Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 6, No. 2, 1989, Page 38
of how he cheated someone out of money. Greg asked “Is that something you would have
done before you got involved?” This question, and the many similar ones that would soon
follow, seemed to draw Ken into recalling and comparing his past identity to his Krishna
persona. When Ken responded negatively, Greg continued: “So that's something you picked
up from hanging around Krishnas... how to con, to cheat. There was a moment of silence as
Ken pondered this information, his fare screwed up in some conflict. Sandy, reacting
perhaps to Ken's struggle to assimilate this information, talked about the dangers of
chanting. “It can be damaging to the thought processes.” He then noted the similarity
between speaking in tongues and chanting (both can be used as a “mind block”) as he
attempted to explain the research on sensory deprivation and the physiological need for
stimulation.
The deprogrammers then began pointing out Prabhupada's moral inconsistencies.
Prabhupada stated that it is not cheating to lie when fund-raising, as long as the fund-raiser
does not keep the money for himself --if he keeps the money, then it is cheating. Ken
responded again by citing doctrine. Greg confronted him on ISKCON‟s use of
“transcendental trickery” during their food distribution campaigns. Krishnas would collect
money, then use only part of it to buy old food. On the one hand it is spiritually and morally
acceptable to trick people to get their message through, yet “... before, we were talking
about spirituality as including total honesty...” At this point Bobbi Stem, who had been silent
for some time, began supporting her husband's disclosures with similar tales from ex-
Krishna clients. In a move that seemed partly designed to authenticate his ex-Krishna
“credentials,” Greg then gave Ken a sample of what he labeled his fund-raising “rap.”
Ken's retreat. When the deprogrammers seemed finished, Ken refuted then in an involved
and personal way, by denying that he had done any transcendental trickery. “I never lied ...
whatever I said was always true.” Greg: “OK, maybe you didn't but you were representing
an organization that ...” Ken finished the thought “... whose members did.”
Curt then added his heaviest confrontation to date. ISKCON leaders engage in
transcendental trickery, and whether or not Ken did it is not the issue. The (ISKCON)
movement does it, and Ken's denial is “God damn lying through your teeth ...and you're
covering their ass ...you're trying to minimize that deception ...yeah, and I'm pissed
because you sit there and you act so innocent when you know damn well that that's what‟s
happening in the movement. If you want to associate yourself with a movement that‟s
deceptive at its core, yeah, that‟s your choice. But don't try to claim that its some type of
higher spiritual understanding.” Silence hung heavy in the room, and Ken looked shocked
and caught off guard. The silence was at last broken by Curt “I'm sorry, I don't mean to get
heavy with you but I just get upset because.. Ken tried to complete Curt‟s thought: “It‟s
part of your job.” Curt denied it “No, it‟s not part of my job it's my true feelings, I get
upset...”
Ken seemed to back down a little. Curt listened intently as the cultist admitted that the
Krishnas do believe the ends justify the means, the ends are spiritual but the means often
are not. Ken: The goal is to make people God-conscious, but the means are not.” Curt
“Exactly, and I don't know if you, before you got involved in this movement, prescribed [sic]
to that [ends justifying means argument], because you're making a big assumption ...that
what you've got is of God! What if it isn‟t? ...One of the main ways to test if something is of
God is by the fruits that it bears ...Truth is truth, man, and it shouldn't have to be
propagated by deception.”
Curt attacked ISKCON's justification for using “transcendental trickery.” Because we are so
caught up in maya (the “world of illusion”), the Krishnas believe we often have to be tricked
into seeing the truth. This is the same logic used by other cults to justify their acts of
deception.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 6, No. 2, 1989, Page 39
Detour and analysis. With the introduction of the ISKCON concept of maya, the
conversation moved in a new direction. It was about 12:45 am. and Sandy, who had left the
room for a smoke, returned and began to disclose more of his experiences as a member of
a shepherding (Christian) cult. Ken just listened. Sandy's group was very different from the
Krishnas. It was a small conclave led by a charismatic lay-preacher named David Stone,
who exercised considerable direct control over his followers. It did not have the rigid
hierarchy that ISKCON has, nor the membership or the extensive organization. Of course,
the philosophies were also quite different. Ken said little at this point other than to ask
Sandy a few questions about David Stone and to point out the differences between the
Stone group and the Krishnas. He did not seem to be relating to Sandy's comparison. Ken
and Brian next began to discuss the nature of explanations for events and experiences.
Brian noted how explanations for phenomena are temporary we use the best explanations
we have until a better one comes along. At one point in Western history, for example, some
events seemed best explained by postulating the presence of ghosts: “The explanations
might have sufficed at the time, but better explanations were discovered, and they didn't
have to rely on ghosts to explain things.” Ken talked about how science is often inexact too.
The conversation was now clearly characterized by the imparting of objective information.
Ken was also beginning to actively dispute information critical of ISKCON. Greg's rate of
questioning seemed to increase in direct relation to Ken's active use of ISKCON doctrine to
defend his beliefs. In general, most of the conversation seemed to emanate from the
deprogrammers, while most of what Ken was saying came in bursts.
The role of fear. In all totalistic movements, the deprogrammers said, fear plays a big role
in the need to control people. This important point seemed to get lost, however, in a round
of abstract political theory. The conversation seemed almost to lack a center. Greg
apparently sensed this, and he refocused the conversation on the role fear plays in ISKCON
doctrine. He described how controlling his senses and impulses without chanting is not a
problem for him --“I don't have to fight to control myself, and I also don't carry around a
fear that something's going to happen to me in my next life ...or in this life.” He was living
proof of the invalidity of doctrine-induced fears that “if you leave all of that accrued karmic
reaction, stuff will catch up with you.” Ken sat and appeared to be listening. To me, he
seemed, on many occasions, to be agreeing with what Greg said, but these “pockets” of
agreement did not yet seem to generalize into a skeptical attitude. Greg's thoughts may
have moved along a similar path, as he continued to challenge Ken. First, he confronted Ken
on Prabhupada's statement that the sun is closer to the earth than the moon. “Do you
believe that?” he asked with his head cocked and thrust forward toward Ken. Ken backed
away, angry. “When you get right down to it, I don't care” what Prabhupada said about the
sun being closer to the earth than the moon: “It doesn't matter.” Greg would not allow Ken
to get the upper hand, yet he did not respond in like anger. “I think the point is that you're
accepting Prabhupada at one point and then at another point it doesn't matter.”
Sudden progress. An admission. Sandy, Curt, and Bobbi began to talk once more with Ken
about sankirtan, and this time Ken's response was different. He now admitted (to the
deprogrammers or to himself.?) to the use of “transcendental trickery.” He began to relate
some of his own experiences, raising money in trailer parks and from cars. Ken's conning
involved the fraudulent selling of “Indian” paintings to art galleries at one point, he was
even arrested by police. I sat there shocked by Ken's revelations, coming so soon after he
denied any personal wrongdoing during fund-raising. Curt's response surprised me even
more he looked sharply at Ken and speculated aloud to the other deprogrammers: “I
wonder if he's giving us one [a con job] now?” Ken laughed nervously. “No, I'm serious.”
Curt sat back. “Well, you've got to understand our position, we've got to think that way ...
You guys have been taught how to lie ...and be good at it. ...You feel justified.” Apparently,
Curt had also been somewhat surprised by Ken's disclosure. What followed was still more
interesting to me. Curt‟s confrontation, rather than interfering with developing rapport