We are the Borg - www.ezboard.com

>

SRF Walrus

Mt. Washington, Ca

Open discussions about SRF

SRF Walrus > SRF Teachings and Ideals > We are the Borg
Page 1 2	<< Prev Topic \| Next Topic >>

Author	Comment
Lobo Registered User (1/27/03 10:48 pm) Reply	Re: TO SRF WALRUS CULT "1. A community or system of religious worship and ritual. 2. a. A religion or religious sect gen. regarded as bogus or extremist. b. Followers of such a religion or sect. 3a. Obsessive devotion to a person, priniciple, or ideal. b. The object of such devotion. 4. An exclusive group of persons sharing an esoteric interest." Websters's II New Riverside University, Dictionary It seems fairly clear to me that SRF could fall into the following depending upon how one perceives the organization and one's experiences with it. 1. 2. a. & b. 3. a. & b. 4. I understand, and react too the word cult pretty much the same as you do, psychedev. It is used as a pejorative, meant to minimize, demonize new or strange religions which are usually seen as a threat to more established religions. It is rather ironic that SRF is now being called a cult, especially by former monastics and members. Of course one can go to any of the popular cult-alert websites and find SRF prominently displayed, but these sites seem mainly to be of fundamentalist Christian persuasion, which blunts their opinion as small-minded and contractive, at least to me.
chuckle chela Registered User (1/29/03 1:14 am) Reply	a response to psychdev Psychdev—I can appreciate your frustration in not being able to get much of a discussion about whether SRF is a cult from people like KS, member108, and others (although lately there seems to be a bit more discussion). While I understand your frustration, I think I know where they’re coming from. I’m sticking my neck out here, and I’m sure they’ll correct me if I’m wrong (please do, guys), but I suspect that they couldn’t care less about whether you or anyone else thinks SRF is a cult or not, and they couldn’t care less about the welfare of the organization. These are people who, I suspect, were badly burned by their experiences with the organization; because of that, they’re not really interested in discussing what might help the organization. One would hardly be interested in a discussion of whether a fire was real when all you have to do is look down at your own badly singed hands. They either don’t think the org is salvageable or don’t care. I haven’t been burned by the org, but I have a family member who was and so I can understand where folks like KS and others are coming from. I can appreciate how people might feel after having had to endure some pretty harsh treatment (it’s all outlined in dozens of posts from last year), and, perhaps more importantly, also found that any attempts they made to improve things were rejected, more or less out of hand. I saw my family member go from being a very enthusiastic and dedicated member (who was thrilled to be given an opportunity to serve at Mother Center) to someone who rejected SRF and spirituality in less than three years because of the experiences at Mother Center. (I will also say that while I understand where the “badly burned” are coming from, I don’t think they do much to convince others of the validity of their claims by using rhetoric and inflamed language). Is SRF wholly bad? My answer would be “of course not.” Same is true for the senior monastics. But it is equally absurd to claim that there aren’t noteworthy problems, which you recognize. Any organization, of course, is going to have problems. What is significant is when that organization denies that problems exist, or that its leaders are capable of making mistakes. You yourself recognize that there are problems and that some changes might improve things. I have friends who work at Mother Center who have been stressed out because of the environment. I know the lay members who were hired to manage the publications center, and who subsequently quit in frustration; these individuals were professionals in their fields who also have served SRF with integrity in many capacities over the years. Since I have become aware of some of these issues, I have contacted Mother Center, and I have spoken with a number of monastics. One senior monastic more or less denied that there were any problems; the only problem was some members who didn’t “understand.” One minister was candid in admitting serious problems and added that not all who were deeply concerned left the ashram; some, the minister said, decided to stay and work for change. Some, I’m told, are more or less resigned to the way things are, sadly; one of these monastics said of the leaders, “they’re not going to change.” More than one monastic told me to contact Bro. Vishwananda, that he wanted to hear from people about all these issues. Vishwananda himself has admitted that there have been problems and that the spirit of “only love” has been lost and needs to be recovered. Interestingly perhaps, those who told me to contact Vishwananda were monks. I never heard this suggestion from any nun. I’ve heard it from one person that there may be a schism that has developed or is developing between the monks and nuns on some of these issues. While that’s interesting, it appears that the nuns have most of the power and control of the organization (which has been the case for many years). I’ve seen your concerns about secrecy and transparency. I would agree. What concerns me even more is that there appears to be few opportunities, either formal or informal, for dialogue within the SRF community, or opportunities for addressing significant problems. I see that Borg has mentioned this, as well. As one former monastic put it, the attitude within the ashram often seemed to be: “problems we don’t talk about don’t exist”; therefore, there are no problems. QED, I guess. Aside from the obvious shortcomings of such an approach, one outcome is that members can develop unrealistic, starry-eyed opinions about SRF, and they tend to see it as being near perfect and remain stuck in black and white thinking. This, of course, is a problem on both sides of this debate. I think that opportunities for open and respectful dialogue could go a long way to resolving many of the problems. The skeptics, though, argue that this was tried both in and out of the ashram, and was rejected by the leaders. What troubles me is that these things point to an organization and community that may not know how to talk about important issues. This lack of both communication and the skills to communicate effectively would appear to be a significant problem, in my opinion. In your latest post (most of this response was composed before I saw your latest), you again affirm that problems exist and need to be addressed. Bravo! More importantly, you wisely assert that when you deal with issues such as groupthink, peer pressure, and conformity you need to have safeguards in place. As a psychologist you are well aware that the social psychological research in these areas is very well developed. This seems to be one of the key problems: there are no safeguards in place in SRF. There is little or no dialogue, decision making is often confined to a select few, some of the monastics appear to have poor listening skills, and there seem to be no formal opportunities, as X Insider mentioned, to raise and vet dissenting opinions. The results of such a lack are all over the Walrus board: millions wasted on accounting systems despite the warnings from SRF members working at Mother Center as IT professionals, problems encountered in Publications and advice ignored, trying to implement an expansion plan that only met with fierce resistance and was defeated by Mt. Washington neighbors who felt they were being ignored, etc., etc. It must have been enormously frustrating for people to watch these things happen, knowing that they could have been avoided. There should be no need for this Walrus board to exist. The funny thing is that SRF could shut it down in no time. All we in SRF have to do is create an official Walrus: opportunities for dialogue and discussion, for members to see what’s happening in decision-making and to have input. Several years ago I had an experience that was both a bit frightening and saddening, partially because at the time I didn’t understand it. As chance would have it, I managed to spend about an hour in what turned out to be a private conversation, completely informal, with an SRF minister. To my surprise, he began to slowly unburden himself before me, explaining the difficulties he faced in having to deal with the needs and wishes of the members on the one hand, and the directives he received from the BOD on the other. I didn’t really understand it at the time, but his frustration in not being able to meet the needs and wishes of the members, which, he hinted, often seemed perfectly legitimate, was evident. The poor man was clearly frustrated, disappointed, and stressed by the position he saw himself in, while I sat there more or less stunned and speechless. What could I say? I didn’t have a clue of what to say as I was fairly blown out of the water by these admissions. But I honored his integrity and his ability to open up about something that was bothering him. Years later, I now have a better appreciation of what he was facing and honor him even more. It will be a long time before I forget that conversation. You mentioned that the organization was “a bit sclerotic.” How about more than a bit, in some respects? Some of the management styles appear to be stuck in the 1950s. Management styles in business, government, religion, and other institutions have moved a long, long way since then; it’s time for SRF to catch up. I’ve spoken with monastics. I’ve said my piece to Mother Center. I pray for the welfare of us all. Tell me, psychdev, what else can we do?
X Insider Registered User (1/29/03 2:38 am) Reply	Re: a response to psychdev I am wondering if you will reply to me. I am wondering if you have decided that the SRF monastic order is not a cult, in your opinion. Or are you saying that you have insufficient information to draw this conclusion?
soulcircle Registered User (1/29/03 3:05 am) Reply	chuckle chela Oh Friend Chuckle Chela, Oh Thank You, Yes, I need someone who can speak for me, when I am not skilled in the warp and woof [the syntax] of some of these posts and the rather blatantly missed agony To this day i wonder how much of this board psychdev has read To the end of days, I wonder if psychdev will respond to your question in the second sentence, of the second to last paragraph [more than a bit sclerotic?......please don't feel bad others that like me don't know the meaning of the word] Your post is so thoughtful, in sports we would say you're in a zone chuckle chela.....your post is so cool, i will add to it now and possibly in the future I gave $3,000.00 at one point to srf that i recall, my wife still contributes, over decades we gave a bunch more that the three grand not to mention decades of our service, not to mention [ask at Richmond], how many of the present members I warmly welcomed and help make comfortable within the fold of my family of three, two of us sing in the choir Easter and Christmas, my wife will be leading meditations, some remind people, tate we the people are California, we the people are the usa, we the people are the world, whatever following of Mataji and babaji there is......it is not a cult or a cult........it is not srf ~~~~~~~~~`it is us....we the people~~~~~~~ I will add this.... when will everyone sit down when they so desire with an annual financial statement and list of officers, and a reasonable look at problems and directions being explored to mount successful campaigns for a solution to the most pressing ones psychdev, we are all in this together, how much had you read of the board, do you have it within your means to extend monetary help to those who are pinched, do you know when you and I might sit down together with chuckle chela with the financial statement for 2002 on our desk do you have it within you to party with some of us abandoning all psychology, intellect, personal tastes and sing, circle dance, and in some simple manner make the music of community and step into the future chuckle chela is right, enjoy srf if you do, make it better if you can, draw some into discussions you will find value in, and accept that i am one of the ones who doesn't give a .......if srf is a cult or not i shed a skin, and i don't even have a recollection of it i shed srf and i don't even have any awareness of organization Oh Chuckle Chela Thank You And Thank You Psychdev Borg and All I thank you Guests Oh Sweet Guests.....Life is Beautiful, You Make It SO! circle
soulcircle Registered User (1/29/03 3:13 am) Reply	in your feelings and discussions Gimme a break, Snuff films are one of the ugliest reflections on humankind In the following paragraph, painfully shared and experienced within a family on this board A kin was snuffed........ *Quote:* I haven’t been burned by the org, but I have a family member who was and so I can understand where folks like KS and others are coming from. I can appreciate how people might feel after having had to endure some pretty harsh treatment (it’s all outlined in dozens of posts from last year), and, perhaps more importantly, also found that any attempts they made to improve things were rejected, more or less out of hand. I saw my family member go from being a very enthusiastic and dedicated member (who was thrilled to be given an opportunity to serve at Mother Center) to someone who rejected SRF and spirituality in less than three years because of the experiences at Mother Center. This is my experience too and others and others Gimme a break how much darker does this darkest hour before dawn get before we turn our backs on the old before fear fears us, and we openly love circle
stermejo Registered User (2/3/03 6:27 pm) Reply	sclerotic Sclerotic: an abnormal hardening of a tissue or part, as in walls of the arteries. Inetresting note: slerotic--the ONLY word, well in my dictionary, wherein sc is followed by L! Wow! I too wonder just how many of the 7,000 + postings on this site psychdev has read. Probably not too many. Psych may be an academic at play. Why do all that research? Too much like work. As for Sclerotic. Don't blame Psych. Didn't you ever get the feeling that one needs a dictionary nearby when reading AY? Master uses a treasure trove of $5 and $10 words. Surely meant to get us all to stretch our word-sense. Trouble is few of us do. ...And, I'm the number one offender. I mean, how many times have I just breezed by those $5 words thinking I can ignore their meaning because i KNOW what the context of Master's message is? Or maybe the footnotes made me think that I knew what he was talking about. I got a thing about the footnotes. How do we ever know for certian what is ego and what is soul? The distinction is a favorite tool of moral bullies. -Michael Murphy, "Kingdom of Shivas Irons"
Lobo Registered User (2/3/03 9:17 pm) Reply	Re: sclerotic RE: The $5 and $10 words in the AY. I heard years ago from a monastic that when PY arrived on these shores he took a word a day from the dictionary and memorized its meaning. Probably thought since he went to so much trouble (English being not his native tongue) he might as well put them into use! I like your idea about using the dictionary more (I didn't know the meaning of sclerotic either). On the Lake Shrine audio tape (which I got from Ananda "Stories to Remember") he used the term Lingua Franca. I, too understood the context and thought I understood the meaning. Well, I took the time to look it up and found that it was the perfect word (term) for the context he used it in: " A language used as a medium of communication between peoples who speak different languages." So that was mind-expanding of a different sort!

Page 1 2

<< Prev Topic | Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Email This To a Friend

Email This To a Friend
Topic Control Image

Topic Control Image

Click to receive email notification of replies

Click to stop receiving email notification of replies

jump to:

- SRF Walrus - SRF Teachings and Ideals -

Powered By ezboard® Ver. 7.32
Copyright ©1999-2005 ezboard, Inc.