Please Support Our Courageous Investigators

Dear Friends,

The TMO is suing 13 people and two entities, but so far they’ve served papers only on the three New Zealanders and the NZ-registered entity IPMT (Institute of Professional Meditation Teachers).

The three New Zealanders are Gary Benner, Bryan Lee, and Tony Martin. Gary and Bryan are centrally involved in our investigative project, so it’s no wonder the TMO would go after them with their big guns.

Thanks to you our first target of $15,000 US has been met. It covered the preparation of their Statement of Legal Defense, submitted on March 12th. Congratulations and thanks!

Also, in legal probing they found out a lot more useful information than they expected and are feeling more empowered as a result

Now we need to set a new target of an additional $15,000 US to cover the next phase of the process, which is “Getting to Discovery.”

So far, the result of all of our collective investigative work has been the production of the powerful “Conversations in the Hive” videos, which are informing the public and rightfully causing the TMO to deal with the truth, rightfully changing the landscape in which they must operate.

Please help us make sure this important work continues. Even $20 and $50 here and there makes a tremendous difference.

The more we look into the Transcendental Meditation organization (TMO), the more we find that’s of concern. The public ought to know! There just doesn’t seem to be any end to it. And we need to know everything that is hidden because we were in it for decades and we all of us need closure.

With heartfelt gratitude for your generous support.

Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

WHO BREAKS A BUTTERFLY UPON A WHEEL?

David Laird was an executive at The Economist magazine for 30 years. Here's his take on this case:

The question was originally posed by Alexander Pope, but found wider exposure in the famous London Times editorial condemning the three-month prison sentence handed down in 1967 to Mick Jagger for possession of four amphetamine tablets. The Times argued that the punishment was out of all proportion to the offense, and questioned whether Jagger would have received the same treatment if he had not been perceived as such a prominent anti-establishment figure. I have the same question regarding the treatment currently being handed out to the targets of the recent TMO lawsuit, particularly to Bryan Lee and Gary Benner.

The TMO is claiming various offenses relating to copyright, trademarks and fair trading. The laundry list of alleged infringements extends to seven pages, ranging from copyright infringement to conspiracy by unlawful means. It is claimed that the defendants intended to damage the TMO, but no proof of intent is offered. The TMO demands both compensatory and punitive damages, but does not detail the nature and extent of any injury or losses incurred.

So: we have an excessively well-funded organisation, with well over $100m in assets, claiming damages from a handful of individuals, many of whom are living hand-to-mouth existences and none of whom is in a position to cover the enormous costs of an extended legal process. Even if they are eventually cleared of any wrongdoing, they will have endured years of legal harassment and financial pressure. The process will be their punishment.

What is striking is that a number of other individuals and organisations are currently teaching Bhavateet Dhyana (the ancient meditation currently taught by the TMO under the name Transcendental Meditation) without attracting the legal firepower of the TMO. In the UK, both the School of Meditation and the School of Philosophy and Economic Science (SPES) teach the technique, with the former explicitly stating that it was brought to the west by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. Hugh Jackman, one of the celebrities regularly referenced in TMO promotional materials, actually learned the technique at the School of Practical Philosophy, an Australian offshoot of the SPES.

In the UK, the Meditation Trust website explicitly states that it teaches Transcendental Meditation and also offers teacher training courses. In the USA, the New York Meditation Center website states: "We teach Vedic Meditation, the form of meditation that our teacher, Thom Knoles, taught for over 25 years within the Transcendental Meditation organizations." The Centre also offers retreats and advanced techniques. And there are many other examples of what Maharishi termed Transcendental Meditation being taught under different names in different countries.

The question is: why is the TMO targeting solely those Individuals associated with the Institute of Professional Meditation Teachers (IPMT) and International Teachers of Meditation Association (ITMA)? I can only assume it has something to do with the fact that Bryan Lee and Gary Benner, both founders of IPMT and former officers of ITMA, have a history of legal disputes with various TMO entities. (Both resigned their roles with ITMA in July 2022)

In 2021 Maharishi Foundation in New Zealand took legal action against Gary because he refused to give them ownership of the internet domain name he had privately registered two decades earlier. The judge dismissed the MF application and awarded Gary costs. Bryan Lee is currently involved in a legal action against leaders of the New Zealand movement to recover the funds he invested in 1997 in a property used as a TM academy. In addition, Gary and Bryan have both incurred the wrath of the TMO by drawing attention to what they and many others perceive as its multiple organisational and ethical shortcomings.

If there are indeed any issues of copyright infringement surrounding the activities of IPMT or ITMA, surely these could be resolved without taking out a heavy-handed lawsuit against a group of individuals who are in no position to pay the potentially huge legal fees involved? Why are these people being hounded while others are given a free pass? The whole thing smacks of petty-minded vindictiveness.

I come back to the conclusion of the Times editorial, which said: "It should be the particular quality of British justice to ensure that Mr. Jagger is treated exactly the same as anyone else, no better and no worse". In the end, justice prevailed, with Jagger being given a conditional discharge on appeal. This discriminatory and punitive lawsuit against Bryan, Gary and others should be consigned to the dustbin of history long before it reaches that stage.