Reach Approach & the Brahma Kumaris

for ex-BKs to discuss matters related to experiences in BKWSU & after leaving.
  • Message
  • Author
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10472
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Reach Approach & the Brahma Kumaris

Post25 May 2011

For me, the other elements I would be questioning is
    a) within what context or school are these individuals practising? (It is not clear stated at all).
    b) how integrated are these individuals themselves actually?
By the latter, I mean, say someone comes to them with issues regarding sex and relationships, I would say a BK has to say, "sex is poison, all relationships are bad for you, be celebrate, remember God and all your problems will go away" (... ho, ho, ho).

Do they do into sex and relationships with the client, allow the client to make their own decisions and carry on their life; or do they subtly push Brahma Kumarism?

If they subtly push Brahma Kumarism, what they are doing is wrong by a therapeutic point of view; if they encourage happy, healthy sex and relationships, what they are doing is wrong by a Brahma Kumari point of view (which is their core defining essence). If you are working against your core defining essence, then surely you are someone that is cut off, cut up and not at all integrated? Does it not make them cut off or cut up inside?

I mean, what would Dr Freud make of the images of wriggle sperm and latent eggs that crop up on the website often?

Now, Brahma Kumarism gives good training, or a good front, to would be therapists, e.g. patience to sit there and listen, emotional detachment, some introspection, loving attitude (perhaps) etc. Does it make for real therapy?

I baulk at the very first premise, "Three Aspects Of Consciousness ... self, other, loving detachment. The paradox of each position can at first appear to muddy the waters but on closer inspection it is possible to see that how each aspect of consciousness behaves is entirely dependent on whether there is order, balance and harmony."

I get this sense of whooshy expansiveness which is great for conning people with ... a grand theory of everything ... and a whole lot of verbiage that really does not mean anything. I am damned sure would not pass peer review if ever it was presented. I mean, OK, what does he really know about any of the traditions he is talking about? A "few" ... !?! You mean there are more??? Like plumbing, electrical engineering and a bit of DIY too? He must really be the Master Ocean of Knowledge.
PHILOSOPHY & APPROACH

The Three Aspects Of Consciousness ... self, other, loving detachment.

Our model and approach is about the clarity and insight that is born from the interactions between biology, sociology, psychology, geography, philosophy, history, physics, religion, art, literature and metaphysics to name a few. These disciplines can, and often do, stand alone but they are infinitely more powerful and helpful to the human experience when allied to one another. "The whole is truly greater than the sum of its parts" and this site is a small attempt to lead the mind in that direction.

Given the enormity of our site and the multidimensional nature of our model, one could be forgiven for thinking our approach and methods are complicated. Nothing could be further from the truth. Our philosophy is clear, simple and has many layers and in order to do it justice we have tried to demonstrate its depth and diversity across the site. However, our primary concern is to meet the varied needs of those looking for positive change in their lives and so to that end we have simplified our message for those who may feel overwhelmed by the magnitutde of the content on the site and have created 'The Reach Approach In A Nutshell'.

jann

friends or family of a BK

  • Posts: 1227
  • Joined: 29 Jan 2007
  • Location: europe

Re: Reach Approach & the Brahma Kumaris

Post26 May 2011

Perfect deception! Anyone would go for that.

alanna

friends or family of a BK

  • Posts: 41
  • Joined: 17 May 2008

Re: Reach Approach & the Brahma Kumaris

Post28 May 2011

Hi ex-l,

I haven't posted here for quite some time as I have been working a lot of things out regarding my BK experience, which I will share with you all soon.

I wanted to reply to this though, as last year (well, Xmas 2009-Jan 2010) I saw a Reach Approach counsellor so can offer some insight. The counsellor is BK insofar as she believes in Baba and The Knowledge, but she recognises there are significant problems with the organisation, that it has really harmed people and agrees with me that children should not be subject to the teachings. I don't think she went to morning class etc. She just did her own thing with The Knowledge. I think Easton is a BK.

As far as I can tell from my limited exposure, Reach offer a bit of a one size fits all approach to counselling, which includes the four key stages set out on their website: Life Map Work, Hall of Shame, Dark Room Work and Lifestyle (see more here). Life map work just involves going over you life and discussing it - talk therapy really - and I found this stage helpful. However, the counsellor also recorded some "deep relaxations" with me, designed to prepare me for change and learn to love myself. I recognise now that these were hypnotism, and my current (cult expert) counsellor has listened to them with me and confirmed as much.

The script for these deep relaxations was prepared by the counsellor and I did not read it before she did a live recording with me, so I was in a hypnotic state when I first heard them, and I always fell asleep/drifted off when I listened back to them at home. So she was completely in control of the process and the ideas that were going into my head in that state - clearly this is not the way therapeutic hypnotism should be conducted.

We only did 2 (I think there were 4 in the series) and they were fairly innocuous on the surface, but included BK trigger words and what my current counsellor views as potentially dangerous ideas along the lines of "no matter how hard this [process] gets, I will carry on with it because the fact that it's hard means it is the right thing to be doing". A few weeks into the deep relaxation process I decided I did not want to carry on working with Reach because much as I believed - and still believe - that the counsellor's heart was in the right place and she really did want to help me, I felt I couldn't trust her because she was a BK.

I am incredibly glad I came to this decision. Listening back to the tapes, reading the articles on their website and seeing the BK-inspired logo (all of which I discussed with my current counsellor), I am very concerned that the Reach view of a whole, happy, healthy person may be modelled on the BK idea of a whole, happy healthy person, and it was this very model that caused my depression and suicidal feelings. It seems like they have a set idea of where a person should be and what they should be like when they are "healed" and this ignores the client's individuality, needs and right to determine their own path and identity.

It scares me a bit to think what might have happened to me if I had carried on with the Reach Approach - particularly if we had got to the "Dark Room" stage where the counsellor would have been "in the driving seat". I am also shocked at myself for just going along with the deep relaxation and being so trusting, not asking critical questions etc., but the counsellor was so nice and did have some genuinely useful insights during the talk therapy stage, so guess I just carried on based on that. But as we all know, that's how they get you ;-).

So I do think Reach has a BK agenda. I was told all the counsellors have been through the process themselves before they start helping others through it, and this means they really believe it works and they genuinely think it can help others. But counsellors shouldn't be steering clients towards a goal that has been pre-defined without the client's input, particularly when said counsellor is a member of a cult! (Although I am not sure if all the counsellors are BKs.) Of course I am only basing all this on one limited experience and my own subjective conclusions, but my current counsellor is very concerned about their practice.

In terms of Reach being a counselling service for BKs, I know someone at my old centre had problems with depression etc. and he went to them and is now better, but of course still a BK. I decided to give it a go as I thought it would be useful to speak with an insider who understood the BKs, but I now think I had a lucky escape, and what I actually needed was someone who could give me an outsider's view and who understood cults. I also know that my counsellor had at least one other BK/ex-BK client. One could potentially view them as a re-programming course for troubled BKs, but I really don't have enough information or experience with them to come to that conclusion.

Hope this helps.

If anyone does want some specialist post-cult counselling, I very much recommend http://www.hopevalleycounselling.com.
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10472
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Reach Approach & the Brahma Kumaris

Post29 May 2011

I looked at the site again and am becoming more critical of its amateurishness, commercialism ... and lack of mention of direct BK connections, e.g. "For over 20 years we’ve built a library of products and resources which respond in very precise and creative ways to the needs of the human condition ... Reach began its unique way of working in 1990. Since that time we have touched literally thousands of people’s lives through our individual work, work with couples, families, groups and countless workshops." Is the 20 year period including Brahma Kumari adherence and including work done as Brahma Kumari "service" like other BK business ventures? From a BK point of view, surely to take from Baba and resell it as a product is prostitution ... or "Copper Age merchant behaviour"?

What gets me even more is that the Bibliography, is actually a reseller's account for Amazon. Click on a book he has ready and he get a percentage off the sakle from Amazon.com. That is a book shop, not a bibliography.

And where is the simple 'who I am' and what my credentials are? The splurge of content seems quite new agey and a lot of new agey therapies (and charismatic religions) are based on creating "false confidences". A state of mind where the individual is encourage to believe they are better/healed etc when in fact they are unchanged. A temporary high often based on an overloading of information, jargon, enthusiasm that burst like a bubble after the invoice is paid. I don't know Easton's work and don't comment directly on it but the site looks more like a shop than that of a therapeutic association ... and the involvement and lack of disclosure of the Brahma Kumarism is concerning.

We know the evolution of these "meditation/hypnosis" commentary tapes.
alanna wrote:I wanted to reply to this though, as last year (well, Xmas 2009-Jan 2010) I saw a Reach Approach counsellor so can offer some insight. The counsellor is BK insofar as she believes in Baba and The Knowledge, but she ... just did her own thing with The Knowledge.

As far as I can tell from my limited exposure, Reach offer a bit of a one size fits all approach to counselling.

I very much recommend http://www.hopevalleycounselling.com.

Interesting ... it sounds more like a mix of coaching and hypnosis rather than "counselling". My bells would ring if the person doing my therapy was an individual of their own authority with no connection to any particular school ... let along being a paid up member of a cult like the BKWSU. I appreciate that many good people just get duped into and hooked by the BKs but, frankly, anyone without any integrity and personal resolution would have to leave the BKWSU as they woke up. The BKWSU resists reality and the whole unresolved area of "it is meditation or is it hypnosis" encouraging the disabling of the intellect is not right.

I'd be concerned about whether "personal development" and "growth" ...
Every member of the team has undergone his/her own therapy and has an ongoing commitment to personal development.

... means Brahma Kumarism. The idea of BKs having therapy is great ... but what happens when their therapy makes them realise that BK-dom is bollocks and it is time to leave? How can one "believe in Baba and The Knowledge" and then not follow it as it is as a failure or a half-BK?

And then there is ...
The name Reach is now a registered trademark. Our registration applies to the work we do in all aspects of mental health and personal development. It also covers all the materials, products and resources we've produced and will continue to develop in the future. The reason we acquired a trademark for our work and products is although we are very happy for our materials and resources to be used for the benefit of all, there have sadly been some misuses and misrepresentations of our name and our work over the last 20 years. It is for this reason that we sought legal protection. This will not change our philosophy and approach - we will continue to make the majority of the things we produce freely accessible to all. We also want those products and services where we do charge a modest fee to continue to be used in beneficial ways by third parties. However, we now reserve the right within law to deal with any abuses and misrepresentations as is appropriate. Obviously we hope such instances are now a thing of the past and so it will not be necessary to enforce trademark law.

Is it "our work" or "Baba's work"? His work or BK service work? ... And he is basically ripping off the BKWSU's "Baba" trademark ... which the Trademark Office won't know ... so how ethically - ESPECIALLY FROM A BK POINT OF VIEW - can he claim the right to threaten others? He has trademarked the BK God.

I see Hope Valley are also attempting to do something charitable with Encourage Cult Survivors.
User avatar

Mr Green

ex-BK

  • Posts: 1877
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Reach Approach & the Brahma Kumaris

Post29 May 2011

I am going to make some inquiries into this, I think I might know someone involved.

You have to remember ex-l, to a BK everything is Baba's work, even going to the loo can be done in remembrance.
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10472
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Reach Approach & the Brahma Kumaris

Post29 May 2011

I agree ... but in my day "my wallet was Baba's wallet".

These days it seems to be, "Baba's wallet, is my wallet". They are all dipping into the old man's business.

Of course, that is the true religion of the Seniors and one that they have clearly been doing since Lekhraj Kripalani, and his secret financiers, died off. They turn god into a business. These neo-BKs are just doing the same within the Western context; counselling, coaching, spiritual business consulting. There is not so much money in religion in the West and the Christians have mostly got it all sewn up, so they have to "follow the money and seek the gold where it is found elsewhere.

I once literally got told that if I had the consciousness, "my wallet" then I was letting Baba down and would fail to earn my Golden Age inheritance. Everything had to be "Baba's". Baba, Baba, Baba ... Baba's wallet.

Of course by "Baba's", they really meant "the BWSU's wallet" ... and who is the BKWSU? That is what I still want to know. If there is a God, he, she or it certainly does not need anyone's money.

Amazing the crap they tried to fill my mind with.

Mike26

  • Posts: 52
  • Joined: 26 Apr 2011

Re: Reach Approach & the Brahma Kumaris

Post30 May 2011

I am grateful to those on this sight who have been scrutinizing the reach approach web-site in greater depth. I am especially grateful to Alanna who has been brave enough and considerate enough to share her experience with them.

Alanna's account mirrors very closely that of my two friends whose own concerns prompted me to raise the issue in the first place. This information combined raises my concerns further - especially for members of the public who are made vulnerable through a lack of awareness about the organisation and are open to the seductive influence of the pseudo-psychology contained on their web-site, and no doubt to the deceptive charm of their practitioners.

A couple of ex-bks have given me a few more snippets of information about Mr Hamilton. His organisation has done extremely well financially out of his venture over the last 20 years, enough to buy a large house in the North of Birmingham, and then a move to a much more expensive one in Sutton Coldfield. He was, and perhaps still is, earning thousands a month from his work seeing dozens of clients each week. He is definitely a committed BK and considers himself an authority on a variety of subjects, including diet and nutrition, psychotherapeutic approaches, medicine, neurology etc, and claims to have conducted heavy research into these areas for many years.

The success of his organization clearly advertises how persuasive his methods are to a public made gullible through lack of awareness. He has travelled widely delivering workshops based on his approach and his clients come to see him from a variety of countries. He appears to advertise these facts as evidence for the benefits of his methods.

I am sure he could be ready, based on the comments on the web-site, to use legal mechanisms to counter what might be considered any form of libel or mis-representation concerning him or his approach. This is rich coming from people who are deliberately deceiving their clients about the true source or basis of their counselling work - BK teachings. I know one person who works in the area of clinical psychology who, during a recent discussion with me about therapy, mentioned his name and described him as a 'transpersonal therapist'. This person clearly knew nothing about his links to BKWSU.

Transpersonal therapists are therapists whose approach to counselling is often based on spiritual ideas and philosophies such as Psychosynthesis pioneered by the Italian Psychiatrist Roberto Assagioli. Seems to me that these people are adept at co-opting and borrowing various psychological and scientific terms to provide their approach with the ring of credibility. It is not a new practice as we all know.

But now that we are pretty sure this organisation is a front for BK work, what can we do beyond discussing it on this site to protect people - to protect the public? I mean what we have discussed so far is extremely valid, and helps ex-bks avoid this organisation, but I imagine the larger majority of their client's come from the mass of unsuspecting public. What can we do, and should we do anything? I am just throwing this point out but already see this might be a difficult step in terms of viability.
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10472
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Reach Approach & the Brahma Kumaris

Post30 May 2011

I would say the reality is there is very little we can do ... unless an individual who has suffered is willing to come forward.

On the outset, strangely enough, the first place to start might be as simple as,
    a) whichever body of therapists they belong to, and
    b) the local trading standards office
    c) Letters to a few related counselling and therapy journals/newsletters might also forward the discussion positively.
... but be warned that the BKs on the whole operate in such a comfortably grey area, not carrying out any significant enough crime or injury, and operate such successful 'charm offensives', that they usually escape any such complaints.

If there is evidence that they are using the therapy to recruit for the cult then I think you will have a clear case with any legitimate organisation.

I fear the issue is largely a moral one within the community ... and it is paradoxical that ex-BKs care about and operate at a far higher concept of morality than BKs whose practise, in my opinion, empowers them to act ambiguously and deceptively. It used to "absolutely against the rules" to use The Knowledge or BK community to make money. Now it seems to be respected.

It is not something that I have looked at for some time but the UK Government is current proposing the regulation of therapists to protect their clients from abuse and exploitation is coming into act this year. There is also a charity set up to check abuse by such individuals called Witness who might be able to advise. "Counselling" I think is an even looser thing than therapy.

If this is as you say, it sounds very much like the whole Brian Bacon affair all over again. He was the guy behind the Self Management Leadership thing which, while it might be perfectly beneficial in its own right, was all tangled up with both Brahma Kumarism and using the Brahma Kumari movement as both test cases, recruitment area, self evangelism and so on. They cherry picked their way through the top Western BKs, creating a business for them and one with a revolving door between the BKs and his interests. In a sense, using the BKs as much as the BKs were using him.

Believe it or not, my objections were from a BK point of view. The Marayadas (principles) are/were "no business chat in the Yagya" ... we were there for "God's work" only. These people are, in essence, exploiting the Brahma Kumari movement for their own business and financial (and egoist) interests. Presumably they are left alone to do it as long as they are "serviceable" ... and financially support the Sisters. It is unfair for their to be one rule for the geese and one for the ganders ... and if they are helping some BKs become wealthy, they should be helping all BKs.

Just out of interest ... if the End of the World is coming, why has he bought an expensive home?

This to me suggest a disjointed spirit.

alanna

friends or family of a BK

  • Posts: 41
  • Joined: 17 May 2008

Re: Reach Approach & the Brahma Kumaris

Post02 Jun 2011

Mike86 - I sent you a private message about this as I am not sure who might be reading!
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10472
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Reach Approach & the Brahma Kumaris

Post03 Jun 2011

You can guess that some BK snoops are reading, recording and passing messages about.

Not all BKs are snoops, and not many read here, but may be one day we will be lucky and a really good persons who is also pro-BK will come along and do something about it all. I doubt they will change the system though.

Mike26

  • Posts: 52
  • Joined: 26 Apr 2011

Re: Is the Reach Approach a BK related con?

Post04 Jun 2011

Have responded to your message Alanna

Kind wishes
User avatar

Mr Green

ex-BK

  • Posts: 1877
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Reach Approach & the Brahma Kumaris

Post14 Jun 2011

I have to make it clear, this is not the same Easton who does painting and handywork at GCH, who sings a very good Bob Marley by the way. I've made music with him.

This guy is from up North apparently.

Enigma

  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2011

Re: Reach Approach & the Brahma Kumaris - response to defama

Post18 Feb 2012

To those interested in another point of view!

Having quietly endured, over the last 20+ years, a constant trickle of defamation, I had decided when this latest set of misrepresentations was put in front of me to just ignore it, which is what I have chosen to do up to now. For those who are reading this I certainly will not be engaging in further dialogue on this matter, I am simply putting this information forward for those who genuinely are interested in making their own minds up based on the facts. Therefore this will be my first and last entry.

I find it ironic that those who claim to be interested in the truth are busy speaking about things they know little about. I've seen my name (Easton Hamilton) repeatedly associated with a whole series of statements that aren't even true. The various authors and commentators speaking about me and the Reach Approach clearly are drawing their conclusions from rumours and assumptions. It's interesting to note that the comments made are not based on individuals having any significant or meaningful relationship with me, nor has my point of view and experience been sought at any time. This is obvious because the comments made about me, especially my connection and involvement in the BKs, are simply not accurate. Most of the historical references are incorrect; dates, activities and what I am alleged to have done.

It makes me wonder that if the real purpose is to establish truth why are those commentating on me and my work doing so from a place of assumption, rumour and ignorance? There were so many factual inaccuracies that it read like a piece of fiction, the only problem being that me and my work are being defamed in the process. As I said this has long been the case, but this particular rendition was so arrogantly presented that it was clear this was not about truth but about destruction of truth ... and for whatever reason, a personal assassination of me. I would ask those behind this to really look into their hearts and ask themselves why are they even doing this?

What I've learned is that there is no point, when individuals have made up their minds, trying to change their point of view, so I have no interest in trying to do that. What I hope is that those who are sufficiently open-minded will take some of the following facts and comments into consideration before condemning Reach, its work and myself.

Firstly, the whole condemnation of the Reach Approach is based on a flawed premise. Again and again in the documents given to me there is repeated reference to the clandestine links between BKism and the Reach Approach. This simply is not true! Reach has a counselling and psychotherapeutic tradition but we equally speak of the need for a spiritual component to human life because we believe that a holistic approach is the only thing that really works. Hence our repeated references to the mind, body, spirit and environment (see The Story of Health). This is not Raja Yoga by another name!

It's worth pointing out that many in the Brahmin family are busy condemning Reach and its work too. They in fact describe it as aspiritual because it is not considered to have enough of a spiritual message at its core. Now, in this forum, Reach is being accused of being a 'con', using its platform to spread BK teachings. So which is it? Both positions can’t be true. Contrary to the propaganda promoted in this forum and elsewhere, Reach has no affiliations with the Brahma Kumaris whatsoever. As I have just pointed out, some of the biggest critics of both myself and my work are in fact BKs so rather than taking selected bits of information and moulding it to your arguments, why not try looking at the facts? For a group claiming to be interested in the truth in order presumably to steer people's minds onto a better course, you need to be careful that your claims and misrepresentations aren't in fact doing what you say you're trying to prevent!

For those of you who are interested, here are some of the facts ...
    1. In all the disciplines that we practise, whether that be counselling, hypnotherapy, diet and nutrition, clinical supervision etc., all our practitioners are appropriately qualified and accredited. For the sake of clarity, with everything we do we provide handouts so that there's no ambiguity about our methods and the process. This practice is not required of us by the profession or the various bodies we're affiliated to and regulated by. This is something we passionately believe in so that the individual at every stage knows what we're doing and why we're doing it. So the idea that someone is ever led blindly through the process, not knowing what to expect, is simply false.

    We have over 500 handouts that relate to every aspect of our work to ensure no misunderstandings. Everything we do has been properly researched and leaves the individual to make up his/her own mind. So for those of you making threats and who want to report our activities to the appropriate governing bodies, trading standards etc. please go ahead because our activities are sound and our conscience is clear. We are part of the most regulated and audited profession and we know we are acting within the various codes of conduct we are bound by, and do not fear any scrutiny of, or question about our professionalism.

    2. There are 64 Reach practitioners and only 3 of them have ever had anything to do with the Brahma Kumaris, so if the BKs are running this they're not doing a very good job. I should point out that I am not ashamed of my past association with the Brahma Kumaris as there is much that I have learned from that path, nor do I have any anger or regrets. I've learned that all experience has benefit if we choose to look for it. For those of you who have really studied my work you will see the evidence of much more than Raja Yoga in the things I've produced. Repeatedly I speak of synergy and the answers being rarely found in one place, so rather than condemning me from a place of ignorance please note, you will find evidence of Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Shintoism, Christianity, Taoism, and much more reflected in my writings and The Reach Approach generally.

    Most of the short-sighted views and defamatory comments I've read expose the fact that those reporting on these matters are too wounded and angry to see the truly multi-factorial nature of The Reach Approach; it is not Raja Yoga by another name. It includes topics and subjects that are rarely ever discussed in the BK world. Maybe it's because I have no axe to grind, and am not looking to assassinate anyone that my past allegiance with the BKs is being misrepresented to fit with someone else's agenda.

    I could say more on the subject of my involvement with the BKs but I think it is irrelevant and anyway those commenting on me don't seem to be really interested in the facts because any independent minded person would clearly see that the Reach Approach is not an organisation striving to lure individuals into BK centres around the globe. We clearly have two different agendas.

    3. Furthermore, the fundamental philosophies of the Reach Approach are in most cases at odds with Raja Yoga. For some of the best examples of this, read: Persuading the Body, All You Need to Know, N.O.S.E., our material on Shame Work and other documents which outline the general principle that until you name and own your stuff, resolution of your issues is unlikely. None of these are Raja Yoga teachings or Brahmin principles. This is a model that prides itself on turning and facing the past, developing a more honest and healthy relationship with the body and in a safe sensitive way facing your demons in order to be free of them.... and does not reflect the teachings of Raja Yoga at all! To the contrary, it is at odds with some of its core ideology, such as 'past is past' and 'forget the body'. Once again if BKism is supposed to be behind this approach, then it's not doing a very good job of promoting its own philosophy! When does that Institution ever speak of orthomolecuar medicine, PNI, neuropsychology, diet and nutrition, the role and importance of water, psychodynamic therapy, existentialism, hypnotherapy etc?

    4. There is also repeated reference to me being a Guru figure, and making a lot of money out of what I am doing. This was the most hilarious bit, mainly because in Reach's 22 year history it has made very little money, in fact most of the earnings have simply been re-cycled back into the project. Furthermore, 85% of what has been produced is given freely. 20% of the clients who come for help pay nothing at all, and a further 10% pay very little; I am clearly not a successful Guru as I have little money, a mortgage, an overdraft and no following to speak of! So much of what comes my way are criticisms, generally from people who know nothing about me and yet deem themselves qualified to comment on my motives and actions.

    There was also a reference to me living in a large house in the north of Birmingham. I was not aware that a three-bedroom semi detached house with a two bedroom flat attached (which I work in) constituted a large house. In fact I have downsized in terms of where I live and the additional space exists purely for my work. Anyway what has where I live got to do with anything, what does it prove? I suppose it's more propaganda to support those who have already made their minds up about what is really going on. It allows them to live more comfortably with their delusions.

    5. Another 'grasping at straws' moment, is the reference to the Reach trademark having a suspiciously BK tinge about it, as well as the reference to 'folks in white on hill tops' and references to the Oxford Retreat centre and Casa Sangam in Italy. These remarks are desperate; it's as if the people quoting this stuff are on some crucifixion mission. Thank goodness you are not my judge and jury! The Reach trademark is no more than what you see. You can obviously make it into whatever you want to, but it was designed by a child and we loved the feel of it.

    As for the retreat centres, I have no problem featuring them on our site as you will notice there are many others, and all these centres are featured because there is consistently good feed-back that comes from those who attend them. I made it clear earlier, I am not anti the Brahmin family - that is clearly your agenda - I am interested in helping individuals make up their own minds about what is truth, and so I am busy opening doors rather than closing them. As for ‘folks sitting on top of mountains dressed in white’, I think I found two examples of this and what does this prove anyway? ... I have no problem with people sitting on mountains in white.

    6. As for those examples given where individuals have had weird experiences of someone trying to persuade them to look at a point of light and become a vegetarian I simply cannot comment, this is not something I have ever done or would ever do. Although I am the Director of Reach and proud to be so, I cannot control every conversation and interaction someone has with another, but given, as I have said, nearly all our practitioners have no knowledge of or interest in Raja Yoga, these accounts make no sense to me and if I were to find anyone engaging in such practices, their association to the organisation would be terminated; we are not interested in brain washing.

    7. Nearly everything within the Reach Approach, should you take the time to study it, predates the Brahma Kumaris teachings. For your own reference look at the work of Confucius, Buddha, Mahavira, Lao Tzu, Plato, Socrates, Dai Zhen, Tagore, Christ, Aurobindo, Bhattacharyya, Rabi'a, Radhakrishnan, Badarayana, Mo Tzu, Shah Wali Allah ... the list literally goes on and on. So please stop talking as if my work simply reflects the BKs and Raja Yoga teachings when so much of what I have written comes from just about every doctrine imaginable and has crossed all the racial, cultural and social divides. Furthermore for those interested you'll also find: TA, Gestalt, Existentialism, Person Centred Therapy, Psychoanalysis, Transpersonal Psychology, Neuroscience, to name a few, integrated into our model.

    Our philosophy and approach is quite deliberately global in its referencing. Again further proof that we believe in synergy. My interests and study of the human condition and psychology began in 1978 before I ever made contact with the BKs and that interest, study and research has never abated. To suggest I need to be 'de-educated' presumably to reclaim my mind is nonsensical ... I should point out I never lost mine which is why my independence of thought and individuality seems to have caused so many problems for me over the years.

    8. In the creation and development of the Reach model I've gone to great lengths to encourage people to remember the message not the messenger. I've written repeatedly that those who become students of history will see clearly that when the messenger is remembered the message is nearly always forgotten and so I have no interest in being the focal point of anyone's attentions because I want the messages to be remembered. This is why I am not plastered all over our website and the many things I've produced do not bear my name. The puny references to my having an ego needing to be fed by such adoration, again illustrates an incomplete understanding of my nature, my work and practices. The suggestion that this is a personality cult centred around me bears no resemblance to what is actually happening on the ground, as I do indeed have a wonderful platform that I could be exploiting for my own ends and clearly choose not to.
Summary

Please make your minds up, what am I and the Reach Approach being accused of? Taking Raja Yoga and prostituting it for my own ends, or running a clandestine operation for the Brahma Kumaris? Again and again in the commentaries speculation in support of both positions has been quoted with certainty, using speech marks and words like 'definitely'. This is both sad and disturbing. Your collective anger is about how the BKs have damaged you and yet you don't seem to mind perpetuating the same crime - as you're busy casting aspersions on me and an organisation that has busied itself making a positive difference to so many lives.

One thing for sure is that I won't be posting any further comments or reading any more of this propaganda whether it's presented to me or not because I've learned over the years that you cannot have a dialogue with people who've already made up their minds and so think they are right. What I do urge you all to consider though is what damage you're doing. History is littered with people falsely accused ... and only after they’ve been condemned have people realised they were wrong! You need to be careful that you don’t become guilty of the same crime.

If you take a close look at the Reach Approach you'll see that we're simply presenting people with options and choices ... they can then decide for themselves whether it fits with their understanding and experience. We have no interest whatsoever in people going against their own desire and conscience. We actively promote the opposite ... personal responsibility and autonomy! Given that you clearly don't understand what the Reach Approach is about, what qualifies you to comment on and decide whether it is beneficial for another?

Finally, what qualifies anyone to speak about the nature of my intentions? It's the ultimate in arrogance to comment on anyone's reasons and motives for doing anything without ever actually speaking to them!!! How would you like your motives and intentions to be judged and commented on, with your point of view never being sought? I think you should all be aware of the poisoned chalice that you're passing between yourselves.

From where I am sitting, your self-righteousness is no better than what you think is worthy of your condemnation. I sincerely hope these Chinese whispers will cease so the misrepresentation does not stop those who are genuinely in need of finding a resource that can actually bring them relief.

Easton Hamilton (February 2012)
User avatar

Mr Green

ex-BK

  • Posts: 1877
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Reach Approach & the Brahma Kumaris

Post18 Feb 2012

Funny thing is you are judging others motives and intentions right here, but never mind, and 20+ years of defamation? Not from the people here. Maybe you should direct your anger where it belongs.

I've heard good things about the Reach project, so good luck with it Easton.
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10472
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Reach Approach & the Brahma Kumaris - response to defama

Post18 Feb 2012

Enigma wrote:I should point out that I am not ashamed of my past association with the Brahma Kumaris

I am glad to read "Reach Approach is not an organisation striving to lure individuals into BK centres". I think that would be unethical.

    By "my past association with the Brahma Kumaris" are we to understand that you are now an ex-BK and have left the BKWSU?

    Is it a past or current association?

It is a bit of a shame for 'Enigma' to run into the forum, throw his stone, and then runaway again after. I'd be interested to read what he, as a therapist, makes of the BKWSU, its historical and philosophical revision, and all the recent revelations?

I'd also be interested to read his informed analysis of the BK leadership, and his experience within the community. It strikes me he is as much a victim as we were and has had his difficult times.

No such "documents" exist to given to anyone, except of this open discussion here. It is easy to say, "it is all false" and then run off in a blur. It would be far better to untangle the confusion and have it corrected.

Enigma wrote:The Reach trademark is no more than what you see. You can obviously make it into whatever you want to

Unarguably it is a BKWSU's Shiva Baba ... unless you wish to argue that what the BKWSU sees as Shiva Baba is actually something else!

    What's your relationship with the god of the BKs now, Enigma?
    Do you buy into Destruction and the whole 5,000 Year thing?

I am sure Enigma is mature enough to understand why ex-members would assume and be concerned about any BK connection, given their modus operandi. Anyone that has stuck around the BKs for a while knows how they work but few to none knew all we have dug out since leaving.

He could add to everyone's understanding of the BKWSU giving us his insights ... if he cared.
PreviousNext

Return to Commonroom