Gurus taking Credit for Endogenous Neurological Events/Visions
Posted by:
corboy
()
Date: November 09, 2013 10:50PM
This information, part of a discussion about an entirely different group might be interesting for some readers.
If you want a debate, contact Professor David Lane.
These two items by Professor David Lane are well worth a peek.
Very many people seem wired to have auditory or visual neurological events if given suggestions--even by someone who does not identify as a guru.
If someone claims to 'give' such experiences and perhaps adds tecniques used in large Group Awareness Trainings, which facilitate regression, mood swings and bonding--thats heavy duty.
[www.ex-premie.org]
THE KIRPAL STATISTIC
Using Inner Visions to Your Social Advantage
(quote)It turns out that almost everybody has the inherent ability to see inner light and hear inner sound. Moreover, almost everybody has the capacity to have an out-of-body experience and behold wondrous inner visions. You don't need to go to an Indian guru to have such experiences indeed, you don't need to go anywhere at all.
But that's not what Kirpal Singh and his successors told their vast following. Instead, unsuspecting seekers(who number in the thousands) were taught to believe that it was the guru himself, not the disciple, who was orchestrating the elevation of the soul into higher regions. But Kirpal and crew were not being completely forthcoming about the mechanism which governs access to such amazing sights and sounds. That mechanism is the brain and that three pounds of glorious tissue is the lot of all humans.
In the early 1980s when I was teaching religious studies at a Catholic high school, I tried several meditation experiments with my students which convinced me that Kirpal Singh and other gurus like him were taking undue credit for their disciples' inner experiences. In my trial mediation sessions, I informed my students beforehand about the possibility of seeing inner lights and hearing inner sounds.
Naturally, given the boring routine of secondary education, my students were intrigued. I informed them that I knew of an ancient yoga technique that would facilitate their inner voyages. I turned the lights off, instructed them briefly about closing their eyes gently and looking for sparks of light at the proverbial third eye. I told them that I would touch some students on the forehead lightly with my fingers. They meditated for some five minutes. I then proceeded to ask them about their experiences.
[Kirpal Singh invariably did such a process directly after his initiation ceremonies; he also kept a running tally of how many saw stars and so on-something which I have called the 'Kirpal Statistic'.]
To my amazement, since I felt that Kirpal Singh and others were actually transmitting spiritual power, the majority of my students reported seeing light. A few students even claimed to have visions of personages in the middle of the light. Others reported hearing subtle sounds and the like.
I repeated the experiment on four other classes that day. I have also in the past ten years conducted the same experiment on my college students (both undergraduate and graduate). The result, though differing in terms of absolute numbers, is remarkably the same. The majority see and hear something. It doesn't take a neuropsychologist or a sociologist trained in statistics to realize that Kirpal Singh and others were simply tapping into an already built reservoir of meditational possibilities.
What was unique about Kirpal's approach, at least in comparison with other Radhasoami gurus, was that he claimed to be the responsible agent, the medium through which such inner experiences can be transmitted. Kirpal's disciples generally did not question his grandiose claims, since many of them did indeed see and hear something during their meditation. What they, of course, did not fully appreciate was that almost anybody could have induced them to have inner experiences.
[I don't mean to suggest, though, that Kirpal Singh was not a good catalyst, but only that he was not unique and that his success at providing thousands with access to inner lights and sounds was not necessarily connected to his mastership.]
Religious devotees seem overly eager to give up responsibility for their own neurological happenings, believing instead that it takes a 'Master' to draw their attention 'within.' This may or may not be the case (and I am not implying that gurus don't have anything good to offer), but one thing is certain: Kirpal's claims, and others like his, cannot be divorced (as they often are in Sant Mat related groups ) from an initiates own cultural and psychological field of interplay.
It is that interplay, that acceptance as fact of a guru's method and the disciple's own inherent capacity-neurological or mystical-for inner experiences, which fuels the claims of would-be masters.
It seems wise to me, in light of Near-Death Experiences and the plethora of other meditation accounts, to inspect how we see and hear during our inner voyages of light and sound. Then we may be able to understand why such experiences can occur to almost anybody, anywhere, anytime. It may also help us contextualize and appraise the claims of gurus like Kirpal Singh, who insist on taking credit for their disciples' wondrous visions.
If, as I have suggested, that anybody can act as a conduit for such other-worldly experiences, then Kirpal and gurus like him should be judged on some other criteria, since their claims for uniqueness and exclusiveness are anything but unique and exclusive.
The 'Kirpal Statistic' is exactly that: the probable outcome that the majority of meditators, provided the necessary instructions in Shabd or Nad yoga practice, will see and hear something. (unquote)
In a follow up discussion, Lane had a dialogue. Whole thing is worth reading.
Will quote some excerpts.
[dlane5.tripod.com]
(quote)DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Nice story, but it doesn't contradict the results of my experiments.
My point, lest we forget, is a simple one:
Almost anybody, given the right circumstances, can help others
"induce" inner experiences of light and sound.
I did it repeatedly, so have scores of other gurus (both in and out
of Sant Mat circles).
I didn't "transmit" anything.
But I did serve as a catalyst for eliciting that which was already
potentially held in reserve within that grand neural symphony we
call the brain.....
The gurus take undue credit, I believe, for that which is already
self generated.(unquote)
(quote)DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Yes, remember not all of my students saw light and sound.
But, more importantly, nor do ALL of Kirpal's initiates.
I have talked with dozens of Kirpal initiates who NEVER saw light
and sound during the time of initiation, even when Kirpal took them
to another room for a private sitting.
Just one week ago I had dinner with Robert Pirsic, an Austrian
businessman and an initiate of Kirpal Singh, who told me point blank
that he NEVER saw any inner light and NEVER heard any inner sound.
All of this despite the fact that Kirpal Singh took him aside
personally and gave him a one on one meditation sitting.
My point again is obvious:
The variablity of inner experiences and inner sounds can be
dependent upon a number of factors, not the least of which are:
1. The brain
and/or
2. The catalyst
I don't doubt for a second that certain gurus work better than
others in "inducing" cerebral fireworks, just as I don't doubt that
certain "prostitutes" work better than others in "inducing"
orgasmic discharges.
I know the analogy may at first glance seem crude but I don't think
it is.....
Orgasms--no matter how beautiful the lover--is something
self-generated.
The lover merely "excites" an already pre-existing program.
I would say the same with "gurus" and inner experiences.
They merely "incite" an already pre-existing program.
Taking credit for another's orgasm is akin to taking credit for
another's inner experience.
To be sure, some gurus may serve better in eliciting a mystical
response, just as some lovers may be better in eliciting an orgasmic
response.
But let us not forget the underlying point:
the orgasm and the vision arise within one's OWN self.(unquote)
If you want a debate, contact Professor David Lane.
These two items by Professor David Lane are well worth a peek.
Very many people seem wired to have auditory or visual neurological events if given suggestions--even by someone who does not identify as a guru.
If someone claims to 'give' such experiences and perhaps adds tecniques used in large Group Awareness Trainings, which facilitate regression, mood swings and bonding--thats heavy duty.
[www.ex-premie.org]
THE KIRPAL STATISTIC
Using Inner Visions to Your Social Advantage
(quote)It turns out that almost everybody has the inherent ability to see inner light and hear inner sound. Moreover, almost everybody has the capacity to have an out-of-body experience and behold wondrous inner visions. You don't need to go to an Indian guru to have such experiences indeed, you don't need to go anywhere at all.
But that's not what Kirpal Singh and his successors told their vast following. Instead, unsuspecting seekers(who number in the thousands) were taught to believe that it was the guru himself, not the disciple, who was orchestrating the elevation of the soul into higher regions. But Kirpal and crew were not being completely forthcoming about the mechanism which governs access to such amazing sights and sounds. That mechanism is the brain and that three pounds of glorious tissue is the lot of all humans.
In the early 1980s when I was teaching religious studies at a Catholic high school, I tried several meditation experiments with my students which convinced me that Kirpal Singh and other gurus like him were taking undue credit for their disciples' inner experiences. In my trial mediation sessions, I informed my students beforehand about the possibility of seeing inner lights and hearing inner sounds.
Naturally, given the boring routine of secondary education, my students were intrigued. I informed them that I knew of an ancient yoga technique that would facilitate their inner voyages. I turned the lights off, instructed them briefly about closing their eyes gently and looking for sparks of light at the proverbial third eye. I told them that I would touch some students on the forehead lightly with my fingers. They meditated for some five minutes. I then proceeded to ask them about their experiences.
[Kirpal Singh invariably did such a process directly after his initiation ceremonies; he also kept a running tally of how many saw stars and so on-something which I have called the 'Kirpal Statistic'.]
To my amazement, since I felt that Kirpal Singh and others were actually transmitting spiritual power, the majority of my students reported seeing light. A few students even claimed to have visions of personages in the middle of the light. Others reported hearing subtle sounds and the like.
I repeated the experiment on four other classes that day. I have also in the past ten years conducted the same experiment on my college students (both undergraduate and graduate). The result, though differing in terms of absolute numbers, is remarkably the same. The majority see and hear something. It doesn't take a neuropsychologist or a sociologist trained in statistics to realize that Kirpal Singh and others were simply tapping into an already built reservoir of meditational possibilities.
What was unique about Kirpal's approach, at least in comparison with other Radhasoami gurus, was that he claimed to be the responsible agent, the medium through which such inner experiences can be transmitted. Kirpal's disciples generally did not question his grandiose claims, since many of them did indeed see and hear something during their meditation. What they, of course, did not fully appreciate was that almost anybody could have induced them to have inner experiences.
[I don't mean to suggest, though, that Kirpal Singh was not a good catalyst, but only that he was not unique and that his success at providing thousands with access to inner lights and sounds was not necessarily connected to his mastership.]
Religious devotees seem overly eager to give up responsibility for their own neurological happenings, believing instead that it takes a 'Master' to draw their attention 'within.' This may or may not be the case (and I am not implying that gurus don't have anything good to offer), but one thing is certain: Kirpal's claims, and others like his, cannot be divorced (as they often are in Sant Mat related groups ) from an initiates own cultural and psychological field of interplay.
It is that interplay, that acceptance as fact of a guru's method and the disciple's own inherent capacity-neurological or mystical-for inner experiences, which fuels the claims of would-be masters.
It seems wise to me, in light of Near-Death Experiences and the plethora of other meditation accounts, to inspect how we see and hear during our inner voyages of light and sound. Then we may be able to understand why such experiences can occur to almost anybody, anywhere, anytime. It may also help us contextualize and appraise the claims of gurus like Kirpal Singh, who insist on taking credit for their disciples' wondrous visions.
If, as I have suggested, that anybody can act as a conduit for such other-worldly experiences, then Kirpal and gurus like him should be judged on some other criteria, since their claims for uniqueness and exclusiveness are anything but unique and exclusive.
The 'Kirpal Statistic' is exactly that: the probable outcome that the majority of meditators, provided the necessary instructions in Shabd or Nad yoga practice, will see and hear something. (unquote)
In a follow up discussion, Lane had a dialogue. Whole thing is worth reading.
Will quote some excerpts.
[dlane5.tripod.com]
(quote)DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Nice story, but it doesn't contradict the results of my experiments.
My point, lest we forget, is a simple one:
Almost anybody, given the right circumstances, can help others
"induce" inner experiences of light and sound.
I did it repeatedly, so have scores of other gurus (both in and out
of Sant Mat circles).
I didn't "transmit" anything.
But I did serve as a catalyst for eliciting that which was already
potentially held in reserve within that grand neural symphony we
call the brain.....
The gurus take undue credit, I believe, for that which is already
self generated.(unquote)
(quote)DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Yes, remember not all of my students saw light and sound.
But, more importantly, nor do ALL of Kirpal's initiates.
I have talked with dozens of Kirpal initiates who NEVER saw light
and sound during the time of initiation, even when Kirpal took them
to another room for a private sitting.
Just one week ago I had dinner with Robert Pirsic, an Austrian
businessman and an initiate of Kirpal Singh, who told me point blank
that he NEVER saw any inner light and NEVER heard any inner sound.
All of this despite the fact that Kirpal Singh took him aside
personally and gave him a one on one meditation sitting.
My point again is obvious:
The variablity of inner experiences and inner sounds can be
dependent upon a number of factors, not the least of which are:
1. The brain
and/or
2. The catalyst
I don't doubt for a second that certain gurus work better than
others in "inducing" cerebral fireworks, just as I don't doubt that
certain "prostitutes" work better than others in "inducing"
orgasmic discharges.
I know the analogy may at first glance seem crude but I don't think
it is.....
Orgasms--no matter how beautiful the lover--is something
self-generated.
The lover merely "excites" an already pre-existing program.
I would say the same with "gurus" and inner experiences.
They merely "incite" an already pre-existing program.
Taking credit for another's orgasm is akin to taking credit for
another's inner experience.
To be sure, some gurus may serve better in eliciting a mystical
response, just as some lovers may be better in eliciting an orgasmic
response.
But let us not forget the underlying point:
the orgasm and the vision arise within one's OWN self.(unquote)
Re: Guru Swami G
Posted by:
dabcult
()
Date: November 10, 2013 10:52AM
Email received
While watching an interview by Rick Archer, Buddha at the Gas Pump, with Swami G I became most impressed with her, for she appeared as most honest, most straightforward. Here was a woman I could trust, I thought. There was something captivating about her openness and sincerity.
Then I began Googling her name, and found your YouTube videos and the posting of theRick Ross forum. You are not alone with your opinion. From you and elsewhere, I found many people describing Swami Guru G as cultic who plays mind games with people, somebody accused of being paranoid, and by former followers.
As I got more informations a marvelous discrepancy appeared in my mind. On the one hand was the sweet, affable lady Rick Archer interviewed. On the other, was the woman who appears as described on YouTube by you and other critic
Had I not found so much evidence against her, I would have believed her to be as she claimed. What impresses me is her great skill in manipulating public impressions of her. I usually have a b.s. detector, but not with her, so I suppose I am confounded by my own ability to have been taken in. With her seemingly innocent charm when needed, she is a master manipulator.
J
While watching an interview by Rick Archer, Buddha at the Gas Pump, with Swami G I became most impressed with her, for she appeared as most honest, most straightforward. Here was a woman I could trust, I thought. There was something captivating about her openness and sincerity.
Then I began Googling her name, and found your YouTube videos and the posting of theRick Ross forum. You are not alone with your opinion. From you and elsewhere, I found many people describing Swami Guru G as cultic who plays mind games with people, somebody accused of being paranoid, and by former followers.
As I got more informations a marvelous discrepancy appeared in my mind. On the one hand was the sweet, affable lady Rick Archer interviewed. On the other, was the woman who appears as described on YouTube by you and other critic
Had I not found so much evidence against her, I would have believed her to be as she claimed. What impresses me is her great skill in manipulating public impressions of her. I usually have a b.s. detector, but not with her, so I suppose I am confounded by my own ability to have been taken in. With her seemingly innocent charm when needed, she is a master manipulator.
J
Re: Guru Swami G
Posted by:
Mike 108
()
Date: November 10, 2013 09:39PM
Mike here:
Refresher: I'm the Mike that used to be in their group - that took sannyas - that went to Florida to spend time and come off meds - and finally that left the group with a public raucous.....
I would like to say the following and then I'm gone:
I swear on my life that I did not start this thread on Guru Swami G.
And I am not involved in continuing it either.
But I did provide personal information to someone here - and they did post it.
And then I did later weigh-in on the thread a couple times.
FOR THIS I AM TRULY SORRY - and I apologise to Hridaya, Guru Swami G, and all others within the group who were offended.
I would remove any and all mention of personal information on this thread if I could.
And I ask the moderator to please do so.
Their birth names, and other personal information, are not for me to share and risk being displayed "for all time" on the www.
In response, they posted 2 videos on their YT channel - with my name in the titles, using my name several times in the content, as well as personal info.
I accept that this is not different (other than the video medium) from what I did to them.
For all who have contributed to this thread, who have followed, and who are active elsewhere on the site - please consider this:
Would you like to have personal info pasted on the web with no means of having it removed?
Than please don't do the same to others.
Regards,
Mike
Refresher: I'm the Mike that used to be in their group - that took sannyas - that went to Florida to spend time and come off meds - and finally that left the group with a public raucous.....
I would like to say the following and then I'm gone:
I swear on my life that I did not start this thread on Guru Swami G.
And I am not involved in continuing it either.
But I did provide personal information to someone here - and they did post it.
And then I did later weigh-in on the thread a couple times.
FOR THIS I AM TRULY SORRY - and I apologise to Hridaya, Guru Swami G, and all others within the group who were offended.
I would remove any and all mention of personal information on this thread if I could.
And I ask the moderator to please do so.
Their birth names, and other personal information, are not for me to share and risk being displayed "for all time" on the www.
In response, they posted 2 videos on their YT channel - with my name in the titles, using my name several times in the content, as well as personal info.
I accept that this is not different (other than the video medium) from what I did to them.
For all who have contributed to this thread, who have followed, and who are active elsewhere on the site - please consider this:
Would you like to have personal info pasted on the web with no means of having it removed?
Than please don't do the same to others.
Regards,
Mike
Re: Guru Swami G
Posted by:
yasmin
()
Date: November 12, 2013 12:58PM
Hi Mike. Actually I agree with you in general about not releasing names and identifying info about followers, and have actually argued against it, particularly in the case of children, on other threads here.
Having said that however, its just mo but at the point where services are being offered and particularly when money/(or other services of value such as free labor) are changing hands, it seems fair that people should be able to identify who they gave money to, and what their experiences/opinions about it were.
Do you agree?
Out of interest,do you feel that someone who is offering spiritual counseling should be held to a higher standard of privacy than others?
What kind of expectations would you have regarding privacy if you were going to a secular counselor?
Having said that however, its just mo but at the point where services are being offered and particularly when money/(or other services of value such as free labor) are changing hands, it seems fair that people should be able to identify who they gave money to, and what their experiences/opinions about it were.
Do you agree?
Out of interest,do you feel that someone who is offering spiritual counseling should be held to a higher standard of privacy than others?
What kind of expectations would you have regarding privacy if you were going to a secular counselor?
Re: Guru Swami G
Posted by:
dabcult
()
Date: November 13, 2013 03:22AM
Hi Mike
[...]
First you say this and that about Swami G ....to people who you really do not know t you can trust .....then you are so sorry to have said what you have said
and now you want to apologise to Guru G and even her stupid followers
[...]
There is sufficient proof of Guru G explotations of ex disciples
such as her demands of worship (asking people to chant the mantra Om Swami Guru)
looking at her picture.....she is one of the more insane and false guru everto appear on YOUTUBE ....your testimonial does not make much a difference ..the woman is a manipulative ...and not to bright on top of that
[...]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/13/2013 03:33AM by rrmoderator.
[...]
First you say this and that about Swami G ....to people who you really do not know t you can trust .....then you are so sorry to have said what you have said
and now you want to apologise to Guru G and even her stupid followers
[...]
There is sufficient proof of Guru G explotations of ex disciples
such as her demands of worship (asking people to chant the mantra Om Swami Guru)
looking at her picture.....she is one of the more insane and false guru everto appear on YOUTUBE ....your testimonial does not make much a difference ..the woman is a manipulative ...and not to bright on top of that
[...]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/13/2013 03:33AM by rrmoderator.
Re: Guru Swami G
Posted by:
rrmoderator
()
Date: November 13, 2013 03:24AM
dabcult:
Please do not insult or attack people personally at this message board.
Please do not insult or attack people personally at this message board.
Re: Guru Swami G
Posted by:
Mike 108
()
Date: November 13, 2013 03:43AM
Let me be very clear.
If you read my last post carefully, I am simply saying that I feel I was wrong for sharing personal information - like full birth name and personal info like marital past etc.
I feel it was not right and not relevant to the discussion.
And so I am apologizing for that specifically.
As far as the rest of it, I think I made my position clear.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/13/2013 03:58AM by Mike 108.
If you read my last post carefully, I am simply saying that I feel I was wrong for sharing personal information - like full birth name and personal info like marital past etc.
I feel it was not right and not relevant to the discussion.
And so I am apologizing for that specifically.
As far as the rest of it, I think I made my position clear.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/13/2013 03:58AM by Mike 108.
Re: Guru Swami G
Posted by:
Mad Advaitistador
()
Date: November 13, 2013 05:56AM
Dabcult, you are sometimes not nice.
Re: Guru Swami G
Posted by:
Mad Advaitistador
()
Date: November 13, 2013 05:58AM
Mike, unequal power balance with guru means she should know, do and be "better" than student and not warring.
Re: Guru Swami G
Posted by:
dabcult
()
Date: November 15, 2013 04:24AM
"she should know, do and be "better"
She is preaching to chant her name while looking at her pictures
She is trouble ...confuse ....she is scamming her disciples and she knows it
you might say "Dabcult, you are sometimes not nice." and you Mad Advaitistador
you are not sufficiently inform ...if you think that Sharon is gonna say SORRY
I was wrong ....I will do better to say that she was wrong would destroy whathever is left of her cult ....lets not be naive her ...in her latest video she talk about buying a house ....when a few months ago she was claiming to be broke
ITs about money its about power ...there is no spirituality in the heart of that scammer
She is preaching to chant her name while looking at her pictures
She is trouble ...confuse ....she is scamming her disciples and she knows it
you might say "Dabcult, you are sometimes not nice." and you Mad Advaitistador
you are not sufficiently inform ...if you think that Sharon is gonna say SORRY
I was wrong ....I will do better to say that she was wrong would destroy whathever is left of her cult ....lets not be naive her ...in her latest video she talk about buying a house ....when a few months ago she was claiming to be broke
ITs about money its about power ...there is no spirituality in the heart of that scammer
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.