A review of "The J.R. Controversy: A Critical Analysis of John-Roger Hinkins and MSIA"
David Christopher Lane is a professor of philosophy
and lecturer in religious studies, based in California. He is probably mostly
known as the guy who constantly bashes Ken Wilber over evolution at Frank
Visser's site Integral World. A trait I find sympathetic is that Lane is
opposed to religious sects or cults, while many other scholars of religion
defend them (J Gordon Melton comes to mind). More annoying is his dogmatic
skepticism, but if you think CSICOP rocks, you might find this side of Lane
congenial, too. Since he is a former supporter of the “Radhasoami” tradition
within Hinduism and Sikhism, I suppose you could say that he has experience from
both sides of the fence…
This Kindle book contains a short piece Lane wrote in 1983, plus a recent postscript. Lane was investigating a number of new religious movements in California, and eventually reached the conclusion that John-Roger Hinkins' group MSIA was a dangerous cult. At the time, Lane was still positive towards the Radhasoami and Wilber, and actually uses arguments mined from their writings to disprove John-Roger's guruship. In a way, this is perhaps a better critique of a cult than the skeptical “they must be crazy for being religious in the first place”, since it attacks the cult on its own turf, so to speak. Thus, Lane points out that John-Roger (who claimed initiation into the Radhasoami tradition) doesn't fulfill the tradition's own criteria for mastership – in fact, he doesn't even come close. Lane quotes his favorite Radhasoami teacher, Faqir Chand, to prove that whatever spiritual benefits the disciples may have gotten from John-Roger really comes from their own efforts (or perhaps their own higher selves). He also uses more “secular” arguments, pointing out that MSIA's message (which claims to be unique) is really a plagiarism of Paul Twitchell's Eckankar, including on points where Twitchell differs from the Radhasoami tradition and hence used his own creative imagination.
Lane claims to have been harassed and threatened by John-Roger's group after his exposé of the cultic practices (which supposedly included corruption, business malpractice and coerced homosexual relationships). Dissident members were expelled, threatened with law suits and accused of succumbing to “the Red Monk”, MSIA's curious term for the negative consciousness pervading the lower realms of the cosmos (in effect, the “devil” of their system). He ends on a pessimistic note, since MSIA became more popular after the exposure than it had ever been before, thus making Lane the cult-buster the inadvertent cause for MSIA's international growth! I agree that this doesn't speak well for the rationality of humanity, or at least certain sub-sets of it…
“The J R Controversy” is only an appetizer, and those interested in the controversy can probably find more meaty material on the web, free of charge. Still, it's not a bad text, so I give it three stars.
This Kindle book contains a short piece Lane wrote in 1983, plus a recent postscript. Lane was investigating a number of new religious movements in California, and eventually reached the conclusion that John-Roger Hinkins' group MSIA was a dangerous cult. At the time, Lane was still positive towards the Radhasoami and Wilber, and actually uses arguments mined from their writings to disprove John-Roger's guruship. In a way, this is perhaps a better critique of a cult than the skeptical “they must be crazy for being religious in the first place”, since it attacks the cult on its own turf, so to speak. Thus, Lane points out that John-Roger (who claimed initiation into the Radhasoami tradition) doesn't fulfill the tradition's own criteria for mastership – in fact, he doesn't even come close. Lane quotes his favorite Radhasoami teacher, Faqir Chand, to prove that whatever spiritual benefits the disciples may have gotten from John-Roger really comes from their own efforts (or perhaps their own higher selves). He also uses more “secular” arguments, pointing out that MSIA's message (which claims to be unique) is really a plagiarism of Paul Twitchell's Eckankar, including on points where Twitchell differs from the Radhasoami tradition and hence used his own creative imagination.
Lane claims to have been harassed and threatened by John-Roger's group after his exposé of the cultic practices (which supposedly included corruption, business malpractice and coerced homosexual relationships). Dissident members were expelled, threatened with law suits and accused of succumbing to “the Red Monk”, MSIA's curious term for the negative consciousness pervading the lower realms of the cosmos (in effect, the “devil” of their system). He ends on a pessimistic note, since MSIA became more popular after the exposure than it had ever been before, thus making Lane the cult-buster the inadvertent cause for MSIA's international growth! I agree that this doesn't speak well for the rationality of humanity, or at least certain sub-sets of it…
“The J R Controversy” is only an appetizer, and those interested in the controversy can probably find more meaty material on the web, free of charge. Still, it's not a bad text, so I give it three stars.
No comments:
Post a Comment