My recent post on the Greenwich Democrats’ appointment of Samapramadingdong Tamm to the Board of Education has spurred several local Dems to protest the unfairness of holding an individual’s past – three decades in a cult run by one Sri Chinmoy – against her. Let’s see why I, and most readers here are concerned:
1. The former “Kathleen” spent three decades with a cult guru, who not only selected a new name for her: Samarpana, but also the man (whom the guru had renamed (Rudra) he told her to marry, but not have sex with.
2. When against their guru’s orders, the lady did have sex and was impregnated by Rudra, she let the child born from that act be named by guru and raised in the cult.
3. When, 23 years after her birth, the daughter broke free of the cult, her mother stayed behind. The break was so emotionally disturbing for the daughter that, she recounts, she “contemplated suicide”.
4. The guru, who died in 2007, was the subject of at least two books from former disciples which detailed his sexual abuse of acolytes and his financial wrongdoings.
5. When our school board candidate did finally leave her guru, after all those years, she not only retained the name he gave her, but to this day continues to live on the street she named after him, Chimnoy Avenue. In fact, looking at Google maps, hers seems to be the only residence on this short stretch of pavement.
All of that raises a number of questions about Samarpana’s soundness of mind and her ability to make wise decisions for children. Certainly, her decisions for her own children over the years were sorely deficient – why should we believe she’d do better with ours?
Here’s the history of how this kerfuffle developed:
On June 14th, “The Word” wrote:
Chris – Sorry to hijack the comments, but did you read the local newspaper story this morning about the Democrat nominees to the school board? I can’t imagine that the Samarpana Tamm is NOT related to the Greenwich Tamms who were among the close allies of “guru” Sri Chinmoy. It was a Jayanti Tamm who wrote a book called “Cartwheels in a Sari: A Memoir of Growing Up Cult”, which you can read more about here:
I thought that the Dem cult worship had bottomed with O, but apparently now they’re going for the real thing. FYI
This was responded to by a local Democrat – notice that even he considers the allegation of a BOE candidate having belonged to a cult to be “mudslinging” – presumably because the mud being slung is a serious accusation; he’s not denying that cult membership might disqualify a candidate to run our schools, just that the accusation wasn’t backed up.
Nice mud sling. You might want to have some sort of BASIC CITATION to support your claim. Do you know this for a fact? If not, think about the next part of the comment …
Like Rock ‘n Roll, “The Internet Never Forgets.”
(Your unsupported accusation is now enshrined forever)
Because I agreed with Demmerkrat Patriot that the charge threw a serious charge against Ms. Tamm, I took down Word’s comment, pending more details, and replied to Demmerkrat as follows:
For confused readers, Demmerkrat’s comment refers to another commenter’s contribution, which I have removed pending, as Demmerkrat rightly demands, a “basic citation”.
Word subsequently did provide a string of citations backing up his claim, so I restored his original comment and penned a new post detailing our new proposed BOE member’s past. The rest is now Internet history.