Who is that man behind the curtain?
Who was "Maharishi Mahesh Yogi"? I think that he was an incredibly brilliant impostor, and very probably much worse.
"Mahesh" is a personal name. There is nothing spectacular there. However, the "Maharishi" part means (roughly) "Great Seer of Truth." It is absolutely the highest title in Hinduism, which he awarded to himself. The "Yogi" part, implying experience and knowledge of yoga disciplines, was also self-awarded. Both titles are undeserved based on his actual background.
So I just call him "Mahesh."
If you wish to delve into Mahesh's credentials, I recommend reading the five-part article "A Visit to the Shankaracharya (search for "Shankaracharya").
Contrary to Mahesh's claims, TM is not a revived ancient wisdom (see same article).
Imagine a Catholic monk who was personal assistant to a Pope. Imagine that the Pope dies. Then a couple of years later this assistant canonizes himself a Saint and begins to teach "the revived lost secrets of Catholicism." He declares that "sainthood is easy", and can be attained with 5-8 years of daily "twenty minutes twice a day" practice of a technique involving daily eye-closed mental repetition of the words "Ave Maria."
He claimed that he was acting under the inspiration and instructions of the late Pope, who is still actively guiding him spiritually. After a few years he realizes that people are "put off" by the whole spiritual angle, so he begins to market the practice as a "simple natural relaxation technique" and membership soars. Some of those who start by learning a "simple natural relaxation technique" end up by becoming celibate monks and nuns devoting their lives to this mere assistant's teachings.
Well, that's exactly equivalent to what "Maharishi" Mahesh "Yogi" did.
Furthermore, Mahesh appeared completely uncaring, perhaps even conscienceless, about the incidence of psychological casualties among his followers. He refused to warn people that such things may occur. He did not show concern about these human casualties. Based on my own personal experiences, and on the reported experiences of others, I believe that not only was Mahesh a complete fraud, but that he was possibly intentionally or uncaringly destructive as part of quest for personal power over others.
But to the world he was also the silly giggling guru of the Beatles, and purveyor of a harmless relaxation technique.
Is all of the reconcilable in any way?
He may have been a sociopath. This is not as radical a concept as it sounds. I was told about this possibility, with particular reference to Mahesh, by Dr. Margaret Singer. She was a Professor of Psychology and a widely recognized researcher of destructive cults at the University of California at Berkeley.
There are variations in estimates of the number of sociopaths in the general population. According to the book The Sociopath Next Door, written by Dr. Martha Stout, a clinical instructor of psychology at Harvard Medical School, 4% of the population is sociopathic. The DSM-IV, places the frequency at 3% of males and 1% of females.
Any of these frequencies mean that sociopaths are quite common. Four out of every hundred people you encounter in the course of a month? Two out a hundred?
Dr. Stout describes a sociopath as someone without a trace of conscience. We don't notice the sociopaths amongst us because clearly the vast majority of this 4% (let's say) is not getting their kicks from physical violence. Only a minority turn into serial killers and such.
The vast majority get their kicks from psychological violence. They satisfy their desires by manipulating and using people, gaining power over them, and by inflicting grave psychological suffering.
They can "read" people with frightening accuracy. They are chameleons in that they can present themselves as whatever sort of person they need to be in order to manipulate and damage the person whom they have targeted. They can be extraordinarily charismatic.
They can be so charismatic that usually no one suspects them. Nobody knows what they do except for their victims. The victimization is conducted so that nobody else knows about it. And very often nobody will believe the victim, because everyone else "knows" what a wonderful person the totally unsuspected sociopath is.
And, since they are totally devoid of conscience, they are absolutely ruthless.
They make absolutely ideal cult leaders.
So was the charismatic, cheerful, giggling, harmless,
peace-loving Mahesh actually a sociopath? Having received all of my
training in psychology from books and the Internet, of course I
don't know. But Dr. Singer was a pro who specialized in studying
cults, and she thought he probably was. Considering the sum total
of his behavior, rather than just what he showed to the public, it
works for me.
