Here’s another right-on message from the person who shared thoughts with me that became a blog post, “A message for those thinking of leaving RSSB, Radha Soami Satsang Beas.” It’s on the same theme, though the focus now is on religions in general.
I heartily agree with these sentiments. I’ll explain why after the message.
Letter from the outside world…
Everyone has the right to believe what they want to believe. It is called freedom of religion.
Nobody should be pressuring you, forcing you, coercing you, yelling at you, bullying you, or trying to influence or persuade or convince you, or expressing disappointment.
Nobody should be trying to counteract you or counter argue with you. If you say “I don’t like this, I don’t want to eat this” in a restaurant, the place will take it away no questions asked. It is the same with a “spiritual path”.
With ANY organisation, you are
-Able to voice doubts
-Question it openly
-Say you don’t like it
-Say you don’t want it
-Say you want to leave
-Leave freely with no consequences
-Nobody trying to get you to come back – this is harassment
-Nobody should exile you or shun you or criticise you – this is coercive controlIf you are facing these things- it should be an even stronger sign to leave. Any environment (work, college, school, university, hobby group, friendship circle, run club, choir, religion, faith group, restaurant) – ANYWHERE will let you leave freely without consequences for you – no drama no fuss.
If they don’t do this- they are taking away your God given right of FREE WILL. It is a sign of danger if this is happening and you are in a cult.
This resonated with me because during the 21 years since I started this blog in 2004, I’ve heard from quite a few people who, like me, became disillusioned with the RSSB teachings and organization.
Often they shared their story with me via an email exchange, and were fine with me putting it in a blog post, but didn’t want their real name associated with the story for fear of retribution. Maybe it was their family who they feared would be deeply upset if they disavowed RSSB. Maybe it was zealous members of RSSB who they feared would punish someone who criticized their faith, or their guru.
Regardless, while I understood their reluctance to have their true feelings about RSSB known publicly, it bothered me that this religious organization could act like a cult if an initiate said, Not for me anymore; I’m heading in a different spiritual direction.
As the message I shared above says, in other areas of life it’s no big deal to leave something or someone behind and look for greener pastures, as the saying goes.
If a marriage isn’t satisfying, divorce is an option. If a job isn’t satisfying, quitting is an option. If a house isn’t satisfying, moving is an option. If a book isn’t satisfying, not finishing it is an option.
Yet when it comes to religions, somehow giving up on a previously chosen faith can be much more controversial — even though it should be just as simple and easy as deciding that it’s time to sell your present car and get a new one that meets your needs better.
What’s strange is that a religion is really happy when someone converts to that faith from a different religion. Praise be, wonderful choice, welcome to the fold, is the reaction. However, if someone deconverts from that religion, choosing a different path, all too often they’re condemned as a quitter, as a failure, as a heretic.
That’s the religion’s problem. It isn’t a problem for the person who chooses to leave. They have every right to do so. Almost certainly, nothing will happen to them. Well, this will happen: they will be happier once they honor their inner truth, and stop pretending.
Discover more from Church of the Churchless
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I agree with all of this too. There are also the psychological effects of becoming disillusioned with a teaching and/or organisation as one can base their entire life on following (or trying to follow) a certain teaching, in ways that may no longer serve them. It perhaps takes a lot of mental strength to think for oneself, see beyond all the mental conditioning and as you rightly state, ‘honor their inner truth and stop pretending’.
@ Graeme D
Maybe you have seen the movie of the last emperor of China Pu Ji.
The poor man had to learn to become an citizen.
Or
Remember the hard work the de-programmers had to do to set an cult member free
Or
Talk with an anti-vaccer about vacines
Or
Talk with those that believe themselves to be … american, christian, democrat etc
Or
talk to those involved in the conflict in Gaza that they are all HUMAN brothers and sisters
Or
Or
Try to find somebody that does NOT identify himself with what he is NOT …HIS IDENTITY …. but just human
Agreed, Graeme.
I’d further suggest there’s two distinct aspects to such disillusionment, and such distancing.
Like, you might be pursuing a course, or indeed a career, in research; and after a while decide that’s not for you. Or you might be pursuing fitness in earnest, maybe, and decide to withdraw from full-on participation. Any time you want to withdraw, you should have the freedom to do that, and others should respect that decision of yours. Not doing that bespeaks coercion, and indeed in some respects a cultic mentality.
But an additional angle, nuance, is introduced when we consider that in this case there’s nothing underlying that involvement at all. Someone putting in work in research, or in fitness, or whatever other legit engagement, ends up with meaning, and with purpose, and with a social group to bond with, friends, networking, all of that: but those are et ceteras, the core thing they get is what they’re actually pursuing: the knowledge and understanding the research yields, the fitness goals, all that. …In this case, in case of religion generally, what is being sold is actually fraudulent, non-existent, fictive. So that it is more like selling the Brooklyn Bridge to some dupe. …To question whether it is appropriate for said dupe to withdraw and indeed to protest when they discover the silliness of having paid good money for said bridge, on grounds that it was their choice to buy it in the first place — a motif I hear coming up repeatedly in the comments that followed both the previous post of Brian’s, and this one as well — is beyond silly. And it is a shameful thing to say, very much a case of victim shaming.
Such criticism will, I guess, come from one of two sources. Either it is the peddlers of bullshyttery trying to pre-empt/counteract valid criticism, by offering nonsense in service of defending the indefensible; else it is other dupes trying to convince themselves they’ve not actually been duped, and in the process trying to plug in their ears against reality.
>> As the message I shared above says, in other areas of life it’s no big deal to leave something or someone behind and look for greener pastures, as the saying goes.<<
Have a look over your shoulder .. think about what political choices have done with the people in the USA, how it has divided them in groups, split families etc, people losing their jobs to.
And what about the corona affair etc etc
Against this background you can easily conclude that what your correspondent stated is .. WISHFULL THINKING … it was in the past, read history, it is now, consult the media and it will be there in the future.
Culture, and social groups have always forced people to have IDEALIST that were able to stir the masses to hill and be killed.
Yes, yes and a gain yes…satsangis among themselves were, can an will be pushing others, intellectual and emotional ..it is an [SOCIAL] PSYCHOLOGICAL ISSUE.
It starts in school when children are pushed to do things they would never do otherwise like for example smoking, drinking and taking drugs … from early youth people are forced to adjust to a group if they want to join.
and …if somebody wants that type of ABSOLUTE freedom for him or herself they should grant that privelege also to others.
Have mercy on those that are afraid
It’s hip to call everything a cult these days, and maybe get a documentary out of it. Every religion would be a cult by the standards set above. This is really grasping at straws here.
You may feel sorry for people you think are trapped by a religion, but I feel sorry for those who don’t believe because they never made a real connection with the divine. There’s no need to be resentful about it. Live your life and be happy.
I was about to say we have no examples of RSSB coercing people. But then I realized we do, and it’s a big one.
And that would be the testimony of the previous Beas Master, Charan Singh. In the RSSB book Treasure Beyond Measure, Charan tells of how his family all but forced him into career, wife, and ultimately guruhood.
To be fair, one might question whether that pressure was from RSSB per se, or the religion of Sant Mat, or from the dynamics of the Indian family. Or to be even more fair, we need not pick on the coercive nature of Indian family dynamics and just note that social ties in Charan day were quite a bit greater than those of today (“quite a bit” is putting it very mildly, we being in the age where men can declare themselves women and parade naked in girls’ lockerooms).
To extend the fairness even further, we can ponder the alternative to a society of strong ties and expectations. Question whether the credo of “freedom, death to all authority” so prized by this blog really deserved the merit its given.
For example, marriage was cited. Don’t like your wife, just leave her. Some think that’s a wonderful ideal. But statistics show that children do far better in a household with two parents. And in general, we Boomers might recall the great experiment of the Age of Aquarius. No authority, no rules, make up your own rules. It always ended in tears, hurt, confusion, and dystopia.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for freedom, but freedom for the sake of the good. And I despise coercion, which I why I’m against the US war party and its interminably demanding mistress, Israel. I’m against universities that sponsor only one political camp, but I’m also against a government that fines these universities billions of dollars to stop a few ethnic Americans from getting their feelings hurt. And don’t get me started on the Covid era.
But as for RSSB, as religions go, it does well to not coerce anyone into becoming a member or staying a member. These being the 2nd time that false accusation has appeared on this blog, without any evidence to back it up, I suggest providing some evidence that RSSB coerces people. If you can.
I’ve never seen any coercion. I did go to the Dera once in 1976 and they wouldn’t even accept any donations then for my 3 month stay. Which included a nice room I had to share for only about half of the time I was there and the rest of the time I had it to myself. Plus all my meals. I did send them some money when I got back because I felt a bit guilty.
But I agree, I’d be interested to see any evidence about coercion. When most people find out about what RS entails you would think they’d run the opposite way immediately. It’s hard to coerce someone into meditating for 10% of their day if they don’t want to.
I never got any impression of anybody being forced but I did gift the sangat a punch bowl and some cups that they can mix Kool-Aid in. I’m still 100% on the path. Done at home with no meetings involved.
” I’m still 100% on the path. Done at home with no meetings involved.”
Me too.
…although I got my start with meetings (satsangs) back in the ’70s when various satsangis of local and international “fame” would give a talk, sermon, or satsang, call them what you will, at the “Gold Room” of the Lawson YMCA in Chicago. Yes, it was the Y, in a rented room, with a satsang, (apologies to Clue) (Queue The Village Prople song here). Capacity maybe 150 people?
Full disclosure: I admit to attending two meetings at the RSSB Goshen center this past July when the two current gurus appeared on stage. The seating capacity there is about 20,000 people. Attendance at the Gold Room rarely exceeded 100. Isn’t that some sort of exponential increase?
My favorite cartoon about meetings was framed on my principal’s desk at the middle school where I taught. About 10 skeletons are sitting around an oval meeting table. Cobwebs and dust are everywhere, draped over the coffee cups, notepads, and everything in general. The caption reads ” Is the meeting over yet? “
I recently watched the FX series “Say Nothing.” It’s about Northern Ireland in the 1970s, and the emotional aftermath of the IRA’s activities.
Here’s the gist: Young Catholics of the IRA go to war with British forces. They conduct massive bombing campaigns in England, sometimes targeting civilians. The IRA also goes after anyone in Northern Ireland who is a traitor to the cause.
Much can be said about the righteousness or lack thereof of the IRA. But the principal characters featured in the series — Brendan “the Dark” Hughes and Dolours Price — are definitely enthusiastic participants in actions that likely deserve to be deemed terrorism. Over and over again, they willingly plant bombs.
But in its later episodes, Say Nothing takes a funny turn. As Hughes and Price get older, they start having regrets about the violent course of their lives in the IRA. Instead of coming clean about it, they both take up a crusade to blame everything on their former IRA friend Gerry Adams.
Did Gerry Adams have anything to do with them joining the IRA, planting bombs, or killing “touts” i.e. informers? Not at all. All of them were faithful to the IRA’s cause of freeing Ireland from British control by any means necessary. Yet both Hughes and Price forget that fact, blaming Adams for their participation in the cult of the IRA. They both sort of switch from hating England to hating Adams.
I found their projection of guilt onto Adams to be a bit absurd. Again, they were both willing participants in terrorism. Not just once or twice, but many times over the course of many years. But now they feel this is all Adams’ fault somehow.
I see a similar dynamic going on with people who were former members of religious sects. For example, I know of a group of ex Hare Krishnas who are bitter about their years living in temples for no pay. They cite all the ridiculousness of the Hare Krishna sect, and it’s hard to argue with them about any of that. They call their years as a monk “wasted,” say that ISKCON “ruined their lives,” etc. And they have a great deal to say about how the grand guru Prabhupada is reprehensible. But I see a key issue to their participation in the Krishnas akin to that of the disaffected IRA members:
If it’s so obvious that being a Hare Krishna is wrong on every level…..why did you join them?
If all the faults of guru Prabhupada (bigotry, racism, sexism, etc) are no secret but are laid out in official ISKCON literature….why did you join ISKCON?
Why did you join that “cult”? You not only joined, but you moved into one of their temples. Not only that, but you stayed there for years, even decades. You were an adult, you had free will….what accounts for you making that life decision?
“The cult tricked me!” But did it really? If the cults had power to trick people, why is it that of all your friends you’re the only one who joined and stayed a member?
I told all this to these former Hare Krishnas. As you may have guessed, they didn’t like it one bit.
But with many years of experience being an “ex cult member,” I think I’m right. That is, I’ve come to the conclusion that it’s absolutely stupid for anyone who joins a cult to lay 100% of the blame on the cult. It’s as foolish as former IRA terrorists trying to blame Gerry Adams for their years of planting bombs that killed and maimed countless innocent people.
And so I’m rather tired of ex-religion members writing endlessly about how bad their former sect was and is. I’d like to see one of them, just once, write an essay where they take responsibility for their decades-long participation in a sect that they now want to tell the world is evil. Write about precisely how you were at fault for joining a particular sect. Was it world weariness? Did you seek a father figure? Did you want to belong to something that gave you needed self esteem? Did you hunger to be a member of a group? Was it a juvenile reaction against your parents’ religion? Or were nobler motives ascendant?
Whatever, you need to own up. You worshipped the guru for many years and agreed with everything he said. In fact, truly speaking, you were the guru. You took his views, his personality, his religious beliefs, and defined yourself by them.
I’ve got news for you: You’re responsible for that!
You chose that cult life. You deeply wanted it. You reveled in it. You had every opportunity to turn your back on it, but you didn’t. You didn’t for decades.
You were Gerry Adams, you were Prabhupada, you were Charan and Gurinder Singh. Take a break from the constant virtue signaling and ask yourself why that was.
If you’ve fallen victim to a Nigerian prince scam, or a fraudulent-call-center-IRA scam, or whatever else; and then, after, are bitter because these cheats befooled you: and maybe tell everyone about all of the gaping flaws in their schemes once those become clear to you: well then, why did you willingly become their dupe? Answer: because it wasn’t obvious to you then, that’s how being fooled works.
These people are guilty of fraud (morally guilty, even if not, given our laws, legally so) given they’re peddling bullshyttery. The Jesus-selling priest and preacher that fills his belly and/or puffs up his ego by selling Jesus-worship nonsense, is guilty of charlatanry because he’s peddling bullshyttery that is patently false, wrong. The Hare Krishna “sellers” are guilty of charlatanry because what they’re peddling is objectively not true. They’re selling a product that’s simply not what it promises to be. …And no, the product per se isn’t the involvement or the camaraderie or the fellow feeling or sense of purpose, those are side effects, bonuses, extras. The primary product is the promise of the Christian heaven and the Jesus-brand post-mortem cruise service, and/or the ISKCON moksha service, or the RSSB post-mortem transportation service to Sat Lok or wherever. To the extent that product is fraudulent, and the whole theology supporting it — and there’s no rational reason to reasonably conclude any of it is true — then they’re charlatans, and their dupes are fully entitled to feel bitter over this fraud when they afterwards realize their mistake. My selling you the Brooklyn Bridge does not mean you can’t cry fraud afterwards, just because you were a fool to fall for it in the first place.
You’re making correlations only a nerd on the computer would make . In fact little of this blog or the comments has much of anything to do with reality.