RR team: is it ok to be posting about a pending legal case on a public forum?

Quote
suenam

Quote
dariusb
[m.facebook.com]

would anyone share their thoughts on Ole's meeting with Dalai Lama. Why would Dalai Lama meet with someone who is always talked about as leader of a cult ?

I think the wording with the photo is deliberately ambiguous and that it omits to say who invited him. My understanding is that DWB members invited Nydahl to join them in going to a public talk given by the 14th Dalai Lama. The lower photo appears to show Nydahl hanging around the rear exit looking for a photo opportunity in a vain attempt to seek legitimation.

No, the Dalai Lama may very well have invited him. He also was present at the opening of Ole's first center in Kopenhagen. Keep in mind that
a) there isn't any hard proof yet that Nydahl's organization has become a cult (or always was one) - in the public perception, it is still far from organizations such as Scientology, perhaps partly due to its relative obscurity
b) the Dalai Lama doesn't shy away from associating with controversial persons (i.e. Shoko Asahara, Jörg Haider), whatever his reasons may be.

Quote
Sceptic Watcher
No, the Dalai Lama may very well have invited him. He also was present at the opening of Ole's first center in Kopenhagen. Keep in mind that
a) there isn't any hard proof yet that Nydahl's organization has become a cult (or always was one) - in the public perception, it is still far from organizations such as Scientology, perhaps partly due to its relative obscurity
b) the Dalai Lama doesn't shy away from associating with controversial persons (i.e. Shoko Asahara, Jörg Haider), whatever his reasons may be.

This is true, and I suspect that Nydahl was presented to him as someone who does a lot of Dharma work and that the Dalai Lama has better things to focus on than this issue - "associating with controversial persons" may also be viewed as being non-judgmental, and as Nydahl belongs to a different lineage, the Dalai Lama has no real authority over him anyway.

What I meant was that it was conspicuous that the wording omitted thto say that he was "invited by the Dalai Lama," and that given this ambiguity, it would be incorrect to assume the Dalai Lama's complicity in this case. The fact that it was implied rather than stated explicity raises the question as to whether this was an attempt at "reputation management," which would be consitent with Nydahl's behaviour in other areas.

Hi to all,

first I would like to thank this forum. It has been a great source and help.

I am sorry to write these words. I value ethical values as much as many other do. In times though, in which ethical values are misused to lead people into dependence and exploitation or even to alienate people from these ethical values it is necessary to be aware of potential dangers.

I am looking back here at about twenty years of unnoticeable slowly increasing buddhist influences. My approach to buddhism was harmless for many, many years. Then I had a short episode, which at that time I thought was pleasant, followed by a very rough and completely unforeseeable struggle with what promised to be peaceful, but is the exact opposite.

After analyzing a lot of different cases, not only of this forum, I came to a different view on what buddhism does and what possibly its intentions are. With this post I want to share the results. It is my hope that this can be useful. Maybe you can confirm it or not.

People who had negative experiences with buddhist leaders, groups etc. often still stick to the buddhist way of thinking. It is said though, one system can not understand itself. It was very difficult to understand what had happened until I stopped thinking about it from within the system in which it happened. So I would like to ask you to try to not read this text with a buddhist mindset.

The steps described below seem to happen not in a strict chronological order but still there is a sequence of steps.


1) Occupation of the mind by referencing to basic values

People of the same origin usually share same basic values. If one claims to have the same basic values, it is easier to gain the trust of these people to a very high degree.

The love of one's neighbor and the resulting compassion in christian societies was addressed by the movie Kundun reporting about the young DL urged to leave his country. They are still addressed by buddhists with the terms empathy and compassion and by frequently mentioning the heart. For many westerners the heart is a symbol for love. The book "Ethics for the new millenium" clearly addressed ethical values. From "The way of the white clouds" I remember descriptions of the heaven and of freedom (tibetan horses so free, they would die in captivity). From "The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying" I remember the description of a ray of light falling into a room, which addresses the idea of light and of a protecting quietness. Then we have the idea of salvation or enlightenment. The basic value of peacefulness seemed to be confirmed when the DL was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. It is also said that Nydahl promises worldly success. And so on, and so on.

In general, when someone comes to us talking of all these beautiful values, we tend to think of such a person as being a good and honest soul. Not so much a foreigner but more like a brother in belief.


2) Occupation of the heart through strong and motivating emotions

Moments of strong emotions can be turning points in our lifes. We tend to respond to strong positive emotions with affection. Sometimes an affection so great, that we wish to repeat these experiences over and over again. Affection and trust can lead us to replace our own values with other values or to develop new behaviours.

An emotion of personal closeness may be created by a touching eye to eye contact in which one feels to be recognized on a personal level. Or by a gentle touch or a calm word. Self-esteem or even pride can be caused by commending people or by telling them that they are or take part in something special. Curiosity can be created by telling people about secrets, especially secrets dangerous to regular people (which again makes you something special), or by offering to be initiated into a secret and so on. Events with buddhist leaders can cause experiences of greater personal strength or personal independence. We also tend to offer admiration to prominent people. One way to become prominent is to meet prominent people in public and it is obvious that some buddhist leaders like the DL do focus on prominent people, actors, politicians or the scientific community.

We also tend to trust a whole community if we feel being member of that community. An experience of security in a community can arise from buddhist mass events or group events, the idea of buddhists living together like a family or when a buddhist leader presents himself as at least possibly being member of his audience. Just a few examples (here of the DL):
- In front of a meeting of neuro-scientists: If I had not become monk I would probably have become engineer.
- Exile government located in India: I am mentally an Indian.
- I am to you what you want me to be to you.


3) Occupation of the soul through key experiences

Key experiences may give us an even stronger impression of a turning point. Assumably these experiences are of a highly individual nature. One needs to find out about own key experiences with buddhists his- or herself. Described below are a few possible examples.

Alone by the amount of literature about these topics, obviously there are very strong mystical parts in buddhism. This is completely underestimated by non-buddhists. It is frequently heard in buddhism, that this world is an illusion. Once we believe that or once our curiosity was aroused successfully and we then want to understand what buddhism means by saying that, we may be opening ourselves for experiences which we can not explain. When we experience something we can not explain, we tend to ask people who probably do know what we experienced. In this case these people will most likely be buddhists. In such a situation we can be told almost anything. We will probably consider almost anything as being possibly true which gives a valid explanation for such an experience.

Buddhism has rituals. For example, it is a fact that initiations are performed in the west. Buddhism has meditations. In meditation or prayer some people may experience seeing a light or have visions like looking into empty space. Some people may experience extreme excitement. Buddhism also uses vows and oaths. I had a Nydahl clone sitting at the other side of a table about half a meter away literally shouting at me full force "take refuge in buddhism!". So much for the subject of peace and tranquility.


4) Demands

The aim of the first three steps is to make us believe: "We are the good ones. We understand you. Liberate yourself and let go of your mistrust and caution. Life is good. You can trust us. We are here to do good to you. We can protect you. We offer something to you, which you can use for your own good." If we fall for that message, we probably are already occupied by the decision to let buddhism become a part of our life. It is made to look like our own decision, but in reality it is a giving in to intense suggestive messages.

People who contact buddhist teachers, groups or organsiations are then ready for the demands. Trust and compassion especially towards the leader will be demanded. This is combined with the demand to give up the ego, which is said to cause troubles, block the path to enlightenment and so on. These two demands together establish a subordination of the students to the leader. It will also be demanded to support the leader and/or the objectives of his buddhist organisation with money and/or work.


5) Occupation of the whole life-experience

At this point a process begins after which buddhism will not be just a part of ones own life, but the whole life will take place within buddhism. Many of the aspects and events of a life will be seen as an achievement of buddhism. In this process the buddhist meanings of the above basic values become understandable for the first time. Just two examples:

Compassion and the heart will not have the meaning of love anymore (in the meaning this word once had). In buddhism love is seen as attachement and therefore needs to be avoided. If at all, love may be replaced by a somehow hollow, almost theoretical "we" feeling, which still separates each part of the "we" from each other part.

Faith will be discussed in an intellectual, critical manner - of course not the buddhist beliefs. For example, I found statements saying not only Christ was a buddhist, but also his and therefore God's words were originally Buddhas words. The originator of a philosophy is becoming God ...

Finally every aspect of everyday living can become ritualized, even house cleaning and bowel movement. I assume you already heard words like "all evils are leaving me"? The conscious mind may enter into a state, in which it is constantly occupied by symbolic, ritualized thinking. This can be interpreted as the beginning of the dying of the person one used to be, which leads to a complete occupation of every aspect of the person.

It seems this is the central aim of buddhism. So let us look at it from the perspective of personal experience. Here I use the terms I know. Please do not be distracted by the words which were used.

Can we agree that in pre-buddhistic times we were for one part our mind, school, education, maybe science? For another part we were our heart, family, friendship, love? For another part we were our soul, faith, art, music? All that pretty much unspiritualized, not always bright and shiny but harmlessly enjoyable.

If we look at the aspects that once we saw as being ourselves and compare the way we feel or think about them now to our pre-buddhistic times, can we see how the roots of buddhism penetrated all these aspects of ourselves?

Can you still just be in love or love someone without having a sensation which reminds you of what you felt in presence of the buddhist leader? Or at least without in some moments a thought of the buddhist leader sneaking into your mind? Can you still be in a mindspace that once was defined by mathematics, by art or by another abstract system without every now and then a thought about the leader? Or without drifting into the mindspace you experienced in buddhist meditations? Can you still receive creative inspiration and be sure where it comes from or does your mind sometimes wonder if this is another achievement of buddhism? How many times did you think you expressed yourself and afterwards noticed that somehow you just expressed what your buddhist leader or author of a buddhist book would have expressed? Can you still connect to yourself alone and nothing else or is there always some kind of buddhist self-observation in the background? Can you still express your soul? Can you still be happy just from the source of your being or is it the somehow extroverted happiness of buddhism?

It seems as if buddhism was severing every connection of a person to the outside world and places itself in between. Subsequently, to a slowly increasing extent every interaction with the outside world goes through buddhism. This means literally every interaction. Every predilection, every interest, profession, friends, family and even faith in a religion or other philosophical or value system will be slowly replaced by the viewpoint of buddhism towards these issues.

What may happen to an identity if it would become completely encapsulated by a belief system? How would one perceive the world when every information about it was filtered and evaluated by the belief system? How would our attitude towards life be affected, if we solely received pre-filtered information about the outside world and the value of our own actions? How could we protect our personality when everything we would perceive, think and do would go through an encapsulating belief system?


6) Loss of any critical distance

The changes in the minds of the students seem to be so substantial, that many of them become unable of questioning their buddhist leader or even recognize the obvious contradictions.

If the motivation was the experience of personal strength, where is the strong personality in a loss of the ego, in group-thinking or in a hierarchy which in some cases even leads to exploitation? If one thought buddhism promised the ethical value of freedom, are members of buddhist groups and organisations allowed to think and act in contradiction to their leaders? Did we hope to find quietness and protection in buddhism? Internet researches revealed horrifying reports related to various buddhist groups and/or monasteries, reports of acts of violence including death treats, murder and different kinds of abuse of people of both genders and different ages, often young, even minors. Or was it the search for love ... no love in buddhist teachings.


7) Dangers

A few explanations for enlightenment:
1) A beautiful peaceful warm summerday with golden sunshine and a lot of nature. (probably the "we are the good ones" part)
2) Something between electrocution and electric chair. (Nydahl)
3) Drinking urine would make no difference to drinking alcohol. (quotation of the DL)

Why do some people desire something without knowing what it is? And this is only the result. What is happening before getting the result?

It is becoming increasingly obvious that it is a misconecption to think one can get enlightened. Rather, it appears either "I" want to be enlightened, but as long as one holds on to the idea of being this "I", enligthenment is not possible. Or the enlightenment takes place, but after that the "I" that wanted to be enlightened does not exist anymore. This is not a process of personal growth or a transformation, it is a replacement. Sometimes the picture of a bowl (the body) is used. What (the soul, the heart, the mind) was in the bowl will be poured out and something else will be filled into the bowl. But what would this something else be? If the "I" that was previously in the bowl is not in the bowl anymore, how can one control what will occupy the bowl?

It is like committing suicide - not of the body but of the soul.

If doing that to yourself was a form of suicide, then what would it be if someone forces another person into these states of being whithout asking the other person for permission (which implies detailed information about what will happen and what the consequences will be) or even if the other person excplicitly stated to reject this? I wonder when the first court decisions will see this as a criminal offence. How will then the responsibility of other people be seen who knew about these actions, supported them or at least did not try to help the victims? Will that be seen as complicity or omission to help a person in danger?

Some former buddhist students were brave enough to publish reports about their experiences in the internet. Given these reports it can be said that there is a considerable risk of very serious psychological problems in buddhist teachings. In more than just a few cases the "I" was not replaced but very deeply injured.


8) Conclusion

Buddhist leaders like to present themselves as being open-minded. In reality buddhism and its leaders seem to be much less bright than one may have expected. According to a newspaper article Nydahl once said "I do not need to be popular. It is enough that I am right.". In their teachings buddhist leaders seem to not be able to understand their beliefs as being just one part of this world. Instead, to them the whole world seems to be what their belief system tells them about the world.

Accordingly, it is almost impossible to get objective answers to critical questions from buddhist leaders. Buddhist leaders seem to be inable to leave their own perspective enough to understand the position of a questioner and thus to be able to understand the question. Instead it is expected that the questioner looks at his or her question from the viewpoint of buddhism. It is a characteristic of a totalitarian dictatorship, when only the leader can demand a change in perspective, but the leader never needs to change his own perspective.

Looking at the above steps and the order in which they occur, one may get the impression of a very well planned trap. The roles are clearly defined. There are a few who believe they know and there are many who sacrifice their lifetimes. Still most people do accept, that this is happening in buddhism, while when looking at it from a time before taking the first steps into buddhism it would have been unthinkable to tolerate this a single little bit. Who still hopes to achieve personal liberation or enlightenment under such circumstances is lost.

This can happen in other philosophical or religious organisations, too? Right, and in the same way buddhism violates some of the original statements. Buddhism is not the goodness in which there was no place for such unwanted events.

Should it not be our free decision what we confess and which direction we give to our lifes? This is only possible if we are not misinformed and especially not manipulated. The values we believe in are not achievements of buddhism. These values did exist before men institutionalized them.

The real question is not about one or the other buddhist leader. The real question is: The values one believes in, is it realistic to realize them, get close to them or to engage for them in a life lived in a buddhist group or organisation? Then the necessary decision is: buddhism yes or no.


(Annotation: I'd like to point out that all this concerns the institutionalized buddhism. I would not go as far as to question every word of Buddha or the sincere work of some followers of his path. It must also clearly be stated, that my trustful interest in and respect for the buddhist path was misused and destroyed by buddhism itself.)


Love.

Hi BackAtHome,

I think you've raised some pertinent points there, however my view is that the reasons behind that are quite different.

Quote
BackAtHome
This can happen in other philosophical or religious organisations, too? Right, and in the same way buddhism violates some of the original statements. Buddhism is not the goodness in which there was no place for such unwanted events.

Should it not be our free decision what we confess and which direction we give to our lifes? This is only possible if we are not misinformed and especially not manipulated. The values we believe in are not achievements of buddhism. These values did exist before men institutionalized them.

Yes, I agree with this idea, but I believe that remaining true to it's "original statments" can actually lead to this "free decision". The issue of institutionalisation in it's original setting is one issue, however there is also the issue of the existing western institutions onto which the import of Buddhism in the west is tacked.

Surely one of the reasons for the appeal of Buddhism is precisely the apparent crises of existing values and I cannot see a time when those values were ever "harmlessly enjoyable."
(Isn't that the same sort of uncritical acceptance of a value system that you are highlighting? Isn't the current economic, ecological, and social issues that we see in the west a result of these values? Isn't the institutionalisation of those values firmly established, and those values that we learn as we grow up not in fact our own, but those of our parents, teachers, and society?)

In regard to Nydahl and DWB that is precisely my issue - that despite calling themselves "Buddhist," they are in fact espousing a totally incompatible set of values, i.e. that of western consumerist economics along with its attendant aggressive and reactionary forms of nationalism and gender politics.

suenam,

some sources point into the direction that the body of a buddhist leader can be seen as a portal through which the conscious being which incarnated many times before and at present in this body can continue to follow its interests in this world. Accordingly, buddhist teachings contain references to periods of time which are beyond the life span of a single person. We do not have to believe this, but it is very likely that the buddhist leader believes this.

Many people think the words of the DL and other buddhists of our era, spoken in public or written in books, are what buddhism is in general. This is simply not the case. Additionally, based on the above one may wonder, if the actions of a buddhist leader including the DL are focused on his current life span only. It is highly questionable that the self-presentation of buddhism of our times is anything more than part of the first "We are the good ones." steps.

Love.

Quote
BackAtHome
suenam,

some sources point into the direction that the body of a buddhist leader can be seen as a portal through which the conscious being which incarnated many times before and at present in this body can continue to follow its interests in this world. Accordingly, buddhist teachings contain references to periods of time which are beyond the life span of a single person. We do not have to believe this, but it is very likely that the buddhist leader believes this.

Many people think the words of the DL and other buddhists of our era, spoken in public or written in books, are what buddhism is in general. This is simply not the case. Additionally, based on the above one may wonder, if the actions of a buddhist leader including the DL are focused on his current life span only. It is highly questionable that the self-presentation of buddhism of our times is anything more than part of the first "We are the good ones." steps.

Love.

I think I see what you are saying here, but I'm not 100% sure.
The teachings on non-duality can be hard enough to apply to oneself, let alone perceiving its subtleties in a teacher. One thing I can say for sure is that Nydahl's discourses on Islam, Africa, and women are most definately dualistic.

Surely the idea that "we" (westerners) tend towards giving more credence to the persona of the teacher rather than the teachings proper is actually a reflection of our own bias rather than an issue with Buddhism itself?
I think that any genuine practice and genuine teacher-student relationship would emphasise the continuity of the teachings themselves rather than the "interests" of the teacher.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/11/2012 06:35AM by suenam.

suenam,

I may be wrong, but are you intentionally trying to distract from my original posting? I am not open to that.

Maybe it has not become clear: I do not have a single little bit of trust towards buddhism or buddhists anymore. I explicitly forbid any buddhist leader, teacher or whatever to try to force teachings into or manipulate my life in any way. Doing so is against my expressed will and is a violation of my privacy.

(for all readers of this forum: there were so called genuine teachers who liked to lie down with their students, whose students needed psychotherapy or psychiatric help afterwards, or who directed the inauguration of the temple of one of the teachers who liked to lie down with his students. again, "genuine" is a word for a basic value - this is step 1 in action.)

BackAtHome:

This thread is not about "Buddhism or Buddhists" generally.

This thread is speicifically about "Ole Nydahl and Diamond Way".

Please focus the discussion here accordingly.

If you wish to discuss the nuances and behavior of Buddhists you have come to the wrong message board.

This is not a forum for a discussion of religion generally or theology.

rrmoderator,

thank you for your message. Please let me explain. It seems that similar events occur in different groups. But when a group is discussed in isolation often one sees messages with a meaning like "This group is not good. But other groups are.". It would just be too sad, if someone would get out of Nydahls DW just to get into a similar environment in another group.

I was trying to bring the discussion from the level of specific details (because sometimes we get lost in details) to a meta-level kind of overview or pattern. My hope was that every reader then can see for herself or himself if there are similarities with their experiences in Nydahls DW and if he or she maybe can see something like a pattern behind that. With such a pattern in mind - that was my hope - the forum members could not only better understand their experiences but also use it when making decisions about their next steps.

To keep it at this level I strictly refrain from reporting about personal experiences. But by posting specifically in this forum it should be obvious that I am not happy with what Nydahl does. In the beginning I was only researching about Nydahl but then was surprised how many reports are out there about other groups, too.

I hope seen this way my forum posts may be acceptable.

Btw. A big thank you for offering this whole website including the Nydahl forum. Your Pages about Deprogramming were a real eye-opener for me and even though not strictly about Nydahl or his DW maybe a good read for members of this forum, too.