Byron Katie's School For The Work March '09

http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?12,12906,68253#msg-68253

 
http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?12,12906,68272#msg-68272

P.S. I'm sorry if I seem harsh with anything I've said but.....it really really pisses me off when people try to turnaround things so that it makes TW seem harmless!!!

-gimmeshelter

The more I read about tw and Miss Katie, the more harmful it seems.  I'm sure a lot of people play around with it and then let it fall to the wayside, but there seems to be a core of followers who go to multiple schools-wow-they must be loaded-or going into debt...and the facilitators in it for the $$.

One the face of it, the work is a cognitive parlour trick, and the inner workings of the org reek of cult.  And it's really, really just all about $$.

Glad to see a new post on this board.  Was noticing that the conversation seemed to dry up.  Would hope more people would feel free to drop in here, even weigh in.

Here's something I'm curious about and will look into:  BK was featured on Oprah in the past year.  Are there messages and links to blogs on Oprah's website where people who've had personal experience with BK have written in?  The running joke, no matter how pleased we might be to have him, is that Oprah picked our new president.  I wonder what the Oprah feature did for and to BK's business?  Probably works both ways, for and against it.  The bigger they are, the harder they fall.

I'm also curious about why/how this thread dried up.  If any regular posters to this topic are still checking in, can you speak to this?  On other boards, where this subject is discussed, they point to trolls,to BK-sympathists who want to confuse the discussion, to people getting phone calls from BK's organization to pull them back in, and various other tactics to squelch the criticism.  What do you think?

Glad to see a new post on this board.  Was noticing that the conversation seemed to dry up.  Would hope more people would feel free to drop in here, even weigh in.
Here's something I'm curious about and will look into:  BK was featured on Oprah in the past year.  Are there messages and links to blogs on Oprah's website where people who've had personal experience with BK have written in?  The running joke, no matter how pleased we might be to have him, is that Oprah picked our new president.  I wonder what the Oprah feature did for and to BK's business?  Probably works both ways, for and against it.  The bigger they are, the harder they fall.

-swampseer

One the face of it, the work is a cognitive parlour trick, and the inner workings of the org reek of cult.  And it's really, really just all about $$.

-beebonnet

 
It's approx. $5000 for the school and $20000 for the turnaround house!!
 
Cognitive parlour trick.......yes!!

I have a good friend who is into Katie and I was telling her about some of the things I've read here and at the other forum, and guess what, she attempted to "do the work" on me about it.  When I first heard about it, it just seemed like another harmless new age thing, but I saw how it affected my friend and I got a little turned off by it.  She became rigid and controlling and kind of "did the work" on people without their knowledge or consent.  It was creepy.  Every one of life's little vagaries was reduced to the 4 questions, even when it seemed unnecessary.

When I started to read more, Janaki's blog for example, it became clear that this is big business masquerading as salvation and not safe for people.  Katie is a capital "C" as far as I'm concerned.  I won't try to talk to my friend about it anymore, I am just going to wait and hope she eventually lets the work go.  I really appreciate the people who spoke up about the school and hope others will feel comfortable doing the same, now that we seem to have shooed the trolls away.

Peace.

I check the site, still.  I stopped posting regularly for two reasons: 1) I'd told as much of the story of my experience as I felt free to share without stepping on the confidentiality of other participants.  Having done so, I needed a breather from all that, some space and time for re-entry.  2) I was uncomfortable with having my posts picked up and posted to another website without my consent.  It's all about freedom of choice, freedom to set one's own boundaries, etc.  School's not really out, yet, and it's not just confined to a hotel in L.A.  It begins to feel like a leap from the frying pan to the fire.

I check the site, still.  I stopped posting regularly for two reasons: 1) I'd told as much of the story of my experience as I felt free to share without stepping on the confidentiality of other participants.  Having done so, I needed a breather from all that, some space and time for re-entry.  2) I was uncomfortable with having my posts picked up and posted to another website without my consent.  It's all about freedom of choice, freedom to set one's own boundaries, etc.  School's not really out, yet, and it's not just confined to a hotel in L.A.  It begins to feel like a leap from the frying pan to the fire.

-arienariadne

I hear ya A-the "other website" is, hm how shall I say, rather militant,  and those guys are on a tear to rip BK a new one.  Some of them apparently went to the school and got burned , so I can't blame them, but it seems like it would have been enough to just link to this forum instead of reproducing posts on that one.  But that's just me.  I still have mixed feelings about the org I participated in, people have bashed it as a cult, but because I got something out of it that was positive, it's hard to hop on the anti-cult bandwagon ...so I don't.  I just try to look at it realistically from my own point of view.  As for the people who bash it...well, they have to do what's right for them.  I won't argue or defend it. 

The waters get muddied when people go out of their way to defend and justify BK or any org on a forum that is critical of her/it.  It makes you wonder if they are doing it because there is an emotional stake in it for them, or financial. 

I don't understand the conflict of interest.

-jgf75

Here's as best as I understand it. Decades ago, I believe in the late 70s and perhaps into the 80s, Stephen Mitchell became a monk in the Zen School of Zen Master Seung Sahn. He left the monkhood and ZMSS' school, and much more recently married Byron Katie.

I myself did a Zen retreat with Zen Master Seung Sahn in 1988, and still practice the style of Zen he taught. ZMSS died around 4 years ago, but back in the 90s, I attended at talk by him, at which he was introduced by Stephen Mitchell. It was the only time I ever saw the Mitchell, and have no connection with him otherwise.

Out of this, gimmeshelter has fabricated some paranoia that it's a "conflict of interest" if I say anything about Byron Katie. The key point is that if you're looking for a reason to attack someone, you can ALWAYS find some excuse.

Stuart

nice try stu

fyi stu doesnt just 'practice' kwan um zen, he teaches it, big distinction

from ross forum april 4 '09

http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?12,58393,68086#msg-68086

You will notice RandomStu's technique is the same, to deflect, distract, and disrupt the conversation to stop people from carefully analyzing the specific techniques being used on them.

Why?
Why does Stuart Resnick RandomStu run interference and create a smokescreen for Byron Katie?
He tried to do the exact same thing in this thread previously.

He does not disclose his connections, of course, quite the contrary, in this thread he said he had no connection to Byron Katie, which was extremely false.

RandomStu's own guru is Seung Sahn, the deceased Leader of the Kwan Um School of Zen.
Stephen Mitchell, Byron Katie's husband, was deeply involved with Seung Sahn, and was even groomed to take over his organization.

For all anyone knows, he may have purchased Kwan Um School of Zen in some type of partnership deal with all the new millions. Who knows who even REALLY owns that group now, not just the storefront? The Kwan Um School of Zen is a huge organization, and was centrally controlled by the iron fist of Seung Sahn until his death in 2004.

RandomStu, Stephen Mitchell, Seung Sahn

Seung Sahn himself, was involved in the sexual abuse of his female students. His excuse was it was for their own spiritual good, and to make them loyal to him so they would not cheat him out of his money...your typical sex abuser guru.
Seung Sahn was involved in many abuses, and should be disgraced, yet his current followers revere his memory and methods, as does Stu Resnick.

Meanwhile, Seung Sahn was clearly a ruthless leader who would do anything to further his own ambitions. He designed all sorts of extreme abusive techniques like...

"isolation for up to 90 days 17 hours a day while only reading the works of Seung Sahn, while NOT BEING PERMITTED to keep a diary"

By the way, RandomStu does not have a problem with his Zen guru Seung Sahn having sex with his students. His basic argument is that Seung Sahn didn't get caught or criminally convicted for raping underage girls, so its fine. ...beware .

Also, RandomStu was deeply involved follower of Muktananda in his ashrams.
And the Muk/GM Syda gang was also involved in very serious sexual abuses, financial abuses, even possible group-drugging abuses...and Muktananda had close links with Werner Erhard, and they learned/used all of Werner Erhard methods as well on their own followers.

So the point is clear.
RandomStu is either totally unaware and ignorant of the group persuasion techniques being used by these various abusive guru's which he has been deeply involved with 24/7 for decades...
...or he is totally aware of them, uses them himself, and sees it as his mission to DISTRACT and deflect from them being explained, as that destroys most of their power.

He may be self-appointed, or maybe Stephen Mitchell gives him a cookie and Brownie Points.

RandomStu appears quite active on 'trips' to Amsterdam, where BKI does a lot of business.

The Kwan Um School of Zen supports RandomStu's behavior, even though he breaks most of their Precepts. What's up with that?

Kwan Um even offers drug counselling...while some of their own Zen teachers are drug users.

To borrow a word from David Letterman, these Zen Houses are crawling with weasels.

The Kwan Um School of Zen methods, are a ruthless type of warrior attack "Zen" from Seung Sahn. It's based on submission to authority.

They verbally attack the new student, from every direction, even in a "random" fashion, to destablize their thinking processes and confuse them. Then once the student is completely confused and broken-down, they move them into submission.

Eventually, they do things like putting people into isolation for 90 days 17 hours a day while only reading the works of Seung Sahn, with no journal allowed.

That is very very serious old school brainwashing, very damaging. That would create permanent changes in the person's belief system, which is obviously it's intent by Seung Sahn, to try and create total submission and lifelong devotion to him.

So people need to be careful out there.

There are many aggressive and dishonest tricksters, and to them lying is something they do consciously, and deliberately as a technique. To them, aggressive lying is completely fair-game, all-is-fair in the art of warrior Zen.

Just because they may hide behind some faux "Zen beard", doesn't mean they aren't a ruthless exploiter or even a predator.

Frankly, they couldn't care less if people get hurt, or get their lives wrecked by their methods.

That's your problem...asshole, in the words of Werner Erhard.

It's the law of the jungle, and if you are too inexperienced to know what's going on, then you deserve to get hammered, according to how they think.

That is why they blame the victim.

Every predator blames the victim, and even get their stooges to run interference for them, as the smart, ruthless predators run amok, hitting the easiest targets they can find.

John Milton (1642):
"They who have put out the people’s eyes, reproach them of their blindness."

You will notice RandomStu's technique is the same, to deflect, distract, and disrupt the conversation to stop people from carefully analyzing the specific techniques being used on them.

-joanieg

I have no doubt that it's very real suffering that drives you to demonize me and other people. But how happy does it make you to attack and demonize? Does it really help your life?

If spewing anger makes you happy, then OK, no problem. But if you find you're still suffering, no matter how much you criticize and blame others... you might consider trying a different technique.

Regarding this specific quote about "deflect, distract, and disrupt." As best I understand it, you're saying that you have an idea of what the conversation should be about, and you're desperately trying to control everyone else so they'll be in lock-step with your own opinions.If I say something that's different from what you want to believe, you call that a "distraction." If you want the conversation to adhere to your dogma, then any free discussion, in which alternate views appear, is a "distraction" from your plans.

Say for example that you want to look at yourself as a helpless victim, with no responsibility for your suffering, with nothing you can do except lash out at others. You speak of "techniques being used on them," as if Byron Katie were breaking into your house and forcibly using techniques on you. By holding this fantasy (that the techniques are "used on" you involuntarily), you can avoid examining the overriding importance of your own thoughts and actions. Attacking and blaming others is your way to deflect, distract, and disrupt any careful analysis of your own power to lead your own life. Looking into your own thinking, actions, and decisions may be much more difficult than demonizing others, but maybe just maybe it's more effective in removing your suffering. Someday, after days or weeks or decades of demonization fails to help your life, you may want to try something different.

The fact is that if you don't like what Katie says, you're perfectly free to not read her books or attend her programs. If you choose instead to obsess on them, that's your own decision, which someday you can analyse if you so choose.

Hi,

I'm Carol and new to this forum (obviously).  :-) 

I am not a BK follower, nor a seeker of 'spiritual enlightenment.'  I do have an interest in totalistic and thought reform groups and was involved with such a group for over 28 years, exiting about 3-1/2 years ago.  [I was involved with a bible-based absolutist group (The Way International), not an Eastern-based group.]

The subject of BK was brought up in a discussion (elsewhere) a few weeks ago.  Prior to that my only cursory brush with the BK teachings/techniques was  back in 2007. I've been following this thread with some interest, due to my interest in totalistic views, group influence techniques, etc.  I've also read (or perused)  the various links in various posts here and at the Rick Ross site.

As an outsider, I thought I'd give my perspective with some questions (for followers and critics) on what I've read regarding BK.

When BK states, "Who would you be without your story?" what does she mean by that?  Is she stating that a person's story is insignificant, is not who they really are?  I've read here and yon, and still do not quite grasp what she is getting at.  (Maybe I'm just thick-skulled.)  If a person is not their story, why does her story have so much significance.....I mean other than to move The Work? 

Another question I have is in regard to the 2nd of the 4 questions: "Can you absolutely know that it's true?" 
After mulling this question over, it is a tricky question, imo.  What do we know with absolute certainty, especially when it comes to subjective experience?  If it's not subjective but rather objective ('he raped me'), that is an absolute fact.  To try to turn into something else (if that is what The Work does, which it appears can subtly be the result...in that the victim is responsible for the attack) seems a terrible disservice to one who has endured such.

Perhaps that isn't  what BK is teaching, but it appears to cause a person to self-doubt their own experience.

It appears to me, that BK's work is one of doctrine over person; ie:  if The Work doesn't work for someone, the person isn't doing The Work correctly and the person is at fault.  That perspective may have come up in this thread; it's been a bit since I've read all the posts here.

I am interested in folks' interpretations in regard to my questions above.

Regards,
~carol welch

I have no doubt that it's very real suffering that drives you to demonize me and other people. But how happy does it make you to attack and demonize? Does it really help your life?
If spewing anger makes you happy, then OK, no problem. But if you find you're still suffering, no matter how much you criticize and blame others... you might consider trying a different technique.
Regarding this specific quote about "deflect, distract, and disrupt." As best I understand it, you're saying that you have an idea of what the conversation should be about, and you're desperately trying to control everyone else so they'll be in lock-step with your own opinions.If I say something that's different from what you want to believe, you call that a "distraction." If you want the conversation to adhere to your dogma, then any free discussion, in which alternate views appear, is a "distraction" from your plans.
Say for example that you want to look at yourself as a helpless victim, with no responsibility for your suffering, with nothing you can do except lash out at others. You speak of "techniques being used on them," as if Byron Katie were breaking into your house and forcibly using techniques on you. By holding this fantasy (that the techniques are "used on" you involuntarily), you can avoid examining the overriding importance of your own thoughts and actions. Attacking and blaming others is your way to deflect, distract, and disrupt any careful analysis of your own power to lead your own life. Looking into your own thinking, actions, and decisions may be much more difficult than demonizing others, but maybe just maybe it's more effective in removing your suffering. Someday, after days or weeks or decades of demonization fails to help your life, you may want to try something different.
The fact is that if you don't like what Katie says, you're perfectly free to not read her books or attend her programs. If you choose instead to obsess on them, that's your own decision, which someday you can analyse if you so choose.

-randomstu

Hi,
I'm Carol and new to this forum (obviously).  :-) 
I am not a BK follower, nor a seeker of 'spiritual enlightenment.'  I do have an interest in totalistic and thought reform groups and was involved with such a group for over 28 years, exiting about 3-1/2 years ago.  [I was involved with a bible-based absolutist group (The Way International), not an Eastern-based group.]
The subject of BK was brought up in a discussion (elsewhere) a few weeks ago.  Prior to that my only cursory brush with the BK teachings/techniques was  back in 2007. I've been following this thread with some interest, due to my interest in totalistic views, group influence techniques, etc.  I've also read (or perused)  the various links in various posts here and at the Rick Ross site.
As an outsider, I thought I'd give my perspective with some questions (for followers and critics) on what I've read regarding BK.
When BK states, "Who would you be without your story?" what does she mean by that?  Is she stating that a person's story is insignificant, is not who they really are?  I've read here and yon, and still do not quite grasp what she is getting at.  (Maybe I'm just thick-skulled.)  If a person is not their story, why does her story have so much significance.....I mean other than to move The Work? 
Another question I have is in regard to the 2nd of the 4 questions: "Can you absolutely know that it's true?" 
After mulling this question over, it is a tricky question, imo.  What do we know with absolute certainty, especially when it comes to subjective experience?  If it's not subjective but rather objective ('he raped me'), that is an absolute fact.  To try to turn into something else (if that is what The Work does, which it appears can subtly be the result...in that the victim is responsible for the attack) seems a terrible disservice to one who has endured such.
Perhaps that isn't  what BK is teaching, but it appears to cause a person to self-doubt their own experience.
It appears to me, that BK's work is one of doctrine over person; ie: if The Work doesn't work for someone, the person isn't doing The Workcorrectly and the person is at fault.  That perspective may have come up in this thread; it's been a bit since I've read all the posts here.
I am interested in folks' interpretations in regard to my questions above.
Regards,
~carol welch

-oneperson

I look at the work as just a mind trick that can be used to manipulate-if it were so effective, it would be used once in a lifetime and then laid aside, but it doesn't work, so people have to continuously refer back to it and after doing that for  a period of time, their thinking becomes scrambled.  I guess I just look at it as unnecessary-self-inquiry is helpful, but allowing some stranger to brainwash you to avoid "suffering" is very dangerous.  A lot of the people who follow bk are fairly well-off American/Europeans-if they truly want to end suffering, I suggest they go visit Haiti and use some of their considerable resources to clean up the water supply in Cite Soleil...that would actually be practical and help them realize how fortunate they are, and that their "suffering" by third world standards is pretty cushy.  Why does bk need their money??  What does she do with it?? 

Thanks for the response Beebonnet,

Do you have any thoughts on what BK means by "Who would you be without your story?"

She probably expounds on this in her book(s)?  I just find it a purposeless question. Without our stories, our lives become meaningless, yes?  Is this 'no story' perspective of a Zen origin?

Perhaps it means a lot to me because in totalitic groups, individuals become non-persons.  Autonomy and an individual's story and how they feel about it is stifled; at least that has been my experience.  Personally, I am endeavoring to embrace my story, to feel, instead of the other way around. (If that makes sense.)

I guess it's not that important; I'm simply curious as to what BK means by the statement. To not have a relationship with our stories makes life intangible, meaningless....or at least that is my perspective at this point and time. 

Re-reading my initial post, I really don't have a 2nd question...as it is more rhetorical.

Thanks again!
~carol

I agree with you carol, it's meaningless, but part of the brainwash, the purpose is to get people addicted to her and extract money from them.  Nothing deeper than good old fashioned greed.  Check out this analysis from the rickross forum

What BK seems to have done, is to take a few components, and put them together as a "gimmick", similar to how she warped hypnotherapy to her own ends.
The Work is not neutral, its directional. It directs the client further toward BK, in a closed-loop. It is a checkmate. Its NOT freedom.

Let's look at it.

1. Is it true?
2. Can you absolutely know that it's true?
3. How do you react, what happens, when you believe that thought?
4. Who would you be without the thought?
Turnaround: (the thought is turned around to its opposite, around to oneself)

Question 1-2 are nothing new or interesting. That is why UG Krishnamurti dismissed it as a gimmick. That is the first question of epistemology in philosophy, which has been asked forever. The answer, is that nothing is 100% "true". But its the start of the BK mindtrap, as she pushes people away from how epistemology works.
The real questions should be, how ACCURATE is this thought, and to what extent can it be verified? That is epistemology [plato.stanford.edu] and is where science begins, through testing for evidence. So beliefs/thoughts/ideas can be put on a continuum of accuracy, from just over 0% to under 100%.

Question 3, is just basic self-awareness. If you believe a snake is a stick, you are scared. Again, its nothing original, just basic stuff.

Question 4, this is where it starts getting damaging. Buddhists have trained people to detach and observe thoughts, so there is nothing new here. But to try to erase and negate thought, and connect that to the SELF, is when things can get damaging. This is the beginning of the Thinking Errors in the BK Work.

Turnaround: this is where it goes right off the rails, and the real Cognitive Distortions, Thinking Errors, and mind-warping starts. Modern therapy has proven that excessive self-blaming creates depression and guilt. Also, Polarized thinking is called Black/White thinking, and is very harmful.

So its very clear how this operates.
She presents the salespitch as a cure to all human suffering, which is a bigger claim that the Buddha, and is obviously false. (the irony is the BK Work does the opposite, and creates more suffering).
Then Questions 1,2, are just basic human thought. But for healthy thinking, you don't say, "is it true", you say..."how accurate is it", and look for objective evidence.
Question 3,4 push people toward the No-Self No-Mind idea, and this is meant to try and clear the slate, so to speak.

Then the power kicks in on the Turnaround aimed at the self.
As when people assign excessive self-blame, they are going to get guilt-ridden and depressed. That is actually proven in many studies. And of course, most women tend to self-blame anyway, and this makes it worse.
Then what? Then people need more Aftercare, more coaching, and even the Turnaround House.

The Turnaround is the most destructive aspect of the Work, and this is what starts to point the person towards Byron Katie, and can even disable people. Then when she layers everything else over top of it, you get exactly what she has.
If the Turnaround is self-applied by people in serious depression, or with suicide issues, they could spin down right to the bottom. As since serious depression is created by excessive self-blame, people will literally start to blame themselves for blaming themselves, and it spirals down to the bottom. If you asked Byron Katie, doesn't the BK work Turnaround spiral people right down to the bottom? She would SMILE widely and say with glee and clap her hands...YES!! She loves spiralling people down to the bottom.

These Turnarounds on the self, can completely disable vulnerable people, and can even lead to suicide. Read the Byron Katie RELEASE OF LIABILITY [forum.rickross.com]

I'm also curious about why/how this thread dried up.  If any regular posters to this topic are still checking in, can you speak to this?...trolls,to BK-sympathists ...What do you think?

-swampseer

I was participating heavily for a while but then got swamped with work. We had degenerated into ad hominum attacks ("you went to the School so should act a certain way and you don't so I don't have to listen to you any more"), and I didn't really see much point in continuing the discussion. I notice there's been a lot of new stuff added. I'll take a look and see if it sparks anything to say.

It's approx. $5000 for the school and $20000 for the turnaround house!!

-gimmeshelter

$5000 for The School actually isn't that unreasonable. That includes full room and board, so the $$ that goes to BKI is about $3,500 for nine days, or $400/day. As far as self-improvement seminars goes, that's middle-of-the-road. Tony Robbins is much more expensive than that, and Jack Canfield, at $250 for a one-day public seminar, is cheaper. If you get into business seminars, costs can run up to $1,000+ per day.

You may object that Katie's making a lot of money, but for a workshop that runs 12 hours a day for nine days, the price isn't far out of line.

I don't find the amounts unreasonable, what I wonder is why so many people would pay that much without first investigating The Work in greater detail. I had been doing TW on my own for many months before taking The School, and knew the effects it seemed to have, etc. My thinking (which proved true) was that The School would greatly accelerate my process, and it was worth it on that basis. Many others seem to go with no prior experience, which doesn't make sense to me.

(And furthermore, I went once and am done. Others go back again and again and again and again.)

I can't speak to Turnaround House except to be boggled at the price tag and, again, at the notion that someone would feel they need to spend that much to do a technique they can get 100% from her free little booklet. Maybe that's why the self-help industry has always been something of a turnoff to me; many of the consumers of self-help seem to be looking for other-help and don't actually spend much time on the self- part.