Monastic Life - why they leave or stay

SRF Walrus

Mt. Washington, Ca

Open discussions about SRF

SRF Walrus > Life on the Inside > Monastic Life - why they leave or stay
Page 1 2	<< Prev Topic \| Next Topic >>

Author	Comment
KS Registered User (1/6/02 2:34 pm)	Monastic Life - why they leave or stay I was talking to a friend who has seen all the monastics leaving but doesn’t know them very well. He can see that they don’t think much of Mother Center and said to me that old thing we hear, “They just weren’t suitable to ashram life”. It occurred to me that many out there probably have no idea what ashram life inside SRF is really like, much less what ashram/monastic life should look like in the first place. So here are some points about SRF ashram life. Many probably assume: 1: There are hours of devoted meditation every day. In fact there are group meditations morning and evening, about 45 minutes, but they are optional. The matas do not attend or lead these meditations. 2: They are given frequent classes by the senior monastics to help them learn. There are once a week classes, which are sometimes movies. These classes are given by fellow monastics almost as speaker training rather than serious learning lectures. Again, the matas are not giving classes to the monastics. They keep to themselves. 3: They live in a supportive helpful environment where they can freely discuss problems they are having. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is a back stabbing place where you are specifically told to inform on fellow monastics should they break any of the thousands of little rules. People “inform” on each other and chop off the heads of others to get ahead. It is worse on the nuns side. 4: They live a life of helping the community and needy people of the world (Mother Teressa – like). Wrong again. They never go out into the community to help and are not allowed to do so. They do sing carols at a local hospital (and then put pictures in the SRF magazine of them doing so). Some very very limited community work was attempted at Mother Center to manipulate the local community, but it didn’t work. 5: They spend their time concerned about the SRF members and try to help them. Actually, the SRF members are viewed with suspicion. They are thought to be curious about SRF internals and critical once they see what really goes on. The member employees are kept at arms length and distrusted in the extreme. Once you realize that they DO HAVE something to hide this behavior makes more sense. Many monastics thought they were joining the ashram to live lives of service and to further their own spiritual lives. Those that finally come to realize that is not going to happen in that disturbed environment leave. To stay in that environment, especially at Mother Center, you must be in at least one of these situations: 1: Have no self esteem. You really are worthless, so them treating you that way is what you expect. This is different than humility. Brother Bhaktananda is truly humble; the list gets pretty short from there. 2: You obtain a position of power. Some of the people, like Jill and Satya, obtain self-important positions and become part of the problem. As long as they are able to cling to their important positions they stay. 3: You learn to “play the game”. You hide at Lake Shrine, Enc, HV, or Hollywood and keep your head down. You have no ambition in life anyway, can sit through the meditations, and enjoy the free and easy life with no real responsibilities. Think of it as boys or girls camp, with Nazi cabin councilors. 4: You are not in a position of power, but once in a while, at a temple or convocation, you get to be a rock star. The members bow and scrape and you are the big man on campus for a time. Sometimes this is enough. You have probably never had that in your life and even though you are not making spiritual progress your ego has that little shot once in a while. 5: You believe the rap that you will be a failure if you leave. You confuse loyalty with staying, and give up your own will to determine your course of action and believe in the matas, letting them run your life. 6: You are lazy. To leave would mean getting a real job, paying taxes, and so on. Hey, you get abused and are unhappy, but you believe the lie that the “outside world” is just as bad or worse. You might not even really believe it but your lazy nature works with the lie enough that you stay. You are probably a hider too. 7: You are too old or too sick to leave. 8: You stay out of a sense of loyalty to Master and try to make things better. You life in this case is especially miserable as you are swimming up stream and those in power will try to destroy you. (See the notes on the Spiritual Life Committees) You may be one of those in fairly deep depression.
XInsider Unregistered User (1/6/02 6:45 pm)	Post by KS Interesting. I would just contend with the opinion that some monastics stay because of laziness. It is more complex than that. After spending some years in a ashram, one becomes institutionalized. Living in the world becomes more difficult, painful to adjust to. This is true of prisoners too; see "Shawshank Redemption" for an accurate depiction of how different individuals cope with suddenly being "freed."
Gray beard Registered User (1/6/02 7:19 pm)	Re: Monastic Life - why they leave or stay Hi KS, You mention that some monastics obtain "self important" positions of power within the ashram. And you mention two individuals, Jill and "Satya", whom I take to be Satyananda. I'm aware from other posts on this board who Jill is (at least I think I know, someone close to the 'matas' who wields a tremendous amount of power?) but could you please tell me what job Satyananda has at Mt. Washington. I heard him give a lecture where he referred to working with the construction project of the member services building, and I see him mentioned in the magazine as having given lectures and classes throughout the US and Europe etc, so I took it he was part of the new younger breed of SRF lecturer's, taking the place of Achalananda and Anandamoy now that they are getting older and probably don't travel well. And I know that he is a minister at one of the local temples. But I've seen other messages that take him to task without any real specific allegations of just what he does to make him such a object of scorn, not that I doubt what you all are saying about him. I would just like to understand the situation better. Thanks
KS Registered User (1/6/02 8:07 pm)	Satya Satya is part of the next generation, but that is not so great. There is a new “good” generation, mostly being driven away, and a “not so good” wanna-be group. Satya’s job at mother center is the manager of monk’s personnel. He sets the rules for the monks up there and decides a lot about their day to day activities. He does lecture, tour, handle the mother center grounds, and has been responsible for Fullerton Temple for years. When the bad ladies crushed the Monk’s Spiritual Life Committee, they didn’t actually do away with it. They put Satya in charge, which in effect killed it. That should tell a walrus reader a lot. He is a company man, and since the “company” is so diseased at the moment, he implements weird stuff. With God inspired management above him, he might do little damage, but that is not the case. He definitely likes the rock star aspect of his position but most of us would. Since many of the members think an orange robe means a higher state, he enjoys the status that brings. To outside people he is likable and I believe thought well of at the temples. He feels he is an intellectual which makes for some humorous lectures (he is not intellectual). He is not popular with the monks. I expect that he will walk in front of a cannon in the next few years and be forced out. Any man with authority is a threat to the ladies, and he is probably the top dog man right now, besides Vishwananda. Others here may know more details or want to share some insights. I have just done his introspection for the day! Can you mother center monitors make sure he gets this?
chuckle Unregistered User (1/7/02 12:10 am)	reply to KS and Xinsider KS, your post and others before it give a good picture of what it's like on the inside. What can one say? Some of you ex-monastics mentioned that the psychologists brought in by the SLCs were horrified at the conditions. Does anyone have any other info on their conclusions, remarks, on any reports they submitted? Vulcan and some of the others have given us all some great analyses of the intrapersonal dynamics. What's interesting in this thread here is Xinsider's remarks about how the environment conditions the monastics to become, as Xinsider put it, "institutionalized." I think this is an important point because it shows how environmental forces play a significant role in determining our behavior. I often take a social psychological viewpoint because I was trained in social psychology and I have worked with adults and families and use systems and social interaction theories in understanding family dynamics. There are any number of ways of looking at the dynamics in a setting such as an ashram--you can examine power structures, roles and status achievement, structural-functional models, etc. etc.--but all these end up showing you how our personalities and behavior can be greatly influenced by external forces largely beyond our conscious control. Social psychologists have taken perfectly "normal" people and put them in situations that have turned them into monsters (those familiar with psychology will remember the classic Milgram shock experiment and the Zimbardo prison experiment). What's important here, I think, is that both of your posts illustrate how the intrapersonal and interpersonal forces can make it very difficult for those living there to change. These are not necessarily "bad" people (or lazy or stupid or whatever): they are people whose personalities have been significantly altered by their environment. And those who have used the "dance" metaphor to describe the situation are bang on--everyone is literally caught in a behavioral dance that is extremely difficult to change without either (a) a significant outside intervention by someone--like the psychologists hired by the SLCs--who can say, "hey, folks, things are really screwy here, and here's what we have to do to change things, or (b) a significant number of people in the environment who can say, "Hey, we're screwed up here and gotta change." Sadly, as so many of you have said, you tried both and it all got shut down (God, I hate to say this but I can think of a huge number of social psychologists and sociologists who would just love to have close look at the ashram and its dynamics (on the positive side, I could virtually guarantee that they would end up doing so much good for the ashram. Sigh.). KS's post shows a number of adaptive behaviors the monastics are forced to adopt to maintain their sanity. Vulcan is right: you've got to get away, as so many of you have discovered. And to anyone at Mother Center who is reading this and is feeling a bit unsure about the dynamics there and you're wondering about your sanity or your worthiness--the research data clearly show that Vulcan is right, you've got to get away, because as the ex monastics have said, the chances of anything changing significantly soon appear to be just about nil. Based on my experience, I have absolutely no reason to doubt what so many have said about the environment at Mother Center driving monastics to depression, despair, suicidal thoughts. Zimbardo was able to change ordinary college students who assumed prisoner roles into fearful, depressed, neurotic, suicidal shadows in just three days (they had to stop the experiment, it was that serious). Milgram was able to get ordinary people to administer what they thought were lethal shocks to others in just a couple of hours. "Environment is more important than will power." Gee, haven't I read that somewhere?...
Kevin Registered User (1/7/02 12:34 am)	Leave or Stay Monastic Life - WHY THEY LEAVE OR STAY !!! My Comments/testimonials to KS points: 1. "There are hours of devoted meditation every day" : A monk who is not a good meditator but who can sit for a 2 ½ or 3 hours weekly and for the long Xmas med., who can smile and idiotically agree and cheers now and then to show his loyalty to the system can make it as a monk. Naturally will have to create a DOUBLE life where he can explore his or her own interests, be they sacred or profane. What many devotees believe, that is, that an orange robe is a sign of some high realization is total B.S. For most of them is just a sign that they have been around a certain amount of years, it does not mean they are even ‘saintly’, much the less saints. 2. "They are given frequent classes by the senior monastics to help them learn" True: Classes are mostly endless repetitions of the same points, over and over again. Most Sundays svcs. to the monks are also to train new ministers, often supervised by Bro. Anandamoy (no need really, if a monk/nun says anything wrong at all, slightly outside of the orthodoxy, it would be reported by a good bunch of them right away). When seniors monks like Anandamoy give talks is mostly for young monks (though every monk shows up), I came to believe that most older monks do not accept a lot of his points of view inwardly (they cannot afford to do it outwardly, he created for himself the authority of one who knew Master and who knows the Truth). At vows ceremony Anandamoy loves to rave against the disloyal monks who left and to depict their ‘miserable, miserable” life. (I know several ex-monastic and none would ever want to return in “there”, NONE !) 3. "They live in a supportive helpful environment where they can freely discuss problems they are having". Until two or three years ago no monk would dare asking any “real” question freely. Discussions are/were limited to more or less ‘dead’ philosophical points, touching /inspiring stories that perpetuate the “kill the ego by all means” attitude most of them seem to love (or maybe it is the only one they are taught). 4. "They live a life of helping the community and needy people of the world (Mother Teressa – like)". They help the devotees by overseeing the meditation centers around the world (ruled with an iron fist or so I perceived it ) and thru correspondence counseling (98 % done by the nuns). Any other help is limited to some schools and hospitals in India but are done mainly by lay disciples or employess, the Indian monks are very few and perhaps a bit more involved in direct helping than anyone in the West. SRF occasionally donates to charitable org. like the Red Cross, they do it in response to a calamity like the earthquake in Mexico years ago, when they donate money it is usually advertised on Newsletters or SRF magazines. The feeling is that monastics are too easily distracted by too much involvement with the world and should be more focused on spreading the teachings. [One postulant told me that the housebrother at the time was recommending not to help car accident victims because of the fear of lawsuits. (maybe it is understandable to some level)]. 5. "They spend their time concerned about the SRF members and try to help them ". T It seems to be more about ‘controlling’ members. It is a natural attitude considering monastic see themselves as guardians of the purity of the teachings. But I don't doubt that in many ways they have helped many with their counseling and inspiration by quoting Master 's writings. (nobody knows -or better still, very, very few even inside know the big mistakes or damaged done to devotees). RE: To STAY IN THE ASHRAM. Most monks are promised that their reward will come at the time of death (I assume it is because very, VERY, VERYfew have any outstanding results from their meditaions OR ANY MASTERY). As a friend of mine put it: there are three types of monks: the ones who missed the point of monastic life (I think they are 85%) and are in there just for a power-trip, for control trips, for codependence trips, for fear of the world, or a feeling of belonging to something larger, and enjoying some of the stardust falling on their robes, or … just for laziness, for been trapped or are just too ‘short’ of brains to know any better. For some lucky ones a life in a secondary ashram can be a bit more rewarding and free and probably more balanced and of direct service to others-also in a small ashram--with more daily contact with lay members their are kept more"real". I think such a large number of monks living together creates a negative environment and a lot of extra, ridiculous rules, to the point that rules become the focus of the Spiritual life. Second; the ones who managed some kind of inner life (though ravaged by bouts of guilt, desperation, probably caused by doing a lot of white-washing) but who get something out of it which I think are 7%, in this part there are also the karma-yogis, who love to serve the work thru managing,directing, buying, etc....; the remaining 8 % are totally clueless about life inside or outside, OR are part of an embittered minority usually relegated to menial, marginal roles in places like Cherry Valley, Hidden Vly, or some temples.
Deep Unregistered User (1/7/02 7:17 am)	They can’t take the monastic life I have heard the same excuse. The reason so many are leaving is that they can’t take the monastic life! Members and fellow monastics very much want to believe in the matas and SRF, so this is an easy rationalization. What a shame. If the people saying this really thought about it I wonder what part of the monastic life they think is driving them out? The easy schedule, the lack of responsibility, or what? Obviously they think it is the lack of freedom. Outsiders feel that the monastics can’t watch TV when they want to, go shopping when they want to, or date. That must drive them crazy! Look at it logically, after 20 years these things drive them crazy? Not likely. KS, There is another type of monastic that stays. Some feel, just like most members, that in spite of the weirdness that SRF is headed in the right direction but “they just can’t understand it all”. The monastics seldom see the leadership themselves, and have the same ideals pushed at them that the members do including the ideals that the matas are God-realized, have been selected by Babaji to run SRF, and that things are being run as they should be. As stated by “chuckle” the environment is very consuming and it takes years to see through it.
AumBoy Registered User (1/7/02 10:31 am)	Re: Monastic Life - why they leave or stay While it is true some stay because they have no place to go, I know of some who have stayed because they are trying to effect change. My brothers who remain have told me that there are very incremental changes happening at MW even now. They've also told me that this board is a thorn in SRF's side. I'm sure that if SRF could they would shut this board down but it is out of their control. I cannot yet be too specific because there's an aura of damage control at MW; they're doing everything within their power to stop leaks of information which have appeared on this board.
Been there Unregistered User (1/7/02 3:44 pm)	Why they stay? There are probably as many answers to this question as there are monastics. Let us not forget that some stay because they like to meditate ALOT and if they can manage to limit their work responsibilities,(a tricky business) they can do this better in the ashram than outside of it. It is worth it to them to put up with the problems if they can put in their hours of meditation each day.
oldtimer Unregistered User (1/7/02 6:59 pm)	Hurrah! In reply to AumBoy, what great news! If the leadership of SRF is aware of this board, it is serving a glorious purpose. Keep the posts coming! Turn up the heat! Get everything out in the open! And spread the word. If you want to let certain people know about this board, but don't want to reveal yourself, maybe the Walrus can help? I saw that he/she/it would get two people together by relaying email addresses. Maybe we could send in email addresses of people to let know about this board and Walrus could send.
KS Registered User (1/7/02 7:47 pm)	Confidential Sharing I have sent names to the walrus email address and he has sent them an invitation. On the other hand there is an "email this to a friend" link at the bottom of each thread. The message sent does not identify who sent it, so it is another quicker way. Sometimes Mr. Walrus doesn't check in too often. You can try it yourself. Click the link below and send it to yourself! Make up something for the FROM address. I agree it is great news that Mother Center is monitoring this board. We already knew that. Months ago they supposedly had a meeting to tell the monks NOT to look at it, as some of them were. As with any disfunctional family, now more of them are looking at it as a result of it. The idea of mother center "leaks" is really something. What the heck would a non-profit representing Yogananda have to hide! (A lot)
Reporter Unregistered User (1/8/02 1:06 am)	To Been There I don't think many stay in the ashram to meditate "a lot". They don't think it is possible to meditate a lot outside the ashram? Hello? In my experience I didn't know any that did that, but there may be. Of course there are those outside the ashram that have long meditations, so I would not be surprised if there have been those that did it in the past inside the ashram.
Been there Unregistered User (1/8/02 7:42 am)	To Reporter Didn't mean they like to meditate long hours. I meant they like to meditate very much. There are a few (very few I think) who say they "wouldn't live anywhere else" for this reason.
chuckle Unregistered User (1/8/02 12:13 pm)	A thorn in SRF's side?! Aumboy, I’m glad to hear that some monastics are still trying; good luck to ‘em. And to hear that the leaders are still upset at the Walrus puzzles me. Don’t they know that they themselves, in a round-about fashion, have endorsed a forum such as the Walrus? I read recently that Psychology Today reported that writing down one’s thoughts, however negative, can be helpful to physical and mental well-being. To quote from the article, “Writing expressively about thoughts and emotions also got people sharing their concerns with friends and family, which speeds resolution of the problems. Emotional expression in writing helps people gain perspective on their experience, says Dr. Pennebaker: ‘People weren’t venting, but working through their problems.’ And their bodies [which ended up producing measurable and significant increases in lymphocytes] were better for it.” And where did I read this? Why, in the “Yoga and Modern Science” section of the Winter 2000 edition of Self-realization magazine. Surely the SRF senior monastics must think the Walrus is wonderful in allowing us all to work through these issues (and it’s evident from the comments of a number of ex-monastics and lay workers that this forum is helping). Seriously, though, if the administration wants to stop the public airing of dirty laundry, all they have to do is talk. You talk, we listen. We talk, you listen. We all learn and grow in understanding. Problems get solved. If the SRF leaders really want this board shut down, they can easily do so by meeting with people. Sigh. Don’t they read history? I do wonder about SRF’s public relations. Those in the PR department should study the Tylenol poisoning crisis and how Johnson & Johnson so successfully handled it. This is the most widely studied case in public relations history. J&J right off the bat went public with the admission of the problem, promised (and kept that promise) to do everything in their power to resolve the issue (even though it wasn't their fault), put public safety ahead of corporate profit (even though this cost them millions upon millions). Net result? Within weeks of the crisis (weeks, not months!) Tylenol was again the biggest selling pain reliever nationwide. And Johnson and Johnson maintained--indeed, enhanced--its honorable reputation. Why did they act this way? Because the famous Johnson and Johnson Credo told them that their customers were the only important thing. We in SRF have our own Credo, the Aims and Ideals. Among them, “To overcome evil by good, sorrow by joy, cruelty by kindness, ignorance by wisdom,” and “To serve mankind [including, one assumes, its own members] as one’s larger Self.” We even have another Credo...Only Love. To SRF, all I can say as a loyal member is that the problems won’t go away, the people won’t go away, and at some point there is going to have to be dialogue. Sooner or later this will have to happen. The longer this gets put off, the worse it will be for you; this isn’t a threat, just a simple fact.
OpenMinded Registered User (1/9/02 5:31 am)	Satyananda I dont know any of these things about Satyananda being intellectual or that he is the leading figure of the 'new' generation of monks or whatever. What I do know is that it was he who helped me out of a miserable life just by being there. He called me friend and gave unconditional acceptance and understanding and real, life-changing strength in the time of my greatest need. I dont care what anyone else thinks about him. I saw the incredible golden aura and vibration of strength, confidence yet fathomless humility that he exuded when he came out here on a lecture tour. Satyananda is just amazing in all the right ways and I believe with all my heart that he is humble enough not to let praise of him go to his head.
Crog Unregistered User (1/9/02 7:29 am)	Satya It is one thing to put on an orange robe, lecture on Master’s ideals, and show concern for people’s problems during interviews. Many TV evangelists do this quite effectively. It does not have to be faked as many people do honestly have real compassion inside them. That is part of the human spirit for most people. I believe what you are saying about Satya is true. He was honestly concerned and cared about your problems. I will give him that credit too. I never felt it much myself, but I know many people who felt as you do. However, when push comes to shove, and he has to do weird stuff to people to keep is position at work or to better his position, he does them. He does not understand right and wrong, loyalty, and how he is affecting the lives of the monastics. Those decisions indicate his character more than the easy role of feeling sorry for people with problems.
been there Unregistered User (1/31/02 7:55 pm)	satya Hello openminded, Wake up. If you still want to stay in denial, go worship satya at your altar. Knowing him as much as I know, being around him for many years, I can only say he is a shark. Read some of KS postings. He is so right on. If someone lives far away and see the monastics only in their best clothes and behavior, while on tour, of course, they will all seem so saintly. THe fartest you are from MW the less contact you have with all that goes on in there, and therefore, have real periferal exposure to the whole thing. It is so typical of SRF devotees in denial to enshrine the monks. THat is so sick in my opinion!
Been there Unregistered User (2/1/02 6:47 am)	Post of "been there" Just wanted to say that it seems there are two "been there's." No doubt more are out there! While I did not post the wake up call about a particular monk, I can second the opinion that the tendency of SRF members to put the monastics on pedestals is well known. Seems there is a human need to have paragons. (Helps prevent the possibility of having to grow up inside and confront the existential demons that plague us all.) But please don't believe these paragons exist in the SRF monastic order. There are good people there, but there are also despots, scared rabbits, those heavily in denial and shut down depressives. Just like out here!
In Recovery Unregistered User (2/3/02 10:32 pm)	To Openminded I'm glad you received a lot of help from Satyananda. He knows Master's teachings very well, and he has very practical and good advice. So I can see how you could be very impressed and uplifted by his help. But I would suggest that his "incredible golden aura and vibration of strength, confidence yet fathomless humility" was perhaps something coming from Master or some other source (perhaps from something within you!). If you had lived with Satyananda and interacted with him on a daily basis (as many of us have), you could not hold such a belief about him without becoming one very conflicted cat.
newboy Unregistered User (2/4/02 11:26 am)	Why Monastics Stay or Leave I'm new to SRF Walrus and appreciate the postings, even though some of them are very disturbing. In all the messages I've read, no one has addressed why a monk like Brother Bimalananda would stay. I don't know him well, but he seems kind, devotional, and grounded in the same way that many of you have praised Bro. Bhaktananda as being. (I'm fond of Bhaktananda, too). Does Bimalananda stay because he is "too old and sick to leave"? Just wondering.
Lobo Registered User (2/4/02 5:11 pm)	Re: Why Monastics Stay or Leave Newboy, That's a good question and one that probably only Brother Bimalananda can answer. The fact that he stays can be construed in many different ways depending upon who is doing the intrepreting so it isn't for anyone other than the saintly Brother to say, in my opinion. But notice another thing in this regard. Where does Bimalananda reside? Is it at Hidden Valley, Encinitas or some ashram other than Mt. Washington? I heard he is at Hidden Valley, although about a year ago I saw him on the grounds of Mt. Washington (I'm not a monastic) visiting with some friends that he was seeing off at their car. The reason the issue of residence is so key to your question, I've learned from this board, is the older men direct disciples seem not to live full-time at Mt. Washington. As you've pointed to Bhaktananda he's been at Hollywood since the late 60's. I don't know about Anandamoy, but would guess that since he is a member of the Board of Directors that he probably continues to live at Mt. Washington. I can't think of any other 'direct disciples' that are men but if you can just ask where they reside. That will be clue to many things, probably including, why they stay.

Page 1 2

<< Prev Topic | Next Topic >>

Email This To a Friend
Topic Control Image

Topic Commands

Click to receive email notification of replies

Click to stop receiving email notification of replies

jump to: