International Journal of Cultic Studies ■ Vol. 3, 2012 61
A member of the group (in 1914) explained his
sexual behaviour by stating
He would quote scriptures and told us
that the flaming sword spoken of in the
scriptures held by the Angel as barring
Adam and Eve had been taken away so
far as he was concerned and he was
purified and had the right to have
intercourse with any girl in the colony.
(Augusta Holliday Affidavit, July 30,
1914, in Fogarty, 1981, pp. 96–97)
He exercised that supposed right on a regular
basis. As another member indicated, “‘he was
the son [sic] of Man and it was our duty to have
sexual intercourse with him in order to be in the
inner court—that every woman must be passed
by the king’” (Edith Clark Affidavit, July 30,
1914, in Fogarty, 1981, p. 96).
Even a medical doctor during the period
indicated, after having examined some girls
from the House of David, ‘“that Benjamin had
‘been tampering with them’” (in Fogarty, 1981,
p. 89). Reportedly, he had intercourse with
some of the 20 girls whom he accompanied on a
sailing trip in 1909, just as he did when he and
others visited Chicago on a missionary trip
(Fogarty, 1981, p. 85). In one instance, the
group hid a daughter from her mother, and even
moved her out of state, in an attempt “to prevent
her from telling her mother about Purnell’s
advances toward her” (Fogarty, 1981, p. 90).
To gain sexual access to girls when he was at his
residence, he arranged the girls’ sleeping
quarters so that they could enter his house
without the rest of the group seeing their
movements. In 1915 alone, he made these
arrangements for 28 girls. Some of the girls
with whom he had sex were quite young. One
former member indicated that “he had relations
with all women in the colony ‘over the age of
twelve’” (Lena McFarlane Affidavit July 30,
1914, in Fogarty, 1981, p. 97). Likewise, during
his 1927 trial, “Ruth Bamford and Estelle Mills
testified that Purnell had forcibly raped them.
Bamford was ten when the alleged rape took
place, and one of his favorite women, Edith
Meldrim, was in the room at the time” (Fogarty,
1981, p. 118). He controlled access to his
bedroom by “the ingenious device of a secret
door...” (Fogarty, 1981, p. 100). Indeed, when
authorities were looking for Purnell between
1923 and 1926, the fugitive seems to have
remained hidden in his bedroom, still receiving a
flow of young women (see Fogarty, 1981, pp.
112–115).
Alas, Purnell got away with his abuse. Slightly
more than a month after the judge ordered
Purnell and his bigamist wife (Mary) out of the
colony at the end of the 1927 trial, but before
this order took effect, he died (Fogarty, 1981, p.
120). The state was unable, therefore, to act on
the charges of rape that were pending against
him (Orrmont, 1961, p. 109).
Swami Muktananda
Belief that a religious teacher’s (presumed)
perfection places him or her “beyond good and
evil” helps to explain why so many people knew
about the heterosexual encounters committed by
the late Swami Muktananda (d. 1982) yet did not
speak up about them. An article in Co-Evolution
Quarterly first brought the issue of
Muktananda’s sexual behaviour to light, and at
the same time raised additional issues involving
intimidation of critics, guns, exploitation of
devotees’ labour, and his organization’s secrecy
around money. As the article’s author William
Rodarmor stated succinctly,
In his teachings, Muktananda put a lot
of emphasis on sex—most of it negative.
Curbing the sex drive released the
kundalini energy that led to
enlightenment, he said. The swami
himself claimed to be completely
celibate. Members of the guru’s inner
circle, however, say Muktananda
regularly had sex with his female
devotees. Michael Dinga, an Oakland
contractor who was head of construction
for the ashram and a trustee of the
foundation, said the guru’s sexual
exploits were common knowledge in the
ashram. “It was supposed to be
Muktananda’s big secret,” said Dinga,
“but since many of the girls were in
their early to middle teens, it was hard to
keep it secret.” (Rodarmor, 1983, p.
105)
A member of the group (in 1914) explained his
sexual behaviour by stating
He would quote scriptures and told us
that the flaming sword spoken of in the
scriptures held by the Angel as barring
Adam and Eve had been taken away so
far as he was concerned and he was
purified and had the right to have
intercourse with any girl in the colony.
(Augusta Holliday Affidavit, July 30,
1914, in Fogarty, 1981, pp. 96–97)
He exercised that supposed right on a regular
basis. As another member indicated, “‘he was
the son [sic] of Man and it was our duty to have
sexual intercourse with him in order to be in the
inner court—that every woman must be passed
by the king’” (Edith Clark Affidavit, July 30,
1914, in Fogarty, 1981, p. 96).
Even a medical doctor during the period
indicated, after having examined some girls
from the House of David, ‘“that Benjamin had
‘been tampering with them’” (in Fogarty, 1981,
p. 89). Reportedly, he had intercourse with
some of the 20 girls whom he accompanied on a
sailing trip in 1909, just as he did when he and
others visited Chicago on a missionary trip
(Fogarty, 1981, p. 85). In one instance, the
group hid a daughter from her mother, and even
moved her out of state, in an attempt “to prevent
her from telling her mother about Purnell’s
advances toward her” (Fogarty, 1981, p. 90).
To gain sexual access to girls when he was at his
residence, he arranged the girls’ sleeping
quarters so that they could enter his house
without the rest of the group seeing their
movements. In 1915 alone, he made these
arrangements for 28 girls. Some of the girls
with whom he had sex were quite young. One
former member indicated that “he had relations
with all women in the colony ‘over the age of
twelve’” (Lena McFarlane Affidavit July 30,
1914, in Fogarty, 1981, p. 97). Likewise, during
his 1927 trial, “Ruth Bamford and Estelle Mills
testified that Purnell had forcibly raped them.
Bamford was ten when the alleged rape took
place, and one of his favorite women, Edith
Meldrim, was in the room at the time” (Fogarty,
1981, p. 118). He controlled access to his
bedroom by “the ingenious device of a secret
door...” (Fogarty, 1981, p. 100). Indeed, when
authorities were looking for Purnell between
1923 and 1926, the fugitive seems to have
remained hidden in his bedroom, still receiving a
flow of young women (see Fogarty, 1981, pp.
112–115).
Alas, Purnell got away with his abuse. Slightly
more than a month after the judge ordered
Purnell and his bigamist wife (Mary) out of the
colony at the end of the 1927 trial, but before
this order took effect, he died (Fogarty, 1981, p.
120). The state was unable, therefore, to act on
the charges of rape that were pending against
him (Orrmont, 1961, p. 109).
Swami Muktananda
Belief that a religious teacher’s (presumed)
perfection places him or her “beyond good and
evil” helps to explain why so many people knew
about the heterosexual encounters committed by
the late Swami Muktananda (d. 1982) yet did not
speak up about them. An article in Co-Evolution
Quarterly first brought the issue of
Muktananda’s sexual behaviour to light, and at
the same time raised additional issues involving
intimidation of critics, guns, exploitation of
devotees’ labour, and his organization’s secrecy
around money. As the article’s author William
Rodarmor stated succinctly,
In his teachings, Muktananda put a lot
of emphasis on sex—most of it negative.
Curbing the sex drive released the
kundalini energy that led to
enlightenment, he said. The swami
himself claimed to be completely
celibate. Members of the guru’s inner
circle, however, say Muktananda
regularly had sex with his female
devotees. Michael Dinga, an Oakland
contractor who was head of construction
for the ashram and a trustee of the
foundation, said the guru’s sexual
exploits were common knowledge in the
ashram. “It was supposed to be
Muktananda’s big secret,” said Dinga,
“but since many of the girls were in
their early to middle teens, it was hard to
keep it secret.” (Rodarmor, 1983, p.
105)
