"Spiritual group's claims, practices are changing"...
  Archive
Posted by:
Cynthia ®

10/22/2006, 11:23:50
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




Thanks to "Gallery" there are many old articles available.  I finally was able to look through some and found the above-titled, dated March 6, 1976.  This article is worth a read just for the sheer entertainment.

10 EVENING CAPITAL Sat., March 6, 1976

Spiritual group's claims, practices are changing

The asserted change comes amid extensive criticism of various novel spiritual groups including that of Maharaj Ji, from ex-members and parents, but Anctil says the opposition isn't what caused the reforms. "We're maturing," he said. "It's evolution."

NEW YORK (AP) Representatives of the organization of teen age guru Maharaj Ji say it is changing its style to tone down the catchy Eastern ritualism that has given some followers erroneously superficial impressions.

It kept people from knowing where we're really at, says Joe Anctil, news secretary for the group, with headquarters in Denver Colo "all they'd see was the trimmings. No doubt it attracted them but it's empty."

Cutting down on the exotic embellishments, he adds, was at the behest of the young guru himself.

"He's doing away with it," Anctil says, adding that the emphasis now is being put on fostering long-term growth in meditative discipline and service.

A lot of people are just on a trip in the beginning,' he says. "They felt they had to be hyped, and some didn't stay long enough to get beyond that. But we've changed as our understanding has changed."

The asserted change comes amid extensive criticism of various novel spiritual groups, including that of Maharaj Ji, from ex-members and parents, but Anctil says the opposition isn't what caused the reforms,

"We're maturing," he says. "It's evolution."

Anctil and an assistant, Andy Harris, said in an interview that the group, called Divine Light Mission, is modifying not only its practices but its exalted claims about the India-born guru, now 18.

Regarding previous portrayals of him as the one, perfect manifestation and channel of divinity in this age, a reflection of Hindu concepts of "avatars" of successive periods, Anctil said some still see him that way, but added:

"There's going to be less and less of that. We're throwing that out. Maharaj Ji never said 'I am the only way.' But it doesn't lessen the fact that he has inspired many of us. His direction is important. And there's no question that we love him."

In earlier phases of the group, which says it has initiated 50,000 into its ranks in this country since 1971, of whom 15,040 remain regular contributors, the guru frequently has been hailed as "Lord of the Universe."

"We don't say that anymore," Anctil said. "At one time he couldn't walk into a room without everyone hitting the floor." The prostrating gesture, called "paranaming," was questioned by the guru himself. Anctil said, adding: "A lot aren't hitting the floor anymore."

However, Maharaj Ji retains his title, "Great King," and for the time being still presides at rites for initiates in which he blows lightly in an ear of each, an affair called "darshan," a Hindu term for being in a holy presence.

"This still goes on," Anctil said. "He does anything members want. But when they line up, it takes all day and it's very impractical so it's likely on the way out."

Asked why some ex-members have been so critical, he said they apparently had inflated expectations of a "high," but "we're down here. It's a perfectly natural process. We're just people working with people."

He said some also "gave money, and now that they're not so happy, they resent it."

"Some expected to get zapped," said Harris, 23, who dropped out of the University of Arizona to work full time for the group. "When it doesn't happen, they get disappointed. And it doesn't happen. Rather than being a cosmic occurrence, it's a way of life that helps a person."

He said some of the past grandiose representations of it resulted from "the desire of people for something mystical. But it didn't make sense."

Anctil said the group simply nurtures a threefold way of living, "meditation, selfless service and sharing experiences, what you probably call witnessing." He said the aim is a "life of continual self discovery and development."

He said the group's special teachers, called mahatmas, no longer wear saffron robes and shave their heads, that about half of them now are Americans instead of Indians and their initiation sessions are simpler and shorter.

He said the group no longer takes to the streets seeking recruits, but presents its case in discussion sessions at centers across the country.

He said Maharaj Ji always wanted to simplify the program and reduce the esoteric externals but "his mother wouldn't let him." The guru and his mother, now in India, had a falling out more than a year ago when he married an assistant.

"The mother wanted to build up beliefs about him, so she would be all-powerful," Anctil said. "But experience didn't bear it out. It was only empty words. They didn't mean anything."

Also, he noted, Maharaj Ji advised, "quiet down."





Related link: Gallery article

Previous Recommend Current page Next

Replies to this message

just amazing
Re: "Spiritual group's claims, practices are changing"... -- Cynthia Top of thread Archive
Posted by:
Susan ®

10/22/2006, 13:41:30
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




I joined in 1975...so I remember well that at first...it was all about LOTU and then in 1976 this sudden and seemingly abrupt change to be normal. Which was SO SO good for me as a person. I got more involved in school, and as I said all of this affected me personally a lot. I was between 9th and 10th grades and when education started being encouraged I was happy to be signed up for all sort of honors stuff in high school and really getting into it. Its just so sad that Rawat backed out, and thats what happened. In 1977 he sent the message he wasn't quitting as the "hit the floor" guru and in fact it was worse devotion than ever before. I got a lot of pressure that being so into school was being a bad premie and my grades went from straight A's in honors to hitting the floor in ordinary courses...all so I could get to every festival and do all the service and satsand blah blah.

Rawat, if you read Mishler, freaked in 1976 when what else left wish the no foot kissing in darshan was the huge money contributions. Giving you inheritance to god is different than giving it to a meditation teacher. Rawat is a selfish, greedy creep.







Previous Recommend Current page Next
Isn't it?...
Re: just amazing -- Susan Top of thread Archive
Posted by:
Cynthia ®

10/22/2006, 14:21:24
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




The articles in the new press section of the gallery tell an interesting story about what DLM was saying about Maharaji.  For instance, one article says active membership was down to 3,000 in the U.S. around 1976 (when Maharaji cancelled a tour in March of that year) while another article states a much larger figure.  Also stated is that his tour was cancelled due to financial constraints, but (Joe Anctil was the press contact for DLM at the time) DLM states they were in the best financial shape ever by not incurring debts.  So many contradictions.

I've just started to put it together because I didn't have time to go through all the articles before.  I also joined up in 1975 (received K in Jan. 1976) so while I wasn't following the press coverage closely at the time, I have very clear memories of what was happening in the communities and in DLM, because I was very plugged in as an aspirant from August 1975 and beyond.  Hartford was a small but tight-knit, and devotional community.

Susan this Washington Post article might interest you.

http://www.ex-premie.org/gallery/news/1980s/wp_article1.htm

 






Modified by Cynthia at Sun, Oct 22, 2006, 14:26:51

Previous Recommend Current page Next
Re: Isn't it?...
Re: Isn't it?... -- Cynthia Top of thread Archive
Posted by:
ocker ®

10/22/2006, 15:23:30
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




As I collected and edited those stories for the Gallery I learnt a lot that I'd never heard of before or I may have read in the press collection on ex-premie.org but as I read that in a furious full-time marathon I may have not been able to retain much of the information.

I'm sure different parts of the puzzle will "appeal" to different people with different backgrounds in the "Mission". For myself one of the stories that really struck home was the Canadian court case (first stories in 1975) in which the former financial adviser for the Mission, one Michael Garson, testified as to the Mission's method of financing through chasing after inheritances and the extraordinary amount of money (60% of the cash flow) going to the guru which was basically preventing DLM from being adequately financed. The Mission would have failed anyway even if Rawat was a "sincere guru" because the meditation techniques do not reveal God or the source of life within or the source of inner peace or whatever he wants to call it but his greed certainly put a huge brake on it.

There is certainly discrepancies in the statistics at times which is understandable as DLM/Joe Anctil was trying to put a positive spin on everything and I think that the different numbers meant different things. The 3,000 meant people in the AMP (Active membership Progam) I think ie people who had signed up for regular contributions. 15,000 meant the people who were still had some connection, going to satsang, etc and 60,000(?) the people who had been "revealed the techniques of Prem Rawat's Knowledge" or whatever they called it then.

Those figures sound pretty possible, don't they?

What also struck me was that even then back in the "Love and Peace" times DLM's defense against Garson's financial testimony was that he was being paid to basically perjure himself and that Mishler had "freaked out" when he lost his honchohood. No reasoned defense against criticism, just petty, nasty, ad hominem attacks.






Previous Recommend Current page Next
Re: Isn't it?...
Re: Re: Isn't it?... -- ocker Top of thread Archive
Posted by:
Cynthia ®

10/22/2006, 18:24:55
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




Thanks for doing all that work.  I appreciate it a lot.

Those figures sound pretty possible, don't they?

Oh yeah, the figures are definitely possible, but we'll never know for sure, because they are numbers given out by DLM press releases or interviews of Anctil.  Also possible is the breakdown as you described:  those who received K versus members of AMP (active).   Three thousand members in AMP sounds feasible for the time for north America numbers, and that would include Canada, but a low number of active people if the 60,000 was accurate.

I had an argument on wikipedia with Momento about this in May over a 50,000 (for North America) figure quoted in a NRM encyclopedia edited by a Mormon religious scholar. Of course I lost the argument, but that's not because I was wrong.  (haha)

For more figures, check out this Adherent dot com website that gives numbers by country, year, and source for DLM.  They list the numbers as "adherents,"  and of course they cite to each other's works.

http://www.adherents.com/Na/Na_257.html






Modified by Cynthia at Sun, Oct 22, 2006, 18:29:12

Previous Recommend Current page Next
Maggie Shivers
Re: Isn't it?... -- Cynthia Top of thread Archive
Posted by:
Joe ®

10/22/2006, 22:41:15
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




Maggie Shivers is quoted in the article on the dangers or being in the Rawat cult.  She was a premie from Maryland, who I knew at COLL and in Miami.  In  Denver, and later in Miami she was a secretary in the legal department of the cult for people like Virgil Cuilio.  She was deprogrammed by her parents in about 1980, and later went on to give congressional testimony on the dangers of cults.  She also went back and got her degree at Yale after getting out of the cult.

In the picture, she's the one in the middle picture facing the camera.  That picture was taken at COLL in San Antonio, around 1975-1976.

BTW -- in the bottom picture, is Mahatma Parlokanand, who was sent to COLL, made to work in the cult car wash, and forbidden from giving satsang, after he was caught molesting kids someplace while on tour revealing the divine knowledge you can't get in college.  He was eventually sent back to India.

Uploaded file
012.jpg (47.1 KB)  





Modified by Joe at Sun, Oct 22, 2006, 23:13:21

Previous Recommend Current page Next
Re: Maggie Shivers
Re: Maggie Shivers -- Joe Top of thread Archive
Posted by:
OTS ®

10/24/2006, 19:42:05
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




Omigod.  Maggie Shivers.  Thanks Joe so much for the photo.  I couldn't put a face to that familiar name.  Omigod.  And the writer of that article, John Feinstein, went on to be the best selling sports author of all time, and a great college basketball columnist.  I knew Maggie well.  I was so touched to read that article in the Washington Post.  Thanks, cynthia.  She was such a nice woman; and worked very closely with Virg, and the entire legal crowd.  Just saw B. Salmonsohn, pictured below also just last month for the first time in over 20 years, as well as Linda Smith, whom I still personally love, though whaddya gonna do?





Modified by OTS at Tue, Oct 24, 2006, 19:43:53

Previous Recommend Current page Next
Re: just amazing
Re: just amazing -- Susan Top of thread Archive
Posted by:
snow-white ®

10/22/2006, 15:07:14
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




Suzan, i'm shocked, you were so young. now i recall that we had two high-school kids in the communit. The amazing thing was that their mothers joined too. I joined just at the begining of the redevotional period and premies who lived together were separating and moving into the ashram. As you said: "Rawat is a selfish, creedy creep.







Previous Recommend Current page Next
We must be about the same age
Re: just amazing -- Susan Top of thread Archive
Posted by:
aunt bea ®

10/23/2006, 15:42:10
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




I was born in 1960. Although I had been going to satsang on and off since about 1975, I never had the "chance" to receive knowledge. But, like you, my grades were affected as well. More importantly the whole thing had a really negative effect in terms of my life direction, though luckily everything turned out fine in the end. When I did receive knowledge finally in 1978, my mom was in the same k. session. So much for parental intervention.

Well, anyway, I just thought it was kind of interesting that we are the same age and both got involved at a really young age during the same period. I drifted off after the ashrams closed in the 80s which I recall you saying something similar to.






Previous Recommend Current page Next
yes we are!
Re: We must be about the same age -- aunt bea Top of thread Archive
Posted by:
Susan ®

10/24/2006, 00:55:53
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




I was born in 1961. We were both on the young side of premies then. Similar years and both left about same time, I think I left end 1978 or beginning 1979...but I was around premies a lot until about 1982.

So we both had a weird 70s adolescence for sure...I stood out like a sore thumb in high school...everyone else dressed Sat Night Fever and I tended toward a little hippy in whatever I wore. I had another teen premie friend who was much more style concious than I was and she helped me to not go over the top in my geekdom!







Previous Recommend Current page Next
saturday night fever
Re: yes we are! -- Susan Top of thread Archive
Posted by:
aunt bea ®

10/24/2006, 02:03:51
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




exactly! That is so funny. I was just the same for me. While everyone else was getting wid da new trends – pooka shells, polyester stretch shirts, platforms – I was emulating hippies turned cult zombies. I found my way out again thank god though – fashion-wise that is. I went through several phases even while still in the ashram. But I bore out the ashram till the bitter end in 82. Once I even went to the notorious New York after hours club called "Berlin" while I was still in the ashram, cause my sister was working there. God did I feel like a complete nerd the way I was dressed.






Previous Recommend Current page Next
LOL I think if we missed a cultural phenomenon it wasn't a bad one to miss
Re: saturday night fever -- aunt bea Top of thread Archive
Posted by:
Susan ®

10/24/2006, 10:49:44
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




The late seventies polyester craze was just pretty ugly anyway. So at least that isn't my big regret. I remember this boy in high school I had a crush on sat in front of me in his very cool polyester multicolored shirt...( of course I felt guilty having a crush on a non premie!)

I felt that toward the end of the seventies premies who could were really getting into clothes as status symbols. The forums are full of stories of initiators demanding a better wardrobe.

My friend and I ( she was the one with style sense ) loved to buy Hukapoo dresses. They were wrap around polyester dresses that must have been a Diane Von Furstenburg knock off.

But I tended, and still actually do, like a little hippie in my clothing. She used to get me to tone that down. I think the clothes issues with premie was a trickle down from top, Rawat was into clothes so we were too.

I actually left more abruptly than drifted...but thats a story I have told before. I left ashram after the philly mala show in about 1979?







Previous Recommend Current page Next
I hope you don't mind me adding to your thoughts.
Re: LOL I think if we missed a cultural phenomenon it wasn't a bad one to miss -- Susan Top of thread Archive
Posted by:
Saph ®

10/25/2006, 04:40:21
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin





Clothes were a bone of contention to me in two ways.

Firstly it was painful to see people whitewashed of all character and dressed up in second hand drab clothes.

But later, long after I was long gonzo (to coin a PatD phrase) I was somewhat shocked to observe maharaji's expensive tastes being taken on by ashram premies, who it appears, began to demand the same highly priced, top name labels as maharaji was accustomed to, at the expense of follower's contributions.

I guess there's no pleasing people like me.







Modified by Saph at Wed, Oct 25, 2006, 04:48:29

Previous Recommend Current page Next
Re: I hope you don't mind me adding to your thoughts.
Re: I hope you don't mind me adding to your thoughts. -- Saph Top of thread Archive
Posted by:
Nik ®

10/25/2006, 06:03:23
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




>I was somewhat shocked to observe maharaji's expensive tastes being taken on by ashram premies<

The adoption of expensive 'style' had begun by early 1975 in the UK, at least amongst some of those who were career minded and saw themselves as being on the 'initiator' train. The premies who stayed in the ashrams in 75-76 mostly continued to live as dirt poor but large amounts of money were spent on beautifying ashrams - they may not have brought peace to the world but premies led the way in 'home styling' for corporate spiritualism.

Nik







Previous Recommend Current page Next
Re: I hope you don't mind me adding to your thoughts.
Re: Re: I hope you don't mind me adding to your thoughts. -- Nik Top of thread Archive
Posted by:
Saph ®

10/25/2006, 06:29:37
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




 Thanks Nik,  I guess it depends which premies I met. I heard about the home styling too, come to think of it.  It seemed to sort of carry over among more recent ashram dwellers, less poverty consciousness than I remembered.  But I guess all levels went on.  The funds had to come from somewhere.

Lp








Previous Recommend Current page Next
Re: I hope you don't mind me adding to your thoughts.
Re: Re: I hope you don't mind me adding to your thoughts. -- Saph Top of thread Archive
Posted by:
Nik ®

10/25/2006, 07:45:25
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




> It seemed to sort of carry over among more recent ashram dwellers, less poverty consciousness than I remembered<

Not sure any DECA survivor will see it that way !

For me though the 1975 stuff was an indication of just how quickly the whole movement was becoming just another materialistic sham. Of course I didn't blame Prem at the time I just thought there was a bunch of suits holding him/us back from the real endevour of an energetic engagement with a wider society.

Turned out Rawat was the suit in chief, intent on living a comfortable life in his luxury bunker. At least I got to go and find my own aesthetic even if I didn't give up believing in the myth.

Nik







Previous Recommend Current page Next
Thankyou Nik for revealing his true identity:-
Re: Re: I hope you don't mind me adding to your thoughts. -- Nik Top of thread Archive
Posted by:
Saph ®

10/25/2006, 09:55:35
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




 The Suit in Chief






Previous Recommend Current page Next
Andy Harris
Re: "Spiritual group's claims, practices are changing"... -- Cynthia Top of thread Archive
Posted by:
Joe ®

10/22/2006, 22:31:35
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




Andy Harris is quoted in the article; he's the University of Arizona drop out who was Anctil's assistant.  Funny, I had lunch with Andy a few months ago.  He is a long time ex-premie who had nothing good to say about either the former Lord of the Universe, nor his spokesperson, Joe Anctil.  He's also a very nice guy with a great family.






Modified by Joe at Sun, Oct 22, 2006, 22:36:26

Previous Recommend Current page Next