MISA, the Anti-Cult Movement and the Courts: The Legal Repression of an Esoteric Movement
This paper presents the legal controversies that accompanied the history of MISA, the Movement for Spiritual Integration into the Absolute (MISA), the legal cases regarding its founder, Gregorian Bivolaru,and their repercussions for the MISA movement as a whole. Fro...
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Type de support: | Électronique Article |
| Langue: | Anglais |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | En cours de chargement...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publié: |
[2017]
|
| Dans: |
The journal of CESNUR
Année: 2017, Volume: 1, Numéro: 1, Pages: 20-31 |
| Sujets non-standardisés: | B
Freemasonry
B Anti-esotericism B Movement for Spiritual Integration into the Absolute B Gregorian Bivolaru B Mediabolization B Anti-cult Movement B MISA |
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Résumé: | This paper presents the legal controversies that accompanied the history of MISA, the Movement for Spiritual Integration into the Absolute (MISA), the legal cases regarding its founder, Gregorian Bivolaru,and their repercussions for the MISA movement as a whole. From Communist to post-Communist Romania, Bivolaru was repeatedly arrested and convicted and his teachings, on yoga and sexuality, often created suspicions of immorality and abuse. He was granted political asylum in Sweden in 2006, but arrested again in France upon a request by Romanian authorities in 2016, and extradited to Romania. The article raises the question of how an anti-esoteric prejudice may have influenced MISA legal cases and their outcome.In this respect, the paper examines three possible explanations of the extreme anti-MISA feelings prevailing among sectorsof the Romanian police and media, related respectively to the Romanian context, the campaigns against “cults,” and esotericism. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2532-2990 |
| Contient: | Enthalten in: The journal of CESNUR
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.26338/tjoc.2017.1.1.3 |