Re: Byron Katie (the Work) and Eckhart Tolle Legit??
Posted by:
helpme2times
()
Date: April 12, 2009 08:48PM
[[url=http://suicidegirls.com/news/culture/23315/]The Enlightened Beings Club[/url]]Quote
corboy
If bored, go to Google and put 'Ken Wilber' 'Bernie Glassman' and 'Gempo Roshi' together and see what ya get.
Aside from the New Wage/Inspiration Industry scene..
the only other social scene venue where you can witness an equivalent amount of derriere sniffing is at the local dog park.
Re: Byron Katie (the Work) and covert Story hypnotherapy
Posted by:
The Anticult
()
Date: April 12, 2009 10:08PM
Jay...
I think a more detailed critical analysis of Erickson, would be better in another thread? I don't want to go off-topic of Byron Katie.
After all, BK at most does only a tiny part of methods taken from that area, and warps and perverts them. I think just focussing on the BK part is more appropriate for the thread.
It seems BK took some elements that sprung from him, 2nd or 3rd generation, probably from the books written about his methods.
As far as Erickson, its very complex, and literally takes years of analysis, perhaps a lifetime.
Erickson didn't write any books for the public, just academic papers. Try to read that stuff, in the Rossi books, its written for professional hypnotherapists. And of course its layered with stuff, that's the fun!
Mozart/Picasso worked on many levels as well, that's why its good, that's how I see it. Its serious stuff.
But just to follow those couple points.
Any "story" coming in the context of hypnotherapy, is never to be taken at face value. Its like a modern parable. It may be based in fact, but then modified. Then other symbolic layers are put into it, to try and get the desired effect. Its in a way similar to a fairy tale, but more sophisticated.
Many of them were carefully re-written, like short stories, many times, with careful language.
So they really are a carefully written hypnotic induction, but done in the form of a modern story, a teaching tale.
The lesson is, whenever anyone is "telling a story" in a LGAT these days, guess what? Same thing, usually done very poorly though. Sometimes incredibly well.
Byron Katie is in the middle of the pack, in terms of skill, but she is at the BOTTOM in terms of misuse.
The Erickson stuff about climbing Squaw Peak, is certainly factual, and also symbolic. People were given therapy homework to climb that hill, for various reasons. That is pure Behavior Therapy.
In behavior therapy, people are assigned behaviors, to overcome certain blocks, etc. It can be very painful emotionally too, like overcoming a phobia of elevators, spiders, etc.
Standard behavior therapy.
He may have stamped on a person foot, he was a licensed MD, so he could give full physicals, test reflexes, etc. But maybe its just a Teaching Tale, who knows.
He was a therapist, and he did behavior therapy, and also psychotherapy, and also hypnotherapy.
Also, some behavior methods are outdated from an earlier era. Some aren't, germ phobics for example, sometimes have to risk taking a crap in a public toilet eventually!
(again, this is applied by licensed therapists, not by LGAT quacks).
The alcoholic being "cured" by "cactus therapy". Did that happen as stated, or is it a symbolic story? I don't know, my guess is both. But its an awesome image for an alcoholic, how that's written. If I were an alcoholic, I would memorize that Story, and buy a cactus to meditate on. Its an amazing little Teaching Tale, with many aspects. [www.nyseph.org]
But what you DON'T do, is use these types of methods to insert images of Byron Katie as Mary Poppins on a rocket-bicycle into people's minds. That is extreme abuse.
What you don't do, is pretend the Stories are "true" to try and get a bigger impact, like BK does, and many others.
As far as consent.
Erickson was an MD, psychiatrist, licensed hypnotist, running hypnotic journals, and later in life, dressed in purple PJ's as they were comfy and made by his daughter. He was in a wheelchair, and he was eccentric, and also probably a genius.
So people came to see him, it was to be "hypnotized" in hypnotherapy. but it gets very complex.
Certainly people did NOT know exactly what was being done to them, on ALL those levels. That's the point. The double-binds, etc, were to occupy the conscious mind, to enable direct communication with the "unconscious". (if anyone can explain the unconscious, they win a Nobel prize!).
There are videos, I've seen many of them, where he works with patients, who go into "deep trance" but talk just like a conscious person. Then they come out of it later, and can't remember any of it.
Its mind-boggling stuff, and its fascinating.
The stuff about the covert hypnosis, is NOT what he was doing though. Its about communicating with the unconscious, to help the patient. The entire thing has been mythologized to this point, and who even knows anymore what is factual, and what is being fabricated by people. He's dead 30 years, so that's done.
But again, I go to the symbol of a surgeon's scalpel.
In the licensed trained hands of an expert, a doctor, it saves lives.
In the hands of a quack, people can be hurt or killed.
In the hands of a crook, people can be robbed.
Erickson was clearly an expert, he was a doctor, and he helped a lot of people in THERAPY. It wasn't an LGAT, or some sales convention.
It was later on that people made it "covert" by selling their LGAT's with it, and denying they are doing anything.
Did Erickson wield power?
Yes, of course. Just like your surgeon wields power too, when they are cutting out your gizzard.
That is why people need to be made aware of these methods, when they are being misused, as they are now all over the place.
Its great to have a doctor cut your gizzard out if it needs cutting out.
But its bad to have a quack butcher you, you could be killed by infection, or die on the table.
There appear to be some conspiracy theories about Erickson and stuff out there. But that is missing to the point, according to my research.
Hypnotherapy, from licensed, referenced, ethical professionals, can be very helpful, this has been priven in actual studies, and many therapists use aspects of it.
Covert hypnotherapy, being done secretly by LGAT salespeople, and dishonest "gurus" is an immoral crime, and very very damaging. They are at best quacks who will hurt you, and more accurately like a robber with a scalpel. If they were legit, they would get a license and training, but they don't want the oversight and responsibility.
The solution, is to NOTICE the techniques, and then that evaporates the TRUST, which is needed in the process. Then it doesn't work.
For example, Michael Katz. It takes minutes to see what he did in the Byron Katie book, to a trained eye. Then it doesn't work. It backfires.
Same with Byron Katie.
So again, more detailed Erickson analysis would be better in another thread, or somewhere else.
Its probably better to just focus on the very SPECIFIC techniques being used by these LGAT guru's like Byron Katie, and many others.
It seems to me, that this aspect is only mayeb 20% of what Byron Katie does. The rest are all the other LGAT methods, sales methods, therapy stuff, etc. She does at least 100 techniques, when including the seminars.
I think a more detailed critical analysis of Erickson, would be better in another thread? I don't want to go off-topic of Byron Katie.
After all, BK at most does only a tiny part of methods taken from that area, and warps and perverts them. I think just focussing on the BK part is more appropriate for the thread.
It seems BK took some elements that sprung from him, 2nd or 3rd generation, probably from the books written about his methods.
As far as Erickson, its very complex, and literally takes years of analysis, perhaps a lifetime.
Erickson didn't write any books for the public, just academic papers. Try to read that stuff, in the Rossi books, its written for professional hypnotherapists. And of course its layered with stuff, that's the fun!
Mozart/Picasso worked on many levels as well, that's why its good, that's how I see it. Its serious stuff.
But just to follow those couple points.
Any "story" coming in the context of hypnotherapy, is never to be taken at face value. Its like a modern parable. It may be based in fact, but then modified. Then other symbolic layers are put into it, to try and get the desired effect. Its in a way similar to a fairy tale, but more sophisticated.
Many of them were carefully re-written, like short stories, many times, with careful language.
So they really are a carefully written hypnotic induction, but done in the form of a modern story, a teaching tale.
The lesson is, whenever anyone is "telling a story" in a LGAT these days, guess what? Same thing, usually done very poorly though. Sometimes incredibly well.
Byron Katie is in the middle of the pack, in terms of skill, but she is at the BOTTOM in terms of misuse.
The Erickson stuff about climbing Squaw Peak, is certainly factual, and also symbolic. People were given therapy homework to climb that hill, for various reasons. That is pure Behavior Therapy.
In behavior therapy, people are assigned behaviors, to overcome certain blocks, etc. It can be very painful emotionally too, like overcoming a phobia of elevators, spiders, etc.
Standard behavior therapy.
He may have stamped on a person foot, he was a licensed MD, so he could give full physicals, test reflexes, etc. But maybe its just a Teaching Tale, who knows.
He was a therapist, and he did behavior therapy, and also psychotherapy, and also hypnotherapy.
Also, some behavior methods are outdated from an earlier era. Some aren't, germ phobics for example, sometimes have to risk taking a crap in a public toilet eventually!
(again, this is applied by licensed therapists, not by LGAT quacks).
The alcoholic being "cured" by "cactus therapy". Did that happen as stated, or is it a symbolic story? I don't know, my guess is both. But its an awesome image for an alcoholic, how that's written. If I were an alcoholic, I would memorize that Story, and buy a cactus to meditate on. Its an amazing little Teaching Tale, with many aspects. [www.nyseph.org]
But what you DON'T do, is use these types of methods to insert images of Byron Katie as Mary Poppins on a rocket-bicycle into people's minds. That is extreme abuse.
What you don't do, is pretend the Stories are "true" to try and get a bigger impact, like BK does, and many others.
As far as consent.
Erickson was an MD, psychiatrist, licensed hypnotist, running hypnotic journals, and later in life, dressed in purple PJ's as they were comfy and made by his daughter. He was in a wheelchair, and he was eccentric, and also probably a genius.
So people came to see him, it was to be "hypnotized" in hypnotherapy. but it gets very complex.
Certainly people did NOT know exactly what was being done to them, on ALL those levels. That's the point. The double-binds, etc, were to occupy the conscious mind, to enable direct communication with the "unconscious". (if anyone can explain the unconscious, they win a Nobel prize!).
There are videos, I've seen many of them, where he works with patients, who go into "deep trance" but talk just like a conscious person. Then they come out of it later, and can't remember any of it.
Its mind-boggling stuff, and its fascinating.
The stuff about the covert hypnosis, is NOT what he was doing though. Its about communicating with the unconscious, to help the patient. The entire thing has been mythologized to this point, and who even knows anymore what is factual, and what is being fabricated by people. He's dead 30 years, so that's done.
But again, I go to the symbol of a surgeon's scalpel.
In the licensed trained hands of an expert, a doctor, it saves lives.
In the hands of a quack, people can be hurt or killed.
In the hands of a crook, people can be robbed.
Erickson was clearly an expert, he was a doctor, and he helped a lot of people in THERAPY. It wasn't an LGAT, or some sales convention.
It was later on that people made it "covert" by selling their LGAT's with it, and denying they are doing anything.
Did Erickson wield power?
Yes, of course. Just like your surgeon wields power too, when they are cutting out your gizzard.
That is why people need to be made aware of these methods, when they are being misused, as they are now all over the place.
Its great to have a doctor cut your gizzard out if it needs cutting out.
But its bad to have a quack butcher you, you could be killed by infection, or die on the table.
There appear to be some conspiracy theories about Erickson and stuff out there. But that is missing to the point, according to my research.
Hypnotherapy, from licensed, referenced, ethical professionals, can be very helpful, this has been priven in actual studies, and many therapists use aspects of it.
Covert hypnotherapy, being done secretly by LGAT salespeople, and dishonest "gurus" is an immoral crime, and very very damaging. They are at best quacks who will hurt you, and more accurately like a robber with a scalpel. If they were legit, they would get a license and training, but they don't want the oversight and responsibility.
The solution, is to NOTICE the techniques, and then that evaporates the TRUST, which is needed in the process. Then it doesn't work.
For example, Michael Katz. It takes minutes to see what he did in the Byron Katie book, to a trained eye. Then it doesn't work. It backfires.
Same with Byron Katie.
So again, more detailed Erickson analysis would be better in another thread, or somewhere else.
Its probably better to just focus on the very SPECIFIC techniques being used by these LGAT guru's like Byron Katie, and many others.
It seems to me, that this aspect is only mayeb 20% of what Byron Katie does. The rest are all the other LGAT methods, sales methods, therapy stuff, etc. She does at least 100 techniques, when including the seminars.
Byron Katie (the Work) Bernie Glassman, Zen Peacemaker Order
Posted by:
The Anticult
()
Date: April 12, 2009 10:37PM
There are some strange links about Bernie Glassman, who apparently endorses Byron Katie.
Even wikipedia, which is very hard to get accurate critical info into, says his group was involved with tens of millions in real estate development, and millions in other areas, with the Zen Peacemaker Order, etc.
How many "Zen" groups are dealing with those huge numbers? Its a huge global organization.
Does that mean the Kwan Um School of Zen has bigger numbers than that?
And the core of "Unknowing"...again. How can you "teach" Unknowing, with all these courses? Knowing Unknowing?
Yes, grasshopper, a paradox.
(its very similar in tone to Byron Katie who talks about her School to Unschool...yes, you will be unschooled alright, unspooled too, You'll get "schooled" that is for sure).
It seems a shame at a time, when wonderful human knowledge is more available everyday, that people are talking about Unknowing.
What's wrong with Knowing?
Don't know much about Bernie Glassman, but endorsing Byron Katie is not a good start!
Its amazing how people like BK can dream up some imaginal past history Story, and pretend they are Enlightened, and then sell it, and so many people just buy it.
In general, most of the pubic are way too over-trusting of these enlightenment salespeople.
Even wikipedia, which is very hard to get accurate critical info into, says his group was involved with tens of millions in real estate development, and millions in other areas, with the Zen Peacemaker Order, etc.
How many "Zen" groups are dealing with those huge numbers? Its a huge global organization.
Does that mean the Kwan Um School of Zen has bigger numbers than that?
And the core of "Unknowing"...again. How can you "teach" Unknowing, with all these courses? Knowing Unknowing?
Yes, grasshopper, a paradox.
(its very similar in tone to Byron Katie who talks about her School to Unschool...yes, you will be unschooled alright, unspooled too, You'll get "schooled" that is for sure).
It seems a shame at a time, when wonderful human knowledge is more available everyday, that people are talking about Unknowing.
What's wrong with Knowing?
Don't know much about Bernie Glassman, but endorsing Byron Katie is not a good start!
Its amazing how people like BK can dream up some imaginal past history Story, and pretend they are Enlightened, and then sell it, and so many people just buy it.
In general, most of the pubic are way too over-trusting of these enlightenment salespeople.
Quote
helpme2times[[url=http://suicidegirls.com/news/culture/23315/]The Enlightened Beings Club[/url]]Quote
corboy
If bored, go to Google and put 'Ken Wilber' 'Bernie Glassman' and 'Gempo Roshi' together and see what ya get.
Aside from the New Wage/Inspiration Industry scene..
the only other social scene venue where you can witness an equivalent amount of derriere sniffing is at the local dog park.
Re: Byron Katie (the Work) and Eckhart Tolle Legit??
Posted by:
corboy
()
Date: April 12, 2009 11:07PM
What follows may seem a diversion but I dont consider it so.'
Today, homelessness is the secular equivalent of damnation, a death-in-life.
Especially in todays economy, it carries a huge, huge emotional charge. We are like healthy people in the middle of an old plague epidemic, seeing bodies on the ground, dreading we could end up like that.
Today, we see the folks on the sidewalk and dread we could become that way, because our social safety net is shredding in many many ways.
So if someone like E Tolle, BK or Donald Neale Walsch include a spell of homelessness in their spiritual teacher legitmation narratives, this is powerful.
They are linking their names to something so emtionally terrifying most of us cant stand to think or feel about it for very long.
Critical thinking shits the bed when we think of homelessness.
So we crave to believe they somehow were magically rescued by a mysterious trick of the mind. That alone is enough to get us to pay uncritical attention.
You can learn more about the early background of Bernie G'if you get and read Ambivalent Zen by Lawrence Shainberg.
Bernie G leads Zen retreats at places like Auschwitz and street retreats in New York.
When you do things like that, you are dealing with stuff society cannot stand to face.
Anyone facing the shadow issues of society this way can be tempted to sidestep their own personal issues, by taking on so huge a topic of social pain that they themselves lose their personal issues in these larger than life Big Issues.
By attaching their public personae, to issues society cant stand to face, such as Nazi atrocities (Auschwitz) to homelessness, (street retreats, or a life story in which one says one was once homeless before becoming enlightened and then a New Age luminary--Tolle, Katie, Neal Donald Walsch) one associates ones own public persona with an issue society cant stand to face--and thus the person attaching themselves to the issue, whether to solve it or meditate with it, or biographically, becomes just as hard to examine as---the painful topic itself.
'This guy does something I'd dare not do. This person is dealing with something I cant stand to even think about.
How dare I be so mean spirited as to have doubts'
An activist or a meditator who associates with an incineratinglly painful social issue gets a sort of derivative sanctity or borrowed halo by attaching his or her name to shadow issues that most of us turn shrink from--Auschwitz, homelessness.
Or by claiming one has once been homeless, but was rescued from homelessness (the equivalent of secular damnation and civil death)--by a sudden and mysterious enlightenment.
It seems mean spirited to even think of fact checking.
Plus agencies serving the homeless often fold for lack of funding or if they are still around,they are obligated by legal guidelines to maintain confidentiality and not talk about former clients.
Ditto with homelessness. If you claim, like Tolle, Katie, or Neale Walsch that youve been homeless, but now are happy healthy and wealthy because you mysteroiusly 'woke up' folks want to believe its so.
They dont want to examine the social and structural causes of poverty.
Its a story we want to believe is true and dont want to check.
Today, homelessness is the secular equivalent of damnation, a death-in-life.
Especially in todays economy, it carries a huge, huge emotional charge. We are like healthy people in the middle of an old plague epidemic, seeing bodies on the ground, dreading we could end up like that.
Today, we see the folks on the sidewalk and dread we could become that way, because our social safety net is shredding in many many ways.
So if someone like E Tolle, BK or Donald Neale Walsch include a spell of homelessness in their spiritual teacher legitmation narratives, this is powerful.
They are linking their names to something so emtionally terrifying most of us cant stand to think or feel about it for very long.
Critical thinking shits the bed when we think of homelessness.
So we crave to believe they somehow were magically rescued by a mysterious trick of the mind. That alone is enough to get us to pay uncritical attention.
You can learn more about the early background of Bernie G'if you get and read Ambivalent Zen by Lawrence Shainberg.
Bernie G leads Zen retreats at places like Auschwitz and street retreats in New York.
When you do things like that, you are dealing with stuff society cannot stand to face.
Anyone facing the shadow issues of society this way can be tempted to sidestep their own personal issues, by taking on so huge a topic of social pain that they themselves lose their personal issues in these larger than life Big Issues.
By attaching their public personae, to issues society cant stand to face, such as Nazi atrocities (Auschwitz) to homelessness, (street retreats, or a life story in which one says one was once homeless before becoming enlightened and then a New Age luminary--Tolle, Katie, Neal Donald Walsch) one associates ones own public persona with an issue society cant stand to face--and thus the person attaching themselves to the issue, whether to solve it or meditate with it, or biographically, becomes just as hard to examine as---the painful topic itself.
'This guy does something I'd dare not do. This person is dealing with something I cant stand to even think about.
How dare I be so mean spirited as to have doubts'
An activist or a meditator who associates with an incineratinglly painful social issue gets a sort of derivative sanctity or borrowed halo by attaching his or her name to shadow issues that most of us turn shrink from--Auschwitz, homelessness.
Or by claiming one has once been homeless, but was rescued from homelessness (the equivalent of secular damnation and civil death)--by a sudden and mysterious enlightenment.
It seems mean spirited to even think of fact checking.
Plus agencies serving the homeless often fold for lack of funding or if they are still around,they are obligated by legal guidelines to maintain confidentiality and not talk about former clients.
Ditto with homelessness. If you claim, like Tolle, Katie, or Neale Walsch that youve been homeless, but now are happy healthy and wealthy because you mysteroiusly 'woke up' folks want to believe its so.
They dont want to examine the social and structural causes of poverty.
Its a story we want to believe is true and dont want to check.
Byron Katie (the Work) Bernie Glassman, Zen Peacemaker Order
Posted by:
The Anticult
()
Date: April 12, 2009 11:28PM
virtually every dubious group has used those methods to strip people's identities down to the core.
They have been breaking people down like this since the 1960's.
Also, they train them, that they can be "happy" with nothing.
So the next step is to live with nothing, hand everything over the group, and work for no-pay.
Victor Baranco from Lafayette Morehouse used homeless camps to his own advantage [forum.culteducation.com] many others have done so. Landmark used the cynical Hunger Project.
As stated, how can you criticize a "charity"?
It seems that each case must be investigated seperately, and checked out very carefully, make sure everything is legit, and the money is going where its supposed to go.
Often that is very hard to do, due to the complexity of each groups structure.
also, many LGAT's use "homeless people" as props in their street psychodramas. Its almost like another test for the LGAT leader....as in Byron Katie
...how can you get people with thousands of dollars to burn, to beg homeless people for a meal?
That's power.
They have been breaking people down like this since the 1960's.
Also, they train them, that they can be "happy" with nothing.
So the next step is to live with nothing, hand everything over the group, and work for no-pay.
Victor Baranco from Lafayette Morehouse used homeless camps to his own advantage [forum.culteducation.com] many others have done so. Landmark used the cynical Hunger Project.
As stated, how can you criticize a "charity"?
It seems that each case must be investigated seperately, and checked out very carefully, make sure everything is legit, and the money is going where its supposed to go.
Often that is very hard to do, due to the complexity of each groups structure.
also, many LGAT's use "homeless people" as props in their street psychodramas. Its almost like another test for the LGAT leader....as in Byron Katie
...how can you get people with thousands of dollars to burn, to beg homeless people for a meal?
That's power.
Re: Byron Katie (the Work) Bernie Glassman, Zen Peacemaker Order
Posted by:
The Anticult
()
Date: April 12, 2009 11:37PM
another interesting thing going on in some BK threads out there.
There was some cross-posting of critical material about BK from this thread.
After that, there were several posts saying something like...
...I used to not be interested in Byron Katie, but those critical posts have made me MORE interested in her, and I have gone to her website to see for myself...
so, it does some like a BK internet sales tactic, and a good one.
Promote the controversy, like Landmark does. Do a turnaround on the criticism.
They can even make posts which trace that thought process, and shape the thinking using the same language patterns discussed. That is certainly going on, to a degree.
One could do an experiement. Pick a senior BK facilitator who is experienced, and sent them the info about the BK seminar criticism, and see how they manage it.
There was some cross-posting of critical material about BK from this thread.
After that, there were several posts saying something like...
...I used to not be interested in Byron Katie, but those critical posts have made me MORE interested in her, and I have gone to her website to see for myself...
so, it does some like a BK internet sales tactic, and a good one.
Promote the controversy, like Landmark does. Do a turnaround on the criticism.
They can even make posts which trace that thought process, and shape the thinking using the same language patterns discussed. That is certainly going on, to a degree.
One could do an experiement. Pick a senior BK facilitator who is experienced, and sent them the info about the BK seminar criticism, and see how they manage it.
Re: Byron Katie (the Work) and Steven Sashen
Posted by:
helpme2times
()
Date: April 13, 2009 03:09AM
Steven Sashen, former "Curriculum Director" for The School for The Work, continues to promote The Work on his website.
In the comments section of a blog entry by "Cosmic Connie", someone (maybe it's more than one person?) points out some problems with alleged Anti-Guru Steven Sashen:
Anonymous said...
I hate to criticize a criticizer...but Houston...we have a problem.
Steven Sashen who is posting here, is actually in the exact same business as Rhonda Byrne...and the New Wagers.
Also, Steven Sashen on his blog brazenly promotes Byron Katie and her methods called The Work, which have come under serious fire.
Steven makes good money from The Work of Byron Katie, over $100-$150 an hour over the phone "coaching".
As well as his "Quantum Wealth", and various other potions like selling MLM memberships for Acai berries.
[www.acai-plus-exposed.com]
He also made a $100 Challenge on his blog, but appears to have refused to apply the evidence procedures of his $100 Challenge to Byron Katie.
[sashen.com]
Bottom line, those who live in New Agey glass houses should not be throwing stones at others' glass houses.
Rhonda Byrne & Co have run a massive global moneymaking scheme, and they fluked off, and made millions and now they are all going to fight over it.
So they deserve to get criticized.
But beware of the fox who puts on a rubber chicken suit to get into the hen-house to do some spin-control on the other hens, and slip a few eggs away...(you get the metaphor!)
Steven Sashen is not a critic of the New Age nonsense, just the parts he does not make money off...yet.
That's a new strategy...act like you are an Anti-Guru, meanwhile making lots of money off your own Guru. Almost amusing...
Another comment, maybe from the same person...
Anonymous said...
Hi Connie, I would say it's not about being a Purist, which would be another form of religion, but a Factist, and treating everyone with an even hand.
The facts are that Stephen Sashen has come under some pretty serious criticism himself for his commercial activities and coaching behaviors, and internet spin-doctoring.
And Byron Katie, if one carefully looks into her organizations, is actually very damaging, far more than The Secret, but of course right now on a much smaller scale.
The Secret is a pretty superficial cash-grab for Rhonda Byrne.
But Byron Katie splits people psyche's wide-open at her 9-day Seminars. Rhonda Byrne just sells books and movies. Byron Katie splits people minds and lives wide-open. Katie is very bad news to those who get sucked in.
There is a lot of information about Byron Katie at the comments at Guruphiliac, and also below.
Byron Katie (the Work)
[forum.culteducation.com]
Of course Sashen can say whatever he wants. But why won't he apply his own evidence procedure in his $100 Challenge, to Byron Katie?
Byron Katie's methods are actually quite similar to the methods used in Scientology.
One more comment, again from an "Anonymous", not sure if it's the same person...
Anonymous said...
Hi Connie, you make excellent points as always.
Its very interesting how there seem to be some Bloggers out there, who appear to be Skeptics and Anti-Guru's, but in reality they are skeptics only against everyone but their own covert Gurus and their own wallet!! (sneaky!)
Some of these same bloggers go around and make hundreds of "friendly and funny" postings on Skeptical type blogs.
For example, basically anywhere you see Byron Katie being questioned, Carol Skolnik and Steven Sashen are making a lot of posts. [soulsurgery.blogspot.com]
So, the above comments about Steven Sashen are NOT an Ad Hominem personal attack at all.
They are professional.
It is just more than a little hypocritical to see someone making critical comments of The Secret, and What The Bleep, yet at the same time be selling...
[sashen.com]
-The Work of Byron Katie
-Quantum Wealth
-Advanced Medication
-Delightenment
-Kabbalstic Healing
-etc.
For example, if you read the Steven Sashen $100 Challenge, at that link, there is a decent evidence procedure put forward.
Steven Sashen states...
"If someone can give me a respected, published scientific study (that can’t be effortlessly debunked because of bad or no control groups, too small a sample size, or other obviously stupid study design) that demonstrates the proof of the 21-day habit building technology, I’ll give you $100!"
Ok, well, look at Steven Sashen's advertising page about Byron Katie.
[sashen.com]
He makes many claims on that page, without ANY evidence at all. And Byron Katie makes even stronger claims, with ZERO evidence. 00.00
I hate to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but there are a few Byron Katie senior "bloggers" who go around a make "buddies" with numerous critical blogs, yet somehow always seem to promote Byron Katie.
Look at what happened at the Guruphiliac blog when people started to criticize Byron Katie there.
What the heck is the real difference between The Secret scamola, and the Byron Katie scamola?
Byron Katie is much more damaging, as it's not just superficial fluff, she gets inside your brain very deeply. It's very very dangerous stuff,and Byron Katie has ZERO credentials. ZERO.
So let Steven Sashen address some of these questions.
That might be a good blog entry itself.
By the way, Byron Katie attacked The Secret as well...so go figure.
[[url=http://cosmicconnie.blogspot.com/2008/04/cosmic-connie-scoops-ny-times-again.html]Cosmic Connie Scoops the NY Times Again?[/url]]
In the comments section of a blog entry by "Cosmic Connie", someone (maybe it's more than one person?) points out some problems with alleged Anti-Guru Steven Sashen:
Anonymous said...
I hate to criticize a criticizer...but Houston...we have a problem.
Steven Sashen who is posting here, is actually in the exact same business as Rhonda Byrne...and the New Wagers.
Also, Steven Sashen on his blog brazenly promotes Byron Katie and her methods called The Work, which have come under serious fire.
Steven makes good money from The Work of Byron Katie, over $100-$150 an hour over the phone "coaching".
As well as his "Quantum Wealth", and various other potions like selling MLM memberships for Acai berries.
[www.acai-plus-exposed.com]
He also made a $100 Challenge on his blog, but appears to have refused to apply the evidence procedures of his $100 Challenge to Byron Katie.
[sashen.com]
Bottom line, those who live in New Agey glass houses should not be throwing stones at others' glass houses.
Rhonda Byrne & Co have run a massive global moneymaking scheme, and they fluked off, and made millions and now they are all going to fight over it.
So they deserve to get criticized.
But beware of the fox who puts on a rubber chicken suit to get into the hen-house to do some spin-control on the other hens, and slip a few eggs away...(you get the metaphor!)
Steven Sashen is not a critic of the New Age nonsense, just the parts he does not make money off...yet.
That's a new strategy...act like you are an Anti-Guru, meanwhile making lots of money off your own Guru. Almost amusing...
Another comment, maybe from the same person...
Anonymous said...
Hi Connie, I would say it's not about being a Purist, which would be another form of religion, but a Factist, and treating everyone with an even hand.
The facts are that Stephen Sashen has come under some pretty serious criticism himself for his commercial activities and coaching behaviors, and internet spin-doctoring.
And Byron Katie, if one carefully looks into her organizations, is actually very damaging, far more than The Secret, but of course right now on a much smaller scale.
The Secret is a pretty superficial cash-grab for Rhonda Byrne.
But Byron Katie splits people psyche's wide-open at her 9-day Seminars. Rhonda Byrne just sells books and movies. Byron Katie splits people minds and lives wide-open. Katie is very bad news to those who get sucked in.
There is a lot of information about Byron Katie at the comments at Guruphiliac, and also below.
Byron Katie (the Work)
[forum.culteducation.com]
Of course Sashen can say whatever he wants. But why won't he apply his own evidence procedure in his $100 Challenge, to Byron Katie?
Byron Katie's methods are actually quite similar to the methods used in Scientology.
One more comment, again from an "Anonymous", not sure if it's the same person...
Anonymous said...
Hi Connie, you make excellent points as always.
Its very interesting how there seem to be some Bloggers out there, who appear to be Skeptics and Anti-Guru's, but in reality they are skeptics only against everyone but their own covert Gurus and their own wallet!! (sneaky!)
Some of these same bloggers go around and make hundreds of "friendly and funny" postings on Skeptical type blogs.
For example, basically anywhere you see Byron Katie being questioned, Carol Skolnik and Steven Sashen are making a lot of posts. [soulsurgery.blogspot.com]
So, the above comments about Steven Sashen are NOT an Ad Hominem personal attack at all.
They are professional.
It is just more than a little hypocritical to see someone making critical comments of The Secret, and What The Bleep, yet at the same time be selling...
[sashen.com]
-The Work of Byron Katie
-Quantum Wealth
-Advanced Medication
-Delightenment
-Kabbalstic Healing
-etc.
For example, if you read the Steven Sashen $100 Challenge, at that link, there is a decent evidence procedure put forward.
Steven Sashen states...
"If someone can give me a respected, published scientific study (that can’t be effortlessly debunked because of bad or no control groups, too small a sample size, or other obviously stupid study design) that demonstrates the proof of the 21-day habit building technology, I’ll give you $100!"
Ok, well, look at Steven Sashen's advertising page about Byron Katie.
[sashen.com]
He makes many claims on that page, without ANY evidence at all. And Byron Katie makes even stronger claims, with ZERO evidence. 00.00
I hate to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but there are a few Byron Katie senior "bloggers" who go around a make "buddies" with numerous critical blogs, yet somehow always seem to promote Byron Katie.
Look at what happened at the Guruphiliac blog when people started to criticize Byron Katie there.
What the heck is the real difference between The Secret scamola, and the Byron Katie scamola?
Byron Katie is much more damaging, as it's not just superficial fluff, she gets inside your brain very deeply. It's very very dangerous stuff,and Byron Katie has ZERO credentials. ZERO.
So let Steven Sashen address some of these questions.
That might be a good blog entry itself.
By the way, Byron Katie attacked The Secret as well...so go figure.
[[url=http://cosmicconnie.blogspot.com/2008/04/cosmic-connie-scoops-ny-times-again.html]Cosmic Connie Scoops the NY Times Again?[/url]]
Re: Byron Katie (the Work) and Eckhart Tolle Legit??
Posted by:
Jay Cruise
()
Date: April 13, 2009 06:57AM
Well Anticult, I agree that criticizing Erickson is not directly related to this thread and I am surprized that you haven't started a specific thread on Erickson. I say 'you' as you obviously have vast knowledge in this area. Not that you should be required to as I'm not sure how much time that would require.
We will have to agree to disagree on whether Erickson was a great man.
And your statement that Erickson didn't write any books for the public is not entirely true is it? He was the teacher to Bandler and Grinder, gave them full access to his records and was obviously not concerned that they were using his name to market his conversational hypnosis (what could be more covert than that?) and manipulation tools to the public as a business venture.
We will have to agree to disagree on whether Erickson was a great man.
And your statement that Erickson didn't write any books for the public is not entirely true is it? He was the teacher to Bandler and Grinder, gave them full access to his records and was obviously not concerned that they were using his name to market his conversational hypnosis (what could be more covert than that?) and manipulation tools to the public as a business venture.
Re: Byron Katie (the Work) and epistemolgy, storytelling
Posted by:
The Anticult
()
Date: April 13, 2009 09:28PM
Quote
Cruz
The other day, my friend who led me to Byron Katie's (no longer) Open Forum shared a recollection that intrigued me to some extent. She recalls being rather surprised when the very first BK book came out, several years after Katie’s alleged experience and quite some time into their friendship. For, prior to this publication, all this time not a cockroach had been mentioned. Not even a hint. The cockroach made its debut when Katie first wrote her story (or had it written, I'm not sure). When she asked Katie about it, Katie replied: “How do I know my people weren’t ready for that (part of the story) yet? Well …, I didn’t tell them”..
the cockroach story is very interesting.
It was obviously put in there, and made central to the Byron Katie Story, after very careful thought.
It works on many levels at once.
The most basic level, is that of primary emotion.
There are only a few primary emotions...sad, glad, mad, scared, disgust, guilt.
Most other emotions flow from those.
So BK created a Story, that contains several primary emotions...sad(depressed)...then the cockroach DISGUST-FEAR in the listener...then glad(enlightenment)...(later she adds the Guilt in the turnaround).
Any human, especially women, would feel utter DISGUST and FEAR if a cockroach crawled on them, they would scream and kick it off. It triggers biological disgust. (I found a cockroach in some spicy noodles I was eating a few years back...lets just say you lose your appetite, at that restaurant for life!)
So the cockroach is about creating DISGUST, and its memorable, you never forget it.
(if a cockroach cralwed onto BK, and then she saw it, she would scream and involuntarily hit it off, just like anyone else, of course. Its all part of her mythology of detachment. If someone accidently spilled a box of cockroaches on her, how would she respond?)
The cockroach story becomes a HOOK, where then the rest of the BK Stories are hung from.
Its very common in hypnotherapy, to create some type of strange TRIGGER like this. Then in the future, all she has to do is say COCKROACH, and it triggers many other aspects of her process.
(we've all see hypnotists do the same thing, creating a trigger word, or image).
UNCONSCIOUS
also, since the cockroach is so primal, it puts people right into their deep unconscious, almost instantly.
SYMBOLISM
In The Metamorphosis By Franz Kafka, Gregor wakes up in bed to discover his "transformation" into a cockroach. [forum.culteducation.com] She just used the same image in her story of being transformed.
William S. Burroughs wrote The Naked Lunch, and wrote stuff containing cockroaches, as he worked as a cockroach exterminator. He was also a raging addict, so addicts of the time would probably read those books in recovery.
Also, Byron Katie wrote a (suppressed) booked called Nog's Quest, obvious based on Nog by Rudy Wurlitzer, which occurs in this weird netherworld. [forum.culteducation.com]
So its more likely she did hit rock bottom, due to the pill-popping and boozing, and then went to AA, and many recovery seminars, groups, workshops, local ashrams, Zen Shacks, eventually going to more advanced LGAT's like EST, and even hypnotherapy seminars, etc.
Being such an ENTREPRENEUR, She would have noticed rather quickly those running the seminars were making 150K in a weekend seminar, even in those days!
And maybe she spent a drunken night in some place with roaches, and used that later in the construction of her story. Who hasn't seen a roach in some motel or restaurant? big deal.
(some of us had 30 huge rats run seemingly at them from a garbage bin, that's not fun either! Doesn't make you enlightened.)
Byron Katie asks, who would you be without your story?
Who would Byron Katie be without her Stories?
That's all she does, is pitch her stories, which have changed over the years.
Without her stories, she would be selling real estate. Or maybe selling a different type of seminar, like a Course in Miracles, or like Ken Keyes, or more eastern Guru stuff.
So its ironic, that she tries to get you to drop all your stories, but she gets to keep all of her carefully constructed stories, which she hammers at you.
And she gets John Tarrant to shove her stories down your throat, and Michael Katz, and The Whiz Mitchell...and about 50 other people, constantly ramming BK's Stories down the publics throats.
Stories are the foundation of human belief, identity, and human consciousness. As a matter of fact, all human religion and mythologies are simply "Stories". The bible is full of stories, ancient oral history is all stories, the Story of the Buddha, its all stories. Humans have always existed around stories.
She knows that, which is why she wants to take control of your stories, and replace them with her stories.
But her stories, are simply myths she constructed, with embedded symbolic meanings with her at the center, and they are not based on checkable evidence, on purpose! They are just like a fairy story, with a cockroach in it, and where BK is the savior of the universe, instead of an LGAT seminar entrepreneur. They all have their Story, which is their marketing salespitch.
But now we can have modern and more accurate "stories" about the nature of reality, which are more productive, as they are based on fact and testing.
Like the Big Bang...its a "story" but there is massive accurate data showing why its accurate, red-shift, microwave background noise, etc. [encarta.msn.com]
Or cognitive psychology, and other areas of modern human knowledge, based on careful evidence, testing, and analysis. That's real knowledge, and it can be very accurate, and its getting more accurate all the time.
Its not 100% "true", nothing is, but its extremely accurate on a continuum from just over 0%, to just under 100%.
Byron Katies stories are at best, just over 0%, but well under 1% accurate. Very close to 0%, but nothing is 0%.
but the big bang is certainly into the high 90% percentile, due to the mounds of evidence. [encarta.msn.com]
Gravitation is experimentally accurate to way over 99%, QED, 99.99999999%
...but under 100%.
Most other aspects of human knowledge are along the continuum, from 10%-50%-80% accurate. And they can change with new evidence, and testing. So its the same with all these beliefs and stories.
If a person believes..."I'm a failure"...you don't say...Is that true? That is the wrong question.
You say...is that accurate? Then you might go through the CBT process, and realize that sometimes you fail, sometimes you succeed, and saying "I'm a failure" is called labelling, and its inaccurate. Then you construct a healthier belief like..."you can't hit the ball if you don't take a swing", and realize you win some, you lose some, etc. Modern psychology can deal with this stuff in a healthy way.
Whereas the BK method, is twisted and biased, and its a leading process, as explained previously.
"Is it true" is a simply horrible question, its meaningless. A better questions is..."Is it accurate?"
So don't lose your stories, check them out and see how accurate they are.
BK is trying to make your stories 0%, which is false, and to make her stories 100%, which is even more false. But her stories are not 0% either, maybe %0.00000001
She she is just trying to control people's belief systems, by manipulating their stories, which is how the brain encodes belief systems, which is information.
What makes it so evil, is they know all this, of course, and just want to use that power for their own advantage.
Why not fact-check stories, test them, and try to pick the most accurate and empowering stories to guide your life? Then you are happy, face reality in a healthy way, and have a good life.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/13/2009 09:41PM by The Anticult.
Re: Byron Katie (the Work) and Eckhart Tolle Legit??
Posted by:
corboy
()
Date: April 13, 2009 10:07PM
Here is one of the Four Questions--can you believe it is absolutely true?
Our society doesnt need absolute truth in order to function.
When you have a trial in criminal in criminal court, the jury is not instructed to decide whether it was absolutely true that the defendant/s did the deed.
The jury is instructed to decide whether the evidence they heard supports a verdict that is 'beyond reasonable doubt'.
Repeat, 'beyond reasonable doubt'.
I suggest that some of her decisions--important ones--indicate that BK has not accepted absolute absence of risk in her own life.
She reportedly had a facelift and two surgeries--one for a corneal transplant and one to remove a basal cell carcinoma (a slow easily treatable skin cancer in most cases).
None of these three procedures is absolutely safe. But she reportedly had those procedures.
She accepted uncertainty and risk in order to have access to the benefits of modern medicine.
If BK , in order to have her eyes and face attended to, apparently did accept that these surgical procedures had risk, were not absoultely safe,
why are we supposed to buy her first question that we can only trust a thought that is absolutely true?
To do the Work we have to reject uncertainty but to get her eyes and face cared for, before the surgeons 'worked' on her body, BK accepted a degree of risk attendent upon those medical procedures and probably had to sign some necessary paperwork.
(One has to wonder if those taking the School event were as carefuly briefed about the possible risks as BK probably was by her surgeons before she had that work done on her eyes and face)
Furthermore, BK has done events in places like San Francisco and lived in places like Ojai and Manhattan Beach (both in California) that are NOT ABOSOLUTELY SAFE, because they're built on fault lines where an earthquake could happen.
And in Ojai, there is not only some hazard of earthquake, but more importantly, there can be fire hazard if one lives in the pretty hillside areas. If the BKSM house is if is anywhere in or close to open, chaparral country, that house is not absolutely safe.
Their house faces fire hazards every dry season, which in Southern California, are getting longer and drier each year, due to changing weather patterns.
If BK can accept living in a house that is in or close to a fire risk dry zone, and in a part of the US that is affected by earthquakes and holds events in places like LA and SF that are not absolutely safe, because they too are in earthquake zones...
if she can accept not being absolutely physically safe--
why does she demand that we can only build our lives --the house of thought--on what is absolutely true?
By living in California and accepting the risks of certain medical procedures she has reportedly undergone, BK has accepted uncertainty and makes decisions accepting an element of risk and uncertainty.
So, why are Workers told to give up decision making strategies that entail acceptance of uncertainty, decision making that BK herself had to use by signing paperwork that accepted the risks--the uncertainties of surgery?
Our society doesnt need absolute truth in order to function.
When you have a trial in criminal in criminal court, the jury is not instructed to decide whether it was absolutely true that the defendant/s did the deed.
The jury is instructed to decide whether the evidence they heard supports a verdict that is 'beyond reasonable doubt'.
Repeat, 'beyond reasonable doubt'.
I suggest that some of her decisions--important ones--indicate that BK has not accepted absolute absence of risk in her own life.
She reportedly had a facelift and two surgeries--one for a corneal transplant and one to remove a basal cell carcinoma (a slow easily treatable skin cancer in most cases).
None of these three procedures is absolutely safe. But she reportedly had those procedures.
She accepted uncertainty and risk in order to have access to the benefits of modern medicine.
If BK , in order to have her eyes and face attended to, apparently did accept that these surgical procedures had risk, were not absoultely safe,
why are we supposed to buy her first question that we can only trust a thought that is absolutely true?
To do the Work we have to reject uncertainty but to get her eyes and face cared for, before the surgeons 'worked' on her body, BK accepted a degree of risk attendent upon those medical procedures and probably had to sign some necessary paperwork.
(One has to wonder if those taking the School event were as carefuly briefed about the possible risks as BK probably was by her surgeons before she had that work done on her eyes and face)
Furthermore, BK has done events in places like San Francisco and lived in places like Ojai and Manhattan Beach (both in California) that are NOT ABOSOLUTELY SAFE, because they're built on fault lines where an earthquake could happen.
And in Ojai, there is not only some hazard of earthquake, but more importantly, there can be fire hazard if one lives in the pretty hillside areas. If the BKSM house is if is anywhere in or close to open, chaparral country, that house is not absolutely safe.
Their house faces fire hazards every dry season, which in Southern California, are getting longer and drier each year, due to changing weather patterns.
If BK can accept living in a house that is in or close to a fire risk dry zone, and in a part of the US that is affected by earthquakes and holds events in places like LA and SF that are not absolutely safe, because they too are in earthquake zones...
if she can accept not being absolutely physically safe--
why does she demand that we can only build our lives --the house of thought--on what is absolutely true?
By living in California and accepting the risks of certain medical procedures she has reportedly undergone, BK has accepted uncertainty and makes decisions accepting an element of risk and uncertainty.
So, why are Workers told to give up decision making strategies that entail acceptance of uncertainty, decision making that BK herself had to use by signing paperwork that accepted the risks--the uncertainties of surgery?
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.