On Dec 11, 2008, at 7:20 AM, dhamiltony2k5 wrote:
Om, that is succinct. Lack of Transparency, Money, power and sex mixed together.
A turning point for me--and a good touchstone for any meditative org-- was to see up close how people who practice a certain teaching fully actually are. In the 80's I popped in with an old friend at Purusha headquarters in the Catskills. I've never seen such a sadly looking bunch of people in my life. They looked like endogenous heroin addicts. A friend accompanying us who was extremely psychic refused to get out of the car, their subtle appearance was so disturbing to her. This despite their being outside a lot, with tans, lots of exercise and skinny-dipping in the lake, etc.
And then I compare these people to other Hindu-based groups I've visited. I compare them to visits to renunciate/hard-care practitioners in other scenes.
It's an experience I'm not likely to forget any time soon. If real transparency brought forth these people, I can't see how that would fair well with the general public. I couldn't imagine any of these people, say on Bill Moyers, discussing world peace.
& that pretty much is the story on them out in the marketplace. Is going to be hard for them to shake or dodge their past given the nature of the internet without their going forward upright. That would be about transparency. Honest transparency.
Well I don't see that happening with their foremost representatives, Purusha (can't speak to mother diviners) who should be the ones out front and in the spotlight. I think of other groups: Thomas Merton, Wayne Teasdale, Father Thomas Keating, Pema Chodron or other renunciates who were or are exemplars. Where are the out front examples from Purusha and Mother Divine shining forth as models to emulate?
Show us your best examples of people who've used your "technology". Let's see them, out in public, showing off your goods. Aye, there's the rub.
Coming to 2009, a stunning change for them could be their putting up on the university webpage the coming in and going out of every nickle through the university. Financial statements. Audited. Include the pundit program to. Honest transparency. They could do that without even having to acknowledge or plead on any of the sex, bad science, or money stuff of their past.
Well they could do a purge of the bad science quietly and begin replacing it with more reasonable fare. But I suspect at this late date it is too late. It's part of the overall mythos and canon. Esp. given the above-mentioned examples. If your foremost exemplars of your methods cannot be even displayed in public, let alone at the forefront of consciousness-raising discourse, this represents a fundamental flaw somewhere.
