I am not so much replying to any of the thoughtful comments in this thread as I am reusing the Subject line because I like the word "disengaging."
It's a long and fascinating process, and one of the most challenging aspects of it is disengaging not just from contact with the organization you no longer feel an affinity with, but disengaging from *assumptions* that organization taught you that still color your thinking. For example, I've known former TMers who "left the fold" physically but who have never left the mindset. Their *reason* for leaving TM was in some cases a lack of profound experiences in meditation. But when I suggest to them that they try another form of meditation and describe it to them, they say, "Oh no, I could never do that. That's *concentration*." See what I'm getting at? While they have walked away from the practice of TM, they have never examined or walked away from the basic assumptions about meditation it taught them. Concentration, to them, is almost by definition BAD, or "contrary to the natural tendency of the mind," or "lesser" than "effortlessness." It can take such a person a decade or more before they are willing to even *try* a form of meditation that was demonized by their TM teachers. And when they do, often they find that what had been described to them by their TM teachers was FALSE, and that they have much deeper and more profound experiences as a result of practicing the thing they had been taught was BAD. As another example, I know people who walked away from the Rama trip, and no longer consider him enlightened. They're off searching madly for a "real" enlightened teacher. So I ask them, "What are your *criteria* for an enlightened teacher? How will you recognize one when you meet him or her?" And they look at me with a straight face and give me the "definition" of enlightenment that was taught to them by Rama. They left *him* behind, but they never once challenged the dogma he taught them. I hope Curtis chimes in on this thread more. He has done a lot of conscious work on figuring out what the dogma or epistemology he had been taught along the way *is*, and examining how much of it is actually true. What I'm suggesting is that "disengaging" from the org- anization is not the same thing as "disengaging" from its dogma. Many do the former but never the latter. How many former TMers do you know who, if asked whether meditation must be performed sitting with eyes closed, would unhesitatingly answer, "Of course!" Thing is...that's not true. Many forms of meditation are performed with eyes open. Many do not require you to sit or remain inactive while practicing them. To be free of everyday interaction with a spiritual organization is one form of "disengaging." But have you really "disengaged" if you've never challenged the basic, core assumptions it taught you to see if you still consider them to be true?
