"Weber, in an oft quoted passage, defined charisma as a certain quality of an individual personality, by virtue of which [s/]he is set apart from ordinary [people] and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities. These are such as are not accessible to the ordinary person, but are regarded as of divine origin or as exemplary, and on the basis of them the individual concerned is treated as a leader." 1"
“In simple terms, the average founder of a new religion, especially one that shows some success during the first generation, is obviously an important factor in the growth and development of his/her movement. The movement is initially an extension of the founder's ideas, dreams, and emotional makeup. The leader may be valued as a teacher and/or venerated as a cosmic being, or even divine entity. However, once the founder articulates the group's teachings and practices, they exist independently of him/her and can and do develop a life of their own. Once the follower experiences the truth of the religion, that experience also exists independently. Once a single spokesperson for the founder arises, the possibility of transmitting the truth of the religion independently of the founder has been posited. If a leader has developed a religious vision with the depth to gain a significant following during his/her lifetime, it will be a religion in which the role of the individual who created the religion, however important, will be but one element, not the overwhelming reality.” "Just as the confirmation of a prophecy rarely alters the direction of a group(10), so the death of the founder rarely proves fatal or leads to drastic alteration with the groups' life. But what does happen when the founder dies? Generally the same thing that happens in other types of organizations, that is, very simply, power passes to new leadership with more or less smoothness depending upon the extent and thoroughness of the preparation that has been made ahead of time." Introduction: When Prophets Die: The Succession Crisis in New Religions J. Gordon Melton When Prophets Die: The Postcharismatic Fate of New Religious Movements By Timothy Miller 260 pages Turq, thanks for this thoughtful reply. I appreciate your frank insight. The experience reads like a condensed textbook example as to where new religion/spiritual groups can go (in life-cycle succession). -Buck in the Dome About [ Zen Master Rama was Frederick P. Lenz, ] http://www.skepdic.com/rama.html http://www.skepdic.com/rama.html .turquoiseb wrote: .Buck wrote: > > Turq, > > How did it go in the Rama group in the longer Aftermath of Rama doing himself > in? I honestly don't know, except for the few people I remained in contact with, primarily over the Internet. For some of them, even though I knew they shared my doubts about the whole thing, the "Don't you dare say anything negative about a previous spiritual teacher" or "Don't say anything bad about somebody who is...uh...dead" thang kicked in, and they just swung back into line parroting the dogma. For some it seemed to be truly devastating, in the same way that MMY's death probably was for TBs who had wrapped their whole lives around him. For others, it seemed to be an event that "set them free," and enabled them to look further for their satisfactions in life, be they material or spiritual. Before he died, they were pretty much tied by the cult mindset into believing that he was the only possible source of such satisfactions. In other words, different strokes for different folks. > Proly lots of immediate shock and trauma but there was existent a form of > organization before he died and is there any vestige of a group afterward? As far as I can tell, being as far away from it as I am, there is. There are a few hardcore TBs who still like to pretend that they are "Rama's tradition," even though he clearly didn't intend to leave one. I have never had anything to do with them, other than to attend one event they staged in Phoenix that I wrote about in the last story of Road Trip Mind. It was fun, but not the kind of fun I felt like hanging around. > Before he died there were some who spoke for the group of Rama as to his > teachings and and running the group. Did any of them come forward afterward > with the teachings or an organization in some form? Succession was not > planned for or necessarily indicated? Anybody go forward with it anyway in > some form? Where did any of the key spiritual insiders tend to end up? > Gravitate to be with whom? How did it transpire for the followers and some > of the tru-believers in particular? I am just wondering by comparison. All good questions. I'll answer as best I can, *not* being part of it all, and thus having picked up only what I've picked up from afar, over the Net. He left *NO* successors. He left *NO* successor organization, except a foundation to distribute the wealth he had accumulated to further the study of what he called "American Buddhism." They have -- to their credit -- spread this money around to a number of well-meaning and in many cases well-acting organizations to help do just that. There are a few people who have "set up shop" as spiritual teacher furthering his tradition. I know them all, and recommend none of them. I went out of my way to not be placed into the position of "speaking for Rama," and I personally think his "tradition" would be better served if more had done so. Some -- who IMO had become dependent on always having a guru or teacher available to "lead" them -- felt his absence strongly, and flocked to other teachers. Not surprisingly, some flocked to people I considered charlatans, because IMO *their* charlatan energy was similar to Rama's (Sathya Sai Baba and Adi Da, for example). Some were IMO wiser, and went for more traditional Tibetan teachers who I occasionally met and respected, just never felt any "pull" to study with. Me, I just went my own Way. In other words, it probably went similarly to what happened after MMY kicked the bucket, except that he didn't kick the bucket out from underneath himself. :-) It's always *amazing* to me to see how many of the ones who tried to continue on "teaching in Rama's name" don't even *mention* his suicide on their websites, or if they do, use the hideous euphemism "his Mahasamadhi." Give me a fuckin' break. Guy croaked himself. I'm *sure* he felt he had reasons for doing so. Anyone with as established a history of NPD as Rama had could have easily come up with such reasons. But still, he had a choice, and in my opinion he made a bad one, heavily influenced by a drug called Valium that he foolishly tried to "kick" his dependence on "cold turkey," even though it says right on the label never to do this, *because of the risk of suicide*. At this point, I really am not the person you should ask as to whether there is much of a lingering "tradition" in his name. I'm sure there is, but I'm SO not part of it. Even if I wanted to be, I doubt I'd be allowed to be, because Road Trip Mind was not exactly what those who run such a tradition consider the "party line." I was -- and am still -- considered somewhat of a pariah and an apostate for having written it the way that I did. Go figure. All I was trying to do was be honest. Om
