ellen's Blog

Re: Sadhguru and the Isha Foundation

isitmystic,
A good page that might be helpful:

http://www.rickross.com/coping.html

Re: Sadhguru and the Isha Foundation

happyd,
I raise my virtual coffee cup to you for masterfully steering the focus of this

Re: Sadhguru and the Isha Foundation

Hi Stuart,

ellen.

Re: Sadhguru and the Isha Foundation

'The biggest issues I had with being at his programs, you are NOT allowed to go the restroom when you need to and if you are puking at the BSP, you have to puke in a bucket in the backroom as, again, you are not allowed to visit the RR unless he says.  You are also NOT allowed to leave the grounds or the Hall when "work" is being done.  I did feel trapped a few times when in GA at BSP.  And, no we're not supposed to talk about what happens inside and my guess was so that others would have to pay to get his info/message/release or whatever you want to call it.'
 
Yogagyptc,

What you write about above sounds very like the process used in the est, Landmark and Lifestream type Large Group Awareness Trainings where total control of the environment is used to effect thought reform or 'brainwashing.'

These latest brand of guru coming from the east are no longer using just the timeless techniques of old, they are moderns and have access to the internet and the big bucks needed to buy in the latest persuasion, sales and thought reform techniques.

There are good teachers around who avoid this guru-con game. The sign of a good teacher is that he/she will not charge $$$$$ for the teaching, he may ask for a small charge to cover his time and hire of premises etc.
A teacher of integrity will not charge because he will be at pains to point out that this is not teachable, each person has to do the main work for himself. A good teacher is a guide and support only, he can impart NOTHING at all to the student, no energy, no magical mystical power.
What the student attains (if he attains anything at all in this process which is essentially about letting go of fixed ideas) can only come from his own application, from his own understanding.

For some detail on the murder charges:

http://globeonline.wordpress.com/2007/06/06/imports-increase-a-tense-dependence-on-china/

For some detail on the very enmeshed (which I don't pretend to understand) political affiliations:

http://kanchikamakoti.blogspot.com/search?q=Jaggi+vasudev

For an interesting discussion on Jaggi and his modern methods of persuasion:

http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?12,59190,page=1

Kylie said:

' I suppose that's why most authentic yoga masters stick to very small groups of yogis who have some understanding of what is being imparted.  I'm sure he's aware that public misunderstanding, fear, and lots of flack are inevitable.  Still he offers it.  I can only guess it's because he'd like to see us stop bombing each other.=)'
 
I can only guess that he still offers it despite the misunderstanding, fear and lots of flack because of the enormous profits to be had from fostering, fomenting and manipulating this fear, misunderstanding and lots of flack.
Authentic yoga masters have very small groups because, when properly understood, this is a minority interest, not a mass market phenomenon that can be sold like a big mac or even an imac.

There is nothing to sell, apart from overpriced soap and wishful fantasies of omnipotence.

No matter how much you pay Jaggi, suffering, imperfection and impermanence will remain an inevitable part of the human condition.
 

Re: Sadhguru and the Isha Foundation

'It's extremely difficut -- perhaps even impossible -- to know what someone else cares about. How would we know what's going on in Mr Jaggi's mind? Wouldn't that involve guess-work?
That's why it's so much more to-the-point to look into our own thinking. What do I care about? What do I want? Why do I live in this world? We can look into our own minds intimately. It's very different from speculating about what someone else cares about.'

Hi Stuart,

While I have enjoyed reading your posts in reply to various threads what is becoming clear is that your replies do not in fact reply to the specific posts but rather promulgate your own preferred solution to any question, your preferred solution being solipsism.

You may not wish to question the authenticity of these self-proclaimed holymen and their impact on their victims but I notice that as an apologist your only defence is to preach self-examination--a poor attempt at avoidance and deflection of the question (and an attempt well known by any questioning devotee of any faux guru) .

Tell me Stuart, do you not think it possible to practice both self-inquiry and sceptical scrutiny of self-proclaimed holymen at the same time? I am not suggesting that you examine both thoughts at the same time, but is it not possible to hold two such divergent views at one and the same time? 
The strapline on this forum is "Scrutinizing the so-called divine guru and other flimflammers"--not 'zen for dummies 101'

So, yes, speculating what goes on in someone elses mind does involve guess work, but any interaction with another person, any attempt to understand another person involves guesswork. Any attempt to understand your own mind involves guesswork--you are just kidding yourself if you think otherwise.

Do you think that washing with Isha soap will help anyone's spiritual life? ; )

Lighten up Stuart, the winking emoticon should have been a clue to a facetious remark. I seriously doubt that anyone who can manage to string a sentence together needs a lecture on the efficacy of soap and water in washing away germs. 

Re: Sadhguru and the Isha Foundation

Seeker,
 
'I didn't see anything harmful in it - unless you think Pranayam is harmful.'

The Pranayam or any other practice is not harmful done in moderation. But what Happyd describes is a total immersion in a world of Isha-think, the robot teacher channelling SJV, the onmipresence of the god-man through magical means, altars and the encouragement to worship--all in a closed world with no outside influence to counteract this oneway subtle pressure or to give another perspective.

This stuff is still in use because it works, it appeals to an inner need we all have for certainty in an uncertain world.
It works like boiling a frog--if you put the frog in a pot of hot water it will jump right out, you have to put the frog in a pot of cold water and heat it up slowly, that way the frog doesn't notice the heat until too late, he is cooked.

Take a good book or ipod with you so when the water starts warming up you can at least break the spell of the group-think.

Re: Sadhguru and the Isha Foundation

Happyd,
'This mantra is never to be discussed to another person, even to another isha devotee. Why not?'
 
It reinforces the secrecy and specialness, as well as keeping the paying punters coming in for their own special mantra and technique. Ex TM-ers find it difficult to disclose their own mantras years after leaving. When enough of them did they found that these 'very special individually chosen mantras' were well-known and common invocations to hindu gods and goddesses.

They were not individually hand picked to suit the new member either but assigned from a very short list according to the age and gender of the new member. Any meaningless sound would work just as well.
The techniques are generic too and can be found in any competent book on meditation and yoga. They are all originally culled from the Patanjali sutras. (You could buy a good translation on Amazon and set yourself up as a guru tomorrow if you wanted to--others clearly have done just that.)

I've heard this described as 'selling sand on the beach' or 'selling water by the river' as in truth, you don't even need a book from Amazon except to clear away the confusions that Mahesh Yogi, Rajneesh and countless other business people have stirred up.

Its the distortions and deceptions, the betrayal of trust that being sold (at a hugely inflated price) a simple generic technique as some kind of magic key to fix everything and make dreams come true--that does the damage. A true and nasty con, no matter how prettily Mr Jaggi packages it.
Its like his soap, all the pretty packaging doesn't change the fact that it is the same as any other soap--you use it to wash with and then it goes down the drain, no matter how slick the advertising or how much you pay for it.

Re: Sadhguru and the Isha Foundation

ytseekmystic,
'Maharishi refers to Mahesh Yogi or Ramana Maharishi? '
 
I was referring to Mahesh Yogi of T.M. who pioneered the greedy guru business model in the west.

I have a very great deal of respect for the teachings of Ramana Maharshi (as he is generally known here) and Sri Nisargardatta. Clear, simple, timeless instruction with no unnecessary nonsense, what more could you ask?

Do you think that washing with Isha soap will help anyone's spiritual life? ; )

I agree with you that Mr Jaggi has no care even for himself. Most of these types become increasingly paranoid and crazy, terrified that someone will expose them or take their ill-gotten gains, hence the increasing tyranny and megalomania you see in these organisations over time.

Re: Sadhguru and the Isha Foundation

Happyd,

'Try checking 'Compatability View' under the Tools menu'
 
Thanks for the tip, it sorted the problem. I will be exploring this as I'm a complete novice in this area. : )

Re: Sadhguru and the Isha Foundation

Happyd, 
'Isn't it the ego that tells other people how wonderful his/her guru is and tries to recruit others to join? Isn't it the ego that defines 'spiritual experiences' as real and true without questioning them?'

Too true. Without this mechanism, whatever it is, not one of us could think or say anything or plan any future action. We would be creatures bonded to and subject to the whim of our animal instincts only--( and easy fodder for anyone with a stronger, more integrated sense of self) --reason enough for me to avoid bad-mouthing ego. It's the same discriminating ego that eventually dismisses the 'spiritual' experiences as interesting but not lasting or particularly meaningful.

I found it helpful, once I'd recognised these properties and potentials of ego (and decided that there was no way I'd attempt to destroy them since they are what make us humans unique among animals) to find other words for it as the word itself carries enormous past assumptions, from Freud, religion and just general (usually derogatory) cultural meanings.

If you just look at the 'ego concept', (which is essentially the thought "I am this" or "I am that", "I am angry." "I am sad," "I am a genius," "I am a fool", whatever you call it, there is nothing to destroy. Everything and anything can be used either to hurt or to help. You don't need an expert to do this although it sometimes helps to have a trusted person to discuss things with to clarify and refine your own thinking.

Its like with beliefs, if you can see through it you can identify less with the concepts attached to the word and thought 'ego' (which are just passing thoughts, no concept or thought is ever set in stone) while still retaining the discriminating mind. This 'spiritual search' is about finding and understanding your own mind (a lifetime undertaking as it will always be with you) and by extension the general concepts and qualities of all minds since we all share the same human nature. The comparing and contrasting of the discriminating mind is vital to this in order to settle on your own values (which will inevitably modify and change with experience and living)

Mr Jaggi's starting point was just this, deciding he wanted to be a mystical guru with millions of devoted followers catering to his every whim. He used his previous business acumen (and canny knowledge of human nature, innate needs and desires) to fashion a workable business model--probably studying the Maharishi and Rajneesh examples-- and set the machine in motion. He knows his own mind ( or at least the greedy, power-hungry part of it ) I seriously doubt he has any interest or care in the minds or spiritual welfare of his followers.
Its all about him, only him and what his business model can bring him.

The practices can be used to relax (open?) the mind. Essentially this allows us to step outside of and so examine habitual, learned character armour, defenses, to a degree, which allows for a lessening of identification with the concepts of the ego. We each need to be in personal control of this as unscrupulous guru types need open, unwary minds when they are looking for power over others, people to control.

Re: Sadhguru and the Isha Foundation

Happyd,

An interesting thread on Rick Ross on Isha.

http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?12,59190,page=1

I begin to understand why you don't like the natural world references I made. One of the problems with these guys is that they betray trust, by using very commonplace and ordinary observations that any person can make and subtly usurping those ideas for their own agenda, putting them to use to undermine your trust in yourself, your own worldview and your external (to the ideology) relationships.
Hence the 'scientific' environmental and charitable concerns.

Re: Sadhguru and the Isha Foundation

Happyd
 
'I ask myself, what is the motivation to recruit others into a belief system? '
 
Safety in numbers? If I'm not sure in my own mind, repeating the induction to others helps solidify my shaky belief. If I can recruit friends and family it legitimises the new belief system, locks it in. It builds a self-reinforcing system and handily provides fresh meat and cash for the system. Once an organisation has more than about 10-12 members it has to expand to survive. At that point the health and continuity of the org becomes more important than the people in it--the ideology is more important.
I'd look more at who truly benefits--in cash terms-- than at what the motivation is. When you see where the money goes the motivation is clear.

Lots of reasons people recruit,  approval from the hierarchy, social proof, group cohesion, a closed world with easily recognised insiders and outsiders, a need to be right and special, to belong.
Most of them are well-intentioned and unaware of the extent to which their good intentions are being manipulated and used by others further up the food chain.

Re: Sadhguru and the Isha Foundation

Happyd,
 
'These 2 traits are mutually exclusive.....what a dilemma'
 
Which is where the compassion comes in handy, for yourself first and then by extension for others.
I would ask myself if they really were mutually exclusive and look for examples (mundane and close to home) where a critical appraisal can co-exist with compassion for this very human dilemma.
 

Re: Sadhguru and the Isha Foundation

Happyd,

 'Depends on who you believe or which book you agree with.'
 
Also depends to a greater extent on what you need to believe and agree with at any particular time. Different people face different challenges throughout life and personally I don't query anyone's need to believe in a particular way. Beliefs are something that we construct to try to explain the world to ourselves and they can allow us to navigate through some difficult times with reasonable equanimity.

I see beliefs as always provisional, when you begin to see through them you have outgrown the need for them and need to find a better, more fitting (as in fitting you better) explanation. All the various practices can be helpful in calming the mind. They are all to some degree hypnotic, if only from the repetition. Nature never repeats itself, every expression of the natural world is a unique expression so trying to impose rigid beliefs on myself or others is doomed to fail.

It doesn't ever change the underlying truth, that we all come from the same source, that no person is a saint or special in any way unless he can get a lot of others to declare him special.

Human nature doesn't change, we want to believe that there is a way out of our natural limitations and are willing to give power, money and exalted status to anyone who can convince us that he has the magic answer we need to transcend our limitations. The 'magic' gets more subtle and hard to spot but its still all smoke and mirrors.
A creative imagination is a wonderful thing but you also need to keep your feet on the ground. I'm not a believer but my favourite proverb is an arabic one:
'Trust in god but tie up your camel.'
 
 
 

Re: Sadhguru and the Isha Foundation

happyd,
Sorry for the misunderstanding re my attributing the statement to you. An oversight on my part.
My screen view cuts off the names of the posters on the left so some confusion about who writes what for me. 

Re: Sadhguru and the Isha Foundation

ytseekmystic,
I am not contradicting you but specifically addressing the issues Happyd originally raised, which were his valid observations, using his critical faculties, that the priority in Isha is something other than the spiritual welfare of the participants. 

Our critical mind is as much 'that' as much 'godgiven' as much 'awareness' as everything else. How can it not be? Or is 'oneness' only  'oneness' when the critical faculties are hypnotised and shut down? All is not All if one part is excluded.

It is certainly easier to experience visions and bliss when the critical mind is shut down, these big time flimflams count on that, and stories of these 'experiences' are the social proof that bring in the punters and the big bucks.
We need good critical discrimination to sort out the flimflams from the ones who might have something to offer. We need it to look critically at the 'experiences', we need it to move past the experiences, we need it before we get in too deep with a fool. Happyd needs it--that is my point.

My point regarding the language used was not to encourage a feel-good vibe. It's great if you feel good but no-one feels good all the time- anyone claiming that, no matter how 'realised', is lying.
Its just that when you use the terminology of force it becomes a habit to view the inner conflicts as a battle, a fight between opposing forces. The objective of this spiritual search is to seek something, there is no point in battering this thing to death before you find it.

Friendlier metaphors, if you are going to use metaphors--and as thinking beings we have only metaphors (even Ramana's THAT is a metaphor for the unknowable) --do not add extra grief to the already inevitable struggle. And it is a struggle, a guru who says otherwise is a con artist. A friendlier metaphor does not wipe out the struggle, it just does not increase the struggle the way that the language of force tends to do.

I agree that the work and study can only be done by the person themselves. A good teacher cannot give anything except some good directions, a good example and some support in the struggle. 

Re: Sadhguru and the Isha Foundation

happyd,
'you have built a strong wall of self around you.. Hence, your ego is probably too afraid of breaking the wall..'

'Mind' and 'ego' are just words, labels we use to describe the sense we each have of a personal, separate existence. Neither mind nor ego exists in concrete, physical form.
Words and labels are language, a man-made system of metaphor that attempts to bridge the gap between two or more human beings. (or, with thoughts, between two or more conflicting impulses) Language is always inadequate because it is an approximation of a sense or feeling--it is never the sense or the feeling, it is a description. A description is as removed from the feeling as thoughts are removed from their unknown source.

Given that senses and feelings are fragile and fleeting and very sensitive, using violent and war-like metaphors for describing these, e.g. breaking, cracking, destroying mind or ego or self, will prove counter-productive and coarsening. It will also entrench the inner conflicts. Fine, if you don't mind gambling with your sanity but mental incapability does not help in any endeavour. 
If you really want to know your mind, treat it with respect, like a friend and choose friendlier metaphors. Like a good friend, it will repay your trust and care.

The guru gains his power by fostering and manipulating the inner conflicts of his followers until they are confused enough to hand over their own power to him. He never has anything more than this. There is nothing more than this to be had.
I think you have already grasped this, happyd

Re: Sadhguru and the Isha Foundation

happyd,
Wasn't being intentionally mysterious when I wrote '--we all have it anyway and cannot lose it -ever- so why look for it?'
The 'problem' from my POV is the view that we take of ourselves as somehow elevated from the natural world due to the development of our thinking capacities. The seeking is an expression of loss, loss of god or nature or awareness depending on your belief system. All creation myths allude to this view that we traded immersion in nature for our bigger brains. But we are kidding ourselves, we are indivisibly part of the natural world and cannot ever be otherwise no matter how exalted our thinking seems to be.

Re: Sadhguru and the Isha Foundation

happyd,
I like your algebra, it puts the whole endeavour in a nutshell, or in an equation.

You might try looking at group dynamics. Its interesting that every group, as it begins to consolidate and regardless of its original intention, can only define itself by comparing itself with what is not the group--insiders against outsiders. Each group develops a consensus reality, the members agree or accept what that reality is to be. If a member questions that consensus reality in any effective way that person is subtly or overtly marginalised, maybe punished and usually edged out. So if you want to be in a group you have to accept the group-think. For me there is no objective reality, just many consensus realities large and small. When people talk about objective reality they are generally referring to a widely accepted consensus reality.
 
When you start looking at why we operate this way you might see that we all do the same thing in our minds. The patterns and dynamics that are obvious in the outer world are expressions of what is going on in my head, your head and everyone elses head. Its just the way it is, the human condition, and there really isn't a way out. We play all manner of games with ourselves and others to avoid seeing this. (My saying that won't stop a single person looking- I knew that years ago and it didn't stop me.) The games can be fun if you don't take them too seriously.

I have quit seeking anything. I found that the seeking is the problem because it presupposes that there is something to be found. 
An enormous amount of anxiety disappeared when I quit looking for that indefinable something--we all have it anyway and cannot lose it -ever- so why look for it?
This is my subjective view and it doesn't preclude me from thinking or learning or keeping an open mind, it just means that for me the search is over and I can concentrate on being an ordinary person among other ordinary people. 

I wouldn't presume to advise anyone else on such a personal and subjective undertaking but I would say that it is very important to find some compassion for yourself just as you are.

Re: Sadhguru and the Isha Foundation

happyd said: 
 'Anyone with any knowledge of cults, group behavior, hypnosis, meditation, persuasion, etc? '

I wrote a long response to this request yesterday then deleted it. It was the word 'expert' that bothered me. I am an expert only in my own perspective. I have no knowledge of Isha but it seems to be a modern, more subtle version of the same old power scam.

Briefly, I was born into a cultic family with all the abuse, secrets, confusion, manipulation etc that we know from the sensational headlines about larger cults.

I quit the family asap and have spent the ensuing years trying to unravel the confusion. I am quite well versed in manipulative techniques, influence, persuasion and group/organisational behaviour having studied this stuff in an attempt to avoid being continually snared by it. My formative education in my family makes me a sucker for this stuff.
Having said that, these behaviours and dynamics are present to a greater or lesser degree in all human interactions-we all manipulate to get our way.

A 30+ year meditator, I am comfortable with meditation being a form of hypnosis, I am just very picky about what I allow to influence me when in a very receptive state--this was not always the case.

I'm not sure what you want or expect from your 'expert'. A study of these subjects doesn't really require an expert, just an open mind and a willingness to put in the effort.
What I have found most helpful is to sort out my own confusions to the extent that I am able before getting involved in someone else's confusions. This means being ruthlessly specific about what I want from a given situation before venturing in.
Personally, I would avoid Isha and his ilk until I was confident in what meaning, if any, 'spiritual' and 'objective reality' had for me.