Forum V: Archive
Compiled: Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 12:11:56 (GMT)
From: Jan 27, 2001 To: Feb 06, 2001 Page: 5 Of: 5


Sandy -:- Trying to deal sincerely -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 04:40:58 (GMT)
__ Robyn -:- Trying to deal sincerely -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 06:29:59 (GMT)
__ __ Patrick Conlon -:- You're a good sport, Robyn -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 09:15:10 (GMT)
__ Katie -:- Sandy - comments on your post -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 22:54:01 (GMT)
__ __ Cynthia -:- Sandy, regarding your post -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 23:11:35 (GMT)
__ Steve Quint -:- Trying to deal sincerely and failing miserably -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 21:05:52 (GMT)
__ __ Sandy -:- You are entitled to your opinion -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 23:14:32 (GMT)
__ Jim -:- You just don't get the process -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 17:19:58 (GMT)
__ __ Kelly -:- Let us define our terms... like -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 18:34:42 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jim -:- Yeah, nice to meet you too -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 19:48:46 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Kelly -:- l didn't realise we needed a formal introduction! -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 22:04:06 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- New Age ain't new. -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 23:18:39 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- On the other hand CSI -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 01:24:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Was that what I said? -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 22:21:00 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Kelly -:- Was that what I said? -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 23:08:12 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Yes, yes -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 00:15:07 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Kelly -:- Yes, yes, that's a clear picture -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 00:47:02 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sandy -:- Kelly -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 03:42:49 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Carol -:- You are so right! And... -:- Tues, Jan 30, 2001 at 01:20:21 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Maharaji doesn't have to be wrong about everything -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 00:59:22 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Kelly -:- Maharaji doesn't have to be wrong about everything -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 14:23:07 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Maharaji doesn't have to be wrong about everything -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 16:38:42 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Kelly -:- Maharaji doesn't have to be wrong about everything -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 17:13:20 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Maharaji doesn't have to be wrong about everything -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 16:09:12 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- How's the exercise going? -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 03:51:43 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Gulp! (nt) -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 16:40:19 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ hamzen -:- Re def of new age -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 23:48:52 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Hal -:- Re def of new age -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 08:36:32 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ ham -:- New age ideas fundamental to being a premie? -:- Tues, Jan 30, 2001 at 01:04:26 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Hal -:- Divisiveness -:- Tues, Jan 30, 2001 at 02:53:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Patrick Conlon -:- Hal, nice post and you said it to the right man -:- Tues, Jan 30, 2001 at 10:00:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Kelly -:- Re def of new age -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 14:34:11 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ hal -:- Kelly keep posting - -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 21:21:17 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Patrick Conlon -:- Thanks Hal - I hope Ham sees your post -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 09:04:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ hal -:- Thanks Hal - I hope Ham sees your post -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 21:08:42 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Patrick Conlon -:- Thanks Hal -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 22:48:20 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Disculta -:- Opera -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 15:35:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Patrick Conlon -:- Opera, Disculta OT -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 19:24:41 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Robyn -:- Re def of new age -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 06:06:30 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Robyn -:- Re def of new age-addition to above -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 07:02:27 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ hamzen -:- Fake because it's a fantasy life, exactly it. -:- Tues, Jan 30, 2001 at 01:12:58 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Kelly -:- Re def of new age. Phew!! I can't handle that now -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 00:56:12 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ ham -:- :) (nt) -:- Tues, Jan 30, 2001 at 01:16:04 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- With you all the way, Ham (nt) -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 00:16:12 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jerry -:- This confronting thing -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 19:41:34 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Kelly -:- This confronting thing..I know I know!!! -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 20:53:38 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- This confronting thing..I know I know!!! -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 22:43:51 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Kelly -:- This confronting thing..I know I know!!! -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 23:20:46 (GMT)
__ __ Sandy -:- Negative figure grounding -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 17:25:32 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jim -:- See? It sure doesn't take much to prove my point -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 17:43:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Sandy -:- You don't get the ball from me anymore. -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 18:51:50 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Get a bandaid if it hurts so much -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 19:52:22 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- I meant 'malice' (nt) -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 22:28:18 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ janet -:- don't you usually mean malice aforethought? -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 11:35:42 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Wow, Janet, you are SO clever!!!! -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 16:46:38 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- clarification -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 17:06:52 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- No shit (nt) -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 22:56:06 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Wasn't it the Canadian spelling for 'email?' -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 15:54:33 (GMT)
__ Tim G -:- Trying to deal sincerely -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 14:12:21 (GMT)
__ AJW -:- But Dad, I Love Him. -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 09:28:34 (GMT)
__ __ Kelly -:- But Dad, I Love Him. -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 13:49:48 (GMT)
__ JohnT -:- Here's the link to the CBA letters -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 08:46:18 (GMT)
__ __ Patrick Conlon -:- Morning John - the Brits are awake -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 09:34:07 (GMT)
__ __ __ AJW -:- Only when they're drunk -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 10:12:40 (GMT)
__ janet -:- i take you as you come. you're real. -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 08:37:37 (GMT)
__ salam -:- I don't belive you Sandy -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 06:44:21 (GMT)
__ __ Aussi Ji -:- Don't beat about the bush salam.nt -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 09:03:32 (GMT)
__ __ __ salam -:- why do you say that ?..nt -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 13:34:11 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ AJW -:- he's being witty salam, -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 14:45:39 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Aussi Ji -:- Yep witty it was meant to be.nt -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 20:13:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ salam -:- Sorry -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 16:32:20 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ AJW -:- No salam, you're not being paranoid. -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 10:12:06 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ salam -:- Is Yves working for you now? -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 12:42:48 (GMT)
__ Francesca -:- Thanks Sandy ... -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 06:21:17 (GMT)
__ la-ex -:- Sandy,you ever read Ken Wilber on Free John? -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 05:42:22 (GMT)
__ __ Sandy -:- no, I haven't. -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 23:18:48 (GMT)
__ __ gee -:- Sandy,you ever read Ken Wilber on Free John? -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 21:42:19 (GMT)
__ __ __ Patrick Conlon -:- Gee, Gee, that's one hell of a post to just drop -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 03:20:33 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- La-Ex, ever read Mad Magazine on 'Teen Dating'? -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 17:52:12 (GMT)
__ __ __ la-ex -:- I don't read MAD, but have 2 points to make... -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 01:54:07 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- Yeah, and Dubya's starting to look presidential -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 02:32:57 (GMT)
__ __ Francesca -:- Insightful post, la-ex -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 06:52:35 (GMT)
__ __ __ Patrick Conlon -:- Insightful post, la-ex -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 09:41:48 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ JohnT -:- Tally Ho! -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 12:53:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Patrick Conlon -:- Tally Ho! -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 19:35:39 (GMT)
__ bill -:- square dealing -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 05:30:21 (GMT)
__ __ gerry -:- The never ending Saga of Sandy the shp -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 16:16:41 (GMT)
__ __ __ Patrick Conlon -:- The Saga of Sandy -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:55:07 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Sandy -:- The Saga of Sandy -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 13:31:58 (GMT)

Runamok -:- meditation for ex-premies? -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 03:41:18 (GMT)
__ Jerry -:- meditation for ex-premies? -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 15:59:31 (GMT)
__ __ ham -:- Quite -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 01:07:41 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jerry -:- Basho -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 22:11:38 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Oops! missed a word -:- Tues, Jan 30, 2001 at 12:51:19 (GMT)
__ __ __ Runamok -:- think the differences are overestimated -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 03:15:10 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Patrick Conlon -:- Thanks for the info Run NT -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:44:16 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ ham -:- I'm partial to the zen that says bollox to that -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:40:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Hal -:- if you get a teacher type .... -:- Tues, Jan 30, 2001 at 03:25:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Runamok -:- just don't wanna get ghettoized nt -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 10:15:35 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Patrick Conlon -:- Run you won't get ghettoized -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 10:45:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Runamok -:- thats the old blame the vic- what a crock nt -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 14:58:58 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Patrick Conlon -:- I quoted you again, Mahatma Trainspotter Ji -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:45:38 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Runamok -:- thanks, I think nt -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 10:16:34 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Patrick Conlon -:- thanks, Run -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 10:52:29 (GMT)
__ Tim G -:- meditation for anyone -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 13:46:10 (GMT)
__ __ Francesca -:- I don't quite get ... -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:10:49 (GMT)
__ __ __ Brian S -:- I like my meditation without maharaji -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 08:23:38 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Patrick Conlon -:- Brian, I like my meditation without maharaji -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 08:41:05 (GMT)
__ __ Kelly -:- meditation for anyone -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 18:59:09 (GMT)
__ __ __ Katie -:- Thanks Kelly! -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 22:23:36 (GMT)
__ __ Joy -:- meditation for anyone -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 17:56:15 (GMT)
__ __ __ Tim G -:- Dullsville -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 18:24:30 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Joy -:- Dullsville -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:52:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Patrick Conlon -:- Joy, Van also said -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 05:33:08 (GMT)
__ __ Marianne -:- Tim - read your email -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 14:10:45 (GMT)
__ AJW -:- Question Run' -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 11:20:55 (GMT)
__ __ Francesca -:- Question Run' -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:16:33 (GMT)
__ __ Runamok -:- Question Run' -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 17:53:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ AJW -:- Run, you dodged my excersise. -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 10:25:46 (GMT)
__ __ Jerry -:- It's the nectar of the universe, Anth! -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 16:21:01 (GMT)
__ __ Kelly -:- The fourth technique...'s not about snot!! -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 15:19:04 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jerry -:- The fourth technique...'s not about snot!! -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 16:35:08 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Kelly -:- The fourth technique...'s not about snot!! -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 18:01:55 (GMT)
__ __ __ Stonor -:- Thanks Kelly - now it's official! -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 16:16:55 (GMT)
__ __ __ AJW -:- Who mentioned snot? -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 15:24:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Kelly -:- Who mentioned snot? -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 17:32:20 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ AJW -:- Take as long as you like Kelly -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 11:39:07 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Kelly -:- Take as long as you like Kelly -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 13:52:27 (GMT)
__ Jean-Paul -:- meditation for ex-premies? -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 10:32:37 (GMT)
__ __ AJW -:- No big mythtree -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 11:30:30 (GMT)
__ __ __ Francesca -:- Anth, you are a delight! n/t -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:26:48 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ The Fat Fag -:- Anth - can't wait to squeeze him NT -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 05:41:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jean-Paul -:- No big mythtree -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 12:16:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ AJW -:- You myth the point Jean-Paul. -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 14:55:10 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jean-Paul -:- You myth the point Jean-Paul. -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 15:17:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ AJW -:- I myth mythself thumtihymes. -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 15:32:32 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jean-Paul -:- You are next to my border, right? -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 15:57:25 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ AJW -:- You are next to my border, right? -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 20:16:30 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jean-Paul -:- To AWJ, ex premie, ex monk, -:- Tues, Jan 30, 2001 at 07:14:58 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jean-Pau -:- You myth the point Jean-Paul. I forgett -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 15:26:51 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Buddhists, Buddhists, everywhere! -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 17:00:41 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jean-Paul -:- Buddhists, Buddhists, everywhere! -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 22:23:26 (GMT)
__ Runamok -:- above by Earon's request nt -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 07:46:11 (GMT)
__ Francesca -:- meditation for ex-premies? -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 04:56:52 (GMT)
__ __ Disculta -:- God - no baragons -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 15:31:04 (GMT)
__ __ Patrick Conlon -:- Francesca, baragons were dumped in 1984 or 5 -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 08:54:28 (GMT)
__ __ __ Francesca -:- you have finally pinpointed the point ... -:- Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 21:16:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Patrick Conlon -:- Wendy in palm Springs -:- Tues, Jan 30, 2001 at 01:07:40 (GMT)
__ __ gee -:- meditation for ex-premies? -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 21:47:14 (GMT)
__ __ Ulf -:- meditation for ex-premies? -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 12:06:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ Francesca -:- meditation for ex-premies? -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 19:51:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Ulf -:- thank you n.t. -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 20:45:46 (GMT)
__ Aussi Ji -:- meditation for ex-premies? -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 04:12:28 (GMT)
__ __ Patrick Conlon -:- Aussie Ji being sensible again -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 06:04:51 (GMT)
__ gerry -:- really nice post, run, really really nice -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 03:50:49 (GMT)

Sir Dave -:- All together now -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 21:30:08 (GMT)
__ salam -:- I love this shit -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 05:32:43 (GMT)
__ Robyn -:- too funny Dave! :) -:- Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 04:41:27 (GMT)


Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 04:40:58 (GMT)
From: Sandy
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Trying to deal sincerely
Message:
Ever since I posted to Jim that his reprinting of Maharaji's satsangs here was doing service in a backhanded sort of way, I have gotten feedback by more than one of you all that I am not being sincere. Sometimes I have gotten caught up in the heat of the moment and have said things that are counter-productive, as many here have also done. The remark about Jim and Maharaji's words seemed to be over the line for many of you, so I will retract my statement and hope that you all can forgive any behavior that offended any of you. It was not intended to offend.

For all the terrible things that have been reported here that have rocked my world as well as yours, I have some personal experiences that are totally counter to all the negativity and I am having a problem reconciling the two diametrically opposing positions.

If I may give an example:

When I lived in Miami in the early 80's, one day my wife and I were at a restaurant and an elderly gentleman came up to me and asked me if I was ever on Paris Island. I said I did not even know where it was. He told me it was an army base off the southeastern coast and he had spent time there during his career as a soldier and he thought I was somebody else. He was a big guy, white hair, gentle and polite, with a bandage on his neck. Anyway, he left and my wife and I finished our meal. When we left the place, we noticed the same man waiting at a bus stop. We stopped and offered him a ride. We drove him home and visited with him more for a bit. He said my wife reminded him of someone too. He looked at her with alot of respect and also alot of genuine old time love. We struck up a friendship that day. We visited him, took him places he had to go, and told him about Maharaji and Knowledge. He went to some satsangs and after a time he received Knowledge. Dennis Marciniak was his instructor. The night he received Knowledge, he came over and we had baked a chocolate cake for him, since it was his favorite. He sat there at our kitchen table and told us excitedly that he had seen alot of light in his head, like a car with its brights on coming up behind him, and he was smiling and laughing like a kid again.
He went to satsang for awhile, then he got sick and went away with some relatives. We got a letter a short time later. One of his relatives had written us to tell us that Robert had passed away. My wife and I have always cherished our relationship with Robert and felt blessed to have known him and to have helped him find that light in his own head before he passed on.

Now I am faced with that memory and some others equally intense and loving in oppostition to all the bad news here. I am not quibbling with anyone over the fact that Maharaji has done and said some things that I find totally outrageous and unacceptable to compute as the behavior of a teacher, even one who occasionally busts on the status quo. I have read John Tucker's documentation of the quotes that Maharaji said that he now denies, from the letter that was sent to the group in Australia. Many of the things he said back then were very influential in my being with him in the first place. I am sure that many here are in the same boat.

As for his activities, I have said that if it's about the money, I was past that. But then Jagdeo's story came out, the blondes came out, the car-bike thing came out, and other things came out that I have been hearing but subconsciously I must not have really been letting it hit me with full impact. It's been coming in waves, now intense, now not intense. Then this morning I read a post from janet that has gone inactive. It was very confronting. I responded to her that if one of my sons came home to visit and told me he was following a teacher, and I became aware that this teacher had done and said all the things that Maharaji has said and done as documented here, I would be extremely concerned and would proceed very delicately to try to help my son see the whole story. I would have to know the whole story myself in order to help him. And with the proof in hand, I would most carefully but most seriously try to help him free himself. For some reason, I would do all that for someone else I love, but have not done the same for myself. I need to do some self-examination and get back to you.

Let me just say that I never was premeditatedly malicious, insincere or just here to create confusion. The battle going on within me has spilled over into your threads, and they are yours and I have been your guest. And some of you have irked me beyond the inner conflict by being rude and nasty. Sometimes I have been on top of my game and handled it peacefully, and some days I have waded into the shit and started throwing it myself, for which I am not proud. I like to take the high road and it feels dumb to go the low road. Sometimes you eat the bear and sometimes the bear eats you. If I seemed to be one way one day and another way the next, now you know why, from my own mouth, no assumptions.

Now back to your regularly scheduled program.

Sincerely,

Sandy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 06:29:59 (GMT)
From: Robyn
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: Trying to deal sincerely
Message:
Dear Sandy,
Hi, it's been awhile since I've read you and posted back but just wanted to say that what I have read of you has always seemed sincere. I don't read any threads that are just mud slinging so I have missed a lot! :) You can't and shouldn't change your views just to be accepted here or to be done with the process of working through all this new info. I am proud of you for sticking it out through all the shit you take for doing so.
It is, of course, my hope that you find your way out. That the reality of the situation with m does change your feelings/opinion of the whole package surrounding m and the guy himself. I can't say I have an inkling of respect for him but I have always like you and wish you well.
Love,
Robyn
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 09:15:10 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: Robyn
Subject: You're a good sport, Robyn
Message:
Sandy has made the mistake of thinking out aloud here. But it isn't really a mistake. He thinks Jim and Gerry are attacking him for his wishy-washy thinking but I think they are attacking his lack of courage and will-power.

Sandy, if you see this remember what Shakespeare wrote: ''Stiffen your sinews, summon up your blood and disguise fair nature with...'' obstinacy, determination, will-power and orneriness. Well not exactly but I'm sure you catch my drift.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 22:54:01 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: Sandy - comments on your post
Message:
Hi Sandy -
You wrote:
Let me just say that I never was premeditatedly malicious, insincere or just here to create confusion. The battle going on within me has spilled over into your threads, and they are yours and I have been your guest. And some of you have irked me beyond
the inner conflict by being rude and nasty. Sometimes I have been on top of my game and handled it peacefully, and some days I have waded into the shit and started throwing it myself, for which I am not proud. I like to take the high road and it feels dumb to go the low road. Sometimes you eat the bear and sometimes the bear eats you. If I seemed to be one way one day and another way the next, now you know why, from my own mouth, no assumptions.

First, I have never thought that you came here to be deliberately malicious, insincere, or confusing (I can identify some premie posters who do that - and you're not one of them). I don't think you're insincere, either. But you have posted some things that are VERY similar to the above portion of your post before. I don't fault you for this - it's just that after reading your posts for the last year or two, I think that it is very hard for you not to engage in this kind of behavior. I believe you may not like this part of yourself, but you do seem to enjoy arguing, like to be the center of attention, and are an Aries from New Jersey who is able to throw shit with the best of them. Anyway, you can apologize for this all you want, but maybe it would just be better to accept that you are like that. It's no crime - those can be useful character traits - although it may not fit in with your ideal self.

I don't even read Jim-Sandy-Jim-Sandy or Sandy-Jim-Sandy-Jim threads anymore because you guys both say the same things to each other over and over, and HAVE been saying the same things over and over - and the content deals far more with the way you and Jim communicate, and with semantics, than with your involvement with Maharaji. If I was as talented a caricaturist as Danny, I could probably write one of those threads myself. (I am sure a lot of people feel the same way about Katie-Jim-Katie-Jim threads - snicker.)

I know it's hard to resist engaging with Jim, but there do seem to be people here who you CAN communicate with - you mentioned Janet above - and it seems that BECAUSE posts by those people mean more to you, you avoid answering them because they really do confront you - and are far less easy (and perhaps less enjoyable) to deal with than your on-going argument with Jim.

I'm not trying to tell you what to do here - just telling you what I've observed. Whatever you decide to do about Maharaji, it's not going to be easy for you, and I think there might be a temptation to come on here and have it out with Jim and others rather than dealing with that decision. I am not saying that what you post to Jim is insincere - but it is repetitive and doesn't seem to require much self-examination.

Comments about the rest of your post -
You really sound like someone who is going through a divorce after a long marriage. Remembering the good things, and then remembering the bad things, and getting really confused. The problem with that particular situation is that the decision is never clear-cut - there are ALWAYS regrets, no matter what you decide. I feel that it will be the same for you with this decision. I don't think any light is going to come on inside your head and you are going to be 'sure', especially at first - although you probably will know later if you made the right decision.

I do not think you can go backwards - back to Maharaji - in this situation (although this is my opinion, and I might be wrong). But it hurts a lot to leave, so you're stuck on the fence. I would really HATE to be in that situation - however I know people who post on this forum who were 'on the fence' for twenty years - although I have never seen anyone but you remain 'on the fence' for so long after active participation in this forum. (Not an insult - just an observation.) I sense that you are avoiding the pain of a final decision either way - understandable, but not very comfortable. Maybe that is why it would be easier to help someone you love get out of the same situation you are now in.

Take care, Sandy -
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 23:11:35 (GMT)
From: Cynthia
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: Sandy, regarding your post
Message:
Hi Sandy,

I have to admit that I just read your post starting this thread and haven't read any others. I just want to give you my first impression.

You seem to be having a pity party, Sandy. That's all right, have it. I've had many myself. Yet, Sandy, all of the events of your life are not spinning around Maharaji as if he is the sun. That is a cult programmed perception. It is not true.

Stop beating yourself up with all your negative thinking. Am I sincere, am I not? Am I a schmuck, or not? Knock it off. Snap out of it!

Thinking is great, correct, recommended, however, I have dealt with being addicted to negative tapes in my head that have nothing to do with M. The process of relief from Maharaji's programming is very similar, and I wonder if you are going through this on line, in front of the participants here.

Once in a while I notice a ringing in my ears and I think, is Maharaji thinking about me,' then I say 'NO' that's magical thinking. It isn't true. I found my old charandmrit (sp?) bottle a few days ago--empty! Do I want more foot water from Maharaji? No.

Settle down, Sandy. The whole forum isn't about Sandy and his exit from the cult. We're all in different places, stages and realizations about the big Goomraji.

The given here, though, is that he's a personality cult leader.

Be well, rest,
Cynthia

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 21:05:52 (GMT)
From: Steve Quint
Email: the_avenger55@hotmail.com
To: Sandy
Subject: Trying to deal sincerely and failing miserably
Message:
I just got your email. You say you're sincere but your email was flippant and arrogant. You're bugging me. You should find somewhere else to hang out.

Steve

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 23:14:32 (GMT)
From: Sandy
Email: None
To: Steve Quint
Subject: You are entitled to your opinion
Message:
Steve,

I was not flippant or arrogant in my e-mail, just brief.
If that's what you saw in my e-mail, then I say you need your eyes and other pickups examined. And if you think I'm going to spend the duration of my time here trying to convince you or anyone else of my sincerity, don't hold your breath.

The fact that I even e-mailed you should have made more of an impact on you than the words I used. But that is asking too much of you, I think, to understand that.

So you offer to communicate with me in private, then out here you trash me. I now have your number, thank you for that.

Sandy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 17:19:58 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: You just don't get the process
Message:
Ever since I posted to Jim that his reprinting of Maharaji's satsangs here was doing service in a backhanded sort of way, I have gotten feedback by more than one of you all that I am not being sincere. Sometimes I have gotten caught up in the heat of the moment and have said things that are counter-productive, as many here have also done. The remark about Jim and Maharaji's words seemed to be over the line for many of you, so I will retract my statement and hope that you all can forgive any behavior that offended any of you. It was not intended to offend.

It's all posing with you, Sandy. You tried that ridiculous stance, it didn't work and now you've got no choice to play this card -- 'humble' -- to try to save face and keep some semblence of credibility.

But I don't buy your bullshit for a minute.

Sandy, there's a process here that you have danced around, flailed at, thumped your chest in the face of, dabbled in a touch but basically never understood and never truly benefitted from. It's a process that you're not ready for and maybe never will. It's a process of fair, honest examination through dialogue. You've got far too many new age ideas to settle in to that process. You're prickly and defensive in the very places where you should be open and engaged.

It's too bad that you can keep generating such underbrush with people here. You fuck up, like you did with that inanity about me and so you do your best to find some relatable common ground, a couple of anecdotes maybe, that will spark some warmth and pats on the back for you. And, as this thread proves, you can succeed when you do this. Hit a couple of common notes with people and you'll get your 'amen's. But it's really just another phase of your solipsistic orbit. As Bob Dylan (who may or may not have been a Perfect Master) himself said, You ain't going nowhere.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 18:34:42 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Let us define our terms... like
Message:
New age ideas?? What are you talking about?? You remind me of an old boyfriend of mine...too clever for his own good!! I think you are in severe danger of disappearing up your fundamental orifice!! Don't expect me to stand up and fight you, I won't. I'm terrified of confrontation, I was beaten too much as a child. But, coming from you, someone who seems to lay so much importance on accuracy and precision in the meaning of words, this seems like a pretty woolly concept. Give us a specific example of a 'new age' idea and maybe we can compare it with one of your 'old age' ideas??!!
Respectfully yours
Kelly
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 19:48:46 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: Yeah, nice to meet you too
Message:
Well, Kelly, do you always tell people they have their head up their ass when you ask them to clarify something? 'Respectfully'? Hm.....

Okay, the new age ideas that I'm talking about here are those about communication. New agers, in my opinion, have, as a culture, special language and ideas designed to shield them from straight-forward, logical confrontation.

Come on, there's a whole code of this shit. Don't you know what I'm talking about? I'm talking about notions like 'my truth' as opposed to 'the truth'. I'm talking about the idea that words, by their very nature, are just ugly traps if they're used to scrutinize, let alone dismiss, or worse still, ridicule some silly belief. I'm talking about the fuzzy notion that these are 'special days', spiritually speaking, and that the universe is teaching us something through the plethora of snake oil salesmen we can read or even follow. I'm talking about the infantile defiance that passes for spirit in some quarters, wherein people decide what facts or truth they're going to 'own' and which ones they'll ignore because, they'll assert, no one has the 'right' to tell them how the world is.

That kind of stuff.

And you? What do YOU call 'new age'? Anything?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 22:04:06 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: l didn't realise we needed a formal introduction!
Message:
But, no, I'm not usually quite as rude on first meeting!
The thing is I feel I've known you for a long time. I've been reading your posts on and off for the last year or so. I find the whole business of forum etiquette quite fascinating. It's hard not to be rude sometimes, simply because it's not possible to reply to everyone who responds to a post. Anyway, where was I?

I'm afraid you haven't clarified much. You describe new agers as having their own language, culture etc. and it's designed to shield them from logical confrontation, and they have special spiritual days and snake oil salesmen and they think no-one has the right to tell them how the world is. They sound really dangerous, I wouldn't have anything to do with them if I were you. What do they look like? do they wear special clothes? and what constitutes a new age idea? I'm still not clear on that.

Anyway, nice talking to you,
Middle ager Kelly

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 23:18:39 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: New Age ain't new.
Message:
Kelly:

'My truth' is just an inarticulate paraphrase of the interpretive turn in philosophy that began with Kant. And the notion that these are 'special days' or that somehow we are at the apex or fruition of the human experience is just an equally inarticulate paraphrase of the Hegellian concept of the 'end of history.' Both have been around for a long time, and aren't particularly new age.

What gets my goat is something even more insideous. They've had 'pre-superbowl' shows on for four hours now--then they'll eventually get around to playing the damned game--and finally they'll gab about the stupid nonsense for weeks or even years as though the history of the world depended on it. Talk about perverse. I'd rather watch grass grow.

Seriously, new age nonsense is the least of our problems. There are lots of other brands of nonsense.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 01:24:01 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: On the other hand CSI
Message:
But, on the other hand CSI is the highest rated drama on TV. Cool.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 22:21:00 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: Was that what I said?
Message:
I didn't say we needed a formal introduction but the fact is you and I have never conversed before, I don't think, and your first comment to me is that I have my head up my ass and, having said that, you'd like to ask me what I mean.

Whatever.

You wrote:

I'm afraid you haven't clarified much. You describe new agers as having their own language, culture etc. and it's designed to shield them from logical confrontation, and they have special spiritual days and snake oil salesmen and they think no-one has the right to tell them how the world is. They sound really dangerous, I wouldn't have anything to do with them if I were you. What do they look like? do they wear special clothes? and what constitutes a new age idea? I'm still not clear on that.

You say I haven't clarified much but I re-read my post and it works for me. Plus, I don't know if you really mean it when you say you don't understand my point or if you're just pulling my chain as you seem to be doing by talking about new agers being 'really dangerous', etc. Your sarcasm is missplaced. I never said anything even slightly like that. So what's with that? Are you denying that there is a new age attitude such as I've described? Or what? There might be but you've never encountered it before and, more specifically, you don't recognize it in Sandy?

Maybe we could even the playing field a bit. Why don't you either tell me what you think is new age, if anything, in this context or, alternatively, why don't you specifically ask me to elaborate on my points above. Either one might get us somewhere. Otherwise, toodles

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 23:08:12 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Was that what I said?
Message:
Yeah you did say that, and I don't think you can ask me what I mean about something that I have already said I don't know what it means and can you please explain? if you see what i mean!! and why would my sarcasm be misplaced? I have a very good sense of direction.!! And what are you doing wearing chains on a Sunday night? Well it's Sunday night here anyway, and we don't do that sort of thing round here!!!

But seriously, before you disinherit me, this new age thing... Often I find when people throw that accusation at an idea or a point of view, it turns out that the idea is, in fact, as old as the hills. Would you call Buddhism new age? In geological terms maybe, but not in terms of the evolution of human thought, and yet when I have expressed a Buddhist or maybe even a Christian or even a Zen inspired idea. I have had it dismissed as 'new age' Is Maharaji and his cult new age?? in your terms ?? What do you mean by a new age idea? Does it matter??

Love Kelly

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 00:15:07 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: Yes, yes
Message:
Hey, the term 'new age' is indeed a bit of a misnomer if only read literally. Scott cites a few old references for this kind of thinking and I'm sure there are many more, both within and without western philosophy and culture. But just like one knows that Democrats aren't necessarily more democratic than Republicans, we use the term somewhat figuratively.

Furthermore, perhaps the reason that 'new age' is such an apt tag is that one of the core beliefs in new age culture is the idea that this really is an exciting, new time spiritually, the dawning of the age of Aquarius, the end of Kali Yuga, etc. The proponents gave themselves the name 'new age' when they thought it was a patently obvious and most flattering perspective.

I'm sorry, Kelly, but when you say you don't know what new age means I have a hard time believing you. Yes, maybe the term's fuzzy on the edges but, as a simple example, if you met some long-haired pony-tailed guy in a tide-dye shirt with an eagle feather in his bandana, silver and turqoise wristbands from Sedona and sandals, and if he gave you a hug and offered to read your chart for you in a special way on account of his ability to channel some exoitc alien entity, and when you told him you thought there were no such things as remote control alien astrologers and he told you that that might be your truth but it isn't his, I'd be extremely surprised if, when someone later describved your new friend as 'new age' you scratched your head and asked what that meant.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 00:47:02 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Yes, yes, that's a clear picture
Message:
I can see him, I can almost smell him, I can even hear him faintly... So that's a new ager? He's a caricature!! It's too sweeping a generalisation, and it seems to me to be a very simple way of dismissing someone who does not think like you!!! Maharaji does that, you know, he poo poos 'self help books' OoooH soooH Profound!! etc etc. I expect more of you. And I still don't know what you mean by a new age idea.

Much love, and sweet dreams,
Kelly

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 03:42:49 (GMT)
From: Sandy
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: Kelly
Message:
Dear Kelly,

If you meet someone who takes apart your sentences word for word,
looks each one up in the dictionary, and then proceeds to put together the words and sentences to mean what he wants them to mean and discredit you with the remains, you have the caricature of an attorney, which is not to say that all attorneys act like that. Jim is an attorney, and also the caricature of one.

People have been reading tarot cards and wearing feathers and colorful clothing for centuries. Some of the most human beings who ever walked the earth wore feathers and channeled spirits. Jim is a bigot, he just doesn't pick on Jews, Blacks, or the usual suspects. His bigotry has poked out on women, which I notice he tucked away but I am sure is still in there, and he is especially bigoted against premies. He acts like all premies who don't jump when he says jump are in cahoots with Maharaji and are baaad.

You seem like a pretty smart lady. I also feel that you are being cordial and civil to Jim to just keep him off your back.
But I tell you from expereince that no matter how cordial you try to be, if you don't buy his way of seeing things, you will be
insulted, demeaned, and made a joke of by him and a few who think he's hot shit. If you don't believe me, check out some other threads and see what I mean. From 'you're kidding, right?' he will progress to 'fuck off' if you don't 'get it' in his good time.

I feel like a lady should have a good strong flashlight if she is insists on walking down a dark alley to meet the caricature of an attorney, so be forewarned if you weren't already.

And thank you for your words to me in the past.

Sandy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jan 30, 2001 at 01:20:21 (GMT)
From: Carol
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: You are so right! And...
Message:
and it will be totally fruitless to try to argue with close minded people about things which they do not know (because they are closed-off to them!) I know this from a few years of experience trying, off and on.

Therefore, I cannot, nor can you, I suspect, possibly try to defend a position on any subject which smacks of 'New-age' or spiritual with the likes of Mr. Heller without eliciting his expected negative reaction.

But I have frequently argued it just the same, because Jim does not represent the total viewpoint of all ex-premies, obviously. It is good to hear from individuals who have divergent experiences and realities!

As I have said before, it is not necessary to throw away all you believe in just because you no longer regard your former Guru in the same way as before! Although, I have to admit, the process of letting go, involved for me, throwing everything out for a time and re-evaluating my own belif systems in entirety! I have emerged from the process after about 2 1/2 years now, with a faith in God which is a true inner knowing that cannot be shaken by the doubts and condemnation of the likes of one James Heller.

However, I have at times, appreciated the offerings of Jim and have to have some respect for certain aspects of his arguments. I mostly have found fault with Jim, and sometimes others here, for rude and antagonistic putdowns and name-calling in which the person is attacked, rather than the idea. Sometimes we just have to agree to disagree!
carol

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 00:59:22 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: Maharaji doesn't have to be wrong about everything
Message:
Kelly,

If you got the caricature, then you understand the term. That was the point. Yes that's a new ager. Where've you been for the last thirty years?

And just because Maharaji thinks something doesn't mean it's not true.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 14:23:07 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Maharaji doesn't have to be wrong about everything
Message:
Good morning Jim,

I think I would make quite a good lawyer, I just manoevered you into defending Maharaji. hehehehe!

You ask where I've been for the last 30 years, you're joking right?... Was that when the New Age started? Well, in 1971 I met this 13 year old guru....!!

Jim can you explain a couple of terms to me. I've worked out most forum-speak for myself. But what is a Monmot? it's not in my dictionary. And why is M called the Hamster? is it something to do with his chubby cheeks? or am I being naive?

All the best
Kelly

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 16:38:42 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: Maharaji doesn't have to be wrong about everything
Message:
Hi Kelly,

Yes, you're right. I prayed, cried and laughed for the first time last night. I even wrote a poem ... can't find it now.

Anyway, 'monmot' is this actual Indian term, supposedly, for an apostate premie, someone who leaves the guru and follows their mind. The first time I remember hearing the term was '74 Guru Puja, Amherst where one of the highly-revered, old-time and just plain old mahatmas, a little guy with glasses, I think, who was in Toronto just before the festival, a guy who was touted as the shit before the festival, was rumoured to have bolted on the guru just about then and was labelled as such. It was scary shit and no, I'm not exaggerating at all. It was like the Exorcist in the sense that everyone knew that this once high and mighty 'soul' had been seduced by the power of darkness, the mind. A cautionary tale for all of us. If he could fall, what about us?

'Hamster' is something I came up with just as a play on 'Master' and yes, his face and general plumpness and subhuman moral sensitivities (hey, I've got cheeks too but then I never said I was God in human form.)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 17:13:20 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Maharaji doesn't have to be wrong about everything
Message:
Thanks Jim,

I really hope you find the poem, I'd love to hear it.

So, we're all monmots together then? I was worried about the Hamster thing , thought it might be some horrible 'pet shop boy' type joke about getting up your fundamental orifice, and I probably wouldn't get it, the joke that is. So I'm glad it has a more innocent explanation. Have you got chubby cheeks? for some reason I imagined you as quite skinny !
Love Kelly

PS This is the 5th repetition of your immortal words 'Maharaji doesn't have to be wrong about everything' I think thats enough!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 16:09:12 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: Maharaji doesn't have to be wrong about everything
Message:
Kelly:

I think 'hamster' is a transformation of 'master,' that first appeared on Forum II. Not sure though. Can't recall who used it first.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 03:51:43 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: How's the exercise going?
Message:
Jim:

New Agers are sort of irritating, but they don't have much influence. They sure don't have much power. I'm a lot more worried about the flaky self referencial media, myself.

Uhh... I forgot you were on the West Coast. I can go years without seeing a new ager in DC. Even the waitresses carry briefcases.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 16:40:19 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Gulp! (nt)
Message:
gggggg
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 23:48:52 (GMT)
From: hamzen
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: Re def of new age
Message:
I suspect I know what Jim's getting at here.

But before attempting a definition of new age, I would like to point out that it's VERY difficult, because new agers are into fuzziness and not language, so that even if they hold two mutually conflicting concepts dear, but they FEEL ok about that conflict, then no problem. So definitions are of little relevance, thus attitude is usually the key definer for a new ager.
Secondly, negativity. Negativity must never be allowed in, any new ager who attempts to look at negativity, darkness, pain, in itself, without looking at the positive aspects of it, will have great problems around other new agers, they will be seen as carrying a 'bad vibe'.
To give an example, all illness is caused by negativity, any misfortune is bad karma, consequently anyone who is ill say, or disabled, in some way brought it upon themselves.

Not surprisingly all of the new agers I've met, serious new agers, have been middle class and usually comfortably off.
Consequently I suspect it's a 'religion' or form of 'cultic' thinking for those wanting the good vibe of spirituality with none of the responsibilities of a standard religion or none of the analytical thought of a philosophy.
I would call it easy, nay suburban, materialistic religion.
So the primary def is that THAT feeling takes a MUCH greater, if not the totality of importance in a new ager, than anything else.

ANYTHING that gets in the way of that good feeling should be detoured promptly, without the risk of being sucked downwards psychologically being even remotely entertained.

A few other asides, most new agers, not surprisingly, suspect ALL language and especially definitions are suspect.
New age definitions are usually quoted as universal rules with few, if any qualifications.

Now as re gm, well during his talks anyway, no doubt he is a new ager, contradictions, no problem, only looking at the positive, no problem, suspicion of language, no problem, simplistic universal rules with no qualifications, no problem, THAT feeling being the be all and end all, no problem.
Gm, in his speeches, not in his life, is the ARCHETYPAL new ager, as were we all. Were we not all after that fuzzy feel good factor, ALL of the time?
For myself THAT is why I feel this issue is FUNDAMENTAL to the issues around gm, not just a side issue.
Without that sloppy fuzzy, reality denial, NONE of us would have been interested for a moment, not for one moment.

That'll do for starters, for me anyway.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 08:36:32 (GMT)
From: Hal
Email: None
To: hamzen
Subject: Re def of new age
Message:
Hi Ham ,

I can see what you're saying. I'm not a new ager. I puke at crystal waving and Reiki etc . however I don't see it as particularly harmful , well no more than most things anyway.

As you were analysing new age then , I was thinking of the rave party scene and tearing that apart too, using similar terms to those just used by yourself.

Aren'r raves about having a totally good vibe, take a substance to dispel any negative thoughts, everyone loves everyone else , no trouble.

Doesn't the ecstacy create a temporary warm fuzzy feeling. Is it real ?

I certainly could view the parties here as religion or cultic thinking. If you're not into them you're not worth talking to , you don't get it. you're an outsider.etc

At least 60% of the ravers are middle class too !

The same can be said for many things surely. After all people do want to feel good , healthy, energised.

Personally I find it counter productive to slag off things that one's not into personally . I think that golf's shit , but I accept that it gives a lot of enjoyment to others. I fucking hate scrabble and gin rummy but what the heck, different folks.

And I hate techno music- thump thump... the tribal mentality... the illusion of oneness and harmony , drug induced.. but what the heck its not that dangerous ,,except for a few suicides due to exctasy depression and deaths from heart attacks whilst dancing, dehydration etc...

Tolerance can be pretty important when attempting to communicate with others and we're not all the same .. Get my point ?

Hal

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jan 30, 2001 at 01:04:26 (GMT)
From: ham
Email: None
To: Hal
Subject: New age ideas fundamental to being a premie?
Message:
That's my key arguing point, do you think it's fundamental to the fact we became premies.
If we had not been infected with magic ju-ju new age thinking we would never have ever been able to deal with lila, the constant revision of our reality models, the constant denial of negativity & thinking, the easy superiority of being the chosen ones,
beyond all that worldly maya.

Re your experience of festival ravers, well where to start. The festival scene is not the house scene, it's got a hippy new age element to it, but this segment is a TINY and totally unrepresentative slice of the house crowd in general.
The house scene is, and has been always predominantly been, working class, the middle class kids have 'dumbed down' fake working class accents etc, even the queen is trying it on now because she knows which way the culture's going. Whenever I've been to a predominantly middle class house crowd, very rare, it's been exceedingly dull, and stiff arsed.

Also if socially your house scene is like that, get out, I've NEVER known a house crowd that was not the least snooty, the most sussed and the most open crowd, on average I've ever met, they'll chat to anybody who's up for it in my experience, whatever your 'it' is, as long as you're up for it.
And just because they're having a good time and getting off their tits at the weekend doesn't mean they only think poositive, have deep philosophies about the lila of it all, and that god is guiding the rave scene through somebodys presence, a perrfect person.
Comeon hal, could have applied your comments that superficially to any activity, but you just glossed over the fundamental points I was making.
I also suspect you haven't seen much of the overall house scene.
The risk factors in taking e's are lower than almost any drugs, and MUCH safer than driving your car.

Of course if belief systems are an irrelevance, and someone deserves respect just because they're alive, (would you be this tolerant of combat 18 members I wonder?).........

It's not just about loving everyone hal, surely you can see my point that we didn't become deluded by accident, and that those techniques of delusion were based directly within new age thinking.

I would also add that I'm not 'against' crystals and reiki per se, UNTIL new age non-explanations about them are put about, then I get loopy.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jan 30, 2001 at 02:53:29 (GMT)
From: Hal
Email: None
To: ham
Subject: Divisiveness
Message:
Hi Ham,

I'm not disagreeing with most of what you say about 'new age'.

I've actually found that there are more premies these days who are not at all new age. There is an attitude that 'new age' is not cool with maha ( he's a jealous master) so they look down on any other spiritual path. A couple of years back the tellytubby made it quite clear that ' nollij ' wasn't to be confused or mixed up with, integrated with ANY other thing.

For me it wasn't new age that made me open to maha. I didn't know much about anything except hallucinogenic drugs in '72.
New agers in my area are definitely not into going to stare at a stupid video of an inarticulate, arrogant little man in a silk suit.

I would accuse all of them of not examining their beliefs with enough logical scrutiny, sure.

However I don't see that attacking them is much of a priority. After all one can easily slam anything. The pope recently attacked the 'new age' movement. He said it was blasphemous and arrogant to say that God is within. Apparently God is omnipresent according to Christianity but the last place he/she/it would dream of residing would be in us filthy sinners. Sheesh!

So everyone slagging off everyone else! Great!

What's this thing with class ? Oh yes, England. I'm working class , does that make me cool or maybe because my wife is middle class that has polluted my purity and filled me with pretensions? Oh dear !

Who chooses what class to be born into anyway ? Come on Ham, drop the class judgement , that's not anyone's fault is it?

So those upper middle class kids drop their private school grammar and diction to fit in with the predominately working class ravers do they? Sad.

Ham , one reason I left the cult was because cult members think they have something nobody else can have unless they subscribe. I've noticed quite a few newbies here refer to this forum as a cult. This is denied vehemently and no it isn't a cult because it doesn't fulfill the criteria. Except in one way.

There is a pressure to conform to a particular approved expremie mindset. It's always felt like that to me too. Being an individualist , I don't like that. I tend to enjoy the company of people who do their own thing and fuck what others think (long as they don't seriously hurt anyone else )
There are loads of wannabe teachers on this forum, know it alls.

I don't welcome all that great advice about how I should be and what I should allow myself to enjoy post cult. Never liked being policed. Sometimes it feels like there are the 'ushers' and church ladies here too!

I thought leaving fatcon was about freedom and the freedom to choose.

Sheesh!!!!! Why am I trying to explain this ? Oh yes I know.....because you are a person I feel will be open to listen to another viewpoint...

What can i wish you that isn't new age ? Love ? Nah.

Freedom !!! Yeah !

I wish you continuing and developing freedom Ham,

( no hugs , no bullshit)

Hal (zen )

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jan 30, 2001 at 10:00:40 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: Hal
Subject: Hal, nice post and you said it to the right man
Message:
Ham probably won't agree with you any more than he does with me but then I don't think you would want him to anymore than I would. Someone posted a nice old saw further up something along the lines of ''dignity is allowing others to be free.''
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 14:34:11 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: Hal
Subject: Re def of new age
Message:
Hi Hal,
You took the words right out of my mouth. I had been thinking along those lines. Thanks
Love Kelly
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 21:21:17 (GMT)
From: hal
Email: steve.mulley@clix.pt
To: Kelly
Subject: Kelly keep posting -
Message:
I love your lightness , humour and valid points you make,

Hal

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 09:04:33 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: Hal
Subject: Thanks Hal - I hope Ham sees your post
Message:
What about us old fogeys who like opera? Are you tolerant of us too? Like you I definitely am more tolerant of the New Age culture than Ham or Jim. I tolerate Ham's raving because he is such a true stoical philosopher and I turn a blind eye to Jim's playing in a rock 'n roll band because he is so uncompromisingly -er- uncompromising.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 21:08:42 (GMT)
From: hal
Email: None
To: Patrick Conlon
Subject: Thanks Hal - I hope Ham sees your post
Message:
Hi Patrick,

I've been enjoying your welcome new input to the forum , it's great that there are so many recent exiters posting now.

I finally split a year ago exactly although I thought that I'd left in '92. I still had a defensive attitude to Maha though because of the good times I'd had. I know lots of ex premies who won't refer to themselves as that because although they can no longer stomach the cult these days, they treasure their good memories and still enjoy a bit of a meditate.

I can't stand opera myself ( Lord knows I've tried ) but I am envious of your pleasure and do of course tolerate even those duped by the illusion of opera such as yourself.

Best wishes Hal ( steve mulley )

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 22:48:20 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: hal
Subject: Thanks Hal
Message:
You thought you'd left in 92. I thought I'd left in 82 and went back last year. Glad I did it. It cured me of any sentimental or guilty attachments I may have still had for the Ratguru.

As for opera. I got my raver son to enjoy by getting stoned with him and listening to Turandot.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 15:35:29 (GMT)
From: Disculta
Email: None
To: Patrick Conlon
Subject: Opera
Message:
Hey dude, me too.

I just went with hub to Elisir d'Amore, which blew us away.

The problem I have is the miserable plots. I wish it was all Marriage of Figaro.

Love, Your New Age/opera-loving neighbor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 19:24:41 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: Disculta
Subject: Opera, Disculta OT
Message:
I'm an absolute sucker for schmaltzy Italian opera. Have a fab dinner and a bottle of velvety claret and off to see Puccini and have a good cry. Very cathartic for me to weep at our mortality. Can't stand Nazi Wagner though. But I guess my favorite stuff is the old masses, chorales, stabats etc. Just love choirs and the human voice in general, old big band chanteuses, torch singers, even Broadway musicals.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 06:06:30 (GMT)
From: Robyn
Email: None
To: hamzen
Subject: Re def of new age
Message:
Dear ham,
Lots of people here thought/think I was/am New Age and I didn't think I was but didn't know what it was about me that was different until I moved in with a friend that is New Age. I think that the lingo is a huge part of it and it makes me uncomfortable. Core Star, Individuation Point to name two. I find that something that was written in a book is taken in and made to fit into their lives. I guess that is like tenants of an organized religion but I bristle against those too. I'd rather just experience my life and talk about it in plain language and who cares if it 'fits' anywere or not!
My friend does work on 'her stuff' to a point but only where it feels ok. I know when I feel like I don't want to think about or face something about myself it makes me realize that whatever that is it is something I have to face and I at least start to work on that, being able to face it. I know with my friend there are lots of things I can't talk to her about without seeing the defensive walls crashing down around her.
I know she just showed me an email about the week starting on Jan 14th and there being some line up of planets or something. Well I can get into that but then it said a lot about some, sun karma and that having something to do with the future or something. I asked what sun karma was! It seemed to be one of the main basis for the article but because my tone was skeptical I was met with an uncomfortable moment of silence and then some quick made up explination! There was another new ager there who came up with an equally absurd but different made up explination! They both seemed very happy with that solution/answer to my question! That's when I dropped the discussion!
In a big way it is like living in a fantasy life, I think. God I hope she doesn't read this site! :|
Love,
Robyn
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 07:02:27 (GMT)
From: Robyn
Email: None
To: Robyn
Subject: Re def of new age-addition to above
Message:
I couldn't go to sleep for thinking about this so...
It isn't only the lingo, core star, individuation point etc but did all or even any of these people have some experience in this spot that made the term and it's definition ring true to them when they first heard it... no. They read about it and then incorporated it into their experience. Doesn't seem possible to me.
That is the part that really get me. Someone could tell me my idividuation point is above my head or in the jade plant sitting next to my computer, if I haven't EXPERIENCED it myself it is meaningless to me.
Teach me something, how to do some meditation for example and I can try it and see if it works for me but this stuff is taken in on blind faith.
Must be I'm from the 'Show Me' state in a past life! :) Is that Missouri?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jan 30, 2001 at 01:12:58 (GMT)
From: hamzen
Email: None
To: Robyn
Subject: Fake because it's a fantasy life, exactly it.
Message:
It's all just, so 'not' real.

I suspect that that attitude is just an inability to deal with the shit of the world, but still wanting to have some justification for that world denial, psycho defeat, let me pretend everything is aok etc.........

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 00:56:12 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: hamzen
Subject: Re def of new age. Phew!! I can't handle that now
Message:
I'll look at it in the morning, after I've done my meditation and ..er..had a chamomile tea and watched the sun rise, on the dawning of a new age!!! well, monday anyway.
Much love Kelly
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jan 30, 2001 at 01:16:04 (GMT)
From: ham
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: :) (nt)
Message:
e
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 00:16:12 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: hamzen
Subject: With you all the way, Ham (nt)
Message:
hhhhhhh
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 19:41:34 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: This confronting thing
Message:
Kelly,

I find it's wiser not to confront. Just be honest on how you feel about things. If somebody comes back at you with an idea that changes how you feel, well then go with that. And you never know, sometimes people can say things that help to crystallize what you really feel but didn't realize before. But if you act defensively when somebody challenges you, or run away, that's a sure telltale sign that you're not really sure of yourself.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 20:53:38 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: This confronting thing..I know I know!!!
Message:
but I'm not really sure of myself. Are you? I posted that message to Jim and then went and watched a TV programme about the Khumb Mela and watched the Dalai Llama performing 'arti' with the Shankarichariya (spelling?)on the banks of the Ganges just a few days ago. I dozed off and awoke to see Hitler and Goering on the screen. What a shock! Delusion and reality blurred into caricature. Anyway, I've gotta go confront my destiny now! Thanks for the advice.
Kelly
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 22:43:51 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: This confronting thing..I know I know!!!
Message:
Hi, Kelly,

It's not that I'm sure of myself that I'm right in feeling the way I do, but I am sure of the way I feel, which leads to the way I think. But those thoughts and feelings could be wrong, and if somebody presents a compelling argument why that's so, then my thoughts and feelings will change and I'll allow that to happen.

But the problem I frequently see here is that people feel a certain way about things as if it's sacred. They don't want anybody messing with that; it's their reality. As Jim has ponted out, that doesn't necessarily mean it's the reality. So I don't hold anything so sacred that I won't allow ideas in that would change my beliefs, if in being honest with myself, I see that's already happenned anyway.

So, this is where I see people getting all flustered. Their beliefs have been challenged to the point where they don't even really believe in them anymore, but they continue to defend them because, well, it's their beliefs. But wouldn't the wiser thing be to just ammend those beliefs, and admit you were wrong about them? Wouldn't it be easier to just be honest with yourself that those beliefs, and feelings, and thoughts don't hold the water you thought they did?

This is what I mean about avoiding confrontation by being honest with yourself, because in the long run, if somebody makes a good case that what you feel isn't warranted, it's not that person you're really confronting anymore. It's your own feelings.

I'm not saying this is the case with you. I'm just saying I see this happenning all the time on this forum.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 23:20:46 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: This confronting thing..I know I know!!!
Message:
Thank you Jerry,

I really appreciate your input, but do you know what? I feel free, really free, I like this place, this forum, because it encourages freedom. That's good enough for me.

Love Kelly

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 17:25:32 (GMT)
From: Sandy
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Negative figure grounding
Message:
So Jim,

How would you like it if the ladies here got so fed up with you calling women girls and not giving you room to change and go beyond your crap that they just nailed you to it and made you feel that no matter what you did, they were going to buy it, that you are a chauvinist forever? I mean, you really should have had that shit together by now, being a lawyer and an officer of the court.

So go ahead and nail me to my shit. I will consider the source.

Sandy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 17:43:40 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: See? It sure doesn't take much to prove my point
Message:
You prove everything I say in spades. You don't have what it takes to engage in honest discussion. Too bad people cut you the slack they do. It's like feeding the animals but this isn't a petting zoo.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 18:51:50 (GMT)
From: Sandy
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: You don't get the ball from me anymore.
Message:
I cannot trust you.
Your agenda includes more than what is advertised. You go after people to hurt them, to cut people off at the knees, you don't just go after ideas and actions to expose them. So - if I never answer you again, please know that it is not because you have dazzled me with your footwork and I am speechless. It is because I cannot trust you. I may be confused, waffling, verbose, new-age and in a weakened state becasue of it, but I am not malicious. You are a malicious person and you vent that malice on anyone who does not 'process' according to your specs. Your profession fosters that behavior, but that is no excuse to do it here. You are sarcastic, cynical, downright rude and nasty whenever the hell you feel like it and you are given much space to run you personal trip by the management. If a premie or someone thinking it over acted like you, they'd be booted often with warnings. You are part of the royalty here, the unspoken ruling class. And you know it and play on it to the hilt. I gave my honest communication and you trashed it, and me as well. So you and the others who think I'm a waste of time, please ignore me and also please ignore those who are communicating with me in a more mature and peaceful way. There is nothing for you on anything further I write here, nor is there anything here for you in anyone else's communication with me. I know this is a forum and you can crash into anybody you want. But please give me the same consideration you so vehemently demand for yourself.

No, I'm not kidding, right.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 19:52:22 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: Get a bandaid if it hurts so much
Message:
Crocodiel tears, every one of them. What you call 'maile' is, to me, just being stragiht-forward. That, to you, is a criminal violation fo your space or something. Ha ha ha......
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 22:28:18 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: I meant 'malice' (nt)
Message:
hhhhhh
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 11:35:42 (GMT)
From: janet
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: don't you usually mean malice aforethought?
Message:
unwittingly you declare yourself as you are.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 16:46:38 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: janet
Subject: Wow, Janet, you are SO clever!!!!
Message:
Here's what I think of your and my communication. You take smarmy pot shots at me which I generally make me yawn and only sometimes raise an eyebrow. Still, because I don't like being ignored here, I try to discuss the matter with you. You then say a whole lot of stuff to which I try to respond. In the last few times we've talked I've left you with some fairly straighforward challenges, none of which you followed up on. You relied on some fairly out-there phenomena as fact and I asked you to prove any of it because, as I've told you clearly, I don't buy any of it. You've never carried on past that point but instead wait a bit and then take another pot shot.

Is this fun? I don't know but I've got to go now.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 17:06:52 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: clarification
Message:
When I said 'Still, because I don't like being ignored here ...' I meant to say '...I'll assume you feel likewise ...'
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 22:56:06 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: No shit (nt)
Message:
nt :)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 15:54:33 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Wasn't it the Canadian spelling for 'email?'
Message:
... and I realize that 'dimensionally expended' and 'dimensionally expanded' aren't exactly interchangeable (though possibly temporally related).

Scott T.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 14:12:21 (GMT)
From: Tim G
Email: usual
To: Sandy
Subject: Trying to deal sincerely
Message:
Thanx for that Sandie. We did have some fantastic times and met and had magical contacts. I feel that most of that comes from our own wishfull pojections and a desire to believe in a Perfect Master. Look at what people can do when they come together for one purpose...add a little 'religion' and you get dynamite. But we have all seen how dynamite can be used both ways.
I met some of my best friends through DLM and had some wonderfull adventures along with some really oppresive experiences. But I have never felt so free since leaving the cult and regaining my true self and discrimination.
I got lambasted here once before for saying thAt I looked back on those days like I would on a Disastrous camping holiday. But that's how it was for me.Others got badly hurt and I do feel m has a lot to answer for.
Why does he never respond to 'his premies'?
Just that alone speaks volumes.
One day he will have to wake up or he will fry for it.
Don't be deterred by the heavy hitters , we all have our problems
peace and love
Tim
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 09:28:34 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: But Dad, I Love Him.
Message:
Hi Sandy,

I've had correspondance with you on and off the forum, for over two years, and I've never doubted your sincerity- your sanity maybe- but not your sincerity.

I can't remember if you have a daughter or not, but imagine if you did...

She's going out with a real shit of a guy, who hits her, gets drunk, spends all her money, and generally abuses her. He's doing the same to a couple of other women, and has left a trail of broken crockery, black eyes and trembling cigarettes all his life.

But she loves him.

He doesn't care about her, other than to satisfy his personal needs. He is a selfish asshole.

But she loves him. And her love is valuable and precious, and, in spite of his abuse, it keeps leading her back to him. Because once you give your love to someone, no matter how much of an asshole they turn out to be, it's not easy and simple to take it back again.

Sometimes you talk to her about him. She knows he fucks up, but wants to give him, 'One more Chance'. After all they had some good times at the beginning. Maybe things can better again.

Everyone else can see it's over except your daughter.

It hurts to watch. You want to yell, 'The guys' a total jerk. Leave the bastard and get on with your life.'

But she is trying to keep a dying flower alive by pouring more and more water on it. She won't give up hope. This is the most important relationship in your life. She loves him and she doesn't want to leave him.

Then one night she's out with him. He's had a few drinks. He's driving a bit fast. He doesn't see the cyclist coming around the corner. There's a crunching crash. A scream. He slams on the brakes. Skids to a halt. The cyclist is dying in the ditch. He panics. He can only think of himself. He pushes your daughter back in the car and drives off. He tells her to keep her mouth shut. If he's breathalised he's go to jail.

Suddenly she sees him in a different light. He's done something so despicable, that she doubts him for the first time. Sanity drips back into her mind.

She wants to be away from him, and think things through from a new perspective. In her heart she knows it's already over.

Anth- (starting a new career as a romantic novelist, having quit designing jigsaws only bongo can do).

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 13:49:48 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: But Dad, I Love Him.
Message:
Anth, I really like this analogy and I think there's a lot of truth in it. It's a good answer to Sandy whose dilemma I fully recognise. It is so hard to reconcile the very powerful but conflicting 'realities'. Until you wake up, that is!! I hate to say it, but it really is something you just have to experience for yourself!!!

I also liked your analogy about the jigsaw, (Were you in a coffee shop when you thought of it?) except for one small thing. Who, in their right mind, would want to do a jigsaw of the sky in the first place?

Love Kelly (not usually a fan of romantic novels)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 08:46:18 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Here's the link to the CBA letters
Message:
http://www.geocities.com/forumarchives12/A/g.htm#P_0P72

They are also reproduced on my site (use the link on my sig below)

JohnT
- never a premie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 09:34:07 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: Morning John - the Brits are awake
Message:
The kids must have climbed into bed again.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 10:12:40 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Patrick Conlon
Subject: Only when they're drunk
Message:
They're 22 and 24.

Anth who ran away from home at 50.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 08:37:37 (GMT)
From: janet
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: i take you as you come. you're real.
Message:
i am startled to see you mention me. i dont know which post it is you are mentioning,(i have put up so many for you.) but know that, whatever i post to you, I want you to know that its always out of value, and earnestly extended to you, with the determination to hang onto that rope, and the hope that you will hold onto it and tie it around you, so that we can use to ultimately tug you to safety, beyond the quicksand, before you get sucked under again.

and as with quicksand, try to stay calm-- don't struggle and thrash around too much, or it only grabs at you more.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 06:44:21 (GMT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: I don't belive you Sandy
Message:
I have not been reading this forum much, as it ears all my time, but the last time I read one of your posts, the sports car with the blonds I thought you sounded way before the time you thought that you rejected gumji.

Remember the post where you asked MD if there was ever a chance that gumji could be right?

Well, personally my opinion of you is that you suck as much as gumji, maybe even more.

You have twisted logic that results in twisted arguments. You can not make up your mind, instead you fill your head with straw, jelly and custard pies.

Yes you got a hard head, as am sure you are thinking of how best to respond to my 'flame'. But do not waste your time.

My advice to you is to stop standing with one leg on the beach while the other in the boat, cause you will be fucked real well.

You do not agree, well tough tities.

I have no second thought about blubber, neither is Jim, Jerry, Marianne, Anth and some other knuckle heads that are around. I challange you to say the same.

Oh, you are a softy ex Christain Jew New age believer, I forgot that.

Just stop bullshit your way around us, cause it's not working, Capicie.

Fucking wake up or stay asleep, hanging in the between is not doing you any good.

You sound so much like shroom in being deviously apolegetic. fortunatly for me I can see it.

And stop telling us some shit stories and sounding so sensetive about you having to deal with leaving the shit hole, what does it take to see that you are rolling in shit,

and as they say, have a nice day

Sandy also sucks

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 09:03:32 (GMT)
From: Aussi Ji
Email: None
To: salam
Subject: Don't beat about the bush salam.nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 13:34:11 (GMT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: Aussi Ji
Subject: why do you say that ?..nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 14:45:39 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: salam
Subject: he's being witty salam,
Message:
I laughed. But when you have to explain a joke it kills the goose that got laid by the golden easter egg. (Easter being a pre-christian, celtic lunar festival- in honour of the Goddess Eostre- just so you don't think i'm being pro-christian here. I'm a pagan myself.)

Are you a theoretical Marxist-Leninist-Moslem-Fundamentalist (with the emphasis on the 'mental'), or just a fun loving Aussie?

Anth, who just got back from the Coffee shop and had better go and watch tv before he starts inventing more upside down verbal jigsaw puzzles of the sky...where's me shoes?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 20:13:33 (GMT)
From: Aussi Ji
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Yep witty it was meant to be.nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 16:32:20 (GMT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Sorry
Message:
I just seem to have become inquisitve lately. You do not know who is looking.

Do you think am being paranoid?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 10:12:06 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: salam
Subject: No salam, you're not being paranoid.
Message:
Your phone is definitely tapped. You are under 24 hour surveillance, and Yves goes through your garbage every night when you're asleep.

Anth who sees all.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 12:42:48 (GMT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Is Yves working for you now?
Message:
You shiftty man you.

I have thrown in the toil (fucking that thing you dry yourself with). This place is hopless. Now I have Mr. Colon up somewhere telling me what to do. Where did you find this guy. He certainly sound like a smokey old desiel truck. You think you can change his air filter.

Said and posted with all due respect and hoping that Mr Colon won't find this post.

Am afraid to put my signature now, sheesh.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 06:21:17 (GMT)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: Thanks Sandy ...
Message:
I hope I understand what you're saying a little better after reading you latest post. I'm still getting to know who people are on this board, and we aren't the same every day, it's true.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 05:42:22 (GMT)
From: la-ex
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: Sandy,you ever read Ken Wilber on Free John?
Message:
Sandy-

As I read your posts, it is quite obvious that you have been going through a lot, trying to reconcile some of the good things you've been through in the past, along with the bad stuff you've been hearing lately.
Both seem to have a certain realness to you, and you seem to be trying to reconcile the two.
One thing that helped me process a lot of this stuff was reading some of Ken Wilber's remarks about Bubba free john.

This is a very basic summary:

1-when we look at soemone who is supposed to be a powerful spiritual person, like m, we all subconsciously create our own set of rules and regulations for this supposed saint. They can't fulfill this wish list;no one can.
When they don't fulfill it, we don't like that, and it bothers us.
We don't want to see their warts, which may be big,ugly warts as well.
They may have some spiritual power, and also be extremely flawed individuals. The bible has lots of examples.
In other words, it's not all black or white...

2-people can have great power one day, and not the next.
This seems to be the case with free john, and m as well.
I don't doubt that at one point m had a lot of power behind him. I think it was enhanced by lots of cult tricks.And we helped elaborate on it as well. But there's no doubt in my mind that at one time, there was a lot of power in this. It is also obvious to me that there is not now, there hasn't been for a long time, and that m is hiding.
There are too many intelligent people who weren't cmpletely conned into imagining the power...it was real at one time.
There is a story that we don't really know about all of this, and for now we just have to live with that uncertainty...I also think it is unfolding, and will eventually be told, thanks in large part to this site...

3-people like bubba and m can have HUGE flaws, so much so that it can completely sabotage any good that they could have done.

4-if a teacher withdraws and will not engage in dialog with students, and will not allow any type of feedback, they are afraid of something...I think this is the case with both bubba and m...

5-in summary, I think in both cases there was some real power to the trip, both teachers have huge flaws that have sabotaged any good work they could have done, both are prone to divine tantrums and a lack of self-introspection, are disconnected from the average person, and will probably fade away with a few 'true believers' at their side...
It doesn't have to discount any good experiences that you had in the past.

Just a few thoughts, late at night...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 23:18:48 (GMT)
From: Sandy
Email: None
To: la-ex
Subject: no, I haven't.
Message:
Can't talk right now, but I have seen old pictures of him, that's all. Later.

Sandy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 21:42:19 (GMT)
From: gee
Email: cronepower@talk21.com
To: la-ex
Subject: Sandy,you ever read Ken Wilber on Free John?
Message:
Yo to that.
M worship is transference but an outrageously elephantine version of how we 'put' our filter on anyone who might meet some childlike expectation. Ironically M himself talked about this himself, the hypocritical shit.
If you think he's hiding, the programme webcasts will soon be available to everyone at home online, thus removing him from the tedious process of running his business by having to actually talk to the Great Unwashed and hopefully chucking some more of the parasites who run it all (badly, abusively) out on the street.
It's so sad to see a few dedicated premmies within the org who speak out struggling but insiders recently give glimmer of hope: at least one serious long term sickophant (sic) has been booted out for serial sexual misdemeanours. Yeah!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 03:20:33 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: gee
Subject: Gee, Gee, that's one hell of a post to just drop
Message:
in a thread where it will probably be missed. I know I am all ears to hear about the ''one serious long term sickophant (sic) has been booted out for serial sexual misdemeanours.''

I know it's not kosher to mention names of PAMs but the juicy details would be much appreciated. Anyway, welcome.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 17:52:12 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: la-ex
Subject: La-Ex, ever read Mad Magazine on 'Teen Dating'?
Message:
I should have known there'd be something whacky afoot when I saw that Ken Wilbur reference.

2-people can have great power one day, and not the next.
This seems to be the case with free john, and m as well.
I don't doubt that at one point m had a lot of power behind him. I think it was enhanced by lots of cult tricks.And we helped elaborate on it as well. But there's no doubt in my mind that at one time, there was a lot of power in this. It is also obvious to me that there is not now, there hasn't been for a long time, and that m is hiding.
There are too many intelligent people who weren't cmpletely conned into imagining the power...it was real at one time.
There is a story that we don't really know about all of this, and for now we just have to live with that uncertainty...I also think it is unfolding, and will eventually be told, thanks in large part to this site...

What a thing to say! Let me get this straight -- you have 'no doubt in your mind' that Maharaji was, at least once, embued with some sort of supernatural power? And your best evidence of that fact is the number of intelligent people who bought into his trip?

Where have you been, la-ex? Is this the same la-ex that's been posting here for over a year? No wonder you use a psuedonym. Maharaji might still have some leftover power kicking around, I guess. Wouldn't want to cross that cat the wrong way.

God!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 01:54:07 (GMT)
From: la-ex
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: I don't read MAD, but have 2 points to make...
Message:
Two points that you made that I will explain further:

1-Do I believe that m had a lot of power at one time?

Yes I do, because of some of the personal experiences that I and some of my friends had around him, either one on one, or in small groups.

Also, by power, I didn't necessarily mean supernatural power.
I think he had a certain amount of presence, or personal power, along with lots of cult tricks/smoke/mirrors...
He also had, as MD has pointed out, a lot of power in the 70's, in the form of all the people who were so dedicated to him around the world.

2-When I said tht all the intelligent people who were once into it couldn't all be wrong, I was referring to people like you...

I think you're intelligent.
You were very devoted to m and k for a number of years, right?
So, the question I have for you is:

Did you get anything out of it?
Or were you completely 'taken' or 'conned' by m?
I think you're too smart to be taken, so I would assume that you got something from m or k for a while, at least....

Not trying to argue, just clarifying a point.
Also, would like to know what you got,if anything, from the whole trip when you were doing it...

la-ex

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 02:32:57 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: la-ex
Subject: Yeah, and Dubya's starting to look presidential
Message:
LAX,

You seem to not know even the scope of your own speculation re m's supposed 'power', then or now. You most certainly raised the question of him having some mojo beyond simple charisma so let's talk about that. I say that it was all a product of our amazingly highly-torqued devotional trip. That's enough, more than enough.

Look, people are gullible. One on one we might be able to ferret out bullshit but when there's a whole orchestrated campaign, such as was DLM, and one backed up, apparently, by an entire subcontinent's so-called ancient wisdom (as we thought m was back then), hell, I'd bet on the cult nine times out of ten.

You know, even now Bush is starting to 'look presidential'. I couldn't see it happening at first but now I'm sure he'll settle into the role and we'll all buy it. And that's with as many critics as he has. Maharaji met us in a private land (the DLM ashrams, the festival sites, our imagination) where he was only lauded and respected as the Lord. Who could withstand that kind of influence for long? I sure couldn't. Not at 19 I couldn't.

I got fooled because I wanted the brass ring, so-called 'realization'. I wanted to believe that this was legit so I didn't ask any hard questions aloud but simply tried to suppress them.

What'd I get out of it? I really don't like that question. It's like asking a guy who did eight years in prison what he got out of it. A few new friends? A couple of skills? Some street smarts? Yeah, maybe, but thanks, no credit anywhere. It was a fuckup.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 06:52:35 (GMT)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: la-ex
Subject: Insightful post, la-ex
Message:
There seems to be a lot of truth to what you've said. Also, as you said, some (or much) of the power was cult tricks, group experience, and I think the amazing power of the mind to literally create 'reality.'

But there may have been some power there too, and some innocence, that somehow got lost along the way. Living the high life can do that to someone. Having too many 'yes men' and 'yes women,' not doing enough meditation, etc.

I know that M's family also seemed to have had some sort of power. I didn't know exactly what to say about them, but they weren't like normal people. It would seem as if the discursive stream of thoughts in my mind could get blown away and I was somehow right in the present moment when I was around them (and in my few brief contacts with M many years ago). I think they sort of lost it too, at least when I last saw BBJ and Mata Ji many, many years ago. (By way of background, in the early 70s there were pictures of the whole family in the ashram and the trip was sold to us as the 'Holy Family' with M being the guru. But the line was not so clearly drawn and we were encouraged to 'worship' them all. It wasn't until the family feud -- over the marriage of Raja Ji to Claudia and M to Marolyn -- that M came into his own, so to speak. He came forward and said his family was not really divine, and he was the guru, and told the premies to break ties with his family.)

I just don't know how much of that was the power of my own belief that they and M had power. But I also know that, often when I am around a person who is focused and/or meditates a lot, there is almost a 'contact high' where a bit of where they are at seems to give me a boost. It always comes back, of course, to my own experience. But again, I really appreciate your reminder that there was something there.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 09:41:48 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: Francesca
Subject: Insightful post, la-ex
Message:
Yes, Francesca there was something there and it is still but in a very attenuated way. I've got my own theories but don't want to practice them here and be ripped to shreds.

Sandy has been practicing his exit from the cult here on the forum and I sometimes think he would be better off writing for himself for a while as thinking aloud can be a painful process.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 12:53:03 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Patrick Conlon
Subject: Tally Ho!
Message:
Yes, Francesca there was something there and it is still but in a very attenuated way. I've got my own theories but don't want to practice them here and be ripped to shreds.

Spoilsport.

Sandy has been practicing his exit from the cult here on the forum and I sometimes think he would be better off writing for himself for a while as thinking aloud can be a painful process.

Yeah, especially for poor Jim when he gets to read it.

Tally Ho! Bit of a fox, that Sandy, what?

JohnT
- I never done it, honest, Guv.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 19:35:39 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: Tally Ho!
Message:
I said: ''I've got my own theories but don't want to practice them here and be ripped to shreds.''

You said: ''Spoilsport.''

Okay, John, one day when I'm perfectly pickled and stoned silly enough to believe my own subjective claptrap I'll post it and let you bloodhounds have your sport.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 05:30:21 (GMT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: square dealing
Message:
I lived across the street from DECA. A trailerpark/cottage 3 acre oasis in a factory area. Run by George Pfaffendorf. We called the place Pfaffendorf Estates. After a flood, we called it Pfaffendorf Lakes. I had a cottage and let anyone who asked move in. Ended up with 7 cottage mates.
Out front, facing the road, was a cottage and a 50ish woman with no hair (because of an operation) would stand smoking by the hedge swearing at the cars. The lord would drive by at least a couple times a day, the locals called him 'the Shiek' because they thought he was a rich ARAB. I brought 'Clair' to see him after I talked to her a few times. She ended up calling him her 'Golden Guru'. She ended up giving satsang at DECA and
since I was her influence, she of course ended up as a Gopi.
All we did was hang out to see him. Had lots of experiences too.
Lots of other stuff also happened Sanford, How to explain some of that stuff away?

He believed he was lord and we did also. That counts for a lot Sanford.

If you want to know what is the real nature of the life here and the playing field and the game here, that is a separate issue.
Try to separate the two.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 16:16:41 (GMT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: shp
Subject: The never ending Saga of Sandy the shp
Message:
I don't know, shp, about the sincerity issue. I personally think you're full of bullshit and just jerking people's chains here for a little attention. Sometimes I think you're insane.

I can't remember what post inspired this next thought but it was one of your many offerings of hot air, where I thought, this guy's a 'psuedo': a psuedo-intellectual, a psuedo-premie, and sometimes, a psuedo-ex-premie.

OK, so you can turn a neat phrase; so what. So can lots of people here. Why don't you take a fictional writing class at your local community college? It would give you a legitimate outlet for your fantasies instead of wasting everyone's time here. Take Runamuck along with you. He needs to meet someone.

Then perhaps we could get on with the business of helping SINCERE people out of the guru trap and sort out some of the more serious issues ex-premies have. How 'bout it, huh? Hit the road for at least a few months? Give us a break, please?

And don't bother whining about the use of the plural case, it's just a convention, and I know I'm speaking for myself, but I strongly suspect there are at least a few others here who feel similarly.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:55:07 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: gerry
Subject: The Saga of Sandy
Message:
You and Jim are too hard on the guy. Sandy's biggest problem is that he talks before he thinks. That advice about taking a writing class is very good.

Go for it Sandy. It helps to rehearse your thoughts before you share them with the sharks.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 13:31:58 (GMT)
From: Sandy
Email: None
To: Patrick Conlon
Subject: The Saga of Sandy
Message:
'You (gerry) and Jim are too hard on the guy. Sandy's biggest problem is that he talks before he thinks. That advice about taking a writing class is very good.

Go for it Sandy. It helps to rehearse your thoughts before you share them with the sharks.' -Patrick

Patrick,

Your post made me wonder why I should even bother sharing my ideas with sharks in the first place. That's asking for trouble whether I rehearse my thoughts or not.

I have always been straightforward as I can be, without rehearsing or muffling what I am thinking. I believe that is a great way to communicate if one lives with others who do the same. Keeps the air clear. But if one lives in an environment where there are shark-like critters, that is not appropriate.


Sandy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 03:41:18 (GMT)
From: Runamok
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: meditation for ex-premies?
Message:
I hear a lot of exes say they don't like to meditate the way M taught them. I think for any ex, they have some kind of period of not meditating and it's not a question of a couple days or weeks. For some people it's permanent- they won't meditate again because there's too much M in it for them (and the same with religion but that's another can of worms). There is so much conceptual garbage that is programmed into it that we have to be weary of using it it too glibly or automatically.

I meditate and really like it at times, but have avoided it for years at a time- and still avoid it when it doesn't feel right. Gone are the days when I 'ought' to meditate. It's really tied up with relaxing for me. I adapted the 'word' to deep breathing before i left, so that helps me now that I had gone my own way with that.

Leaving really happened for me after really peaking in meditation. I really enjoy the nonsectarian aspect of 'raj' yoga, which doesn't need any belief system. But Maharaji, in spite of his 'no concept' rap required a lot of baggage and so ultimately cutting him loose was part of moving on in meditation.

Exercise also helped bridge the gap for me and gave me more room to not meditate in. A jog leaves my breath a bit more full and free.

There's a bit of an attempt to turn the thread below into one on meditating for exes, but threre's too much sarcasm afoot to make it float there. I can't really tell what the more sarcastic people are saying and dont' read F5 enough to know their preexisting viewpoints.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 15:59:31 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Runamok
Subject: meditation for ex-premies?
Message:
Hi Run,

The only meditating I do these days is mindfulness. In the book, The Wooden Bowl, written by a former zen monk, he points out that we are present all the time, whether we're consiously aware of that or not. It's the nature of consciousness. It's always present. So, I find that taking stock of that, now and again throughout the course of the day, helps to lighten the load and gives me a fresh perspective on life. It keeps me focused on the reality of NOW, which I find both interesting and reinvigorating for some reason.

But I find that setting aside time for formal meditation is too much of an ordeal, especially Knowledge. That's an hour of my day that I have to give to something that I don't even get anything from. I've recently tried some zen breathing techniques for about 20 minutes at a time, but even there I feel I'm being foolish because I believe that meditation, in the final analysis, is just about being AWARE, and that can be done anywhere, anytime, under much more interesting circumstances than sitting in a chair following your breath.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 01:07:41 (GMT)
From: ham
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Quite
Message:
is just about being AWARE, and that can be done anywhere, anytime, under much more interesting circumstances than sitting in a chair following your breath.

Because in the end it's about us as individuals, not rules and regs.

Have you read any of Basho's poetry?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 22:11:38 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: ham
Subject: Basho
Message:
Hi, ham,

I was just reading some while browsing through a bookstore during my lunchbreak. I like haiku (love it, actually), but Basho isn't one of my favorites. Outside of Yosa Buson(sp), there aren't too many medieval Japanese poets I care for. My tastes in haiku run more toward the modern western type. I can relate more easily to the world they describe, so it's easier for me to visualize and identify with the images created by them. Also, Basho seems to lean toward the philosophical in his poetry which doesn't go over very well with me. But here's one by Yosa Buson I just found that I like:

in the sea
waves undulating and undulating
all day long

Nifty, eh?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jan 30, 2001 at 12:51:19 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Oops! missed a word
Message:
That should be:

In the spring sea
waves undulating and undulating
all day long

The Japanese loved to mention what season it is. Makes a difference, don't you think? Just that one word can make or break the effect of the poem.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 03:15:10 (GMT)
From: Runamok
Email: None
To: ham
Subject: think the differences are overestimated
Message:
Yes there are some, but like martial arts when you're good at it they tend to be less important than similarities. Zen is derived from the Shaolin-based Ch'an Chinese school which is historically related to Yoga through the Indian Buddhist missionaries who travelled to China, like Bodhidharma known as Da Mo in Shaolin history. The lineages coming out of that history also show the trappings of master/discipleship as well as vestigal evidence of nectar, word, etcetera.

Since we're talking Zen, I'm partial to the doctrine of 'sudden enlightenment.'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:44:16 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: Runamok
Subject: Thanks for the info Run NT
Message:
w
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:40:05 (GMT)
From: ham
Email: None
To: Runamok
Subject: I'm partial to the zen that says bollox to that
Message:
otherwise known as no-zen.

Must admit official zen bores me stiff.

I checked out an official zen site on the web the other month for my first and only time, and I'm tellin ya it was scary.
There was a group photo of about thirty zenists, and every single fucking one of them looked physically the same, really FRIGHTENINGLY the same, made the stepford wives look like individuals,

for me ANY single word said about zen is bollox, because it's ABOUT, I'm not interested in about, nothing else to be said.

But I do owe yer a partial apology, lost me e-mails last year, but one thing did hit me that has stuck in the memory re Cecil Taylor, impressive, somebody I've got a lot of time for,love to hear an avante-garde dance remix of one of his trax sometime because heis/was undeliably funky, in a very chunky kind a way

And run, do us a favour, stop being so intimidated by gerry and jim, if you can't deal with them, don't. Just ignore them, what's in it for you in responding? A'int a competition is it? And if it is, you're never gonna win.
And then whining just makes you look foolish.

Think of Cecil, think of one of his chords, and fuck the sensitivity AND the sudden enlightenment, and I'm not gonnna get into a dialogue on this, sorry Run, not interested, you need to be out on the street a bit more I reckon, or something.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jan 30, 2001 at 03:25:05 (GMT)
From: Hal
Email: None
To: ham
Subject: if you get a teacher type ....
Message:
trying to define the teachings.....nut him.

Nice one Ham

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 10:15:35 (GMT)
From: Runamok
Email: None
To: ham
Subject: just don't wanna get ghettoized nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 10:45:29 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: Runamok
Subject: Run you won't get ghettoized
Message:
Every ex is already in their own ghetto and if they aren't they ought to be. It is not easy to be an eccentric but it's worth it. I read your posts and enjoy them when you are not being defensive. You are the king of your own realm. Don't defend it - flaunt it.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 14:58:58 (GMT)
From: Runamok
Email: None
To: Patrick Conlon
Subject: thats the old blame the vic- what a crock nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:45:38 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: ham
Subject: I quoted you again, Mahatma Trainspotter Ji
Message:
in the thread above also dealing with meditation.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 10:16:34 (GMT)
From: Runamok
Email: None
To: Patrick Conlon
Subject: thanks, I think nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 10:52:29 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: Runamok
Subject: thanks, Run
Message:
If you think you've taken flak wait until you see the bloodhounds go after me once I get over my shyness.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 13:46:10 (GMT)
From: Tim G
Email: usual
To: Runamok
Subject: meditation for anyone
Message:
It seems that motive is all important. If I set out to meditate for some reason...to calm myself , to feel peaceful, to solve or avoid a problem it is only one part of the self trying to appease another part i.e. the same old game of ego.
Most techniques are really repetitive devices that self -hypnotise or desensitise the person [me]. In fact any technique by it's very nature is a selfish device.
Krishnamurti once observed 'one has noticed that people who have spent years and years in meditation are the dullest people on earth'.
So maybe it is more a matter of really facing the fact of ourselves and others.
Epiphanies come by themselves..uncalled for and unplanned. Any honest person can attest to a few of those.
Greetings
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:10:49 (GMT)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: Tim G
Subject: I don't quite get ...
Message:
what you are trying to say here.

It seems as if you are insinuating that anyone who meditates is selfish and possibly dull. I'm not sure if you are trying to take a jab at those who do meditate, or just get a little dialogue going. If you don't enjoy meditation, that's fine too, but I take exception to your comments though I agree in part with some of them. I also don't understand what you mean by some of it.

No one is perfect. By insinuating that meditating to better oneself is selfish, and thus there is no way out of the ego trap through meditation just seems plain wrong. The neuro science tests spoken of in the recent issue of Newsweek, referred to in a post below, indicate that meditation and prayer in many traditions has the effect of blurring the line where the self ends and the rest of the world begins. Ego is a sense of separation of self and other at its height. Thus it seems that meditation and prayer have the effect of at least softening the grip of ego, softening the hard line between self and others, and creating a sense of oneness.

Here's the link to the article. I don't know how long they keep them online.

In my humble opinion, is the endless stream of thoughts that constantly defines self and other, and thus solidifies it in our consciousnesses. If we can slow down that stream of thoughts just a little, or loosen our fixation on them, perhaps there is a chance for another view.

Now the Tibetan masters would agree with you that there is a way to meditate yourself into dullness. This occurs when a person believes that the point of meditation is to stop all thoughts. Thought may stop in meditation, but I've been told by many types of meditation teachers that stopping thought is not the goal, nor does it matter if thought stops. It is our clinging to thought and our fixation on it that can be problematic. In fact, suppressing thought and seeking to stop the natural creative nature of the mind can have the effect of a sort of dullness or torpor. That is because meditation masters say that there is a natural intelligence, uninpededness, spaciousness and luminosity to the nature of the mind, and dullness of course, is the opposite of that.

I agree that self-centered goals, such as calming one's own mind, 'escaping' a problem (which is impossible, I feel), in an of themselves, are not a good motivation for meditation. However, that may be, at the moment, all that one has. One has to start honestly from whatever point one find themselves. If I am a calmer person, believe me, it is better for those I have to deal with. I can be harsh, arrogant and judgmental. Also impatient. Not a great joy for anyone to be subjected to. To say that one must have nigh perfect motivation or it is hopeless seems like the very crap we were told by M himself. We were never pure enough for him, our motives were never good enough for him, so that he could make us feel that it was hopeless to meditate unless we groveled at his feet for some sort of magic blessing. I do agree that compassion and caring for others is not stressed in M's religion, and possibly not in bhakti yoga either, but I don't know enough about it to say. Caring for anyone outside yourself would seem diametrically opposed to the bhakti idea that the whole universe is just you and your guru.

And as far as dull, two of the people who meditate that populate this forum, Pat Conlon and Aussie Ji, seem anything but dull to me.

The part where I don't understand what you mean is this:

'So maybe it is more a matter of really facing the fact of ourselves and others.'

On the relative level this is indeed a fact. On the absolute level all is one. I don't know if I've gotten to the all is one very often if at all, but I have certainly had the edges blurred enough for me, to see that self and other, from one view, is an illusion.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 08:23:38 (GMT)
From: Brian S
Email: None
To: Francesca
Subject: I like my meditation without maharaji
Message:
I still meditate and I have found that meditation without maharaji is better now that I have cut him loose than it was with him in my life.

I do not have to wade through my attachment to him, my emotional issues regarding devotion, his dogma's, I am not haunted by
my guilt for not meditating enough,etc. plus dealing with all of his garbage, which is I need to say to myself, [I don't care if he is a decietful, manipulative, abusive, irresponsible, greedy, hit and run murderer who cheats on his wife. He is the lord and it is all a Lila as a test of my faith as a true devotee, blah, blah, blah] Now what kind of quality experience of the so called truth can one have predicated to dealing with of this mound of crap before or while sitting down and going inside? Slim to none in my case.

I am now free to just sit with myself whenever I want to, under no pressure, to trust my own inner experience, to follow my own instinct's, to be clear and present with my own peacefulness, to be responsible for and to master my own life. I am not worshiping anything or expecting to see god in this, what it is now is a way for me to stay in tune with myself. And that goes to your point about functioning better with others as a result of this.

There is meditation after M and there always was, this is just one more good thing that he screwed up for myself and a lot of other people as well.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 08:41:05 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: Brian S
Subject: Brian, I like my meditation without maharaji
Message:
Thank you for posting this: ''...what it is now is a way for me to stay in tune with myself.''

I have always enjoyed it and did it before I met the Rev Rawat. Then for some stupid (probably catholic martyr syndrome) I thought I needed a guru to keep my ego in check. But he got in the way and I ended up often doing it for the wrong reasons - like some sort of religious ritual. Now I'm doing it for myself and I'm doing it because I want to.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 18:59:09 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: Tim G
Subject: meditation for anyone
Message:
I love that Krisnamurti quote, I really do.....and I also have felt for some time that there is something fundamentally wrong with rawat's 4 techs. They are totally goal orientated, and therefore you set yourself up for failure everytime!! Which, of course, perpetuates the subservient student master relationship, because the assumption is that 'he' is really experiencing what you are striving for....What a suck! I much prefer the Buddhist idea of 'calm abiding'..and my own approach is along those lines.
I look forward to meeting you soon
Kelly
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 22:23:36 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: Thanks Kelly!
Message:
You wrote:
I also have felt for some time that there is something fundamentally wrong with rawat's 4 techs. They are totally goal orientated, and therefore you set yourself up for failure everytime!!

I really dislike using the four techniques - always have, even when I was a premie. You have just pin-pointed the reason why - and I think also the reason why they work for SOME people (I mean some ex-premies.) I am such a goal-oriented person in the Real World that the four techniques always made me anxious when I practiced them, and of course, then I never really experienced anything. If I do any meditating at all (I don't call it meditating), I far prefer to do visualization or something where it doesn't matter what kind of 'experience' I have.

A lot of people here still practice at least one of the four techniques, and say that they think they are good meditation techniques. Probably true - for those particular people anyway, but they aren't THE Way, THE Truth, and so forth - as advertised.

Thanks again!
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 17:56:15 (GMT)
From: Joy
Email: None
To: Tim G
Subject: meditation for anyone
Message:
That's an excellent post, Tim.

I was sort of surprised to learn that lots of people still meditate with the techniques, though they don't like M anymore. I quit meditating when I quit M and the ashram and it's been a wonderful relief not to have to go through that struggle every day. At the time, I stopped doing it because I couldn't dissociate it from M, couldn't see doing it without pranam-ing before and after. So, trying to break free completely, I stopped doing the sitting meditation also.

I think still meditating on 'Knowledge' ties one in subtly to Maharaji somehow. It's sort of saying, yeah, I'll take what you're offering, and yeah it's got great value and yeah, I enjoy it and it gives me peace, but to heck with you! I feel that to give Knowledge validity is to give Maharaji validity and say that yes what he is offering actually is worthwhile.

As Francesca pointed out below, if people want to meditate there are many other less guru-oriented styles available, Buddhist meditations for example. (The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying, available everywhere, has a whole chapter on it, with techniques and all.)

But in the end, I agree with Tim/Krishnamurti: It's Dullsville!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 18:24:30 (GMT)
From: Tim G
Email: usual
To: Joy
Subject: Dullsville
Message:
Greetings my dear friend. I love 'Dullsville' . Could be the title of my next CD. A trance album with repetitive loops of 'This time I have come with more power than ever before' and a girly chorus whailing [out of tune] 'Satsang, Service......meditation'.

Yep. I can understand not wanting to perform the 4 techniques...too close to the old Rawat himself.

I'll be in touch.
Greetings to all the ex premies,
At The Lotus Slipper,
Tim

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:52:56 (GMT)
From: Joy
Email: None
To: Tim G
Subject: Dullsville
Message:
That'd be a great CD . . . you could have a photo on the cover of premies staring vacantly at a video feed and then on the back cover someone asleep under their meditation blanket, dozing on a baragon. . . maybe run the 'satsang/service/meditation' chant backwards so it sounds really artistic and people wouldn't know what it was. And then layer in a few Bholay Shri Satgurudev Maharaji Ki Jai's for good effect!

And do a track with the famous So Hung mantra -- I could make an offcolor joke but will refrain. . .

......

Seriously, though, I like Kelly's point that meditation techniques are totally goal oriented, thus perpetuating a master/student(servant) reality. This was (and is) my whole problem with Eastern religions and meditation in general, the premise that you are somehow not okay and have to do something better than you know how or are able to actually do it to get to that okay state. I saw this over and over in Buddhism. Enlightenment was said to oftentimes take many lifetimes (or an instant, take your pick). I just do not have that kind of perseverance, dedication and ability to pull myself up by my own bootstraps into enlightenment. It is such a relief to not have to try! I am SO MUCH happier! A good walk in the woods calms my mind much better than meditating does, and is much more inspiring (and a lot cheaper than belonging to any religious organization).

In the words of the wonderful Van Morrison: NO GURU, NO METHOD, NO TEACHER (just you and me in the garden wet with rain)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 05:33:08 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: Joy
Subject: Joy, Van also said
Message:
''Breathe in
breathe out
and you're high.''
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 14:10:45 (GMT)
From: Marianne
Email: delores@gofree.indigo.ie
To: Tim G
Subject: Tim - read your email
Message:
I'll talk to you later or you can ring me.

Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 11:20:55 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Runamok
Subject: Question Run'
Message:
Hi Run',

Practice the fourth technique for a minute.

Describe to me, and people who don't know anything about it at all, as clearly and honestly as you can, what your experience was.

What was the taste?

Anth, not trying in anyway whatsoever to be sarcastic or anything. Honest.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:16:33 (GMT)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Question Run'
Message:
Anth:

I found that the 4th technique was not what it was sold as, but in abbreviated form it is helpful for concentration.

In other forms of meditation I have practiced you just curl the tongue back, kind of flattended against the roof of your mouth, and it helps you to keep from swallowing spit while you are sitting with your mouth closed, for one thing.

But yes, I don't know what the Hey they were getting at with the nectar thing, or trying to put your tongue back up in your head. Sweet snot was what most people called that one.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 17:53:29 (GMT)
From: Runamok
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Question Run'
Message:
OK Anth the not being rude smartass.

Firstoff, Kelly is right although I disagree on some details (including that M said anything worthwhile). Nectar is common throughout China, and used by most or many Tai Chi pratitioners. You don't have to study the more obscure (notice 'more' is the modifier, not very) microcosmic orbit which she refers to in order to run into people doing it.

IMO, the stricter more trad'l raj approach is sticking it way back there. That's mostly how I do it when I do it, with a more relaxed period leading up to it.

I never ate my snot that much, Anth, and I don't mind taking your backdoor confession of being a big snot eater. Whether God is snot, I can't say. I don't really worry about any of that- is it God, etc. It gets ultimate at times when I use the techniques, but I don't push for those experiences. Just want a little relax and let go. If there's too much patterning of thoughts with a cultist tune (havta do this or that... or obsessing over something) then I stop.

BTW I hope you and JM don't end up on survivor together. You might eat each other or something.

The techniques probably transplanted to China through the Shaolin monastery (I think around 500 BC). Early Buddhist missionaries from India knew Yoga techniques. The differences in meditation style between India and China (the Orient really) are easily exagerrated. There's probably more in common than not.

Lineage in Chinese and Japanese schools as well as other techniques besides nectar bear a great resemblance to the raj stuff in India. If exagerrating the dif gets you away from M, more power to you. It's always nice to get away from Maharaji.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 10:25:46 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Runamok
Subject: Run, you dodged my excersise.
Message:
Never mind.

You say, 'Whether God is snot, I can't say.'

I can Run',

God is not Snot.

Anth who knows his nose from his soul.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 16:21:01 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: It's the nectar of the universe, Anth!
Message:
What's the matter with you? Haven't you learned anything, you dull-witted boy? Hahaha! Seriously, I'm with you, Anth. It's just a dumb thing to do.

The day I received Knowledge, walking home after the K session, I was really focusing on the 'nectar'. I noticed that people I passed were smiling at me. I figured they must see, subconsciously perhaps, that I've just been blessed with the greatest gift a human could receive.

When I got home, still focused intensely on 'nectar', I noticed in the bathroom mirror how funny I looked while practicing that technique. It suddenly dawned on me; 'Holy shit! That's what I look like while practicing nectar?! No wonder those people were smiling at me! It's a wonder they didn't laugh out loud!'

I never practiced nectar in public after that again, or if I did, I made it a point not to push my tongue back so far that my chin would disappear into my face.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 15:19:04 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: The fourth technique...'s not about snot!!
Message:
Anth, I really take issue with you about this.

When I was a child, I remember praying to God with my hands together and suddenly I was immersed in bliss, and my mouth filled with an incredible sweetness. This I believe was the 'nectar'. Several times, in recent years, I have had a similar experience while practicing the 4th technique.

To be fair to Miragey..... in a 'knowledge' review in 1994 he said something like...'for all you heroes who can get your tongue right back, there's nothing there for you!' I never could, so that was a big relief!!

Two years ago I started learning Chi Kung, and part of the practice is to keep your tongue connected to the roof of your mouth. The theory is that it completes an energy (Chi) circuit.(The Microcosmic Circuit) and that even the saliva, which flows freely in the process, is charged with Chi. Saliva, not snot!!

Without going into it too deeply, I do think there's something in this. We all know that 'Knowledge' is just four old Yoga techniques. Doesn't mean they don't work! There is one branch of Yoga that has many many different positions for the tongue.

's not about snot
Love Kelly (sticking my tongue out at you)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 16:35:08 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: The fourth technique...'s not about snot!!
Message:
Hey, Kelly, did you ever think it has something to do with taste buds, and that natural sweetness is just what that's about, nothing mystical about it at all? I personally feel that all this mystical attachment to human experience is just a former age at a loss for why they experience the things they do, like 'nectar'.

But since our brains had evolved into these highly imaginative menchanisms we see divinity every which way we turn. At least, our ancestors certainly did thousands of years ago. Perhaps it's time to shelve their superstitious beliefs and look at things the way they really are in the light of new scientific discovery. At least, if it's the truth we're after, I think that might be a good idea. I know, myself, I'm interested in knowing what's really going on, not what ancient 'philosophers' from the east imagined.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 18:01:55 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: The fourth technique...'s not about snot!!
Message:
Yes Jerry, I do think about it a lot, I think and read about the physiological relationship to so-called mystical experience eg near death experiences. and I have to take an agnostic stance...there are too many accounts that have the 'ring of truth' but yet I remain cynical. Recently, through experiencing something that I can only describe ( subjectively ) as an awakening, I have seen through the Rawat cult illusion. I have no scientific explanation for this, just as I have no explanation for the extraordinary experiences that accompanied my joining the cult. It's about awareness, it's about consciousness. Beyond that, try as I may I can't understand it...but never mind, I am enjoying, and I mean this, I am really enjoying, trying to understand, with every faculty that I have, including the one that has been lying dormant for so many years....My Mind..!!!

Love Kelly

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 16:16:55 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: Thanks Kelly - now it's official!
Message:
Thanks for your post Kelly,

I can now be certain that I have learned all 4 'techniques' (and many others) without any mention of rawat, 'Knowledge,' Radhasoami(sp?), or joining a cult. I remember that that particular yoga/meditation teacher described it in exactly the same way as you did - completing the Chi circuit ... in much the same way as joining the thumb and index finger of each hand or clasping the hands in some postures. (I've always been very surprised that Hatha Yoga wasn't part of rawat's package.) But I understood that 'Chi' isn't only in the saliva, it's in everything - in Tai Chi you are collecting and moving and moving through Chi - you can 'feel' it.

I don't see it as being to rawat's credit that he actually once said that there was nothing in it for those could get their tongues way back, as I have heard that some went to extremes in order to do so.

Anna

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 15:24:05 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: Who mentioned snot?
Message:
I'm on my best behavious Kelly.

But why don't you try what I asked Runamok to do, then type your answer below.

Anth the non-mucoid.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 17:32:20 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Who mentioned snot?
Message:
For pity's sake Anth, what do you expect (orate) after one minute? What sort of instant yoga do you practice? one minute?? I don't expect nothing after one minute....Now, if you're talking two minutes...now you're talkin'.... I'll let you know.

Love Kelly (practising the 5th )

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 11:39:07 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: Take as long as you like Kelly
Message:
Just describe what you experience- honestly, clearly and accurately.

I await your response- and that of anyone else who'd like to try the experiment.

Anth the Social Researcher.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 13:52:27 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Take as long as you like Kelly
Message:
I'm just humouring you now Anth, because I don't really see the point of the excercise. Anyway i just did it the way I usually do. I curled my tongue back against the roof of my mouth. First thing that happenned was I tasted very strongly, the toasted cheese and onion sandwich I just had for lunch, the onion was particularly potent, but after about 20 seconds I started to get this sensation of sweetness, not a taste, but a sensation, that sort of surrounds the tongue and fills the space behind it. Thats the best I can do. I might add that I have had some really lovely experiences while practicing this tech. I find it really centres me and sometimes I get brighter light than during the first tech, and it comes in waves that fill my whole body with bliss. well you did ask.
Love Kelly
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 10:32:37 (GMT)
From: Jean-Paul
Email: jfagnaux@hotmail.com
To: all
Subject: meditation for ex-premies?
Message:
What I found in the book of Chogyam Trungpa, 'The myth of freedom'.
Translated from french. 'It is known that Bouddha practiced many traditionnal hindouist forms of meditation. He jumped into the fire. He communicated with the energy of tantra bij visualating a lot of things. He saw a neurologist light bij pressing on his eyes and heard a so called yogy music bij pressing on his ears. He made himself all these experiences and realised that all these phenomenas are artifices rather than meditation or true samadhi.'
2500 years later there are still people who play the role of perfect master showing the 4 technics!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 11:30:30 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Jean-Paul
Subject: No big mythtree
Message:
Milarepa, Tibets Great Yogi, recognised by Premies as a 'Past Perfect Master', bricked himself up in a big upside-down plant pot for four years and lived on nettle soup. After that he could fly around on rocks. And even flew to two seperate towns at exactly the same time.

And then there was Krishna, also a 'Past Perfect Master'. When he was a baby there was this incredibly big poisonous snake. It had a thousand heads. This little toddler, leapt onto one of the heads of the snake, and playing his flute, danced from head to head, killing each head in turn until the snake was dead. Then a few years later, he split himself into a thousand different bodies and shagges a thousand milk maids at the same time.

Then there Moses, who parted the ocean with a stick.

And Thor, son of Odin, with a magic hammer.

And Zeus, up there on a cloud somewhere inventing democracy and theatre.

Then there's Santa Claus, who comes down the chimney every year and leaves lots of presents for rich kids, but not many for poor kids (The Thatcherite God).

Joseph Cambell wrote the Ultimate series of books on the subject Jean-Paul.

It's called 'Mythology'.

Anth who always myths the point.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:26:48 (GMT)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Anth, you are a delight! n/t
Message:
n/t
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 05:41:56 (GMT)
From: The Fat Fag
Email: None
To: Francesca
Subject: Anth - can't wait to squeeze him NT
Message:
woof
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 12:16:56 (GMT)
From: Jean-Paul
Email: jfagnaux@hotmail.com
To: AJW
Subject: No big mythtree
Message:
I don't care about mythology. What is interesting is that Bouddha tried the technics shown bij m and others and came to the conclusion that they are incomplet and not valid. I think it is worth to be mentionned. That is my experience also. I got nice experiences with the technics of m but they are superficial. I never really changed. When I got depression, technics of m didn't help me. The technics of samtha and vipassana helped me to deal with my suffering and to get in contact with my painfull emotions and slowly I knew what they were and I feel happy now. Not afraid of me anymore. That is what I lived.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 14:55:10 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Jean-Paul
Subject: You myth the point Jean-Paul.
Message:
You say you're not interested in mythology, but Buddha is a mythological figure, like Christ. I'm not saying that these people weren't also historical characters, but in our mind, they assume the archetypal role of a God in human form- avatar - who is a central character in human mythology.

It's all in our heads. In reality, if there is such a thing as an infinite consciousness- call it Enlightenment, Samahdi, Heaven, God-Consciousness or whatever, then we are all it. It isn't the role or state of a single person. It is the actor- or consciousness who is playing all the roles.

I'm not sure if I still believe all that stuff myself. I'm moving more towards the 'Life is a sticky game of hide and seek' school of marma-zen nowadays.

Anth (Old English of course.)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 15:17:54 (GMT)
From: Jean-Paul
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: You myth the point Jean-Paul.
Message:
Not only, I don't care about mythology, but I don't care also about Bouddha and infinite consciousness. I was speaking about my experience. Teachings and technics of buddhist meditation helped me to get out of depression. Now, I use them to know myself better. I didn't talk about belief or anything like that.
If you don't know what I am talking about, no problem.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 15:32:32 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Jean-Paul
Subject: I myth mythself thumtihymes.
Message:
Hi Jean Paul,

I read your posts again, and you are quite correct. I misunderstood you. I take your point.

Anth of the foot in mouth technique

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 15:57:25 (GMT)
From: Jean-Paul
Email: jfagnaux@hotmail.com
To: AJW
Subject: You are next to my border, right?
Message:
I think you said that. If you pass in Brussels, let me know.
I will convert you to Buddhism, french fries, belgium beer, salsa and africam rythms hi hi, just joking
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 20:16:30 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Jean-Paul
Subject: You are next to my border, right?
Message:
Hi Jean-Paul,

I love Belgium. I think it's one of Europe's best kept secrets. And being a serious beer drinker, I'm already converted. Belgium has the best beer in the world, in terms of variety and quality. Fries (they call them chips in Britain) I'm scared of cos they make me fat. Salsa and African music I love. And I lived in a Buddhist monastry once- but became disillusioned with it and left.

Anth the chipmonk and former fryer

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jan 30, 2001 at 07:14:58 (GMT)
From: Jean-Paul
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: To AWJ, ex premie, ex monk,
Message:
Have you been monk? That's really funny. I could never do that.
Like too much life, the real world and mix with everybody.
Even in buddhists circles, a lot of people forgett that where they are is where everything is happening.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 15:26:51 (GMT)
From: Jean-Pau
Email: None
To: AWJ
Subject: You myth the point Jean-Paul. I forgett
Message:
I am not here to speak especially about Bouddhism. I find it funny, that Buddha, according to Trungpa, tried the technics that m and others show, and threw them away.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 17:00:41 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Jean-Pau
Subject: Buddhists, Buddhists, everywhere!
Message:
That is interesting, JP. Thanks for mentioning it. But what's even more interesting is that yet another ex has gone Buddhist. What is this, the natural evolution of a premie? I also find myself responsive to much of the Buddhist philosophy, primarily becasue of the emphasis on the use of consciousness as an alleviation of suffering. I really think that's all Buddhism is about ultimately, being totally awake, conscious of NOW, finding the release from suffering in the nature of consciousness, itself. I don't care for the belief in reincarnation though, and I'm not really interested in consigning myself to the eightfold path or studying the 49 whatever they are, something or ever. I just like the zen idea of being present. It works for me.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 22:23:26 (GMT)
From: Jean-Paul
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Buddhists, Buddhists, everywhere!
Message:
In buddhism, they is a big variety of schools and teachers. Meditation samatha, vipassana and mindfulness and love for others are common to all the schools. Wether it is buddhism zen, theravada, mahayana or vajrajana, basically , it is the same. Only vajrajana offers more technics that are a little bit mysterious. Among the teachers, I like especially Dhiravamsa (thai), Gunaratana (Shri Lanka) and Trungpa (Tibet). Is it an evolution of premie? I don't think so. Everyone finds his way and it is good like that.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 07:46:11 (GMT)
From: Runamok
Email: None
To: Runamok
Subject: above by Earon's request nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 04:56:52 (GMT)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: Runamok
Subject: meditation for ex-premies?
Message:
I think many folks talk about meditation.

I kept meditating after I left in about 1985, but did only holy name and nectar. I got tired of the baragon thing and actually heard that there were K reviews where folks were told to do the techniques without it! I didn't see any use for the techniques so I quit doing them. Then I stopped using M's techniques and started using general Buddhist techniques in about 91. In 92 I got involved in Tibetan Buddhism and shamanism (kind of simultaneously, because I don't see any conflict). For daily practices I do Buddhist meditations: mental calming practices, insight meditation, takings and sendings and various deity practices. I'm especially fond of Green Tara, Medicine Buddha and 1,000 Arm Chenrezig.

The thing I loved about the very basic Buddhist stuff was that I didn't have to join a religion, people could just learn how to meditate without making any commitments and you could teach anyone else you wanted how to practice.

There are even Western Buddhist teachers like Jack Kornfield teaching meditation on tapes, and Thich Nath Hanh has some nice tapes also. It is always better to learn from a live teacher and to have some group sessions before striking out on one's own, but there is a lot out there and there are a lot of folks who don't want to join cults.

I can't blame them ...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 15:31:04 (GMT)
From: Disculta
Email: None
To: Francesca
Subject: God - no baragons
Message:
It was bad enough for my back WITH a baragon. But if I tried to do it without one, using my knees, it would round my back into spasms.

Thank god I got out before the baragons were removed.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 08:54:28 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: Francesca
Subject: Francesca, baragons were dumped in 1984 or 5
Message:
The gooroo did two events (in two consecutive Julys in 84-5?) in Palm Springs where the premies were divided up into ten small rooms of about 100 and he spent a couple of hours in each room.

He dropped the definitions (light, music etc) and substituted the word ''feeling'' and recommended a pillow on the knees instead of a baragon if your arms got tired. It was the first and only time that I felt that he was approaching being what a real teacher should be although I think even one hundred is a bit big for one class.

But the man has messianically epic ambitions (and an equally epic lack of competence or concern) and obviously one hundred students is not enough to keep him in the style to which he has become acccustomed.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 21:16:03 (GMT)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: Patrick Conlon
Subject: you have finally pinpointed the point ...
Message:
where I bailed from the train. I was definitely not going to go to Palm Springs for that fancy-ass K review. A mahatma was sent to encourage us to go. I remember my friend who did told me the baragons were dumped and yet folks were still supposed to do the techniques. I figured, why bother with the techniques, anyway, if it was going to be an exercise in S&M?

The idea of going to an expensive hotel in Palm Springs and what was coming down in the local communities was yuck. Only initiators and a few annointed church ladies could give satsang. No satsang at people's houses -- only in bank meeting rooms and other neutral (read sterile) environments. Once we got kicked out of Majula's living room where the Indian premies put the sheets down on the floor and we all sat together, that was the beginning of the end. Mark & I quit going, and I've only been to one program since -- where I had my epiphany that MJ was more like a used car salesman or one of those pumped up motivational speakers than a guru.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jan 30, 2001 at 01:07:40 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: Francesca
Subject: Wendy in palm Springs
Message:
I was just reading your and Joe's reminiscences and remembered that we met Wendy in Palm Springs. Her boyfriend had been working on the hotel which was new and she was not at the program and was quite embarassed. But I always liked her a lot. Although she did not say it out loud I knew that she had cut loose from the fraud and wanted to talk to her about it as I was and still am open minded about anything. I felt that she was a bit afraid that I was going to lay some heavy satsang on her.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 21:47:14 (GMT)
From: gee
Email: cronepower@talk21.com
To: Francesca
Subject: meditation for ex-premies?
Message:
Please don't be put off by my email address: it means power to rather than power over...
Anyway.
I don't think you are ever an ex premmie. I think you should use knowledge however you want without necessarily having anything to do with M or his mouldy minions.
All that stuff about the triangle is bollocks of course - he just wants the $$$.
I got K in 1990 and no one called it nectar or nbreath of God.
Was like giving a rubric cube to an unsighted person.
BUT, I did have some astonishing experiences, so much so that I lifted off the ground and fucked up nbits of my life for a couple of years.
Anyway, anything that gets you there.
Gee
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 12:06:54 (GMT)
From: Ulf
Email: None
To: Francesca
Subject: meditation for ex-premies?
Message:
Hi Francesca
perhaps you will tell us how to do the Green Tara
and the 1000 Arm chenrezeg, rigth here?
It couldt be interresting to see what it is ?

Ulf

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 19:51:33 (GMT)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: Ulf
Subject: meditation for ex-premies?
Message:
Takes a bit more explanation than that I'm afraid, though it doesn't hurt to ask. Also would not want to set myself up as a teacher. Many folks on this forum have had enough of those!

Most of the Tibetan meditations incorporate, chanting, visualizations and periods of silent meditation. It takes a while to learn any of them. There are many books on Tara, and one on the extended 1,000 Arm Chenrezig practice called 'Nyung Nes.' (The group I do Nyung Nes with does the practices a little bit differently than explained in that book, but essentially the same.) There is also a short version of the practice as well.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 20:45:46 (GMT)
From: Ulf
Email: None
To: Francesca
Subject: thank you n.t.
Message:
pp
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 04:12:28 (GMT)
From: Aussi Ji
Email: None
To: Runamok
Subject: meditation for ex-premies?
Message:
G'Day Runna,
I love to meditate everyday just on the breath technique which I have modified over the past couple of years to suit myself.I actually lokk forward to doing it each day,not as a ritualistic thing or a chore but the same as I look forward to watching a good movie or going out in my boat.It relaxes me and has no excess baggage at all,it has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with maharaji except that I got it off one of his mahatmas at the time.If not from him,I am sure I would've got it from somewhere else eventually.Anyways I have got it and love it.Don't be put off by some people on the forum,eventually you will find your feet,It just takes a little while
Cheers mate,Aussi Ji.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 06:04:51 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: Aussi Ji
Subject: Aussie Ji being sensible again
Message:
I practiced the first three techniques for two years before I met the Rev Rawat. How the fuck it happened I do know but the next thing I knew I was under his spell.

Actually I do know. I was under the impression that in order to really make progresws in meditation and experience nirvana (no ego) you had to have a master to shit on you or something to that affect, humiliate you.

Probably left over from having been beaten everyday for six months when I first went to catholic boarding school ''to break my willfulness'' as the sadistic Quebecois asshole who did it to me said.

Anyway I feel as if I had what I needed before meeting the Ratwat and all he taught me (actually a mahatma) was what is known around here as the snot technique.

I never did learn the fifth technique (tongue in cheek) until the very end (a month ago) when I realized that it was the Ratwat's favorite one. That's the one that got me mad at him finally.

Nice to have you back.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 03:50:49 (GMT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: Runamok
Subject: really nice post, run, really really nice
Message:
but extremely boring, however.

Let's talk about underpants or something, ok?

There is so much conceptual garbage that is programmed into it that we have to be weary of using it it too glibly or automatically.

Very weary indeed. I think I'll go to bed...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 21:30:08 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: sirdavid12@hotmail.com
To: Everyone
Subject: All together now
Message:
Some of the personal perspectives which I have had are now together on their own site.

Click here for Lord Haharaji's Domain

Many thanks to all those people who gave me inspiration and whose work I nicked.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 05:32:43 (GMT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: I love this shit
Message:
keep it up.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 04:41:27 (GMT)
From: Robyn
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: too funny Dave! :)
Message:
afagha
Return to Index -:- Top of Index