Joe -:- The Personal v. the Big Picture -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 06:07:58 (GMT)

__ Katie H. -:- Thanks, Joe - and it's true for all of us -:- Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 18:19:44 (GMT)

__ donner -:- The Personal v. the Big Picture -:- Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 00:32:43 (GMT)

__ Chuck Sprague -:- The importance of the Big Picture... -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 20:30:51 (GMT)

__ __ Kelly -:- The Big Picture...I heartily concur. nt -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 22:58:41 (GMT)

__ Francesca -:- Yes, brother Joe, I testify! -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 18:27:55 (GMT)

__ __ Francesca -:- Forgot to mention that it was not 'cruel shoes' -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 20:40:47 (GMT)

__ __ Joe -:- The worst part -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 18:41:37 (GMT)

__ __ __ Joe -:- Sorry Franny, that was to you not Erika, -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 18:44:29 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Francesca -:- Sorry Franny, that was to you not Erika, -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 20:44:02 (GMT)

__ Susan -:- great post -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 16:57:49 (GMT)

__ Jerry -:- The Personal v. the Big Picture -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 11:59:43 (GMT)

__ AJW -:- The Personal v. Sanity -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 10:33:43 (GMT)

__ Dermot -:- Blocks to premie Realization -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 09:01:40 (GMT)

__ __ Joe -:- Blocks to premie Realization -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 17:54:33 (GMT)

__ __ __ Katie Darling -:- Hey Joe -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 18:09:19 (GMT)

__ Connie -:- Excellent as usual Joe -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 06:57:30 (GMT)

__ __ Francesca -:- You've stated one of Erika's key conflicts ... -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 22:17:01 (GMT)

__ __ __ Connie -:- Yep, the good part -:- Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 00:29:21 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Francesca -:- Supporting each other -:- Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 00:55:10 (GMT)

__ __ Joe -:- Well said, Connie -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 19:18:05 (GMT)

__ TD -:- Brilliant Joe - that totally sums it up....!! -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 06:46:14 (GMT)

__ __ Marianne -:- Agree wholeheartedly -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 11:03:07 (GMT)

__ __ __ Pat Conlon -:- I hope she does sort it out -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 11:20:13 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Katie Darling -:- I hope she does sort it out -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 11:38:05 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Brian -:- Looking at what's leftover afterwards -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 15:21:25 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ bill--good to see -:- you posting more Brian....nt -:- Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 23:48:47 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Francesca -:- Just read this again, GREAT POST***** n/t -:- Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 04:58:38 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Monmot -:- The Human Face on the Mechanism of Denial -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 22:14:53 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Chuck Sprague -:- Great posts, Monmot and Brian (nt) -:- Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 01:55:47 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Francesca -:- Paradigm shift -:- Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 00:05:13 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Monmot -:- You Betcha -:- Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 02:15:48 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Francesca -:- Here's to dark hallways!! LOLs n/t -:- Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:04:18 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- Wow, awesome post... -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 22:26:39 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Richard -:- Brian, Monmot, Joe - I am doing that now -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 23:28:17 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Monmot -:- It ain't easy, but you're doing it.... -:- Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 02:25:37 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Richard -:- You're totally Monmot... and we love it!! /nt -:- Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 02:33:43 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- Brian, Monmot, Joe - I am doing that now -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 23:54:02 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Pat Conlon -:- I'm peeling onions and having some good cries -:- Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 01:06:07 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Monmot -:- Here's a vitual hanky... -:- Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 02:30:13 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Pat Conlon -:- Here's a vitual hanky...If that typo were vital... -:- Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 02:40:18 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Francesca -:- Just what you always wanted.. brilliant! -:- Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:09:29 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Pat Conlon -:- I always new we were twins separated at birth NT -:- Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 08:45:56 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Katie Darling -:- Brian, that's brilliant! nt -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 18:07:19 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Richard -:- I agree Brian brilliant re: self-protection /nt -:- Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 21:51:37 (GMT)

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 06:07:58 (GMT) From: Joe Email: None To: Everyone Subject: The Personal v. the Big Picture Message:

From time to time premies (PWKs) come to the Forum and say something like: I have a good life, and I'm successful and happy. I practice knowledge and I enjoy it, and I find Maharaji inspiring, and I enjoy seeing him at events and in videos. I don't give much money to Maharaji or Elan Vital, and although things were pretty weird in the 70s and 80s, Maharaji has straightened all that out now, and it's not a cult. Also, I have had a couple of really great personal experiences with Maharaji (in darshan, or in talking with him etc.,), and it was one of the most profound experiences in my life. And then there are the really funny things to explain the contradictions that inevitably are presented to these people, like: I didn't see the commandments as commandments, like I thought never leave room for doubt was about finding truth (just really badly worded); I thought pranaming was a yoga exercise; I never understood 'Lord' and so it didn't affect me, and, boy of boy, I just didn't have the means to think it had anything to do with 'god', etc. I never took that stuff literally, and it wasn't meant to be. etc> You know, the stuff that's on Drek's website of the premie responses. We have them all memorized by now. Well, one retort to this, other than, well that isn't MY experience, is the bigger picture. You know, how Maharaji never gave a shit about the premies, how he treated the ashramites and the Initiators, as well as his disgraceful personal behavior, greed, etc. I mean, Maharaji himself is the biggest problem for premies, because he is such an easy target. And not very good at PR. I think one example of this came up when Erika was saying she had a really groovy conversation with Maharaji about whether she should leave the ashram and get married in 1982. She was really scared to bring it up (which is weird and undermines her contention that fear wasn't involved 'for her,' (again the subjective defense.)) Maharaji apparently didn't say much, kind of said she should make up her own mind, but she saw it as him being supportive of her as a person, and making up her own mind. Okay, personal level. Now the bigger picture. What was going on outside that room where Erika sat with Maharaji in 1982? Well, I'll tell you one thing that was going on, David Smith, acting on orders from Maharaji himself, was terrorizing the ashram premies in the Bay Area, in a fashion that would make the Spanish Inquisition pale. There wasn't the slightest suggestion that we ashramites should 'see what's true for us' or that we should 'just take a vacation and see how things go,' or that 'we should just think about it and see how we feel' etc. No, we got a very different message from Maharaji than Erika did, and it was 'surrender now' 'shape up or ship out,' and you aren't allowed to even read books, let alone have 'special friends.' No, it was really different. Frannie can testify to what this was like. So, the picture I am getting, as as confirmed by the Mikes, is that Maharaji lets others carry out the dirty work, but can play nicey in a private setting. He sets the Nazi David Smith loose on us in San Francisco, while in Miami, he's telling Erika to take a vacation, teach music to her kids, and make up her own mind about the ashram. Right at the very same time. Which is more significant? The personal, or the bigger picture? So, what do you do? Take Erika's 'personal experience' of M, and expand that into a 25-years devotion, or do you take the uncarring treatment of dozens of other premies who weren't sitting in a room with him and dump this fraud for what he is? Isn't this kind of one of the basic problems here?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 18:19:44 (GMT) From: Katie H. Email: None To: Joe Subject: Thanks, Joe - and it's true for all of us Message:

It's called social consciousness. There's a lot of things we all could do that would be 'good for us', but would indirectly hurt other people. In my experience it is very hard to make someone have social consciousness - especially about a particular issue where they haven't seen or don't believe in the harm being done to others by something they support. (I'm not implying that Erika or other premies don't have social consciousness in other areas - I know they do.) That is the value of this site and forum - or part of the value. I know the revelations here affected me in that way. Take care - and lots of love, Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 00:32:43 (GMT) From: donner Email: None To: Joe Subject: The Personal v. the Big Picture Message:

great post and great point joe....and how many times did i hear behind someone's back what m really thought and of course did not say to them to their face. so even the 'nice' stories have a different side to them.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 20:30:51 (GMT) From: Chuck Sprague Email: bctanda@hotmail.com To: Joe Subject: The importance of the Big Picture... Message:

The Big Picture is exactly what a cult does not want you to see. I've just been reading all the replies to this thread, and they are so excellent. A lot of good points have been made. The cult thrives on keeping premies focused on the 'small' picture. The rationalizations and justifications premies make work just fine, as long as they don't see the bigger picture. Premies like Sandy's wife don't want to hear a word of what is said here, because they instinctively know that their fragile belief system could be blown apart by new information, information that would allow them to connect the dots, and see the larger picture. I have to give Erika credit for at least posting here, and being willing to examin some things. She's been given a lot to think about, and I'm sure it's too much to assimilate all at once. She said she was going to withdraw, that she has to let some of this information 'percolate' for a while. She said she couldn't answer all the questions people have asked, because she doesn't have answers for some of those questions herself. She didn't say she would never post here again, only that she would post less, and she needed time to think. When premies get new information, they either try to reject it, or try to assimilate it. I think Erika is doing the latter, and it's often not a comfortable experience. I hope she will perservere. I feel that on the whole, she was treated pretty well here. I know she felt battered at times, but I think part of that is because premies are not used to having their opinions and experiences with K and M examined and critisized, or challenged, I mean really critically challenged (as opposed to lite critisms exchanged between premies). And part of that has nothing to do with ex-premies. As someone wisely pointed out, it is a part of the internet experience. In that respect Forum V is not much different than other internet forums. I felt she was pretty brave to post here as a premie, I couldn't post here until after I had made a definite mental break with M., and even then it was difficult. But it sure has been worth it! I resolved to be not afraid to look at the bigger picture. The truth always holds up to scrutiny, while lies are ultimatly exposed by it. I have only lost illusions, and what I have gained in their place is much more satisfiying. The truth really does set you free. I'm glad Erika took the time to post here, I feel a lot of good issues were brought up and addressed, that may help many people who read the forum. I hope we will hear more from Erika, when she has had some time to assimilate things and sort things out for herself. When premies get new information, it can be upsetting, for a time. But it doesn't have to ''ruin'' your experience of life, in fact, you may end up enjoying life more, once you sort yourself out. I know I am experiencing a lightness and freedom these days that I haven't felt in years, I'm just free to be me, free to be myself, without trying to fit myself in somebodys box. I'm very grateful. Thanks Joe, for sticking to the facts, and not letting us lose sight of the larger, complete picture. Thanks Susan, for reminding Erika (and everyone that reads here) that even people in cults can have good experiences. I had once thought that I could not possibly be in a cult, because I had good experiences. That seems so silly now. If people only had bad expriences in cults, they wouldn't stay in them. EVERYONE has good and bad experiences, whoever they are. That's life. Thanks everyone, for your contributions here. - Chuck Sprague, who believes a Master is someone who owns a dog (unless it's Themla in her fishnet stockings).

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 22:58:41 (GMT) From: Kelly Email: None To: Chuck Sprague Subject: The Big Picture...I heartily concur. nt Message:

Thanx

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 18:27:55 (GMT) From: Francesca Email: None To: Joe Subject: Yes, brother Joe, I testify! Message:

I have spoken of 'the purge' in other posts for the past several months. Joe is not exaggerating. In fact, after Herr Schmitz went through the men's ashram where Joe lived (in Oakland), it caused such personal devasatation amongst the ashram brothers who had so little of their own to begin with -- in the sense of belongings in the sense of personal space in the sense of time for oneself (for healthy personal growth)-- that Schmitz had to go a little lighter on everyone else. As I remember it, all personal belonging were going to be taken away. No books, no non-premie music, no magazines, etc. We were told that it was going to be so bad that my ashram sister took her math textbooks to her aunt's house (she used to teach at the college level in another state) and I took little personal items liked stuffed animals to work and put them in a file drawer. However, we sisters in SF were not totally spared, as Barara Mahler was going around our house even before the purge and throwing our stuff away. She figured she had authority from on high. 'No books that the Lord does not want us to read!' she said, gloatingly, as she held a copy of Steven Martin's 'Cruel Shoes' over the trashcan and dumped it in. She went through the whole house for books. She threw away certain foods (like artificial mayonnaise) because after that horrible Kissimmee ashram meeting tirade of the Bratguru, she decided that we should have, 'No substitute foods for the foods the Lord would not want us to eat!' The funny thing was that Eve Jacobs came to the ashram after Schmitz left, and Eve was reading the same novel that Barbara had thrown away (one of the sisters had been reading it until it was unceremoniously dumped). I hope Barbara has lightened up, because I haven't seen her in years. But all the years I did know her, she was hot and cold -- i.e. reasonable, and then fanatical. Love, F

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 20:40:47 (GMT) From: Francesca Email: None To: all Subject: Forgot to mention that it was not 'cruel shoes' Message:

that Eve was reading. Barbara threw out a lot of books. I didn't pay any attention to what she was reading, but one of the other sisters thought it was really funny, and talked to Eve about how she enjoyed the book!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 18:41:37 (GMT) From: Joe Email: None To: Francesca Subject: The worst part Message:

You know, Erika, really the most damaging part of what Smith did to was was twofold. 1. He gave these fire and brimstone speeches to the asrham premies, that were completely abusive, the subject being that we were useless pieces of shit, that Maharaji was angry that we were so spaced and undevoted, and it was our fault there weren't any aspirants, and that we had better get our act together, (i.e. turn into mindles automatons, just like David Smith. 2. He maintained that he had directions from Maharaji to do just what he did. And like you said, since Maharaji had already been so heavy on us at Kissimee, it didn't even seem inconsistent. That was the worst part. Funny, Maharaji apparently never got around to telling Smith that we should all take a vacation, and just be good to ourselves, and just figure what 'was true for us,' unlike what he apparently implied to Erika. Now, clearly in retrospect, David Smith was mentally ill, but Maharaji is ultimately responsible here. By the way, one of my unanswered letters to Maharaji, covered this very subject. The lack of response from Maharaji, after having devoted myself and every cent of my earnings to him for 10 years, was a major drip for me.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 18:44:29 (GMT) From: Joe Email: None To: Joe Subject: Sorry Franny, that was to you not Erika, Message:

Although it might not hurt her to read it. BTW, I printed out that picture of you and it's on the bulletin board behind my desk. Every time I look at it, I can't stop laughing. Thanks, so much. Laughter is always good, and very theraputic.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 20:44:02 (GMT) From: Francesca Email: None To: Joe Subject: Sorry Franny, that was to you not Erika, Message:

I figured that out! but thanks. I also fogot to mention that it was an astute comparison between Erika's scene with MJ talking about teaching music to her kids and following her heart, and David Schmitz stomping on ours. After all, no friend, no family, no feelings except 'devotion,' puke blah, puke blah, puke blah Glad you liked the picture!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 16:57:49 (GMT) From: Susan Email: None To: Joe Subject: great post Message:

Again, you are one of the most insightful writers here. And also you have been one of the personally kindest to me....thanks for another great post.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 11:59:43 (GMT) From: Jerry Email: None To: Joe Subject: The Personal v. the Big Picture Message:

The thing about Erika is that she approached Maharaji with an image of him in her mind that he was way above her. This wasn't just some nice guy that was giving her friendly advice. To Erika, this was the guy who came down off his throne in heaven to mingle with us lowly humans, and impressed the heck out of her for doing so. What Erika needs to do is look more closely at Donner's and Dettmer's testimonies and see the guy for who he really is... a goddam hypocrite! Even hypocrites can give good, friendly advice. It doesn't make them nice people. It just shows what kind of facade they can carry off.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 10:33:43 (GMT) From: AJW Email: None To: Joe Subject: The Personal v. Sanity Message:

Hi Joe, That's right on the ball. I would questions Erika's interpretation of her conversation with Captain Rawat. If Erica believed that the Captain was the Superior Power in person while she was talking to him, this clouds her interpretation of the event. Premies are incredibly good at changing the Captains sow's ears into silk purses. If the Captain is the Lord of the Universe, everything he does and says is for the benefit of Erica's soul. Of course she's going to put her best face on it. I'd say Erica's 'personal experience' is as open to as much interpretation as she herself has put on it. (Multiply everything by infinity and you always get the answer you want.) Anth the finite.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 09:01:40 (GMT) From: Dermot Email: None To: Joe Subject: Blocks to premie Realization Message:

Really good post Joe. I was thinking along vaguely similar lines this morning before reading your post. I came up with three blocks to premie realization but I'm sure there are many more. 1. Not reflecting on the flow of chance and circumstance of their lives from birth to present day. 2. Continuing to believe that the vagaries of their individual, subjective experience (the common experience of the human animal)is somehow reliant on the grace and favour(or otherwise) of Prem Pal Singh Rawat. 3. Not thinking deeply and dispassionately enough on the ever increasing revelations (especially of PAMS) in the public domain regarding the hypocritical words and behaviour of Prem Pal Singh Rawat.This 'not thinking' is perhaps due to a desire to not confront head on such revelations but rather to sentimentally hope that somehow they will just go away and former certainties will return in full grace and glory.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 17:54:33 (GMT) From: Joe Email: None To: Dermot Subject: Blocks to premie Realization Message:

. Continuing to believe that the vagaries of their individual, subjective experience (the common experience of the human animal)is somehow reliant on the grace and favour(or otherwise) of Prem Pal Singh Rawat. Very well said. And the subjective experience feeds off the doubt in themselves that is inherent in the cult system. I have a good experience with M or knowledge, and if I don't, it must be my fault, not M or knowledge. The result is, M gets credit for all that is good, and nothing that's bad. Fortunately, most of us in the West were raised with at least the rudiments of a sense of justice and right and wrong. I know for me, it was the way I saw OTHERS being treated in the cult that got me to question, and it was only later that I saw how miserable I was myself, so conditioned I was to discount my ability to know or analyze those things myself.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 18:09:19 (GMT) From: Katie Darling Email: None To: Joe Subject: Hey Joe Message:

you said: 'I know for me, it was the way I saw OTHERS being treated in the cult that got me to question, and it was only later that I saw how miserable I was myself, so conditioned I was to discount my ability to know or analyze those things myself. ' Funnily enough I had just written almost the exact same thing in my post in this thread below quoting my letter to Erika.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 06:57:30 (GMT) From: Connie Email: None To: Joe Subject: Excellent as usual Joe Message:

Extremely valid subject, Bigger picture v Smaller picture. Thanks for taking the time to express it so clearly. Illustrates the way the organization works and how people operate, and the slide of loss of morals, integrity, compassion and growth. This has been going on for 30 years for some. I never knew David Smith was like that, I've read a few times here about his abusive behaviour from different people, all stating the same thing. Just thought he was a bit distant. Incredible eh. BTW, you have never come across to me on FV as 'inflexible'. Your posts have always indicated someone of integrity and decency, with a strong sense of what is right and wrong (& funny and maybe a little frustrated at times). This was one of the things that caught my attention on this forum, as it was in COMPLETE contrast to the world of k, where unfortunately there is only the smaller picture view, doesn't matter about the rest, ABSOLUTELY EVERYBODY is totally dispensable, without a second thought given to them. MY EXPERIENCE AND WHAT I FEEL AND DO is the only thing that matters. The bigger picture in pwkdom is universal only in the context of seeing and doing for m the person. It was tearing me apart. Even though it took so long for me to see it for what it was, I feel lucky not to have lost every shred of humanity in me, and could recognize the total corruptness of it all.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 22:17:01 (GMT) From: Francesca Email: None To: Connie Subject: You've stated one of Erika's key conflicts ... Message:

quite articulately, though several of us have in different ways -- me Susan, Joe, and so many others in threads all over the place this weekend. (So many posts directed at one person can be tough, but I hope she reads them, although I don't expect her to keep trying to answer. In fact, too much answering may disrupt the processing.) It's the lack of compassion for others that is such a key component of M's cult. Being able to 'turn up' connection to my own experience and 'tune out' the experiences of others. Divide and conquer, as Mike Donner said. That phrase comes back to me in so many ways, applied to situations vis a vis the cult. I think you were the one who also described the scene so well where a wife gets invited to M's secret invite bash, doesn't even tell her own husband and they see each other (or their children, or their good friends) as they come in. And smile that 'secret little smile.' Aren't we so lucky! Oh, puke. I've been reading some stuff that Elisabeth Kubler-Ross said about working with death and dying and it is interesting to apply some of the concepts here. The more that others die, the more invincible we may feel, rather than the other way around -- instead of having more compassion, more empathy. The dying can almost become pariahs. That's extreme, but the tendency to push them away because we don't understand, or don't want to understand, or don't want to be in the same 'club' they're in, is there. I think this happens in a smaller way with life's other slings and arrows. There are many primitive emotions we have, and they are not noble. It's best to see the tendencies for what they are and often they are overcome, just in the knowing and being gentle to ourselves as well. I saw that I can even push away my own father's death process somewhat if I am not mindful, because it is not me who's dying. It's important that I don't do that, that I allow it to be part of my process too. The same with other people's pain. When we are one, when we are interconnected, I see that it is my pain too. Then I don't run. Yah, we all wake up, that's the good part! Francesca

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 00:29:21 (GMT) From: Connie Email: None To: Francesca Subject: Yep, the good part Message:

Francesca Sad to hear about your father, you have my sympathy. I hope he is comfortable and from what you have said, know he is being supported, a very important thing when dying. Supporting each other, only as much as we are capable of, when losing a loved one is an important expression of compassion and care, even though it can be hard. I think this is because those surrounding someone's leaving of life have no way of computing what it is like, we can only observe, plus realize that we will go through this process as well. Saying goodbye to someone we loved, or who has just always been there is never easy. Very good relating dying and death to leaving the cult, many parallels. Take care.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 00:55:10 (GMT) From: Francesca Email: None To: Connie Subject: Supporting each other Message:

Yes, the other part of the equation is that this is just as much about supporting my mother and everyone else involved. My mother-in-law is in the hospital on this coast re her degenerative arthritis (family circus, I know), and my father-in-law has a hard time just dealing with it. He feels so much compassion and helplessness that he just has to get away sometimes. Reminds me of some Winston Churchill quote about 'those that stand and wait.' Thanks for your kind thoughts, and your affirming of the parallels.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 19:18:05 (GMT) From: Joe Email: None To: Connie Subject: Well said, Connie Message:

Thanks Connie. It is kind of amazing how supposedly Maharaji is giving this 'gift' of love, understanding and peace, and yet the whole organization around him and the way people are treated, is so fucked up. I did hear that a bunch of the hierarchy of Elan Vital resigned because they were, once again, put in the awkward position of doing unethical things surrounding covering up Jagdeo's child molestation. So, I think most people do have a conscience, and a breaking point. A point about David Smith, and really it applies to others too. David could be a real nice guy sometimes. But I think his mental state was/maybe still is, one that is highly susceptible to dogmatically carring out the orders of somebody he thinks is God, and then all other morals, conscience, and human decency go out the window, if he thinks that's required to do what Maharaji wants. And then, also because of the whole 'surrender' system Maharaji set up, Smith had a whole group of people, almost completely vulnerable to what he inflicted on them. So, Maharaji is responsible both or utilizing Smith, and also for making his victims so vulnerable. I think that's clearly what happened in the ashram inquisition Frannie, I, and others accross the world have talked about in connection with Mr. Smith. I do think it was due to his own mental problems, but it was Maharaji who made it all possible. Connie, I really enjoy your posts, and I think your perspective is very important, because you were so recently involved. Joe

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 06:46:14 (GMT) From: TD Email: None To: Joe Subject: Brilliant Joe - that totally sums it up....!! Message:

So, what do you do? Take Erika's 'personal experience' of M, and expand that into a 25-years devotion, or do you take the uncarring treatment of dozens of other premies who weren't sitting in a room with him and dump this fraud for what he is? I've read a lot of profound things on this website over the years, but Joe - this one - is a cracker and really hit home for me. Especially as so many of us became premies because of someone telling us about 'their personal experience' of M and K. If our only exposure to the whole cult had been the 'big picture' sort of stuff, we'd never have gotten sucked in, or even if that happened, stayed very long. I think that is why so many premie lite aspirants, piss off once they've received K. Unless they've got a constant source near by (ie premie partner/friend/etc) to keep reinforcing the 'personal experience' tales, then the 'big picture' stuff would soon put them off (expensive events, dysfunctional premies, fat squeaky Indian twat on a chair sprouting garbage)... Mind you - it also cuts both ways. For a number of ex-premies who witnessed seeing Maharaji act like a total and utter bastard in a private setting - that probably got them out quicker than the big picture stuff.... in the end, they were probably much luckier than people like Erika who got the 'I'm your nice touchy-feely guru' sanitised version of M. They're out while she's still being misled by a fraud - all because of a couple of nice 'personal experiences'. Wonder if Erika had seen him do a hit'n'run of an Indian man - or witness him discarding one of the female premies he'd just shagged - would she still be espousing how 'nice he was'....

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 11:03:07 (GMT) From: Marianne Email: None To: Joe Subject: Agree wholeheartedly Message:

Thank you for saying all of that. And Joe, you're extremely open minded and kind hearted. Erika has a great deal of sorting out to do. Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 11:20:13 (GMT) From: Pat Conlon Email: None To: Marianne Subject: I hope she does sort it out Message:

I think she bit off more than she could chew. Top of the morning to you. It was so hot for two days the fog was sucked right in.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 11:38:05 (GMT) From: Katie Darling Email: None To: Pat Conlon, Joe etc. Subject: I hope she does sort it out Message:

I think she IS sorting it out. I don't need her to agree with me. I'm more concerned about people who are really suffering in cult-think and maybe don't see any way out, or people who are out and really suffered but never did a recovery process. Thousand of ex-premies in suspended animation, not quite realizing they have P.T.C.S.D. (Post-Traumatic Cult Stress Disorder). Joe, I think the big/small picture thing is one of the cruxes of the matter. This is part of what I wrote way below to Erika, whom I knew. 'I really get what you are saying about the validity of your experience no matter what ours were (you can read mine all over the place here - used to be Disculta, and I have a Journey). I was thinking about it last night, and I remembered two clients I had in my therapy practice years ago, who were sisters. One had been consistently sexually abused by their grandfather. The other wasn't. She thought of him as a kindly old Santa Claus-type figure. The issue they were having was between themselves - the molested one feeling that the other one should cut all ties with the ailing old geyser. Both their experiences were valid. Should the non-molested one be influenced by the other one's experience? I think it's a valid question. I have spent a lot of my life since being a premie in various explorations of belief systems and how different realities can co-exist and both be valid, and how to stretch one's consciousness to integrate both sides of something. Both grandfathers were the 'real' grandfather, some of the time. But a full understanding of the grandfather included both, I think. I actually left MJ because of the effects I saw that his irresponsible disowned behavior was having on others, more than on me. I became outraged (I wrote about the details of this in a recent inactive post). Briefly, I wrote a very long letter to him detailing how things he was saying and doing were making premies suicidal - I had dealt with three in a week, and what was he going to do to clear up the confusion. I knew who to give the letter to (having been a mail-answerer myself) and never heard anything and exited. Only later did I realize to what extent I myself was traumatized and my health battered by some very direct stuff that MJ did and said.' We are above the fog up here, but have been watching it snaking in on our hikes in the glorious headlands. Cough cough. Love to all, Katie Darling

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 15:21:25 (GMT) From: Brian Email: brian@ex-premie.org To: Katie Darling Subject: Looking at what's leftover afterwards Message:

Something that I found helpful when I was sorting through the false beliefs that I held and the underlying beliefs that supported them was an idea that I had heard or read somewhere before. That everything I believe or do, regardless of whether it's objectively in my best interest, is always believed or done by a part of me that is trying to protect me from some danger that is posssibly long-forgotten. That part of me is always looking out for me, and seems to require praise for the job done so far and then relieving of duty before it will stop 'helping'. In many cases, I had forgotten the initial danger because I've already 'delegated' the job of watching out for it to some behavior or belief. I raised some shield long ago and could then forget what the threat was, since it had been 'dealt with' and no longer needed my conscious attention. When I question those beliefs later, I feel anxiety rising from the part in charge of maintaining that 'protection'. Incorporating other people's accounts with my own helps to complete the 'Big Picture'. But it's still very hard to remove the 'Personal' behaviour or belief after I've unconsciously built it up to reinforce its protective effect. It's easy to say that I should quit my job after it's been 'proven' to me that my employer's product line includes nerve gas. But the only reason that I spent as long at that (or any other) company as I did was to provide for my family and protect myself from being pennyless in my old age. I wanted steady work at a good income promising a pension. If I'm not able to see that those are my real concerns, I'm forced to rationalize that Acme Company also makes soap - a very helpful product - and to remember the good friends that I've made, the company picnics, etc. It's counter to my own self-protection to even consider quitting, so the rationalisations pour from my un-examined needs. Or maybe I write letters to the the Board of Directors in the hope of getting the harmful product dropped from production. I want to view them as not being aware of the harm in the product, and if I point it out, THEY will change so that I won't have to. But their reasons to continue in their own self-protective behaviors are just as powerful as mine, so the gas rolls on. When I was working through my beliefs about Maharaji, I found that part of me didn't even want to risk my being able to review the real reason for buying into it in the first place, and it was hard to drag it out of myself. For me, it was the underlying belief that there is a God and 'he' knows what I'm doing even if I don't. That I should live on faith rather than take any responsibility for areas of my life that might result in a massive eternal mistake - like damnation. It was as if that part of me responsible for ensuring that the total 'me' didn't end up in Hell was refusing to put the subject on the table for discussion. The consequences were so extreme and I had proven to myself that too many times that I was incapable of making the 'right' decision on 'important' matters.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 23:48:47 (GMT) From: bill--good to see Email: None To: Brian Subject: you posting more Brian....nt Message:

asfg

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 04:58:38 (GMT) From: Francesca Email: None To: Brian Subject: Just read this again, GREAT POST***** n/t Message:

thank you thank you

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 22:14:53 (GMT) From: Monmot Email: None To: Brian Subject: The Human Face on the Mechanism of Denial Message:

Brian: Fabulous post which deconstructs how we create, and remain in, denial. Denial is such an effective tool in protecting ourselves, particularly because its strength is in allowing us to believe, albeit unconsciously, that we're safe as long as the belief(s) which the denial is protecting remain in place. Ironically, quite the opposite it true, and it usually takes quite a lot, if not disastrous, challenges to these unstated and unchallenged beliefs before we will examine them. Thomas Kuhn wrote a book delineating the mechanics of a paradigm shift and one thing I remember from reading this book is that there's an incredibly enormous amount of stress right before a paradigm shift. After the shift takes place, quesions which apparently had no answers were automatically answered post-shift, because the new paradigm's parameters incorporate the old paradigm while simultaneously expanding into a new dimension, allowing a previously and seemingly impossible perspective to emerge. I remember the incredible stress I felt when I was in the process of leaving M, and how, after much quesioning of my beliefs, there finally was cool relief. All the questions about K and M which I couldn't integrate into my previous belief system were either answered or became non-issues afterward. Kind of like leaving the paradigm of fear and entering into the process of self-realization without an external monitor or internalized M judging every move. Quite freeing actually, and although it's the end of one restrictive system, it's the beginning of another expansive one. Sometimes I think life is just a process of paradigm shifts. So although many of us may have been hurt and angered by M, we are fortunate to have been able to use those hurts and anger as the motivating force to evict ourselves from CultLand and allowing us to enter into the greener pastures of our own lives as we choose to live them. M

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 01:55:47 (GMT) From: Chuck Sprague Email: None To: Monmot Subject: Great posts, Monmot and Brian (nt) Message:

Been there, done that, got the T-shirt. And what a RELIEF afterward!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 00:05:13 (GMT) From: Francesca Email: None To: Monmot Subject: Paradigm shift Message:

Great post there. This really got to me: Thomas Kuhn wrote a book delineating the mechanics of a paradigm shift and one thing I remember from reading this book is that there's an incredibly enormous amount of stress right before a paradigm shift. After the shift takes place, quesions which apparently had no answers were automatically answered post-shift, because the new paradigm's parameters incorporate the old paradigm while simultaneously expanding into a new dimension, allowing a previously and seemingly impossible perspective to emerge. Like births. But only with the death of old ways of looking at things, because the new paradigm's parameters incorporate the old paradigm while simultaneously expanding it into a new dimension. Leaving K behind is not the only major paradigm shift I've gone through over the past 20 years, but it was one of the biggies. I went through one over the past two years, and that description you posted really nailed it for me. And yes, the K stuff was incorporated into the next paradigm and into the latest one. But it's amazing that the K stuff is still getting worked on, because each time the paradigm shifts, all that old crap comes along and gets retooled, reunderstood, and rexplained. Does this make sense?? Love, f

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 02:15:48 (GMT) From: Monmot Email: None To: Francesca Subject: You Betcha Message:

Hey F: I completely understand what you're saying. I recently had a shift in which the resulting perspective was the total opposite of the one I had before the shift. It had to do with my childhood which, obviously, precedes my time with K & M, so it makes perfect sense that your understanding and perspective regarding K (and any other important aspects of your life) get shifted also. Usually, too, with these shifts, the emotional load carried gets lightened for some reason. Maybe experiencing these paradigm shifts is akin to experiencing a sort of emotional evolution in motion. I think going through life resisting and not allowing these shifts is equivalent to living the unexamined and inauthentic life. You tend to get stuck. But it's hard work and takes a lot of willingness to hang glide over the abyss and to live with ambiguity while you're getting your belief system retooled. One of my favorite T-shirts (now defunct) said on the front: When one door closes, another opens. And on the back it said: But the hallways sure are dark. I always thought that described a paradigm shift to perfection, plus it's funny. Thanks, F M

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:04:18 (GMT) From: Francesca Email: None To: Monmot Subject: Here's to dark hallways!! LOLs n/t Message:

n/t

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 22:26:39 (GMT) From: Joe Email: None To: Monmot Subject: Wow, awesome post... Message:

I'm continually amazed how I can relate so vividly to an anlysis like you just wrote. Reading your post is like putting flesh on the bones of my views on what actually happened. Leaving M, or at least the lead-up to leaving M, was one of the most stressful, and at the same time exciting, periods in my life. And that's so true about all the answers coming to questions I hadn't dared ask before. Of course, for many of us, what goes along with getting the answers is the feeling of having been so stupid to have not seen them before the shift. Thanks for that great post. Joe

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 23:28:17 (GMT) From: Richard Email: None To: Joe Subject: Brian, Monmot, Joe - I am doing that now Message:

Even after basiclly setting M & K aside in 1987, I never really made a clean break as, say Donner did by mailing M that letter. So last week when I began posting as myself, my palms sweat for 2 days, I voraciously read and responded to everything and have incredible energy and positive outlook. This I attribute to letting go of the fear I did not know I was carrying. I was living sub or semi-conciously in the old self-protective paradigm) using both Brian's and Monmot's model). In fact, Joe, I was still somehow in 'that place' inside. This is a huge psychological revelation here gents. Richard - sweaty palms no more

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 02:25:37 (GMT) From: Monmot Email: None To: Richard Subject: It ain't easy, but you're doing it.... Message:

Richard: Getting wise to ways of denial is like catching a demon in your blindspot, and you're to be congratulated for being willing and able to do so. It's weird, because Thomas Kuhn was writing about scientific paradigms, but everything he said fit to perfection the emotional and psychological paradigm shift I had just experienced. It really helped me see that I hadn't been insane, but that I had endured an arduous process. Congrats to all of us really, because you have to go through this one way or another in order to fully separate from M, sort of like casting out the devil in our heads. Take care M

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 02:33:43 (GMT) From: Richard Email: None To: Monmot Subject: You're totally Monmot... and we love it!! /nt Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 23:54:02 (GMT) From: Joe Email: None To: Richard Subject: Brian, Monmot, Joe - I am doing that now Message:

Richard, From what I can tell, you've come quite some way. (If that speech for M at Portland is any indication. That was really great, by the way. Joe

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 01:06:07 (GMT) From: Pat Conlon Email: None To: Joe Subject: I'm peeling onions and having some good cries Message:

Layers and layers of Maharajism concepts peeling away only to find old paradigms some of which feel as comfortable as an old pair of slippers and others which are no longer useful. Having a good cry of relief and and even bigger belly laugh that I have DIS-enchanted myself of that old bhakti juju spell.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 02:30:13 (GMT) From: Monmot Email: None To: Pat Conlon Subject: Here's a vitual hanky... Message:

You make me laugh with your wise and funny insights, and I am forever grateful to you for coming up with bhakti juju. Gee, what do you think's at the center of the onion? N

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 02:40:18 (GMT) From: Pat Conlon Email: None To: Monmot Subject: Here's a vitual hanky...If that typo were vital... Message:

...you would be in the typo hall of fame along with ridiculting. At the center of the onion? Who knows? I love opening surprise presents. I'm an optimist, so I'm sure is just what I always wanted.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:09:29 (GMT) From: Francesca Email: None To: Pat Conlon Subject: Just what you always wanted.. brilliant! Message:

I love it when you say things like that! ==f

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Mar 20, 2001 at 08:45:56 (GMT) From: Pat Conlon Email: None To: Francesca Subject: I always new we were twins separated at birth NT Message:

j

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 18:07:19 (GMT) From: Katie Darling Email: None To: Brian Subject: Brian, that's brilliant! nt Message:

zcv

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 21:51:37 (GMT) From: Richard Email: None To: Brian Subject: I agree Brian brilliant re: self-protection /nt Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index