and the nature of cults. As far as the TM group is. They are a benevolent cult. The have a time tested, well designed system for teaching meditation. It costs a fair amount, but it is a one time fee. After that you are free to call them anytime through out your life time for any guidance you may need with your meditation practice. The money goes half to the teacher and the other half goes to the organization that uses it to fund research and set up centers and such. is it an effective and spiritually : beneficial technique?
There are millions of TMers around the world that will tell you that it is very effective. Many go on to the follow the spiritual offerings of the organization. Others go on their own or integrate meditation with their own spiritual tradition. Some people that have gone on are Deepak Chopra, John Grey (Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus), Paul McCartney for example. Others take the course, practice for a while, and decide that meditation is not for them. Still others get involved with the organization, get burned one way or another and try to dissuade others from learning the technique. Go to an introductory lecture. If it seems right for you do it. If not you will find that they do not practice a hard sell. The general notion they bring to newbies is that they will come when they are ready. — ~Stu
Response:
. The idea that all groups use the same level of ethics when recruiting and retain members seems a bit nonsensical. For example, it is not the beliefs of Scientology that is the basis of that controversy, it is their ethics. Well tell that to Tom Cruise and the numerous Hollywood actors/actresses that espouse Scientology.
I would love to. To think that celebrities are not subject to deception or psychological manipulation would be a mistake, I think. The Scientologists run a different sort of program for celebrities than they do for ordinary people. The celebrities don’t get sent to RPF <http://www.demon.co.uk/castle/xenu/xenu-11.html, for example. The celebrities are told that people who tell tales of RPF and other abuses are just "disgruntled" or worse, and such stories should be ignored. The Catholic Church is considered to lack ethics in the current sex abuse case.
I’m beginning to think that perhaps you haven’t actually familiarized yourself with the position you are attacking. Anyone who cares to actually read some of the links I gave will discover that the discussion of ethics is very precisely defined. May I suggest actually studying the position that you attack? The ethics focused by folks such as these <http://www.csj.org/infoserv_cult101/cult101.htm are mainly the ethics of recruitment and retention. There are certainly other ethical discussions to have, but those are *different* discussions. A difference between the RCC and Scientology is that an individual seeking membership in the RCC (in most places in the US anyway) must go through a formal course on exactly what RCC membership entails *before* actually committing himself. I believe that in most places in the U.S. there is also a one or two-year waiting period involved as well. In contrast, someone investigating Scientology involvement really has no realistic idea what they would be signing up for. They don’t know, for example, that after many thousands of dollars and much personal sacrifice, they will be "allowed" to study this doctrine <http://www.demon.co.uk/castle/xenu/xenu-11.html. They don’t know this because Scientology recruitment is deliberately deceptive. The only importance of mentioning the Scientology "Xenu" doctrine for this discussion is that I doubt that many people would start Scientology if the whole thing were known to them ahead of time. That is why Scientology recruitment is kept *unethically* deceptive. Another thing to look for it is the unethical use of psychological influence techniques during recruitment. I question the fact, for example, that the full religious agenda of Transcendental Meditation is not revealed to initiates until they are in a post-trance state, and are therefore possibly unduly susceptible to indoctrination. Recruitment programs of the Unification Church ("Moonies"), for another example, often take place at a remote conference or retreat facility. Potential recruits are invited there on deceptive pretenses, and are encouraged to accept rides with others. Once there, they are cut off from their normal surroundings and unable to easily leave. They are subjected to a disorienting psychological influence technique called "love bombing", which makes them the focus of the almost constant attention of love and praise and encouragement from the active Moonies in attendance. One evening they find themselves in an indoctrination lecture where they first introduced to the Rev. Moon’s doctrines. The disorientation from the artificial milieu and the love bombing turns out to be another technique whereby susceptibility to indoctrination is increased. See "Combatting Cult Mind Control" by Steven Hassan <http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0892813113/qid%3D968393515/sr%…. Hassan is a former high-level Moonie familiar with these practices. Many fewer people would start TM if they were given a full opportunity to assess the reality of the teaching before submitting themselves to post-trance indoctrination. The same holds true for the Moonies. Few people would ever go to such a weekend if they knew in advance what would happen and what they would be taught. If given a chance to assess these teachings using their full capabilities, most people would decline to participate. That is why such groups have to use deceptive recruiting methods and unethical psychological influence techniques. The RCC recruitment method *described* *above* differs significantly. There is "full disclosure" of the RCC agenda before people make any sort of commitment or subject themselves to hidden psychological influence techniques. There are many things about the RCC that many people dislike. That is subject matter for *other* discussions of ethics. In terms of the criteria discussed at the "Cults 101" link above, the Scientology and TM and Moonie recruiting methods that I mentioned raise a red flag. The *particular* RCC recruiting method that I mentioned does not raise the same concern. Many will say that *other* RCC recruiting methods used either today or the past *do* meet the criteria of unethical recruiting. That is fine, then. Those claims should bear the same scrutiny and be subject to the same criteria. For example, some people do have such a concern currently about the recruiting methods used by one particular RCC organization called "Opus Dei" <http://www.freedomofmind.com/groups/opus/opus.asp. The ethics of pedophilia are simply another discussion. To imply that all groups are the same because all groups might harbor pedophiles would also be nonsensical, I think. Many pop stars lack ethics and have followings.
Again, I do recommend studying the position that you are attacking. Many so called leaders are immoralists, they have a following and as politicians have a thing to preach.
Ditto. The whole cult thing and use of words of that effect is truly just a media nonsense
I would be more impressed if you understood what you were arguing against. If you would open yourself to some of the horrific experiences that people have endured in some of these organizations, perhaps your heart might be able to feel a little compassion for them. And perhaps you would not stand in the way of some very practical guidelines that people can use in order to help protect themselves and loved ones from similar experiences. Again I don’t care about doctrine. The Scientologists could preach the doctrine of Xenu all day until the cows come home and I would never say a word against them, if I felt that everyone was really giving *fully* *informed* *prior* *consent* before subjecting themselves to the intense Scientology influence process. Ditto the Unification Church. Ditto TM. Ditto Opus Dei if that’s a problem with them. By the way, no I don’t have a hidden Christian or other agenda. That’s why it is important to find out what someone means by "cult" before attacking their position. I have no commonality with doctrine-based definitions of "cult" such as are often promoted by Christian groups. Such terms are often used to say "anyone who does not *believe* as I do is in a cult". But just the fact that there is much semantic confusion about the word "cult" does not mean that someone can not meaningfully define at least one useful definition of the word. –Joe — Joe Kellett (reformed former TM teacher) www.suggestibility.org
Response:
. The idea that all groups use the same level of ethics when recruiting and retain members seems a bit nonsensical. For example, it is not the beliefs of Scientology that is the basis of that controversy, it is their ethics. Well tell that to Tom Cruise and the numerous Hollywood actors/actresses that espouse Scientology.
I have never heard Tom Cruise espouse Scientology. I know he practices it. The Catholic Church is considered to lack ethics in the current sex abuse case.
You mean certain members of the Catholic Church. For the most part I think the great majority the Church feel great disdain for these perverts. Many pop stars lack ethics and have followings.
Yes. Lack of ethics is often a prerequisite for being a pop star. It requires a contract with the devil. They’re followers are well aware of that. Many so called leaders are immoralists, they have a following and as politicians have a thing to preach.
For politicians see pop stars above. Same formula. The whole cult thing and use of words of that effect is truly just a media nonsense
Not true. A cult is a group of people with a common belief and generally a leader. It would be hoped that the group operates in an ethical manner especially if they are espousing ethical rhetoric. — ~Stu
Response:
. The idea that all groups use the same level of ethics when recruiting and retain members seems a bit nonsensical. For example, it is not the beliefs of Scientology that is the basis of that controversy, it is their ethics.
Well tell that to Tom Cruise and the numerous Hollywood actors/actresses that espouse Scientology. The Catholic Church is considered to lack ethics in the current sex abuse case. Many pop stars lack ethics and have followings. Many so called leaders are immoralists, they have a following and as politicians have a thing to preach. The whole cult thing and use of words of that effect is truly just a media nonsense
Response:
Just another word to fling around and basically all such attempts are seen as discrimination by many courts around the world for those who have tried to argue against them. Such attitudes are basically narrow mindedness and the fact is the church is as much a cult as Michael Jackson. discussion that you may find useful: "Cults 101" <http://www.csj.org/infoserv_cult101/cult101.htm.
Equating "the church" (I’m not sure which one) to Michael Jackson doesn’t seem useful. The definiton of "cult" that I referred to focuses exclusively on a group’s ethics <http://www.csj.org/infoserv_cult101/cult101.htm, not on their doctrines. People should feel free to teach and believe as they see fit, but we should be able to protest if we see people treated unethically. The idea that all groups use the same level of ethics when recruiting and retain members seems a bit nonsensical. For example, it is not the beliefs of Scientology that is the basis of that controversy, it is their ethics. See "The Road to Xenu" <http://www.demon.co.uk/castle/xenu/xenu.html, especially <http://www.demon.co.uk/castle/xenu/xenu-11.html. See also. <www.xenu.net. The problem that I have with TM has to do with ethics, not belief. –Joe — Joe Kellett (reformed former TM teacher) www.suggestibility.org
Response:
Just another word to fling around and basically all such attempts are seen as discrimination by many courts around the world for those who have tried to argue against them. Such attitudes are basically narrow mindedness and the fact is the church is as much a cult as Michael Jackson.
discussion that you – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – may find useful: "Cults 101" <http://www.csj.org/infoserv_cult101/cult101.htm.
Response:
interested in exploring this technique, but am a bit wary of the organization… any information as to whether it’s on-the-level, or whether it’s more along the lines of a cult? is it an effective and spiritually beneficial technique? any info would be appreciated… thanks, chris.
My views on TM are published at <www.suggestibility.org. For reasons explained there, I recommend giving TM a wide miss. I think that "Maharishi" Mahesh "Yogi" is a fraud, and that serious psychological problems can arise from heavy TM involvement. As for "cult", there are a many definitions and usages of that word. I prefer to focus on a group’s ethics in recruiting and retaining members, rather than on their doctrine. Here is a discussion that you may find useful: "Cults 101" <http://www.csj.org/infoserv_cult101/cult101.htm. –Joe — Joe Kellett (reformed former TM teacher) www.suggestibility.org
Response:
Hi, Stu… Are you the same "Stu" from the amt newsgroup? If so, ‘hello again’… sounds like you are doing well. Do you know where Delia is these days (virtually speaking)?
Probably flying over Pasadena on a broom. Was thinking of her today. After her influence it is hard to see Easter as anything else but a pagan holiday. — ~Stu
Response:
Hi, Stu… Are you the same "Stu" from the amt newsgroup? If so, ‘hello again’… sounds like you are doing well. Do you know where Delia is these days (virtually speaking)? All the best… … Chet – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -tested, well designed system for teaching meditation. It costs a fair amount, but it is a one time fee. After that you are free to call them anytime through out your life time for any guidance you may need with your meditation practice. The money goes half to the teacher and the other half goes to the organization that uses it to fund research and set up centers and such. is it an effective and spiritually : beneficial technique? There are millions of TMers around the world that will tell you that it is very effective. Many go on to the follow the spiritual offerings of the organization. Others go on their own or integrate meditation with their own spiritual tradition. Some people that have gone on are Deepak Chopra, John Grey (Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus), Paul McCartney for example. Others take the course, practice for a while, and decide that meditation is not for them. Still others get involved with the organization, get burned one way or another and try to dissuade others from learning the technique. Go to an introductory lecture. If it seems right for you do it. If not you will find that they do not practice a hard sell. The general notion they bring to newbies is that they will come when they are ready. — ~Stu
Response:
Categories: Yoga Schools | 
No Comments »