Quote

First: "Hey, by the way. I just got enlightened yesterday." And the other person would say, "Yeah, right, sure. Does it pay anything?" - I hope you can hear the humour here.

Of course. I was indicating the fact that he is stating that he became enlightened; realizing the context in which it was stated does not change the fact of his comment.

Quote

Further: I clearly read him say he was the witness of that presence "to be the witness of the presence..." He further calls the presence omniscient, "...in the presence of omniscience..."

You contradict yourself when you say there is no personal self and he is the witness. Is he the witness, or is he the presence? Does he teach Dvaita or Advaita? Would you not concede that he is the presence? That is what he teaches.

Quote

Further "In the presence of omniscience, there is no ignorance"
That is far different than saying "I am omniscient"

In context it is not as you put it:

“To ask a question is coming out of ignorance, is it not? In the presence of omniscience, there is no ignorance, so there is nothing to ask. So if you ask [b:f77645072b]me[/b:f77645072b] what question would [b:f77645072b]I[/b:f77645072b] like to know, there isn't any, to tell the truth. There isn't any answer [b:f77645072b]I[/b:f77645072b]’m interested in…”

Quote

what I am hearing him say is that God is, and not "I am God".

When people say, “God is”, they don’t usually add that because God is omniscient they no longer want to know anything. People say, yes, God is omniscient, and I still want to learn everything I can about the universe He created. To say “God is” and there is not personal “I”, is to say, “God is all that is” and likewise, “I am God”; it comes to the same. He also states that he is “Nature”, his book calibrates at 999.8, and he relates with Huang Po (at 960). What about these claims?

Quote

Later you get him as saying that he existed before the universe and will exist after it ends. Likewise has said Nisargadatta Maharaj, Ramana Maharshi, Ramesh Balsekar, and I am sure others...

That’s true, sort of. I’ve studied all of those teachers as well. When Hawkins states, “the Self… which always was, always will be, before and after all worlds or universe”, this statement falsely adds the component of time. Listen to the difference in Nisargadatta’s words: “Before all beginnings, after all endings – I am.” From the [u:f77645072b]Tao Te Ching[/u:f77645072b]: “Before time and space were – the Tao is.” And from Christ: “Before Abraham was – I am.” The Self IS, not was or will be. (Thus it is eternal factually, not in words, as there is no time in the Absolute.) Ramesh states that the only truth that is not a concept is “I am”. The Buddha also states that the only absolute truth is consciousness. Po states that “Pure Mind” is the only truth. Even with Descartes, everything could be questioned except existence; he could be incorrect regarding everything [i:f77645072b]about[/i:f77645072b] existence, but not that there is existence.

Quote

I do not doubt the claim that "...he existed before the universe and will exist after it ends." but he is not talking about Doc. Hawkins, he is talking about the one universal I, that each actually is. Actually it is You.

I would point out that very few people according to Hawkins reach this state. Thus I believe there is an exclusivity in his teachings – and you do admit that he is claiming to be God, but not as a personal me. However, the vast majority of people are below 200 according to Hawkins, let alone enlightened or “God”. Thus, he is God or the Self, while the vast majority are below 200. Compare this teaching to Ramana, Po, Ramesh, etc. – “You are already and eternally That.”

Quote

It is the one state common to all when the "each/seperate" identity falls away.

Is not calibrating people a contradiction to the “each/separate identity” falling away? If nothing Real can be threatened, and nothing unreal exists, then Hawkins’ entire system is unreal from a spiritual (absolute), as well as scientific (relative) perspective.

Quote

But if you want to add that to the looney pile, then so be it,

Again, happy “enlightenment” or “mystical” experiences are not being judged here as “loony”. Your experience sounds fine to me. Note that it is vastly different from being offered the power to control worlds from :evil: Lucifer :twisted: , and other similar claims from Hawkins. There are many legitimate concerns regarding Hawkins that continue to go unacknowledged by you.

Quote

And that is why the "observation" (and not opinion) that all thought is vanity is true,

It is similar to the statement, “All generalities are false”; the point being that this too is a generality and for the statement to be true, it must also be false. “All opinion is vanity” is an opinion because this is a subjective statement. I personally appreciate and respect individuality, and enjoy the fact that there is so much diversity of thought. That to me is not vanity, but beauty. There are many types of flowers in my garden. It is subjective, and thus reveals Hawkins own psychology rather than a fact about the universe in which we live. How do you suggest that this “observation” be considered a fact?

Quote

it is an observation not an opinion, because all thought is about or from the personal I, and it has no eternal reality as the One without a second.

I have no critical comment to make regarding Realization. I would suggest that AK contradicts your point here, however, and in spiritual terms reinforces the illusion of separateness rather than the truth of reality.

Quote

It is a play, and a wonderous one to participate in this lila. Nothing Real can be lost, nothing can be gained.

How do you account for calibrating people then? Is it not reinforcing illusion from a spiritual perspective?

Quote

The thoughts can be fun, opinions can be fun to play with, but they are vanities if they ascribe reality to what is not Real. Then they are false, they are vane.

And so do you admit that spiritually as well as scientifically Hawkins’ entire AK system, including his “Map of Consciousness” (followers call it “MOC”) and ascribing a “level of consciousness” (likewise, “LOC”) to people is opinion and vanity? (Not to mention judgment?)

Quote

That people wake up to this is not only for Huang Po. Some stay there apparently. For others, the personal I rebirths.

When a person asks, “Is reincarnation true?”, Ramana states: "Only so long as there is ignorance. There really is no reincarnation at all, either now or before. Nor will there be any hereafter. This is the truth."

Ramesh points out the obvious. Hawkins’ system is very odd. For example, Hawkins uses logic and reason, and exhibits intelligence, but places these in the 400’s. Ramesh is the most accurately scientific Advaita teacher I have read. (He also loves Lao Tzu, by the way, which is odd from a Hawkins’ perspective, since Lao Tzu supposedly “calibrates” lower than Ramesh.) Ramesh states that the population has grown exponentially, and so new life has been created. Thus, reincarnation of a personal ‘I’ is impossible. To account for people remembering past lives, he appeals to memories being stored in Consciousness (the collective unconscious), but they do not belong to any one person. A couple thousand years ago there were millions of people. Today, there are billions. (To hear it from Ramesh, go to [advaita.org] , click on “Talk Excerpts”, scroll down and play “Reincarnation”.) Further, Hawkins recommends reading Ramesh, but why he does so is beyond me. Ramesh’s fundamental teaching is that there is no free will. Hawkins disagrees with this teaching. (Anticipating a possible reaction of, "How could Hawkins be a cult leader if he teaches free will"?, please just look at Dr. Lifton's criteria applied on the first page and keep in mind that actual cult experts are claiming that Hawkins is a cult leader and appears to suffer from NPD.)

Another point that is interesting is that Hawkins points out that people drop in calibration when they behave poorly, if he disagrees with the person, though he does not seem to mention people he does agree with. Case in point, when Dan Rather reported incorrectly about Bush, Hawkins stated that the “CBS Evening News” dropped in consciousness. However, when Ramesh and Bill O’Reilly had respective sexually-related scandals, I did not hear a peep out of Hawkins (perhaps you did?). I saw a bumper sticker that I liked yesterday, “A PBS mind in a Fox News world”. Hawkins calibrates Fox News higher than NPR, etc.

Quote

Ramana goes one further and calls that a certain type of Samadhi...cannot recall its name frm the yoga texts, but he says there is still a duality at play - the real and the unreal, and in the highest Samadhi then the arisings are not different to the emptiness. This natural state, being that which is Real is thus omniscient. It is known by virtue of being it.

Ramana also states: “There are no stages in Realization or degrees of Liberation…If anything can be gained that was not present before, it can also be lost, whereas the Absolute is eternal, here and now.” Huang Po states, “The Ever-Existent Buddha is not a Buddha of stages.”

I understand what you mean. However, Ramana as well as Nisargadatta and others state that God’s “omniscience” is in fact a Not-knowing. Ramana states that in fact God knows nothing, He is the “thoughtless thought”. For Hawkins, omniscience falsely means knowing everything such as revealed through AK – any question one could have practically is supposed to be able to be answered absolutely through AK and his pseudoscientific system. (To be sure, however, for Christians and others God is omniscient in a more literal sense.) For Ramana, the point is the end of questions, not through “answering” absolutely every question one could ever think to ask, or by “calibrating” everything and everyone in the universe (which is all "ego" for Ramana), but by going to the “root” and question the “I” itself – atma-vichara, self-enquiry, “Who am I?”. “All other methods retain the ego. In those paths so many doubts arise, and the eternal question remains to be tackled. But in this method the final question is the only one and is raised from the very beginning. No practices are even necessary for this quest.”

Quote

There is no other Real knowledge [than] that which is.

Again, I would suggest that Hawkins’ system contradicts this.

Quote

Anyway, your dismissal of Doc Hs accounts are unfounded.

I am not dismissing his accounts, per se, but that he props them up with a pseudoscience, a Ph.D. from a diploma mill, a false claim to absolute scientific truth, a suspicious knighthood, etc. It is one thing to believe you are enlightened, and another to need to prove it, or convince others and so on, in this fashion.

Quote

Maybe he made them up...it doesn't seem like it, just from the way he talks. And it doesnt matter, the task is still to see it for oneself and to that he says "place no head above your own".

Actually, he quoted the Buddha when stating that.

Quote

"Do not worship a teacher or a teaching, worship the Truth"
Harldy the words of someone trying to get followers. I mean what a lousy approach.

And what of the other facts above? The qualifications, the mathematical and scientific ignorance, the use of a pseudoscience to teach (and judge), etc.? "Truth" according to Hawkins is his pseudoscientific judgment -- AK is the "science of Truth" (which is a meaningless statement, as I pointed out earlier). Thus, to "worship the Truth" is to worship [i:f77645072b]his[/i:f77645072b] "Truth" not [i:f77645072b]the Truth[/i:f77645072b]. How do you account for him getting a Ph.D. from a diploma mill and never stating the source? Every other author notes the source of their credentials, they do not just boldly note that they are a “Ph.D.” without referencing where the degree came from. John Gray exhibits more factual integrity than Hawkins by at least noting that he got his degree from CPU [www.mars-venus-counselors.com] and very clearly, even noting the problems with CPU, here [www.marsvenus.com] . (See what Dr. Carroll noted regarding Gray’s degree from CPU: [www.skepdic.com] . And also see what Rick Ross has on John Gray: [www.culteducation.com] .) How do you account for his apparent nonsense knighthood? His reliance on vanity articles? How do you account for the “truth” of his system when it judges people, contradicts itself repeatedly, clearly demonstrates ignorance of mathematics, physics, science, etc., and is a pseudoscience? None of this is to get followers? He lies for what purpose then? For a “higher purpose” perhaps? Well, this would be quite similar to the Moonies’ “heavenly deception”, for example, and would also contradict the Kantian categorical imperative that Hawkins states he is so fond of (and makes an arm go weak if not followed); i.e., the end does not justify the means.

Quote

I cannot add much more to this thread. Through someones perspective, tainted by their conditions, they see him one way. To others they see a humble man pointing people to look within.

Ad hominem [ [en.wikipedia.org] ]. I would suggest some people look at the evidence and others see what they want to see. If you have time, check out James Randi’s ABC News Special, “The Power of Belief” [www.xenutv.com] . He tricked an entire country into believing in a "guru" he trained (for the purposes of education about nonsense). When he and the pretend guru revealed the hoax, people still came up to the “guru” and said that they believed in him, regardless of the fact that he revealed himself to be a fraud. (Check these out too: [www.xenutv.com] especially “The Wave” [www.xenutv.com] And very importantly, "[i:f77645072b]Discovering Psychology: Constructing Social Reality[/i:f77645072b]" which includes an interview with cult expert Steven Hassan [www.learner.org] . "[i:f77645072b]Cults are also on the rise because people are under more stress, we're more sleep-deprived, and our society has less confidence in government and religious institutions. Combine all those factors and I would say people are more susceptible to someone who comes along who's very confident and loving -- and offers answers....Essentially, people are not allowed to be themselves as unique individuals in a mind-control group. Any traumatic experience or rough period in life can make a person more vulnerable to a cult, but the greatest vulnerability is a lack of understanding about how destructive cults operate.[/i:f77645072b]" - Hassan. His website by the way is [www.freedomofmind.com] )

On this subject, if Hawkins’ claims are true, as he states that they are, he (or any one of his followers who use AK) should be able to take Randi’s challenge [www.randi.org] and win $1 million. No one has passed thus far.

"[i:f77645072b]AK has been tested thoroughly, and has always been found useless[/i:f77645072b]." - James Randi, [u:f77645072b]An Encyclopedia of Claims, Frauds, and Hoaxes of the Occult and Supernatural [/u:f77645072b]
[www.randi.org]

Skeptics are aware that evidence will never take down gurus:

Quote

[i:f77645072b][u:f77645072b]The Skeptic’s Dictionary[/u:f77645072b] does not try to present a balanced account of occult subjects. If anything, this book is a Davidian counterbalance to the Goliath of occult literature. I hope that an occasional missile hits its mark. Unlike David, however, I have little faith, and do not believe Goliath can be slain. Skeptics can give him a few bumps and bruises, but our words will never be lethal. Goliath cannot be taken down by evidence and arguments. However, many of the spectators may be swayed by our performance and recognize Goliath for what he often is: a false messiah…I hope to expose Goliath’s weaknesses so that the reader will question his strength and doubt his promises… You may not change your teacher’s mind, but you may take away some of his power over you.[/i:f77645072b] – Dr. Robert Todd Carroll [skepdic.com] see also the AK/Hawkins entry: [www.skepdic.com]

The fundamental fallacy of Hawkins and followers is to use Ad hominem attacks against people, rather than deal with the factual evidence confronting them. By stating "160" or "430" or “ego”, etc., or as TossedSalad above assumed we are “mad”, “angry” or there is "just a hate mentality" and this is why we present relevant facts that legitimately discredit Hawkins. As Andrew P. stated:

Quote

[i:f77645072b]Hawkins' supporters [are] incensed that someone should be so dismissive of their teacher and his philosophy. I firmly believe that Hawkins' calibration worldview is religious fundamentalism disguised as pseudo-science, and the nature of the criticisms I receive bear this out: specific points and objections are not discussed, but rather the disciple, in the spirit of his teacher, rants on about my ignorance and my low calibration… all classic fundamentalism.

Having learned the hard way that it is a complete waste of time trying to talk reason with a fundamentalist, I no longer bother to reply to emails from Hawkins' supporters, for their authors are almost invariably not after mutual understanding but symbolic annihilation of anything and anyone that opposes their ideology.[/i:f77645072b]

Quote

Those who are to be influenced by him will meet him. Those who are to be influenced by you will meet you, etc, etc.
Q"Why are there so many false gurus?"
A"Because there are so many false seekers"

Ad hominem.

Quote

I am content to let it be.
Wishing you much peace in your quest.
With Respect,
j

I am personally not on a quest. To quote Huang Po, “Eons of striving will prove so much wasted effort. Put an end to your seeking and you will already be there.”

Best to you,

Phoenix

Please (once again) see ad hominem [www.nizkor.org] .
Thanks and blessings,
Phoenix
phoenixpotterx@yahoo.com

Hi SELFs,

The Doc says that ALL Truth is the same.

Been doing some research for fun...check it out.........

The Buddha said - "Therefore, be ye lamps unto yourselves, be a
refuge to yourselves. Hold fast to Truth as a lamp; hold fast to the
truth as a refuge. Look not for a refuge in anyone beside yourselves.
And those, who shall be a lamp unto themselves, shall betake
themselves to no external refuge, but holding fast to the Truth as
their lamp, and holding fast to the Truth as their refuge, they shall reach the topmost height."

Jesus said, "When some of the Pharisees asked Jesus when the kingdom
of God would come, he answered, saying to them, The kingdom of God
does not come by observation. Neither will they say, Behold, it is
here! or, behold, it is there! for behold, the kingdom of God is
within you."

Muhammad said, "Whoever knows himself, knows God,"

From the Vedas (Hindu): "There is one Supreme Ruler, the inmost Self
of all beings,who makes His one form manifold. Eternal happiness
belongs to the wise,who perceive Him within themselves - not to others"

Swami Vivekananda -from Sri Ramakrishna said "It is impossible to find
God outside of ourselves.Our own souls contribute all of the divinity
that isoutside of us. We are the greatest temple.The objectification
is only a faint imitation of what we see within ourselves."

Zoroaster said "One need not scale the heights of the heavens
nor travel along the highways of the world to find Ahura Mazda. With
purity of mind and holiness of heart one can find Him in one's own heart."

Dr. David Hawkins - "God is immanent"


I'm sure not everone accepted the teachers or teachings from thousands of years ago either. But they seem to all be saying the same thing. Perhaps it matters not when or by whom we finally hear it, but that we eventually do - - and as the Buddha says (paraphrase) even after having heard of enlightenment, nothing else can ever satisfy you. Hawkins is not the ONLY way, but he a modern way and speaks to the modern mind.

Attacking teachers seems to be a waste of time if our goal is to find the Truth for yourself. Unless your concern is coming from your heart and you really and truly and earnestly are concerned about those who follow his teachings and fear the fate of their souls or something :) - and if that is the case, then your love and concern for others will lead you to the Truth on it's own. :) That seems to be the way.

Fighting for what you think is wrong will not bring you peace, but perhaps instead, finding the right fit (teacher) for you could be a more advantageous option to your path. This stuff will just keep you from peace. Just find that which resonates with you and then you will know that you have found the right teacher (for you). :)




namaste, love and peace!

4truth said:

Quote

Fighting for what you think is wrong will not bring you peace, but perhaps instead, finding the right fit (teacher) for you could be a more advantageous option to your path.

Not so and a false reading of the purpose of posting here.

No one is "fighting," but rather discussing and at times exposing the bad behavior of some teachers.

That's a good thing and it does bring "peace.

That is, peace of mind regarding speaking out about perceived injustice and wrongdoing.

And also the peace that may come when bad behavior is stopped by people taking appropriate action to expose it.

You seem to be suggesting doing nothing when teachers hurt people.

That is not the kind of response most caring people would agree with and fails to address the wrongdoing of bad teachers.

Hi Moderator,

I see your point. My symantics might be off, in using the word fighting. I get what you are saying and that you are feeling as if there are teachers that can be harmful, etc and I actually do appreciate a service such as your's to educate the public. But my question is (and I do mean this respectfully) by what standards is a teacher right or wrong for a person? I can tell you that my experience of Hawkins is not of a Cult leader. This is a relationship with the Holy Spirit and that is what he points to. In fact, he urges one to go within and ask God and I can;t see how that is harmful. All of the great teachers say it. He is pointing people inward and there is absolutely no control anywhere.

Anyway, I would love to have a resepctful catharsis on this topic if you feel like it on this board. Perhaps we can both learn something. I can tell you that I am not in a cult and that I have never felt so free in my life!

What say you rr? :)

namaste

4truth:

Thanks for explaining that you are essentially here to defend Hawkins.

Fine.

Your subjective spiritual experience is not an objective measurement of a potentially unsafe leader or group.

See [www.culteducation.com]

[b:067cb46013]Ten warning signs of a potentially unsafe group/leader.[/b:067cb46013]

Absolute authoritarianism without meaningful accountability.

No tolerance for questions or critical inquiry.

No meaningful financial disclosure regarding budget, expenses such as an independently audited financial statement.

Unreasonable fear about the outside world, such as impending catastrophe, evil conspiracies and persecutions.

There is no legitimate reason to leave, former followers are always wrong in leaving, negative or even evil.

Former members often relate the same stories of abuse and reflect a similar pattern of grievances.

There are records, books, news articles, or television programs that document the abuses of the group/leader.

Followers feel they can never be "good enough".

The group/leader is always right.

The group/leader is the exclusive means of knowing "truth" or receiving validation, no other process of discovery is really acceptable or credible.


[b:067cb46013]Ten warning signs regarding people involved in/with a potentially unsafe group/leader. [/b:067cb46013]

Extreme obsessiveness regarding the group/leader resulting in the exclusion of almost every practical consideration.

Individual identity, the group, the leader and/or God as distinct and separate categories of existence become increasingly blurred. Instead, in the follower's mind these identities become substantially and increasingly fused--as that person's involvement with the group/leader continues and deepens.

Whenever the group/leader is criticized or questioned it is characterized as "persecution".

Uncharacteristically stilted and seemingly programmed conversation and mannerisms, cloning of the group/leader in personal behavior.

Dependency upon the group/leader for problem solving, solutions, and definitions without meaningful reflective thought. A seeming inability to think independently or analyze situations without group/leader involvement.

Hyperactivity centered on the group/leader agenda, which seems to supercede any personal goals or individual interests.

A dramatic loss of spontaneity and sense of humor.

Increasing isolation from family and old friends unless they demonstrate an interest in the group/leader.

Anything the group/leader does can be justified no matter how harsh or harmful.

Former followers are at best-considered negative or worse evil and under bad influences. They can not be trusted and personal contact is avoided.


[b:067cb46013]Ten signs of a safe group/leader.[/b:067cb46013]

A safe group/leader will answer your questions without becoming judgmental and punitive.

A safe group/leader will disclose information such as finances and often offer an independently audited financial statement regarding budget and expenses. Safe groups and leaders will tell you more than you want to know.

A safe group/leader is often democratic, sharing decision making and encouraging accountability and oversight.

A safe group/leader may have disgruntled former followers, but will not vilify, excommunicate and forbid others from associating with them.

A safe group/leader will not have a paper trail of overwhelmingly negative records, books, articles and statements about them.

A safe group/leader will encourage family communication, community interaction and existing friendships and not feel threatened.

A safe group/leader will recognize reasonable boundaries and limitations when dealing with others.

A safe group/leader will encourage critical thinking, individual autonomy and feelings of self-esteem.

A safe group/leader will admit failings and mistakes and accept constructive criticism and advice.

A safe group/leader will not be the only source of knowledge and learning excluding everyone else, but value dialogue and the free exchange of ideas.

Call me crazy, but I will not put my trust in someone whose qualifications are questionable, if not outright lies.

While Hawkins has lots of verifiable qualifications, there are others that are questionable and others that appear to be false.

Why would such an apparently advanced person lie about his qualifications?

I could not look up to such a person. If he lies to me about his qualifications, he is perfectly capable (and likely) to lie to me in his teachings...

HI again Moderator,

No, I would not say that I am here to defend Hawkins. I was interested in your site becasue I heard of this discussion. And becasue this is a "cult education" forum, I stopped by to see what it was about. I am assuming becasue you run this forum that you are naturally interested in having factual information that you can share with the public and it seems that the facts for at least your Hawkins portion, as I have not read much of anything else here, are not actually factual but based on your perception as well and that of others. It would seem that in order to have all the facts, that one would need to take into consideration that one might open up to see ALL sides of this issue. That is the only way to be fair and balanced instead of attorney-like, where we find what we can to support our causes.

You are right, I am speaking of my subjective experience as well, but at least I have walked in these shoes to be able to determine for myself. I am not talking about something or someone I do not know.

Before I address your list, I will just say that subjective experience is all that we have...right? And that subjectively, I have observed that what Hawkins is saying is right-on when he speaks about spiritual states. Again, not defending Hawkins here and I am not talking about things in the linear. I am talking about the non-linear spiritual awakenings that happen due to spiritual "work" that is done on an indicidual level, having nothing to do with what one's teacher teaches, but rather shares as being a Reality having been there himself. It's kind of like talking to someone who has traveled to India and has told you about the sites and then you get there and you follow their itinerary and you get to see for yourself. But, again, I am not talking about the world of form. I'm just telling you that when the spiritual world begins to open up and your teacher has pointed to the sights and you begin to see that you are experiencing that which he has shared due to being kind and loving, forgiving, radically honest and in deep prayer with God, that you know that it was something within yourself that brought you to that place and that your teacher just let you in on what was ahead.

Okay..and now the list.

Again, I am thinking that you actually do wish to have all facts, from all sides so that you are representing the Truth on your forum becasue I do realize that you are earnestly and lovingly trying to educate people here. And so, as a student of his work, yet a follower of God and no one else, I offer you my subjective experience. :)


[b:f6c4591e06]
Ten warning signs of a potentially unsafe group/leader.

Absolute authoritarianism without meaningful accountability.[/b:f6c4591e06]

Can you explain this? How is he an absolute authoritarian? What facts do you have to support this? I am free. He does not have control over me. he doesn't even know my name.


[b:f6c4591e06]No tolerance for questions or critical inquiry.[/b:f6c4591e06]

Tolerance or do you mean doesn't agree?



[b:f6c4591e06]No meaningful financial disclosure regarding budget, expenses such as an independently audited financial statement.[/b:f6c4591e06]

I don;t have a financial statement either. But aren't non-profits financial statements public domain? I might be wrong, but my question is..have you ever tried to get one from him or the state? Or is this based on not having even tried to get it. Have you asked Veritas and been denied?

[b:f6c4591e06]Unreasonable fear about the outside world, such as impending catastrophe, evil conspiracies and persecutions.[/b:f6c4591e06]

This is not a fact. I can tell you that. There is no fear of the future and no evil conspiracies coming from the mouth Hawkins.

[b:f6c4591e06]There is no legitimate reason to leave, former followers are always wrong in leaving, negative or even evil.[/b:f6c4591e06]

This is not a fact. Do you have factual information to support this claim?

[b:f6c4591e06]Former members often relate the same stories of abuse and reflect a similar pattern of grievances.[/b:f6c4591e06]

I have observed no such thing. Who has been abused and in what sense?

[b:f6c4591e06]There are records, books, news articles, or television programs that document the abuses of the group/leader.[/b:f6c4591e06]

There are websites such as this one, yes. But do you know this for yourself or is this speculation? Have you met Hawkins, studied his work or been to a lecture or satsang? There are people who don't like the Teletubbies....this statement is kind of obvious considering our vastness in culture, preferences and goals in general.

[b:f6c4591e06]Followers feel they can never be "good enough".[/b:f6c4591e06]

Now this I will speak to becasue there is 1/4 Truth in this but has nothing to do with Hawkins. First of all, I am not a follwer of Hawkins. I do, however, apply his teachings to my life....and it turns out he is not the only teacher that is saying these things. Where you are partially correct is about the "Good enough" part. But again, having nothing to do with Hawkins. It does, however, have to do with one's own perception of internal "progress" as one maneuvers through one's life and experiences and sees that one could be kinder and nicer and more honest, etc and when one in a split second uses destructive words instead of being kind, then one does feel like one is failing and "not good enough" and only prayer to God and forgiveness of one's self can help allieviate such a feeling about one's self. But this has nothing to do with Hawkins. He doesn't know what I am doing or how I am "progressing" or not. He does not beat us up at the lectures saying the sky is falling because we our failing in our efforts to be Truthful and kind. No such thing here. It has to do with inner integrity and knowing the higher road, yet choosing a lower one - - which would mean harming another or not choosing kindness.


[b:f6c4591e06]The group/leader is always right.[/b:f6c4591e06]

Can you explain this or give some examples? I really do not know what you mean. He doesn't campaign that he is right. When you get to "India" after being kind and loving and truthful, no one has to tell you what India looks like when you start to see it for yourself. (By the way, I am not indicating that I am enlightenened. Am not. But I have experienced enough and seen enough to say I have visited the outskirts of India. :)

[b:f6c4591e06]The group/leader is the exclusive means of knowing "truth" or receiving validation, no other process of discovery is really acceptable or credible.[/b:f6c4591e06]

Not true. Back to "India", Subjectively one begins to see for one's self. Also, he has demonstrated kinesiology and it is in one's hands to use it or not (if able).


Ten warning signs regarding people involved in/with a potentially unsafe group/leader.

[b:f6c4591e06]Extreme obsessiveness regarding the group/leader resulting in the exclusion of almost every practical consideration.[/b:f6c4591e06]

I don't understand that one, can you please elaborate.

[b:f6c4591e06]Individual identity, the group, the leader and/or God as distinct and separate categories of existence become increasingly blurred. Instead, in the follower's mind these identities become substantially and increasingly fused--as that person's involvement with the group/leader continues and deepens.[/b:f6c4591e06]

Couldn't disagree more on this one. just becasue we are all doing inner work, doesn't mean I belong to anyone who is doing it as well and we are "exclusive". LIke is everyone who wants to be a pro-golfer a Tiger-wood's cult member? It has to do with interests being the same.

[b:f6c4591e06]Whenever the group/leader is criticized or questioned it is characterized as "persecution".[/b:f6c4591e06]

Is this a fact?

[b:f6c4591e06]Uncharacteristically stilted and seemingly programmed conversation and mannerisms, cloning of the group/leader in personal behavior.[/b:f6c4591e06]

You mean "hawkinisms" I think. I Can't disagree with that. He has come up with some interesting take on words to really get to the essence of what he means and what Webster's doesn't offer. But this is no secret language and there are no special mannerisms that a gang or cult might use so that no one will know what we are talking about. I mean, think about how Seinfeld has influenced the world with "Seinfeldisms"...."not that there is anything wrong with that!" :) lol There are no restrictions or special ways of having to express anything, ever. There are no rules or dictates or "goods" or "bads".

[b:f6c4591e06]Dependency upon the group/leader for problem solving, solutions, and definitions without meaningful reflective thought. A seeming inability to think independently or analyze situations without group/leader involvement.[/b:f6c4591e06]

This IS and has been true until getting the point of where he is pointing. It is about not being able to understand the process or mind or ego and getting lost in one's spiritual efforts and wanting to be shown some direction. It's like going to a medical doctor over and over again for a scraped knee until one realizes that one has their own box of bandaids in the cabinet.

[b:f6c4591e06]Hyperactivity centered on the group/leader agenda, which seems to supercede any personal goals or individual interests.[/b:f6c4591e06]

This is not a fact for me.

[b:f6c4591e06]A dramatic loss of spontaneity and sense of humor.[/b:f6c4591e06]

Couldn't be further from the Truth. Have never been happier.


[b:f6c4591e06]Increasing isolation from family and old friends unless they demonstrate an interest in the group/leader.[/b:f6c4591e06]

I have pulled away from some old friends. It is not becasue they haven't joined me on my Path and don't have an interest in Hawkins. It is becasue I needed the sielnce in my life. What I pulled away from was drama and negativity becasue I needed less material in my life to deal with as I sought to transcend those identical qualities within myself.

[b:f6c4591e06]Anything the group/leader does can be justified no matter how harsh or harmful.[/b:f6c4591e06]

I can't say that Hawkins has been harmful to me.

[b:f6c4591e06]Former followers are at best-considered negative or worse evil and under bad influences. They can not be trusted and personal contact is avoided.[/b:f6c4591e06]

This is not true. Has he said this? He has never indicated an us vs. them philosophy or mentality. Again, I don't even think he really knows even our names. He never, ever has asked me or anyone in my presence to "not do" anything. He may suggest not doing something like listening to teachers who channel teachings, but he doesn't demand or say NOT to do something. It is more of an advisement and not a to do or not to do. He advises what is not beneficial if one is choosing a straight and narrow path. There can't be former followers becasue there are only students (or not) of his teachings. He is not my "leader".


[b:f6c4591e06]Ten signs of a safe group/leader.

A safe group/leader will answer your questions without becoming judgmental and punitive.[/b:f6c4591e06]

yes. agreed. My experince of Hawkins has never been what is stated above.

[b:f6c4591e06]A safe group/leader will disclose information such as finances and often offer an independently audited financial statement regarding budget and expenses. Safe groups and leaders will tell you more than you want to know.[/b:f6c4591e06]

I commented on this before, earlier in this post.

[b:f6c4591e06]A safe group/leader is often democratic, sharing decision making and encouraging accountability and oversight.[/b:f6c4591e06]

There are no decisions to be made. It's not like we get together to make lunch or build a sky scraper. I go there to learn about disecting mind/ego as I know he has done it. There is nothing to decide.

[b:f6c4591e06]A safe group/leader may have disgruntled former followers, but will not vilify, excommunicate and forbid others from associating with them.[/b:f6c4591e06]

And he has?

[b:f6c4591e06]A safe group/leader will not have a paper trail of overwhelmingly negative records, books, articles and statements about them.[/b:f6c4591e06]

Well, we do live in a free speech country. Not everyone likes or agrees with everyone.

[b:f6c4591e06]A safe group/leader will encourage family communication, community interaction and existing friendships and not feel threatened.[/b:f6c4591e06]

Yes. He calls it "Way to God through the Heart", Way to God through the Mind" and "Selfless service". Devotion, Adviata and Karma Yoga. The three great Yogas.

[b:f6c4591e06]A safe group/leader will recognize reasonable boundaries and limitations when dealing with others.[/b:f6c4591e06]

Hasn't crossed a line with me.

[b:f6c4591e06]A safe group/leader will encourage critical thinking, individual autonomy and feelings of self-esteem.[/b:f6c4591e06]

Yes and I also have been urged to go within and ask the Holy Spirit for guidance as well.

[b:f6c4591e06]A safe group/leader will admit failings and mistakes and accept constructive criticism and advice.[/b:f6c4591e06]

Is there something that I am not aware of here?

A safe group/leader will not be the only source of knowledge and learning excluding everyone else, but value dialogue and the free exchange of ideas.

Quote


Yes and I also have been urged to go within and ask the Holy Spirit for guidance as well.


I realize that this is a cult education forum and not a Hawkins discussion group; but becasue like you, I value the Truth, I thought I'd add one more subjective experince to the pot so that your information that you are trying to provide for the benefit of people and their families can provide a wider angle. RR, I do realize you care for people otherwise you would not have a site such as this and devote your time to this endeavor, but I only hope that you can open up and see for yourself in person and subjectively before checking off your lists with "YEPs, I have heard that this is true". Why not go find out for yourself. If you so choose, I will personally purchase the $125 ticket for you.

Respectfully and in friendship!

After re-reading my post, I disagree with the way my last sentence came across. I am not here to convince you of anything or to tell you that you should go see Hawkins. That is not what I mean to convey.

The point of all of my posts have been to either investigate the claims you make yourself and to offer my experience and to get back to the point of we have great teachers that either resonate with us or not. Hawkins might not be everyones teacher (in addition to other teachers disucssed on your forum who may or may not be qualified as cult leaders) but the point would be, these teachers are saying the same things that love and happiness and peace and the Kingdom of God is found within and no where else, not even in one's teacher of choice.

In Peace!