bill b ...holy discourse -:- from m dettmers about his 'mere mortal' teacher. -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 06:06:59 (GMT)

__ Wavering Will -:- from m dettmers about his 'mere mortal' teacher. -:- Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 05:14:56 (GMT)

__ JW -:- Thanks Bill. -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 19:01:25 (GMT)

__ Scott T. -:- Still crazy, after all these years? -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 16:33:03 (GMT)

__ aoaji -:- from m dettmers about his 'mere mortal' teacher. -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 12:47:23 (GMT)

__ __ Jim -:- I love this kind of analysis, aoaji -- thanks -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 16:59:27 (GMT)

__ __ __ aoaji -:- I get paid by the Word, Jim -nt- -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 20:40:49 (GMT)

__ __ Scott T. -:- from m dettmers about his 'mere mortal' teacher. -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 16:55:37 (GMT)

__ __ __ aoaji -:- chairs and microphone booms -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 22:07:08 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Jimmy Fitz -:- chairs and microphone booms -:- Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 02:15:11 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ aoaji -:- chairs and microphone booms -:- Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 11:57:17 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Honey Fritz -:- He Jimmy you 3@^%**!!! -:- Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 02:23:49 (GMT)

__ Dettmers -:- from m dettmers about his 'mere mortal' teacher. -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 12:01:58 (GMT)

__ __ G -:- Thank you Michael -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 19:23:08 (GMT)

__ __ __ JW -:- I don't know what's worse...... -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 20:23:12 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ G -:- I don't know what's worse...... -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 21:19:01 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ JW -:- Very Interesting -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 22:46:26 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- Very Interesting -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 23:14:17 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ aoaji -:- I don't know what's worse...... -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 22:27:52 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Susan -:- so how old are you now? -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 22:36:49 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ aoa -:- so how old are you now? -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 22:44:54 (GMT)

__ __ JW -:- Michael, sorry if the following posts sound harsh. -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 18:55:33 (GMT)

__ __ __ Jim -:- Yeah, you should see what I sent my family! -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 19:07:34 (GMT)

__ __ JW -:- Michael, this is confusing...what do you mean? -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 17:58:58 (GMT)

__ __ __ gerry -:- an extremely intelligent human being.' -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 20:07:15 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Gregg -:- an extremely intelligent human being (!) -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 23:15:42 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ JW -:- an extremely intelligent human being (!) -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 23:37:13 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ aoaji -:- an extremely intelligent human being (!) -:- Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 12:12:26 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Gregg -:- How about Marloe? -:- Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 16:21:36 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- You mean Marjoe Gortner? -:- Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 20:55:31 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Gregg -:- Yeah,Marjoe. And Al Sharpton... -:- Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 21:25:06 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ JW -:- an extremely intelligent human being (!) -:- Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 14:42:28 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Powerman -:- an extremely intelligent human being (!) -:- Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 18:21:31 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- rambling -:- Fri, Apr 14, 2000 at 01:15:32 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- I disagree, it's a COMPLETELY fair question -:- Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 02:40:35 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Powerman -:- I disagree, it's a COMPLETELY fair question -:- Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 04:31:50 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JW -:- an extremely intelligent human being (!) -:- Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 18:41:13 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Powerman -:- an extremely intelligent human being (!) -:- Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 04:21:11 (GMT)

__ __ __ JW -:- Closing the Ashrams -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 18:03:47 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ JW -:- Can't Get Over this LINE. OH, MICHAEL! -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 18:20:20 (GMT)

__ __ Powerman -:- from m dettmers about his 'mere mortal' teacher. -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 16:05:41 (GMT)

__ __ And On Anand Ji -:- from m dettmers about his 'mere mortal' teacher. -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 13:05:24 (GMT)

__ __ JHB -:- from m dettmers about his 'mere mortal' teacher. -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 12:35:06 (GMT)

__ Jim -:- Possible explanations -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 07:06:18 (GMT)

__ __ JW -:- Selective Memory, Jim -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 18:07:54 (GMT)

__ __ __ Scott T. -:- The Preservation of Memory -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 20:21:48 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ JW -:- Preserves and Preservation -:- Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 18:45:00 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Preserves and Preservation -:- Thurs, Apr 13, 2000 at 03:51:49 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ JW -:- Still Don't Get It -:- Thurs, Apr 13, 2000 at 18:43:03 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- 'The point ... I had shelved the decision process' -:- Thurs, Apr 13, 2000 at 18:15:37 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ aoaji -:- Preserves and Preservation -:- Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 02:21:19 (GMT)

__ __ __ Jim -:- I agree -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 18:19:39 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ baggage -:- teenage wasteland (lampoon, ot) -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 22:14:42 (GMT)

__ Jim -:- The date?? (nt) -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 06:39:08 (GMT)

__ __ Jim -:- Scratch that -- I see it's '77 (nt) -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 06:43:25 (GMT)

__ __ __ Way -:- Much thanks to Bill Burke -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 14:32:44 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Susan -:- well said Way -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 17:34:58 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ aoaji -:- well said Way -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 22:30:49 (GMT)

G -:- More from the author of 'My Key' -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 03:53:35 (GMT)

__ Selene -:- substitute cybersex for knowledge -:- Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 03:37:07 (GMT)

__ Jim -:- She's moved on to 'Calrity' -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 17:07:06 (GMT)

__ __ Jim -:- Jokes on me -- I mean 'clarity', but here's 'bliss -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 17:09:01 (GMT)

__ aoaji -:- 'My Key' will eat anything -nt- -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 11:48:38 (GMT)

bill burke -:- dettmers is SUCH a lier!!! -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 03:38:49 (GMT)

__ bb -:- the smoking gun -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 04:50:40 (GMT)

__ __ bb -:- the smoking gun -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 04:56:37 (GMT)

__ __ __ cq -:- How come you can post this - but not that? (nt) -:- Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 19:21:12 (GMT)

__ __ __ Jim -:- That's not fair -- to Mike or us -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 05:04:57 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ bb -:- easy for you to say -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 05:15:13 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Anonymous -:- there's no' e 'before 'ing', Jesus (NT) -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 19:41:38 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Sorry, Bill -- I'm just such a paragon of virtue -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 05:16:44 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ bb -:- and thats why I love you-nt -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 06:08:36 (GMT)

__ Powerman -:- I tend to agree with you, bill (nt) -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 04:12:15 (GMT)

And On Anand Ji -:- locations of Michael Dettmers' recent posts -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 01:24:24 (GMT)

Abbot -:- Still in turmoil after 30 years -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 18:25:38 (GMT)

__ trixie -:- Still in turmoil after 30 years -:- Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 19:40:00 (GMT)

__ Susan -:- thank you for posting -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 18:42:06 (GMT)

__ __ Gregg -:- thank you for posting -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 02:44:59 (GMT)

Jim -:- Anyone checking out the satellite broadcast? -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 17:10:41 (GMT)

__ Jim -:- No reports? Shit, I want to learn about 'Phase 2' -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 17:38:22 (GMT)

__ __ JW -:- Can you please explain 'Phase I?' (nt) -:- Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 00:24:46 (GMT)

__ __ __ Jim -:- Don't ask me (or if you do, send money) -:- Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 02:34:26 (GMT)

__ __ Anonymous -:- the org lied about broadcast -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 20:14:08 (GMT)

__ __ __ G -:- How stupid does he think people are? -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 22:05:22 (GMT)

__ Daneane -:- Who wudda thought? -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 00:58:44 (GMT)

__ __ Anonymous -:- there's no 'e' bef 'ing'.(NT) -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 19:50:25 (GMT)

__ __ __ Daneane -:- Yes, and I believe its 'would have' as well.(nt) -:- Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 01:02:03 (GMT)

__ __ Jean-Michel -:- They'll keep you on their list whatever -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 08:37:09 (GMT)

__ __ __ Daneane -:- Thanks for the reply -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 23:26:35 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Jean-Michel -:- Me? I'm a security issue! not you! -:- Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 07:31:27 (GMT)

__ __ Helen -:- Who wudda thought? -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 02:55:57 (GMT)

__ __ __ Daneane -:- Who wudda thought? -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 03:09:54 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Helen -:- Who wudda thought? -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 23:38:33 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Daneane -:- Who wudda thought? -:- Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 00:32:59 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ JW -:- Devotion Feels Good (to some extent).... -:- Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 17:22:01 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Daneane -:- very astute stuff...thanks JW(nt) -:- Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 21:14:40 (GMT)

__ Oliver -:- Anyone checking out the satellite broadcast? -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 00:40:43 (GMT)

__ AOA Ji -:- I'm wearing my tin-foil hat. I can't hear it (nt) -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 22:40:47 (GMT)

rule seeker -:- well then just what are the rules admin. -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 04:10:20 (GMT)

__ G -:- Your post needs clarification -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 13:24:50 (GMT)

__ __ rule seeker -:- Your post needs clarification -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 14:11:43 (GMT)

__ __ __ Katie -:- Your post needs clarification -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 16:11:10 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Katie -:- P.S. to rule seeker -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 16:21:28 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ rule seeker -:- thanks for the explanation -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 16:34:46 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- you are welcome -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 16:59:34 (GMT)

__ AJW -:- What's your problem? -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 12:05:35 (GMT)

__ __ rule seeker -:- What's your problem? -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 14:30:37 (GMT)

__ __ __ AJW -:- No, I was being nice. -:- Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 11:35:31 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Selene -:- selene of the whip -:- Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 03:07:51 (GMT)

__ Selene -:- well then just what are the rules admin. -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 04:16:57 (GMT)

__ __ rule seeker -:- sorry, I don't get it -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 04:25:04 (GMT)

__ __ __ Alien from Area 51 -:- You can post anything at this other place -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 13:24:12 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Selene -:- how do they think I feel? he was my guru! -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 19:32:09 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Dave -:- how do they think I feel? he was my guru! -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 00:36:56 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ selene -:- yes makes em set in their ways it does -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 05:10:20 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ G -:- But it's good to be polite -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 13:28:14 (GMT)

__ __ __ JHB -:- sorry, I don't get it -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 09:57:52 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Runamok -:- sorry, I don't get it -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 20:56:10 (GMT)

__ __ __ Selene -:- sorry, I don't get it -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 04:27:25 (GMT)

Bjørn -:- Black and white -:- Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 21:47:19 (GMT)

__ Loaf -:- I agree - but its good to challenge (nt) -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 06:55:05 (GMT)

__ Yaar, Da Rieendeer meat!! -:- There are none so blind as those that will not see -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 02:12:45 (GMT)

__ __ Selene -:- I think he should ask Bob (nt) -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 02:19:14 (GMT)

JW -:- Dettmers/LA-Ex -:- Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 19:07:52 (GMT)

__ Susan -:- Dettmers/LA-Ex -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 20:13:15 (GMT)

__ __ Susan -:- LA ex....read above post please. -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 19:55:14 (GMT)

__ AJW -:- Dialogue -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 12:25:29 (GMT)

__ bill b -:- JW -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 05:34:16 (GMT)

__ __ AJW -:- Mr Nice Guy. -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 12:43:55 (GMT)

__ __ __ bb -:- Anth the Brilliiant bar fly -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 00:31:47 (GMT)

__ Joey -:- Dettmers/LA-Ex -:- Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 22:41:26 (GMT)

Jim -:- 'Who is Satguru?' ( Pt 1: 1971 - published '78) -:- Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 16:26:52 (GMT)

__ Jim -:- Part 2 (JM, please note. This is for your page) -:- Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 16:58:14 (GMT)

__ __ Jim -:- Part 3 -:- Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 18:04:31 (GMT)

__ __ __ Jim -:- Part 4 (The beginning of the good stuff!) -:- Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 18:30:57 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Jim -:- Part 5 ('Guru is bigger and bigger than God') -:- Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 20:58:35 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Part 6 ('One pranam, one year's karma out') -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 16:47:01 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- One left to go -- anyone reading this shit? -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 19:48:30 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Susan -:- Yes, I have read every word. -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 00:18:10 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ JW -:- I am reading it too. -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 23:36:34 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- I'm reading it, very bizarre stuff, -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 23:09:16 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Oliver -:- I'm reading it too. -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 00:55:16 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Jean-Michel -:- Looks great !!! -:- Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 18:45:56 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Looks great !!! -:- Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 19:03:25 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- Deputy Dog is miragey's dog. Deputy Dog, read this -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 01:28:05 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Deputy Dog -:- Very funny G, very funny! -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 02:59:36 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ AJW -:- Forgive me Delilah -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 12:57:19 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Deputy Dog -:- Forgive me Delilah -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 13:52:41 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sister Mary O'Malley -:- Aren't you soooo special -:- Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 02:33:03 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ AJW -:- Now you tell me! (nt) -:- Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 11:39:37 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- the light technique, who taught it improperly -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 16:08:57 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Susan -:- Watch Anth see the light, I have to agree -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 20:10:32 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- Ok, I get it -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 20:17:37 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- meditation, chains -:- Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 03:30:27 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Mike -:- AND another song, too! -:- Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 04:04:26 (GMT)

__ __ cq -:- Does Satguru forgive sins? Yes.Any more questions? -:- Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 17:20:46 (GMT)

__ __ __ me -:- Does Satguru forgive sins? Yes.Any more questions? -:- Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 18:55:15 (GMT)

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 06:06:59 (GMT) From: bill b ...holy discourse Email: None To: Everyone Subject: from m dettmers about his 'mere mortal' teacher. Message:

I wont get to it all tonight and I will be out of town for a few days but here is some excerpts. M dettmers is speaking after saying how he has been hanging around our lord and traveling with him to get to the event. SO, being the PAM, he is bestowing us with his 'inner circle' wisdom during the years he was 'overseeing a complete restructureing of his (the lords) organization.' 'But still, why does the perfect master keep coming again and again? for himself? I just realize that the more I realize what maharaj ji is doing for us, the more I realize that I just want that red carpet wherever he goes. that we've just got tounderstand how precious guru maharaj ji is for us. Every time we have the opportunity for guru maharaj ji's darshan, our growth, our openness, our love, our experience of knowledge is just multiplied a million times. You cant even put a quantity to it. It just opens up. And what maharaj ji has done for us today we'll never understand, we'll never realize it. We'll never really be able to figure it. But its more than those thousand steps that maharaj ji takes. because we use that example: we just take one little step towards guru maharaj ji, and he takes a thousand steps...you can say a million, a billion, because where maharaj ji is coming from is infinite. You cant even put a figure on it. But he's come into our lives in a way that we could have never expected, we could have never expected, we could have never hoped. But that pure grace that he talks about just manifests. And I just see that whatever effort we're making, it's just so insignificant compared to the significance of guru maharj ji in our lives. And that love and devotion is so critical, is the thing that will give us that trust and that faith and that love to be able to surrender. To me, that's what knowledge is. Knowledge to me is JUST the means to surrender. Knowedge to me is JUST the means to get closer to guru maharaj ji. because the more that we can surrender to guru maharaj ji, the more that we can just get rid of this ego, get rid of this mind, get rid of anything that's separating us from guru maharaj ji, then the more that experience of perfection is just there. It's just that there's this mind, there's this thing that's just blocking it from coming through. And if we can take that and surrender it to guru maharaj ji through satsang service and meditation, then the thing that we want just manifests without any apparent effort, because we recognise that everything that comes is just through his grace. We begin to realize that all we need is love and humility to really realize this knowledge. The qualification for anyone receiving knowledge is to understand one simple thing, and that is that we are weak, and that we are ignorant, and that we are filled with the impurities of this world. This is the vow that weee say to maharaj ji when we receive knowledge: thats the acknowledgement that we make, and thats about as simple as the qualifications are. They're not that we have to be great yogis, that we have to be detached, that we have to be all these things that we think we have to be in order to realize knowledge. But just to recognise that we ARE weak, and we ARE ignorant, and we ARE filled with the impurities of this world, and that it is that love and it is the grace that guru maharj ji bestows upon us that can take us beyond it, and that can take us beyond all of those limitations. We just have to keep recognising that he is always here with us.' I cant type any more of this smoking gun tonight. I think this is of course more than enough to present to our recent forum visitor m dettmers and ask him to kindly just be honest with himself and us. After all, I was in that audience and I knew that THIS was a guy that hangs out with our lord and is a 'great soul' mahatma because he said so. Why he cant face his responsibility to be honest now with us is most likely due to his inability to be honest with himself about all this. When I came to the forum I needed help to unravel myself from my own making EXCUSES for my former ultimate ruler and mike dettmers is STILL making excuses and should read this oct 77 satsang and read the posts addressed to him here carefully and try again to communicate about this honestly as he can now. I remind him that he spent endless hours telling us from an announced 'insiders position' all this kind of cult programming satsang and we are asking him to not insult us but to face it squarely and not try to compare it to 'gossiping about princess diana and clinton'. Life is NOT an illusion. Face this squarely and do not pretend.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 05:14:56 (GMT) From: Wavering Will Email: None To: bill b ...holy discourse Subject: from m dettmers about his 'mere mortal' teacher. Message:

Why he cant face his responsibility to be honest now with us is most likely due to his inability to be honest with himself about all this I'm sure you hit the nail on the head, but personally I can relate to his dilemma. It is incredibly hard to face up to some (true?)alternate view of your reality when you desparately want your version to be 'the truth', especially if it has been a part of you for more than half your life. I've been there, in some ways I'm still there, and for all the wrangling going on, I'm actually finding Dettmer's slow opening up to be very helpful, so I hope it continues. Please don't scare him away by being too harsh, too soon.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 19:01:25 (GMT) From: JW Email: None To: bill b ...holy discourse Subject: Thanks Bill. Message:

Thank you Bill, that was very helpful. I'm also really impressed with how you've starting using punctuation. Is this a new phase in your life? ::))

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 16:33:03 (GMT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: bill b ...holy discourse Subject: Still crazy, after all these years? Message:

Bill: I wonder if you'd take a little pity on those of us with CRT damaged eyesight who have trouble seeing the little quote marks. God, I thought you had re-converted! I tend to agree with Jim's assessment of the situation below. In my case, even though I had left the mission and was having severe doubts about M's 'divinity,' to the extent that I wrote him a letter in 1982, I could still be seen from time to time trying to convince my poor exasperated relatives that he, or at least his 'Knowledge' were something special. That crap was almost on auto-pilot, and until I came across David Lane's site a few years ago it was merely dormant. Fortunately, I was not in a position of real power or influence at any time during this period. I can relate to Michael's experience to some degree; and think that he probably needs to look at this squaurely in order to put it behind him. He owes you a debt of gratitude for holding it up to his face. --Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 12:47:23 (GMT) From: aoaji Email: And_On_Anand@yahoo.com To: bill b ...holy discourse Subject: from m dettmers about his 'mere mortal' teacher. Message:

... he spent endless hours telling us from an announced 'insiders position' all this kind of cult programming satsang and we are asking him to not insult us but to face it squarely and not try to compare it to 'gossiping about princess diana and clinton'. We traveled all the way to Rome, Italy that year. I was exhausted -- I slept on the lawn of the Piazza Della Sporte (sp?) -- I got to see Rome, that's something. The Initiators (that's what they were called then) and (I guess: Dettmers) and Patterson and others who had roles like they did -- even Claudia -- they all spoke on the stage for at least 40 minutes, maybe as much as 90 or possibly longer -- that is a long time to speak to anyone without interjection. I used to think if I did not blink and did not move my eyeballs at all, that the resulting visual field distortions were somehow what I was supposed to be getting out of it, physiologically; I thought that was some kind of elevated state of awareness and that I was listening to some kind of inner direction -- the Guru Maharaj Ji on the inside, which was definitely part of the ontology given. I practiced being as absolutely still as possible, not even giving in to the temptation to feel strong elation that would distract me from the present experience my inner dialog announced (in English) that I was having. I probably didn't use that technique while listening to Dettmers (I don't actually remember him, just his name; I remember Bill Patterson clearly though -- and I very clearly remember the language and phraseology you quote in the above). I would definitely look forward to some of the Initiators' satsangs, and paid strict attention all the time they were on stage. Guru Maharaj Ji once said something like [talks about people getting up for a cup of coffee to keep from falling asleep during satsang] 'that coffee -- that is going to end up in the toilet -- and one day, your life will end up in that toilet...' Maharaji was vulgar and coarse, on a regular basis, but he drove the point home. We were not to get up and get a cup of coffee while he was on stage. I painted myself 'more insightful than the Premie sitting next to me' for intuiting that he also meant that level of undivided attention was to be paid during 'satsang' and that meant listening (my phrase only) to 'pretty much any Premie, Initiator or even Aspirant who doesn't sicken me listening to their wild ramblings'. I always felt shame, when I gave satsang, because deep inside I knew I was full of malarky (sp?) I also knew I was naturally a gregarious person and that this quality was being exploited to an ill purpose. -- Commentary I do believe in noetics -- that we do know things 'through and through; balls to bone' (Oracle). I think what we know comes from common sense, and then: education. I understood Dettmers' points on the nature of understanding -- but it falls apart somewhere (somewhere that has been beaten to death on the Internet -- the science of knowing and learning and understanding is well-covered in a multitude of discussions, net-wide). Another way of saying it: you might as well step forward, and stand on what you believe. It is always changing: that's true enough. But at this moment, you always have to choose to believe something. That on the highway, driving 62 mph, around the bend the road won't suddenly just end -- that it will still be there tomorrow, much the same as it was a week ago. You have to understand what things change and at what rate. I think the cave men had been doing that much! The real explanation for all this guru stuff is only obvious (IMO) when you consider the vast amounts of time they had to cook it up, and tailor it to the current crowd. Primates are generally incredibly socially-aware animals; they really read each other's body language with an astonishing capacity to intuit what is going on inside the other -- to exploit it, hone the intuitive grasp of it -- and make use of it to further themselves. Humans have had tens of thousands of years to cook up schemes (in aggregate, handed-down from one primate to the next, in succession). It's our great theme: wise-man, hu-man -- can pass her knowledge down to the next generation. Maharaji didn't invent this. He was taught to exploit this. -- We knew it was 'agya' that put Brian MacDermott (sp?) on the stage, weeping 'like some grandmother' (Kurtz) in the Poconos, and then 'Mrodgie' shows up in that chopper, and someone tells the story of how Maharaj Ji instantly impresses the chopper pilot with his piloting prowess talk, painting an almost impossible level of instant apprehension on any subject by this young guru. Mr. Dettmers is still working the program, still putting 'spin' on it like there was no tomorrow. I'm telling you, I was ready to send him five dollars, after reading his scratsang. Good to see you here. We should get together and do something sometime. I always think of you when I play the guitar; more than anyone else, you made it an accessible experience. That's a rare quality in anyone. Thanks again, Bill. Chris

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 16:59:27 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: aoaji Subject: I love this kind of analysis, aoaji -- thanks Message:

I just love getting into the nitty gritty mental gymnastics we used to do trying to 'realize Knowledge' back then. For me, that was really what it was all about and I know I wasn't alone. The other night I had a few friends over, partying, playing music lte through the night. At one point I got into a bit of an 'exposition' on the cult experience (and no, that's not something I do all that often. These are mere people, for one thing). The real challenge is in trying to explain what it was really like, climbing over my imaginary mental monkey bars trying to meet Maharaji on the other side of 'Mach I' (i.e. the speed of sound). We were clearly promised that what we supposedly 'experienced' in the Knowledge session (and no, I don't buy that 'experience' at face value at all) was but a glimpse of what awaited us once we truly 'surrendered'. The most important goal we had in the early seventies was to 'realize Knowledge'. No question about it, that meant clicking past some imaginary turnstile where we'd supposedly pick up some divine Dr. Strange kind of ability to see everything in its 'infinite' and divine nature. Something like that. But try to tell anyone about this! Forget about it. That's why I'm grateful, aoaji, that you bothered to explain some of the mental machinations we'd go through listening to satsang. Yes, there was an internal war going on alright. We were fighting the forces of darkness which were holding us back from scaling Holy Mountain. Michael's satsang came in the early renewed religious era of the late sevenites. Funny that no one talked about 'realizing Knowledge' anymore by then but that was exactly what we were trying to do. And yes, every second counted. Maharaji himself had made that clear in satsangs like the 1971 Alta Loma Terrace one I've been transcribing. He also made it clear that the only reason we weren't merging with him once we had knowledge was because our minds kept getting distracted: You see, the source of creating imperfect energy, vibration, is mind. If mind is converted into pure vibration, everything will be converted into pure vibration. Mind is the leak in the pipe; people are just sometimes opening it fat, or sometimes closing it, or sometimes opening to the source when the water has stopped coming. Look in the middle, the leak is there. water is leaking from there. So if you want to change vibration, you have to change your source of vibration. Michael's satsang, like all of ours, was really just a trick to give us something to concentrate on while we attempted to surrender, right there and then, to Maharaji's grace. That's why in satsang the words supposedly 'didn't count'. Because we were supposed to be trying to surrender to something much deeper while we listened. My point, though, was that by '77 we didn't talk so openly about 'realizing Knowledge' and that term soon dropped off the map. I think we were chastened by the fact that we'd struck an ungodly truce with the mind in '76 and now understood that we were so, so weak and so, so untrustworthy. We weren't brave spiritual adventurers so much as weak, prodigal sons, every one of us. It was time to grovel and Maharjai was all prepared to show us how. Michael, I don't know how you can look back at all this and not want to hold Maharaji's feet to the fire. But then, again, maybe you're thinking about things. I think I can understand that. None of the rest of us have to balance any of our disillusionment with our fake Lord and cult leader with the memory of someone who called us on some sunny, California morning and said 'Hey, Mike, how's it going?' You know, like a person or something. But Michael, there is one thing that has to be different as you think about Maharaji today compared to back then. Back then we assumed that guru's were real, that there was, in particular, something called a 'Satguru' and that Maharaji was it. If you don't accept those 'noble truths' and put Maharaji to the test, theoretically, of proving who ro what he is, there's nothing. A long history of dueling self-proclaimed Godmen in the Ridemypony tradition (as set out on JM's site). By not giving Maharaji any further 'benefit of the doubt' he's left as just another windbag not better or worse than his brother, Satpal, who also claims that he's the Lord of the Universe. It was bad form and impolitic in the extreme to want to know too much of Maharaji's so-called 'lineage' back then. No wonder.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 20:40:49 (GMT) From: aoaji Email: None To: Jim Subject: I get paid by the Word, Jim -nt- Message:

nine ten

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 16:55:37 (GMT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: aoaji Subject: from m dettmers about his 'mere mortal' teacher. Message:

Chris: You have my nomination for Wordsmith of the Day, Week, whatever. Excellent, and thoughtful post. I learned from it. I practiced being as absolutely still as possible, not even giving in to the temptation to feel strong elation that would distract me from the present experience my inner dialog announced (in English) that I was having. No wonder I was such a shitty premie! Call me 'Mr. Fidget.' --Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 22:07:08 (GMT) From: aoaji Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: chairs and microphone booms Message:

I'm glad the post has had the impact that it seems to have had! I appreciate the feedback and encouragement. -- I put up a few pix (of self) from those daze: And On Anand Ji's Home Page -- I couldn't help but notice that there was this whole thing about his chair and the microphone boom used. It was always the same model microphone and boom, and the chair was usually consistently the same model (or line). That'd be a good question for Michael Dettmers, if he knows the answer: did the local community coordinator rush out and buy these for each program, or was there just one stock that toured with Maharaji? Did they throw the chairs out, or reuse them? Was some office clerk sitting in one of those chairs a few weeks later, or was it disposed of specially? We never got a 'used' Maharaji chair in Hartford. Just some foot-washin' water to drink, or something. -- By the way, has anyone here ever drank the water that was used to wash anyone else's feet, besides Maharaji's? Should I tell my doctor? :)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 02:15:11 (GMT) From: Jimmy Fitz Email: None To: aoaji Subject: chairs and microphone booms Message:

aoaji, if you are talking about the rather simple light tan chair with the padded armrests of the same color I might have an answer and maybe JW might also know. I believe that the 'chair' came from the Chicago community originally and Janet Maggio of Miami via Chicago was a player. I also believe that thE chair was crated up and traveled. Sorry, I don't know about the microphone and booms nor do I know what happened to thE chair, but I know that Janet eventually left Maharaji in the '80s to follow a 35,000 year old warrior that was being channeled by a Tacoma, Washington housewife named J.Z. Knight.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 11:57:17 (GMT) From: aoaji Email: None To: Jimmy Fitz Subject: chairs and microphone booms Message:

Thanks Jimmy. I know that Janet eventually left Maharaji in the '80s to follow a 35,000 year old warrior that was being channeled by a Tacoma, Washington housewife named J.Z. Knight. ! I was thinking of the black one (I think it was black). That tan one kind of looked like a cartoon alligator's belly -- the one with the pyramid shaped backrest with the wide horizontal panels in the backrest. So if they crated that one up then they probably brought the microphone boom with them, too. It's just that I'd never seen that microphone boom used anywhere else. I was wondering if it was off-the-shelf or designed for Maharaji or something. He had really nice stuff. Whatever else he was and did, he did a lot of traveling, which for him amounts to 'business' travel.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 02:23:49 (GMT) From: Honey Fritz Email: glyng@techline.com To: Jimmy Fitz Subject: He Jimmy you 3@^%**!!! Message:

drop me a line. I'm anxious to hear what you're doin'. That is if I haven't committed the sin against the holy ghost or nuthin...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 12:01:58 (GMT) From: Dettmers Email: None To: bill b ...holy discourse Subject: from m dettmers about his 'mere mortal' teacher. Message:

Jim, thanks for your efforts to be fair about this. Let me add to it. First, I don’t deny that I would have spoken those words in 1977, although I think Mr. Burke should have included a specific date and location. The real question, however, is why does this make me a liar. There seems to be this naïve notion that in 1974, when I first spent any personal time with Maharaji, I had somehow come to the overnight conclusion that he was not the lord but a mere mortal. I never said that nor did it happen that way for me. In my April 5th memo I said, “In those early days I accepted and practiced all of the ashram’s prescribed protocol, and I enjoyed and derived great personal benefit from doing so. The first time I actually spent any personal time with Maharaji was during his visit to Canada in 1974. …. As I spent more personal time with Maharaji, I became less in awe of him as a perfect master sitting on a stage, and got to know, respect and love him as a person – a very incredible, uniquely talented, and extremely intelligent human being.” In my April 6th response to LA – Ex I said, “And it was important to me that I develop an intelligible and functional interpretation of who Maharaji was and how best to support his work. It was in this context that I 'gradually' (emphasis added) come to some of the recommendations I referred to in my earlier memo.” When I summarized the conclusions I had come to as a result of the unfolding process I underwent, I explained it using the metaphor of Einstein and gravity. However, in that April 5th memo I made it clear that this was my current (read year 2000) perspective on the matter. During the time I was involved, it wasn’t always that clear to me, nor could I have expressed it in those terms. On another note, I apologize for the callous manner in which I spoke about the closing of the ashrams. Yes, I take full responsibility for recommending that they be closed, and I have no regrets about making that recommendation. But, even though I was not directly involved in implementing the decision, I do regret the shameful manner in which it was handled in most cases.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 19:23:08 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: Dettmers Subject: Thank you Michael Message:

On another note, I apologize for the callous manner in which I spoke about the closing of the ashrams. Yes, I take full responsibility for recommending that they be closed, and I have no regrets about making that recommendation. But, even though I was not directly involved in implementing the decision, I do regret the shameful manner in which it was handled in most cases. Apology accepted and thank you for acknowledging the shameful way they were closed. I don't feel you should have any regrets about making your recommendation that the ashrams be closed. In fact, it was the right thing to do. Was it difficult to make this recommendation? From what I've heard, Maharaji has repeatedly reacted with anger towards suggestions. I would think this took courage. I'm curious as to who was involved with the closings and who decided how they were closed. How much was Maharaji involved? The impression I got was that he didn't know how it was handled until afterwards (even though he was supposedly all-knowing ha ha).

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 20:23:12 (GMT) From: JW Email: None To: G Subject: I don't know what's worse...... Message:

I agree G, that the decision to close the ashrams was the right decision. But given that these people had devoted their lives PERSONALLY to Maharaji, and not to some 'institution,' Maharaji himself had a moral obligation to be out front in the whole closing scenario and admitting his mistakes involving the ashrams in years previous. But maybe he wasn't involved. I don't know what is worse. That he WAS involved and let it be handled in an atrocious manner, or that he didn't even care enough to BE involved, or was so out of touch with his own devotees that he just didn't bother to think about it. I think probably the latter -- Maharaji never gave any outward evidence that he gave a shit about his devotees, beyond what he could get from them. I have told people who know nothing about Maharaji that I lived in his ashram for almost 10 years, and during that period I never even spoke to Maharaji even ONCE..... When I tell people that they can't believe it, and in retrospect, I can't either. He didn't know my name, didn't know I was alive, and cared nothing about knowing anything about any of us who lived in one of his 'houses of the forelorn.' In that light, what should we expect when the ashrams were closed?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 21:19:01 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: JW Subject: I don't know what's worse...... Message:

I feel the same way. Whether he was involved or not, it shows that he didn't care. Maybe he just delegated it because he was too busy living la vida loca. One thing I didn't mention. When the ashrams were closed, besides not admitting his mistakes, he never came out and explicitly released us from our vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience. In fact, being unmarried was still a requirement for being an instructor for quite some time. I was reluctant to get married because of that and might have gotten married otherwise. Some premies moved into a quasi-ashram situation even after the ashram closed. In terms of guidance, all I heard (and not from him) was that he wanted ashram premies to be more normal, whatever that was supposed to mean. Were we to continue to sing arti twice a day? be vegetarian or go ahead and eat meat? have sex without feeling guilty or not? continue to send 15% of our income or how much or none? get up when we feel like? What was normal? Hard to figure out after being brainwashed for years. I even heard a story, and I believe it was just a story, that the only reason he reopened the ashram after '76 was because some premies kept bugging him to do so. Never mind that he wrote the ashram manual. So basically, I felt like the ashram premies were made scapegoats for what happened. Also, the mentality of obedience was left in place so people like me could be exploited to do 'service'. Based on writings at www.enjoyinglife.org, this mentality seems to still exist and be encouraged. The after-effects of the ashram lifestyle still go on.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 22:46:26 (GMT) From: JW Email: None To: G Subject: Very Interesting Message:

Very interesting stuff. So the ashrams might have been physically closed, but it was left up to the former ashram premies to figure out what that meant. Typical Maharaji. When the ashrams were closed, besides not admitting his mistakes, he never came out and explicitly released us from our vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience. In fact, being unmarried was still a requirement for being an instructor for quite some time. I was reluctant to get married because of that and might have gotten married otherwise. Some premies moved into a quasi-ashram situation even after the ashram closed. In terms of guidance, all I heard (and not from him) was that he wanted ashram premies to be more normal, whatever that was supposed to mean I can see how that must have been awful, sort of being in the ashram without really being in one. I guess I had the advantage of also having rejected Maharaji at the same time I rejected the ashram, so that was a clean break, and the idea of sending him money after the many thousands I had already sent him, was out of the question. I don't suppose he meant 'normal' to include not sending him money. ::)) I remember soon after I left, having lunch in an Italian restaurant in San Francisco with Dennis Murphy. Poor guy. He was an initiator at that time, and I really layed into him, telling him how ripped off I felt and what a fraud Maharaji was. He didn't even try to defend it; he just got out of there as soon as he could. ::)) I even heard a story, and I believe it was just a story, that the only reason he reopened the ashram after '76 was because some premies kept bugging him to do so. Well, in retrospect, not all the ashrams closed in 1976. Many of them stayed open, I know the one I lived in in Chicago did, as did ashrams in Boston, Denver, and a bunch of other places. If you read Mishler's interview, he implies that Maharaji went back to the 'super-devotional' period after 1976, including promoting the ashrams, because he became afraid when the droves of premies left the ashrams in 1976 that he wouldn't be worshipped anymore and donations would dry up. So, a lot of what happened in 1977-1983 was basically Maharaji's paranoia and gross over-reaction to what happened in 1976, when, to some degree, premies started thinking again, and becoming more 'normal.'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 23:14:17 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: JW Subject: Very Interesting Message:

Fortunately, there were people at work and a girlfriend of mine who got me out of the ashram mentality, but I was a hard nut to crack. I didn't move into a quasi-ashram environment, though I was invited. I was asked 'Don't you want to be humble?', I said 'NO!' How the word humble can be misused. I doubt he meant that 'normal' meant not sending him money.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 22:27:52 (GMT) From: aoaji Email: None To: G Subject: I don't know what's worse...... Message:

Good post. I'm confused by the dates cited; I got knowledge in Buffalo in Jan, 1978 (after 18 months as an aspirant -- I was a minor until '78!) There were plenty of ashrams around by then. I think the Hartford ashram opened in maybe late 1977; I was there in early '78, and stayed overnight in the Boston and Syracuse and Buffalo ashrams that year. David Smith was at the Syracuse ashram when I was there. I went in the Air Force in 1981; when I came home for a visit (during the haitus I was reading Carlos Casteneda and riding my motorcycle around Perimeter Road with my eyes crossed, visiting cornfields at sunset, and generally afraid of beings that live inside of vegetables :) . . . When I came home for a visit, I met up with a 'cuckoo premie' who brought me to the New Ashram in town; I didn't know anyone there but was welcome to the morning meditation. The vibe was way off (but then again I had my cornfields as background vibe). I also got baptized (full dunk) a year or two earlier -- I wanted to be sure all the gods wanted my corpse during the Rapture, I suppose. :) We were really fucking crazy.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 22:36:49 (GMT) From: Susan Email: None To: aoaji Subject: so how old are you now? Message:

How old were you in that picture? You look REALLY young. Like I am guessing 15-16? I was a teenage premie too. I am now 38.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 22:44:54 (GMT) From: aoa Email: None To: Susan Subject: so how old are you now? Message:

That photo was taken some time after I received knowledge (since I hadn't met the photographer yet, I'm sure of that much). I'm guessing 1978 or maybe '79. I hit 40 in December.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 18:55:33 (GMT) From: JW Email: None To: Dettmers Subject: Michael, sorry if the following posts sound harsh. Message:

I do believe that you are trying to sort through all this, and many of us who have done a lot of sorting of our own can understand how difficult and disconcerting it is. It's very confronting and difficult, but it is SO worth it, to be freed from the programmed tapes in your brain. To me, that's the difference between 'non-practicing premies' (of which there are THOUSANDS), and 'ex-premies.' The NPP's have, for the most part, just slid away from the cult, and that can carry on for YEARS after 'leaving'. They might also well slide back sometime. They, for the most part, haven't rooted out what was done to them while they were in. In my opinion, most 'ex-premies' have done that. For me, it took me years, and a lot of therapy, including looking at a lot of stuff I didn't want to look at. And all I can say, Michael, is that I really feel for you. I am just SO grateful that there are no recorded or printed satsangs of MINE from back then........

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 19:07:34 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: JW Subject: Yeah, you should see what I sent my family! Message:

O once posted a long letter I sent my sister nad mother before Millenium. You know, swear to Darwin, I can actually remember the very moments of sitting there at the kitchen table .... no, what am I talking about? It's typed! So much for memory, huh? Must have been a different letter. But anyway, I wrote this letter that is just complete boiler-plate Hindu transcendental bullshit, coupled with a summary analysis of all the 'wrong ways' our family had tried to find love and fulfillment in 'this world'. Then an urgent invitation to join me at the actual, no-shit inauguration of a thousand years of peace ('Why only a thousand?', I quietly wondered a few times) in Houston. I assured my mother that it would be 'really cool' for her because all of the parents were going to be able to stay in the same hotel as the mahatmas! I was nineteen years old. I end the letter saying that, if nothing else, it would 'really cool' if they could send me some money for my plane ticket. Sure, I had been working the past couple of months, but all of us ashram premies wee sending as much money as we could to the festival itself and needed some assistnace from others. What a service opportunity for my family! My postscript is just a mention of how 'really cool' the latest issue of And it is Divine is if they wanted to pick one up. Funny, I don't think they ever did.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 17:58:58 (GMT) From: JW Email: None To: Dettmers Subject: Michael, this is confusing...what do you mean? Message:

Thanks for the clarification, Michael, although thanks to Bill Burke, I think we have a somewhat better understanding that you were every bit as programmed as the rest of us to view Maharaji as a supreme being, even after spending years working on his staff, (1974-1977 in this case, Bill said the date of your satsang was October, 1977, probably at the Rome Hans Jayanti Festival.) Clearly, in 1977 you were saying the same line Maharaji was, that devotion and surrender to Maharaji was the goal, the end all and the be-all of following Maharaji, and 'knowledge' was secondary to that. It's kind of unclear when and if you really changed that view. As you say, your April 5 memo says that 'shortly' after going to Denver in 1974, you 'became less in awe of him (Guru Maharaj Ji) as a perfect master...and got to know...him as a person---... an extremely intelligent human being.' I think you have now explained that the process was, in fact, gradual, and it's very obvious that it hadn't progressed very far, at least within the first 3 years, given this discourse in 10/77, in which your speaking was very much in line with viewing Maharaji as god incarnate, to whom we were supposed to be surrendering our lives. So, Michael, when did that 'gradual process' actually bear some fruit? At what point did you see Maharaji as a 'human being?' Further in you 4/05 memo, you also said that it was in your view that is was 'unnecessary and unwise to suggest that devotion to Maharaji was an integral condition for experiencing knowledge.' Obviously in 10/77 you weren't thinking that way yet. When did you start?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 20:07:15 (GMT) From: gerry Email: None To: JW Subject: an extremely intelligent human being.' Message:

That's what really gets me. People saying this little piss ant is 'extremely intelligent.' Just read what he has said in the past and listen to any present day 'videos.' The guy's clueless. Cunning and gluttonous, I'll grant him; extremely intelligent? Has anyone here seen any evidence of that? And don't bring up the pilot thing. We could almost all accomplish that give Goober's seemingly unlimited resources (our money, btw.)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 23:15:42 (GMT) From: Gregg Email: None To: gerry Subject: an extremely intelligent human being (!) Message:

I don't know Mr. Rawat personally (unless you count kissing his feet 'personal'), but judging by his public discourses, this guy is no Einstein. You'd think that if he were smart, he wouldn't hide it on purpose when on stage...I mean, that's the one time it might make sense for him to pull out all the stops and impress us with his brilliance. But instead, we were subjected to performances of meandering blather, pointless anecdotes and banal metaphors. Satsang from the mouth of The Divine Swan, indeed! Honk honk honk! (of course, at the time, being in love with the Guru, I bought the party line that his simplemindedness was simplicity, sacred simplicity.) Could Rawat really be as smart as M.D. says, or is he still smitten? (Or remembering things rosily, as Jim observes.)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 23:37:13 (GMT) From: JW Email: None To: Gregg Subject: an extremely intelligent human being (!) Message:

Gregg, right. The first time I realized how utterly incoherent Maharaji spoke, was then I brought people I worked with to a program at Zellerbach Hall in Berkeley in 1981 where Maharaji gave an 'introductory' program. It was one of the first times I listened to him from the point of view of the people I brought. And you're right, it was wandering blather. I was actually embarrassed. I remember wanting to say to them: he is usually SO MUCH BETTER THAN THIS, but then I couldn't think of how. I remember a woman I brought asked me as we left: 'Was there some POINT to that?' I had no idea what to say. I just went with her and drowned my confusion in chocolate cake.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 12:12:26 (GMT) From: aoaji Email: None To: JW Subject: an extremely intelligent human being (!) Message:

I don't know -- the early selling-point all had to do with his age and his accomplishments at that age. Starting with being an 8 or 9 year old in India, and commanding the attention that he did. How does an eight year old (even an 8 yr old son of a cult leader) dream that up? Are there any known historical comparisons, in other political or religious dynasties? What about in the American (xtian) evangelical community? Any parallel stories there? My understanding was that he wasn't propped up by Mata Ji or anyone else; he more or less stole the show while they were bickering over power in the back room. People (do they exist?) who were touring with him and have a balanced perspective could be very helpful in shedding some light on that. On the face of it, a teenager doing any of what he did is downright astonishing. Look at the kids around you, and then project that onto what the boy Guru Maharaji was. My guess is that Shri Maharaj Ji was a bit off in his final days, and pulled little Sant Ji aside and laid a heavy, emotionally-abusive trip on his youngest son, telling him he was 'the one to continue' etc. I can't think of another situation (other than the story given by DLM propaganda of the day) to explain what put him up on that stage for that first historic satsang after Shri Maharaj Ji's death (in late summer of 1966, I believe). He was a young child, not even in puberty yet. That's quite a context. He had to have a fairly high IQ to do what he did, I'd think. From the get-go, he was in a power struggle with his mother and others. It's a big franchise to win in a coup, even for an adult.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 16:21:36 (GMT) From: Gregg Email: None To: aoaji Subject: How about Marloe? Message:

Marloe preached at a very young age (and later renounced his whole shtick). Kids preaching are curiosities, rare but not unheard of. I still don't view GMJ's early rise to gurudom as evidence of intelligence, just circumstances and chutzpah. BTW, I have an eight-year old daughter who could talk rings around Maharaj Ji. Not about Knowledge, God and Satguru, I guess. Maybe I should have brainwashed her with cultic lore so I could retire from my day job and paraded her around the world as the Perfect One...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 20:55:31 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Gregg Subject: You mean Marjoe Gortner? Message:

Marjoe (from 'Mary' and 'Joseph') was a child evangelist and subject of a 1972 movie by his name ('Marjoe'). Later became an actor in cheesy action flicks.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 21:25:06 (GMT) From: Gregg Email: None To: Jim Subject: Yeah,Marjoe. And Al Sharpton... Message:

Reading the paper over wontons today I read that Al Sharpton first preached in a Harlem church when he was 4. Everone thinks it's so cute when a little one says grownup things. That's how GMJ got to where he is...all those ashram premies of Shri Hans thought that Prem Pal was just the cutest little thing!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 14:42:28 (GMT) From: JW Email: None To: aoaji Subject: an extremely intelligent human being (!) Message:

I don't know what his IQ was, but he was uneducated, and he also never got any feedback. He could babble up on stage about anything and he would STILL receive fawning adulation. Most of us learn by making mistakes and getting feedback from somebody that we made them, and suggestions on how to correct them. Not Maharaji. Whatever he did, not matter how stupid, was considered 'perfect' and never criticized, at least not to his face. Another question for Dettmers: Did he or anyone ever tell Maharaji that he rambled and was incoherent in his discourses? Did he ever try to get any training in speaking, or trying to make some sense in what he was saying?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 18:21:31 (GMT) From: Powerman Email: None To: JW Subject: an extremely intelligent human being (!) Message:

Another question for Dettmers: Did he or anyone ever tell Maharaji that he rambled and was incoherent in his discourses? Did he ever try to get any training in speaking, or trying to make some sense in what he was saying? JW, I don't think this is a fair question. I mean, did any of us ever say that to each other, even in private. Did we ever even say it to a non-premie? I doubt it. When I read maharaji's words now, they're inane. At the time they seemed to make sense but that was secondary to feeling the experience that I believed came from his satsang.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 14, 2000 at 01:15:32 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: Powerman Subject: rambling Message:

Once while I was in the middle of 'giving satsang' to dozens of people, a premie told me I was rambling. I was, I realized it, and stopped. As Maharaji said himself (paraphrased), it's rude to interrupt someone when they are not making sense, but it's cruel to let them continue. Since he's more than willing to criticize others, he should accept criticism himself. So I think it's a fair question. Also, the lack of critical feedback to Maharaji has only served to feed his ego and hinder his maturity. Part of being mature is accepting and benefiting from criticism.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 02:40:35 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Powerman Subject: I disagree, it's a COMPLETELY fair question Message:

What's unfair about asking just how much Maharaji's 'handlers' handled him? Nothing. And in terms of any shortcomings the guy had, it's all fair game. When the Lord comes you're allowed to look closely. Close enough to kiss his feet? Close enough to comment on anything and everything about him, er, I mean 'Him'.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 04:31:50 (GMT) From: Powerman Email: None To: Jim Subject: I disagree, it's a COMPLETELY fair question Message:

Well, Jim, number 1, Dettmers wasn't maharaji's 'handler'; he fell in line like the rest of us. Number two, as far as looking closely at the Lord, how many times did we drill each other about how you can't judge the Lord by all those limited standards, like logic and intelligence, etc. etc? Essentially that's how we kept the cult ball rolling... 'don't look too closely'. Now that I think about it, Dettmers' claims about being removed from the cult programming are just ridiculous. What a fucking clown.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 18:41:13 (GMT) From: JW Email: None To: Powerman Subject: an extremely intelligent human being (!) Message:

Well, Michael said he told Maharaji he disagreed with the way Maharaji was presenting himself, and that he didn't agree that 'devotion' was a necessary component, I just wondered if any other suggestions were ever made to M in the way he presented himself. As I said, I doubt it, but I thought I would ask.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 04:21:11 (GMT) From: Powerman Email: None To: JW Subject: an extremely intelligent human being (!) Message:

Yeah, I see your point, but I think Dettmers is waffling. We all read that satsang Bill Burke posted. Dettmers is just talking tough now but chances are he was as guru-whipped as the rest of us.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 18:03:47 (GMT) From: JW Email: None To: JW Subject: Closing the Ashrams Message:

Michael, you say you weren't involved 'directly' in implementing the decision to close the ashrams. How were you involved, and who WAS directly involved? Specifically, what was Maharaji's involvement? Did Maharaji ever express to you concern about the many people who had spent up to a decade or more in his ashrams and what might happen to them? Any discussion of financial or career aid or consultation? Did it occur to you and to anyone else, especially Maharaji, that given that just a year or two earlier, Maharaji was cajoling people to move INTO the ashrams, and was having his honcho intititators 'clean up' the ashrams, that this change would appear draconian, rash, out of the blue, and utterly lacking in preparation?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 18:20:20 (GMT) From: JW Email: None To: JW Subject: Can't Get Over this LINE. OH, MICHAEL! Message:

'And that love and devotion is so critical, is the thing that will give us that trust and that faith and that love to be able to surrender. To me, that's what knowledge is. Knowledge to me is JUST the means to surrender. Knowledge to me is JUST the means to get closer to guru Maharaj Ji, because the more we can surrender to guru maharaj ji, the more that we can just get rid of this ego, get rid of this mind, get rid of anything that's separating us from guru maharaj ji, then the more that experience of perfection is just there.' Now, Michael, that's pretty blatant. I assume you believed it, and you weren't doing a wink and nod to your boss while you said it. I mean, this is the essence of the 1977-1983 period in the cult. I think it sums it up better than anyone could explain it. So, you obviously believed he was god at this point; when did you stop? Was it when he started cheating on his wife in the early 80s with Moncia Lewis and other premie (mostly blonde) women? Was that what did it?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 16:05:41 (GMT) From: Powerman Email: None To: Dettmers Subject: from m dettmers about his 'mere mortal' teacher. Message:

I know these words from Dettmers' satsang well... we were all speaking this garbage. I know I was faking it and from what I can tell everyone else was too. When I remember the things I said back in the '70's it makes me cringe, and Dettmers' satsang made me cringe too. For one thing it was just terribly dumb; like this part Every time we have the opportunity for guru maharaj ji's darshan, our growth, our openness, our love, our experience of knowledge is just multiplied a million times. You cant even put a quantity to it. It just opens up. And what maharaj ji has done for us today we'll never understand, we'll never realize it. We'll never really be able to figure it. But its more than those thousand steps that maharaj ji takes. because we use that example: we just take one little step towards guru maharaj ji, and he takes a thousand steps...you can say a million, a billion, because where maharaj ji is coming from is infinite. This just isn't true. It's a bunch of bullshit. But not only that, it implores other people to make big changes in their lives based on what's being said. It's asking others to trust not only Maharaji, but us. What can you call something like this but UGLY? And what can you call it when someone is faced with having done this and doesn't say something simple like 'I was wrong. What I did was stupid. I'm sorry.' Well, I call it even uglier.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 13:05:24 (GMT) From: And On Anand Ji Email: And_On_Anand@yahoo.com To: Dettmers Subject: from m dettmers about his 'mere mortal' teacher. Message:

I think it takes courage and a lot of integrity for you to show up here and say what you have, and listen to the response cycle, Mr. Dettmers. I don't know what you've done and what you're accountable to -- and I have no fantasies of ever learning such. How can that be compressed onto a typed page? I've always had trouble loving people who have done me damages or just excessivly annoyed me. I was raised that way. A time had come to own up to the bitter disappointment and the broken promises not kept me, by Maharaji. Maharaji presented himself as more than a man -- as the one man on the planet I (and most everyone else) must get to know better. That's not really what he was. I believe you know that, on some level. He was (suppose, still is) a complex individual with a lot weighing on him. I think it's time he gave up the guru schtick and made some reparations. I mean -- you can't try anyone in the media, and that's what this site is, partially. It's also partially the historical record. I only wish it were treated more rigorously, somehow (and that is no criticism of how it's been handled thus far). Anyway -- thank you for your comments, Mr. Dettmers. They do add a dimension to my understanding of the past that has a value. I'll let the others with more specifics challenge every version of the truth (their truth) that doesn't add up in what you say -- and cheer for both sides. I think we need both sides, to have a conversation.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 12:35:06 (GMT) From: JHB Email: None To: Dettmers Subject: from m dettmers about his 'mere mortal' teacher. Message:

Mr. Dettmers, That's all fine and dandy for you. Because you had day to day contact with Maharaji you were in a position to form a more accurate view of who he was. Those of us with no personal contact were influenced not only by Maharaji's words, but also by premies who did have that personal contact including yourself. By sustaining the belief he was the incarnation of God, and other cult beliefs such as the demonisation of the mind, our personal development was damaged. You have not discussed this issue at all, and in your refusal to discuss anything critical of Maharaji, you have made such discussion impossible. Your admission that you did make such speeches as posted by Bill when in a position of power now requires that you address yours and Maharaji's culpability in the damage caused. As it appears you do continue to read here, maybe this will prick your conscience. John Brauns

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 07:06:18 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: bill b ...holy discourse Subject: Possible explanations Message:

1) He had a gun to his head 2) He was joking 3) His memory's playing tricks with him 4) He's playing tricks with us My conversations with Mike lead me to believe No. 3 more than anything. According to Michael, he not only doubted that Maharaji was the Lord as early as '74, he came to know he wasn't around then too. First, as Dettmers has told me, and as was true in my case as well, this 'doubt' didn't become 'knowledge' overnight. Who knows where Michael was really at in October, '77? Obviously he still had some of this shit in him; but I don't question his sincerity when he tells me he stopped thinking that way a long time before. What I think Michael's doing is selectively remembering the doubts which have since grown and flourished apparently since then. What he's forgetting is everything else. Something like that anyway.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 18:07:54 (GMT) From: JW Email: None To: Jim Subject: Selective Memory, Jim Message:

When people are leaving a cult, it's a natural phenomenon. When my mother showed me letters I had written to her in the 70s, a few years later, I was shocked that I ever said that stuff. When you have unpleasant memories, especially if they involve your identity, there is a tendency to white-wash the past. It really isn't dishonesty, unless, of course, you are confronted with it and continue to do it. That's what's happening here, in my opinion.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 20:21:48 (GMT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: JW Subject: The Preservation of Memory Message:

Joe: When you have unpleasant memories, especially if they involve your identity, there is a tendency to white-wash the past. It really isn't dishonesty, unless, of course, you are confronted with it and continue to do it. That's what's happening here, in my opinion. Yes, memory is very strange indeed. I recall having decided to try a certain brand of fruit preserves on a provisional basis when I was in the L.A. community, thinking that I'd just use it a few times and then decide whether I liked it better than the name brands. After I left L.A. and became inactive that little piece of memory got folded in with all of the rest of the stuff about Maharaji that I shoved into the basement storage of my mind. 25 years later, when I got around to actually looking at my involvement with some sort of critical eye, I discovered that I was still using those preserves on a provisional basis, thinking I was going to make a decision any day now about whether I actually liked the stuff! Totally goofy. --Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 18:45:00 (GMT) From: JW Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Preserves and Preservation Message:

You mean after eating the preserves for 25 years, you still hadn't decided if you liked them? Did you keep forgetting after you ate them whether you liked them or not? ::))

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 13, 2000 at 03:51:49 (GMT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: JW Subject: Preserves and Preservation Message:

Joe: The point was that I had shelved the decision process in favor of indecision. Clearly I liked the stuff, but my use never got beyond the stage in my mind of being 'provisional.' I don't use it any more. I think the company went out of business because dopes like me never made up their minds. I think it was 'Prichard Orchards,' or something like that. Maybe they're still around in SoCal. --Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 13, 2000 at 18:43:03 (GMT) From: JW Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Still Don't Get It Message:

So, are you saying everytime you bought the preserves, it was with the mindset that you were going to just try them to see if you liked them, despite having bought them for 25 years? That gives new meaning to the word 'indecision.' I think with Maharaji and the cult, it's more that a cult-member has no means to make up his or her mind about whether it works, they like it, or whatever. First, the longer you are in, the harder it is to compare it to any alternative, or even to know there is an alternative. Second, there is an inherent philosophy in the Maharaji cult that you aren't supposed to look at any of it objectively, to doubt it in any way, and if you do, you are falling into the hands of your evil mind. Hence you can't tell whether you like it or not. And, true, like cq says, some of staying a premie is just a bad habit.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 13, 2000 at 18:15:37 (GMT) From: cq Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: 'The point ... I had shelved the decision process' Message:

You say, Scott 'The point was that I had shelved the decision process' I'd almost forgotten that there was a time when I was evaluating the Maha, intending to come to a decision about him. And that's a place that EVERY premie, current or not, has been. And did I make up my mind about him? Or did events kind of carry me along until I found myself sitting cross-legged in an ashram, thinking, 'how long before I'm self-realised?' The temptation to stay with the Maha simply because I'd spent so many years on that particular path (a cul-de-sac as it happened) was strong. But another path appeared, and before long I was shelving the decision-making process again. What was I? - a chronic 'cultie'? Something attracted me to it. A sense of belonging? An escape from a pretty disfunctional family life?. Or was it a feeling that: if this really is the second coming, hadn't I better give it my all? Well, a quarter of a century later, I know for sure it wasn't the second coming. And what of the good people today who are being tempted to buy into the con? Do I just let them find out the hard way?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 02:21:19 (GMT) From: aoaji Email: None To: JW Subject: Preserves and Preservation Message:

'I don't like spinach, and I'm glad I don't, because if I liked it I'd eat it, and I just hate it.' -- Clarence Darrow

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 18:19:39 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: JW Subject: I agree Message:

Michael's really struck me a someone trying to be honest. Hell, maybe I'm an idiot but ....well, I did follow a teenage Lord of the Universe, didn't I? (Sorry, Mike :) ). But I honestly think he's trying to see this all clearly. The test, of course, is how he deals with the picture as it comes into clearer view. Thanks everyone. You, too, Michael.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 22:14:42 (GMT) From: baggage Email: aoa To: Jim Subject: teenage wasteland (lampoon, ot) Message:

I can just see it in some 3rd-shelf magazine rack, on the cover: 'I was a teenage Satguru' -- Dear Abby I was a teenage Satguru, and now I'm trying to make a living as an airport baggage clerk. It's my first real job. It doesn't pay well, but it's an honest day's work. STUMBLING IN MALIBU (and LA/X)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 06:39:08 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: bill b ...holy discourse Subject: The date?? (nt) Message:

yy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 06:43:25 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Jim Subject: Scratch that -- I see it's '77 (nt) Message:

nn

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 14:32:44 (GMT) From: Way Email: None To: BB Subject: Much thanks to Bill Burke Message:

BB, Thank you for your efforts, even though reading that transcription is extremely painful for me. Initiator and big honcho satsang was always my favorite. Why were we not more vigilant, especially since we called ourselves 'seekers of truth'???? A couple days ago, some premie posted under the name Brandy that 'we only hear what we want to hear.' Boy, is that true of Maharaji's premies back then. It makes me shudder - for myself, for my friends, for the people who are coming today and hearing the message for the first time that 'He is here.'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 17:34:58 (GMT) From: Susan Email: None To: Way Subject: well said Way Message:

I was stunned when I read it. It has been a long time. I had forgotten how bad it really was. All I could think is I am glad I was never important enough that someone transcribed my satsangs.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 22:30:49 (GMT) From: aoaji Email: None To: Susan Subject: well said Way Message:

And how. Being low on the totem-pole never looked so good.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 03:53:35 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: Everyone Subject: More from the author of 'My Key' Message:

From www.enjoyinglife.org - Days with Knowledge - April 2, 2000 Ivete Belfort Mattos: I admit I propagate Knowledge all my time From Sao Paolo, Brazil I admit that I propagate Knowledge all my time. I wish I could express my love with no words, Convey it with a deep and strong feeling. I would like to have the ability to transmit it though my eyes. I would love to communicate the happiness inside me through the air. Then I could concentrate all my effort in expressing All my gratitude in a simple way, Transparently, enjoying it without effort. In an invisible way feeling thankful and happy. However, with a plan or without one I admit that I propagate Knowledge all my time. I can not avoid to do it. It is indeed stronger than I am. I talk, invite, provide videos, leaflets. Alone, I follow my path expressing my love. I never judge or select people - I don't know if they are ready for all this happiness - So, I invite everyone. I admit that I propagate Knowledge all my time. I talk, invite, provide videos, leaflets. And the best result is that It is so much pleasure. Doing it with all my gratitude, I have a lot of fun!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 03:37:07 (GMT) From: Selene Email: None To: G Subject: substitute cybersex for knowledge Message:

and she could make some money. (or so I have heard) Not sure about the invisible part, maybe with the right VR tools.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 17:07:06 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: G Subject: She's moved on to 'Calrity' Message:

Clarity Clear Light Focus Keeps Life Eternal. Clear Light Inside Wise Heart Always. Clear Light Enjoys Interior Beauty Clear Light Graces Real Love. Ivete Belfort Mattos Sao Paolo, Brazil

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 17:09:01 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Jim Subject: Jokes on me -- I mean 'clarity', but here's 'bliss Message:

My master's bliss There is no home, like the home of my master's knowledge, There is no wisdom, like the wisdom of Maharaji's words, There is no security, like the security of my master's peace, There is no joy, like the joy of my master's bliss. Stojan Svet Postojna, Slovenia

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 11:48:38 (GMT) From: aoaji Email: None To: G Subject: 'My Key' will eat anything -nt- Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 03:38:49 (GMT) From: bill burke Email: None To: Everyone Subject: dettmers is SUCH a lier!!! Message:

His recent satsang posts are so far from the truth of his past. If you read his 3 posts you see many sentences that claim he was seeing rawat as a 'mere mortal' Just one of his claims is that in 1975 he was unfazed by the cultish notions about rawat & that as a result of his great insights, rawat asked dettmers 'to take on a new role as his personal manager where I would oversee a complete restructureing of his organization.' So I suppose dettmers thinks the events of 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 (when about he 'left') are reflective of a mere mortals efforts at spreading a breath technique. He claims in his post to us that 'my biggest concern was that the STRUCTURE, taken as a whole, had all the earmarks of a cult. For these reasons, I was a strong advocate for closeing the ashrams.'-----What is so damn culty about a house and bodies in a house?? The cult is in the lord of the universe's very dominating behaviour and demands. There are so many more sentences of false history and flat out lying in his posts but I dont have all night. Now to post excerpts from dettmers own 'festival satsang' years after his 1974 and 1975 claims of a 'mere mortal' view of rawat and his 'mission'.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 04:50:40 (GMT) From: bb Email: None To: bill burke Subject: the smoking gun Message:

is all typed out here on my screen but I went offline to type it up and why the heck doesnt the submit button work? I saved it also incase the computer wants to eat it. If I cant get it on in the next few minutes I will take it to boston and find a way to post it from there. sheesh. well this post has made it to the preview page so maybe the satsang post will go in next.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 04:56:37 (GMT) From: bb Email: None To: bb Subject: the smoking gun Message:

bummer I lost it. Well I saved it and I still have the publication to retype it. But no more time tonight. I leave for boston now. too bad about the delay. It is such a classic satsang of that ultimate PAM....m dettmers.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 19:21:12 (GMT) From: cq Email: None To: bb Subject: How come you can post this - but not that? (nt) Message:

How come you can post this - but not that? (nt)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 05:04:57 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: bb Subject: That's not fair -- to Mike or us Message:

Bill, The least you could do in the circumstances is fairly paraphrase the salient points and put a month and year on it. It's just not fair for Dettmers to have to wait for you to get back from anywhere to hear the other shoe drop when you've made a point of decrying him so.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 05:15:13 (GMT) From: bb Email: None To: Jim Subject: easy for you to say Message:

It is so damn late and the car is packed. typeing (and now rtypeing) the damn thing is just one more burden that came out of dettmers unwillingness to be honest with himself. Anyway, I just got back on to do that very thing. so,

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 19:41:38 (GMT) From: Anonymous Email: None To: bb and everyone Subject: there's no' e 'before 'ing', Jesus (NT) Message:

(NT)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 05:16:44 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: bb Subject: Sorry, Bill -- I'm just such a paragon of virtue Message:

I just can't help myself!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 06:08:36 (GMT) From: bb Email: None To: Jim Subject: and thats why I love you-nt Message:

dstht

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 04:12:15 (GMT) From: Powerman Email: None To: bill burke Subject: I tend to agree with you, bill (nt) Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 01:24:24 (GMT) From: And On Anand Ji Email: And_On_Anand@yahoo.com To: digest Subject: locations of Michael Dettmers' recent posts Message:

###################################################### ###################################################### Jim -:- Michael Dettmers speaks out! -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 00:01:55 (GMT) [This one is in the Forum V archive]. http://www.ex-premie.org/pages/archives.htm Forum V, 12 C Forum V: Archive From: Mar 25, 2000 To: Apr 07, 2000 Page: 3 Of: 5 To: Jim Heller From: Michael Dettmers Date: April 2, 2000 At your suggestion, I am writing to address many of the comments that have called my integrity into question in the Forum section of your website... ######################################################## ######################################################## Jim -:- Dettmers speaks out a little more -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 22:51:56 [This one is currently (Sunday night) in the 'inactive' section of the current forum.] Just got this from Mike. I'm sure he'll be interested in your feedback. To: Jim Heller From: Michael Dettmers Date: April 5, 2000 I have read the responses to my April 2nd memo on your website. I am willing to address, as best I can, some of the more fundamental issues that have been raised. Let me reiterate, however, what I said in my earlier memo... ######################################################## ######################################################## Dettmers -:- questions for michael dettmers -:- Fri, Apr 07, 2000 at 06:24:04 [This one is also in the current inactive forum section.] Dear LA, I have read your request and I will do my best to answer some, not all, of your questions. I say some because, as I have already stated, I have not spoken with Maharaji nor attended any of his events or programs for years... -- end --

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 18:25:38 (GMT) From: Abbot Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Still in turmoil after 30 years Message:

I lived with an ex-premie for three years and witnessed the terrible effects Maharaji can have on peoples lives. My partner was an exceptionally talented musician whose life, at the age of 50, was filled with the most heart renching guilt, fear and pain concerning his devotion to 'M' Although he continued to practise Knowledge ie. the meditation techniques, he became more distraut that although he meditated, this in itself did not protect him from the up's & down's of everyday life and the problems that we all have to deal with. He was even more terrified that he could not live with out his regular Sunday video meetings and needed to hear 'Ms' voice to feel 'well' . He quite often expressed deep love for M. This eventually culminated in severe clinical depression and thoughts of suicide. I have never met more gentle, kind, intelligent and talented man, he was all of these things without M's influence. Love and strength to others in similar position.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 19:40:00 (GMT) From: trixie Email: None To: Abbot Subject: Still in turmoil after 30 years Message:

Thank you for that post. It describes the prison premies live in. I know what it is like live with someone that needs the fix of a video evening to feel well again. And then it rubs off within 36 hours. It is torturous to witness it not to mention carry on a relationship. I have come to regard it as the equivalant of an alcoholic. If a person begins regular drinking in the teens, the emotional developement is put on hold. Likewise with this cult. As adults many of us need to beging the emotional developement we should have gone through back then-once we leave the cult. This is a horrible thing for a partner to wittness. The amount of co dependance denial and dysfunction used to get through it is worth a PHD if it was to be studied. Thanks again for your post Trixie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 18:42:06 (GMT) From: Susan Email: None To: Abbot Subject: thank you for posting Message:

What you say is important as supposedly the cult has been toned down so that it is less cultlike and devotion to Rawat is not paramount. But, from what I observe it is still there, it is just more insidious and clandestine. One can wonder too, if the damaging effects are harder to face, the cult harder to recognize, with the outward trappings of the cult toned down, but the dynamics of devotion still very much in place. I am so sorry about your partner's struggles. Many of us ex's have felt much of the same. I do hope that he is able to see the good in himself that you see in him and see that he is a wonderful valuable human being and that Prem Pal Rawat did not create him, make him wonderful, and that without Rawat he would still have the capacity for love, joy and all the beauty life can bring.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 02:44:59 (GMT) From: Gregg Email: None To: Susan Subject: thank you for posting Message:

A friend of mine once told me premies were some of the brightest, most creative friendliest people around. And I agree. Though, of course, there were plenty of space cases to spice up the mix. I'm not sure how all these cool people have been sucked into cults like DLM...I've got ideas, but I'm on my way up to the bathtub where my daughter is pruning... Anyway, thanks for posting, Abbot, and keep the faith (some of us exes still have faith in...well, lots of things, one thing, NoThing...something...Faith.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 17:10:41 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Anyone checking out the satellite broadcast? Message:

As much as I'm enjoying transcribing that 1971 satsang from Maharaji below (which is well worth reading if you don't mind skimming over a few hoary ol' Hindu stories to get to the real shit. It's all there, the whole program), it'd be interesting to hear Maharaji's vision for the new millenium. I think we could all use a little inspiration, a little direction. Some understanding. Clarity.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 17:38:22 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Jim Subject: No reports? Shit, I want to learn about 'Phase 2' Message:

Okay, maybe some of you can just carry on as if the world's the same but, fact is, it isn't. Maharaji gave a satellite broadcast to the planet last night! Think about it, the Lord talked to us all (or at least all of us savvy enough to buy a dish and register in time). So what'd he say? I don't feel any different yet --- well, maybe a little, I guess. How about you?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 00:24:46 (GMT) From: JW Email: None To: Jim Subject: Can you please explain 'Phase I?' (nt) Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 02:34:26 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: JW Subject: Don't ask me (or if you do, send money) Message:

Joe, 'Phase 2' is something Maharaji started talking about last year when he went to India and thereabouts, I think. Don't you remember? I have no idea what he's talking about although I did get the impression that world history so far was really little more than a soundcheck. You wouldn't want to miss Phase 2.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 20:14:08 (GMT) From: Anonymous Email: None To: Jim and all Subject: the org lied about broadcast Message:

A premie, that is very devoted, was embarrassed by Maharaji for first time. She brought two aspirants that have been given the ok for Kn. someday. They handled the broadcast better by just saying - ' Well, didn't learn anything new.' The devoted syrupy sweet premie however was embarrassed mainly by what she called advertising for programs. She also felt manipulated. Also, for first time said - after seeing broadcast about going to programs - it made her not want to go to programs. She's admittedly confused. First time since early eighties when Maharaji said he doesn't hear our prayers - that sent her off the deep end of confusion. Don't know how she ever dealt with that but she is a devout premie like the early days, regardless. She also felt if they needed money then just say so - don't manipulate and lie giving the impression this is a live braodcast - it happened around March 20-22 or so. I'm assuming LA. She didn't say where. That's all I know. She did say her aspirant friends are clear they want knowledge and no fellowship or group dynamics. Knowledge and then they seem to think they'll be outta there. Oh, Maharaji apparently said things were going to be changing - he's getting older and he can't be traveling all over the place like before - or something. Also, sorry he hadn't kept in touch he had been working on a project that we all would be hearing about shortly - or something to that nature. And just all about how important it was to attend programs. Was the main jist.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 22:05:22 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: Anonymous Subject: How stupid does he think people are? Message:

This premie should just tell those aspirants the techniques so they can be out of there quicker. Why take chances? Besides, that way they won't hear about it from him. So he's getting older, poor guy, yeah, he's a real senior citizen at the advanced age of 42. Sounds like early retirement or maybe a way to cut expenses so he can take in more money. How does he figure that some enigmatic project he's been working on is an effective carrot to keep dangling before the work horse? He thinks they will keep paying money to maybe one day hear about this project. I hope most premies are not that gullible. 'Working on a project', sure, is that what he calls it? Yea, baby, I'm working on you real good. You go to a program to be inspired and the main thing you hear is that you need to go to programs, that you need him. This is one thing that finally turned me OFF to him. It just doesn't make sense. Lets say that you go to a restaurant and instead of feeding you, they tell you how you need to come back, i.e. 'keep in touch'. This, after pre-paying for the meal! How would anyone feel about that? And why is this happening? Because he doesn't have any food to give.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 00:58:44 (GMT) From: Daneane Email: None To: Jim Subject: Who wudda thought? Message:

I was actually invited to attend it...there was a message on my machine today. It surprised me. Its strange to me to see these directly opposing good intentions. Out of concern I would not go, since my interest is not genuine. And out of concern, I was invited, since my interest has not been genuine. Maybe a lot of the anger I see around this place has to do with that frustration. It's very difficult for my mind to see this - I can't quite name what concerns me. It's like two people argueing over which one has an axe in their head or something.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 19:50:25 (GMT) From: Anonymous Email: None To: Daneane Subject: there's no 'e' bef 'ing'.(NT) Message:

(NT)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 01:02:03 (GMT) From: Daneane Email: None To: Anonymous Subject: Yes, and I believe its 'would have' as well.(nt) Message:

Spelling sucks.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 08:37:09 (GMT) From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: Daneane Subject: They'll keep you on their list whatever Message:

They don't have that many aspirants .... and unless you're a 'security' (oooops ... 'special usher') case, they won't ban you from their lists. You've been catalogued as a 'seeker', definitely not 'ready', but there will always be hope in their minds! I remember 'aspirants' who've been hanging around for 10 years or more before receiving k ...... Even if they would do or say crazy things, we were still inviting them, and trying to be kind with them ('love bombing'). And that works in some instances ! Be careful ! Hahahaha I tend to think these ex-premies websites etc are just one more 'lila' for them, or one more manifestation of 'darkness', and they'll go on whatever happens. This world has always been opposing the perfect masters after all, they've even crucified Christ ... and now there are many reincarnations of Judas today! You can justify it so many ways ... They'll try to 'talk' to us, 'share' their understanding, send some 'nice guys' here and there (like M. Dettmers) etc. You know what? There is an EV guy living next to my place who came to 'talk' to me about 10 days ago! He wanted to meet with me, share his 'understanding' etc ... hahahaha. I told him I was busy (which is actually the case, and offered him to exchange emails, or come and talk on the French forum. Never got any news from the guy (Jean-Claude S.). I don't have anything against talking with these guys, but I won't spend hours talking with them unless they are actual friends, not like yours (and mine)! Real friendship is something that's not affected by this. I'm still quite disappointed to see that these so-called friends were not actual friends. I have friends who are into serious problems these days, and with whom I disagree a lot on what they're doing. What actually happened is that this situation actually brought us closer, because we talk about it, I try to help and understand them, because I like them! And they appreciate my views and presence, even if we don't agree or understand each other very well. This is true friendship.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 23:26:35 (GMT) From: Daneane Email: None To: Jean-Michel Subject: Thanks for the reply Message:

Say, you still invited to events??

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 07:31:27 (GMT) From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: Daneane Subject: Me? I'm a security issue! not you! Message:

I guess my case must be slightly different than yours! Maybe I'm wrong! I should try getting in, just for the fun of it, and see what these stupid robot-ushers are going to tell me! Now that I've said this, maybe they'll let me in without uttering a word .... Hahaha, I own one of those undetectable mini-recorders!!! I'll transcribe it ...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 02:55:57 (GMT) From: Helen Email: None To: Daneane Subject: Who wudda thought? Message:

Isn't that obnoxious to keep calling you and inviting you to stuff when you clearly are not interested? It reminds me of the worst sort of evangelisim--every contact with another human being is an 'opportunity to bring them to Jee-sus' even if the 'unsaved person' is Jewish for Christ sakes!! Premies used to camp on my doorstep and bombard me with satsang every night when I got home from work (this was back in the flagrantly devotional 70's) It was so annoying at first and then I just stopped listening to that part of my mind that set boundaries with other people and just became passive. Yuck. That's what all that satsang did, it just made me become one with the collective Borg. (Just watched 'Trekkies', can you tell?) I hate thinking about it. Just tell them to leave you the hell alone!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 03:09:54 (GMT) From: Daneane Email: None To: Helen Subject: Who wudda thought? Message:

To tell you the truth Helen, I wasn't annoyed at all. She sounded sincere and true to her beliefs which is what put me in a reflective mood about it. Not my scene, yes; but I am awed by the devotion of it. 'Course that's probably the same type of thinking that got me into it in the first place. And maybe what keeps me hanging around here.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 23:38:33 (GMT) From: Helen Email: None To: Daneane Subject: Who wudda thought? Message:

I guess I focussed on the axe in the head imagery and thought you weren't feeling too good about being asked. Another example of the limits of internet communication. There are many sincere people involved with M. And you have been exposed to it in such a different way than I was in the zany 70's. But could you tell this woman you found this website and how would she (your friend) address these issues. I would wager a guess that she says something along the lines of 'all I know is my experience' and give you a blissful look. She may be sincere but she is devoted to something which has huge information gaps, and so she is hiding from the whole truth. If the sincerity seems attractive, perhaps what you are attracted to is her innocence and beauty. Nothing wrong with that but to be so innocent that one gives one's heart to a charleton--that's not good. Just some thoughts on the subject.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 00:32:59 (GMT) From: Daneane Email: None To: Helen Subject: Who wudda thought? Message:

I barely know the woman who called. Just seen her at meetings. It wasn't so much about a personal friendship so much as her devotions to call someone despite recent absence. Again and again I marvel at the devotion involved.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 17:22:01 (GMT) From: JW Email: None To: Daneane Subject: Devotion Feels Good (to some extent).... Message:

That's why premies get addicted to it. It does feel good, in a sort of self-esteem-destroying way. But that's true about devotion to ANYTHING. Devotion to your kids or your spouse feels good too, but see, you actually KNOW them, and there can be a wonderful love relationship. With Maharaji, most of those premies have never even met the guy, and so their devotion is to a distant being, who isn't even what or who he claims to be. So, devotion can feel good, and it is attractive, but it is also a terrible trap. If there is one thing I've learn from the terrible calamity of ever being involved with Maharaji, is that you have to be very careful about who or what you devote yourself to. Otherwise, you can give or yourself to something that isn't worthy of it, and that's a terrible waste.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 21:14:40 (GMT) From: Daneane Email: None To: JW Subject: very astute stuff...thanks JW(nt) Message:

Her name is Lola she is a show girl with yellow feathers in her hair and dress cut down to there...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 00:40:43 (GMT) From: Oliver Email: None To: Jim Subject: Anyone checking out the satellite broadcast? Message:

It was supposed to happen in my part of the world over 14 hours ago. Does that mean (shock horror) that it wasn't live and was just another video event? Oh well, saved some more money.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 22:40:47 (GMT) From: AOA Ji Email: None To: -- just kidding -- Subject: I'm wearing my tin-foil hat. I can't hear it (nt) Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 04:10:20 (GMT) From: rule seeker Email: None To: Everyone Subject: well then just what are the rules admin. Message:

Do NOT embed any links that cause Graphics files, or Java Applets, etc to load into the browsers of readers of this Forum without them first choosing to click on a visible link. When we see this, we will delete or edit the post. If you want to provide a link to either, then follow the instructions. That was in full compliance with the rules you have posted. Better rewrite the rules if you are going to not follow those that are written.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 13:24:50 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: rule seeker Subject: Your post needs clarification Message:

What are you talking about and who are you? Your post is vague and doesn't make sense. Are you saying there is a post here that doesn't follow the rules, if so, which one? If you saying that the above post didn't follow the rules, you are mistaken. Bold, large text is not a graphic file or applet. Or are you saying that the above post was edited, even though you followed the rules? If that is what you are saying, state exactly how your intended post differs from the above.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 14:11:43 (GMT) From: rule seeker Email: None To: G Subject: Your post needs clarification Message:

I made a harmless post which opened the head of Bob in the table when the page was opened. I noted in the subject line Warning:opens picture. Whoever administers the board found this threatening enough to delete the post. So far I haven't been able to understand why this was deleted. I though that it complied with the posting rules. With the exception that I have altered my psuedonym for the sake of humor, it appears that I am not alone in doing this. AJW As a matter of fact I did spend some time in the institutions AJW. Haven't we all?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 16:11:10 (GMT) From: Katie Email: None To: rule seeker Subject: Your post needs clarification Message:

Hi Rule Seeker - The 'rule' doesn't mean that you can have a post which automatically opens a picture within the body of the post - no matter what you say in the title. It means that you have to put a link to the picture IN the body of your post. If you are wondering why this is necessary, it is because embedding things like pictures screws up the archiving. Also, it used to make some people's computers crash - don't ask me why, but it happened. I hope this is understandable! Take care - Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 16:21:28 (GMT) From: Katie Email: None To: rule seeker Subject: P.S. to rule seeker Message:

Just want to make it clear that I'm not the admin! But I did want to explain why that rule exists - it's just a practical thing.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 16:34:46 (GMT) From: rule seeker Email: None To: Katie Subject: thanks for the explanation Message:

It is a little spooky to see the unseen hand of the admin. at work without any explanations. Admin. might want to put this info on the pre-forum page.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 16:59:34 (GMT) From: Katie Email: None To: rule seeker Subject: you are welcome Message:

I did think that the 'rule' page was clear enough, but perhaps 'in the body of your post' needs to be added?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 12:05:35 (GMT) From: AJW Email: None To: rule seeker Subject: What's your problem? Message:

What's your problem? Do you rush into a public bar, or cafe, and yell, 'What are the rules in here? Is there a rule that you can't piss on the floor?' 'The toilets are out the back.' 'Yes, but is there a rule saying you can't piss on the floor?' Were you raised in an institution? Do you live in an institution? For christs sake relax. This is just a bunch people talking about a religious cult they used to be in. What do want rules for? Don't you know how to behave with your fellow human beings without a checklist? Anth the Dada-regulator

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 14:30:37 (GMT) From: rule seeker Email: None To: AJW Subject: What's your problem? Message:

did you feel like you had to give someone a good thrashing?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 11:35:31 (GMT) From: AJW Email: None To: rule seeker Subject: No, I was being nice. Message:

You want to see me when I get mad. But seriously, why do need rules to tell you how to behave? Anth the Cybersadist

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 03:07:51 (GMT) From: Selene Email: None To: AJW Subject: selene of the whip Message:

Anth I doubt you are a sadist. trust me on this selene hanging up her whip. off to get not in trouble. coming down now. feeling like being a human being again. I hear there is a world out there. showers!!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 04:16:57 (GMT) From: Selene Email: None To: rule seeker Subject: well then just what are the rules admin. Message:

I think I answered you halfway down the page in the Award of the Day thread :)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 04:25:04 (GMT) From: rule seeker Email: None To: Selene Subject: sorry, I don't get it Message:

I took great pains to understand what the posting rules were before I posted. I stated a warning that the link would open a picture. Just trying to make full use of the website and bring it out of a static textual argument into everything that it could be. Haven't broken any rules that are posted and do not intend to. html is a wonderful language that is expanding by the day. Why did you take the picture down? There is no answer down below.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 13:24:12 (GMT) From: Alien from Area 51 Email: None To: rule seeker Subject: You can post anything at this other place Message:

You can post pictures, sound files, video even, on The ANYTHING GOES Forum. There's no restrictions or rules there.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 19:32:09 (GMT) From: Selene Email: None To: Alien from Area 51 Subject: how do they think I feel? he was my guru! Message:

I brought him here. Is it sexual discrimination do you think? Or is it that it's new age? as soon as I waver from the hard line athiest view this happens? I'm crushed.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 00:36:56 (GMT) From: Dave Email: None To: Selene Subject: how do they think I feel? he was my guru! Message:

I think it's that old prejudice, Pipeism rearing its ugly head again. I've seen it happen before. Pipial prejudice is alive and well in the 21st century.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 05:10:20 (GMT) From: selene Email: None To: Dave Subject: yes makes em set in their ways it does Message:

I think they need a good hit of X

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 13:28:14 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: Alien from Area 51 Subject: But it's good to be polite Message:

Sound files can take a long time to load. I'm annoyed by auto-loading sound files that I didn't ask for. They are usually supid anyway.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 09:57:52 (GMT) From: JHB Email: None To: rule seeker Subject: sorry, I don't get it Message:

I took great pains to understand what the posting rules were before I posted. Isn't one of the rules that you post under a consistent pseudonym??? John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 20:56:10 (GMT) From: Runamok Email: None To: JHB Subject: sorry, I don't get it Message:

Isn't that a recommended guideline, not a rule?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 04:27:25 (GMT) From: Selene Email: None To: rule seeker Subject: sorry, I don't get it Message:

I don't get it either really. I was joking with AJW that they (the FA'a) either got a hold of the same weed and were bored and missing all that deleting or ??????? who knows.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 21:47:19 (GMT) From: Bjørn Email: None To: Jim Subject: Black and white Message:

To your response to my post in 'why' under a previous thread I responded to Jim. I did not get an answer so may be you did not read it. Here it is again: 'BTW Jim, thanks you for posting conversations with Michael and Joan. Whatever the outcome would have been, I think that was great and fair of you. In Norway there was a popular song a few years ago. The theme were something like this; 'If you see everything in black and white, you have n't understood a thing.' To me it seems like people put on different glasses. Here there are the premies glasses, where everything is fine. Then there are the expremie glasses where everything is absoultely rotten. I choose to think that the reality is somewhere in between. What Maharaji is doing in his personal life, I think is none of my business. About 15 years ago there where a program in Finland. A Norwegian premie asked Maharaji: I've heard rumours that you use drug and drink alchohol. What do you have to say to that' I cant excactly remember Maharajis words, but I think he neither denied it nor admitted it. He was pretty clear and said something about that he offer this Knowlegde and that each person is responsible for what they are doing. As far as I remember he also said that the point is to enjoy this life. (like he always says) Otherwise I stand for what I have written. If people enjoy this Knowledge fine. If they don't, I cant do a thing about it. But everybody has the right to believe whatever they believe.' The reason for me to sometimes to read and reply to some posts here is to get a more balanced viuw. Do you think it is ok that some other peoples perspective are posted here or do you think only expremies should be allowed to post here?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 06:55:05 (GMT) From: Loaf Email: Loafji@yahoo.com To: Bjørn Subject: I agree - but its good to challenge (nt) Message:

o.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 02:12:45 (GMT) From: Yaar, Da Rieendeer meat!! Email: None To: Bjørn Subject: There are none so blind as those that will not see Message:

I wouldn't bother Bjorn. Let the site stand for what it is as it is. People are not all stupid. As for Jim , he wakes up arguing...with himself.Then the cat...then in traffic...then in court....It's endless. And I just love those proxies! Norway? Me, I'm from Hoboken , or was it Timbuktu...The black stump? Perhaps the Christmas Islands....Ho ,Ho ,Ho....Dare to struggle , dare to win >>.I'll bet money you're no Finn :)))

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 02:19:14 (GMT) From: Selene Email: None To: Yaar, Da Rieendeer meat!! Subject: I think he should ask Bob (nt) Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 19:07:52 (GMT) From: JW Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Dettmers/LA-Ex Message:

I'm bringing this up to a new thread because I think it's an important issue. Down below, LA-EX made a very thoughtful and constructive suggestion that Michael Dettmers try to set up some kind of a dialogue between Maharaji and the ex premies. Much as this suggestion is commendable, I think for Maharaji, one of the many things he plans to do on the day hell freezes over, is to meet with his critics, especially ex-devotees who feel he has failed them in a big way. I would like to be proved wrong here, but in all the years I have observed Maharaji, I think he has a MAJOR character flaw, and that is the inability to face his critics or accept responsibility for anything negative he has done. He's over 40 now, maybe he will have a midlife crisis and change, but I tend to doubt it. Also, any kind of a meeting with Maharaji would have to be public, for all to see, or at least result in a public airing of all the issues. It isn't acceptable to just meet with a few people and try to quell his 'enemies.' Oh, no, that's not acceptable at all. There are way too many ex-premies who have been harmed for that to happen, and all the potential new cult recruits need to know about those things as well. I think Michael Dettmers has some kind of a personal friendship with Maharaj and well as some kind of personal loyalty to him. The problem is, Maharaji was a 'public' figure to most of us, so perhaps we can be more objective than Michael can. I think Michael wants to bend over backwards to protect his 'friend.' In some ways this is commendable, but when you understand your 'friend' has committed atrocities, whether you think he intended to or not, there is a much bigger issue here. It's a kind of 'greatest-good-for-the-greatest-number' kind of thing. You have thousands of people who have been damaged by Maharaji's behavior, and you have loyalty and friendship on a personal level. Can you rectify that? Also, I think there is an issue here with Michael personally. If you read the thread on the ashrams, and if Michael is saying he was instrumental in the way the ashram residents were summarily dealt with when the ashrams were closed, I think Michael may have some personal responsbility here as well, unless he can explain otherwise. Finally, I want to hear Michael discuss more how he did NOT benefit from the slave labor premies supplied at DECA. He says he didn't, and that might be true, but then Michael said he didn't think the renunciate workers at DECA were 'slaves'. Bill and I have pointed out how that it hogwash, and Michael hasn't responded. So, Michael, I think your financial dealings in leaving your position, the monetary settlement, if any, and how Dettmers Industries were connected to DECA, are important to clarify as well. Michael, I think, intends that his explanation to Jim answers those but I for one don't think it does.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 20:13:15 (GMT) From: Susan Email: None To: JW and LA-EX Subject: Dettmers/LA-Ex Message:

Good posts both JW and LA-Ex LA-ex, would you mind emailing me? sjhklh@earthlink.net

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 19:55:14 (GMT) From: Susan Email: None To: Susan Subject: LA ex....read above post please. Message:

I just have an idea for you. If you are nervous about me keeping your ID or something open a hotmail or yahoo ID and then your email will stay private. But I would keep it private no matter. Mine is sjhklh@earthlink.net

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 12:25:29 (GMT) From: AJW Email: None To: JW Subject: Dialogue Message:

Hi Joe, I think you're dead right about Maharaji avoiding dialogue with his critics. He doesn't even like to have 'dialogue' with his loyal premies. I was involved in lots of premie publications over the years, and there was always this idea resurfacing, where it would be great to put an interview with him in the magazine. The answer was always 'No'. The nearest I heard to an interview was where the questions were submitted on paper, and answers sent back. Maharaji did do questions and answers for a while a few years ago, with premies and newcomers, but they were wierd, particularly the premie questions. I don't even know if he does knowledge and aspirant sessions any more- but he did questions and answers at thosse. Audiences was carefully selected for these events anyway. I think, at any Maharaji event, anyone asking an awkward question, who became persistant in not receiving a satisfactory answer, would be told to shut up or leave. And if they still persisted, they'd be hauled out. There are always people around waiting for that kind of situation, ready to remove any perceived 'threat' in the form of verbal confrontation or whatever. Anth the Social Observer

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 05:34:16 (GMT) From: bill b Email: None To: JW Subject: JW Message:

He DID have his midlife crisis and it was triggered by his moms death. In his mid life analysis he rebought into the hindu -its ok to play god- schtick and also embraced the Man a la Mancha model and has tried to graft that whole Don Quixote reasoning onto his life as some heroic figure. Too bad for him that you cant graft that crown wielding do-gooder role on a lifetime of tyranny and power abuse and get away with it unless you can quiet the ex premies and get the mike dettmers and others to try and distort history. Speaking of m dettmers, do you remember hearing instructors (like 'dr' john horton) retell thier coming to knowlege story over and over and dress it up and change it and glorify it and make it in fact a fantasy all polished and gleaming and making them look better and better? WELL, dettmers sure cant help himself from doing that in his posts about the REVISED history of his involvement. He sure wants to have us think he was SO SMART. Well, his satsang from that era will wreck his fantasy portrayal of his great supposed historical role. I hope to post his satsang tomorrow night. He hasnt been to so many programs, big deal, he gets the videos. He could really benefit by reading the great posts folks have posted but he is too dishonest with himself at this point to be able to take advantage of this great opportunity to step out of his unfortunate box.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 12:43:55 (GMT) From: AJW Email: None To: bill b Subject: Mr Nice Guy. Message:

Isn't Michael trying keep everyone happy at the same time? He's portraying his time in the cult as some kind of high powered job for a foundation. There's nothing wrong with that. You've got to put something on your cv. He's maintaining 'professional integrity', by refusing to talk about what went on in his personal dealings with his employer. There's nothing wrong with that either. He's talking to Jim, showing that he's no longer in a cult, has nothing to hide about his past and can live with himself. Perfectly fine. There's something unresolved in there though. Like you say bill, it's a revised version of history. When you line the bits up next to each other, there's a big piece missing. What does he really feel about his involvement in a guru worshiping religious cult? Perhaps he doesn't know yet, as he's still in the early stages of exiting. Where ever he's at, I'm sure it would do him good to talk about his experiences with somebody. Does he think all this private jets, mansions, sycophantic worshipping trip is healthy stuff? What's under his spin? That's what I'd like to know. Anth the Nosey Parker

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 00:31:47 (GMT) From: bb Email: None To: AJW Subject: Anth the Brilliiant bar fly Message:

Another question to add to the list is how much money he skimmed off rawats banks without asking anyones permission. Anth, I liked how you put the 'professional integrity' between him and a 'former employer' comment. As is revealed by his satsang that I will post tonight, there was NO professional relationship. It was pure cult programmed slave droid. Still in evidence in his posts.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 22:41:26 (GMT) From: Joey Email: None To: JW Subject: Dettmers/LA-Ex Message:

I agree with you that any possible dialogue or meeting with m is an important issue for those of us here. I have to disagree however with your description below in the other thread that the suggestion contained in LA -Ex's post for a meeting between m and exes is as 'heartfelt' as you'd like us to believe. Heart felt by whom? As a matter of fact I felt alot of heartfelt disagreement with much of what Mr. Ex-Lax had to say. For example here are his key points in his letter to Dettmers. ...since you haven't been here before, please accept apologies from most of us who do not wish to engage in venting anger from the past over past issues that you did not create. The anger is generally directed at maharaji, and I don't think you deserve any of it... Again,I find the example of exes apologizing for their anger directed against m and the cult to be really objectionable. No one here has to apologize to m or Dettmers or even to each other. It should be understood that all of us have a legitimate reason for our anger. We were in a destructive, mind manipulating cult. Furthermore LA-Ex's assessment of Dettmers historical role(s) and responsibilities in the cult is a joke. IN fact we don't even know the full extent of Dettmers legal culpability for his role in perpetrating any of the potential illegalities that m and the cult have been involved in, but one need only imagine. His legal vulnerability should the cult be fully investigated and exposed maynbe so great, his interests today have to be in terms of wanting all or much of this opposition to subside. More Ex-Lax, now. ...I don't believe that most people want to walk around with anger, negativity or unpleasant feelings over past issues.It prevents all of us from growing, understanding, healing and moving forward in our individual evolution. Does this ring a bell with you? How about a premies #1 fear, now transposed on this so called ex, the fear of anger, negativity or unpleasant feelings So to spare us all this ...LA-EX asks Dettmers the following: Would you volunteer in acting as some sort of mediator between maharaji and some of the people on this site (not the haters, but the ones with real questions), so that we could all clear these things up and move on? I find this insulting and specious ... a possible attempt on his part to divide and conquer and in so doing coopt us into some sucker situation of a bullshit agreement or detente with m and the cult, arrived at in a closed door meeting between m and a few select exes who he suspects of giving him the least difficulty. For reasons which I thank you for pointing out and the one I've mentioned aboeve re: Dettmers legal vulnerabilities, he's is totally unacceptable to mediate anything between exes and m. I don't know what La-EX has been reading that has led him to believe that MD can mediate some kind of quick fix to our opposition to m and the cult , but his proposal sounds really silly and naive. I also thank you for mentioning the important condition of including everyone of us who wants to be there at such a meeting. In addition it's a good idea IMO, (if the unimaginable happens and such a meeting does take place) to have some third party scrutinizaton of the process by a limited number of reps from the media and a concerned and relevant organization like the American Family Foundation...so that the cult wouldn't be able to pull the wool over the public's eyes about what really went down at any such hypothetical meetings, and get away with a PR snow job. But again, I AM in favor of the idea of a meeting with m as YOU expressed it, even more so with my suggestions taken into account. I just won't hold my breath waiting for m to engage in a meaningful dialogue with us subject to third party scrutiny. Next question. What should be on the table for our discussion with m if it ever happens?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 16:26:52 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Everyone Subject: 'Who is Satguru?' ( Pt 1: 1971 - published '78) Message:

Who is Satguru? Gu means darkness and Ru means Light. One who brings us away from darkness into Light is called Guru. You were going to tell us who the Satguru was? The thing is: how much love you have for the Satguru. Who is Satguru? [Four people ask] Satguru is one who brings us away from darkness into Light, Light of Truth. I have a question. Yesterday you said that we know what Knowledge is at initiation, but we don't know who Satguru is. What did you mean by that? Because when a man knows who Satguru, he dedicates his whole life. How do we find out who Satguru is? How do you find out that what you are drinking is water and not something else? Then you will say that 'Yes, what I am drinking is something else instead of water.' But no, it is water. You know the effects. You know that it is not poison -- it is water. It is very easy to know that. It is very easy, because where Satguru will come, He will give that Knowledge to people. Wherever Light will go, darkness will be buried there. Then and there. Is there a living Satguru? Always. The living one is called Satguru. Manifest? That we can talk to? Yes. Who is He? I won't tell you that (laughter). First of all you wnt hints from the master. Then after hint you want answer paper from master. After answer paper, you even want question paper. You won't get that. And even if you have question paper, you want answer paper also. Can you do that in school? I thought that the Knowledge was all that we needed, and now I think that people are expecting you to do something. Knowledge is! Knowledge is what you should have. But if you want to know about Satguru, who is He, then I should tell you. Otherwise, no. Yes! Yes! Yes! Why do you want to know about Satguru? Why do you want that: Who is Satguru? To increase our devotion. To replace faith with certainty. To jump off the wheel of birth and death. I've heard that the Satguru is necessary if one wants liberation from the wheel of birth and death. One needs the Grace of the Satguru. Okay. So no more questions? No more questions? Because I will tell you about Satguru, and if you have any questions or doubts in your mind, then you will repel what I have said to you. Yes? Shouldn't we give our devotion to God? What is God? Well, Guru is a personification of God in the Earth, right? I told you yesterday: Who is Guru? The highest manifetation of God is Guru. So when Guru is here, God is here, to whom will you give your devotion? I want that the general should sing some papers. I needne't go to his office when he is sitting in my home. Is it necessary to go in his office when his is sitting in my home? When God has come here, then what is the need to give devotion to God there? Why didn't Jesus say -- or does it say in the Bible anywhere -- that He would manifest Himself again? For future generations, so they could have a living God? He has said, He has given you a hint, but you want everything in a perfect state. He has given you a hint -- you don't recognize that hint. In Mark, Chapter 13, he says that One would coem after him, not the son, not an agenl, not a messenger, but the Father. I think in Srimad Bhagavat Gita, it is written that He will come full, He Himself will come. That first when He came, particularly to some places He saved; but now because He will come to save the whole world, He will Himself come, full. Why so puzzled? It is a very fortunate thing for the people of this age that He Himself, full, will come. Or has come. Yes? Doesn't it say He will come with a shout through the clouds? Not at all. Not at all. I came by airplane! (laughter) When I came there were clouds, many, many clouds. But the whole world would hear the shout in the clouds. Yes, when a plane comes it makes too much noise. That's not a shout. How many people will see Him? How many people will see Him? People don't have time even to see airplane. And somebody is driving in highway and he is seeing up that God is coming in the helicopter? He won't come like that. Are you saying that you're Jesus then? No, I am not saying I am Jesus. So you're saying He will come like that ... You see, if I write that God will come from Earth, break the Earth, so many people will believe it. So many people will believe me. When He clearly says that 'I am the son of God,' and 'I and my Father are one,' people never believe. If He comes, then people will say that 'No, he is a magician.' And if suppose He comes, then what will he give you? A plane is going in the sky -- catches fire. People are forced to take parachutes down. They are coming down. While there are midway, plane bursts. Loud noise comes. And then they see taht people are coming down. All people die, except one is comeing down. So you believe that he is Christ? There was a shout also, there is a ciming also ... Yes! It is written here. Are you seeing if it is the same soul because there will be a mark on his head? That that soul -- his name will be on his head? 'Yes, soul of tha man is this, this, this and from there, transmitting from this, from this in this, in this ...' So the name will be carved in his head? That's right? How will you know who he is? Who were you before? Do you know? Before you were born. Before body. Can you know that? Then how can other man also know that you were that? Otherwise they would ahve easily known where the Frankenstein's soul had gone. And then they would ahve caught him: 'What was your condition? How did you come to an accident? What is the matter?' But they couldn't know. They were not able to know that. Nobody knows who he was before, who was he before, who was he before. Because the name is not carved out. Your soul has got no name. Soyou can't know who you were before. What would happen to a person who has realized this Knowledge that you have given to them? Is he still your disciple? Or one with you? When he will get this Knowledge, he will have permanet Peace all that life. Understood? First of all, that devoiton is such a thing -- if you are a devotee, and your devotion is actual, real, wherever Guru goes in the world, South Pole or North, America or India, it follows Him. Devotion will follow Him. If you are not a rel devotee, you can't have a real devotion, and your devotion can't follow Him. You must follow Him? Or your devotion must follow Him? No, your devotion will follow Him. You see, you can't see devotion. When real devotee calls me, from real heart, then it comes. The torch should light always? But, no. Until the button won't be on, the torch won't light. Everything is there. Any more questions? Is it true that if for some reason the disciple leaves the Master, that the Guru will never desert the disciple? If he is a disciple. And you don't become a disciple just by taking Knowledge. You becoem a disciple when you do meditation on it. If yu are doing meditation, you cvan't be away. Dog's chain -- dog wants to go there, he is free to go there. When he sees him there, master does like that (pulls on chain). So you cna be -- that is just if you are doing meditation regularly. Se, dog thinks that 'Yes, I am free. Now I dan run.' He runs, but chain is there; master pulls. Yes? Is it not true that the Satguru is within us all, within our hearts? God is within your heart. Guru is outside. God is within us all, but His highest manifestation takes place outside. Then H eopens this medium to see, look, inside. He says that what you are seeing -- Krishan says that 'What you are seeing is nothing, is only the body like you have, and I. So if you want to see me, look inside, who I am.' Then he gave him that technique. Yes.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 16:58:14 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Jim Subject: Part 2 (JM, please note. This is for your page) Message:

[JM, here, in segments, is this satsang I thought was pretty important. The staff at Elan Vital sure thought so. This was supposedly the satsang where Maharaji really told what was what.] Is there in reality anything other than God? This maya. But maya is illusion, right? Created by? Ignorance. It has been created by God, not ignorance. It is looked at with ignorance, through ignorance. Thi ahs been created by God. We look at it through ignorance. But that still sounds as though it were a dualistic thing, God created maya. What is maya? What is maya? The illusion -- the attachment and attraction to the illusion. This is the thing: Bend your desires in which are going outside and this whole world will become okay. This whole maya -- you will realize what this maya is. Krishna syas that 'People believe that I am this maya. I am in this maya, but never believe that I am maya. I am away from maya; realize me. You can't realize me, who I am, if you are in this maya. Take your mind away from maya; then you will realize who I am.' How do you define maya actually? What do you actually think maya is? Rupee? Money? No, the attachment to what you see ... Attachment was created through you. You were the medium of attachment. Breakthat attachment. Then when the attachment is broken, there is nothing other than God? That was the question I had. Yes, Shore is left; then sea comes. 'Maya is chaya' Charanand Ji says, 'Maya is chaya.' Maya is shadow. Adn when sun rises, then shadow goes. Light comes; shadow goes. Light comes, maya goes. God comes, God is Light; maya goes. Till then, maya is completely with you. Yes? Is there a way that you can change the vibrations of this into pure energy, so that one becomes energy? You see, the source of creating imperfect engergy, vibration, is mind. If mind is converted into pure vibration, everything will be converted into pure vibration. Mind is the leak in the pipe; people are just sometimes opening it fat, or sometimes closing it, or sometimes opening to the source whee the water ha sto come. Look in the middle, the leak is there. water is leaking from there. So if you want to change vibration, you have to change your source of vibration. Any more questions? Yes? When we remember the Name, are we devoting ourselves to you? Actually, everything will include telling about Satguru: What is devotion? Who is He? How should we give deovtion to Him? What is service to Him? Service to Him is service to humanity. Why does He come into this world? And who is He? Every important question. There is even very important question of the world. Any more questions? Yes? What's the difference between service to God and service to Satguru? You know what is God and what is Satguru? Do you know? First know the definition of God, and then know the definiton of Satguru. And then make out the difference. Any more questions? Does Satguru forgive sins? Yes. Any more questions. Can you give the defintion of God and the defintion of Satguru? I can give it; it will include what I want to tell you. But you don't want to listen. Maybe you want to listen to it, but there are many here who don't want to. Any mroe questions? Every question -- time is delay. I am marking a date: 1978. I will come in 1978 then. Maybe 1978, 1979, 1980, I will coem to Los Angeles. What do you mean by giving Knowledge? Giving that technique, giving that supreme technique thorugh which ... No matter how much you tell me, nor how much I am filled, I still won't know, 'That's it' You see, man must ahve love to receive it. Until he ahs that, he is not able to receive it. Krishna says, 'You can receive this Knowledge by all means, but first be humble enough to know that Knowledge. Have a heart of a child.' It never means that you become a child. But like a child ha sgot no sort of ideas of impurities in him, be like that. Be as humble, as requesting, as eager as a child to know that Knowledge. Thne you will get it. Any more questions? Yes?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 18:04:31 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Jim Subject: Part 3 Message:

Am I prepared to receive Knowledge? Listen to more satsang. You will be prepared if you are not. And if you are prepared, then come, go and sit there where then initiation will be given; and then if you are prepared, then it will be given to you. If you are not prepared, then it won['t be given to you. You need money to buy something. You just don't go and ask for it; you need money. You need first internal preparement for that Knowledge; then you will get it. Asking -- a child can also ask. What is Knowledge? Knowledge ... (laughter) Wait, please let me answer. Knowledge -- like I was not able to speak 'A,B,C,D.' When I went to school, master taught me 'A,B,C,D,' and everything. And now, eventually I was able to speak English. We don't know what Peace is, we don't know who is God, what is God, we can't see it, but when we get Knowledge, we are able to. It has come for darkness. In darkness you can't see anything. Battery -- a cell is brought in, light is brought in, we are able to see everything. There is great darkness in ourselves. As soon as the Knowledge is brought in, and that sun, that Light glows in us, which is in us, we are able to receive that Peace. This is Knowledge, understood? Any more questions? Would you explain to us whyit is that if we talk and ask questions, we cannot learn and listen to what the Satguru is? That's not it. If the room is itslef filled, if the glass of water is filled, how can you put more? First it has to be empty. If our mind is filled with doubts and I tell you something, how can it go in? First it has to be completely empty, then i will tell you, and then it will go in. That's why I am saying, 'Have no doubts, and I will tell you.' Yes? Any more questions? Because you won't get time until 1978 to talk with me. Though people are going to India, they will be able to talk. But after that, by December they will come back. So remember. Ask what you have to ask. You will not be able to talk with me till 1978. Guru Ji, I know that you are a Guru and I want to receive Knowledge, but I am afraid taht I am not prepared. Then don't be afraid of that. Don't be afraid for that. It is not a matter of being afraid. Well, okay, but if I go to receive Knowledge and I'm not prepared, well then what should I do after that? Listen more carefull,y more clearly, more patinetly, to what is being said. Any more questions? No more questions? Now don't laugh, and listen to me carefully ... Okay, first shout as much as you can: Far out! (Everyone yells 'Far out' and laughs) After that, no laughing, no shouting.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 18:30:57 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Jim Subject: Part 4 (The beginning of the good stuff!) Message:

God has created this whole Earth. He made enjoyment and sufferings, so many sufferings that they can't be easily settled down. They were incredible. Man had to suffer without this Knowledge so much, so much, so much, that it was impossible for him to bear the sufferings of this world. But then .... You call God a form of kindness. He is kind. He took a form to refine this whole world, to make sufferings easier for His people. He wanted to go and do taht work mor eand more Himself to make it easy, and first make more and more suffereings on his head, instead of anybody else's. God manifested Himself fully into a form. Not a part, but wholly into a form, to cure people from the diesase of suffereings. He came into this world; nobody recognized Him. For He never came like a flash or something, so that people could recognize Him. He came as the law of nature was; He came very silently. But what He was doing side by side, it was rather impossible for people fo any time to recognize Him. People fo this tiem also can't recognize what He is doing. They can't recognize what His works are. They can't respect Him. But when He will finish up, and the whole result will be added up, people will pray. Jeuss came; they crucified Him. Nobody listened to Him. After that, the holy Bbile was written. So many churches were made; so many things happened. When Jesus was there, nobody listened to Him. That's why He says -- what were the last words of Jesus when He left His body? 'Father, forgive this whole world.' Yes, forgive this whole world! He called, 'You forgive this whole world. They can't bear that.' Now He took a form to refine this whole world. He was trying to do all that in the Middle East. But now He has taken a form to refine this whole world, from one corner to the other corner of the whole world. He has come. And what does He do? He gives people such a technique, such a method, which is perfect, and gets them away from sufferings, the cause of sufferings of this world. God made the mind but He never made a stoplight. And when He saw that 'There is no stop in this mind which I have made,' He was very sorry. He had to take a form. The form of Guru is nobody but Himself, the whole that you want to see. The whoel power is now in the form of a body. That is the body which is the Supremest of all, and its duties, works are not like those of humanity. Humanity does everything for stomach -- selfish purpose. But He is not selfish. He does whatever He does for the good of public, good of people. He came, and He is curing people, giving that technique through which mind will be completely stopped. Where mind will be completely stopped, people will be saved. That's why His first nature is to save people. When He comes into this world, He saves people. People don't want Him, because mind goes, 'No! Don't want Him! Don't like Him! He will stop you, stop you, stop you!' People threw stones, did many, many things -- Jesus said, 'Don't bother about anything.' He said, 'Okay, don't bother about me. I will come again to tell you.' He neve said that 'No, now I will do so many things to you!' He said, 'Okay, don't bother. I will come again.' That's why He again and again comes, takes a new form, new examples for people, new forms for people, new things for people, but the same ancient Knowledge behind his back. We have to give our whole devotion to Satguru, because He Himself is full. Take one glance, one glance at this whole world: people mad, they want to cry, but their tears go back into their heads. So God had to take such a form, because He is so kind, so merciful. And whatever mercy He had, He put that mercy into one form, and plced Himself in that form, and came into this world. Can't you say that Jesus was the kindest man on Earth? So many things people did -- 'Okay, don't bother. God, forgive them.' Error for human; forgive for divine. Satguru is divine. Guru is divine. The msot divine. That's why Shankaracharya says, '[a bunch of Hindi I STILL won't type in. Look, you hve any idea how tiring this gets after a while? You want to type it in, do it yourself. If you don't have it, make it up. Use lots of 'r's, 'n's and 'a's. That should work/] Guru is whatever is; nothing else but Guru. Whatever is, is Guru. God first puts whatever mercy is left in a body, and them places Himself. It is said that one nail of Guru is filled with mercy. If He scratches this world, it is for mercy, to dig a hole for mercy.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 20:58:35 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Jim Subject: Part 5 ('Guru is bigger and bigger than God') Message:

See this whole heaven, see the beautiful structures in this world! See trees, see sweet scent in them. Smell them. How kind He was to make that oil! How much He has given you! Remember that. How much He has given you! How much, how much, how much, how much, how much He has given this humanity, no one can tell. So much, you can't put a full stop. Kabirdas said that 'If I convert this whole Earth into paper, whole Earth, and ocean into ink, all the woods into pen, and then start writing, the ink will finish, the paper will finish, of all the woods nothing will be left, but even then, much, much and much and much and much will be left to describe about Him.' Can you think about your God, about your Father, who has put sweetness in apple? No harm in it; beautiful sweetness, beautiful scent in flowers -- can you think about Him? How much He has given you? And how much have you given Him? Compare it. That's why He always forgives people. They can't repay Him. He was the kindest form in this world. Remember, if He has made suffereings, He has made techniques to destroy those sufferings also. And if the people can't, He makes them enabled. He comes, He makes them enabled to do that. Sp where are you seeking to give devotion? You have to give devotion if you have some devotion left. Because you just were wasting you devotion into these materialistic things [thus sayeth, the Successful Private Investor -- sorry, couldn't resist]. You are a devotee of your wife sometimes, and wives are devotees of their husbands. Some were devotee of this wealth, some were devotee of this house -- how many things! If you have some devotion left, then give it to the Guru. Guru is that practical thing that can say: 'Okay, come on!' Light ahs got no hands to use. That's why, because we have got no words to put him in a word, we say, 'Guru is the highest manifestation of God.' Remember, Guru is God. Bigger than God. Bigger and bigger than God. They have said, 'Nobody in this world has been yet born who can describe about Him, who can describe about Him.' Such an easy technique to put our mind on -- can you think of an easier tehcnique? The people who have got this Knowledge -- can they think of an easier technique than this to put out their minds, to control their minds? Can there be an easier tehcnique? He made the easiest thing for them. Popel took apple trees, took many fruits that God made them, into their possession. God says, 'Sow the seed, and the wheat will grow from rocks also. Sow the seed, and the wheat will grow from rocks also!' And there are many trees which grow from rocks, mountains. So merciful, so kind, so divine. This mind tried to take us back into what we have done, back into so many techniques of errors, makes us feel more guilt. Satguru says -- shouts, not only says, shouts -- 'Don't follow our mind, don't follow our mind, don't follow our mind. Don't follow our mind! Give me your mind. Let me rule it, for I will take it into the right place of this world.' And He takes the mind, and takes us to the rightest place of this world. So if you want to give your devotion, if you have some devotion left, give it to the Guru. Give it to the Guru. Guru is a new word for you actually, but remember, His owork is ancient. Word is new because it has come from East, but do you know what is the value of Lord, what is the meaning of Lord? Everything! Lord. 'You are my Lord, you are my God, you are my Father, you are my Mother.' One has said, 'Twameva mata, chapita twameva' that 'You are my God; you are my Father. You are my God; you are my Father. You are my Mother; you are my Friend; you are my everything.' And if you want that family, seek into Him. He has given you friends, He has given you father, He has given you mother, He has given you so many things around. Something you have also to give to Him. Just a little, but almost eqwual to what He has given to you. (more later......)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 16:47:01 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Jim Subject: Part 6 ('One pranam, one year's karma out') Message:

Krishan says that 'I am just hungry of devotion.' When Ram was going, He stopped at Bhilni's house in the jungle. And what had Bhilni done? Bhilni took all the fruits, berries from bushes, and tasted them. Bitter -- threw them out. Sweet -- he offered that to Lord. Why did Ram say, 'I won't come into palace?' Ram did not go to that palace, Ram did not go to so many houses. But where did He go? To the hut of Bhilni. Not a castle; hut of Bhilni. What was that? What brought Ram there? Devotion! It was the love that Bhilni could give Ram, internal love that he could give. When Duryodhan called Krishna, 'Now come on, have a feast in my home,' He said, 'No, I won't have.' And He went to have food where there were only boiled leaves in water and some salt over that. He said that, 'I will prefer that more than the 36 types of food. I prefer this thing more!' And He ate those boiled leaves with salt. What is that that brought Him? What is that that brings God from heaven till here? Devotion. What is devotion? The internal call from the heart, the internal love. You can't -- you try to give this, but give it to only One who has given you so many things. One saint has said, 'How should I pray to my Guru?' Brahmananda has said that 'My Guru did so much Grace on me that has removed all my doubts, all attraction, all mental sufferings.' At last he said, 'What should I present to my Guru? I can't see a thing in this whole world. Brahmanand says that it cnnot be equal -- if I give Him the attraction of wealth, it cannot be equal, never eqaul.' He says that 'I used to go to churches, temples, mosques, but He gave me such a thing that my house became a mosque for me, my house became a church for me. My house became that!' He said that 'How should I repay my Guru? How should I describe my Satguru, that how much He has done for me?' So, see, you can never repay Satguru ever in your life. But there is one method that you can repay -- give devotion. I was telling you yesterday that Guru will take devotion and multiply it and give it to God. Remember, I was only saying that for your mental satisfaction. Guru is Himself God! Look at Him; what is God, you will see in Him. Look at Him first. See in Him, and you will find God. The full power of God that you have seen in Light, that you will see in Light. So that kind Master only wants love, nothing else. Some people think: 'Oh, we will give two dollars for our pocket and that's okay.' But remember, how many apples, how many fruits are there in this world? Air and water -- how much water and how much air? How many animals? How many men? Millions and millions He has given us, and we are only satisfied to give Him two dollars? Brothers, I am not hungry of two dollars; keep it with you. If you have something that is love, give me. What is taht thing that brought me here and will take me back to India? What is that thing that brought me here and will take me back to India: devotion, love. That brought me here and I am going there. So, see that if you want to give devotion, give it to Guru. Guru does not deal with us as father or as friend, but as children. As children. Something happens to us; He takes care of that. How many medicines are there in this world? How many medicines has He created? So see, search in God; you will find that Guru is the Supremest of all. It is said that 'In a day I should bow many thousands, thousnads, thousands, thousands, millions, millions and millions of times to Satguru.' Such a high thing, such a high power, has come. 'I was seeking for God, but God has come in body! What can be higher and holier than that?' We think that God is the highest and holiest thing. But listen: God has come in the form of human man, form of you and me! What can be higher than that? Such a high person took the same form as the lowest thing. No shame at all! For our benefit. I came here for benefit of you. I left my school. I left everything to give you something. I have come here to give you something. I have come here to give you something. The peopel who have taken, I have given them something. Now I am expecting something that they will give me. And if they have'nt got devotion to give, can they give love to me? And if no love, okay. Cany they be obliged to me? If they can't be obliged, then also okay. Be satisfied; go and do anything. God never says, 'No, you will have to give me devotion. You have to give me love.' But if you are meditating, devotion will flow out of you. Brahmanand says, 'I was searching for God. But now I have seen Guru -- why should I search for God? Because He has taken me to God!' If I go to God: 'God, please!' 'What do you want?' 'I want wealth.' 'Okay, take wealth!' 'God, please god!' 'Yes, what do you want?' 'I want so much wealth.' 'Okay, take wealth!' But if I want to go to Guru, if I go to Guru and beg Him, He says, 'Okay, take God!' That's why he said that if you go to God, He will give you some wealth and some ordinary pleasures, but if you go to Guru, He will Himself give you God. Guru is that man taht gave you the key for hidden treasure. Hidden treasure, that you were searching for from time immemmorial. Today we just read book and ask questions about that. But remember that His every second, every quarter, or half of a second, is precious. Because you can think of something higher and holier than God? And He is Himself everything. He is God. Say, 'You are Creator of whole universe, you are Destroyer of whole universe, you are kindness, you are Peace, you are Light, you are everything for me.' The giver -- only Guru. Taker -- we are. How can we become Guru? What is that thing -- that why don't we become Guru? Why can't we become Guru? You wre not able to become a general; how can you become a Guru? People have said, 'Okay, we want to be a Guru.' Guru said, 'Okay, you want to be Guru? Okay. Take it. Be.' People felt it, said, 'No, we don't want to be Guru.' They begged at His Lotus Feet. Why do people surrender themselves? Why do people do pranam? Indication that they want to surrender themselves. One pranam, and one year whol karma's out! And do more and more pranam, and more and more karmas out. People will say that 'If you are God, if you are Guru, why don't you say?' If I will say, then people will kill me. How will I be able to give this Knowledge to more and more people?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 19:48:30 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Jim Subject: One left to go -- anyone reading this shit? Message:

You know, I work my finger to bone for you. Anyone actually reading this? Because the next section has even more those super boring Indian devotee stories, the ones you didn't like even when you were super into this. Still, there are enough nuggets to justify a little strip mining.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 00:18:10 (GMT) From: Susan Email: None To: Jim Subject: Yes, I have read every word. Message:

Thank for doing it. Though, I must admit, some of this does make me recall how I was BORED during some of his satsangs! As I shared at the Latvian gathering, when I was bored in the satsang hall I often dealt with it by passing my teenage best friend gossipy notes about the premies with their names all in code, that is a fun memory I cherish. Gotta haul those good memories away from any experience and cherish them.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 23:36:34 (GMT) From: JW Email: None To: Jim Subject: I am reading it too. Message:

Jim, I'm reading it and it sounds like a lot of the drivel I heard Maharaji and people like Charnand spiel. Thanks for getting it all down and I think it's important to have this recorded, but can somebody do a Cliffs Notes version, one with the key quotes about Maharaji claiming divinity, etc., so we don't have to read ALL that garbage?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 23:09:16 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: Jim Subject: I'm reading it, very bizarre stuff, Message:

it's no wonder they wanted this stuff burned. Hey, it's a dirty job, but somebody's got to do it. Thanks for your effort.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 00:55:16 (GMT) From: Oliver Email: None To: Jim Subject: I'm reading it too. Message:

I wasn't around in the early years so am finding it most interesting. I smiled when he said he didn't want the persons two dollars. He never wanted my two bucks either. It was usually my one or two hundred that he was really interested in.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 18:45:56 (GMT) From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: Jim Subject: Looks great !!! Message:

Please don't forget to mention details on the publication: date, name, vol, issue, publisher etc pages etc

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 19:03:25 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Jean-Michel Subject: Looks great !!! Message:

Thanks, Elan Vital Spring 78 Vol ll, Issue 1 Page 38 from a satsang given at Alta Loma Terrace, Hollywood, California, August 15, 1971 Table of Contents reads: One of the most powerful discourses ever given by Guru Maharaj Ji, this 1971 satsang has never been published before. After an hour and a half of questions, Maharaj Ji finally agreed to tell his audience about the Satguru.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 01:28:05 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: Jim and Deputy Dog Subject: Deputy Dog is miragey's dog. Deputy Dog, read this Message:

Is it true that if for some reason the disciple leaves the Master, that the Guru will never desert the disciple? GMJ: If he is a disciple. And you don't become a disciple just by taking Knowledge. You become a disciple when you do meditation on it. If you are doing meditation, you can't be away. Dog's chain -- dog wants to go there, he is free to go there. When he sees him there, master does like that (pulls on chain). So you can be -- that is just if you are doing meditation regularly. See, dog thinks that 'Yes, I am free. Now I can run.' He runs, but chain is there; master pulls. Yes? Maybe this is where 'Deputy Dog' got his pen name from. Perhaps he fancies himself to be Maharaji's dog and that his 'inner Maharaji' deputized him to act on his Master's behalf in this hostile arena. 'Deputy Dog' has come to save the day! 'Deputy Dog' goes out, empowered by inner agya, to defend the honor of his Master! Da da da DA! Yes, it does sound like a cartoon. But Dog, read the above quote carefully, don't you feel insulted and demeaned at all by it? You are not his, you are not a dog, you are a human being. But to him, you're just a dog, not a deputized dog, just a common dog, actually just a mutt. This is the 'Knowledge' that miragey talks about, the abuse of meditation as a means of mind control in a cult setting. Do you think you are free, Dog? Do you say to yourself 'Yes, I am free, Now I can run (to whatever seminars I want)'? Ah, but you're still bound to Maharaji and will stay bound until you break the chain by seeing that it is an illusion. From now on, I will address you as miragey's dog (or maybe miragey's mutt, mm for short) unless you decide to change your pen name. You really ought to have more self-respect.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 02:59:36 (GMT) From: Deputy Dog Email: None To: G Subject: Very funny G, very funny! Message:

G, An excellent post, and humour aside there is probably some truth to it. But it's not that difficult to leave M though is it? I know many many people who received Knowledge and no longer practise. It's probably easier to leave than stay. I just happen to value the experience of meditation. You talk about chains. What about all those suckers out there watching television for 4 hours a day. Are they free? There is an excellent poem by Dylan Thomas called Fern Hill. The last lines of the poem go: Oh as I was young and easy in the mercy of his means, Time held me green and dying Though I sang in my chains like the sea. If I'm in chains, I'm in God's chains. -- Dog

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 12:57:19 (GMT) From: AJW Email: None To: Deputy Dog Subject: Forgive me Delilah Message:

Hey Dog, 'God's chains', It's not so bad as all that. You sound like one of those penitents from the Middle Ages, 'suffering for God'. You should get hold of 'God's key.' and unlock 'his chains', leave, 'his dungeon,' and come out and play in 'his sunny fields' with the rest of us. There's also a line sung by another Welshman that jumps to mind, 'Forgive me Delilah, I just couldn't take any more.' take it easy anth

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 13:52:41 (GMT) From: Deputy Dog Email: None To: AJW Subject: Forgive me Delilah Message:

Anth, All this from a guy who can't do light technique properly, -- Dogg

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 02:33:03 (GMT) From: Sister Mary O'Malley Email: None To: Deputy Dog Subject: Aren't you soooo special Message:

And I am supposing your ability to do all the techniques correctly is what allows you to live in the special light of God's grace? You are such a pompous ass. Your big old spiritual ego shines like a thousand suns.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 11, 2000 at 11:39:37 (GMT) From: AJW Email: None To: Deputy Dog Subject: Now you tell me! (nt) Message:

you mean I was supposed to take my glasses off...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 16:08:57 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: mm Subject: the light technique, who taught it improperly Message:

Here are a lot questions to consider: Why are you calling the '2nd' technique the 'light' technique when Maharaji doesn't call it that? Why was it renamed? Why was the old version taught and why was it called the 'Light' technique? If just about anyone rubs their eyes, a sensation of light is produced. Is this the Light of God? How is it basically different from other sensations of light? And what did Maharaji have to do with it? You are assuming that Anth cannot to the revised technique. Based on what? That he doesn't know about this revision or is somehow physically unable to do it the new, improved way? Maybe he doesn't have hands? Btw, if someone doesn't have hands, what are they to do? Who were the heads of DLM when the 'Light' technique was being taught improperly? None other than Maharaji and his father. Did they know it was being taught improperly? If not, why? Shouldn't they have known? How could they not have known? If they did know, why did they let it be taught improperly and why did they call it the Light of God? Why was the technique changed? Who made the decision to change it? It has been assumed that it was Maharaji's idea and decision to change it. How do we know that? How do we know it wasn't an advisor pointing out that possible physical damage could result from someone squeezing their eyeballs? Or maybe someone, not necessarily Maharaji, did some research and found out that Maharaji and his dad had it wrong. I found a quote on the internet, apparently about the revised technique, with the wording 'with a touch as light as a feather'. So I have doubts that Maharaji came up with the revised technique on his own. Maharaji never gave an explanation of why it was changed. I think the revised technique is fine for someone who wants to meditate, but I see no reason for hyping it up.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 20:10:32 (GMT) From: Susan Email: None To: G Subject: Watch Anth see the light, I have to agree Message:

Anth seeing light I must agree with Dog. Anth's fingers are on his glasses, and his eyes are open. I mean, even when they revised the techniques so there would be less in the way of lawsuits over retinal detachment, you still touched your eyelids. And they say Dogs don't have a sense of humor. Or Anth, read humour.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 20:17:37 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: Dog Subject: Ok, I get it Message:

Dog, Ok, I'll call you Dog for now. You do have a sense of humor. Oh, and I meant the '1st', not '2nd' technique. G

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 03:30:27 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: mm Subject: meditation, chains Message:

So you don't want to be the Master's dog, do you? Yes, most people who 'received Knowledge' have left M. That does not mean it is an easy process. I was quoting M talking about the chain that is there before a person leaves M. In the above, you are equating leaving M with not practicing. So you are saying that practicing Knowledge means more than just meditating, correct? There are people who have left M but still meditate. Are you saying that they are not practicing? That 'keeping in touch' and 'participation' are required for the techniques to work? That's the chain. Another thing is that some people give up on meditation when they leave M because of this belief. That's another chain. One thing to carefully consider: Maharaji said in the 'Unique Event' the following, which I had never heard him say before: 'Even if you do it on your own.' What do you think he meant by that? I value the experience of meditation also. I agree, there are many chains. You're in God's chains? What do you mean by that?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 04:04:26 (GMT) From: Mike Email: None To: G Subject: AND another song, too! Message:

Dog: The beatles sang, 'All you need is love...da da da da da, All you need is love...da da da da da.....' They didn't say a thing about no stinking guru! What has the lyrics to a song got to do with any of this? I mean, if you are quoting the lyrics from a non-premie song, then they must be lost, right? So why quote them? Quote your mathta, igor..... only your mathta.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 17:20:46 (GMT) From: cq Email: None To: Jim Subject: Does Satguru forgive sins? Yes.Any more questions? Message:

'Does Satguru forgive sins?' 'Yes. Any more questions?' Just who did we think he was? THE NUNS WHO HAD THE WEEKEND OFF It was Friday, and four nuns went to the priest at the local Catholic church to ask for the weekend off. They argued back and forth for a few minutes. Finally the priest agrees to let them leave the convent for the weekend. 'However,' said the priest, 'as soon as you get back Monday morning I want you to confess to me what you did over the weekend.' The four nuns agree and run off. Monday morning comes, and the four nuns return. The first nun goes to the priest and says, 'Forgive me Father, for I have sinned.' The priest asks, 'What did you do sister?' She replies, 'I watched an R-rated movie.' The priest looks up at heaven for a few seconds, then replies 'You are forgiven. Go drink the holy water.' The first nun leaves, and the fourth nun begins to chuckle quietly under her breath. The second nun then goes up to the priest and says, 'Forgive me, Father, for I have sinned.' The priest replies, 'Okay, what happened?' She says, 'I was driving my brother's car down the street in front of his house, and I hit the dog and killed it. ' The priest looks up at heaven for half a minute then says, 'You are forgiven. Go and drink the holy water.' The second nun goes out. By this time, the fourth nun is laughing quite audibly. The third nun walks to the priest and says, 'Forgive me, Father, I have sinned.' The priest says, 'Ok. Out with it. What did you do?' She says, 'Last night, I ran naked up and down Main Street.' The priest looks up at heaven for a full five minutes before responding, 'God forgives you. Go and drink the holy water.' She leaves. The fourth nun falls on the floor, laughing so hard tears run down her cheeks. The priest asks her, 'Ok, what did you do this weekend that was so darn funny?' The fourth nun replies, 'I peed in the holy water...'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 18:55:15 (GMT) From: me Email: None To: cq Subject: Does Satguru forgive sins? Yes.Any more questions? Message:

This Maharaji is a pretty slippery guy He takes the money and runs This Maharaji is a pretty slippery guy He takes the money and runs This Maharaji is a pretty slippery guy He takes the money and runs leaving one pondering what happened. and just invested enough in the trip to have heard that if nothing is happening it is because one isn't doing it enough, giving enough, trusting enough. A no win situation for anyone except the fat one

Return to Index -:- Top of Index