Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1997, page 44
should not follow any instruction we did not understand or take on any idea we had not
personally verified to be true. Of course, professing lack of understanding or lack of
verification did not safeguard one from the consequences of violating exercises, or,
especially, tasks. And those who lagged in following the exercises were not given positions
of power and influence granted to those who did. Violating tasks deemed essential for the
well-being of the community was grounds for removal from the organization. Tasks revolved
around sex, money, drugs, and, of all things, gossip.
We have downplayed the sensational, and in the following have summarized those exercises
we can recall to give a flavor of how much it takes to finally remove the autonomy of
people. You can also see how far people will go when they trust a leader and believe his
directions will ultimately help them to gain psychological freedom, love, consciousness, or
contact with the divine. The limitations seem a small price to pay for the promised results.
Control of interactions with the leader. We want to point out again that destruction of
autonomy is not obvious. Verbal rather than physical abuse prevails, with passive rather
than active assaults. Your perception of reality is systematically questioned, your feelings
denied, your worth undermined. The invisible chains of psychological dominance are forged
slowly, gradually. The dominant person establishes the terms of the interaction and builds
dominance by many means. Some of those include the following: (1) he alternates kindness
and abuse --intermittent friendliness erases the memory of upsetting behavior (2) he
controls inter-personal communication and decides on acceptable subjects to discuss,
ignoring questions he does not care to address (3) he allows no validation of your
experience of doubt, fear, or anger with him (4) he manipulates feelings if confronted,
primarily by focusing on what‟s wrong with you (5) he displays indifference, disrespect, and
disregard toward you in the guise of being above such petty, mechanical concerns (6) he
disregards or discounts any hurt feelings you might have and (7) he maintains emotional
distance in the name of being a “higher” man.
After the first few years, the leader controlled virtually all interactions we had with him, and
he became more and more inaccessible. When he did invite you to be with him, he
determined when you would speak. You might ask him a question, such as “How do you
deal with anger?” or “Why don‟t you invite women to the symposiums?” And he would
answer with, “Look at the beautiful irises Joan has arranged for the table,” or “How is your
mother?” These diversions would be read as ways to bring you back to the present, away
from abstract intellectualizing. In fact, they effectively silenced doubts and concerns.
Control of speech. The first exercise anyone experienced was introduced at the
prospective student meetings and involved eliminating certain words from your vocabulary.
The words changed over time, but for many years included all contractions, and the word I.
The ability to speak while eliminating these words was supposedly a sign of consciousness,
or, at least, a kind of divided attention we attempted to cultivate. If, while speaking, you
uttered one of the words, another student would make a hand signal to alert you to your
“sleep.” This exercise threw prospective students off, minimized their ability to express
themselves, and at the same time showed them one method for awakening from the “sleep”
of ordinary awareness. Since “no gossip” was a task, the subjects of our conversations were
also limited. The formidable exercise of not expressing negative emotions was another
bulwark of the practices that curtailed our speech.
Control of dining. The leader selected the menus, often elaborate, for the group‟s dining
hall. He preferred fine dining with china, silver, flowers, and four-course meals. He gave
explicit instructions on how to eat, including the mechanics of holding the utensils, and he
put people on diets if he thought they needed to lose weight.
Control of clothing. Women were asked to stop wearing pants and wear only skirts or
dresses. He liked to purchase clothing for both men and women as part of the intermittent
should not follow any instruction we did not understand or take on any idea we had not
personally verified to be true. Of course, professing lack of understanding or lack of
verification did not safeguard one from the consequences of violating exercises, or,
especially, tasks. And those who lagged in following the exercises were not given positions
of power and influence granted to those who did. Violating tasks deemed essential for the
well-being of the community was grounds for removal from the organization. Tasks revolved
around sex, money, drugs, and, of all things, gossip.
We have downplayed the sensational, and in the following have summarized those exercises
we can recall to give a flavor of how much it takes to finally remove the autonomy of
people. You can also see how far people will go when they trust a leader and believe his
directions will ultimately help them to gain psychological freedom, love, consciousness, or
contact with the divine. The limitations seem a small price to pay for the promised results.
Control of interactions with the leader. We want to point out again that destruction of
autonomy is not obvious. Verbal rather than physical abuse prevails, with passive rather
than active assaults. Your perception of reality is systematically questioned, your feelings
denied, your worth undermined. The invisible chains of psychological dominance are forged
slowly, gradually. The dominant person establishes the terms of the interaction and builds
dominance by many means. Some of those include the following: (1) he alternates kindness
and abuse --intermittent friendliness erases the memory of upsetting behavior (2) he
controls inter-personal communication and decides on acceptable subjects to discuss,
ignoring questions he does not care to address (3) he allows no validation of your
experience of doubt, fear, or anger with him (4) he manipulates feelings if confronted,
primarily by focusing on what‟s wrong with you (5) he displays indifference, disrespect, and
disregard toward you in the guise of being above such petty, mechanical concerns (6) he
disregards or discounts any hurt feelings you might have and (7) he maintains emotional
distance in the name of being a “higher” man.
After the first few years, the leader controlled virtually all interactions we had with him, and
he became more and more inaccessible. When he did invite you to be with him, he
determined when you would speak. You might ask him a question, such as “How do you
deal with anger?” or “Why don‟t you invite women to the symposiums?” And he would
answer with, “Look at the beautiful irises Joan has arranged for the table,” or “How is your
mother?” These diversions would be read as ways to bring you back to the present, away
from abstract intellectualizing. In fact, they effectively silenced doubts and concerns.
Control of speech. The first exercise anyone experienced was introduced at the
prospective student meetings and involved eliminating certain words from your vocabulary.
The words changed over time, but for many years included all contractions, and the word I.
The ability to speak while eliminating these words was supposedly a sign of consciousness,
or, at least, a kind of divided attention we attempted to cultivate. If, while speaking, you
uttered one of the words, another student would make a hand signal to alert you to your
“sleep.” This exercise threw prospective students off, minimized their ability to express
themselves, and at the same time showed them one method for awakening from the “sleep”
of ordinary awareness. Since “no gossip” was a task, the subjects of our conversations were
also limited. The formidable exercise of not expressing negative emotions was another
bulwark of the practices that curtailed our speech.
Control of dining. The leader selected the menus, often elaborate, for the group‟s dining
hall. He preferred fine dining with china, silver, flowers, and four-course meals. He gave
explicit instructions on how to eat, including the mechanics of holding the utensils, and he
put people on diets if he thought they needed to lose weight.
Control of clothing. Women were asked to stop wearing pants and wear only skirts or
dresses. He liked to purchase clothing for both men and women as part of the intermittent
