Dear RR Moderator,

I appreciate your links and the information that is compiled within them. I would certainly expect no less considering we are coversing within an "anticult" forum. However, much of the information is discussing cult definitions and examples which do not apply to Guru Swami G specifically as, other than inuendo, you have no valid, supported or tangible proof that any of the embittered claims by one atheist that began this campaign are, in fact, true. Once again, there are no former students here or their grievanced families that are supporting the accusations of financial abuse, physical abuse, sexual abuse, brain washing or keeping them held prisoner from their friends, families, education or work lives. As a matter of fact, you have quite the contrary: students that are speaking to their personal experiences that support the work of Guru Swami G.

You are also negating all acts of meditation, prayer or personal direct experiences of millions of people and a wide class of spiritual ideology by stating they are mere tactics to brainwash people or works of dellusion. This is quite a wide claim and, as I am sure you are more than aware, will not win your case over as "true", as there are an equal number of published works that would argue these practices are beneficial (not to mention the heartheld beliefs and experiences of a majority that would directly challenge your opinions).

You are entitled to your views, opinions and beliefs. But let us be clear here; that is all that has been presented. There is nothing more in this entire thread than mere speculation, gossip and arguments of "he said, she said".

When you have some tangible "evidence" or "proof" that would suggest, beyond a reasonable doubt both within the public eye and legal system, please feel free to share so the matter can be handled in a proper venue beyond this forum with its inherent arguments which tend to revolve in circles.

sarojini:

Your personal bias as a supporter of Swami G and an apologist is noted.

There is no "campaign" here and frankly your reaction seems just a bit paranoid and overly defensive.

Also, attempting to negate points made by labeling someone an "atheist" is not a meaningful response, but rather a personal attack.

The proof about Swami G has been provided by you, John A. Lobur, Swami G's Web site and the YouTube videos.

Anyone interested can simply follow the links on this thread and come to their own conclusions based upon that evidence.

Dear RRModerator,

Moderator: "Anyone interested can simply follow the links on this thread and come to their own conclusions based upon that evidence."

Finally, we agree upon something.

Regards,
Sarojini

Quote
rrmoderator
To whom it may concern:

Neo-eastern cults often use "meditation" or what can be seen as trance induction/hypnosis, to render participants more suggestible. In such an altered dissociative state they become malleable and can then be relatively easily persuaded to feel and believe almost anything.

In trance an individual's perception of reality can be greatly altered, e.g. "a sense of calmness and serenity; a method to concentrate and focus on a single point; a way to stop the constant verbal thinking and relax the mind..."

This is directly relevant to Swami G.

Watching her YouTube videos you can see people that appear to be in various states of trance.

But "meditation may not always be good for you," said noted clinical psychologist and cult expert Margaret Singer.

Here are some interesting links to better understand this phenomenon.

See [www.culteducation.com]

Also see [www.culteducation.com]

The research sponsored and subsequent claims made by Transcendental Meditation (TM) founded by Maharishi, perhaps the most well-known organization that promotes meditation, has been criticized.

See [www.culteducation.com]

There are many neo-eastern groups, some that have been called "cults," which seem use "meditation" or "stilling the mind," as one tool to gain undue influence over adherents.

See [www.culteducation.com]

Note that two of the groups listed under Neo-Eastern within the archives are the Holy Order of Mans and ISKCON.

Swami G has admitted to historical ties to both of these groups and she once lived within Hare Krishna ashrams.

To better understand how "thought reform" or "coercive persuasion" works see the following:

[www.culteducation.com]

[www.culteducation.com]

To better understand the distinctions between various forms of persuasion, such as education, advertising, propaganda, indoctrination and thought reform see the following:

[www.culteducation.com]

Noted scientist Carl Sagan put together what has been called a "baloney detection kit," to examine the claims of anyone or any group.

See [www.culteducation.com]

Now to stay on topic the above information should be applied to Swami G.

Can she stand such scrutiny?

Lets keep the discussion here focused to the topic and within the rules.

Personal attacks are against the rules.

Thank you for posting this. I agree with you that there is an attempt by Guru Swami G's supporters to divert the topic.

Quote
rrmoderator
Neo-eastern cults often use "meditation" or what can be seen as trance induction/hypnosis, to render participants more suggestible. In such an altered dissociative state they become malleable and can then be relatively easily persuaded to feel and believe almost anything.

In trance an individual's perception of reality can be greatly altered, e.g. "a sense of calmness and serenity; a method to concentrate and focus on a single point; a way to stop the constant verbal thinking and relax the mind..."

This is directly relevant to Swami G.

Watching her YouTube videos you can see people that appear to be in various states of trance.

But "meditation may not always be good for you," said noted clinical psychologist and cult expert Margaret Singer.

Here are some interesting links to better understand this phenomenon.

To be honest, I do not think the links you provide lead to a better understanding of these phenomena at all, unfortunately. In the sources you cite, I can find no compelling evidence for your contention that meditation can be used to "brainwash" people and control their minds. The sources John A. Labour provides, appear far more balanced and do seem to actually contribute to our understanding of these phenomena. As a more or less " neutral" observer in this debate (if neutrality in such matters is really possible) I tend to side with sarojini on this matter, when she writes that:

Quote
sarojini
you are also negating all acts of meditation, prayer or personal direct experiences of millions of people and a wide class of spiritual ideology by stating they are mere tactics to brainwash people or works of dellusion. This is quite a wide claim and, as I am sure you are more than aware, will not win your case over as "true", as there are an equal number of published works that would argue these practices are beneficial (not to mention the heartheld beliefs and experiences of a majority that would directly challenge your opinions).

Isn't it somewhat perplexing that our language concerning states of consciousness is so meagre: we generally use the word "trance" to cover various SoCs, whereas the variety of types of states of consciousness available to us is amazingly rich? The statement that in "Watching her YouTube videos you can see people that appear to be in various states of trance" is a good example of this, the word " trance" being used to render suspicious these kinds of scenes in one stroke. Granted, the state these people seem to be in after receiving shaktipat or diksha appears to bear some resemblance to the way some people tend to act when high on drugs, but to immediately jump to conclusions based on a superficial impression alone would be far too easy.

Moreover, the argument that Guru Swami G has a history of involvement with dubious (in some cases downright malignant) organisations is not sufficient to discredit her at all, logically speaking at least.

I have two final questions:

The first to sarojini and John: are there any negative qualities or points of improvement you would ascribe to your teacher?
Secondly, to those on the other side of this debate: do you think it is possible that there are authentic, trustworthy and wise spiritual teachers out there?

Nomad_K:

The topic of this thread is not the authenticity of "spiritual teachers" generally, a debate about religion or meditation.

The topic here is "Guru Swami G."

Having said that the overwhelming majority of religious groups within such traditions as Hinduism, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, or the so-called "New Age" movement don't generate complaints at this site.

Questions are being raised though about Swami G and her authenticity, past "cult" affiliations, finances and practices.

As the link you first provided on this thread demonstrates Swami G has apparently incorporated some of the teachings she learned through the Holy Order of Mans and ISCKON to form the amalgamated composite path she teaches her followers.

The sudden influx of Swami G's followers here is also quite interesting, and fits a familiar pattern at this message board.

The observations of mental health professionals regarding how "meditation" or trance states have been used by cults is also directly relevant to this discussion.

As you observed Swami G's followers seemed "high on drugs," but were more likely in trance states of altered consciousness.

It will be interesting to see if sarojini or John can identify anything negative about Swami G. and/or suggest any areas where she might improve her behavior.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/18/2010 07:53PM by rrmoderator.

Quote
Nomad_K
Granted, the state these people seem to be in after receiving shaktipat or diksha appears to bear some resemblance to the way some people tend to act when high on drugs, but to immediately jump to conclusions based on a superficial impression alone would be far too easy.

Yes, but having put the question three times in this thread (once to Swami G herself) as to what is actually going on during the giving and receiving of Shaktipat with Swami G, there has been no reply. John A. Lobur stated that he'd have no answer that would satisfy me.

I am willing to put aside any surface impressions and sincerely consider what Shaktipat with Swami G actually is and what it involves, and to discuss it.

Maybe you can answer, Nomad_K: what exactly does Swami G do when she gives Shaktipat and what happens to the person who receives it?

Guru SwamiG's journey to realisation, which she describes in this video on YouTube is interesting:

[www.youtube.com]


It is interesting in what it omits as least as much as what is included in the story she tells.

To begin she describes her first experience of Kundalini awakening, which was a physical sensation and a mental experience of light felt when someone from the Holy Order of Mans did a 'laying on of hands.'
I don't doubt that this felt wonderful to her. When someone is desperately seeking signs and wonders, the mind often conveniently produces exactly what is so ardently wished for---that doesn't mean however that the vision is anything other than a passing fantasy, however vivid and seemingly-significant that fantasy may appear.
Indiaspark mentioned paredolia, an ordinary phenomenom that explains how the mind does this:

[en.wikipedia.org]

What is omitted is the amount of doctrine (influence) that SwamiG had previously imbibed from the Holy Order of Mans--a recognised cultic organisation---- that would have primed her to look for and expect these signs and visions. SwamiG promotes bhakti--the path of devotion--that exhorts the devotee to not question the leader in any way. So she accepted the reality of these sensations (signs and visions) as whatever the leader chooses to interpret them as.
She had already surrendered her own mind to the leader.

Any competent stage hypnotist can produce a similar effect in those pliable minds that place their faith in him. Charismatic christian pastors do it at every service when they touch members of the flock who then unwittingly produce the expected performance of speaking in tongues or falling over from the holy spirit. Given enough time to figure out his vulnerablities and prime my victim, I could do it too, and I make no claims to be either a hypnotist or preacher.

This is the path of bhakti, devotion to the Guru, it is a path of complete surrender of your own mind to the Guru, allowing the Guru to dictate what is and is not reality:

[www.guruswamig.com]

"Devotional acts include serving the guru, prostrating daily and offering a gift in love, chanting his or her name and meditating on his or her inner form as the embodiment of the Divine, partaking of ucchishta-waters from his or her holy sandals, and his or her food leavings-emulating his or her awakened qualities, seeking initiation and striving for Self Realization as he directs. Codes of harmony include seeking hisor her blessings, obeying his or her directions, keeping no secrets and honoring his or her lofty presence. Prohibitions include never contradicting or arguing with the guru, never criticizing him or her, nor listening to criticism by others, not imitating his or herdress or deportment, not standing or sitting above himor her, nor walking or driving ahead of him or her; not assuming authority in his or her presence, nor uttering words of falsehood or contempt, and not initiating conversation or asking questions unless invited. The Kularnava Tantra explains, "Be always in service of the guru, ever in his or her presence, giving up desire and anger, humble and devoted, lauding in spirit, upright in doing his or her work."

Take good note of: emulating his or her awakened qualities so the devotee gets in some practice at performing as an awakened one before the big event---priming, or acting?


Guru SwamiG then left the Holy Order of Mans--a cultic organisation--taking with her the belief in signs and visions that she had learned there. She studied the Bible and contemplated for 3 years.
3 is a significant figure, like 7 in numerology. For some reason humans like these numbers, 3, 5, 7, 9 and they frequently crop up in religious stories and doctrine because the human mind hooks onto them and gives them a mystic significance that they do not really have outside of the discipline of mathematics.
There is a reason that conmen salesmen on the internet always give their prices as $39.97, or $49.97 and that is because they have done the market research and know that humans attribute some special meaning to those numbers that isn't really there--it increases the number of people who are influenced to buy.

Then SwamiG had a past life memory as a Buddhist monk. I have past life memories all the time, when I think back to stuff that happened years ago--I try not to do that too often. I have past life memories every night when I am dreaming too, but those are more colourful and imaginative because the mind when it is set free from the normal constraints--as in dreaming or meditation--comes up with some very strange fictional stuff.
Smart people use this creative ability of the mind to write stories, do maths, produce films, paint pictures, imagine what fun they are going to have on their vacation. Most of them do not claim that their visions are real.

Some people who have such visions start religions if they can convince enough others that their personal dreamtime is real and thus evidence of another, better world somewhere if only we could find it---and who better to show us the way, for a price of course, than the person who dreamed the dream in the first place?

Guru SwamiG then describes her association with ISKON, another recognised cultic organisation. The leader of that organisation--remember that SwamiG promotes bhakti, surrender of her own mind to the guru---- told her that she would reach 'realisation' in this lifetime.
That is a very strong suggestion, from the guru to the surrendered one, and something that all shady gurus promise to their all followers. Each follower thinks that the guru has singled out only them for this wonder, so they feel special and exalted but it is a standard line to everyone--it is the bait that hooks the fish.
The guru has made them feel special so that the person wants to be close to the guru to keep feeling special.

What has been omitted, and very deliberately so by the guru, is exactly what 'realisation' means. You will never pin down what this means by asking the guru because it has to mean whatever fantasy each individual wants it to mean---being god, knowing everything, power, success, being an annointed one---you name it, 'realisation' covers it, it is only bait, remember?
Here is the dictionary definition, quite an ordinary process that happens countless times each day as we learn something new:

[wordnetweb.princeton.edu]

One of the major obstacles of being a spiritual seeker is that the search pre-supposes that there is something to be found but until that something is nailed down in concrete terms, the seeker hasn't a hope of finding it--gurus love this as it keeps the seeker dangling on the hook of hope for years sometimes.
A good teacher would tell you to be a finder of the truth, not a seeker, as 'finder' implies that you actually have to do some leg-work, and employ your own agency (your critical faculties) at first defining what you are after and then finding it, rather than passively waiting for 'Guru's Grace' to deliver that nebulous 'realisation' as signs and wonders from the netherworld.
(Finder also contains the implication that you might actually get somewhere on this quest)


Moving on, Guru SwamiG left ISKON, thanking the corrupt cult leader and presumably taking the beliefs she had unthinkingly imbibed from him as a bhakti devotee--- who does not question or criticise even corrupt cult leaders--with her. She went to India to study Tantra, not the sexy kind so beloved of the naive westerners but the real magic kind, the one that those wanting power over others study.

Tantra is about manipulating the dark fantasies of the mind, the demons and bogeymen and the things that go bump in the night and scare us witless--to hopefully learn to control those fears. First though you have to control those fears in your own mind and a lot of tantra apprentices--before they become adepts--go stark staring mad, become psychotic, because that stuff is terrifying.
And you can use it to terrify others, if you are willing to risk your own sanity in the process, for those scary things don't go away, even for the accomplished adepts who often get bitten in the bum by their own fantasies. That sword, being double-edged, always cuts both ways.
Let us generously assume that Guru SwamiG has actually become an accomplished adept as she claims, although personally I have my doubts, as the real dudes aren't all over YouTube for a start, they are far too smart for that.

What Guru SwamiG omits in this Tantra section is the exact names of her teachers, although she has been very forthcoming about her previous cult involvement with regard to naming names.
Why this glaring ommission now I wonder?
There is also no proper explanation of what Tantra really is, apart from stating that it isnt the sexy, fun kind--again that fuzzy bait to hook the fish--can it really be whatever you imagine it to be, all those dark powers harnessed to your bidding (everyone's favourite fantasy of omniscience) and absolutely no mention of the very real risks of psychosis? If Guru SwamiG really did become an adept and is now so all-powerful, how safe is it to be around her and how do we know that she came through it with no lingering psychosis that might rear its ugly head anytime?

We move on to the banks of the Ganges, that river sacred to Hinduism, in Rishikesh no less, where every charlatan guru in India has set up a stall since the Beatles and the giggling fraud Maharishi first made it famous as the place to go to get 'enlightened.' The Beatles and Mick Jagger got enlightened alright, when they realised that the Maharishi was a fraud and riding on their fame to reach a mass audience.
They are significant mystic names to a lot of seekers still, redolent of the exotic, the unknown, the miraculous signs and wonders--just like Medjugorje-- the fuller story of which Indiaspark linked to earlier in this thread:

[www.spectator.co.uk]

I'm agnostic myself, I try to keep an open mind but not so wide open that my brains fall out. There is usually a mundane explanation for these signs and wonders which comes to light in the passage of time. Sadly, it usually involves power sex and money, the three things that humans find most desirable of all, even more desirable than 'knowing god'--which, since I grew up some and stopped demanding the impossible, has always smacked to me of overreaching, or spiritual greed.


Place names are given, as they have mystic significance and resonance amongst the general public, but no names of Tantra teachers--who are also very proud and strict about lineage..... hmmmm, a bit strange that.

To cut a long story short, the biggie happened on the banks of the Ganges at Rishikesh.
SwamiG managed to have 'realisation' even though her mind had 'dropped away'--a bit of a contradiction in terms there.
'A whole new being emerged' although to anyone else she probably looks just like the old SwamiG--a subjective assessment on her part perhaps, or are we talking about the emergence of multiple personality disorder?

Remember that Guru SwamiG is a devotee, a promoter of bhakti, that path where you submit so totally to the Guru that you will drink water from his sandals and obey his every whim. She has, by her own admission already given over her mind to several others. Is this whole new being that emerges the combined implanted avatars of her previous gurus, the corrupt leaders of ISKON and The Holy Order of Mans as well as the nameless Tantric masters?

We are getting into the fantasy film 'Alien' territory now, except that the heroine of that film was fighting the bad guys who were parasitically laying eggs in and killing their victims, not becoming one of them.
What happened to the old SwamiG? Is the husk abandoned on the banks of the Ganges or does it still lurk somewhere in the new SwamiG's psyche? Does she even have a psyche anymore now that she has abandoned her mind to the control of so many other corrupt cultic leaders and reckons that her peak enlightenment experience was her mind dropping away? Where does this mind drop to?

Can a benign being really emerge from the mixed influences and beliefs of several malign cultic leaders?

Finally, Guru SwamiG talks about the wonders we can expect as this new person if we follow her path, the main one being that we need no longer rely on the phenomena of this world.
Guru SwamiG seems to be relying quite heavily on the phenomena of this world, the internet to broadcast her message and bring in recruits, the donations of those recruits to boost her income, the gullibilty and wishful thinking of those 'seekers' who accept not questioning her in any way.
But most of all she relies on simple carny tricks, the phenomena of fake signs and wonders, easily reproduced by any savvy manipulator, to convince her flock that she is really something special and has a direct line to god.

If it sounds too good to be true it usually is.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 09/18/2010 10:27PM by Stoic.

If anyone wants an up to date description by a participant observer on the social patterns of becoming a sadhu (male renunciate) or sadhvi (female renunciate) in India, get and read Wandering With Sadhus by Sondra L Hausner.

Hausner learned that the texts make it seem that sadhus and sadhvis completely renounce ordinary family, householder and social life.

Actually the renunciates have their own familial and social structures that are just as distinct and in parallel to mainstream society.

Every sadhu and sadhvi, if the real thing, can and will name his or her guru, the gurus lineage, and even the Akhara, the administrative body that oversees his or her part of the lineage. Sadhus are known to each other and discipline is administered to anyone who misbehaves.

Some persons associated with kundalini and tantra in India now have very bad reputations, such as Baba Muktananda who himself had claimed lineage from a guru and whose own claims are now considered doubtful.

Quote

Upon first meeting, almost all sadhus ask one another 'Who is your guru?" because the response situates a renouncer as a member of a particular order and the recipient of a particular lineage's teachings. The guru-disciple relationship ensures that a renouncer is never outside of a monastic social structure. Even a sadhu who chooses (and is permitted by his or her guru) to practice in complete seculsion belongs to a social web, and is beholden to sadhu society, through his or her connections to his or her guru. The relationship between guru and disciple precisely prevents the social isolation and disconnectedness that might otherwise be expected of renouncers.

Wandering with Sadhus by Sondra Hausner, page 74

In this book, Hausner also discusses the cities on the sadhus route, and the role of the festivals, especially the Kumbh Mela, by which the sadhus and sadhvis gather, recognize each other, are assessed and if necessary, reprimanded for lapses in discipline. They recognize each other from having met at past festivals. And Hausner tells us that renunciates of a particular lineage stay with each other at specific camps--you stick with your family when sharing food and sleeping arrangements and this is stricly expected.

So contrary to folklore and the texts, a sadhu cannot easily 'go rogue' and not have other sadhus take note of it.

So, who is your guru, what is your akhara and how many Kumb Melas have you attended?

All those are questions that can be asked and must be asked.

One cannot politely ask what mantra one has been assigned--thats private.

But...it is polite and considered necessary and the sign of being discerning to know to ask,

Your lineage?

Who is your initiating guru? (diksa guru)

Which living persons have also received diksa (initiation and mantra) from your same initiating guru?



Your akhara--the administrative body(precinct) of your lineage?

Which Kumbhmelas have you attended and what years?

rrmoderator, thank you for clarifying. My apologies of straying off topic.
Also: Stoic, very informative post. Thanks.