Ex-Premie.Org |
Forum III Archive # 7 | |
From: May 8, 1998 |
To: May 19, 1998 |
Page: 1 Of: 5 |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 19:14:25 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Jack, swims back up again Message: Jack replied to JW below and I thought I'd respond (why, Lord, did you make me like this?): JW: 'It doesn't require some organizational structure to do either of those things. It just requires him to say it. As you know, we hung on his every word.' Jack: You mean we hung on our every interpretation of his every word. JW with all due respect, your trivialization of the process of change indicates a real lack of experience in this area. Run it by Scott your resident MBA. If he's objective I trust he'll agree, even the smallest change in a complex organization can have significant and far reaching impact. Jack, this is more nonsense. We're not talking a large manufacturing concern, we're not talking a large body politic, we're not even talking a large cult. We're talking a small, extremely hierarchial spiritual dictatorship that produces nothing but captive minds and guru money. In the early 70s, again long before you had any idea that some fat little Indian kid was going to smother you for decades (hopefully not longer), DLM was completely based on the power structure of the 'Holy Family.' Then, when Satpal, Mamapal and Herbiepal split, it took one little word from Maharaji, followed by a terse, three-line letter to change that entirely. Maharaji sits on his bully pulpit like the Reverand Gene Scott or any other televangelsit and simply makes shit up as he goes along. If he wants to change something, he can do it there. what's the holdup? Does he have to run it by his policy wonks? Clear the decision with administrative staff? Obtain shareholder approval? Of course not. This is NOT a complex organization, Jack. It's an extremely simple one. Why, could you imagine if Maharaji actually HAD an MBA on board? What would they do? I agree, if Maharaji was running something as grand as General Motors, say, or even Greenpeace, or Dupont, or the Divine United Orgainzation, or maybe even the amazing multi-dimensional World Welfare Association, it might take some time to change things. But he's just running his little psychic porn video shop. It ain't that big a deal. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 20:35:36 (EST)
From: Jack Email: None To: Jim Subject: Jack, swims back up again Message: Like JW, you demonstrate a naivity regarding how organizations evolve, in particular this particular organization. This organization (which you attempt to trivialize by calling a cult) is comprised of hundreds of thousands of people world-wide, in 60+ countries, on 5 continents. Take into account the message the organization communicates is tailored to fit into a multitude of cultures, languages, and customs. Add to that most of the activity is initiated by one man who travels to as many of those countries and continents as he can. And most of the infrastructure is made up of volunteers - meaning there are issues with accountability and quality. Add to that the unique nature of the subject matter, which is not easily translated into tangible goals - i.e., ones that can be tracked and managed like those of other multi-national organizations. You have no idea Jim. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 20:49:36 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Jack Subject: Never mind, Jack Message: Jack, Frankly, can we agree that this particular point is too boring to hash out. The next thing you know, we'll be doing pie charts. (Have you ever actually done a pie chart? I have to say, I haven't). How about answering my question above, though? [Sorry, JW, if you want to keep this going. Personally, I'm just afraid of those pie charts.) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 00:19:46 (EST)
From: Keith Email: None To: Jim and everyone Subject: Guru papers Message: Jim, One more point that I feel needs to be made. I could quote parts of or whole books to support my own beliefs and understanding... as you have with Dawkins and now with the guru papers. Not that I'm knocking you for doing so .....I have quoted aurobindo as well. But all these quotes would in their own ways make compelling and convincing reading to those especially receptive to the particular perspectives being presented. The author of the guru papers is in danger of promoting his ideas as gospel too.....and of being perceived as the type of authority that he disclaims . Maharaji can be experienced and thought about on so many different levels. But when all the debates and discussions (and quotes) have evaporated into the great Ether I am left with a simple and totally self-evident awareness of my own 'presence' and that is what Maharaji is mostly addressing. We shall never agree Jim because I know I am a divine being and I know you are too but you do not know and you really believe your consciousness is an outcome of your biological evolution. In a way I don't give a stuff about what you and I think about Maharaji and premies......the real issue is what WE think about life and death, about mind , about spirit, about astrology , about economic rationalism, about everything. You are you , not dawkins , not an agent for the guru papers, not a member of the ex-premie 'club- cult' ; And I am I , not Maharaji, nor Krishnamurti, nor a member of the premie 'club-cult'. You do make some good points but at the same time you truly are blinkered , which is a fact that you then project onto premies. Yes....you do have insights into others , Jim, but you lack so much insight into your self. I propose that an anti-Jim site be set up , so all those who have been hurt and betrayed by Jim can help each other to heal. Jim should also be held accountable for his past actions . Of course it would help if he would admit to his errors and say sorry , but he just continues on as if he has learnt nothing from his past. Does this type of reasoning sound familiar? Naturally any attack on Jim will meet with denial from those who share his essential beliefs. Am I talking about Jim or Maharaji? How does projection work? Could it be that Jim is a frustrated would-be guru? Just asking ! ps: don't confuse this post with the fact that I feel the guru papers have some very penetrating questions . This is more about relativity and subjectivity . Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 15:48:42 (EST)
From: Gerry Email: None To: Keith Subject: Guru papers Message: The author of the guru papers is in danger of promoting his ideas as gospel too.....and of being perceived as the type of authority that he disclaims . Keith, the author himself addresses this very issue early on in his book. I am only into the introduction and already, there it is. I would be helpful for those who comment on it to actually read the book first, so I am withholding any further comments until I finish reading it. I propose that an anti-Jim site be set up , so all those who have been hurt and betrayed by Jim can help each other to heal. Jim should also be held accountable for his past actions . Of course it would help if he would admit to his errors and say sorry , but he just continues on as if he has learnt nothing from his past. Come on Keith, you're confusing Jim with Maharaji. In one breath, you extoll the vastness of M's empire, hundred's of thousands of people, etc. and then compare that with Jim's solitary efforts at unmasking the authoritarian guru, who has obviously done great damage to many and continues to do so to this very day. This is not a personal vendetta, but rather true service aimed at helping others become free for guru slavery. It just doesn't compare M's distorted counterpart. What premies experience is their own. M is not the source of an individual's experience of the own connection to divinity. Why all the extraneous trappings? Could it be that authoritarianism is so ingrained in us we need to feel subservient to some thing or some one external to ourselves? Do we really need big daddy guru to know our own divine nature? I submit we will never know our own true selves until we give up this constant seeking and all spiritual practices. Then our true selves can appear naturally and quietly. And hey, guess what, it really is something quite ordinary and unprofoud. Spirituality is the last and greatest trap which keeps us from finding our own true selves. Maharaji is just a very visible and particularly obnoxious impediment. Give it up! BTW Jim, are you divine? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 19:22:57 (EST)
From: Keith Email: None To: Gerry Subject: Guru papers Message: Firstly Gerry, I agree I should read the entire Guru Papers before commenting. But what I was saying to Jim was at least partly said tongue in cheek. Thanks for the e-mail address re: getting a copy of the g.p's but I've ordered it through my library. The simple, ordinary experience of who I am is IT! Some people refer to this one way and some another. But I would still choose to say (sometimes) that the ordinary is extra-ordinary and the simple is profound. Why ? Because the ordinary and the simple are divine. What is divine? Life is divine.....creation is divinely created. Your mind and your ability to think is a divine gift. By the grace of that divine gift someone(or two) could write the Guru Papers. By the grace of divinity Jim can denounce what I am saying as new-age spiritual hogwash. By the grace of the divine this forum is sustained. And Maharaji regardless of everything else going on , helps to introduce people to this FACT. Could it be? So do others . Could that be? Fine , and if you can experience , understand, grow , learn and evolve into your own potential.....explore and integrate and transcend the less for the more ...without a guide ...great ....I have no problem with that, but in my perception that makes you a rarity. Do you even know what you are capable of? Can anyone really judge anothers experience by the yardstick of their own? Could it be that we really are spiritual beings having human experiences? Divine regards, Keith. (ordinary, simple, extra-ordinary, profound, divine blessings). Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 20:08:08 (EST)
From: Gerry Email: None To: Keith Subject: Guru papers Message: Keith, . You make my case for me. I think most everyone has the experience of at least catching a glimpse of the Self behind the self. The tricky part is sustaining that awareness. This is where the mind becomes a most valuable tool. It helps you maintain a sort of vigilance over your own thoughts, feeelings and body sensations. Then you get to play hide and seek with the self. Sometimes the divine Gerry (apologies to Miss Midler) and other times the 'Cult of Gerry', what I call Gerryism, and that's fun, too (though rarely). Either way, it is what it is and I am what I am (apologies to Popeye). It's great place to be in however you get there. When would now be the time to shed the guru and just enjoy 'Keithism' and let Maharaji figure things out for himself? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 23:41:16 (EST)
From: eb Email: None To: Gerry Subject: Guru papers Message: Hi Gerry, I liked your post. Just wanted to say that I've been practising ebism for several years now. I take what I like and leave the rest. If it works, I keeps doing it. If it doesn't work, I let it go. I yam what I yam. Sweet potato eb Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 22:12:45 (EST)
From: Nigel Email: None To: Keith Subject: Guru papers Message: the real issue is what WE think about life and death, about mind , about spirit, about astrology , about economic rationalism, about everything Why should anybody have to think more than three words about astrology? Just wondering. Nigel PS. - silly me - 'Crock of shite...' Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 23:13:47 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Nigel Subject: Guru papers Message: My views exactly. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 14:54:34 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: Jack Subject: Jack, swims back up again Message: Good point, Jack but it's irrelevent to what I was saying. I said that BM didn'even mention any concern for children of premies, either inside or outside of programs before 1983 and you have agreed with that. I pointed out that his failure to do that caused suffering among some premie parents and children as a result, which has been supported by ex-premie parents, and their friends, posting on this site, and which I saw with my own eyes. The difficulties of organizational structure are really quite irrelevent to the point I was making, but thanks for the input anyway. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 15:59:46 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Maharaji on evolution Message: [From London, England, March 5, 1978] It always gets me real concerned when all these people come out with all these crazy explanations: generation of cells and degeneration of cells, and test tube babies, and all these different trips -- you know, making people so that they could use them as robots. Or something like watching Star Trek where these people are travelling in time, people are travelling in space, these people are coming with all these theories of how this odd-looking monkey was your ancestor, and trying to prove it, trying to take the bones and saying, 'Yeah, see how this is more similar to your bone structure. This is more similar to your bone structure, till now you are here.' ... Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 10:44:04 (EST)
From: devotee Email: None To: Jim Subject: Maharaji on evolution Message: It's good to know that M. is so concerned about these matters. He has never spoke a truer word. This only goes to prove that he is wise above our understanding - without even going to University or probably even reading a book on the subject. Magic Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 22:21:59 (EST)
From: Nigel Email: None To: devotee Subject: Maharaji on evolution Message: Are you for real? - or is this Jim doing a wind-up 'cos no-one else would reply to his thread? Please help me, Devotee. What are you saying here? We are not apes? Intuition and no education beats science every time? Psychic healing is better than medicine? Are you some kind of creationist, or something? He has never spoke a truer word. You are probably right there, at least. Please explain yourself, Devotee. I promise nobody will laugh. Nigel Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 23:15:17 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Nigel Subject: I think it was Gerry Message: Nigel, The name, the grammar, the stupidity... doesn't it remind you of Gerry's first fake post? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, May 17, 1998 at 02:57:58 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: Brian Subject: Please re-post? Message: Brian I can't open Nigel's Maharaji on Evolution - I get an 'illegal operation' message. Is there any reason for that? thanks Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Tues, May 19, 1998 at 01:25:19 (EST)
From: Brian Email: brian@ex-premie.org To: Jude Subject: IE online help Message: Brian I can't open Nigel's Maharaji on Evolution - I get an 'illegal operation' message. Is there any reason for that? That depends whether the error box was popped up by IE or by Windows95. If the message said This program has performed an illegal operation and will be shut down, then it was Windows95 that caught IE misbehaving on your computer. In that case you can read the 'Details' by selecting something (a button in the box I think) and noting what .DLL or .EXE the error happened in. Then you can possibly check out the probelem in the Microsoft newsgroups or via their tech help. Microsoft maintains newsgroups on its own server. The URL for the server is: news://msnews.microsoft.com (Clicking this should cause your newsreader to get you there.) The newsgroups to read are: microsoft.public.inetexplorer.ie3 microsoft.public.inetexplorer.ie4 and for anyone running Win3 still, this newsgroup: microsoft.public.inetexplorer.win3 Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, May 17, 1998 at 13:12:50 (EST)
From: Gerry Email: None To: Jim Subject: I think it was Gerry Message: Nope, can't claim this one. BTW, ...going to University is a Canadian or maybe British expression, if that gives you a clue. We solid Americans 'go to college' (except me) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 11:24:39 (EST)
From: John Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Question for premies Message: I believe Jude is the most recent person on this Forum to have rec'd K, and she received K from the Master Himself, whereas 25 years ago I got it from a guy named Mahatma Parlokanand (who, by the way, was in a hurry to catch a plane). Somewhere below she said this: (I have edited this, but this is the essence of what she said) 'He has said don't practice while you are doing other things, in the car, walking etc - as that isn't knowledge. He defnintely said that doing it continuously while doing other stuff is incorrect. The way I learned the 3rd technique involves imagining Maharaji, as part of that technique.' Either Jude mis-heard or mis-understood or this is incredible! I mean, this is very different from what I and everyone else in the 70's learned! And it's very different from what he taught his western initiators who went around giving us all K reviews in the late 70's. And in fact it must be very different from what M himself learned from HIS guru! Well anyway, premies, just curious, is all of this true? And Jude, not that I don't believe you, this is so radical that I just have to get other opinions! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 14:06:10 (EST)
From: CD Email: None To: John Subject: K Message: You are always welcome to go to one of the review sessions when they come around to get first hand info. I have been to a few since I went to a K session in 1972. I remember the first Western initiator, the English guy. The main problems seem to be over complication and the failure to believe that something simple can be profound. If you want to send me an email we could have a short discussion off-line: webmaster@cdickey.com CD Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 17:44:19 (EST)
From: mark Email: Apple4256@aol.com To: CD Subject: K Message: cd/recently, a premie friends daughter left a knowledge selection meeting when the bait and switch that we all either see , are proud of, or go into VERY DEEP DENIAL over- took place it was stressed to her that what she was recieving was a relationship with the master. the knowledge techniques were secondary this was 1997 , mind you, not the evil confused 70's,premies slough off as a case of garbled communication. so she split, pursuing 'the All' in a more self empowering fashion, and dad has been forced to examine things- resulting in stepping back a few feet and donation $$'s from the Rawat Circus. Don't you feel a little embarassed to be 'shining on' the bedrock master aspect.? i mean don't you honestly in the bottom of your experience feel that M's the catalyst, your savior ? I mean,it is a bhakti cult- very very enjoyable to some but that's what it is!Quite a fun little circus! A devotional cult tied around public domain techniques, hey whatever turns you on-spiritual Viagra ! but I think you must address either personal ethics or a serious case of personal denial to continue your Stepford Wives presentation of this. To get the knowledge ,and a leg clamp prohibiting personal growth simultaneously, is bad joss?others offer the same techniques, sans bhakti. . . Everyone with DLM has a real investment to stay deluded ( I did too ), from the big cheese to all the holi / holies but I would guess by your 2 years not following agya and communicating( at least posting) here there's a certain part of you that's hungry for the experience of connecting with your SELF outside the RAWAT forcefield. Watch out- it's addictive !! And REAL . Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 14:39:57 (EST)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: John Subject: Question for premies Message: Just to add a little weight to what you've said, John; Maharaji's father, Shri Hans did used to say something along the lines of - he(she) who remembers my name (meaning breath) at all times is my true devotee. This is just paraphrasing Shri Hans. Perhaps someone else has the exact quote. My own experience is that if one gets into the word during formal meditation, then later on when one is not meditating formally, one finds that you don't have to try to remember the word - it remembers you - and you can be with the word or in the word while driving, walking or doing anything. At such times it is impossible to try to STOP meditating. It is just like you are being meditated and a most pleasant experience. The fact that Maharaji tells people to forget the word has given me grave doubts that he has ever experienced meditation. Now I'm not a perfect meditator, far from it, but I do know that the word is not something you can just simply stop doing once formal meditation has stopped. I may meditate for only twenty minutes and yet some time later during the day I sometimes feel myself immersing into the word without even trying. Maharaji cannot have experienced this phenomenon to have said what he does. This fact alone (regardless of his lifestyle) causes me to reject him completely as a person capable of teaching anything. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 14:46:12 (EST)
From: CD Email: None To: Sir David Subject: doubts Message: >The fact that Maharaji tells people to forget the word has given me grave doubts that he has ever experienced meditation. What 'fact'? Where did you get this 'info'? M has said that you should be thankful for your life as often as possible. Each moment is important. CD Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 15:43:48 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: CD Subject: doubts Message: Well, Chris, some people here, recently self-liberated from the cult, explain that they were told just that. Are you saying they weren't? Are you saying nothing's changed in that respect since Maharaji COMMANDED us to 'constantly meditate and remember the Holy Name'? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 16:12:56 (EST)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: CD Subject: doubts Message: I am thankful for my life, Chris. Very thankful indeed! Having nearly died a few years ago I could say that I'm extremely aware of my life's value. Now isn't M saying such a thing rather vague and obvious? A bit like saying you should be thankful for your eyes because they enable you to see. I'm sure that most people are thankful for their life, when push comes to shove, despite any hardships. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 20:34:51 (EST)
From: CD Email: None To: Sir David Subject: thankful Message: > I'm sure that most people are thankful for their life, when push comes to shove, despite any hardships. Is that what you see manifesting in daily life these days? I am guilty of being caught in the treadmill. What is the nightly news broadcasting tonight. How important are those big houses we live in. Are street people really people. Is hitchhiking moral. Do we need bigger 4x4 battering rams to drive on the freeways. Do we share our wealth with each other when there isn't a disaster at hand. How many guns do we need in the US. >Having nearly died a few years ago I could say that I'm extremely aware of my life's value. >Now isn't M saying such a thing rather vague and obvious? He is a bit of a cheerleader isn't he. You are a lucky guy. CD Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 20:55:01 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: CD Subject: Chris, would you mind Message: Chris, would you mind answering my question above too? Thanks. By the way, I agree with you here. David's obviously seeing the world through rose coloured glasses. -g! Jim Surrendered my life in 73! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 16:45:58 (EST)
From: CD Email: None To: Jim Subject: why surtanly Message: Jim, Your new crusade is to denounce guitar lessons as a form of finger torture. Is one hour a day too much? Don't fall into the pit of endless practice like Garcia. A guitar is just a piece of wood with a few attachments. No magic there. Sitars are the work of mindless music maniacs. Dont pay respect to a music teacher. You banged the strings. Look, people quit playing, it can't be that enjoyable! Music has no purpose anyway. Music is for people who don't want to work. If Hendrix had a job he would still be alive. Burn those Beatles records. Don't be fooled by music cults. Banish feeling, long live logic! CD Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 15:47:36 (EST)
From: Selena Email: None To: John Subject: Another Question for premies Message: I have another question: Why this silly service thing at events? oh, excuse me, they call it participation now. I can see needing ushers to help seat people. And I suppose there are some security issues. but isn't it a little extreme to find doors for everyone to sit in front of? I have worked as a stage techie. Some doors lead to nowhere. In more ways than one I suppose. But, really, no where threatening, no access to the backstage, some doors are just to storage areas, etc. And, as someone said once, haven't these people ever heard of locks? The convention center staff are willing to keep doors that lead to unncessary places locked if one asks for it. I am still haunted by that beautiful woman who sat next to me. I mean, she was really pretty, not the 'premie beautiful' stuff. And she had packed the most outrageus clothes and jewelry, all to spend an entire weekend sitting alone in front of a door and I knew she was miserable, anyone looking at her could tell. It's just a variation on the guarding of the Cheese of David and that was 20 something years ago! Really , she disturbed me, I wonder how she is. I hope whatever inner conflict she was obviously going through has been resolved. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 16:26:27 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Selena Subject: Another Question for premies Message: Selena, I think I know exactly what that's about. It's a vestigal remnant of the old surrender platform, like a bit of old software that never leaves your drive. Used to be, we spent every waking moment doing some form of satssang, service or meditation. Anything else was called 'spacing out' and unfit for a serious, practising premie. After all, Maharaji kept hammering the point home, if we wanted to really let go, we had to give everything in SS&M. (The only exceptions sanctioned were these pathetic moments like when a mahatma came to town and invited you to play tennis or something.) I was in several premie bands and the score (no pun intended) was always the same. We weren't there to do anything but meditate, realize Maharaji was the real agent behind all actions, surrender and do the service in faithful detachment. If you were getting into the song too much, you wre getting into your mind. Bad! So 'real' premies never wanted to break their stride. Say you went to a program in Miami. If you lived in the ashram or were a dependable community stalwart, you might have some pre-assigned service waiting for you on arrival. If you were a bigshot, you might have meetings or you might be in charge of some function. (My great glory, besides singing a few tunes at one of the Miami programs, was to be in charge of premie assistance at one of the Kissimee programs. That's where I got to counsel an extremely freaked-out but decidedly pompous Tim Gallwey). If you had no status at all you just got into ushering (or World Peace Corps security, depending on the year), food prep or the like. A cool service was looking after premies who'd faint in the darshan lines. An uncool service was parking attendant. The trip was, you were supposed to be absolutely indifferent, that is, unattached, to whatever service 'Maharaji' gave you. See, there was that kind of status too. There was real worldly status, like that enjoyed by co-ordinators, initiators and the like, but then there was the 'spiritual' kind, the kind you could get by showing everyone, subtly of course, that you were just an empty vessel of love and devotion. I remember premies flying in to Miami jumping out of the vans before they got to their hotels and rushing off the the convention centre just to 'plug in'. Most of us, snuck a little pleasure by walking on the beach, gettign ready for the program. Of course, you could meditate. You could also sit around in little circles giving satsang. Or, you could hit the streets of Miami with leaflets. The choice was yours. So, I figure that premies doing service these days are exactly like Charlotte Rampling in the Night Porter. She puts on her old concentration camp outfit just because it feels so familiar. You're right, it's pathetic. So? It's a free country, ain't it? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 18:26:41 (EST)
From: Selena Email: None To: Jim Subject: Another Question for premies Message: >like a bit of old software that never leaves your drive. Very good analogy, especially Microsoft software, it installs files all over the disk for every package, impossible to get rid of the entire mess. Another reason to keep Bill Gates and M away from each other. I am afraid I may have nightmares about this unholy union. Yes, the tiered level of their participation duties is a key issue. It gives people a sense of something to aspire to, the closer you can get to a decent stint at an event, the closer you can sit, the more the experience. Makes sense to me, NOT!! well, that poor woman didn't get much payback, she was sitting next to someone who was feeling increasingly bewildered and bored by the whole show. (me) Too bad she couldn't carry on a conversation. She was too busy crying. I would have loved to know where she did her clothes shopping. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 18:40:42 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Selena Subject: Very funny Selena (and Mark) Message: That's all. Just after getting worked up blasting Jack down below, it's nice to read something sharp for a change. Speaking of which, Mark, once again, your post above is hilarious. Thanks a bunch for doing some service on the Zombie Premie Project. Stepford Wives is right. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 20:15:57 (EST)
From: Joy Email: None To: Jim Subject: Service at Programs Message: Yes, I remember service at programs and what a scam it was to try and get near the front. Also the way, towards the end of my stint (1980) everyone used to dress up so fancy in imitation of M and the initiators (difficult when you're penniless and in the ashram, but people managed it nonetheless). The amount of clothes-horse aspiration that went on the ashram was amazing, it was one sanctioned way people who'd been denied any form of materialism for many years could exercise their material desires without being frowned upon (after all, how could M or the initiators criticize it when M wore $5,000 suits from Bijan of Beverly Hills, and the initiators came as close to copying him and Marolyn as they possibly could?). I was one of the lucky ones in that I used to work with the production people, so I scammed this service of helping the music coordinator type up song lists for M to pick and choose the songs to be played live from. This enabled me to a front row seat for several years (though off to the side, usually), so as to be available for any last minute changes that, say, Raja Ji or some high-up initiator might make. I'd have to rush off at the last minute as tensions were building up to M entering the stage or auditorium, retype the list, then rush back to get it submitted. Gee, Jim, I probably sat near you at some program or other, if you were in the musician's section! But being in the front certainly didn't deepen my understanding of K, ultimately, because here I am on the Forum, posting away with all the ex-s, and laughing about what a crock of s**t/bad joke it all was. It amazes me that this 'land grab' for the front seats still goes on -- just goes to show that this cult is really nothing about spiritual realization, and everything about personality cult. Guess this is sort of a diversion from the original topic here.... I remember 'always remember Holy Name' as being one of the central tenets of DLM and would be surprised also if BM had reversed that (maybe he was drunk at the time and just forgot?) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 20:57:21 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Joy Subject: No, I wasn't that lucky Message: Joy, I played at that one program in Miami in 80 I think, the one where they put the stage sideways for a change. But I generally did not get to sit in the musician section. Maybe if I had... Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 21:30:53 (EST)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Joy Subject: Guru of confusion Message: I am amazed that no premie has come back and tried to answer the original question on this thread. Surely Maharaji must be the most inconsistent guru of the century. I also find his complete non understanding of his 'knowledge' to be an insult to those of us who sincerely practised it as layed down during the seventies. I was one of those premies who used to hang on to the word through long days doing some factory job to help support Maharaji when I was in the ashram. We had it printed out and pinned onto the walls of the ashram, those five commandments, one of which was, 'Constantly meditate and remember the word'. Maharaji even gave satsang about how you could drive your car through the rush hour traffic and if you were remembering the word, then you wouldn't crash. Remembering the word WAS the main message continually shouted out either by M or his many mahatmas and initiators. We were even told it could be done while sleeping. Now this is just a personal thing here, but I've come to the angry conclusion that Maharaji is one of the biggest bullshitters I have ever come across and had the misfortune to take any notice of. The experiences I've had of practising meditation are good. They were very good from the day after I received the techniques because I wanted to get into it at that time of my life. I am very angry that I then allowed myself to get caught up into the most ridiculous and confusing cult by believing M and trying to give my life to him for the next ten years. All those years of tearing myself apart and trying to make myself fit Maharaji's sceme of things. Trying to surrender to someone who I thought was God when all the time he was just some ignorant bullshitter who didn't have a clue as to what I was experiencing. This is a personal thing here. To have spent all those years remembering the 'Holy Name' with love (as Charanand used to say) and then to hear M just dismiss it. Can you see why I am angry! He didn't even acknowledge that we were trying to practise his bullshit. He hasn't even acknowledged that we layed our lives on the line for him and gave our all for him. He's just dismissed it. And now it seems, he's not only forgotten about what he used to teach, he even critisises those poor unfortunate premies who are still sincerely trying to practise his old teachings. So similar to the derision and scorn he dished out to the premie who asked him in 1986 if he was God. Like Maharaji was talking as if the guy was a moron to even have the notion that he was God. Conclusion: Maharaji is definitely NOT a person to take seriously or give your life to. Forget the roller coaster of the world that he talks about. The roller coaster of trying to follow Maharaji is far more confusing and potentially damaging, to a sincere person. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 17:40:51 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: Sir David Subject: Guru of confusion Message: Very well put, David. I just wanted to let you know that you aren't the only one who is angry about how BM dismisses, ignores and makes fun of people like us who just tried to sincerely do what he told us to do and believed who he presented himself to be. The arrogance of that man is not to be believed. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 19:16:46 (EST)
From: Selena Email: None To: Joy Subject: Service at Programs Message: Hi Joy Believe me, it's still a scam. We had the great opportunity to know someone in 'seating' service, and you wouldn't believe what goes on! This person reserves like a dozen seats, in different names, and chooses the best and has this scam going to offer this 'service' to others. It's weird. Thanks for the clothes explanation. That one always bewildered me. It seemed so out of place with the rest of the b.s. Don't get me wrong, I just spent $80 at a boutique and want to go back this weekend, and probably will. But I am not pretending to be some spiritually evolved-beyond-the pettiness-of-the-world being. I just like clothes. It's sad that was the one allowed outlet for so much repressed energy. repressed anger and frustration is maybe a better way of saying it. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 09:39:50 (EST)
From: peter Email: None To: rivo alto Subject: to rivo alto Message: GO to conection Rivo,sincealy yours Peter Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 08:41:46 (EST)
From: peter Email: None To: rivo alto Subject: conection Message: Hi rivo , you are the one and only who knows about this when that actually happen ,it was only four people present in that event I hope Im right .Im doing fine, number one is taking care that was the last time I heard his voice, how is everybody at the Res? the kids are OK? yours sincerly Peter Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 00:44:29 (EST)
From: *>* to Mark . and also Email: None To: Everyone Subject: richard and bruce Message: Hello Mark and all, Thanks for your journey post and your help here. I did want to discuss with you a related subject. I gather from reading your posts some picture on your present views. Now excuse me if in getting into this subject if it seems that I am trying to put words in your mouth or assuming things. I dont want to do that. That said, How about this: However the creation came about, elements were made, a so-called DNA system came into play and evolved the life forms and a large chunk of the behavioural display. Maybe ALL the behavioural display except for part of the human. (now this is where Jim and I diverge). And that a concious thing monitored the creation and it's subsequent human creation. WE are part of that concious thing. I say, there are basically two types of thinking going on. (please allow for a little generalization) The eastern thinking, says we are on our own and we are to, by our actions, try and merge with this 'oneness' and realize some state on trancendence and mysterious realizing 'knowledge' or whatever the term. On the other hand, contrary to YOUR lumping all the groups together, the western view is that the power that operated and monitors this place IS concious, and is in your general favor, uses what it can to steer us and help the created human parts of itself. It has capacities and can respond to an individuals effort in its direction. I say this is a BIG difference. I am not sure what great new thing rennie thinks he sees, but it looks like he has just lumped it together also and has missed this subject. In the eastern thinking, guru's or lama's or whomever, can pretend to be the god in form and that is ok because since they think it is just some basically unconcious 'oneness', what standards are there really? Who is to judge and say they are pretending? And like poor richard, they think who really cares? It is just all 'oneness' It is just 'spiritual method' No blame, it is YOUR illusion. How vastly different from the actual message of Yeshua/jesus and some of the jewish and the islamic stuff. Yeshua/jesus marched around the countryside in front of witnesses doing things that run contrary to the way the power has things set up. walk on water, heal, blind see, dead rise ect. ect. Now what did he have to say? feel love for the concious power that exists, feel love for the other humans. (quite different from prem rawats going into rages at people right? he admitted to getting enraged at someone right in the middle of the dec. 97 event. We will get the audio). Now if rawat is allowed to redefine the behavior and message of the power of life, as he is trying to do, the consequences of someone as faulty as him doing that are severe. He does NOT believe in any god but himself. Notice that? Yet he has infected 50 countries with the notion that he is god incarnate. YOU and many people know he isnt, the new age eastern misperception of life says-what the heck? It's all illusion anyway! dont you like the breath? forget the fraud going on!(richard) I personally find this thinking incorrect and for whatever reason, here we are, with 18 billion years of evolution to make this place, and as incredible as it is, we just blow off the concious power that DOES have it's own conciousness and personality and STANDARDS! Right and wrong are NOT just some duality to brush aside like they are nothing and this is all illusion so lets just let pretense go on and on and assume some imaginary 'oneness' viewpoint and fall prey to more dumbness. I was driving today and I thought 'jeez, is this small website any match for this hinduism wrapped around the breath?' and a bumper sticker went by saying 'never underestimate the power of god' I hope MY interpretation of that is what will be. A little respect PLEASE for the power that is sponsering the show. To go around pretending to be lord and have everyone kiss YOUR feet, and claim everyones breath as your own claim to godhead status is REALLY __________________________ A)eastern answer=situation normal B)western thinking answer=fucked up! bill burke Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 03:13:23 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: *>* Bill Subject: Concepts Message: I too am thinking along the lines of - well if we expected to find god through M. - what was our picture of what it would be? I think after all the evolution you describe we are still in Kindergarten in this subject. Some new age books say it is the final frontier - the science of the interior and of consciousness However out of the 2 forms of 'understanding' you have described, I personally think the Eastern is a bit more evolved (but equally it looks pretty undeveloped). After all, the Christians idea is not that you 'merge with god' but that you 'go to heaven' which assumes there is still you after death. The Eastern idea is that you surrender you to become who you truly are, not who you think you are (eventually). Also, many 'New Age' people say Christ studied in the East. Were you aware of that? That he came from a sect of very strict 'spiritually conscious' people and he trained very hard. He then went to India, some say, and learnt more before he began teaching. New age people also say that when he said 'the kingdom of heaven is amongst you' he meant it is within you, and that he said we are all like him, not that he was the One but that we can all do what he did. I'm just passing on some ideas I picked up like a virus on my travels. It could be irrelevant. Regards Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 04:56:16 (EST)
From: Richard Email: None To: *>* to Mark . and also Subject: Huh!! Message: Sorry Bill, I must have missed something, do you want to run that by me again! R. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 08:28:43 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs@hotmail.com To: *>* to Mark . and also Subject: richard and bruce Message: Dear Bill, I agree with parts of your post and not with others. I don't know if you feel that Christianity is the 'only way' but my feeling is that there are different ways because people relate differently to spirituality. I hold extremly different beliefs than you yet am I any less of a seeker or any less deserving because I can't relate to your beliefs? I also believe that BM is a fraud. I really believe that even though I see great value in MY OWN ability to experience K that BM has no place there, no thank you, or pay you, or work for you, or trust you, or respect you, nothing. I think he puts himself there because it is working for him. If his devotees would rebel against his lavish life style and insist on his becoming a humble servant I think he'd be looking for another job. Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 01:41:25 (EST)
From: *>*...Hi Robyn! Email: None To: Robyn Subject: this one is coherent Message: Hi Robyn! I dont have very much in the way of christian beliefs compared to a lot of people I know. They spend time learning and reviewing sentences and subjects that I dont consider core topics. in my gropeing after comeing away from the lord of the universe I had to come to some view of life and the operateing power. Thanks to Jim and dawkins I got a dose of DNA reasoning, and reviewing the story of yeshua/jesus gave some insight into standards of behaviour and a probabaly correct view that the power is concious and has a personality. By that I mean -well I dont have that in me tonight so maybe tomorrow. The promise keeper guys and the others I met showed me how --well, let me say that I know it is not the same everywhere, and I am very lucky that in this rare jewel of a small and very old town there is this reknowned church where lots of men are quite active and so I am getting an unusual hit of the christian scene, but it is the dose I am getting so to it I relate.-- The guys are for real examples of honest and true human guys who are trying to face the reality of a concious friendly power that has standards and responds to thier response. There is a rich wealth of logic or wisdom that is available to help see your way through your life. And good hearted friends that base thier views of others on the logic that there is a good god as a reality. They try genuinely to face that reality. It does show I must say. Even though they are faulty, thier efforts at being good are rewarded. I happen to agree that the power is concious. Which puts me on the other side of the line from all those including prem rawat and a large group of eastern influenced people that think there is no concious power to have a real relationship with in your life. I dont think I want to say my side of the street is christian, because for one thing the guys name wasnt jesus OR christ. His mom called him Yeshua. And in addition, ANYONE is free at any moment to view the life power as something alive and concious. I happen to think that it is not conjecture or religious thinking. It is the way life on earth is. Those that view the power as some 'ONENESS' and we are supposed to spend our time humming or chanting or vibeing or thinking our way into, are loseing time to just enjoy a friendship with life and instead are caught in a trap of trying to earn or work thier way up a nonexistant ladder. I object to the advancement of that thinking. That is why I dont see 'many paths to the one'. It is each person independent and haveing a long (hopefully) walk with the friend god through an amazing lifetime. To miss that is just not faceing reality in our day. For rawat to pretend to BE that god is just incredible thievery. The type of eastern thinking that spawns guys like this is in fact our enemy and not some laudable evolution of understanding of life and so called new age spirituality. This is what I mean about not being happy at all with rennie davis's view that rawat is just a part of this great evolution. WHAT evolution? In this one area there is only ONE WAY. Sorry, I couldnt resist useing that line. Just to get your eyebrow arched. So, I figure my after- rawat wander led me to yank a few lines from yeshua and also to recognise and accept that no matter what I experience, the power is itself, and I am myself. If I do any mergeing, hell, who wants that now? Let the ocean stay separate from the drop thank you very much, I like my freedom and independence. As much as I have, it is a great design. The work I have to do here, the fun and adventure I can have here, is mine. And I dont have to waste time trying to do or attain something the design didnt want in the mix in the first place. The genious Idea of trying to merge with the 'oneness' while you have a body is just really stupid and a waste of time. Feel your breath? That is not mergeing, that is what it is. The concious power/friend is still existant no matter what YOU experience. HIndus like rawat think THEY dissolve some illusion and THEY assume sole divinity. Sheesh! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 13:33:08 (EST)
From: Paul Email: None To: *>* to Mark . and also Subject: richard and bruce Message: Not all eastern religion/approaches are the same. The buddhist approaach (and yes I know it's not perfect) is non-theistic. There is NO god to merge with and many would say that there is no 'higher consciousness out there' to be obtained, only reality to be perceived just as it is. The 'goal' is freedom/liberation , learning to see things and accept things as they are in the moment. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 01:50:01 (EST)
From: *>*...Hi Email: None To: Paul Subject: Paul Message: How about giving your response to the post to robyn above, OK? what do you think about that possibility mentioned there? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, May 17, 1998 at 01:00:03 (EST)
From: Paul Email: None To: *>*...Hi Subject: Paul Message: Hi! I'll try but i'm not quite sure what 'possibility' you're referring to unless it's that spirituality comes down to 'different strokes for different folks.' And while on one level this is certainly true in that we are all free to pursue whatever path meets our needs, it doesn't mean that I have to suspend critical thinking and the use of reason. I think it is the use of such reason which is necessary to balance 'experience,' so that we can sort out the real. It is what is lacking, I believe, in many premies, jesus freaks, etc. who create absolutes because they've had some type of experience. As Carl Sagan said, 'just because you believe something, doesn't make it true.' Psychologically, it's very comforting to have everything wrapped up in a nice little package-whether it's having the perfect master, the lord jesus, or the hale-bop comet. Living with ambiguity and paradox is a lot more trying. Well, I've rambled and am unsure if I've responded in the way you meant-let me know. Paul Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 16:52:02 (EST)
From: Mark Email: Apple 4256@aol.com To: *>* to Mark . and also Subject: richard and bruce Message: sorry bill that particular post went over my head tho others have been a total delight ! it might be that i have a bit of flu feel free to email me a simplified version of the above mark Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 18:44:46 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Mark Subject: how to read Bill's posts Message: Sorry Mark, you're on your own. It's a focusing thing. Kind of like those 3d pictures, the ones you stare at for a while then see the whales or what have you. There's a lot there but, like those pictures, you can't get them all. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 00:10:11 (EST)
From: *>*....Hmmm, this time Email: None To: Jim Subject: in english. Message: Hi Mark. Guess what I got in the mail today? a copy of your journey entry! It is such a stellar entry and really helpful. At first I couldnt figure out who sent it because no one signed it and then I realized very few people know where I live, by the handwriting on the envelope I see it is an active premie. well...great fellow, hope he is smoothly transitioning. Is that possible? Your journey helped them obviously and they either know I'm here or they are sending your work out as a service. I read your post in the rennie thread last night and the post to you was actually at first a response to that. In my convoluted way. I guess it was really an attempt to unravel the logic rennie used in looking back at his dlm involvement and his viewing it as just a part of this new age wave. I guess what propelled that need to respond to his view (as stated by you in that post explaining rennie), was that I still think that rawat is a formidable long term force and the bulk of the 50 countries he is in are vulnerable to a slowly growing but eventually large movement in his direction. He is aiming directly at grass roots effort and look how hard it is to brush him off since your own breath is involved. As brilliant as YOU are, people in those 50 countries cannot read or probabaly understand most of your post. It was loaded with great stuff but besides the language barrier, they need a certain smartness and education to fully hear it. Meanwhile, rawat has selected videos and film footage of his previous and present I am god performance. These people have only this 'look he is traveling the globe to do this and all around the world look! they cheer him!' They dont know about him pretending and in some of those countries they are from that whole eastern thinking anyway so if he says he is this special master, he is! Over time, long time, his legend will grow. However skeletal it looks now, it is there and it is on no ones radar screen. ex premies like rennie and others who trumpeted at the starting gate have a responsibility to see and take some responsibility for the foisting of a fake lord on the unsuspecting masses. rennie sees the u.s. and the flighty new age movement. He thinks that THERE is some worthy reality recognition and that rawat is some small and faded part of this whole glorious eastern thinking invasion. I beg to differ. I think he should see the threat of rawat and also see the consequences of so-called new age thinking. Whatever part of the jesus related trip someone finds wacky, wether the eat my body thing or whatever, the overall effect of many of the words and explanations in that bible book, are good. The jewish part and the new. To trade that in for rawat's future maharajianity is a real bad trade. Here is another way to put that. The christian guys I know talk all around the breath. 'drink from the same spirit' 'spirit means breath' ect. Yet by this point in history they have lost the breath connection. FINE. Except, that the wrong guy is going around talking up the breath. He comes with this whole long term packaging that you and I know now is false. He is nothing special and he has some real defects. But by his actions, and actions of future and present zealots, a big groundswell of belief can come up over time and what is the problem? For those with eastern thinking, nothing really. For those that see the power as being concious and haveing standards as articulated in parts of the bible, it is a very bad problem. WHY? Because of a few reasons. I wont get to but maybe one. rawat by his claims to be god incarnate now rewrites the standards for living. How does he rewrite? By his opinions and actions. He already has spent lots of time practicing on us. He ran our lives and with a vengence. You know that for sure. A CROWN! The guy has a crown! Either he is the lord or he is one heck of an anticrist type. You know he is a fraud. Rennie thinks 'hey! no big deal! this is just part of this whole groovy new age wave!' I say, perhaps the jewish and christians are right about a peculiar subject, that there is a force that fights against the goodness of the concious power. Maybe it is to provide some outlet for that part of the god that seems to like a good fight, but I think rawat is not to be written off as just another part of the faulty 'oneness' movement, but as a person who by his actions of pretending to be god incarnate, and using the breath, is lined up to have an increasing impact on more and more people and the facts about him should be told. In that garbled up post above, I said alot but it was in my own code to myself I guess. So much for winging it sometimes. I also read the thread by richard and bruces posts and that was mixed in there as well. Hopefully this has much less codeing. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 21:45:48 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: *>*....Hmmm, this time Subject: Masters and Gurus and Such Message: 'I think he should see the threat of rawat and also see the consequences of so-called new age thinking.' 'For those with eastern thinking, nothing really. For those that see the power as being conscious and haveing standards as articulated in parts of the bible, it is a very bad problem.' 'rawat by his claims to be god incarnate now rewrites the standards for living. How does he rewrite? By his opinions and actions. He already has spent lots of time practicing on us. He ran our lives and with a vengence. You know that for sure. A CROWN! The guy has a crown!' 'Either he is the lord or he is one heck of an anticrist type.' Dear *>* I enjoyed your thoughts but was a bit concerned by the above, so in the spirit of debate… You use the word 'threat'. I think it is a good point about (bad for) 'those who see the power as being conscious and having standards' - do you mean those who believe that M is god - ie his Grace will be with you, he will guide you, he is making things happen so you can learn, etc.? But by threat, do you mean a threat to God, or to the church? From what I found, there was one weird thing that kept happening that I thought was his Grace, but otherwise it was pretty much business as usual, ie the usual coincidences, problems, opportunities (but come to think of it, a lot of really heavy things happened too that I wasn't prepared for, because I thought I had Grace) Yes I see he is a kind of threat but that's a very strong word. I was hoping you didn't mean he was a threat to the Christian church or to Christ's memory. After all, Christ could have easily been another Maharaji - like you say, stories and memories linger long afterwards, and only the good was recorded and kept. Was there anyone he didn't heal, for example, who thought he would? So the point I am trying to make here is maybe we are examining the whole question of whether such an entity does or has ever existed, the Perfect Master. As you mentioned, Jesus had a name, Yeshua did you say? And also a title, Jesus THE Christ. Christ is a title, like 'your majesty' According to some new age thought, as I mentioned earlier, Jesus was supposed to have been trained by his tribe, (the Essedenees -?) in strict practices including fasting etc and then gone to the East and learned more. He may also have been part of a succession. Some also say he did not die on the cross and never wanted to be a Martyr. His rising from the dead did not take place (he wasn't dead). But because the human race so much needed the crucifiction story, which is a symbol of matter v the spirit, he had to die for the psycho-drama to be complete. They say in fact he went back to the East and married and had children, and his lineage continues today. Now of course that is just more 'interpretations' and 'stories.' We are talking about a man who is alive now, who we have seen and been in his presence. Yes we were young, or hurt, or idealistic - but we were certainly genuine. You mustn't discount people's own ability to find their own way out - as everyone here did (and many many others - as they say his numbers in the west have dwindled considerably) To say he is a threat implies some sort of action should be taken to stop him. Then you get religious wars. Best to keep telling the truth, and perhaps discredit him, for those who are seeking to awaken from the spell. Just more thoughts. Oh! The Mind! The Pain! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 22:32:34 (EST)
From: Mickey the Pharisee Email: mgdbach@ziplink.net To: Jude Subject: Masters and Gurus and Such Message: Jude, There is no proof that Jesus (or Yeshua, if you prefer) was educated by the Essenes or had any contact with them. Some think that John the Baptist may have been an Essene but we really don't know much about them outside of what Josephus wrote. We know that they separated themselves from the Temple and its cult (this is cult in a different sense than BM and the Moonies) as they saw it as corrupt due to the connections with the Romans. As for the New Age idea that Jesus traveled through the East and was educated the Hindus, Buddhist, Zorastrians, et al, a lot of this stuff comes from The Aquarian Gospel of the Christ, which is hardly a primary source! It is some goofy 19th century fantasy in Elizabethan English (so it will sound like the King James Bible). If Jesus had been educated by these people, much would have been made of this as lines of authority were important to the people of Late Antiquity, i.e., Matthew's visit of the Magi. I wouldn't put too much stock in those New Age ideas regarding the historical Jesus. Regards, Michael Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 23:20:22 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Mickey the Pharisee Subject: Primary sources and such Message: ...a lot of this stuff comes from The Aquarian Gospel of the Christ, which is hardly a primary source! Mickey, aren't we venturing onto thin ice here? The bible that we know today is a virtual collage of copied, translated, copied and translated writings of who (we're not sure) from when (we're not sure either). 'Primary source' material is a pretty high standard for this stuff, I'd say. Witness the Jesus Seminar. It turnsout Jesus didn't say or do a quarter of what he's credited with. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, May 17, 1998 at 02:00:41 (EST)
From: Mickey the Pharisee Email: mgdbach@ziplink.net To: Jim Subject: Primary sources and such Message: Jim, I have 'The Five Gospels' and am well aware of the Jesus Seminar. Do you realize that the members of the Jesus Seminar vote on what they have decided is authentic and what isn't? I know that the gospels are not accurate historical accounts, nor are they meant to be; they are theological in nature. I am surprised that a skeptic like your self accepts the Jesus Seminar hook, line, and sinker! The synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke/Acts) were supposedly assembled from oral traditions, and it is possible that the authors of Matthew and Luke/Acts used Mark and a source called 'Q' for 'Quelle,' German for 'source.' But even you should be able to admit that possibly first century sources on Jesus might be a bit more accurate than something put together by a 19th century spiritualist. Sheesh, Jim, next thing you'll be telling me is 'Jesus taught this Knowledge.' Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 23:24:40 (EST)
From: eb Email: None To: Mickey the Pharisee Subject: Masters and Gurus and Such Message: Thanks Mickey. I believe I first heard the 'jesus traveled to the east, learned meditation etc., and taught knowledge' stuff around 1973. Some of the premies I hung with were also into witchcraft, so I got a really bizarre blend of new religion when I got into maharaji. (This after being raised a mormon and *loving* jesus during my early years). Got into lots of new age hooey hooey during the past 15 years and heard a lot more rumours which are passed off as truth. Feels good until one questions the veracity. or the integrity. Don't get me wrong: I love to experience the merge. But I am awfully careful about what I'll swallow these days. This forum has provided me with great new insights and understandings. I appreciate you all. Gratefully, eb Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, May 17, 1998 at 00:13:09 (EST)
From: Mark Email: None To: *>*....Hmmm, this time Subject: in english. Message: bill 1. that was dave h i guess, he emailed me and said he was sending a copy to rawat and 5 post-premies 2. i sense we had a kindred sort of experience as sort of householder true believer warriors in this,. I have enjoyed your posts over the last few months. there was one you wrote to fuzzbee last summer that assisted me in trying to get a point accross to him. thank you in arrears. i think we're all waking up from this dream in a different way. many with anger. some like you concerned about the fufure. some 'what the heck hit us'. others can't we be all friends. some posting on the internet. others reading. others denying. others reembracing their experience with knowl;edge and M holding on for dear life.some trying to do expose's.some switching to still another ostrich cult. i have to think there is some sort of Gollum-like cave that M and others who have falsely worn the Ring of Power will get to visit. anyway, i want to keep my being tied to the deepest and most beautiful part of experience I can. so if I spend my life fighting M, i'm just being a devotee a different way. that's my opinion.So I'm going to pass and get on with my journey. so i have made my contribution to this FORUM 20th century underground express,THAT TO ME IS THE FIRST THING DOING ANY SORT OF SELFLESS SERVICE FOR PREMIES IN 25 YEARS. that hopefully can enable premies that are ready to embrace themselves have a bit of courage to step free. And i support it by going public and writing what i have this last week.But i don't want to make this a new identity. I do point out 'conversations w god' to you personally as it seemed to give me a healthy post DLM perspective. i personally feel that the collective consciousness creates Maharaji's and Reverend Ike's AND THEIR LIKE. you wanted a living god( so i guess did I ) ordered one up from the concsiosness machine, and got a confused self deluded boy who was raised as a god in waiting. the rest they say, is the story of our lives. i sent a letter to him 3 years ago offering to counsel him, but i felt that was all i could personally do. Like all letters to him, it got no reply. i think this generation should be the last of it. and actually tho in your and my and maharaji's conceit M may be important , he's just one of 5 guys advertising knowledge techniques in Thousand Oaks ( right next to his hometown) / and is earmarked for the truly small print in the historical review. Christsakes, Yogananda beat him to the punch by 50,000 devotees and 70 years. and that was without Joan Apter! good luck with raising your kids. you and i 'll do just fine, without crying( for too long ) over spilt milk. Mark Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, May 17, 1998 at 00:59:20 (EST)
From: Katie Email: petkat@mail.trib.net To: Bill Subject: For your *>* only, Bill Message: Hiya, Bill. It's so hard to get hold of you by e-mail that I am putting this on the forum. I am sending you the audio-tapes on Monday (I wanted you to know this, anyway), and would like to know if you would also like a copy of 'Conversations with God' (the book that Mark A. spoke about). I have an extra one and will put it in the box for you if you like. Let me know, Katie Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, May 17, 1998 at 20:22:14 (EST)
From: *>*....For Email: None To: Katie Subject: YOUR...((*.*)).....Katie dear Message: Sure! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, May 17, 1998 at 21:27:45 (EST)
From: Katie Email: None To: Bill Subject: YOUR...((*.*)).....Katie dear Message: OK, it's on its way, with the tapes, as of tomorrow. Tapes are courtesy of Ms. Selena, lest you forget. Take care, Bill. Katie Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, May 17, 1998 at 22:51:22 (EST)
From: VP Email: None To: Katie Subject: Katie dear Message: Hey, I thought I was getting the tapes...Are you splitting them up? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, May 18, 1998 at 00:13:59 (EST)
From: Katie Email: petkat@mail.trib.net To: VP Subject: Katie dear Message: Hi VP - You are getting the videos (6 of them - isn't that ENOUGH?), and Bill is getting the audios (w/lipstick traces...). Is that OK? I am going to attempt to watch a couple of the videos and then will send all to you with the LOTU video. Let me know if that's OK. Katie Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, May 18, 1998 at 08:02:13 (EST)
From: VP Email: None To: Katie Subject: Katie dear Message: 6 of them! Yes, that is enough. Anymore and I may be joining the cult afterall-JUST KIDDING!!!! Did you work up the intestinal fortitude to actually watch any of them, BTW? VP Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, May 18, 1998 at 08:35:11 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: VP Subject: Video addendum Message: Like the rain your love came callin' fallin' soft upon my windowpane you came to make my desert green again, changin' everythin.... your love is like the ray-ain that's the latest devotional video I've seen. (nice country sort of voice accompanied by shots of Indian premies catching holi water in tin buckets, and of course the bare feet with the little chains on the ankles, walking to see him on the dusty ground) You non-video guys wouldn't have the experience of seeing M about 10 times larger than life, just that face (the same view a baby gets of mummy?) It's pouring outside. Good, clean, rain. Not like the rain, just the rain. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, May 18, 1998 at 14:01:19 (EST)
From: VP Email: None To: Jude Subject: Video addendum Message: Jude, at first I thought that you were singing that song to me. How disappointing! ;) -g. I am really going to enjoy this little peek into the new and improved DLM, coutesy of Selena's strange friend. I think it would be hard to look at the videos if you had recently been a devotee. Having NEVER been a devotee, I guess I am up to the challenge. VP Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 22:42:04 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: Brian Subject: Me virus transmittor? Message: Brian Duhh...I just have realised that in my post called 'Sighting the Site' (still active) I used the Useful Links connection from this site to go to another site (have to check the name). I cut and pasted in to my Word doc from an article called - 'On the Psychology of Spiritual Movements' by Michael Rogge. I also created part of my answer in Word and then pasted it in to the Forum. (I was mulling over it a bit, trying to get it right because I do waffle on a bit.) I certainly hope it wasn't me who has given anyone either a virus or some strange messages which look like a virus. If you need more precise info please get in touch. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 23:26:06 (EST)
From: Brian Email: brian@ex-premie.org To: Jude Subject: There is no virus! Message: Scott T. already posted that it was a false alarm, and his virus-checking software just burped is all. You will NOT get any virus from reading forum post. Period. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 23:40:49 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: Brian Subject: There is no virus! Message: So I just want to confirm that I can't give the people using the Forum a virus either? e.g. If I paste my posts into the Forum from Word? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 00:55:55 (EST)
From: Brian Email: brian@ex-premie.org To: Jude Subject: Right Message: So I just want to confirm that I can't give the people using the Forum a virus either? e.g. If I paste my posts into the Forum from Word? That's correct. You can't transmit a virus that way. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 12:35:40 (EST)
From: Selena Email: None To: Brian and all bug haters Subject: Right Message: Hi all I posted some stuff about MS buggies down in the original virus thread. Just trying to help so if I missed something or was unclear, just let me know, and maybe you could be gentle if you like but if not I'm in a good mood cause it's Friday. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 12:42:29 (EST)
From: Selena Email: None To: Selena Subject: ps about my post Message: I typed one and posted it and decided it was unlear so I typed another one.. I hate to ask this, it's mean because I know you are busy Brian. I was just wondering, what do you think of the idea of making posted editable by the author? I mean , after they are posted? Don't get me wrong, I program some and do know how time cnsuming it is, just wondering if it's worth considering as a future mod? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 15:42:42 (EST)
From: Brian Email: brian@ex-premie.org To: Selena Subject: It would be chaos Message: what do you think of the idea of making posted editable by the author? I mean , after they are posted? I considered that when I wrote the software, but imagine responses to posts that are changed afterwards! Once it was posted there might well have been people responding to the post even as the author was changing the meaning entirely. I decided to just go with previewing as many times as the author wants instead. Besides, Paradise didn't even let us preview. The html stayed broken until (and sometimes after) the archive was run. And I'm not grumpy - I just hate the 'V' word is all. And the 'M' word. The other letters are okay though... [grin] Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 18:30:59 (EST)
From: Selena Email: None To: Brian Subject: It would be chaos Message: You are right Brian. I was thinking of how I would use the editing, but I can see someone using it to try to win some point. Imagine if Jack had changed the name he gave me. Here I would be, posting doggie names all over the place. People would wonder what drugs I was on! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 14:21:52 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Everyone Subject: gumby, dawkins and success Message: Hi gumby, I haven't read the Blind Watchmaker but highly recommend Climbing Mt. Improbable. There's another Dawkins book some of us have read, River out of Eden, which is short and highly readable. I'd recommend that or Climbing. His thesis in a nutshell? How about a few links instead? Here's a 1994 English tv interview (Channel 4) regarding religion: Dawkins_BBC_interview And here's a short review (with further links) of the Blind Watchmaker: Blind-Watchmaker Here's a Dawkins' 1991 essay analogizing religion to a mental virus (employing his concept of 'memes'): mental_virus That should give you a much better idea of his ideas than anything I could say. As for losing cases, are you kidding? Of course I do. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 14:32:18 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Jim Subject: Mental virus excerpt Message: Here's a bit from Dawkins' 'mental virus' essay about the 'symptomology' of mental viruses, including that for religious belief: Like computer viruses, successful mind viruses will tend to be hard for their victims to detect. If you are the victim of one, the chances are that you won't know it, and may even vigorously deny it. Accepting that a virus might be difficult to detect in your own mind, what tell-tale signs might you look out for? I shall answer by imaging how a medical textbook might describe the typical symptoms of a sufferer (arbitrarily assumed to be male). 1. The patient typically finds himself impelled by some deep, inner conviction that something is true, or right, or virtuous: a conviction that doesn't seem to owe anything to evidence or reason, but which, nevertheless, he feels as totally compelling and convincing. We doctors refer to such a belief as ``faith.'' 2. Patients typically make a positive virtue of faith's being strong and unshakable, in spite of not being based upon evidence. Indeed, they may fell that the less evidence there is, the more virtuous the belief (see below). This paradoxical idea that lack of evidence is a positive virtue where faith is concerned has something of the quality of a program that is self-sustaining, because it is self-referential (see the chapter ``On Viral Sentences and Self-Replicating Structures'' in Hofstadter, 1985). Once the proposition is believed, it automatically undermines opposition to itself. The ``lack of evidence is a virtue'' idea could be an admirable sidekick, ganging up with faith itself in a clique of mutually supportive viral programs. 3. A related symptom, which a faith-sufferer may also present, is the conviction that ``mystery,'' per se, is a good thing. It is not a virtue to solve mysteries. Rather we should enjoy them, even revel in their insolubility. Any impulse to solve mysteries could be serious inimical to the spread of a mind virus. It would not, therefore, be surprising if the idea that ``mysteries are better not solved'' was a favored member of a mutually supporting gang of viruses. Take the ``Mystery of Transubstantiation.'' It is easy and non-mysterious to believe that in some symbolic or metaphorical sense the eucharistic wine turns into the blood of Christ. The Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation, however, claims far more. The ``whole substance'' of the wine is converted into the blood of Christ; the appearance of wine that remains is ``merely accidental,'' ``inhering in no substance'' (Kenny, 1986, p. 72). Transubstantiation is colloquially taught as meaning that the wine ``literally'' turns into the blood of Christ. Whether in its obfuscatory Aristotelian or its franker colloquial form, the claim of transubstantiation can be made only if we do serious violence to the normal meanings of words like ``substance'' and ``literally.'' Redefining words is not a sin, but, if we use words like ``whole substance'' and ``literally'' for this case, what word are we going to use when we really and truly want to say that something did actually happen? As Anthony Kenny observed of his own puzzlement as a young seminarian, ``For all I could tell, my typewriter might be Benjamin Disraeli transubstantiated....'' Roman Catholics, whose belief in infallible authority compels them to accept that wine becomes physically transformed into blood despite all appearances, refer to the ``mystery'' of transubstantiation. Calling it a mystery makes everything OK, you see. At least, it works for a mind well prepared by background infection. Exactly the same trick is performed in the ``mystery'' of the Trinity. Mysteries are not meant to be solved, they are meant to strike awe. The ``mystery is a virtue'' idea comes to the aid of the Catholic, who would otherwise find intolerable the obligation to believe the obvious nonsense of the transubstantiation and the ``three-in-one.'' Again, the belief that ``mystery is a virtue'' has a self-referential ring. As Hofstadter might put it, the very mysteriousness of the belief moves the believer to perpetuate the mystery. An extreme symptom of ``mystery is a virtue'' infection is Tertullian's ``Certum est quia impossibile est'' (It is certain because it is impossible''). That way madness lies. One is tempted to quote Lewis Carroll's White Queen, who, in response to Alice's ``One can't believe impossible things'' retorted ``I daresay you haven't had much practice... When I was your age, I always did it for half-an-hour a day. Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.'' Or Douglas Adam's Electric Monk, a labor-saving device programmed to do your believing for you, which was capable of ``believing things they'd have difficulty believing in Salt Lake City'' and which, at the moment of being introduced to the reader, believed, contrary to all the evidence, that everything in the world was a uniform shade of pink. But White Queens and Electric Monks become less funny when you realize that these virtuoso believers are indistinguishable from revered theologians in real life. ``It is by all means to be believed, because it is absurd'' (Tertullian again). Sir Thomas Browne (1635) quotes Tertullian with approval, and goes further: ``Methinks there be not impossibilities enough in religion for an active faith.'' And ``I desire to exercise my faith in the difficultest point; for to credit ordinary and visible objects is not faith, but perswasion [sic].'' Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 15:32:42 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Jim Subject: Mental virus excerpt Message: Jim: Like computer viruses, successful mind viruses will tend to be hard for their victims to detect. If you are the victim of one, the chances are that you won't know it, and may even vigorously deny it. Allow me to be a devil's advocate here. 'Mind virus' may be precisely the sort of model construction that he later regards as suspicious. Models intentionally oversimplify a process and are, by there very nature, conditional. The mega-issue here is whether the model itself is falsifiable as stated. Is there a way that we could determine 1. that the construction he calls a 'mind virus' is an ill conceived rendition of reality, and if so how? 2. Is there a reliable way to differentiate a 'mind virus' from 'the substance of things hoped for... the evidence of things not seen' or are we simply to conclude that the concept of 'mind virus' is coterminous with the concept of 'faith?' If so, it is a non-falsifiable hypothesis. Are there no completely subjective experiences that are real? In other words... the reality and efficacy of the mind virus model rests ultimately on the faith that valid and useful human experience includes no non-specifiable subjective experiences. The problem is that, so far, there appear to be quite a few of them, or are we to disregard this completely as evidence of anything? I have no problem using the 'mind virus' concept as a spur to skepticism. But, to the extent that skepticism leaves me with nothing upon which to base a life or a culture, I reserve the option to reject it. Why, ultimately, do I believe that the Universe is not perverse? In the final analysis it is because I must. If the conjecture about the 'big crunch' turns out to be valid, then I really have a problem with my belief. I can't imagine anything more perverse than the 'big crunch' unless it is unalterable and unstoppable expansion. In short, my need to believe that the universe is not perverse requires that I either reject both of these models for a hypothesis that involves some sort of balance, or that I try to expand my definition of reality to include something beyond the 'physical' that has the capacity to regulate and balance the thing. The irony is that if either the 'big crunch' or 'unstoppable expansion' or true then it is quite reasonable to believe that Maharaji is God. I don't know if Dawkins regards any of this as problematic, but suspect that like most thinkers he has managed to bracket his universe somehow. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 16:43:10 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: I found the virus, Scott Message: It's in you! Really, I tried to follow your reply and accepted as reasonable the question of 'mental viruses' being just another meme -- sorry, there's another one! -- just another model which may or may not be worthy of serious consideration dependant upon its falsifiability. I think I got your point and will mull it over. (Really, I'll just wait until Nigel says something and let you guys hash it out). Then you said: The irony is that if either the 'big crunch' or 'unstoppable expansion' or true then it is quite reasonable to believe that Maharaji is God. And I thought, 'Oh, my God! Am I just one big brunch away from crawling back to Maharaji's lotus feet?' Then I saw you'd written 'crunch', not 'brunch' and figured 'of course, that's it, Scott. If things don't stop expanding around here, there is a good chance that Maharaji is God. But then I started to think about Bal Bhagwan Ji.... Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 17:08:14 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Jim Subject: Silly string theory Message: Jim: The point about BBJ is quite interesting because I once had a friend who resolved the issue of multiple simultaneous Satgurus with the notion that if two existed then the universe must have been twice as big. Clearly she had this mixed up because that would indicate a shrinking universe. In that case, at a certain point we would only need 0.5 Satgurus..., then 0.25, etc. Zeno's problem again. What is the minimum Satguru (the 'absolute fraction of a centimeter'). Anyway, there's this 'string theory' thing that might be a way out. It might all end in a 'big brunch' with everyone covered in 'silly string.' A party. I like it. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 17:24:17 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Silly string theory Message: What's so funny is letting your mind really go back and relive what it was like to take that kind of insight from the master. When he explained, so confidently, so matter-of-fact, so happily, that there could only be one master, such are the laws of the universe, I recall being extremely impressed. Now we spend all our time ridiculing it, but I sometimes remember what it was like to fantasize about his unfathomable power. Thus, it was never hard for me to accept 'no leaf moves but by my grace' stuff. As good hardcore premies we tried to never forget. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 18:17:00 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Jim Subject: Trouble with haircut and car Message: Jim: I used to play this game when things got wierd by foisting them off on MJ. This was definitely not kosher, but when shit started to happen to me for no apparent reason I'd always have this conversation with MJ that went something like: 'Well, what the fuck do you know about me, and what makes you think you know what's best for me? I want to do [this] and if you think it's such a bad idea just tell me. Quit subverting what I'm doing to make your cute point!' Needless to say I never got any response, which I took to be an attempt to get me even more angry. I recently felt the need to get a haircut for graduation, and job interviews and I'm really finicky about that. There's this north African woman that cuts my hair, but when I called to make an appointment it turned out she only comes in on Sundays. So I waited a week, but when I called for a Sunday appointment the shop said she would only be in 'next' Sunday. I figured, 'what the hell,' made an appointment and then waited another week. I went in for my appointment to discover that she had some exotic disease (like measles) and wasn't going to make it. On Monday I called around to a number of shops and finally got an appointment at one I've never tried. But when I went out to my car it wouldn't start. After about two hours working on the damn thing it still wouldn't start. Now, in the old days I'd have attributed the whole thing to Maharaji trying to teach me some sort of lesson. I'd have had lots of agruments with him, all of which I'd have lost. Of course. Instead, I just went to the barber here in the building and got a perfectly good haircut, plus a nice conversation about the unending rain (which had apparently shorted out some wiring in my car). I really don't see any 'lesson' in all of this, unless it's just the general one of 'do what you can.' I could just as easily have gotten a bad haircut and been pissed about that. But, I wouldn't have been nearly as frustrated as when I used to think MJ was behind it all. This is why I was such a rotten devotee. I just can't get the knack of surrender. I started off kicking my kindergarten teacher in the shins and never really turned the corner. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 18:45:11 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: Jim Subject: Mental virus excerpt Message: 1. The patient typically finds himself impelled by some deep, inner conviction that something is true, or right, or virtuous: a conviction that doesn't seem to owe anything to evidence or reason, but which, nevertheless, he feels as totally compelling and convincing. We doctors refer to such a belief as ``faith.'' 2. Patients typically make a positive virtue of faith's being strong and unshakable, in spite of not being based upon evidence. Indeed, they may fell that the less evidence there is, the more virtuous the belief (see below). I would add one other element to this 'mind virus' analogy. The more 'central' or 'necessary' the particular faith or the conviction is, the more likely it is to be a 'mind virus' and the more difficult it is to stamp it out. To continue with the transubstantiation belief from the Catholic Church, this is a, if the THE, central requirement for the Catholic Church to exist at all. It really is about the only thing that separates it from some protestant sects. It is at the core of church teaching for that reason. So, despite the fact that you drink wine in a Catholic church and it still smells and tastes like blood and not wine, the belief if accepted my millions without question. It is simply too costly to give it up. Hence, it IS a mind virus, and it has lots of mechanisms to prevent outside forces from killing it. Same thing with BM. If BM is a fraud; if he has nothing really to do with the internal experience of knowledge and has no special powers, 'grace' or the like, the entire cult is kaput. That is the only thing that makes his cult anything different from any religions, new-age self-help group or a yoga class. So, great mechanisms to protect the virus from attack are utilized, including some of the ridiculous mental acrobatics premies will engage in to keep from accepting evidence of BM's specious nature. So, despite his obvious material greed, personal foibles,contradictory statements and actions over the years, disputes with his family, and questionable heritage, premies go on believing without question. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 19:37:04 (EST)
From: nigel Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk To: Jim Subject: I believe for every drop of .. Message: Thanks Jim, very much indeed for the 'mental virus' link. Believe it or not - hey! this is spooky - I have been going through cupboards and boxes in the attic on-and-off all week looking for the very same paper. Why? - because I thought that many ex's - you in particular - would appreciate it. (And why didn't it occur to me to check out cyberspace?) I will disregard Scott's warning about downloading stuff that is associated with your threads and risk catching a virus. (Hey! - It was good enough for Moses...) Unfortunately, since he recently took up the position of 'Professor for the Public Understanding of Science', or somesuch, RD has toned down down his public utterances to an alarming degree. I recently saw him on a late-night brainy chat-show using the word 'god' (as a cypher or metaphor) to enable himself to have a meaningful conversation with fellow-panelists who were talking about 'God' as a reality. What they were discussing was, basically, 'all things bright and beautiful' - humanity's ultimate niceness and vision and oneness and blah blah blah this and that (which I have absolutely no problem with, I hasten to add), but he didn't mention viruses once. BTW> Sue Blackmore (my bestest friend and confidante) has a new book out soon called 'The Meme Machine' which - as I understand it - explains belief in the paranormous in pure Dawkinese. I told her it would be good idea. PS> My best mate and drinking pal (part from Susie, of course) recently exchanged a few emails with Professor Dawkins. I will pass them on to you soon. They're very funny. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 19:55:52 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: nigel Subject: I believe for every drop of .. Message: Nigel, Synchronicity's my middle name. But you're very welcome, nonetheless. Are you serious about Blackmore? Yes? No? I couldn't really tell. Can't wait for the emails. And no, Scott, you can't see them, not until you admit that Dawkins is tres cooler than Gould. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 20:21:26 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Jim Subject: I believe for every drop of .. Message: Jim & Nigel: The truth is, Buchanan seems genuinely intrigued by Dawkins, but also slightly befuddled if you press him on it. Usually when J.B. indicates that he can't understand something what he really means is that he thinks it's crap. In this case, however, I think I detect some degree of awe, or at least respect. I also think he is increasingly uncomfortable with the positions he has taken over the years. His wife has been ill for a long time, and that has mellowed him quite a bit. He thinks Dawkins may be able to bail him out, to some degree. Ms. Lavine, of course, feels obligated to be derisive toward nearly everyone but Dewey, and she makes sure to give even him a good whack anyway, whenever the subject comes up. (You may have noticed a similarity in style. Children of Christian Scientists are often clever at pulling the rug out from underneath everyone.) She lets me off the hook simply because she thinks I'm too stupid to bother with, I'm sure. It's great to be beneath the line of fire. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 20:50:09 (EST)
From: nigel Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk To: Jim Subject: I believe for every drop of .. Message: Hi Jim - nice to talk to you in 'real time'. Much as I love name-dropping, I'm sorry to say that Sue Blackmore probably doesn't speak about me in the same fond terms as I speak about her. Our association is merely as follows: A few years back, whilst doing my degree and having to choose a final year research project, and having become become heartily disenchanted with most of the bollocks-merchants they teach you in orthodox psychology - Freud, Jung, Bandura, Berne, Eysenck, Rogers, Maslow, Skinner etc. etc., I chanced upon a paper by Sue Blackmore that seemed to have found a connection between people's belief in the paranormal and their relatively poor judgement of probablity, in that perfectly normal coincidences are seen as being 'too unlikely' and therefore meaningful. She has a whole theory of paranormal belief based around various kinds of perceptual and cognitive illusion. (I seem to remember premies see amazing coincidences everywhere ) So I sent her a big self-addressed envelope asking for more information, and - God bless her - she sent me back a pile of unpublished research papers which were absolutely wonderful as background materials for doing my own research project, which was... (well, maybe another time). I sent her the finished write-up and she wrote back some mostly favourable comments. Anyway, just after I graduated I saw this advert for a research assistant post in parapsychology in the paper, working for a Phd alongside none other than... you guessed it. I sent off my application together with a doctoral proposal and got myself an interview. Met her - very nice person - but I was scared shitless which didn't help the interview much. The job went to some smarmy creep who wasn't me, (and probably isn't really a smarmy creep - but envy brings about certain perceptual illusions) , and who, I am certain, knew her already - and that's about the end of it. But I did shake her hand, and made her laugh as well. The handshake is quite important, since it means I have shaken hands with someone who has - almost certainly - shaken hands with James Randi who has shaken hands with Stephen Jay Gould, who has written an essay about the definite lineage of handshakes he can trace right back to Charles Darwin. Ah well, such small claims to fame... (BTW> the Dawkins emails are genuine. Get back soon.) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 21:00:39 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: nigel Subject: coincidence Message: Nigel: I'm curious as to how you read the deaths of Adams and Jefferson, who died on the same day, July 4, exactly 50 years after signing the Declaration of Independence. I mean, it is kind of creepy, isn't it? -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 21:05:00 (EST)
From: nigel Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: coincidence Message: I mostly feel sorry for Aldous Huxley who died the same day as somebody even more famous on November 22, 1963. Didn't even make the papers! (ps> nice to talk to you too in real time, I should have said) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 22:01:47 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: nigel Subject: coincidence Message: Nigel: Almost real time, anyway. Sorry the Ph.D. program didn't work out. If it's any consolation I got turned down at quite a few before I made this connection. Too old. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 15:46:44 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: nigel Subject: coincidence addendum Message: Nigel: I mostly feel sorry for Aldous Huxley who died the same day as somebody even more famous on November 22, 1963. Didn't even make the papers! Sorry I didn't get around to a reply before this, but the coincidence of Kennedy's and Huxley's deaths falling on the same day was just that, pure coincidence. The apriori odds would have been low, but there is no huge significance to those two people being tied together, so the exposte odds are appropriate. In the case of Adams and Jefferson it is the apriori odds not only of their deaths falling on the same day, but that this is tied to a third coincidence: that date itself is so significant. The apriori odds of the deaths of Adams and Jefferson falling on the same July 4th, exactly 50 years on from the Declaration of Independence is truly astronomically small. In fact, within conventional statistical methodology the probability that the null hypothesis is correct is a good deal less than .001 (and more like .0000000001), so statistically speaking it would be an error to not reject the null. So, the point of my question then is: What's the explanation, given that the deaths of T.J. and J.A. was almost certainly not coincidence? -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 20:40:07 (EST)
From: Nigel Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk To: Scott T. Subject: Coincidences are coincidences Message: Really, Scott! The odds against something happening can only be said to be 'meaningful' to humans if a human has made a prediction that the outcome of said event will occur; otherwise you have no 'null hypothesis'. This will apply equally to a 'simple event' (such as which of several million sperm succeeds in fertilizing an egg), or to a 'compound event' (such as when a gambler places an accumulator bet on the successive outcomes of a number of horse races). The strange coincidence of Adams and Jefferson's deaths is a compound event, involving, as you point out, {Adam's death} AND {Jeffereson's death} AND {the 50 year jubilee} AND {the actual date of the treaty's signing}. Multiply them all together and there is your a priory probabilty. No problem. But only when a prediction has been made before the event. I will not quibble with your maths here - though I wouldn't place the level of statistical significance nearly as high, since, as people get older, their chances of their both dying on the same day increase - and in this case, neither man was young. But forget the maths: it is your reading of probability theory I have a big problem with. Say it were possible to organise a horse race with 10 billion horses (the Adams/Jefferson odds), it would be unremarkable that one horse should ultimately be the winner, but truly amazing if Uri Geller told you in advance which horse it would be. (Uri would, of course, do no better in this than you or I or the next stage conjurer, fake psychic, or lottery punter, but I'm straying from the point here...) A sensible bookmaker living at the time of the Declaration of Independence might well offer you odds of 10000000000:1 against the Adams/Jefferson jubilee deathbed scenario; but on the day after it happened the probability would have plummeted to 1:1, since the event is now certain, definite, has already happened etc. - which is why, I imagine, the bookies won't allow me to place bets on the outcome of last year's Derby. (Ok, this obvious, maybe, but it was CD, not me, who said it here first that 'the obvious is not always apparent') It is important to remember that, within your terms of reference, for every seemingly 'meaningful' billion-to-one coincidence that is found to occur, the same coincidence will fail to occur one billion-minus-one times; just as a billion-minus-one horses fail to finish first in the Billion Horse Derby, or a billion-minus-one sperm fail to fertilise any given egg. In the case of famous signatories to great treaties dying together on a landmark jubilee date, this may only happen once only in 10-billion treaty signings, yet we must expect it to happen nonetheless as a matter of course. Such events are rare rather than miraculous or even unique. Admittedly, I'd be very impressed if the same coincidence happened twice in, say, the same millenium - and would probably start looking for non-chance explanations. But even then I might be wrong to do so, since expecting random events to distribute themselves evenly over a given time period can lead to what is known as the 'gambler's fallacy' - where casino gamblers will sometimes (stupidly) wait for reds to come up seven times running on the roulette table before staking all their money on black for the next spin. If we then broaden our terms of reference to include every possible hypothetical event that technically could happen (ie. not just famous presidents and their famous treaties), and yet which would seem miraculous to living witnesses, such as the simultaneous suicides of seventeen Church of England Archbishops, or the Beatles once again holding the top five places in the American pop charts, I think we may safely say that since breakfast time this morning, at least 72 trillion such events will have already spectacularly failed to occur - or least enough of them to balance out those signs and wonders that are routinely observed by the wishful thinkers among us. Aside from all of which, consider the following: Say there was an unseen power capable of manipulating the cosmic machinery to bring about such stastical oddities. Has he/she/it really got nothing better to do with such powers than tinker with the timing of ultimately insignificant deathbed events whose appeal lies chiefly with obsessives, conspiracy theorists, trainspotters, and collectors of trivia? (ps: not that I would classify you as any of the above, I hasten to add!) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, May 18, 1998 at 09:19:04 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: coincidence addendum Message: So, the point of my question then is: What's the explanation, given that the deaths of T.J. and J.A. was almost certainly not coincidence? The new agies would say: because they both chose it. They came here with an agreement to do a task. Perhaps they were even part of the same soul -entity. They chose to come, and to go for their own reasons. This kind of information is from a chanelled book called 'The Nature of Personal Reality' by Jane Roberts. Or perhaps it was another of her books, the nature of collective reality (something like that) See I don't just make it up! By the way, glad to see Aldous Huxley mentioned here. Was I dreaming, or did you say you took LSD way back when? How did you survive that to become a scholar? Did it affect you much? (PS Aldous became a hermit and lived on an island in the last years of his life - he didn't like people - sad eh?) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Mon, May 18, 1998 at 09:54:55 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: coincidence addendum Message: Scott I just realised that was a pretty bizarre post. All those New Age books must have stuck somewhere inside of me (from years ago). No need to dump them on you, though! I started out thinking I could give you an answer, ridiculous or not (a theory if you like). However you may find it insulting to read such garbage. But I really like the way you are asking such a good question. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 08:38:43 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs To: nigel Subject: Nigel Message: Dear Nigel, Please tell us your research paper topic. Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 15:39:13 (EST)
From: Nigel Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk To: Robyn Subject: manana... Message: Certainly Robyn. Unfortunately it is a bit complicated to explain in a few sentences, and I'm totally exhausted after a bad day at work, and a bedtime that was extremely late last night (after spending far too long on the forum). I'll post you about it tomorrow. Nigel Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 21:51:56 (EST)
From: Nigel Email: None To: Robyn Subject: and manana... Message: Ok, Robyn, I have posted the research paper I wrote about my project at: http://www.redcrow.demon.co.uk/paper.html (My web-browser can't find it yet, but I expect it will be there soon) I'm afraid it's full of jargon, so if you're at all baffled (and still interested!), tell me and I will attempt a plain English summary... Nigel Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sun, May 17, 1998 at 11:14:53 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs To: Nigel Subject: and manana... Message: Dear Nigel, I just stopped in work to check my email while running other errands. Thanks for the address. I'll check it out during the week. Right now I am in the middle of a parental crisis. The 1st time my 16 yr. old didn't come home or call! She came home at 8am! I haven't slept and am VERY upset, wish I could get some advice. Right now I am so tired and upset her punishment is a VERY long list. The problem, or one of them is that she has never thought things through to their conclusion and her cute little mistakes aren't so cute anymore! A day in the life... I know this is about to go inactive but if you or anyone have any thoughts on this I'd be all ears, or eyes! Thanks. Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 13:11:43 (EST)
From: Brian Email: brian@ex-premie.org To: Everyone Subject: Link to Spanish Cult Site Message: I received this today: .AIS (Assesment and Information about Sects/Cults)is the only association in Spain involved in the study and prevention of this phenomenon. Our web is in www.redestb.es/personal/ais and we are interested in including your address in our 'links' section, if you do not mind. On the other hand, feel free to include our page in yours. We are mainly developing the Spanish section, but soon will potenciate the English one. I wrote them back and told them they could certainly link to the site. After checking out their English page (only one right now) I'm going to hold off linking there until they get more online. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 19:13:17 (EST)
From: Selena Email: None To: Brian Subject: Link to Spanish Cult Site Message: Muy bien, Brian. (did I just mix up my French and Spanish again?) I just checked it out and saw the link back to here. It's amazing how this is growing. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 07:00:10 (EST)
From: Richard Email: None To: Everyone Subject: What about the knowledge??? Message: Hi everyone, I surfed into this site when a critic of Maharaji put me onto it. Having had a quick look around it seems to me that most of the 'problems' which ex-premies have are with either the organisation or Maharaji and focus on: ego-trips, emotional blackmail, financial rip-offs and various control scenarios. These things are hardly exclusive to the Divine Light Mission. I received knowledge in 1971 and had to go through the usual rituals of humiliation and assimilation. Having spent several years on the circuit of ashrams and other forms of 'service', including working directly with members of the family, I am well aware of the paradox's and contradictions which exist in and around the 'top' levels of the structure. Most of the 'revelations', especially those of the instructor, seem pretty tame compared with my own experiences. I guess it's a relative thing. For myself, I never gave much to the Mission other than my time and I have never regretted giving anything which was mine to give. What I received, however, was a tiny but perfect gift which remains my own and is untarnished to this very day. Forget the manner in which the gift was packaged, forget the price which some Mission honchos demand. You have the gift now. Think about it. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 07:07:16 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: Richard Subject: What about the knowledge??? Message: Richard, could you please explain a bit more on that line....what do you experience when you practice? Has it grown with time? Does it make you feel fulfilled? Do you see light or hear music? I hope you don't mind answering me, this enquiry is genuine. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 09:05:55 (EST)
From: Bruce Email: phoenix@b024.aone.net.au To: Jude Subject: What about the knowledge??? Message: Dear Jude, I hope you don't mind me coming in here. I was about to reply to JW's post from a while ago and noticed this thread from Richard and your questions to him. I noticed some time back that you had received K. at Amaroo in the new centre. This caught my attention as I helped build it, and I have a friend who also received K. there at the same time. I think its really such a major point to focus on the gift ie Knowledge. This has always been M.'s primary message for me. (I received K. in 1974). As Richard said, there has been heaps of weird things happen with DLM and now with EV although to a much lesser extent. There has also been a lot of really great things too. When I first received K. it was a simple familiar feeling. That feeling has grown over the years for me, but I have also had periods of not much happening too. A lot more has occurred for me when I've been able to relax and enjoy the simplicity of it. The experience has always been there! I do feel very fulfilled most of the time now, and sitting down and spending that time with myself has a marked effect how my whole day feels. Yes I do see light, hear harmonies etc. It took me a while too slow down enough experience the sublety though. Its funny in a way because I know that at least some of the people here who consider themselves to be anti M. still enjoy practising the techniques and say that they feel better now that they don't attribute it to M.etc. My view of this that I'm not at all surprised, as they all were given the gift and it still works no matter what you think of M. Doing it is the key. Actually, now they are probably forcing themselves less and not making such a religion of it, its not surprising they would be happier and experience more. This to me is the crux of this whole thing. M. is constantly altering the box K. comes in because we have the innate tendency to want to grab onto the box and not open it to experience what's inside. In my experience by enjoyng the gift, recognition of the giver of that gift is possible. No amount of debate can do it. So much is said of M. here, most of it negative and much just rumours stated as fact. I guess thats pretty much to be expected. If you 'd like to see some footage showing how much fun it was back in the 70's here are some great video titles. Remembrance. M.in 1971-1974 The Message remains the Same:Maharaji 25 years in Australia Windows in Time Here are some quotes from those videos; reporter. at 14 years do you feel equipped for the job? M. 14 years doesn't teach them . 14 years has got nothing to do with it. Its the Knowledge that teaches them the Knowledge. 14 years is just 14 years Regards Bruce Goodnight Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 11:29:38 (EST)
From: John Email: None To: Bruce Subject: What about the knowledge??? Message: 'Its the Knowledge that teaches them the Knowledge.' That was certainly my experience. It was my own effort which gave me realizations which I verbalized and understood through my own satsang and listening to others speak about their experience. Sure, I had a great time listening to M, just like I had a great time listening to many others give satsang. Just like I have a great time here talking to others on a variety of subjects. But I do not miss seeing M in his Krishna suit with crown listening to gooey ooey devotional songs sung to him. And I don't have a heart of stone either. I cry quite often reading stories to my daughter about normal people living their ordinary lives. This whole worship of the physical form of M is what I don't miss at all. Now I worship my wife's physical form, and it's far more interesting. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 11:38:47 (EST)
From: Richard Email: None To: Jude Subject: What about the knowledge??? Message: Hi Jude, well what can I say? If I try to describe the light I sometimes see, you will generate some idea of your own by relating my words to your own memories or whatever. So I think that this is the point. If you have received knowledge then be confident and practice it if you want to. To try to answer your question factually; I don't actually do the techniques for light and music anymore, neither do I formally keep a set time for meditation. Rather I meditate on what we 'old premies' used to call the 'word' at any time at all, although it is very nice to sit quietly it is not really necessary. I am a family man with young kids and a non-premie wife whom I love dearly so the formalities of knowledge as they used to be promoted are not realistic. Yes, the experience of knowledge grows with time/practice but not 'bigger'. Rather it is the confidence in the knowledge that grows. I feel that I understand and am comfortable with my place in the scheme of things. I think that the need to make comparisons regarding the quality of one's personal experience is something that the practice of knowledge can diminish. In the light of this I believe that all new recipiants should have nothing at all to do with premies or any organisation managed by premies for at least ten years. R Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 11:51:52 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Richard Subject: How limp, Richard Message: Richard, Did you just read my post? I just read yours. What a diff, huh? You're talking about a nice little stress reliever -- oh, sorry, I forgot that the experience is so fragile that it's best to not even talk about it. 'But, believe me, it's.... well, I guess I really can't say' Yeah, right. Honestly, do you remember how we laughed at TM? Oh, sorry, I guess we're not supposed to compare other meditations either. Ooops! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 12:27:34 (EST)
From: Selena Email: None To: Jim Subject: Limp, Richard? Message: In addition to having a punk band with the UPS name, we also had one for a while called Thick Richard. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 12:31:17 (EST)
From: Richard Email: None To: Jim Subject: How predictable Jim Message: Jim, I guess you just proved the point. It is pointless to make comparisons or to try and explain this stuff with words. You either confirm someone's prejudiced view or get their back up. And who laughed at TM? Not me. Not even Maharaji said it was exclusive to him, only that he could show it to you. Personally I feel the same way about sources of knowledge as I do about alien life forms. Why go looking when it's in your lap? As I said before, if you received knowledge then it's still there waiting for you. Do it brother. Get on with it instead of looking for someone to blame. Wassamatter didn't you like the packaging? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 12:49:17 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: Richard Subject: How predictable Richard Message: And who laughed at TM? Not me. Not even Maharaji said it was exclusive to him, only that he could show it to you. I recall that as premies we considered TM to be just a relaxation technique but not the true knowledge. And BM openly ridiculed other spiritual practices and religions as either the practices of dead perfect masters or imposters for the 'true knowledge' that only he was revealing. And this is way the rest of the above statement is absolute nonsense, or maybe just revisionism. During my 10 years as a premie, BM repeatedly said he was revealing THE ONE TRUE KNOWLEDGE, that he was THE ONE PERFECT MASTER revealing it, and the only others to which was was NOT exclusive to was Buddha, Krishna, Ram, Jesus Christ and his father, all of whom were dead. Indeed, there was only ONE perfect master on the planet and he was it. If people enjoy 'practicing knowledge' great. I don't think even ex-premies have a problem with that. But what is 'practicing knowledge?' With Maharaji, it extends beyond just doing meditation. In my day as a premie it also included satsang and 'service' and 'service' was ONLY to Maharaji himself. If you didn't do all three (SS&M) you didn't get the experience of 'knowledge.' And then, of course, BM extended it beyond even that. He said, repeatedly for years, that 'devotion' was what he was really about, and he hardly even talked about 'knowledge.' Devoting to, worshipping, surrendering to, serving, and loving BM was what he was about. And I think he still is about this, he is just more subtle in the way he describes it. This devotion and surrender nonsense got a lot of people like me to make some very damaging and otherwise unfortunate choices in our lives. If BM had said just practice meditation and have a good time, that would be one thing, but you and I both know that he didn't do that, because if he did, he wouldn't have the net worth he does today. I think most exs have realized that the experience of meditation has zero to do with BM and the rest of it is basically a devotional cult, which has been very damaging to a lot of people. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 13:35:45 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Richard Subject: How predictable Jim Message: Richard, I'm going to go out on a limb (although not too far, I believe) and say you're lying if you say that, as a premie in the early 70s, you didn't laugh at TM. We all did and you know it. After all, if, as Maharaji said, there was only one true meditation, what was that TM shit anyway? Certainly nothing to take seriously. Now, you can fool people who weren't there, you might even be able to fool some who were but either can't or don't want to remember. But, for anyone who does recall, your denial is worthless. And tell me, dear brother, since when did it become 'pointless to make comparisons or to try and explain this stuff with words.? Isn't that what satsang is? One big advertisement for the fantastic? What the hell do you think all those Kabir poems are? All those 'scriptures'? Shri Hans' satsangs? Maharaji's wild claims about light 'brighter than ten thousand suns'? (Yes, he said it too, don't deny it). Here, again, the answer's so obvious it's embarrassing to have to interact with grown adults on this level. Maharaji can't deliver what he promised! JW is completely right of course about Maharaji claiming exclusivity. Of course he did. He said countless times that: a) you could only get 'perfect knowledge' from a 'perfect master' b) a 'perfect master' was always in the world for his true devotees. c) there could only be one 'perfect master' at a time as it would be physically impossible for perfection to manifest in two places at once. d) he was the 'perfect master.' What part of that don't you remember? I mean, really, Richard, all you have to do is look at the fallout with his family. If Maharaji didn't claim exlusive rights to his special sauce, how could he denounce Bal Bhagwan Ji as a fraud? Or are you denying that he did that too? Anyway, do you want the quotes or are you willing to admit the truth and save yourself a little face and me the effort? Your call. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 19:10:45 (EST)
From: Carol Email: None To: Jim Subject: The basis for the beliefs... Message: In the book on Shri Hans it is stated that an opposing group: 'the Arya Samaj, did not believe in the principle of the Avatar Vad, while Shri Hans had full faith in the incarnation of God. The unmanifest god can only be realised through the grace of the manifested one. He often quoted the Gita, and I remember both reading it and hearing this from mahatmas: 'Whenever virtue subsides and wickedness prevails I manifest myself. To establish virtue, to destroy evil, to save the good, I come from Yuga to Yuga. Fools deride Me in my manifested form, without knowing My real nature as the Lord of the universe.''He once proclaimed himself to be the greatest incarnation. When challenged to prove by evidence from the Vedas that he was the incarnation of God, he replied that he had never said such a thing, that he was but a humble devotee of God.(I've heard M say that too.) A member of the Arya Samaj replied,'but your devotees address you as the incarnation of God.' to which he replied,'A devotee should have reverence and faith for his Guru,' and quoted the Upanishads to substantiate his statement. He also asked, 'What is the harm if his devotees out of reverence say he is an incarnation of God?' He also stressed the importance of the Guru. 'The Upanishads make it clear that no spiritual knowledge is possible without a teacher.' The whole of the Upanishads is a dialogue between Guru and disciple. Shri Hans represented these views which emphasized spiritual experience and blissful devotion as opposed to sets of rules and dogmas developed in other aspects of the traditional Hindu religion. IMO Maharaji is doing the same thing in a different way, toning down the proclamation part of it so as to be less subject to criticism, however many of us know the answer to the question, 'What is the harm?' And I swallowed a whole set of religious beliefs that I did not know were religious beliefs! Carol Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 20:53:33 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Carol Subject: The basis for the beliefs... Message: Great post Carol. You have clearly thought quite deeply about this and done some real digging. Thanks for sharing the result with us. The hidden agenda has now become even more hidden and disingenuous. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 22:24:18 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: Jim Subject: So many questions Message: light 'brighter than ten thousand suns' Jim, first I want to say it is good to get these explicit details from the early days. When I was introduced to K. there were many things like the above post mentioned by an 'original' premie, but always dangled, enticingly and then no questions allowed. I guess he didn't want to say too much because then he coudn't answer the questions. He didn't agree with the 'new' changes, and still virtually gave satsang. The others tried to exclude him from service because he was saying too much stuff to people (ie coming between them and M?) but in fact he partially did me a service because I realised there was a lot more to it and it was big. So I backed off for quite a while. Then I just forgot most of what he said and listened to M., and I could have almost believed that all that stuff was made up or created by premies and mahatmas, and had nothing to do with M. So confusing. I need to ask about that light - because when I was 19 I had a big LSD trip and saw that light. That's a good description of it.I have never seen anything like that with Knowledge but only practiced 18 months. Therefore I could perhaps conclude that light does exist, but whether it is in the brain I don't know. Because they say LSD opens the doorway of what the brain normally 'screens' out or it would go crazy. ie big awareness/consciousness (of it's own self?). I know I am not being very clear but I know LSD is dangerous, and I know that 'grounded spiritual practices' are meant to be safe. I do believe that. What do others think about seeing this light? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 22:29:42 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: Jim Subject: So many questions... Message: To make myself more clear I have to add that along with seeing this light there was a tremendous experience of total awareness and blinding awe, of being in the presence of god. This is true, and I think it also made me crazy for years. How could anything compare to an experience like that? I couldn't integrate it so in a way I was 'blinded'. during psychotherapy many years later (like about 20) I re-experienced an LSD flashback and felt that there was much healing going on in me dating back (now we are going to get into time travel) to that time of my life (I took a lot of trips, but none like that one). I felt that at that time my consciousness had been fragmented or shattered, and that parts of me had been flung into the future, which I was now recovering. This may not be interesting to others but I say this due to the connection with the light others talk of in relation to knowledge. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 02:00:55 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Jude Subject: So many questions... Message: Jude: I experienced things like that on LSD. Some of it was sublime, and some awful. It took me years to recover, and to tell the truth Maharaji and DLM were part of my recovery. I still remember those experiences, however. For most of them it is reasonable to conclude that LSD just created a certain drug-induced psychosis. A few things were different, and I can't really relegate them to that explanation. So, something is going on that doesn't quite fit with the version of reality we've been taught, but on the other hand most of the 'spiritual' explanations I've seen also fall short. The way I see it, reality is just the way things are regardless of how strange that might seem at the moment. I also might not have registered everything accurately, like the first Greek who upon seeing a single rider on a horse took it to be a centaur. They saw something unexpected and unusual and their minds filled in the blanks. I used to have this notion that if you took a bunch of billiard balls and just scrunched them together in three dimensions they'd form an agglomeration without a regular shape. I tried it once, and they always form something called a cuboctahedron. Always. Furthermore, the concentric shell populations have weird properties, corresponding precisely to the electron/proton mass ratio. I have no idea why that's the case, and neither does anyone else, because 'sphere packing' is not part of the study of subatomic physics. Physicists just never thought it important to explain those kinds of things. Too weird. Something is going on and we have gaps in our collective and shared experience so these things don't seem systematic enough or sufficiently related as part of some comprehensible pattern to investigate rationally. Someday they will be. I'm pretty sure. Unlike CD I don't think they are inherently irrational. Electricity once seemed like magic, and I think we are all preprogrammed with perceptual flaws that are as distorted as those that led people to see electricity as a spiritual force. The notion that only physical events really 'exist' is just such a distortion. It's like believing that the sun 'comes up' even though it makes no sense. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 03:27:10 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: So many questions... Message: Thanks, Scott. I find what you say extremely interesting because you are so well informed and you also have the patience to talk to people like me. That is a rare and valuable quality I think. By the way, you mentioned some of your studies previously (they seem to encompass a wide area - is it politics as well as maths?), and your teacher. I recalled reading something once about Buckminsterfullerenes (sp?) Is that to do with the shape of sub atomic particles also? I can't quite recall the context. (hey, this is like a mouse saying something to an elephant, intellectually, i think!) I want to reply to some things you say, because they stimulate my mind but I think in a very loose sort of way, just grasping onto things (like a monkey swinging through the trees) I had this thought when you talked about critical thinking and you said a hypothesis had to be disprovable to be useful? Well what about if we are talking about something like life itself - then the disprovable hypothesis is death (ie You have life, and you don't have life). Like the viruses, the ony way you can 'prove' something is for everyone to say what they really, really think or know, quite carefully (ie honestly, accurately if possible). Then when you compare them, you will find the virus, or maybe the truth - because the truth exists in matching up all these subjective awareness about our 'lives'. I have put that really badly and don't even know if that was my original thought. Please don't laugh! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 10:37:09 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Jude Subject: Not laughing Message: Jude: Well what about if we are talking about something like life itself - then the disprovable hypothesis is death (ie You have life, and you don't have life). Well, life is not really like an hypothesis because it is the context for all hypotheses about other things. This is exactly the point (if I understand him correctly) that Habermas is making in differentiating between the 'system world' and the 'lifeworld' (or 'Lebenswelt'). What he wants to do is to redefine what 'rational' means so that we can create 'the linguistification of the sacred,' by utilizing 'unconstrained discourse.' Like the viruses, the only way you can 'prove' something is for everyone to say what they really, really think or know, quite carefully (ie honestly, accurately if possible). Then when you compare them, you will find the virus, or maybe the truth - because the truth exists in matching up all these subjective awareness about our 'lives'. What you've stated here is a very insightful rendition of unconstrained discourse leading to linguistification of the sacred. A big part of Habermas' 'Theory of Communicative Action' is the notion of 'dramaturgical action' (which he borrowed from another philosopher). Including dramaturgical action in the definition of rational discourse allows people to make judgments about the honesty, veracity or sincerity of 'truth statements,' in addition to their objective truth or strategic importance and relevance. I think you've stated it with a great deal more clarity and simplicity than Habermas has ever managed to do. If I knew him I'd send him a copy of your statement. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 10:46:52 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Not laughing Message: utilizing 'unconstrained discourse Scott in some other thread they were saying about whether M 'channels' his satsang. Well to me I loved his Satsang often because of that quality of tapping into a stream of consciousness...but wise consciousness. I believe we could all do that (if we had the key?) Is that like what you mean in the quote above? When my daughter was only about 3 (maybe younger) I was crying in the garden one day and she came up to me and said 'why are you crying, are you sad' and I said, Im kind of happy and sad at the same time, and she said 'it takes sunshine and rain to make a rainbow, mummy' That was a pretty perceptive comment - in fact it was astonishing. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 11:16:06 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Jude Subject: Not laughing Message: Jude, Your daughter's comment was wonderful but it wasn't supernatural now was it? Isn't 'astonishing' a little much? Why does it matter? Because of the context. It looks as if you're actually suggesting that there was more going on than your wonderful then-three-year-old being sweetly precocious. If that's what you actually think, I'd say you were imagining things. I have to ask you, as well, what Maharaji ever said that was 'wise'? I think he echoed Hindu spiritual dogma and played with owrds and paradoxes. He made grandiose, if inconsistent, claims and told a bunch of lame jokes. Some, as to be expected, were better than others. 'Wise'? How? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 11:31:14 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: Jim Subject: Not laughing Message: It was more the quality of synchronicity - the way I could go in with a terrible weighty problem and in some way he would answer it or I would feel relieved of my burden. Especially when I really needed the help, my answer would be there. As if there was a level of his talk which I could tap into which met my level of where I was at. Maybe just two sentences. And maybe no-one else even noticed that part. Other parts I wouldnt even hear. Like there were many levels in what he was saying - it was multi layered. For a few moments I would feel he was talking to me and me alone, like he was right here with me. God, I miss that. I haven't felt that for quite a while. I dont understand it Jim. I agree with everything sensible that you and others have said and you have helped me look at it all in a rational light. My daughter I really think was only about 2 1/2 when she said that. It was pretty awesome for her age. All I mean is, where did it come from? What does 'sweetly precocious' really mean? She got that really complex metaphysical thought into her mind and out it popped! Sometimes I think she was channeling (her soul?) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 11:36:46 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Jude Subject: Not laughing Message: Jude, Re Maharaji: Please read the Guru Papers. You'll love it and I'm sure we won't be having THIS discussion afterward. Track it down on the net. You can even find excerpts somewhere. Trust me, it'll make a difference. Re your daughter: I'm sorry, that was far from a 'realy complex metaphysical thought'. You're projecting. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 11:35:06 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs To: Jim Subject: Not laughing Message: Dear Jim, and Jude, I thought your daughter's statement was astonishing also. Jim, if I may give you my take, not speaking for Jude, of course, the thought process that was used to make the mental connection between being happy while being sad and needing rain and sun to have a rainbow is pretty impressive for a 3 year old, I think. My kids were that age to long ago and my god my oldest started talking at 6 mo, really taking off at 9 mo. I've worked with that age in the past and I know one 3 yr. old now and I don't think he could make that connection although I love him dearly, maybe it is because he is a mear male, just kidding.... Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 09:09:10 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs To: Jude Subject: So many questions... Message: Dear Jude, You can see an account of a darshan experience I had on LSD. It didn't freak me out or make me crazy because although I felt it was significant as were many of those experiences as far a being a window to the minds capabilities, I knew it was the drug and that really helped me. One of my oldest sisters friends talked to me about good vs bad trips years before I ever tried it and he gave me good advice. Interestingly, the only bad trip I ever had was one where I had responsibilities to deal with, that says a lot too. I only did that 3 times in a matter of a few months and although I had deep experiences I do not condon the drug, just wanted to make that clear. That was 25 years ago. Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 08:59:40 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs To: Jude Subject: So many questions Message: Dear Jude, During the year and a half to two years I intently practiced K I watched the light change and develop from blobs of colors moving around to donuts with one color outside and another inside to changing symetrical designs. A year or so ago I was exhausted after a long day of driving my daughter back to college after a break, driving about 10 hours. When I closed my eyes I just saw a road moving as if I was still driving so I did the light technique, and Jim I never pressed my eyes hard at all, and the 'picture' changed to an almost white but violet, there is that word again!, lilly pad flower. I was so pleased and enjoyed it for a bit but stopped because I wanted to sleep but the image stayed for a very long time and I finally gave up trying to shake it off and just accepted it. Also when I get a massage or go to the chiropractor and have my eyes shut I usually see changing colors in the area of my 3rd eye. All these experiences cause me to believe in my, and all humans and who knows could very well be in animals too, ability to experience this life on more than a surface level. I have been picking buleberries at a beautiful beaver pond that is a few acres as well as extended wet lands, natural, wild place since I stumbled on it in 1973. Over the years some have been better than others and one year there were virtually no berries. When I closed my eyes I 'saw' a sunny day with tall lush berry bushes swaying in the breeze. I shook it off but, same as the lilly pad flower it stayed and I just enjoyed. I consider these 'visions' as withing the scope of the light technique. Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 10:14:58 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: Robyn Subject: Seeing the light Message: Thank you very much, Robyn. You are the first person who has ever shared with me anything specific about their experience. Where can I see an account of your darshan experience on LSD? This is important to me because of my own experience. I think that like some others, there are parts of my deep past I have not dealt with, and imagined I never would. It is interesting, I was thinking that I took all that LSD in about 1976. They were amazing years. I hear people talking about living in ashrams, but I also lived in some pretty weird experiences. I remember the comet Kahoutec (sp?) passed over somewhere around that time, maybe a year or two earlier. Someone mentioned M's brother saying that was significant. Astrologers aid it was too but I can no longer recall why. But whatever the influence that was around in those years, I remember being a very trippy girl. I used to dream about all sorts of things and write poetry and had so much longing...Instead of finding M I found other stuff as I mentioned. Guys, I know you will hate this but you did survive the ashram experience. People who got into other stuff like drugs are probably not around any more to have their Forum. However that doesn't alleviate your suffering in any way. But there were a lot of things happening in those times that's for sure, that will probably never happen again in that way. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 11:12:18 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs To: Jude Subject: Seeing the light Message: Dear Jude, Have you looked at any archives? I'm not sure where it is and don't have a lot of time to look but I will try and we can see who finds it first. I am not sure when I sarted posting either but sometime after January of this year. I love to talk about this stuff but haven't found many here who do too! Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 11:33:50 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: Robyn Subject: Seeing the light Message: Ok thanks.I will look for it - do you recall what it was called? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 11:38:11 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs To: Jude Subject: Seeing the light Message: Dear Jude, Sorry, I'm cluless, I can't remember from one minute to the next. Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 13:58:25 (EST)
From: Carol Email: None To: Jude and Robyn, all of U Subject: Peaks,Love,Magic events Message: Jude and Robyn,I share the opinion of you both about what I would call 'amazing moments of awareness of magical mystery' or delightful 'coincidences' that are just too perfect to be written off as accidents. I had my whole world view shaken and changed by events in my life that I attribute to a divine presence that knows me and reveals the magic to me both through my own perceptions and through other people. The first time I took LSD in 1969, I was overcome with feelings of love and beauty. When I was coming down early the next morning, I went for a walk to a big city park nearby. I felt the world had lost it's color and I saw people everywhere going to work and walking who seemed so sad and separate from eachother. I became very sad. Then as I was walking around the lake feeling alone, an old lady with an incredibly crinkled, rubbery-looking face came towards me and smiled a huge smile and said to me: Is it any warmer on the other side? Then I was OK! I had 'Peak experiences' about 3 or 4 times in my life; one of the most powerful in Nov. 1971 when I had taken LSD. It wasn't just the LSD, because I had taken it several other times. I sat in Lotus position with a very straight back and focus on the third eye during the peak of the LSD. I felt like I had merged with God and experienced intense love and energy. A lover with me who was watching me said when I opened my eyes later (I had no sense of time) that my body had disappeared for a moment. (He was peaking,too, so who knows what he saw!)the feelings and awareness lasted for several days after and it was an experience of absolute certainty that God existed and was in me and was who I really was. I was finding messages in the lyrics of the music we listened to and seeing new meanings everywhere. I felt that the LSD was just a catalyst which caused me to glimpse reality. I tried to meditate to keep the awareness by referring to a book about Yogananda and looking at his incredible eyes in his picture, and by looking at a candle, and by trying to let thoughts float by without attaching to them. I studied Be Here Now. I was actually sort of giving satsang to my friends about it and when I did, I felt a renewal of the high and the love. But it faded and I was back to normal after about a week. I felt somewhat schizophrenic with an intense desire to experience God again, but trapped in my world, again using pot and being promiscuous. I felt intuitively that I would never have an experience like that by ingesting LSD again, that I would have to find it another way. I was extemely ripe for receiving Knowledge when I heard about it 9 months later. I am still certain that there is a higher consciousness of which we are a part that communicates to us and through us. In fact a thread I read recently about Mr. Rawat 'channeling' Guru Maharaji really caught my attention. Because that higher consciousness exists in him as well as in you and I, maybe any individual can have that power and love drawn out of them by the recognition of it inside themselves by themselves or by the focus of that recognition by others. We do not need to ever feel separate from the presence of God when it is inside of us and can be reflected back to us in any person at any time. 'God' or whatever you want to call it, is manifested in everything and everyone but we tend to see in limited ways. Maybe with evolution we will have expanded use of the parts of our brains that we don't use now and these experiences will all be explained physiologically. Maybe our Big self and our little self will be united. How were we made??? and by what or whom?? We did not create our world or our bodies but we co-create our experience of life. Wishing you all amazing experiences and love,Carol Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 20:12:53 (EST)
From: Mickey the Pharisee Email: mgdbach@ziplink.net To: Carol Subject: Peaks,Love,Magic events Message: Carol, My LSD experiences were similar to yours, and I must say that I still feel that they were higher spiritual experiences than anything I experienced while practicing Knowledge. I, too, had a peak experience in which I merged with God and creation and was one with everything; I realized that I was not this body and it was totally transcendent. I was never able to re-experience that on LSD or in meditation. I no longer feel a need for such experiences. I performed my first baptism on Thursday night, with one of my best priest-friends assisting and another priest-friend preaching, and I experienced the power of God through the love evident in the community gathered. What I call the Holy Spirit was powerfully evident in that gathering, and it was what I consider a beautiful spiritual experience. Regards, Michael Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 22:32:08 (EST)
From: Carol Email: None To: Mickey the Pharisee Subject: Peaks,Love,Magic events Message: Thankyou for sharing. I also never experienced the same strength of realization from LSD or meditation either. It is so great that you are have chosen to be a priest. I have thought of being a pastoral counselor. I have fairly universal beliefs that often go through changes in detail. I don't think I could fairly represent any one churches beliefs. I would love to communicate more with you about the subject of faith and what it is of! Carol Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 22:44:05 (EST)
From: Mickey the Pharisee Email: mgdbach@ziplink.net To: Carol Subject: Peaks,Love,Magic events Message: Carol, I would be happy to carry on such a conversation off-site via e-mail. I am presently trying to finish up the semester, then I have a week before I'm off to Panama for three weeks, but e-mail me and we can talk. Regards, Michael Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 19:03:31 (EST)
From: Lg Email: None To: Jude Subject: So many questions Message: Jude I experienced this light singing Arti once. I strongly believe Arti had nothing to do with it though. Rather it was due to the fact that I was staring m's picture. I wouldn't say m's picture was the cause either. Just the concentration. So the same could happen if you are in a serene frame of mind with concentration. It's easy to credit m and k when you don't know better. They have nothing to do with it. It was a very intoxicating experience as well (love). I had many similar experiences at the time, specially before I received k. (Getting out of the bus, laying down in bed, only once in medication.) Each experience had a message of some sort, or a finger pointing in the 'right attitude in life' as a reward: (listening to your own self instead of every one else) as an example. And the value of concentration when I experienced that light. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 07:17:05 (EST)
From: Richard Email: None To: Jim and Bruce Subject: Sex, Lies and Videotape??? Message: So Jim, you want me to cast my mind back to the 70's so's you can dig up evidence to refute what I say? 'Quotes' for chrissake! OK sure I laughed at TM, also at the Catholic Church, C of E, Baptists et al. I also laughed at the premies sharing the squat that I lived in, defaced their posters, ripped-up the little JAI SAT CHIT ANAND flyers stuck all over the walls which really irritated me and trashed their glossy magazines. I was right and everybody else was wrong. Then the inevitable happened and after attending a couple of programs I asked for and received knowledge from Bai Ji at The Avenue in London. Even this pissed me off a little as I had been hoping for Ashokanand, (more impressive you know). Now it was different, now WE were right and everybody else was wrong. Except, of course, that the Mish was a microcosm of the world and WE were not truly brothers and sisters in harmony anyway. Factions existed and factions within factions. People made their way through this mess as best they could. People like you Jim (apparantly) gave up sex and drugs and rock n' roll while the rest of us tried (pretended) to but failed. So Bruce wants the dirt on the Mish to free the trapped, what do you want to know? That Ashram Secretaries seduced house mothers with the excuse that Maharaji wants us to share our love? Mata Ji loved that one. That Mata Ji used to beat ashram premies with a stick for not being devoted enough? That Ashram Secretaries would rip-off jumble funds to buy themselves fancy suites for personal darshan with Maharaji while the premies lived like paupers on killer homemade bread and stomach-wrenching industrial strength daal? That the guy who put the cream pie in Maharaji's face was given a severe and literal hammering by a Mahatma who shall remain nameless lest I get sued? That the WPC (World Peace Corps to the newbies), although a part of the Mish, was in fact a seperate entity with its own fundraising, fleets of vehicles, skilled labour, security arm and seemingly endless resources and was at war with the Mish? That the above had its own special programs, accomodation (ashrams) and agenda? That this war was not limited to words but blossomed into full-scale confrontations of a physical nature and included espionage and counter-measures? I can still remember some of the tapes. I can also remember being personally cursed by both Balbagwan Ji and Ashokanand and consigned to the pits of hell. Further, I can recall Maharaji contradicting himself several times in the same sentence. There's more, much, much more, but where will it get you? You may see this as evidence that Maharaji is a fraud who should be ignored or locked up. The Pharisees took a strong line with fake gurus I seem to remember. Hey, now that's a good idea. Why don't you spend some time to collate all the facts and then take them to the authorities and demand that they crucify..oops sorry, prosecute Maharaji. Look what that did to the Christians. On the other hand? I still have knowledge and a life in which to try to practise it. The adventure continues and nobody said it would be easy. You can philosophise all you like but I still have to find peace (continually) in a world of N.Ireland, Kosovo and smaller personal tragedies. You don't get knowledge and then its all over. You have to do it all day every day. So far, I have not found anything more effective at keeping me sane, continually enlightening me and of allowing me to contribute positively than the knowledge which was revealed to me. Your call Jim and Bruce. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 07:23:06 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Richard Subject: Sex, Lies and Videotape??? Message: Hi Richard, We're real-time apparently. I couldn't sleep at my girlfriend's so decided to come home, log on, maybe get some work done. Instead, if you like we can talk. By the way, where are you? I'm in Victoria, B.C. (on Vancouver Island - western Canada). It's just past 4 here. By the way, did you hear that Sinatra died? Nice voice but what an asshole, apparently. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 11:10:53 (EST)
From: Richard Email: None To: Jim Subject: Just a reply..... Message: Hey Jim, I just read your message. Sorry you can't sleep but isn't it great to be able to find someone awake to talk to no matter what. I am in Plymouth U.K. and it's now about 4p.m. Yeah I heard about Sinatra. Well he lasted longer than Jerry Garcia, but did he enjoy himself quite as much do you think? Richard Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 11:18:08 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Richard Subject: Just a reply..... Message: Hard to say. Probably more, really. Garcia ended up being miserable. I think Frank wasn't. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 08:17:28 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Richard Subject: Sex, Lies and Videotape??? Message: On the other hand? I still have knowledge and a life in which to try to practise it. The adventure continues and nobody said it would be easy. You can philosophise all you like but I still have to find peace (continually) in a world of N.Ireland, Kosovo and smaller personal tragedies. You don't get knowledge and then its all over. You have to do it all day every day. So far, I have not found anything more effective at keeping me sane, continually enlightening me and of allowing me to contribute positively than the knowledge which was revealed to me. Richard, I'll just carry on. I'm not sure what you're saying here, really. But I'll tell you my position: I think 'Knowledge' is bullshit. That is, I don't think there is any such thing. I know too much about natural selection to take seriously the pre-scientific myth that people were 'created' with a secret chamber inside, the door to which can only be unlocked by prince charming. I think that the notion that the breath is conscious patently absurd. That's not to say that it's any great mystery why people could believe such a fallacy. After all, you breath every moment you're alive; how simple, then, to put the cart before the horse and dream that the breath is somehow consciously orchestrating life instead of being just a function of it. Incredibly simple mistake, yet that's what it is. One might as well argue that the heart -- also functioning from birth to death -- is somehow conscious. Stupid? Of course but, you know, that IS exactly what people have believed. Indeed this whole 'heart / mind' dichotomy -- equally useless in my opinion -- is a sublimely ridiculous fruit of that illusory tree. Want another example? Think of anything that exists throughout life and you'll likely find some tradition of worshipping that effect as causation. How about your blood? We obviously need it and we obviously have it all of our life. Well how many cultures imbue this simple, if essential, bodily fluid with supernatural power? Lots. Think of all the sacrificial customs, think of catholicism. How 'bout Sangera? These are all rich, magical mythologies and they make for great movies, but are they true? Of course not. It's like astrology. Not only is it bullshit but we can even see, really clearly, how people created it to begin with. Romantic projection, mixing up cause and effect, trying to make some sense of a mysterious world. If we were starting from scratch, postulating theorems of reality and what have you, nothing would be whackier than suggesting that a few stars that kind of form a shape of a certain animal (really they don't even come close but let's assume they do just to make the point) give you some of that animal's 'characteristics' if the sun happened to be situated therein when your'e born. Like I say, that's about as nuts as you can get. Wonderfully romantic but to actually take that seriously? You've got to be crazy. It's like that Goerge MacDonald children's book, At the Back of the North Wind. Beautiful idea, but only a fool -- or someone steeped in a primitive culture -- would actually believe that the wind is conscious, etc. The funny thing is a lot of otherwise sane people DO believe that shit. Katie, here, 'likes' astrology. Does she think it MAY be true? Maybe. Bill, still thinks the breath is conscious. Oh well. What can you do, huh? Anyway, Maharaji sold this whole trip to us -- that the breath is indeed conscious, that it is 'mercifully', 'selflessly', 'lovingly', 'wisely' giving us our very life moment by moment. (Sometimes he throws a little heart-as-agent in there too, just to take advantage of the popular culture, I'm sure). The big point he's always made is that the breath is there while you're alive AND, most importantly, will be there at your moment of death as well. If you're pure enough then, if the grace is with you, if you've surrendered, and all that, then you'll go with it. The breath is, after all, Maharaji himself... you know the rest. Well, I think this is absolutely stupid. I'm ashamed that I ever fell for it. Indeed, I should ahve gotten off the train that first month of satsang. Here's what happened. I'd been going to satsang and hearing how Maharaji was the Lord, how he was going to enlighten everyone -- or those who really wnated the truth -- or those who he qould pick to relaly wnat the truth, sonething like that. The point was, though, that he was the personal protector of al of his premies. He controlled everything. Then, one night at satsang in Toronto, the premies got the terrible news that a carload of premie musicians from Michigan had crashed and several of the premies had died. They were all on their way to some other town to see Mata Ji, I think. That should have done it, right there. Obviously, the notion of a protector who only protects you when you're safe is an empty concept. Mind you, that's what religion's been trying to rationalize forever: 'the problem of evil.' Well, there's no problem of evil if we didn't project such false expectations on life. Anyway, you get my point, don't you? Knowledge is a crock. It might feel great, and thus it might be a completely valid thing to do. But to anthropomorphize the breath is a real mistake. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 08:18:57 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Jim Subject: Shit! I blew the html! Message: Sorry, In the post above, the first part's Richard's, the second part is mine. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 13:02:23 (EST)
From: Forum Elves Email: None To: Jim Subject: We fixed it, Potty Mouth Message: Now you owe us BIGTIME! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 10:38:37 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: Jim Subject: Non-rational Message: Dear Jim, What about symbolism? Do you have any regard for that, or does everything have to be literal? Can I ask you what M did to you to hurt you so deeply? What happened to you after you left the ashram? Did you crash badly? How has your life been since then? Do you feel there is something you lost then and have not regained? I hope you don't mind me asking such personal questions and of course I respect you saying whatever you want to say, and not saying whatever you don't want to say. I just think this kind of discussion would help me, too. I have felt just as angry as you about the rational part of myself. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 10:59:47 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Jude Subject: Non-rational Message: Jude asked: What about symbolism? Do you have any regard for that, or does everything have to be literal? I'm not talking about symbolism, I'm just talking about what people believe to be true. Actually true, i.e. literally true. People really believe in astrology, they really believe that their 'heart' houses emotion and the really believe that their breath is conscious. I'm just saying I think those are silly things to believe. Can I ask you what M did to you to hurt you so deeply? What happened to you after you left the ashram? Did you crash badly? How has your life been since then? Do you feel there is something you lost then and have not regained? M didn't do anything particularly bad to me. I've just never been in any cults before, this one kind of rubbed me the wrong way. After I left, I worked for a while, then went back to school. I didn't crash badly and life's been okay since then. I do feel that I lost a lot by being in the cult. Essentially, I lost my twenties. Who knows what else I would have done? Maybe nothing special, maybe something very special. But I really see it as a great waste of time. Jude, my categorical dismissal of Knowledge and certain other 'spiritual' beliefs doesn't necessarily mean I'm especially angry. Sometimes I get angry here, usually when dealing with premies who try to obscure unquestionable facts. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 11:23:27 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: Jim Subject: Non-rational Message: See I was going to say something which Richard's reply to you about the ashram sparked in me - did I hear someone say you are a Scorpio - but you 're not going to like that so I should use another analogy. However I will say it and be damned. I had a good friend, a Scorpio who lived on an ashram for several years. He slaved in the kitchen up to 12 hours a day, cooking for all the 'family'. He did this because he was a very hard worker and naturally a very giving peron (kind, too - even though he has a sting) He was also completley celibate because he believed what the Master told them. He took it to heart, ie seriously, and he did what was asked. He got pretty mind-fucked, too. After he left he found out the others were all screwing around. He had no idea. He was actually serious about the whole thing. Now he was deeply devastated by that experience (because in the end they were betrayed by the Swami, who was having sex with under-age girls at the ashram) The parents of these girls were also deeply betrayed. I met some of them about 10 years later and they were still taking the guy to court. I don't know how my 'friend' feels about that experience now. I am not saying you are like him but I can't help it, I think 'oh, someone else I know is the same sign and they had were like that...' It's just a way of trying to understand someone. And perversely, the more you learn about astrology, the harder it gets. Because everyone has all the qualities somewhere in their chart. So then you can see that I am like you, just in a different way. I am glad we are still able to have a civil conversation. I know myself as a 'niggler' from way back. I seem to like to get on other people's nerves - to stir them up - and it's not funny. It's to do with having a very unconsciously angry/depressed father. So I am glad you are not angry. I am not angry either. I may be ignorant but that's another story. By theway I met some premies once from Vancouver, who own an organic oil company. With a little time I could remember their names. But I guess it's a huge place. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 11:28:46 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Jude Subject: Non-rational Message: You must have met either Udo Erasmus or Bill Vincent. They were partners in a flax-seed oil compnay but had a falling out. There were one or two other guys -- Bob Whalberg was there too, I think. Jude, the more you REALLY know about astrology, like how it test drives in double-blind studies, the more you realize it's worthless. Sure, it's fun as a PURE fantasy but that's all. No truth value, none. I don't mind frank discussion; glad you don't either. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 11:44:28 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Jim Subject: Non-rational Message: Yeah that's them - Bob and Robert. Bob was older than Robert. Robert was a nutritionist. He's the one who told me about hydrolised vegetable protein (never to eat it!) that I mentioned to you in that post about food. I only met them briefly but it was the first time I saw M 'in the flesh'and we were in a tent having a nice meal. I wasn't even an aspirant then. M came into the tent and was eating near us. I kept staring at him. The others were all really spaced out (like on drugs). Someone was grinning and saying they were all getting high on his presence. I thought that was a bit strange (I mean did they channel their bliss from his presence? I mean does he get drained from all these people trying to hitch a ride on his energy?) Anway, they were talking about their oils , how great they are and I said 'are these snake oils you're talking about?' One of them told me how M had helped him 'rise up' from a problem he had. I think a lot of people like the idea of 'going up a level' in their consciousness. I certainly did. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 14:29:33 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Jim Subject: Non-rational Message: Jude, Are we morphing here? The last post was from you, not me, no? Anyway, do you distinguish between somone getting high on M's presence and someone thinking they are? I'll grant that the latter was happening. I don't believe the former, though. I guess one of the Bob's might have been Walberg. Don't know who the other one was. Lot of good people sucked into a cult. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 14:15:58 (EST)
From: Carol Email: None To: Jim Subject: Sex, Lies and Videotape??? Message: Jim, I think the breath is just one road to consciousness and it doesn't only have one way of 'being revealed'. You may be very able to explain everything in terms of the physical or natural selection, etc. It is great to explore those ideas and realities, but how can any of them explain how anything, the first atom or whatever, came into existence, and when, where, how, and why? I believe that I did not do it and you did not do it, so what or who is the doer???? I think it all is because of one permanent conscious energy source that manifests as matter and is experienced as love. Carol Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 21:01:13 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Carol Subject: Mt. Improbable Message: Carol, [Here's an excerpt from Dawkins' book, Climbing Mount Improbable, which explains natural selection by way of the extended metaphor of a mountain, high and steep cliffs on one side but with a long, gentle slope on the other. We see complexity (including consciousness) and assume that someone (i.e. God) put it all together. Not so, apparently. Now, I don't think that natural selection offers any explanation for the most fundamental layers of existence, it really just addresses organic life (although there have been some interesting speculations of how the theory might apply outside biology). Still, the only consciousness we KNOW of exists within the organic world and natural selection does seem to explain its evolution better satisfactorily. I'm impressed enough to give up looking for any sort of consicousness outside the process.] _________________________________________________________________ Mount Improbable rears up from the plain, lofting its peaks dizzily to the rarefied sky. The towering, vertical cliffs of Mount Improbable can never, it seems, be climbed Dwarfed like insects, thwarted mountaineers crawl and scrabble along the foot, gazing hopelessly at the sheer, unattainable heights. They shake their tiny, baffled heads and declare the brooding summit forever unscalable. Our mountaineers are too ambitious. So intent are they on the perpendicular drama of the cliffs, they do not think to look round the other side of the mountain. There they would find not vertical cliffs and echoing canyons but gently inclined grassy meadows, graded steadily and easily towards the distant uplands. Occasionally the gradual ascent is punctuated by a small, rocky crag, but you can usually find a detour that is not too steep for a fit hill-walker in stout shoes and with time to spare. The sheer height of the peak doesn't matter, so long as you don't try to scale it in a single bound. Locate the mildly sloping path and, if you have unlimited time, the ascent is only as formidable as the next step. The story of Mount Improbable is, of course, a parable. We shall explore its meaning in this and the next chapters. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ...To this day, and in quarters where they should know better, Darwinism is widely regarded as a theory of 'chance'. It is grindingly, creakingly, crashingly obvious that, if Darwinism were really a theory of chance, it couldn't work. You don't need to be a mathematician or physicist to calculate that an eye or a haemoglobin molecule would take from here to infinity to self-assemble by sheer higgledy-piggledy luck. Far from being a difficulty peculiar to Darwinism, the astronomic improbability of eyes and knees, enzymes and elbow joints and the other living wonders is precisely the problem that any theory of life must solve, and that Darwinism uniquely does solve. It solves it by breaking the improbability up into small, manageable parts, smearing out the luck needed, going round the back of Mount Improbable and crawling up the gentle slopes, inch by million-year inch. Only God would essay the mad task of leaping up the precipice in a single bound. And if we postulate him as our cosmic designer we are left in exactly the same position as when we started. Any Designer capable of constructing the dazzling array of living things would have to be intelligent and complicated beyond all imagining. And complicated is just another word for improbable - and therefore demanding of explanation. A theologian who ripostes that his god is sublimely simple has (not very) neatly evaded the issue, for a sufficiently simple god, whatever other virtues he might have, would be too simple to be capable of designing a universe (to say nothing of forgiving sins, answering prayers, blessing unions, transubstantiating wine, and the many other achievements variously expected of him). You cannot have it both ways. Either your god is capable of designing worlds and doing all the other godlike things, in which case he needs an explanation in his own right. Or he is not, in which case he cannot provide an explanation. God should be seen by Fred Hoyle as the ultimate Boeing 747. The height of Mount Improbable stands for the combination of perfection and improbability that is epitomized in eyes and enzyme molecules (and gods capable of designing them). To say that an object like an eye or a protein molecule is improbable means something rather precise. The object is made of a large number of parts arranged in a very special way. The number of possible ways in which those parts could have been arranged is exceedingly large. In the case of a protein molecule we can actually calculate that large number. Isaac Asimov did it for the particular protein haemoglobin, and called it the Haemoglobin Number. It has 190 noughts. That is the number of ways of rearranging the bits of haemoglobin such chat the result would not be haemoglobin. In the case of the eye we can't do the equivalent calculation without fabricating lots of assumptions, but we can intuitively see that it is going to come to another stupefyingly large number. The actual, observed arrangement of parts is improbable in the sense that it is only one arrangement among trillions of possible arrangements. Now, there is an uninteresting sense in which, with hindsight, any particular arrangement of parts is just as improbable as any other. Even a junkyard is as improbable, with hindsight, as a 747, for its Parts could have been arranged in so many other ways. The trouble is, most of those ways would also be junkyards. This is where the idea of quality comes in. The vast majority of arrangements of the parts of a Boeing junkyard would not fly. A small minority would. Of all the trillions of possible arrangements of the parts of an eye, only a tiny minority would see. The human eye forms a sharp image on a retina, corrected for spherical and chromatic aberration; automatically stops down or up with an iris diaphragm to keep the internal light intensity relatively constant in the face of large fluctuations in external light intensity; automatically changes the focal length of the lens depending upon whether the object being looked at is near or far; sorts out colour by comparing the firing rates of three different kinds of light-sensitive cell. Almost all random scramblings of the parts of an eye would fail to achieve any of these delicate and difficult tasks. There is something very special about the particular arrangement that exists. All particular arrangements are as improbable as each other. But of all particular arrangements, those that aren't useful hugely outnumber those that are. Useful devices are improbable and need a special explanation. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is another way of saying that objects such as these cannot be explained as coming into existence by chance. As we have seen, to invoke chance, on its own, as an explanation, is equivalent to vaulting from the bottom to the top of Mount Improbable's steepest cliff in one bound. And what corresponds to inching up the kindly, grassy slopes on the other side of the mountain? It is the slow, cumulative, one-step-at-a-time, non-random survival of random variants that Darwin called natural selection. The metaphor of Mount Improbable dramatizes the mistake of the sceptics quoted at the beginning of this chapter. Where they went wrong was to keep their eyes fixed on the vertical precipice and its dramatic height. They assumed that the sheer cliff was the only way up to the summit on which are perched eyes and protein molecules and other supremely improbable arrangements of parts. It was Darwin's great achievement to discover the gentle gradients winding up the other side of the mountain. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 08:26:03 (EST)
From: Bruce Email: None To: Richard Subject: Sex, Lies and Videotape??? Message: Richard, Somehow I think you have mixed me up with someone else? Regards, Bruce Goodnight Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 16:57:33 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Richard Subject: Knowledge in a jar Message: Richard: I guess you just proved the point. It is pointless to make comparisons or to try and explain this stuff with words. You either confirm someone's prejudiced view or get their back up.... And... [N]not even Maharaji said it was exclusive to him, only that he could show it to you. I guess the first point is whether we can learn anything from comparative analysis and I suggest that those methodologies are well worked out. We can't resolve all questions, but we can definitely learn something. Habermas talks about 'speechless unity' vs 'speechless separation' and the notion that reality is in between. You seem to be saying that reality is only at the extremes. As far as your second point goes, that's really not accurate, to say the least. Maharaji clearly claimed that only his version of Knowledge was 'real' and that his claim to be the Perfect Master was exclusive. There would hardly have been a point to the whole thing if that were not the case. As I recall he never mentions Sant Mat, which is the tradition out of which he comes. The possibility of putting himself into competition with hundreds of other similar 'Satgurus' might have dissuaded him to some extent, don't you think? It is pretty clear he wanted to preserve a monopoly as long as possible. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 20:49:08 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: Richard Subject: How predictable Jim Message: 1. He has said quite recently he is the only living master, with the only truth 2. He has said don't practice while you are doing other things, in the car, walking etc - as that isn't knowledge. By the way guys - he didn't say only practice 15 minutes, he said MINIMUM 1 hour for all 4 techniques - but you have to do it 'properly'. You could be practicing 6 hours a day - but he defnintely said that doing it continuously while doing other stuff is incorrect. 3. richard, the way I learned the 3rd technique involves imagining Maharaji, as part of that technique. So how can I separate it from following him? Good to see you joining the fray. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 02:36:43 (EST)
From: Carol Email: None To: Jude Subject: all day meditation Message: One of the defining advantages of the meditation techniques as they were presented to early premies was that unlike a mantra which could be interupted say, when the phone rang, the Word or Holy Name could be meditated on all day. When M's dad, Shri Hans was in charge, he urged premies to always stay in Holy Name. Workers in a cloth mill expressed interest to realize God but worried that they had no time to spend sitting in meditation or to renounce the world, he assured them that they could meditate at all times. He was said to have been regarded as the Messiah of the poor. This from a DLM publication from Delhi, 1970. carol Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 03:28:27 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: Carol Subject: all day meditation Message: that's intersesting. I have heard M described as a rich person's guru. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 09:33:09 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs To: Carol Subject: all day meditation Message: Dear Carol, What do I care what BM says, sorry. I usually meditate on my breath while I am doing something and I too, along with those factory workers, find that to be a big part of it's appeal. Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 13:17:20 (EST)
From: Carol Email: None To: Robyn Subject: all day meditation Message: Are you misunderstanding my purpose in posting the info? It has to do with the way the message has changed not whether I approve or not. I also hold to the old view and appreciate the 'do it anytime and anywhere' aspect. I haven't obeyed in many years! Carol Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 13:24:34 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs To: Carol Subject: all day meditation Message: Dear Carol, No, I didn't misunderstand your purpose, I was just commenting. Sorry 'bout that. The written word leaves much to be desired sometimes. Never realized that until landing here. Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 06:20:16 (EST)
From: Bruce Email: phoenix@b024.aone.net.au To: Jude Subject: To Jude Message: Jude, Its sure interesting how people interpret things. I've been to a lot of K. reviews, some with M. in person, and some with M. showing the techniques on a video. I've always understood that he discourages people from practicing the 3rd or 4th while doing other things primarily because people(myself included) end up just doing this and never really sitting down and getting into a profound experience. I don't think he means its wrong to snack just as long as we still get stuck into a full meal. Also, I've never heard of imagining Maharaji as part of the 3rd technique. This is a new one on me! Are you sure of this? Bruce Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 07:18:23 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Bruce Subject: Don't you remember, Bruce? Message: I've always understood that he discourages people from practicing the 3rd or 4th while doing other things .... Bruce, how long you been a premie? Staying 'on the word' was a central dogma in M's teachings from the time he started this charade until I left, anyway, in the early 80s. Countless satsangs prove this point. Don't you know that? Now, if you want to say that Maharaji changed his program, that's another thing but there's no point denying the obvious. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 08:21:30 (EST)
From: Bruce Email: None To: Jim Subject: Sure I remember Message: Jim, Its all a very long time ago but yes I was shown the techniques by a Mahatma. Padarthanand. In those early times I did try to stay practising the 3rd and 4th techniques most of the time and it became natural to me. When M. started to tour the world doing K.reviews personally, I realized that I'd been shown the 1st technique not quite correctly. Pardarthanand later apologised publicly for this and it was received warmly without recrimination. I also went much deeper into an inner experience than ever before. M. made a point at this time about the importance of really concentrating solely on each technique and not making a soup of it. The difference was astounding and I can see its better to spend the time focussing solely within and then giving your full attention to the world when you need to. I don't think the basic idea has changed, though. Its just better to do it well for a short time than messing it up all day. I still remember the Word whenever I feel like it! BTW, I'm not a liar, as you seem to like to call me. Bruce Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 08:44:03 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Bruce Subject: But do you really? Message: Bruce, Referring to some of what you said yesterday, I wonder if you remember this: ... Devotion is the stick, and with his devotion and meditation he ahs to kill this crazy damn fly. In the same way, mind, too, is strong; it is very big. To a man it is very pretty but of course it is a fly. In the same way, our minds in this age of darkness are very strong. The will of this world is so strong. REally it is something that you cannot bear. When the holy man leaves, you are lost. And then these evil powers start acting upon you, and this illusion, which is itself darkness, comes and puts a black sheet over you. Now, where to go? Where to go? Where is the path? .... So remember. We have to find that God, that person who is perfect; He is ours and we are His, and we have to find Him. To whom do we belong? We have to find Him, and get together and be one with Him, because if we are two we have got duality. Wherever there is duality there is darkness. Wherever there is darkness there is frustration. Wherever there is frustration ther eis ego. Man is completely surrounded by it and he is put in prison by the chains of his mind. So remember: we are part of Him who has manifested Himself as a Guru and who has come into the earth, and now we have to be one with Him. We have to compeltely merge and make our souls one with Him becuase He is perfect, and once we merge with Him we will also be perfect. .... You think that your wife, your husband, your children will give you love? No. It is the love of selfishness. Baby loves mother because mother gives milk, not becuase they have a connection. No, just because of selfish love. In the same way, you love everything because of selfishness. But we love guru without any selfishness. It is pure and perfect love, it is the love which cannot be disturbed by mind at all. ...... So be careful about the golden opportunity He has given you. And don't be confused by the hypnotic shadows of the mind which are making you frustrated. Once you get frustrated you will not be able to return again. Don't be frustrated. Don't look anywhere, just look at the destination which you have to reach. Don't look anywhere. ..... So realize it and be one with it because this is the aim of human life which has to be completed. This is it. This is the aim of human life. It should be there, it must be there. Because ultimately, if you don't get there, you'll find yourself living in great darkness, ignorance and suffering..... So, really Bruce, what DO you remember? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 10:59:03 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: Jim Subject: But do you really? Message: I hate to say this, but in a way I think that sounds pretty good. The trouble with this stuff is, in a way it could be seen to be quite right. Human bonds can be selfish. When we die, we die alone. I personally don't dispute the spirit with which he speaks in the above quote. It sounds quite clean. Yes, kill this damn crazy fly (the mind) is way over the top and of course you can't do that. These days he admits you can't, it's impossible. He is just grappling with the questions that Eastern gurus have always grappled with (to my limited knowledge). That the mind is a monkey or whatever that will jump from one thought to another all day long. How strange that in some ways the intention (if, indeed if, this is an age of darkness) is very caring there. I don't know what happened subsequently. Something has gone wrong, that's for sure. Kill me for being the devil's advocate! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 11:10:28 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Jude Subject: But do you really? Message: Jude, First, the quote was to rebut Bruce's claim that Knowledge was just a way to enjoy life and the ashrams presented a lifestyle for enjoyment. The trip was MUCH heavier than that. This quote, and countless others like it, prove that. Beyond that, I can only say that I don't buy one iota of that spiritual bullshit. In particular, I don't buy the proposition that the mind is bad and that there's some spiritual glory waiting for anyone who can control it. Nonsense. Nor do I buy the fact that Maharaji's the Lord. I'm surprised that you do. As for selfishness, we're all selfish. Love is selfish. There's nothing wrong with that and there's certainly nothing wrong with interpersonal love. Love for a guru is just another kind of selfish love; to the extent that its based on a fraudulent basis (e.g. the guru's divinity), it's a big mistake. The fact that estern gurus have been touting this line for a number of centuries doesn't impress me the least. I grant that Maharaji's just yet another in a tradition. I just think the whole tradition's fake and that these guys are full of it. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 11:55:25 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: Jim Subject: But do you really? Message: That's a very good point - of course his love for us is selfish - what does he get out of it - and of course our love for him is selfish. It would be nice if it wasn't. Children are so idealistic. It's hard to make the transition from childhood to adulthood. I sickened myself with my comment about the house I live in and the car at another time in these posts, but it's true. Whether or not I wanted to admit it, I was willing to give up 'everything' for M (and I wished there was an ashram to go to when I was really feeling it strongly) but as well, and that is a big as well, I was also hoping that he would 'shake my tree' and lots of great things would happen, including material possessions. Of coures I would use them to pursue knowledge more, and to travel to see him. I thought it would be easier to practice and be devoted to him if I didn't have to work, worry about accommodation and all those nasty realities that make you so selfish and materialistic in the first place. But its ongoing isnt it - you're never satisfied no matter how much you have, anyway, when you're thinking like that. I admire you for giving everything up and living in the ashram. At least you seem to have truly understood that it was not about possessions. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 12:43:13 (EST)
From: John Email: None To: Jude Subject: Hey Jude Message: I quoted you above in a new thread. I started to wonder after I wrote it that maybe I was mistaking you with someone else. I wonder if I am correct about what I said - that you recently rec'd K directly from M in the past few years? Thanks! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 22:25:30 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: John Subject: Yes Message: Yes I did receive knowledge fairly recently. I didnt want to reveal this about myself as I was scared some honcho at headquarters might be taking notes... But anyway, yes I have told you as accurately as I could what my opinion is of what has been said by M. Firstly, the comments about not practicing while doing other things he said on videos probably made within the past 12 months. I can't quote directly but I defnitely am absolutely sure he said words to the effect of, that's not practicing correctly, doing that. Some people think they are practicing that way. Keith seems to know what I am talking about. He didn't say 'don't always focus on holy name' he just side-stepped that altogether. What I mentioend about the 3rd technique (the breathe or word I believe you call it) I was taught directly in my knowledge session so i can be absolutely certain of that. Whether the word 'imagine' is accurate enough I don't know. Maybe 'picture' is better? I told Katie about it if you want to talk to her. Regards. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 09:30:10 (EST)
From: Jude Email: sundogs To: Jude Subject: How predictable Jim Message: Dear Jude, Could you please list the techniques by # and their corresponding word names. I think this number naming is so hollow, like the video's of BM instead of listening to real people in satsang! Incase you don't know the names: Light Word (breath) Nectar Music Thanks, Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 09:37:32 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs To: Jude Subject: sorry that was me not Jude Message: I just clicked on it and found it was me! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 11:07:24 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: Jude Subject: Techniques Message: Dear Robyn Of course I don't mind doing that. Out of interest, I didn't even learn them in that order! I think the way I learned them in those terms is: light music word nectar Also, I have never heard a lot of this material about the 'word' technique. Someone tried to explain it once but it went right over my head. Why is the breathe the word? What about what Jim was just saying, about how the breathe was conscious? I don't know any of that. By the way, the reason he gave for changing the names was to get rid of all the associatons. I think he was trying to get rid of the connection with any 'religion'. He said things to that effect (but I can only speak from my understanding of what I heard - and that changes!). He said that's why he shut down the ashrams. Why he said you don't have to be a vegetarian. Why you can have any religion and still practice. By the way, what they asked us when we asked for knowledge was not if we had another religion, but if we practiced something else to 'go inside' eg another form of meditation, or a mantra. That would make it a dog's dinner. Apparently some people mix them up. He even discouraged 'aromatherapy'. He said he just wanted to keep it simple and not have any other associations. He certainly must have realised all the problems that were happening but how he has dealt with them in human terms is definitely wrong. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 11:26:30 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs To: Jude Subject: Techniques Message: Dear Jude, Thanks, don't you think the numbers are so cold and impersonal, unless you love numbers, I guess. Of course he wouldn't want you to be doing TM or whatever, he wanted all your money going to one place, him. (a sarcastic over statement, maybe) I don't know really but maybe the word technique was called that because in the bible says something about the word being there first before anything else. I have no frame of reference to the word being consious except that if it is thought of as being there before anything else it is, I guess, equated with being god, the creator. How was it that you leaned to equate BM with the word, which also use to be called the vibration which is more how I would describe the 3 strong experiences I had with that one. I also didn't know premie's didn't have to be vegitarians anymore. I wonder if they barbecue steaks on the grill in Malabu? Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 03:21:49 (EST)
From: Carol Email: None To: Robyn Subject: Techniques:Word Message: The biblical reference frequently stated in the past is: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God. And later...And the Word was made flesh(indicating incarnation of God as Jesus or other past Perfect Masters). It was also called Holy Name... the name that could not be spoken, (therefore was not a mantra like Rama,Rama,Rama.) Also known as 'the Holy Ghost' with which Jesus baptized his disciples. (Many I should learn to teach comparative religion.) Carol Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 17:25:18 (EST)
From: Mickey the Pharisee Email: mgdbach@ziplink.net To: Carol Subject: Techniques:Word Message: Hi Carol, The Word referred to in John's gospel is the 'Logos' in Greek, and it does not mean 'Holy Name.' In Bauer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament there are almost two and a half pages devoted to Logos. Logos can mean anything from the spoken word or proclamation to 'the subject under discussion' but Logos in John's gospel is defined as 'the independent, personified 'Word' (of God).' This is a very Hellenized theological term as opposed to the more Hebraic theological terms used in the synoptic gospels. It is associated with the Holy Spirit of the Trinity in that all three 'persons' are the same God, but the Logos and the Paraclete are different parts of the Trinity. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 08:18:07 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs@hotmail.com To: Richard Subject: What about the knowledge??? Message: Dear Richard, I totally agree with what you say about the gift you recieved that stays with you no matter what you think of M and there are many other ex's who feel the same. Thanks for posting. Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 10:28:16 (EST)
From: Mark Email: Apple4256@aol.com To: Robyn Subject: What about the knowledge??? Message: I'm definitely in support of the inner experience supporters side of things. I think there is the old tendency to chuck out the baby with the bathwater. I like to see M as a totally self deluded CABLE GUY. Who seemingly innocently( '14 doesn't spread K' ) comes in and shows you your own black box and hooks you up to some of your own built-in interdimensional capabilities, which if practiced sincerely will give a clear alternative to 3D life, and the pitfalls of 24 hr a day 7 day a week ego identification. However, like Mr.Carey, it turns out that the real agenda, the real message, is' I'm your master', not enjoy cable TV. When I attended a few programs as a post-premie I was amazed to analyze the syntax of satsang clearly for the first time and see what was going on. Extremely agreeable Leo Buscaglia, Kabir, generic satsang, and Rawat experieces, were bundled together to heighten the message of our innate capacity to experience the truth within. Then at high pitch, total logic lapses occur, and he'll say' and that's why we must love the master'. Sort of like 8 minutes of Rawat commercials inexpertly edited into an otherwise ( as we say in Canada )' right on' 30 minute we-are-part-of-God show. That's the part that sucks! So we walk out gargling the baby and the bathwater, and its hard to separate the two. And of course send your devotion not to your immortal self but to ME Conversations With God discusses analyzing the 'sponsoring thought' behind things. Well at premie events the CLEAR AND OVERRIDING SPONSORING THOUGHT is that M is the Master, and you are the student. It has nothing to do with the 14 year-knowledge thing anymore.That's the will breaker part. Knowledge and your inner bliss become tools for losing control of one's life to the Master. And all we wanted was to have our cable turned on ! The cable capabilities and the enjoyment thereof are standard human issue. In fact, there are other far out things on 'cable ' too besides Kriya 1( knowledge) techniques. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 10:35:52 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs@hotmail.com To: Mark Subject: What about the knowledge??? Message: Dear Mark, Well said, although I haven't seen Jim Carry's movie The Cable Guy, heard it was bad. But I agree that some mahatmah, I unlike many here don't have a clue as to his name, showed me the techniques and for that I am thankful although I think as Bill Burke says BM just plopps himself inbetween the experience and you, no more. Also, I love Leo Buscaglia but haven't heard or read anything from him in years. Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 12:02:00 (EST)
From: Carol Email: None To: Mark Subject: What about the knowledge??? Message: Thankyou Mark, This is very well said. I have felt recently in danger of chucking all my experience and beliefs out with the bath water. Feeling that I have been wrong about Maharaji makes me question everything, because I once believed without a doubt that he was God or the way to God. When I was about 9 there were several experiences that effected me deeply and helped to form my belief structure: parents fighting and near impending divorce, father abusing my sis and (sort of) me, I was hospitalized with a serious fever and pain which dr.s never figured out, I heard for the first time that there were several religions and arguments about who was right. Anyway I recall looking intently at myself in the mirror and saying to myself that no one I knew could help me to know the truth and that I had to figure it out on my own. Well now I'm back to that view, I have to figure it out for myself. I am open to hear everyone else share their beliefs and yours is very helpful to me right now. Carol Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 12:34:15 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs To: Carol Subject: Carol Message: Dear Carol, That fasinates me, your account of realizing you were on your own to figure out the truth at the age of 9! I was at or near that age when I had the same revelation/awakening. I think we are doing a fine job! Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 12:59:38 (EST)
From: Selena Email: None To: Mark Subject: What about the knowledge??? Message: My favorite part of the cable experience was finding out that 'the trouble with real life is there's no danger music' Jim Carey vs. M? You know his other movie 'The Mask' is a good comparison too. I agree, the baby and bath water become so tangled up together that it sure is hard to keep ones spiritual side nurtured. For me, being involved at any level with M made it harder for me to accept my spiritual side because I just couldn't wholly accept M and the premie thingy. The next stage of my growth will be to get back some kind of experience, this time without the Guru. I just know this will happen and so for now all I can do is let the water drain out and help the poor little baby come up for air. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 17:14:39 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Mark Subject: Mark Message: Mark: Gosh, that's well written. I'm jealous. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 17:39:55 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: Mark Subject: What about the knowledge??? Message: Mark, I agree with you but I wonder, given that I think you have fairly recently departed from the 'master-thing,' what your opinions are on a few things. First, what do you mean by '(14 doesn't spread K)???' Second, I never saw the movie, but to me, BM never even WAS the 'cable guy.' Mahatma Parolkanad showed me the techniques, I just believed, because he and BM told me, that BM actually had something to do with it. But it is amazing, that there are some people who received knowledge and figured out this nonsense right away. If you watch the Lord of the Universe Video, there is an interview with a guy who figured out in his knowledge session that the 'leap of logic' of crediting the experience to BM made no sense, and he pretty much had nothing to do with him after that. I think that guy was probably just very, very smart, certainly a lot smarter than I. Third, so I agree that BM, in a total leap of logic, sticks himself in between ourselves and our own experience. But he used to be fairly explicit about it. He used to say that the experience of 'devotion' was the supreme gift he was offering and that HE had the power to 'pull' devotion out of us and so without him we didn't get this great gift. Now, from what I have heard, he doesn't say even that anymore. He just says the master is needed, but doesn't say why, since devotion is apparently no longer mentioned. So how does he work the 'master' into the whole scheme? I know he is actually revealing the techniques these days, so maybe that's part of it and some premies say BM is necessary to provide the inspiration to practice the meditation and to be reminded the experience exists. This has never made any sense to me. What do you think? I know what you mean about how how easily his schtick falls apart when you look at the syntax of what he says. All these years later, it's easy to do that, but in retrospect, I think I stopped listening to much of anything he had to say about four years into being a premie. He just said the same stuff over and over anyway, and it never did make much sense, so I just let it waft over me and tried not to think about it, because if I did, I would experience 'doubt,' which was the ultimate no-no. I would assume that premies pretty much don't listen to the actual content of what he says anymore than they used to. If you ask premies what BM had to say at a program or whatever, they usually can't remember anything, except for a joke or something outrageous he might have said. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 21:13:08 (EST)
From: mark Email: None To: JW Subject: What about the knowledge??? Message: the 14 reference was in relation to Bruce's post above me. i am so pleased to hear you communicate with such authority. I keep remembering the quiet mustachioed security guy kicking us out of the kitchen at Coll late at night. a noble experiment Sorry for any confusion re Saturn in Libra. Glad you found your own voice. M by the way consulted astrologically with Koran ( she lived North of SF ) for 15 years until she passed from cancer a few years back. So much for the 'you are all knowing' title just a guy in the knowledge business looking for a little clarity in his life. He separates M from Mr, Rawat who he sees as sort of an eyes open channel that arrives when he takes the stage or gives knowledge/agya i think there's so much secondary and tertiary devotional residue in this system that it's primed to manifest as a absolute rock solid devtional reality for anyone who responnds in that level at a picture, song, Darshan story historical reference. And thats the same for Jesus, Bal Bagwanji, The Supreme Eck, or Paul McCartney. And our very supplicant consciousnesses will manifest whatever we invoke. So its there , tho of course more subtle. Like Pamala Lee acting fully clothed. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 21:35:57 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: mark Subject: What about the knowledge??? Message: Sorry for any confusion re Saturn in Libra. No problem Mark, it caused me no harm, was kind of fun, and was the least of the problems going on then. I think that was during the 1976 'freedom Summer' probably the most enjoyable time in the cult for me. BTW -- speaking of COLL, whatever happened to Marc Lerner. I saw him when he had MS and was having trouble with his eyesight, but that was early 80s and I haven't seen him since then. He separates M from Mr, Rawat who he sees as sort of an eyes open channel that arrives when he takes the stage or gives knowledge/agya This is fascinating. I have never heard this actually stated before, but I have thought this might be how he deals with the cognitive dissonance in viewing his own behavior and problems, with the 'all powerful' nature of the perfect master. Has he said this publicly? How has he expressed that this is what he believes? So, he needs a program to fully 'be' the 'master.' Can you comment any more on this? Regarding the devotional residue, I notice that the songs sung to him at programs, at least in the one video I watched from 1996, make no bones about using devotion and related terms. But in the video, M seemed to replace it with 'gratitude.' Do the holdovers from the 70s just see this as a code work and a kind of wink-and-nod, we all know what's really happening here, kind of speech? Thanks, Mark. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 21:42:11 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: mark Subject: What about the knowledge??? Message: Mark, That's great. Actually, I went out with Pamela Lee for about a month before she moved to the states. There's a video around here somewhere. But yes, you're right, it's exactly like that. How could I say otherwise? The astrologer tip is fascinating. Were you friends with this woman? How do you know? Can she be reached? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 21:49:27 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: Jim Subject: What about the knowledge??? Message: Can she be reached? Maybe she can be channeled. I think Mark said she's dead. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 22:51:32 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: JW Subject: What about the knowledge??? Message: Maybe she can be channeled. I think Mark said she's dead. Joe, I thought we had an agreement -- I won't make disagree with anything you say and you won't ruin my jokes. What's going on here? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 01:30:36 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: Jim Subject: Of Possession and Channels Message: Funny joke. So, what do you think of Mark's statement that Mr. Rawat rationalizes to himself and he just kind of 'channels' Maharaji at certain times, like at programs, and the rest of the time is just a fat, greedy Indian guy, waiting for the next time M decides to appear? Or maybe he can summon Maharaji to possess his body at will? Kind of reminds me of the exorcits, or maybe the Pope when he sits in the chair of St. Peter, versus when he doesn't. So, I guess we don't have 'all-Maharaji-all-the-time,' but only some of the time. I wonder if this is what a lot of the premies believe. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 03:41:28 (EST)
From: Jude Email: None To: JW Subject: Of Possession and Channels Message: Actually I have wondered that myself at times about M. isnt' it great when you find some weird thing you think only you would ever think adn someone else did too? It must be because I was into new age stuff for a few years in the eighties. I did Reiki, rebirthing, seminars, the lot. I was seeking for sure, and drugging myself intermittently. A very unhealthy mix. Well I wondered if he is 'channeling' for example the accumulated wisdom of his father and forefathers. It could be like tuning into a realm of wisdom. That's definitely a new age concept. And to think, I thought M would free me from all that garbage. M's simplicity was so refreshing, like a lovely walk in a sweet, sweet garden (I really liked all that slow, repetitive stuff. It was very calming when your mind was going at a million miles an hour, full of anxieties and worries) I mean there is a marketplace in this world today, like a supermarket of ideas. Which way to Jerusalem? Over Here! Like someone else mentioned I got very serious after witnessing my dad's death. All these ideas seemed like a lot of hogwash. When you are dying, ideas are not comforting. When you know you are mortal and you have one life, and have experienced a great deal of suffering from the 'feast' of life, whether it is your own doing or not, then you don't want the crap anymore. Any of it. And most of this external stuff is just that. The World - eg nature and beauty, is being trashed and I always believed in that. It is very compelling to believe there is a pure, beautiful and untouched dimension inside, unpolluted by the mind (which can be a beautiful instrument but can get wrecked, too) I still believe in that place. Im still trudging along in this other place, where I have to do stuff I don't want to do, and be treated like a child when I am a 42 year old survivor, because I havent accumulated anything, like knowledge or business skills, which I can sell. How can I too not be a hypocrite, I want to live in a nice house with a nice garden and be 'spiritual' too. About the 'channeling' a super-spiritual sort of self, well one interpreation of christ's story about 'dont let the left hand know what the right hand is doing' is that he is talking about the Little and Big selves. Maybe they are always separate. (the me and the I?) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 07:24:26 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: JW Subject: Of Possession and Channels Message: Joe, I think it's one of the most amazing things I've ever heard about Maharaji. Please, Mark, elaborate. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 13:29:41 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: mark Subject: The Confused Sagittarius Message: M by the way consulted astrologically with Koran ( she lived North of SF ) for 15 years until she passed from cancer a few years back. So much for the 'you are all knowing' title just a guy in the knowledge business looking for a little clarity in his life. This is fascinating too. Is this the same astrologer from Marin County that Nancy Reagan used to consult? So, did BM talk about why he saw an astologer? It sounds like he was doing it for Mr. Rawat, and not for Maharaji, as, obviously, Maharaji would have no need for any help or clarification of what he was doing. Sorry, but I have a hard time getting over this because I find it astounding. If I understand what you are saying, Mr. Rawat is 'just a guy in the knowledge business,' but 'Maharaji' is the all-knowing master. Since they do not exist in the same space at the same time, although they use the same corpulent body, this allows Mr. Rawat to be as flawed, confused and in need of astrological advice, as he wants to be, while preserving 'Maharaji' as a being of perfection, and away from even participating in those problems or endeavors. Is this how he thinks/talks about who or what he is???????? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 14:02:09 (EST)
From: The all knowing Aquarius Email: None To: JW Subject: The Confused Sagittarius Message: Hi JW M does talk about Maharaji in the third person, sort of the same way it's 'this' knowledge and 'this' life and 'that' experience. Selena, dog with sun in aquarius, sagittarious rising and most else in aries..... Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 16:42:53 (EST)
From: mark Email: None To: JW Subject: The Confused Sagittarius Message: Koran was a premie who was brought in during a time of troubles in the marriage 82-4 I know because I functioned as a sort of astrological backup. She remained as a retainer of sorts, though she did follow another guru after seeing the real dynamic. However, in fairness, M was very appreciative, saying she'd been a 'towtruck' for him in addressing his problems, and getting him past the ' I wanna quit' stage.And she certainly loved M as well. He spent some time talking about her at Long Beach 95 right before she died. i don't think he consciously channels the Master but there's a clear body politic/body natural schism . He often uses 3rd person referencing Or will say ,eg, this music was composed by Rawat. also, during that time he discussed the miracle of being on stage and manifesting, even though his personal life was in shambles( privately). From that point on, I think the personality split became real. Sort of the Royal WE. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 14:40:24 (EST)
From: JW Email: joger02@aol.com To: mark Subject: To Mark: Personality Split Message: Mark, you are full of all sorts of interesting information. Thanks for taking the time to respond. I do have a few more questions. You said: also, during that time he discussed the miracle of being on stage and manifesting, even though his personal life was in shambles( privately). From that point on, I think the personality split became real. Sort of the Royal WE. By the personality split becomming real, do you mean it became a part of his rationale, or part of his psychological disorder? And how was his private life in 'shambles?' Do you mean that his marriage was falling apart? Koran was a premie who was brought in during a time of troubles in the marriage 82-4 I know because I functioned as a sort of astrological backup. She remained as a retainer of sorts, though she did follow another guru after seeing the real dynamic. What do you mean 'astrological backup.' Did BM actually consult you for astrological advice? Again, 'time of troubles?' What do you mean? M was very appreciative, saying she'd been a 'towtruck' for him in addressing his problems, and getting him past the ' I wanna quit' stage. I didn't hear about the 'I wanna quit stage.' What is that? How did that manifest? Quit what? Maybe in retrospect Koran didn't do him or anyone else any favors by talking him out of it, if it had to do with remaning a charalatan messiah. And don't you think if he did want to quit his future pecuniary financial situation, as well as having to live with no longer being worshipped, for which I believe he has a pathological need, might have been factors in changing his mind as well? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 17:25:07 (EST)
From: mark Email: None To: JW Subject: To Mark: Personality Split Message: i think of it more as a stage personality Koran was the counselor/astrologer not me. she just asked me for some feedback Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 11:46:19 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Richard Subject: is red herring Message: The way people talk about Knowledge now sure ain't the way I remember it. I was sold (and bought, hookline, no thinker) that there's this world and then there's Maharaji's world. This world is maya, bullshit, dysentery-in-a-pan, meaningless and, yes, if you got the right Indian mahatma -- and even Maharaji indulged, samskara. Maharaji's world was eternal, perfect, beyond comprehension, perfect, unbelieveable: heaven. Knowledge was the ticket; Knowledge would take you there. Like climbing out of one set of clothes into another, if you wre really dedicated and allowed the grace to take you there, well, in an instant, you could do what Maharaji himself did as a little child, you could cross over into heaven. Maharaji, we were completely lead to believe was always there. Now, unless some of you premies are saying that that's still the program, I don't give a shit about how nice you feel meditating on your breath. Unless you're saying that you're confident that you're on a path that, any day now -- in fact any moment now [it just may be today!]-- you're going to merge with perfection and leave your silly little earthbound, miserable personalities behind, I'm not interested. How nice it feels to squeeze your eyeballs is meaningless unless you think that sets the stage for you to merge with the light. Now, before you say I'm being a little unreasonable, ask yourself, why would a bunch of nineteen year-old guys agree to give up sex for life, forsake sports, drugs and rock and roll, and willingly move into houses where they started every day bowing to a picture of a fat little Indian kid (and his family!). It wasn't to feel nice. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 12:28:27 (EST)
From: Rick Email: None To: Jim Subject: is red herring Message: Well put, Jim. Right on! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 15:29:07 (EST)
From: VP Email: None To: Jim Subject: Fraternity rush Message: Jim, I agree that this is a red herring. For the revisionists out there, just examine the aspirant process: They tell you that you are going to get this incredible experience and that you should have no preconcieved ideas about it. Then you have to spend SIX months minimum looking at videos which are supposed to 'prepare you for this experience' about which you are supposed to have no preconcieved ideas? Give ME a break! It makes NO SENSE. This thing is free and you already possess it inside, yet you have to go through this entire process to get to it? Nonsense. The selection process is little more than another exclusive fraternity rush--minus the alcohol of course. VP Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 16:14:01 (EST)
From: Paul Email: None To: Jim Subject: is red herring Message: Yes, and what is the 'gift,'richard's talking about? Gift implies giver and what premies consider the gift of knowledge is basic zazan available for free everywhere. So convenient for premies to dissociate the giver from the gift. In case they've forgotten: 'Give me your love and I will give you peace. I am the source of peace in the world. I declare I will bring peace to the world.' Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 17:19:46 (EST)
From: Bruce Email: None To: Jim Subject: is red herring Message: Jim, This was precisely your mistake!!!!!!!!!!!!! I was around in 1974 and I've always understood that Knowledge was about ENJOYMENT of this life. Many people enjoyed the ashram lifestyle, and many still do. Obviously, you missed the point. Thats a shame I suppose but you were 19 not 5 years old . If it was really so bad, why didn't you just move out? M. never said the ashram was compulsory, and most people did not live that lifestyle. Stop blaming other people for your own dimness, Jim. Affectionately, Bruce PS Squeezing your eyeballs IS NOT the way to do the first technique. Perhaps you should ask M. for a K. review. He spent a lot of time way back going around the world making sure people had gotten the techniques right from the instructors. Some people hadn't. Maybe this is another of your problems. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 18:06:46 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Bruce Subject: Bruce, you're a liar Message: Not much to add really but I will for the sake of others. You, yourself, are just a blad-faced liar and I have no hope of ever resolving a single fact with you. But, for any who misse that particular party: Knowledge, in the early 70s, was not 'about ENJOYMENT of this life.'. It was about complete surrender, sacrifice and god realization. It just so happens that god was supposedly the source of all joy and thus a surrendered premie was, supposedly a happy one. But it was surrender first, and you know it. Do you remember Maharaji's Mach 2 analogy? You should, he used it often enough. The path of surrender was outrageously narrow. Sure, life was fine -- for the most part -- if you did nothing but satsang, service and meditation. If you literally stopped up each moment of your waking existence with some cult activity, you could build quite a head of steam and really feel 'the grace'. BUT, if you let your mind think of anything else, let alone actually allow your body to DO something else, you'd fry. Your mind would, understandably, gasp for relief and yet, as we all believed, that gasping was evil. Knowledge, as Maharaji warned us with his little welcome letter when we were initiated, was an antidote to the mind. So Maharaji told us about planes aproaching the sound barrier. He explained how they'd shake like crazy just before they broke through. We were like that, he said. The more difficult it seemed, the more our mind wanted to break free, the more we struggled, the more we knew that 'Knowledge was really working on us.' Intense? It was supposed to be. The ashram, by the way, wasn't a 'lifestyle' to be 'enjoyed' you idiot. Can you imagine what Maharaji would have said if he'd heard anyone talk like that? Well the fact is he must have because he did comment. He specifically said that the ashram was NOT a lifestyle and that we were NOT there to enjoy ourselves. This was a much more serious trip than that. The ashram was a place to surrender your life, bucko. Bruce, if you'd ever had the guts to actually step up the plate back in the early 70s you wouldn't be talking like this. Now, you're part of this revisonist conspiracy with Maharaji; he claims that he never demanded surrender and you join in, quite relieved. I'm sure, because you never had the guts to really try. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 18:13:06 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: Jim Subject: Bruce, you're a liar Message: Jim, thanks for responding to Bruce, here. I read his post and my eyes glazed over. I was ready to go on auto-pilot and respond, with the usual indignation, but then I thought< 'what is the POINT?'. It really is amazing how premies give the same, stupid, revisionist explanations, over and over. I guess it's Brave New World in the premie kingdom. Thanks again, Jim. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 17:19:47 (EST)
From: Jack Email: None To: Jim Subject: Bruce, you're not a liar Message: Back to your old mean-spirited self, eh Jim? I doubt if Bruce is a liar, but I can say for sure he's focusing on a different set of facts than you. I think that's allowed? To support his point about enjoyment, I recall an early interview where M was asked the purpose of life and he started laughing uncontrollably for the longest time before saying, 'Happiness is the purpose of life'. Do you remember that? This I think is the significant difference between the two camps. One group focused on the happiness factor and continue to get no end of enjoyment from the gift of Knowledge, while the other group focused on other things all of which made no sense without the enjoyment. I guess you misunderstood at least one important fact Jim. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 18:36:51 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Jack Subject: Jack, you should be ashamed Message: Jack, You're acting like a simpleton. The very best you could possibly say for yourself, seeing as you're playing this role, is that you weren't there. That's right, it's either ignorance or bullshit, Jack, take your choice. Did you read that little satsang excerpt I put up for Bruce? Recognize it? Do you know how much else Margie said like that, how many other 'kill the mind or else' satsangs we read and re-read on our lunch breaks at our jobs in the 'world'? You came along when? In '77? Really, you don't know shit, Jack. But, actually, you do. You know enough to know that Maharaji specifically, categorically, chewed us out for even thinking that the ashram was a 'lifestyle' choice. As for simply moving out because it was a little 'heavy', as Bruce suggested I could have done at 19, I am speechless. What kind of idiot would argue that? Tell me what part of this you don't understand: 1) M's the Lord. He created you and you belong to him entirely. You always did but now that you have knowledge you know that. In case there's any doubt, listen to him. He'll make that point in no uncertain terms. 2) You've accepted that as true and accordingly have given your life to him. Moving into the ashram was both the scariest and most exhilarating day in your life. Like becoming a human sacrifice. Wait a sec... it WAS becoming a human sacrifice. That was what it was all about. Wake up while it was still dark to bow, once again, to his image and offer your life. 3) You don't just move out of that, Jack. We're talking heaviest guilt trip imaginable -- 'the boy who stole his life back from the Lord!' When I left the first time I fell for that shit so hard I almost went crazy. I'd go to satsang and what do you think I heard? Maharaji and the premies talking about surrender, complete dedication, etc. No wonder I crawled back in 6 months later. By the time I left the second time, when you and your robotic superior gave me the ultimatum, either give myself to Maharaji a hundred per cent in the ashram or go to my own thing with Deb (like you would with Amy a short while later!), I was just burnt out on this shit. Yes, you're right, I wasn't too dedicated then. In my own mind I was starting to call Maharaji's bluff. But even then, even in 1981, leaving was a heavy thing to do. Were you there as I walked out of that house in Calgary and Fuckface Peter MacDonald, one weird cat if I've ever met one (but really just a 'good' premie) smiled as he gave me the black spot? In the softest, smuggest voice imaginable, with his particularly unpleasant sachharine fake sincerity, Peter reminded me of the story of the guy who goes to the river, looks down to get a drink and then wastes his entire life on an illusion. Where do you think Peter got that story, Jack? And this was '81. Try '73. Really, you should be ashamed of yourself. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Sat, May 16, 1998 at 11:08:38 (EST)
From: VP Email: None To: Jim Subject: Jack, you should be ashamed Message: Jim, I am confused. How did Jack give you an order? What was his position in DLM at the time that happened? VP Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 18:37:12 (EST)
From: Keith Email: None To: Everyone Subject: K , M and oneself. Message: This has been an interesting thread. I agree with Richard that Knowledge can be experienced and appreciated without M being a part of the equation. But M does do more than just prepare people for K and then give them the techniques. What we all think about this 'more' is another thing. M is playing the role of a 'teacher'....a 'guru' regardless of the specific title he chooses at any given time. Of course one can choose to take the gift and dismiss the giver. Especially if the giver is giving more than just that gift. So what is this 'more' that M gives? Is that 'more' a philosophy? A way of looking at life? Is that 'more' involve an over dependency on M? There are many such questions one could ask . Personally I admit I feel like I am walking along this track between the two armies.....the pro's and the con's. I mingle among the ranks of both armies trying to enter into the very heart and soul of their experience.......; I give myself permission to completely surrender to the influence of both armies. And the longer I maintain this position the deeper and more expansive my insights become , but not as yet my final conclusions. Both sides have some very strong plus's on their side. Both sides have some very strong minus's on their side. There are four possible outcomes that I can imagine. 1) I shall finally choose one side over the other. 2) I shall decide that staying inbetween is the best position.....and then I could just take what I like from both sides and disregard the rest......(maybe there are bits of baby and drops of bathwater on both sides). 3)I shall dismiss both sides and just move on. 4)I shall invent my own team , perhaps founded on the bits I like from 1 and 2 and call myself mahatmaji keithie. In the meantime I shall continue to enjoy all these varied perspectives and remain an 'independent'with obvious past leanings. Keith. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 18:43:27 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Keith Subject: Me, too, Keith Message: Keith, I feel that way too. I certainly don't want to get boxed up with either the premies or the ex's. After all, they both have something to offer. I just wish we could all take Rodney King's advice a little closer to heart -- you know: 'Why can't we all just meditate with one another?' (King, 1992). Hopefully, some of my open-mindedness can rub off on some of the regulars here. JW, for one, seems so rigid. No offense, Joe, but.... here's an example. Years ago, I took a Scientology personality test. See? Now you never did that, did you? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 19:16:46 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: Jim Subject: Me, too, Keith Message: Yes, Jim rigidity is such an unattractive quality (in most situations, anyway). I mean if we were more like Keith and just never decided what in the hell we believed, we could be a part of any and all groups, believe and disbelieve everything we are told at the same time, and just float along in confused bliss. Like Keith, I could help BM build some meditation center in australia, but not know whether I believe in him or not, and have no idea what role he really plays, if any, in my life. At the same time, I could be working against him on an ex-members site, . Just keep it all vague and mushy. It's a great way to live. Hey, that way I could be a democratic-republican, a catholic-athiest, a free-market-marxist, a tax-and-spend-conservative, a patriarchical-feminist, or a british gourmet. So, what did the scientology test say, Jim? Did you pass? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 19:27:28 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: JW Subject: Actually.... Message: So, what did the scientology test say, Jim? Did you pass? Actually, Joe, they kicked me out. I was a premie then, living in the Toronto ashram (Lowther). Scientology was a few blocks away and I strolled over looking for a fight. Maharaji was the Lord. What else could I do? (By the way, in case any weren't around then, I should add that life was all about 'propogation'. Just not the fun kind. The kind whee we never left the house without a bunch of leaflets and gave them out to everyone). So, I wasn't really looking for a fight. I just wanted to hear their speil. I started answering the questions and they were SO stupid, these questions, that I started asking questions about them (the questions). That's when they kicked me out. Flexibility is the key. Remember how Maharaji used to explain some people are like juicers, some are like strainers and some are like toasters.... or was it fridges? Some are like sieves, I know that. And some, I'm sure he said, are like those things you put on a phone to stop the cord from getting all tangled. I think he said something about nightlights, too. Some people are like nightlights. Well, I've really been trying to make that real in my life. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 19:37:09 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: Jim Subject: Actually.... Message: Well, I don't recall what BM said about what various appliances people are like, but Father Burke told us boys in the 10th grade that when it came to sex, men were like light bulbs and women were like irons. I guess that is information I won't be putting to good use. Speaking of propogation, and Appleman might remember this, in San Antonio, the ashram had about 150 people in it and for awhile we lived in a big hotel downtown (the Gunther). Anyway, on the floor where we had the satsang hall was the office and meeding room of a group called 'Silva Mind Control.' Remember them? They were an est-like group that charged a lot of money so they could put you through humiliating, boot-camp-like weekend training programs that told you that you were responsible for everything that happened to you and that now you had 'it.' Anyway, the premies used to ambush the people going to these offices and try to hussle them into satsang. It got so bad that the Silva people complained to the landlord and we were told to stop. Silva left the building shortly after that. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 19:37:31 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs To: Jim Subject: Actually.... Message: Dear Jim, Some people are like nightlights. Well, I've really been trying to make that real in my life. Like Uncle Fester from the Adams Family! Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 18:49:38 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Keith Subject: K , M and oneself. Message: Keith: 2) I shall decide that staying inbetween is the best position.....and then I could just take what I like from both sides and disregard the rest......(maybe there are bits of baby and drops of bathwater on both sides). Why do I feel so certain that 'baby stew' is in your future? -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 18:53:18 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: K , M and oneself. Message: Very funny, Scott. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 19:07:26 (EST)
From: Keith Email: None To: Jim Subject: K , M and oneself. Message: Jim, I'm getting worried. You agree with me? You see positive bits of baby and positive drops of water on both sides? Pray tell! Keith. ps: what positive bits are there about maharaji? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 19:15:25 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Keith Subject: Maharaji's good side Message: Keith, I'm glad you asked. I really like Maharaji's house. I think he picked a good location and I like large, white houses with lots of green around them. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 19:21:08 (EST)
From: Carol Email: None To: Keith Subject: Me three, Keith Message: Well stated. This has been a really good day. Thankyou everyone! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 19:44:43 (EST)
From: Keith Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Freedom Message: The freedom to make choices is such a magnificent gift! Being 'stuck' is only a state of mind. Essentially I stand alone, for the air is cleanest there. Why huddle in confined groups where the air becomes so stifling? At least know when to move on . Know when to breath deeply of your own living freedom. Who I am you cannot know through my presentation, nor through my manifestation and certainly not through my words. These externals are only as symbols..hinting at ...a freedom you must feel . Knowledge is 'a' way that helps to bring a soul into contact with the power and the freedom of it's own divine source. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Thurs, May 14, 1998 at 23:06:27 (EST)
From: *>* What about the long Email: None To: Richard Subject: term consequences, Richard? Message: Richard, Hi, what about the long term consequences of him haveing people in 50 countries that still are fooled by his pretending to be the lord? And they dont have the chance to judge fairly because all they have is the videos and the slant that he presents. He is haveing people kiss his feet again. He said in 96 that we are to think of him at the moment of death. Have mercy on the ones that cannot leave him because all they have had is the hard programming all these years and they did not have the chance to hear about the way he really is. I myself only got out last year and it was not easy and there are many people that cannot leave without a little help. YOUR help would be if you would PLEASE just tell the truth about what you saw up close. There is a 24 year old girl in new haven connecticut that someone is bringing and what if she was YOUR daughter? Do you know that after you go through 6 months of videos and programmming about the importance of the master that you are not allowed to recieve knowledge unless you stop haveing any religion except maharaji? That is true. That is the way he is doing it now. He is haveing them play the lord of the universe song again at the december 97 large L.A. program. And other devotional songs. Please help free those that are pinned for thier life by his fake lord trip. The true stories of his behaviour are certainly crucial for those who deserve the full facts about the man who is claiming so brazenly to be thier lord. YOU saw. YOU got out. I was not close enough and did not hang out with those that were in the front 100 rows and were part of the up close grapevine. I had my sources but they were not enough to help break the intense programming we were subject to at such a young age. It is not fair. I know a lot of people who are still trapped and what they need to know is that he is not only just like them, but that he has had a REAL bad behaviour problem and a lot of evidence that he is certainly NOT the lord he is pretending to be. PLEASE for the sake of a lot of people, please just tell the truth. Look, I cant tell you how grateful I am that I finally was able to break free of him. It was with the people here at this forum who took the time out of thier lives for my behalf. I am very grateful that they were so kind and willing to help save me. Like the others here, I am not stupid, but the programming and his brazen fraud, and his hijacking of the breath and his claiming ownership of your breath and then your life is STILL going on and what defense do people in 50 countries have against his claims about being the lord? He shows the old video footage and makes it seem like surely he MUST be the lord because of the way he played us. What defense do people have but the truth? YOU have your true story. For many peoples sake, PLEASE TELL IT FULLY. bill burke Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 01:18:53 (EST)
From: CD Email: None To: *>* What about the long Subject: term consequences, Richard? Message: Long term is good. >He shows the old video footage and makes it seem like surely he MUST be the lord because of the way he played us. Thats not how it is working. M continues to be a proponent of the importance of the feeling of life after 25 years on the road. New music is being played and new stories told. Today the importance of the inner experience is not a common theme in societies of the world. It is not something that is taught in schools or presented in the nightly news. Technology, money, endless goals and amusement still rule until disaster strikes and a person is forced to reevaluate their priorities. What is the problem with someone inspiring people to take the time, effort and have the patience to sit quietly in order to experience the grandeur of their existence in a simple inner experience of peace and love? Nothing! It is positive. That is what is happening. I would like to hear Richards story. It will not be the sword of hate that you are foolishly lusting after these days. M is still talking about and promoting the same Knowledge and feeling that Richard ran into back in 1971. That is true stamina and commitment. Not a bad role model. Regards, CD heard King of Kings in 1972 and strange trumpet music at the New Delhi airport Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 01:59:37 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: CD Subject: Chris, you're spooky Message: Chris, I've got to say that you spook me sometimes. You're like a shell. You joked about this before. Someone called you a robot, I don't know who (was it me, for god's sake?). And you tried to make light of it. Sure, it's all fun and everything. But the truth is, Chris, you're scary. You're like most of a person, just not all of a person. You can't really discuss things but you can almost discuss things. You can smile, right? Someone showed you how to smile and you can smile. Well that's great, Chris, but I'll tell you truth: I'd rather be dead than be like you. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 14:30:09 (EST)
From: CD Email: None To: Jim Subject: the smile Message: >You can smile, right? Someone showed you how to smile and you can smile. I smile when I feel happiness. Its natural. I recieve compliments for being in a good mood. I thank my parents for a great childhood and love. M has inspired me even more to respect life and love. >Well that's great, Chris, but I'll tell you truth: I'd rather be dead than be like you. No you wouldn't. You are simply acting out the part of a cheap, egotistical, vicious mouthpiece with no class. Your only inspiration these days seems to be a few concepts and a misguided revenge motive. There is much more to life and this existence. Beauty and love have no explanation and require no logic. And thats that, CD Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 14:50:23 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: CD Subject: Class? Who's got class? Message: You are simply acting out the part of a cheap, egotistical, vicious mouthpiece with no class. Chris, Who's got class in this game? Maharaji, who took the reigns of thousands of peoples' lives, lead them nowhere and then refuses to deal with them? Premies like you who avoid full discussion like the plague? Who's got class, Chris? Tell me something, what do you think would happen if some participanthad stood up at this event and interrupted Maharaji, saying that he had a question? How would the teacher have dealt with a student with a question? Would he have been interested in the question? Would he have let the guy ask it? Or would he just wait a second for his ushers to remove him? What do you think would happen? Your only inspiration these days seems to be a few concepts and a misguided revenge motive. Inspiration? Funny how you guru people still think in those religious terms. As if 'inspiration's one of the basic food groups. Inspiration's lovely when it happens, Chris, but you can't force it throough some force-fed cult dogma. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 10:27:48 (EST)
From: Richard Email: None To: *>* What about the long Subject: Sex, Lies and Videotape??? Message: So Jim wants me to cast my mind back to the 70's so's you can dig up evidence to refute what I say? 'Quotes' for chrissake! OK sure I laughed at TM, also at the Catholic Church, C of E, Baptists et al. I also laughed at the premies sharing the squat that I lived in, defaced their posters, ripped-up the little JAI SAT CHIT ANAND flyers stuck all over the walls which really irritated me and trashed their glossy magazines. I was right and everybody else was wrong. Then the inevitable happened and after attending a couple of programs I asked for and received knowledge from Bai Ji at The Avenue in London. Even this pissed me off a little as I had been hoping for Ashokanand, (more impressive you know). Now it was different, now WE were right and everybody else was wrong. Except, of course, that the Mish was a microcosm of the world and WE were not truly brothers and sisters in harmony anyway. Factions existed and factions within factions. People made their way through this mess as best they could. People like you Jim (apparantly) gave up sex and drugs and rock n' roll while the rest of us tried (pretended) to but failed. So Bill Burke wants the dirt on the Mish to free the trapped, what do you want to know? That Ashram Secretaries seduced house mothers with the excuse that Maharaji wants us to share our love? Mata Ji loved that one. That Mata Ji used to beat ashram premies with a stick for not being devoted enough? That Ashram Secretaries would rip-off jumble funds to buy themselves fancy suites for personal darshan with Maharaji while the premies lived like paupers on killer homemade bread and stomach-wrenching industrial strength daal? That the guy who put the cream pie in Maharaji's face was given a severe and literal hammering by a Mahatma who shall remain nameless lest I get sued? That the WPC (World Peace Corps to the newbies), although a part of the Mish, was in fact a seperate entity with its own fundraising, fleets of vehicles, skilled labour, security arm and seemingly endless resources and was at war with the Mish? That the above had its own special programs, accomodation (ashrams) and agenda? That this war was not limited to words but blossomed into full-scale confrontations of a physical nature and included espionage and counter-measures? I can still remember some of the tapes. I can also remember being personally cursed by both Balbagwan Ji and Ashokanand and consigned to the pits of hell. Further, I can recall Maharaji contradicting himself several times in the same sentence. There's more, much, much more, but where will it get you? You may see this as evidence that Maharaji is a fraud who should be ignored or locked up. The Pharisees took a strong line with fake gurus I seem to remember. Hey, now that's a good idea. Why don't you spend some time to collate all the facts and then take them to the authorities and demand that they crucify..oops sorry, prosecute Maharaji. Look what that did to the Christians. On the other hand? I still have knowledge and a life in which to try to practise it. The adventure continues and nobody said it would be easy. You can philosophise all you like but I still have to find peace (continually) in a world of N.Ireland, Kosovo and smaller personal tragedies. You don't get knowledge and then its all over. You have to do it all day every day. So far, I have not found anything more effective at keeping me sane, continually enlightening me and of allowing me to contribute positively than the knowledge which was revealed to me. So you have my story Bill. Does it do you or anyone else any good to know that, despite being aware of all the 'facts', I still value what I have beyond measure. Why should I prevent other people having it revealed to them? You want someone to prevent premies being ripped-off, try Consumer Affairs. Being ripped-off is part of the human experience. My kids get ripped-off in the playground every day of the week and there is little I can do about it, aside from to teach them how to shrug. What I am trying to say, badly, is that, if you gave time, money or effort to the Mish (albeit disguised as Maharaji), then you probably got ripped-off. However, if you received knowledge then you did OK out of the deal. sorry about the ramble, Richard Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
|
Date: Fri, May 15, 1998 at 15:00:19 (EST)
From: CD Email: None To: Richard Subject: London Message: >I asked for and received knowledge from Bai Ji at The Avenue in London. I attended a K session with Prakash Bai Ji in London in 72. Very nice. I still remember a few personal highlights and a few songs. CD Return to Index -:- Top of Index |