Ex-Premie.Org |
Forum I Archive # 3 | |
From: May 7, 1997 |
To: May 14, 1997 |
Page: 1 Of: 5 |
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 21:00:16 (EDT)
Poster: Jim Email: To: Everyone Subject: Why don't they talk with one another? Message: Here are a few slightly recycled questions: 1) Why do premies hang here instead of on pro-Maharaji pages (like Harlan's or Mili's)? 2) Why don't the premies on Harlan's premie guestbook actually talk with one another? Are they afraid? If so, of what? 3) Maharaji has clearly prohibited premies from advertising his glories on any but the most personal one-to-one basis. It's okay to tell your workmates. It's not okay to hold a company seminar. He's also made it clear that he does not want to have a presence on the internet. One could safely assume that, if he were asked, he would order premies to NOT talk about him, let alone for him, on the internet. All the worse, I'm sure, on an ex-premie page. How do you premies, Chris, OP and Mili justify being here? 4) If there's any question about Maharaji's wishes (and after all, he's the one with the master plan), shouldn't you ask him if he minds your involvement? Shouldn't you ask him if he minds you describing, projecting, justifying, second-guessing and sometimes even criticising him? 5) How do you know he isn't completely pissed off that you premies are even acknowledging a web site where people regularly call Maharaji a little fat fraud artist or worse? 6) Do you want to know what he really wants or would you rather ignore his wishes? 7) Do you think Maharaji knows what goes on here? 8) Do you care? Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 16:17:45 (EDT)
Poster: Mili Email: To: Everyone Subject: My Experience Message: People, Knowledge is beautiful, and Maharaji is true! He is sincere, and he is capable of bringing you to a wonderful inner experience! He is not a bad guy out to rip people off. He certainly didn't rip me off, but fulfilled his promise instead! If you think you can do it on your own, forget it. Maybe you'll get something, but not what he is talking about. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 17:03:04 (EDT)
Poster: Jim Email: To: Mili Subject: Re: My Experience Message: People, Knowledge is beautiful, and Maharaji is true! He is sincere, and he is capable of bringing you to a wonderful inner experience! He is not a bad guy out to rip people off. He certainly didn't rip me off, but fulfilled his promise instead! If you think you can do it on your own, forget it. Maybe you'll get something, but not what he is talking about. God, Mili, I'd never really thought of it like that! Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 18:16:16 (EDT)
Poster: Mili Email: To: Jim Subject: Re: My Experience Message: Check this out, it's an excerpt from a letter I just got: 'Myself, I lived in the ashram at one time, participated in numerous events around the world, and lately simply attend weekly videos with the one premie couple living in this town. I was tempted to post a lively reply as you did, but then reconsidered figuring why bother? All this pissing and moaning and somebody fondled somebody in '76, and he robbed my life and on and on ad nauseum. As far as I'm concerned, Maharaji's message hasn't changed, he's just got ridden of a lot of the extraneous nonsense, including his family (mother, brothers,) DLM, and so on. And did you ever think Bob Mishler knew what he was talking about?!? It's funny that so many of the ex-premies still want to tell everyone the 'way it is', just like they did as so-called premies! Oh well...much much MUCH better to simply sit and practice,
take a run, and catch a video! Later...'
|
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 18:52:19 (EDT)
Poster: Jim Email: To: Mili Subject: Re: My Experience Message: Check this out, it's an excerpt from a letter I just got: 'Myself, I lived in the ashram at one time, participated in numerous events around the world, and lately simply attend weekly videos with the one premie couple living in this town. I was tempted to post a lively reply as you did, but then reconsidered figuring why bother? All this pissing and moaning and somebody fondled somebody in '76, and he robbed my life and on and on ad nauseum. As far as I'm concerned, Maharaji's message hasn't changed, he's just got ridden of a lot of the extraneous nonsense, including his family (mother, brothers,) DLM, and so on. And did you ever think Bob Mishler knew what he was talking about?!? It's funny that so many of the 'ex-premies' still want to tell everyone the 'way it is', just like they did as so-called premies! Oh well...much much MUCH better to simply sit and practice, take a run, and catch a video! Later...' Okay, so you're not the fool plugging away for the guru. No one said you were. Tell your friend that he probably never knew Maharaji's 'message' to begin with. (Hint - It wasn't 'don't worry, be happy'). Tell him, or her, that that 'extraneous nonsense' includes the family members your fat little fraud presented to us as DIVINE - if that word means anything to you. Tell your friend, as well, that his criticism of Mishler is incredibly insightful and not at all superficial and empty. Finally, tell your friend that this is one ex 'so-called premie' that realizes how wrong I've been to tell anyone anything. After all, why think when it's so '.much much MUCH better to simply sit and practice, take a run, and catch a video!' ? ROTFL Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 19:00:47 (EDT)
Poster: Jim Email: To: Jim Subject: Re: My Experience Message: I left out a word. ' Okay, so you're not the fool plugging away for the guru. No one said you were.' should read 'Okay, so you're not the ONLY fool......' Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 19:00:53 (EDT)
Poster: Jim Email: To: Jim Subject: Re: My Experience Message: I left out a word. ' Okay, so you're not the fool plugging away for the guru. No one said you were.' should read 'Okay, so you're not the ONLY fool......' Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 19:41:46 (EDT)
Poster: JW Email: To: Mili Subject: Re: My Experience Message: Check this out, it's an excerpt from a letter I just got: 'Myself, I lived in the ashram at one time, participated in numerous events around the world, and lately simply attend weekly videos with the one premie couple living in this town. I was tempted to post a lively reply as you did, but then reconsidered figuring why bother? All this pissing and moaning and somebody fondled somebody in '76, and he robbed my life and on and on ad nauseum. As far as I'm concerned, Maharaji's message hasn't changed, he's just got ridden of a lot of the extraneous nonsense, including his family (mother, brothers,) DLM, and so on. And did you ever think Bob Mishler knew what he was talking about?!? It's funny that so many of the 'ex-premies' still want to tell everyone the 'way it is', just like they did as so-called premies! Oh well...much much MUCH better to simply sit and practice, take a run, and catch a video! Later...' Oh, so THAT was the problem -- I wasn't really a PREMIE! I was just a SO-CALLED PREMIE! Boy, did I have THAT wrong all those years. What a joke on me, right? Gee, tell your friend thanks for straightening that out for me. Welcome back, Jim. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 19:52:28 (EDT)
Poster: JW Email: To: Mili Subject: Re: My Experience Message: Check this out, it's an excerpt from a letter I just got: 'Myself, I lived in the ashram at one time, participated in numerous events around the world, and lately simply attend weekly videos with the one premie couple living in this town. I was tempted to post a lively reply as you did, but then reconsidered figuring why bother? All this pissing and moaning and somebody fondled somebody in '76, and he robbed my life and on and on ad nauseum. As far as I'm concerned, Maharaji's message hasn't changed, he's just got ridden of a lot of the extraneous nonsense, including his family (mother, brothers,) DLM, and so on. And did you ever think Bob Mishler knew what he was talking about?!? It's funny that so many of the 'ex-premies' still want to tell everyone the 'way it is', just like they did as so-called premies! Oh well...much much MUCH better to simply sit and practice, take a run, and catch a video! Later...'
Oh, and also, your friend might be talking out of
the other side of his mouth if he was the one of the ones who was
fondled in '76.
|
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 21:05:05 (EDT)
Poster: Brian Email: To: Mili Subject: Re: My Experience Message: Oh well...much much MUCH better to simply sit and practice, take a run, and catch a video! Later...'
And yet you'll be back and back and back...
|
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 22:32:24 (EDT)
Poster: Chris Email: To: Jim Subject: Re: My Experience Message: I left out a word. ' Okay, so you're not the fool plugging away for the guru. No one said you were.' should read 'Okay, so you're not the ONLY fool......' Its starting to look like you're loosing it. Hang in there. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 22:39:29 (EDT)
Poster: Chris Email: To: Jim Subject: Re: My Experience Message: I left out a word. ' Okay, so you're not the fool plugging away for the guru. No one said you were.' should read 'Okay, so you're not the ONLY fool......' Victoria must be a beautiful place. Why are you so restless? Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Tues, May 13, 1997 at 18:32:05 (EDT)
Poster: Frank K. Email: To: Everyone Subject: Why did you leave Maharaji? Message: Hello all, I have found the information on these web pages very interesting. I'm an inactive follower of Maharaj Ji. I've often wondered why Maharaj Ji needed so many material things to spread his message of Knowledge. I must say that the experience of knowledge was quite incredible at the time that I was involved. The light you shed on his life gives a different perspective. What I appreicated was the very close freindships that I had during the time I was active in the movement. Why did you and the others leave Maharaj Ji and what has happened to the many loyal followers? I also wonder what Maharaj Ji's wife and kids think about him and the luxury that they apprently live in. Going to all these programs can be very exspensive. Anyway, I'd love to hear your thoughts and other former premies and why they left Maharaj Ji. Please email me at kuokoa@hgea.org to let me know if you have posted anything here. Otherwise I may not know it has been posted. Regards!
Frank K.
|
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 05:19:48 (EDT)
Poster: Dave P Email: To: Frank K. Subject: Re: Why did you leave Maharaji? Message: Compare the vitality and excitement surrounding GMJ in the early 70's (that's what brought me in!) with GMJ's current cheap soap opera, cheezy and an insult to human intel.(this is why I have left). Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 15:41:15 (EDT)
Poster: Chris Email: To: Dave P Subject: Re: Why did you leave Maharaji? Message: What year did you leave? Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 21:31:48 (EDT)
Poster: Jim Email: To: Chris Subject: Re: Why did you leave Maharaji? Message: What year did you leave? Another probing question, Chris! You should be a reporter (for the Divine Times, that is). Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 21:38:16 (EDT)
Poster: Jim Email: To: Frank K. Subject: Re: Why did you leave Maharaji? Message: Frank, I left because I started to think for myself and started to question whether or not Maharaji knew what the fuck he was doing. I decided he did not. That is, he's not the Lord, he didn't come with more powers than ever before and he's certainly not saving the planet. I, too, enjoyed the meditation a lot when I first got into it. It might be years before I really understand how to think of that. Maybe it'll always be a mystery. Maybe not. But I'll bet my last dollar on the fact that it ISN'T the portal to the conscious energy keeping me alive. It isn't god. Consciousnes is something compeltely different. Read Dawkins. As for Maharaji's loyal followers, he only has three left. Mili, Chris and OP. There are no others. These three, as you may have noticed, appear regularly on this page. So, in a sense, we're all here. This is it. Oh yeah, Maharaji's got some land in Australia. He's selling off small parcels the size of souvenir wedding cake slices to wealthy ex-premies who want hobby ranches down under. He would ahve sold them to loyal follolwers but OP has no money, Chris can't understand the contract and Mili has never really trusted Maharaji, not enough for a real estate transaction in any event. How bout you? Would YOU like to get in on the action a little? Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 22:43:44 (EDT)
Poster: Chris Email: To: Jim Subject: Re: Why did you leave Maharaji? Message: Jim, give me a break. I'm trying to be gentle. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, May 12, 1997 at 12:53:49 (EDT)
Poster: Mili Email: To: Everyone Subject: Interview with Authors of 'Guru papers' Message: Scott, I am posting this again since it was one of the files that were lost with the previous archive. I am sure you will be grateful to me for doing this. The Kramer Papers: A Look Behind the Mask of Antiauthoritarianism A personal account of a meeting with the authors of The Guru Papers: Masks of Authoritarian Power by Hal Blacker Introduction For many of us today the very word authority sounds strangely incomplete without its common prefix anti. If you've lived through Watergate, through Contragate, or through any number of the other abuses of the trust reposed in our leaders, it is difficult to prevent the reflexive arising of a deeply negative response when authority rears its head. A long history of suffering and disappointment has caused the concepts of authority and authoritarianism-the misuse of authority for its own selfish ends-to become synonymous in many people's minds. In the arena of spirituality, the scandals of the past twenty years or so surrounding numerous gurus and spiritual leaders make the response of antiauthoritarianism to the concept of spiritual authority almost inevitable. So it is not surprising that of late there has been a rising tide of voices suggesting that the entire idea of authority in the spiritual world would best be resigned to the junk heap of history, to join other concepts which most modern educated people agree have outlived their usefulness, such as the divine right of k,ings and papal infallibility. But none of the critics of the guru go as far as Joel Kramer and Diana Alstad, authors of The Guru Papers: Masks of Authoritarian Power. Their book is said to have had a profound influence on, among others, the vocal anti-guru convert Andrew Harvey during his time of spiritual crisis, when he broke away from Mother Meera, whom he had only recently declared the avatar who would save the world. Because of their influence on some of those who are most vocal in articulating the anti-guru new paradigm, I knew I had to speak to Kramer and Alstad for this issue of What Is Enlightenment?, which examines the role of purity and authority in the spiritual life. Joel Kramer is a trained philosopher, having completed most of his studies towards a Ph.D. in Western philosophy before dropping out to pursue Eastern philosophy and yoga. When we met, Diana Alstad told me, He studied Western philosophy and got it. Then he studied Eastern thought and got it, too. He taught at Esalen in the 1960s and is a self-proclaimed hatha yoga adept. Diana Alstad's credentials are impressive as well. She received a doctorate from Yale University and taught the first women's studies courses at Yale and Duke universities. The Guru Papers is the only published portion of a far larger and more ambitious work called Control. It is perhaps the most articulated attempt to deconstruct the entire concept of spiritual authority and the philosophies underlying its uses and abuses. When I called Joel Kramer, he readily agreed to an interview. At his request I reread the last chapters of his book. I also sent him the last two editions of What Is Enlightenment? A few days before our interview, however, he telephoned me and said that he had decided to call it off. We were too far apart, he told me. He had no respect for my point of view, or that of our magazine. He did not wish to grant us an interview, he said. I told him that an interview would give him a chance to reach the very people he was trying to help, seekers interested in the philosophies he saw as so dangerous and damaging. I reminded him that I was even willing to take the journalistically unorthodox step of granting him the right to review all of his statements for accuracy and completeness to ensure a fair treatment of his views. But he told me that this did not matter. He was not interested in trying to reach our readers, he said. Then he said something that sent off shock waves of the sort I imagine might occur in the far reaches of outer space when matter and antimatter collide. He told me that what bothered him was that our publication's point of view is that of a morality based on selflessness. He said that moralities based upon selflessness are a major source of the problems and dysfunctionality of the world. He went on to say that the major themes presented by the people included in our forum-themes he identified as those of impersonal love, detachment and egolessness-are the ideas responsible for the horrible mess that our planet is in. While listening to him, for no apparent reason an incongruous memory of walking down a desert highway in the heat of the midday sun entered my consciousness. I remembered the eerie sense of dislocation caused by the shimmering heat waves that surrounded me, how the colors of the landscape around me began to sickeningly undulate, shift and dissolve. Somehow, reading The Guru Papers had not prepared me for the vehemence with which Kramer attributed the world's troubles to the influence of such ideas as selflessness, impersonal love, nonattachment and self-sacrifice. I found his position fascinating-and utterly incomprehensible. I had to go back and read his book again. And there it was in black and white. Why hadn't I seen it before? In The Guru Papers, Kramer and Alstad do not only attack the institution of the guru due to its recent record of scandal and abuse. They go further and reject as inherently abusive and authoritarian the entire morality which they say underlies spiritual authority. The heart of their work is their critique of this morality, what they call renunciate morality, which they see as dangerously flawed because it teaches the possibility and desirability of attaining selflessness. They say that renunciate morality, by teaching that selflessness and self-sacrifice are possible and are superior to self-centeredness, causes people to doubt themselves, and thus become susceptible to authoritarian manipulation. It is simply impossible to have selflessness without also having its opposite, self-centeredness, they say, and to teach otherwise is just a way of confusing and controlling people. According to Kramer and Alstad, moralities that teach selflessness as the highest goal are responsible for the mess that the world is in today, a mess that threatens humanity's very survival. When it really hit me that this was their underlying premise for rejecting what they call the guru system it shook me up, unsettled and even scared me, in part because I could see the alluring attraction of the idea that selfishness is natural, inevitable and OK. During our telephone conversation, Kramer went on to say that although he would not do an interview, he was very interested in speaking to me personally about our views. Who knows? he said, he might change his mind about the interview after we spoke. When we finally met, it became clear that Joel Kramer had never been serious about the possibility of changing his mind. But we did engage in a discussion, a debate and an encounter that lasted over four and a half hours. This encounter revealed more than a simple interview would ever have been likely to do. It left me feeling, both as a journalist and a human being, that I would be remiss in my duty to anyone serious about spirituality and its difficult challenges if I failed to recount at least a portion of what I saw of the psyche behind the mask of antiauthoritarianism that The Guru Papers's author presented. @@@ It was a sunny day last summer when I went to meet Joel Kramer. I drove my car up an unmarked winding road to the top of the seaside mesa where he and Diana Alstad live. Diana Alstad met me at the door and invited me inside. Soon Kramer joined us and asked me if I would like to sit with him on their deck outside. As we sat there high above the Pacific Ocean's endlessly rolling and crashing waves dotted with foam, sea gulls and an occasional surfer, it seemed somehow fitting to me that my meeting with two of the sources of the widely proclaimed anti-guru new paradigm was taking place in the town of Bolinas, California. Bolinas is a coastal town off Highway 1, at the West's furthermost limits. A bastion of anarcho-libertarianism, its residents have driven the authorities to despair by repeatedly tearing down every sign announcing its existence that the California Department of Transportation has ever posted. Enjoying the dramatic beauty of our surroundings, I thanked Kramer for meeting with me, and I told him that I had found his book fascinating. Then I brought up the subject of its reputed influence on Andrew Harvey. Yes, he said, the book had influenced Harvey. But he was critical of Harvey for not going far enough. Although Harvey criticizes the guru system, he still believes in the virtues of self-sacrifice and impersonal love, Kramer said. Then, obviously not a man to waste time getting to the point, he let me know in a passionate tone that he had me and the magazine I write for pegged as perpetrators of what he calls the renunciate morality based on selflessness and self-sacrifice, which he claims is wreaking havoc upon this planet. He told me that he would never grant an interview to a magazine that promulgates such views, because he would not want to appear to endorse them. Taken aback, I was not sure how to proceed, but I did not have to think about it for long. In a still forceful yet more philosophical tone, Kramer immediately went on to say that what is necessary is understanding-never renunciation. He asked me to explain how renunciation could ever lead to any good. I told him that I have personally struggled with a tendency towards anger, towards lashing out at people when I am crossed. I agreed with him that understanding is essential, and I told him that I am interested in anger's causes and effects. But being doubtless about its destructiveness, when I feel anger arising I think I should renounce acting out of it. By doing this, breaking the chain of action and reaction that anger creates, I have a better chance of coming to an understanding that will uproot it, I explained. But Joel Kramer was clearly unconvinced. I brought up what I considered to be the heart of the matter. I told him that I found it hard to believe that he and Diana Alstad were serious in their assertion that selflessness or self-sacrifice does not have a higher moral status than self-centeredness. But I proposed to Joel Kramer that if we defined our terms it mig,ht turn out that we were not so far apart as it appeared. Perhaps they were using the term self- centeredness in a way that is different than usual. I can see aspects of what you might call selfishness or self-centeredness that arguably should not be negated, such as creativity, individual discrimination, personal responsibility and so on, I suggested, attempting to find some meeting ground. Perhaps this is what you mean by self-centeredness, and why you say it is necessary and should not be renounced? But he dashed my hopes for a rapprochement, informing me in no uncertain terms that our viewpoints were diametrically opposed. This despite the fact that in his book, and in our ensuing conversation, he cited over and over again similar positive aspects of self- centeredness to those I had just proposed to him. Then Kramer retook the offensive. He attacked the emphasis Eastern thought places on oneness, on our ultimate identity. For example, he pointed out to me that everyone has to face their death alone. I don't know if it was because we were perched so precariously high above the Pacific Ocean's crashing waves, but I was deeply struck by his point, and found myself sinking like a stone into the depths of a still contemplation of the aloneness of each of us in the face of the ultimate. That is a very profound paradox, I heard myself say, staring at him dumbly while vaguely recalling that paradox was one of those things Joel Kramer found especially pernicious, a sure sign of authoritarian thought. Joel Kramer looked at me, waiting. I repeated, That is a mystery, and a profound paradox. Then the answer came to me, like a silver fish leaping unexpectedly out of the blue ocean. We are alone in the face of death, that is true, I said, but that aloneness itself is a universal experience, pointing to our oneness as well as our individuality. He remained silent. For a moment I could not tell if it was because he was struck by what I had said or flabbergasted at my obtuseness. Then, as if I had said nothing at all he stated, No one else can feel my pain. Our conversation continued in a similar vein. I wasn't surprised by the fact that our views were different. But what disturbed me was that we were never able to meet, even when it seemed at times that we agreed. Every time I posited a higher one, he acknowledged it, but then countered with a many. Every connecting universal I proposed was greeted with a nod, followed by the assertion of a unique and separating individual. Kramer told me that he does not discount the idea of oneness, or the religious experience of it. I've had oneness experiences, he said. But he and Alstad argue that from the oneness experience, religions abstract philosophies of oneness, drawing conclusions about human nature and the nature of existence from the experience of oneness, and this is where the trouble begins. Kramer and Alstad call these philosophies oneness ideologies. In such ideologies, oneness and selflessness are given precedence over separateness and individuality, and thereby authoritarianism is born. Why is this? Because oneness is only one side of the picture, they say, and giving it higher priority than separateness makes human beings feel bad about themselves, and consequently susceptible to authoritarian manipulation. We went over these points in various ways, again and again. Much was said, often with great passion, but very little actually happened. We seemed to be continually stuck at the same barrier, despite exploring it from every different angle. I would try to leap it, but would be pulled back. Sometimes I would barrel on, almost feeling lush green spaces beneath my feet, only to find I had been corralled back into the same narrow pen. At some point I noticed that several hours had passed. Diana Alstad eventually joined us. I hoped her feminine grace would cause the jagged sharpness of our ideological battle to soften a little. I was growing a little tired of all this energy without motion. We were still sparring over individuality and uniqueness versus oneness and connectedness, and had not progressed at all. Diana solicitously took out a handkerchief and gently wiped some moisture from her husband's face. She began to say something to me that I did not catch, but Joel interrupted her, waving her off and saying, He's more sophisticated than that. Holding up the last edition of What Is Enlightenment? and pointing to the words impersonal enlightenment on its cover, she criticized all teachings that emphasize the impersonal. Turning the conversation to the topic of love, I suggested that there is nothing uniquely personal or special about romantic love. This elicited a strong and immediate emotional response. But everyone wants to feel special! cried Diana. No one loves Diana the way that I do, Joel asserted. Yes, perhaps, I responded, but then everyone feels that way about their romantic involvement. Joel Kramer changed the subject. He asked me if I thought that God or the Absolute was identical with the universe, and if so, wasn't Adolf Hitler God? No, Adolf Hitler isn't God, I said. Well then, is God separate from the universe? Joel wanted to know. No, I said, God isn't separate from the universe, but He or She or It is not identical to the universe. But that's dualistic. That's monotheism,exclaimed Alstad. (Kramer and Alstad believe that monotheism is patently authoritarian, whereas the authoritarianism of Eastern oneness ideologies is more subtle and hidden, although equally pernicious.) I replied that saying that God is identical even with the entire universe still limits God, and God is unlimited. A moment of stunned silence. Then I pointed out that we were enmeshed in the old debate of transcendence versus immanence of the Absolute, a philosophical issue of great profundity that theologians have been wrestling with for centuries. I don't have the answer either, I said. The closest I can come up with at the moment is that God is both transcendent and immanent. Well, you can't have it both ways, Joel protested. I have to admit that even at this late stage in the proceedings this response surprised me a bit. One of the more interesting aspects of Kramer's and Alstad's thought is their insistence that we need to go beyond either/or bipolar thinking and become proficient at dialectics if we are to have any hope of solving the problems of our weary and burdened globe. The hallmark of dialectics is that out of the clash of opposites, a higher inclusive synthesis is supposed to emerge. But despite hours of lively tete-a-tete no glimmer of a synthesis of our opposing views was in sight. I decided to give it one last try. Couldn't your understanding of oneness or selflessness be artificially limited? I stammered. I was getting worn out. Isn't the very point of genuine oneness experience and understanding the resolution of the conceptual opposites of one and many, self and nonself, into a higher unity? And isn't this where dialectics is supposed to ultimately lead? It didn't work. He said that there is no higher oneness; the one is always opposed to the many. And we were back in the same loop. But I hadn't quite run out of steam yet. I finally asked, If selflessness is a harmful basis for morality, as you argue, what would you base morality upon? They both answered, Survival. They said that given the ecological crisis and the threat of nuclear extermination, this was the problem most urgently facing humanity today. I could not disagree with this. But I asked how a morality of survival could be free from the danger of authoritarianism. In fact, I went on, I don't think you could find a morality more susceptible to authoritarian abuse than one based ultimately on survival. Wasn't the survival of China, for example, the rationale for Chairman Mao's authoritarian oppression? Couldn't survival as the ultimate yardstick justify the most extreme forms of suppression of the individual? Diana Alstad hesitantly offered that respect for the individual would be seen as necessary to survival of the race. Then Kramer changed the subject again. Feeling that we were now beyond the point of polite philosophical debate, Kramer told me, in so many words, that although intelligent, relatively sophisticated, and sincere, I was very confused. I don't hold back saying where I think things are at, he told me, in case I was unsure of this. After four and a half hours of battle with his and Alstad's prodigious intellects, this was one of the few things I was not unsure of at this point. But there was one other. Joel Kramer had told me that in his days of teaching at Esalen and elsewhere, he had been tempted to become a guru himself. Several times during the course of our conversation he had asserted that he could have pulled it off if he had wanted to. I know what people expect, and I could play that role, he told me. But when he was teaching he saw the temptation, and the effect that adulation from others had on him, and he didn't like it. He knew that the temptation to abuse the position was too strong and he renounced taking the role. I respected him for that. I had even had a similar experience, although not as dramatic as his, years ago when teaching a class on spirituality, and had made a similar choice. Well, I haven't told you explicitly what I think is behind your philosophy, I said. They invited me to go on. I think that many people have been deeply burned, both by what they have seen in others who have abused the guru role and by what they have seen in themselves, I said. Being genuinely selfless is the greatest challenge. Most of us come up against the same temptations in ourselves, and make the same mistakes, over and over again. It is very easy to despair of ever going beyond the temptations of power and selfishness. I was speaking from personal experience here, not from theory. Despite years of effort at personal transformation, I was still very much struggling. I think that the difficulties that you faced in yourself have made you deeply cynical about the possibility of anyone manifesting real selflessness I concluded. There was a moment of silence. I could not tell if they were impressed with my point, or only affected by the emotion behind it. It seemed that for an instant there was the possibility of meeting in mutual respect, but the moment passed. There wasn't much more to say. Soon, another visitor dropped by and I took my cue to thank them both and leave. On my way out Alstad gave me a book of teachings by Kramer from years ago, some articles by him on yoga and a copy of a manuscript of a new book they are working on about the inherent authoritarianism of Buddhism. Diana and I spoke for a few moments about my current spiritual involvement, and she graciously said to Joel that she thought there was more to it than the usual oneness ideology. But Joel, looking annoyed, just waved this off, said good-bye and returned to his guest. I drove back down the mesa, through a grove of eucalyptus, and headed south on Highway 1. Bolinas Lagoon rippled orange beneath the setting sun, silhouetting statuesque egrets, herons and other waterfowl, nature forming a picture of peaceful perfection. Exhausted, I breathed a sigh of relief. Moksha Foundation 1995 Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Tues, May 13, 1997 at 17:48:32 (EDT)
Poster: JW Email: To: Mili Subject: Re: Interview with Authors of 'Guru papers' Message: Since you have re-posted this interview puff-piece I will re-post my (abreviated) response: I read the interview' you posted, which, you will have to admit was written by someone who writes for a magazine with a vested interest in people searching for spiritual teachers, and Kramer and Alstad aren't fond of such endeavors, especially if it involves surrendering to a guru. I was surprised that the interview wasn't much more than the interviewer expressing his inability to understand where the authors were coming from. Kind of like the way you, OP and Chris relate to the rest of us on the site. I don't think the authors believe that oneness philosophy is the only cause of the world's problems. They don't say that in the book. And this interview doesn't even address the subject of the pathological nature of the guru-disciple relationship, which is by far the main subject of The Guru Papers. Nevertheless, I can see where one could reasonably conclude that oneness philosophy eventually leads to vulnerability and abuse, given the nature of human beings to want to be vulnerable, on the one hand, and also to dominate, given the opportunity, on the other hand. Political systems, domestic violence and abuse, child abuse and various forms of manipulation result, with the vulnerable and surrendered the most likely to get stepped on. I agree with Kramer that the experience of oneness (as in the experience of knowledge) is fine in and of itself. But if that experience becomes a oneness ideology, especially if it is focused on surrender to another person (aka a cult like Guru Maharaj Ji's world) that causes people to be susceptible to authoritation manipulation. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 18:12:48 (EDT)
Poster: Mili Email: To: JW Subject: Re: Interview with Authors of 'Guru papers' Message: Well, I see that you've closed the lid completely on the possibility that there might be some value in being a genuine disciple of a genuine spiritual master. Too bad. You know there just MIGHT be a possibility that Maharaji is a genuine Master who has something genuine to offer. Of course, people who think like you will never find out. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 18:55:46 (EDT)
Poster: Jim Email: To: Mili Subject: Re: Interview with Authors of 'Guru papers' Message: Well, I see that you've closed the lid completely on the possibility that there might be some value in being a genuine disciple of a genuine spiritual master. Too bad. You know there just MIGHT be a possibility that Maharaji is a genuine Master who has something genuine to offer. Of course, people who think like you will never find out. Ah, we've been here before! Many times, as I recall. All on the newsgroup. Mili, fair is fair. You asked this question before and, if you remember, I answered - yes. Yes, ' there just MIGHT be a possibility that Maharaji is a genuine Master who has something genuine to offer.' But now it's your turn. Do you agree that there just MIGHT be a possibility that Maharaji is a fraud? You never answered me before. Will you now? Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 19:49:00 (EDT)
Poster: JW Email: To: Mili Subject: Re: Interview with Authors of 'Guru papers' Message: Well, I see that you've closed the lid completely on the possibility that there might be some value in being a genuine disciple of a genuine spiritual master. Too bad. You know there just MIGHT be a possibility that Maharaji is a genuine Master who has something genuine to offer. Of course, people who think like you will never find out. No, I disagree with your statement of what I think. There MIGHT be a possibility that Guru Maharaj Ji is a Genuine Master, and I think I found out he really did have something genuine to offer, but I found out he is really a BAD GURU, or at least a NOT VERY GOOD GURU when it came to what happened I got the genuine stuff he had to offer. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 22:25:17 (EDT)
Poster: Chris Email: To: Jim Subject: Re: Interview with Authors of 'Guru papers' Message: Of course there is a possibility that M is a fraud. You seem well rested and ready to go after your vacation. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, May 12, 1997 at 11:31:20 (EDT)
Poster: Scott Email: To: Everyone Subject: A New Forum Message: Dear Forum Participants, - Due to the fact that I have received several requests to open up a second 'special interest' forum for those former premies who still feel they are on some sort of inward spiritual path, I have recently opened a second forum called the 'Possible Dream?' forum. If this idea seems interesting to you, please click on the 'Go Up One Level' icon at the top of this forum and then review the new forum description for the 'Possible Dream?' forum. - This new forum is not meant to prevent or stifle anyone from expressing their views. This 'Anything' forum will, of course, remain open for that purpose. It is simply meant to provide an atmosphere where many of the views that seem to have been stifled here might be expressed a bit more openly without feeling the need to exert so much energy defending one's self. - By establishing this new forum, I am in no way attempting to imply that any of the many 'negative' experiences that so many ex-premies have reported were untrue or invalid. I am simply attempting to provide an atmosphere where some of the 'positive' experiences can be discussed more openly. Still I think that by limiting participation in this new forum to former premies only, it will naturally prevent the discussion from becoming too 'pro' Maharaji. Sincerely, |
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 11:29:38 (EDT)
Poster: Jim Email: To: Scott Subject: Re: A New Forum Message: Dear Forum Participants, - Due to the fact that I have received several requests to open up a second 'special interest' forum for those former premies who still feel they are on some sort of inward spiritual path, I have recently opened a second forum called the 'Possible Dream?' forum. If this idea seems interesting to you, please click on the 'Go Up One Level' icon at the top of this forum and then review the new forum description for the 'Possible Dream?' forum. - This new forum is not meant to prevent or stifle anyone from expressing their views. This 'Anything' forum will, of course, remain open for that purpose. It is simply meant to provide an atmosphere where many of the views that seem to have been stifled here might be expressed a bit more openly without feeling the need to exert so much energy defending one's self. - By establishing this new forum, I am in no way attempting to imply that any of the many 'negative' experiences that so many ex-premies have reported were untrue or invalid. I am simply attempting to provide an atmosphere where some of the 'positive' experiences can be discussed more openly. Still I think that by limiting participation in this new forum to former premies only, it will naturally prevent the discussion from becoming too 'pro' Maharaji.
Scott Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 18:11:04 (EDT)
Poster: Jim Email: To: Jim Subject: Re: A New Forum Message: Dear Forum Participants, - Due to the fact that I have received several requests to open up a second 'special interest' forum for those former premies who still feel they are on some sort of inward spiritual path, I have recently opened a second forum called the 'Possible Dream?' forum. If this idea seems interesting to you, please click on the 'Go Up One Level' icon at the top of this forum and then review the new forum description for the 'Possible Dream?' forum. - This new forum is not meant to prevent or stifle anyone from expressing their views. This 'Anything' forum will, of course, remain open for that purpose. It is simply meant to provide an atmosphere where many of the views that seem to have been stifled here might be expressed a bit more openly without feeling the need to exert so much energy defending one's self. - By establishing this new forum, I am in no way attempting to imply that any of the many 'negative' experiences that so many ex-premies have reported were untrue or invalid. I am simply attempting to provide an atmosphere where some of the 'positive' experiences can be discussed more openly. Still I think that by limiting participation in this new forum to former premies only, it will naturally prevent the discussion from becoming too 'pro' Maharaji. Sincerely,
Well, I'm still on vacation but well, you know, I was checking my mail and thought I'd just well...you know Scott, I really feel that creating this new forum of yours is a bad mistake. I know the simple answer is that if I'm not interested in contributing there or, perhaps more to the point, if I don't QUALIFY, I should just ignore it. Of course I'll never contribute there. After all, I DON'T qualify. Any more than I would for a carefully demarcated Christian forum. Perhaps that was my problem with Harlan. Perhaps he assumed that any visitor to his 'premie' site would respect the basic premie ideology, however vague and contradictory. Well you know what they say about 'assume'. (I always hated THAT little Joe Anctilism). Anyways, my real complaint is that I think your creation of a 'doubting believer' forum is philosophically and symbolically misguided. You state that the forum ' is simply meant to provide an atmosphere where many of the views that seem to have been stifled here might be expressed a bit more openly without feeling the need to exert so much energy defending one's self.' And that reminds me of Carl Sagan's final work, The Demon-Haunted World, an excellent paen to science. Sagan states a simple but extremely important point which, nontheless, is often overlooked. The virtue of science, unlike all (most?) other mental conventions is that it INVITES hard questions. The scientific orientation is truly the most humble philosophical attitude as it never ignores the possibility that our ideas may be wrong. While it's commonplace to nominally admit as much in any discussion, the scientific attitude is the only one that encourages people to take that warning to heart. Moreover, science teaches that, all in all, one should always appreciate the benefits of being 'liberated' from a false idea. Your statement above suggests that you don't feel this way. It suggests that people should be encouraged to exchange their views here without the risk of persuasion. Your tacit offer for the new forum is that 'here is a place where you can say and think anything without the risk of honest feedback. Here is a place where you can be as stupid and silly as you like, as inconsistent as the moment inspires, and no one will be so rude as to point that out to you. A safe place, safe at least for your ideas.' Scott, I know that you personally are about as far from an insulting person as I've ever had the pleasure of meeting. But I suggest to you that your comment above is in fact quite nasty. Think about it. You claim that some have had their ideas 'stifled' here. How's that? Oxford says to stifle is to 'suppress, smother.' What I've seen here is anything but that. I've seen some pose some challenging questions to various people in order to flush out their beliefs, not suppress them. It's quite misleading to suggest the opposite. Similiarly, I think you shoot dangerously wide of the mark when you claim that people have had to defend 'themselves' here. Don't you mean their ideas? The only ad hominem attacks I've seen have been from the believers. Even you, in your attack on scientists' integrity, indulged. On the other hand, those challenging the various 'spiritual' ideas here have, as far as I can tell, avoided this tactic. And why not? We can afford to because, after all, we're already loaded with these good, hard questions. In other words, there's no need for the low blow. My main point is that the very way Maharaji sucked us in to begin with was by convincing us that hard questions were bad. As soon as we break free from that assumption we begin to reclaim our real self. How can you think that those questions are good for Maharaji but not for any and all 'spiritual' thinking? Isn't that hypocritical? So I wonder what could possibly happen on that other forum of yours. Are people free to discuss there or is it going to look more like Harlan's page where people make isolated comments but no one actually has the guts to even begin a discussion? You should decide quick because if a discussion does start up you're on dangerous ground. Someone might actually challenge someone else's comment. In that case, what will you do? Offer yet antother ICU for the newly-challenged idea, a protected forum within protected forums? Or will you kick out the newl-offending challanger and banish him or her to the 'anything' hinterlands? Even if no one ever uses your new forum (a real possibility given the stringent reuqirements), it's very existance somehow undermines the one thing all the ex-premies necessarily agree on: we should have asked more hard questions. Hard questions are good. My turn to apologize. It's wrong for me to call
your slur against critics 'nasty.' I think that's a little
strong (although 'slur' isn't). In other words, I'm sure you
never meant to do other than call things as you see them.
'Nasty' is the wrong word.
How about 'unfair'?
|
Date: Wed, May 14, 1997 at 23:30:01 (EDT)
Poster: Scott Email: To: Jim Subject: Re: A New Forum Message: Dear Jim, - Obviously, due to the lack of participation in my new little forum, I don't think you have to worry about being the last one left out of any groups, Jim. It appears that rather the opposite is the case. Ah well, perhaps it's just a reflection of my having grown tired of feeling like we've been going around in circles in our discussions. I'm sure you must feel some of the same. Perhaps you and I (and maybe also some of the others around here) have both made up our minds on some level that lies beneath the level of mere discussion. Perhaps mere discussion simply doesn't have the ability to reach that more basic level. I don't know. I'm sorry. If no one ever ventures over onto the new forum, I won't mind in the least. I have said what I felt I needed to say, perhaps been about as stubborn as some of the current premies around here, and don't feel I have the energy or desire to say much more. Ah well, I guess it's time to archive. Again, I do thank you Jim, Anon, and all others for your willingness to engage with me in these discussions. Even though I have reached a place where I feel that I am not ready for any further such discussions at this time, your presence and insights have meant a lot to me, for which I am grateful.
Take care, |
Date: Mon, May 12, 1997 at 00:54:22 (EDT)
Poster: ZEB Email: To: Gunther Glockenspiel Subject: Gunther- I'm a friend Message: Hi there. I am using my name as ZEB because that used to be my old name until I changed it. First of all, I am also 17 years old and my mom was involved in the Divine Light cult. So IS my dad, however. He's my step-dad (I love him very much, though.) My real dad was married to my mom a long time ago and they both were involved in the Divine Light cult until he stopped practicing knowledge and realized how stupid this thing was. But that wasn't the reason they split up. That's a whole other story for a different web-site. Anyways, it wasn't till I was about 14 years old that I became brain-washed, so to speak, into thinking that Maharaji was the spiritual master and if I didn't get knowledge, I was missing the whole boat of life. I had started listening to tapes of Maharaji speaking and watched videos, pretty sure that I wanted to receive knowledge when I was 18, and I couldn't wait to receive it, wished that they would drop the age of receiving knowledge so that I could be 'fulfilled' in this life. I would go to public showings of Maharaji videos, and was so happy. But of course, I woke up about a year ago and realized that I was going to join a cult. The experience that opened my eyes, came about a year ago. I had always bugged my mom and dad about letting me go to a Maharaji event so I could see him live. Well I went to Miami Beach, Florida to see an Anniversary event. (30 years of teaching, 25 years in North America). And that is when my eyes were opened. It was the third and final day of the program. I was enjoying myself and having a great old time in the 90 degree farenheight weather. Near the end of the final program after he had done his little speaking, he left the stage and then people cheered and he came back out. Some of his 'followers' were singing songs to him. One of them was 'ROCK ME MAHARAJI'. Practically everybody in the building stood up and starting singing 'Rock me Maharaji, roll me tonight, Rock me Maharaji, say it's alright.......it's alright.....' blah blah blah. And I looked around the whole place, at the thousands of people throwing their hands in the air, singing these songs of praise to this guy (Maharaji) sitting in this chair smiling. And I got a look at his eyes, and it was almost as if he were thinking 'Yes! This is how I wanted it to be! This is the way it should be.' And at that moment I realized that no human being on this earth should be worshipped and have that kind of power over people. It's just not right. I guess my mom must have seen it in my eyes (how weird I thought this whole thing was) because a few months ago, my mom left the Divine Light cult, for good. It has caused some major turmoil in our home since my dad is still involved with it. But things, I think, are starting to cool off a bit. Sorry Gunther, I guess I kind of just got carried away. I can type so fast (76-85 words a minute) so it doesn't take me very long to type a whole huge message. I guess my whole point that I am trying to make is that (in response to your question) Maharaji is not some sort of God. Some people might label him as that, but it's all brain-wash. Believe me, there is nothing Godly about Maharaji. There are a whole bunch of bad things about this cult that I would have to make this message a few pages more. The list just go's on and on like a duracell battery. I can relate to you, Gunther, and I hope this post has helped you. Greetings and tidings from ZEB (an admitted Nice Guy) Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, May 12, 1997 at 01:29:21 (EDT)
Poster: Gunther Glockenspiel Email: To: ZEB Subject: Re: Gunther- I'm a friend Message: That's an impressive tale. The closest I came to the cult was when I was about 4 months old and my dad took me to one of the Holi? things. We they spit paint out of huge super soakers or something. Sounds like something I would do now at a rock Concert. Anyway, your story was helpful in depicting the kind of guy Mahraji is. For Chrises sake I will not make any comparsions. (Nothing about snot though. 8 ) Well, its cool your from Miami too because thats where I was. Now I am on a different seaboard so I guess I can't just drive over and say Yo. Anyway. Maybe we'll talk some other time. I know a guy here whose name is Zeb, he's a cool guy. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, May 12, 1997 at 02:53:02 (EDT)
Poster: Chris Email: To: Gunther Glockenspiel Subject: Re: Gunther- I'm a friend Message: Deena's son is into the 'snot interpretation' thing too. Must be a new 'in' rationalization. Anyway, take care. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, May 11, 1997 at 23:50:08 (EDT)
Poster: Gunther Glockenspiel Email: To: Everyone Subject: Am I real?? Message: I assure you that I am a real living and breathing carbon based human bieng. I am not another person that has used this before you. I am 17 and my mom was an ex-cult member. (My eating habits differ from her too) I was just curious about why you folks did this thats all. If you want me to try and prove my existance I welcome any questions. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, May 12, 1997 at 03:03:10 (EDT)
Poster: Chris Email: To: Gunther Glockenspiel Subject: Re: Am I real?? Message: Sometimes people switch their identity to try to get some extra leverage in this ongoing debate. Carbon based. Heavy. Does that mean amino acid earthling? I was quite a bit older when I ran into the M thing. I was 21 hitch-hiking out of London with my Martin guitar in hand and got picked up by a van full of premies on a mission from God. I liked it. Some great stuff happened. And I learned a lot. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, May 12, 1997 at 18:33:44 (EDT)
Poster: Gunther Glockenspiel Email: To: Chris Subject: Re: Am I real?? Message: I have a little more respect from you now becuase you play guitar. And a Martin Acoustic too. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, May 12, 1997 at 20:18:39 (EDT)
Poster: Chris Email: To: Gunther Glockenspiel Subject: Re: Am I real?? Message: I have a little more respect from you now becuase you play guitar. And a Martin Acoustic too. Yeah, I have a Martin M36, Les Paul Jr, Les Paul, Strat and Guild Starfire and a couple Fender amps and a Marshall. I gave the Martin I used to have away a long time ago. Jim Heller plays guitar in a band. Its not so easy to figure people out on these Internet pages. CD Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, May 12, 1997 at 23:13:52 (EDT)
Poster: Gunther Glockenspiel Email: To: Chris Subject: Re: Am I real?? Message: I play in a band and we have a gig coming up. I play Bass Guitar. But a musician is a musicain and guitar players have some weird link. Anyway, that is quite a collection. One of are guitarist has a real Gibson Les Paul. Its a beauty. I have trouble even looking over at it. My bass is nothing special but it gets the job done. Anyway, its cool you play guitar. Maybe thats one other thing we can talk about besides snot. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Tues, May 13, 1997 at 15:11:10 (EDT)
Poster: Chris Email: To: Gunther Glockenspiel Subject: Re: Am I real?? Message: Good luck with the band. Go to college or a university if you can. Its always good to learn some different stuff. I started at UCSD and quit after 2 years but went back and ended up doing 7 years studying economics, math, business and systems engineering. These days I do computer software for a business: www.webcom.com/garjak/cdickey Contrary to some peoples beliefs, having an interest in Ms teachings does not mean you can't think or have fun. I do all three. CD Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Tues, May 13, 1997 at 18:37:16 (EDT)
Poster: Gunther Glockenspeil Email: To: Chris Subject: Re: Am I real?? Message: I have college aspirations. You seem to be able to balance your time well between stuff. Thats one thing I suck at. I am getting help though. Well thats all I have to say. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Tues, May 13, 1997 at 20:41:37 (EDT)
Poster: Yo Mamma Email: To: Gunther Glockenspeil Subject: Re: Am I real?? Message: If you are serious about those aspirations boy get the to thy HOMEWORK! Love. Yo Mamma Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, May 11, 1997 at 08:58:06 (EDT)
Poster: Mili Email: To: Everyone Subject: Past, Present and Future Message: The past is gone, the future hasn't happened yet. The only thing that exists is the present. You are alive NOW. Be aware of it. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, May 11, 1997 at 10:09:30 (EDT)
Poster: Brian Email: To: Mili Subject: Re: Past, Present and Future Message: You are confused, Mili. This is not Mili's Satsang Page. Your cosmic insight looks a bit pale posted next to your slam of G's mother and her own personal testimony about your tennis buddy. Your indifference to any need to apologize to her is exceeded only by MJ's indifference to his former devotees. Keep it up and you too can be Lord. Practice, practice, practice... Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, May 11, 1997 at 19:41:42 (EDT)
Poster: Chris Email: To: Brian Subject: Re: Past, Present and Future Message: I give Mili a bit of slack. He has been through some rough times in the place he lives. Here in the US we are much more spoiled and secure. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, May 12, 1997 at 12:30:51 (EDT)
Poster: Mili Email: To: Brian Subject: Re: Past, Present and Future Message: You are confused, Mili. This is not Mili's Satsang Page. Your cosmic insight looks a bit pale posted next to your slam of G's mother and her own personal testimony about your tennis buddy. Your indifference to any need to apologize to her is exceeded only by MJ's indifference to his former devotees. Keep it up and you too can be Lord. Practice, practice, practice... Brian, your insults are pale, but they are nothing but insults. So why not be more straightforward, like: Brian, why are you such a moron? Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, May 10, 1997 at 22:28:06 (EDT)
Poster: Chris Email: To: Everyone Subject: Anything Positive? Message: We have all read a lot of negative stuff posted here. Does anybody have any comments on something positive that they learned from their association with Maharaji? Did anybody learn to appreciate and love life just a bit more? Did anybody experience that something inside really exists to be felt when the whipped up thoughts of the mind settle into a glassy calm? CD Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, May 10, 1997 at 22:45:29 (EDT)
Poster: G's Mom Email: To: Chris Subject: Re: Anything Positive? Message: We have all read a lot of negative stuff posted here. Does anybody have any comments on something positive that they learned from their association with Maharaji? Did anybody learn to appreciate and love life just a bit more? Did anybody experience that something inside really exists to be felt when the whipped up thoughts of the mind settle into a glassy calm? CD Chris, #1 I learned the hard way to put my life experience and critical thinking skills to use in evaluating all things. I learned to be very skeptical of people who promise weird new age types of things. I can spot cults of all descriptions very quickly because they have many similarities. I know cultspeak when I hear it even if it is coming from an Amway salesman. #2 My kids taught me that and so has my husband. I cherish them.GMJ never taught me that. #3. Yes. But so what? I feel the same way when I take a Xanax. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, May 11, 1997 at 04:02:14 (EDT)
Poster: Mili to G's Mom Email: To: G's Mom Subject: Re: Anything Positive? Message: If you think a Xanax is better than no Xanax, your critical thinking leaves much to be desired. When you take the next Xanax, take a fistful, wash it down with vodka, and don't forget to put on the black jumpsuit and white Nikes. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, May 11, 1997 at 08:12:05 (EDT)
Poster: Bill Cooper Email: To: Mili Subject: Re: Anything Positive? Message: If you think a Xanax is better than no Xanax, your critical thinking leaves much to be desired. When you take the next Xanax, take a fistful, wash it down with vodka, and don't forget to put on the black jumpsuit and white Nikes. Milli Is this your idea of humour ? Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, May 11, 1997 at 20:26:42 (EDT)
Poster: JW Email: To: Chris Subject: Re: Anything Positive? Message: I haven't heard anyone on this site, nor any ex-premie I have talked to, say that there wasn't something positive in meditation, and meditation was certainly part of GMJ's world. And, as I have said before, I think some of the premies I met in the cult were some of the finest people I have ever met, and a few are close friends to this day. That also is positive. But having said that, saying something positive is a little difficult because you have to ask yourself: positive compared to what? I can say I had good times while I was a premie, but I would have had good times doing just about, anything. Since Maharaj Ji was offering the ultimate realization and the purpose of life and, in some peoples' views at least, he didn't deliver and instead consumed years of our lives and all our resources, well, it's hard to come up with something positive after you realize that. As an ex-premie, if somebody asks me if I had a good time in the cult, I have to always ask: COMPARED TO WHAT? Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, May 11, 1997 at 22:40:06 (EDT)
Poster: Chris Email: To: JW Subject: Re: Anything Positive? Message: JW: 'As an ex-premie, if somebody asks me if I had a good time in the cult, I have to always ask: COMPARED TO WHAT?' That is a good point and a big question. Who is really successful in the USA or this big world? Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, May 12, 1997 at 00:53:07 (EDT)
Poster: Gunther's Mom Email: To: JW Subject: Re: Anything Positive? Message: Excellent Point! And I will add....at what cost? Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, May 12, 1997 at 12:42:06 (EDT)
Poster: JW Email: To: Chris Subject: Re: Anything Positive? Message: JW: 'As an ex-premie, if somebody asks me if I had a good time in the cult, I have to always ask: COMPARED TO WHAT?' That is a good point and a big question. Who is really successful in the USA or this big world? I guess it depends on your definition of success. I have my own definition, which includes at the top of the list things like, self-direction, integration of intellect and emotions, moderation (just like Plato), and, as I think you can tell from things I've said here: justice, fairness, taking responsibility for your actions (whether you meant to cause harm or not (Maharaj Ji, are you listening?)), and a profound respect for people as individuals and not taking advantage of them for your own selfish purposes. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, May 12, 1997 at 17:29:22 (EDT)
Poster: JW Email: To: Gunther's Mom Subject: Re: Anything Positive? Message: Excellent Point! And I will add....at what cost? Exactly........AND AT WHAT COST? Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, May 10, 1997 at 18:25:46 (EDT)
Poster: Anonymous Email: To: Everyone Subject: Chat Message: If you can chat at 4pm PST please go to Healthychoice.com/ and then to travel and then to chat. Pick the room called newstand. If it is already full we can go to another room and I think we will recognize eachother from the screennames we pick. Hope to see you there! Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, May 10, 1997 at 18:44:09 (EDT)
Poster: same Email: To: Anonymous Subject: Re: Chat Message: Coffee Klasch room is not busy I am in there Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, May 10, 1997 at 19:08:56 (EDT)
Poster: Exprem Email: To: al Subject: Re: Chat Message: I am in the chatrooms and they are pretty confusing. Look for exprem go there I will stay till 4:25 I think if anyone is coming they are lost! Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, May 10, 1997 at 21:10:44 (EDT)
Poster: Chris Email: To: Everyone Subject: Re: Chat Message: The turnout was small but the chat was a success. Jim, Gunthers mom and Chris duked it out in a rendition of a tag team match. Jim slapped Chris around a bit and forced him to cough up his phone number. An important topic was the depth of sincerity that one put into singing the famous Arti song. This is closely related to the issue of whether M was viewed as a divine being or not by each individual. Not much discussion took place regarding wether or not there really is an inner experience at the center of our existance. Chris was accused of being evasive and possibly pretending to be a fool. The atmosphere was fluid and pleasant but mildly dull as all nasty words were replaced with '*'s such as the '69' in my phone number. This constraint on vocabulary got Jim Heller a bit uptight. I expect to have the full text version of his opinions available on my answering machine. All things considered, a good start. Congrats G's mom, Jim and Chris for getting to the chat room. See you all at the next chat! CD Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, May 10, 1997 at 16:56:34 (EDT)
Poster: Gunther's Mom Email: To: Everyone Subject: The Guru Message: Dear Everyone, Obviously people who have come before me have much the same opinion about their wasted years at GMJ's lotus feet. Now how can anyone even question that a person who allowed Arti to be sung to him and his feet to be kissed in Darshan lines was portraying himself as God? Give us all a collective break. And has that person changed....no he I am sure is simply doing what he needs in order to live in the style to which he has become accustommed. By saying what I have to say here I will divulge my identity to those I reported this to. But I am going to because so many current premies are here it seems. I was a premie as a young teen. When I was 15 myself and a 14 year old friend were fondled by Mahatma Jagdeo. I reported this to GMJ and I know the information got to him. Apparently it was not important enough for the man to be removed. I also heard from children of premies, girls between 10 and 15, that they were also molested by this man. I know that the Catholic Church has had similar problems and I think that is why people with ilnesses such as this man seek positons of trust. But in case he is still out there keep your little girls away from him OK??? I am not saying this for any other reason than to protect children from similar experiences. I am certain he went all over the country doing this as you often saw him so beautifully surrounded by innocent children, much like Michael Jackson. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, May 10, 1997 at 19:02:56 (EDT)
Poster: Mili Email: To: Gunther's Mom Subject: Re: The Guru Message: Scott, that's another great rumor to add to your collection! Jagdeo struck me as a very devoted and serious person. He was a little sore when we played tennis and I whupped his ass, though. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, May 10, 1997 at 19:45:27 (EDT)
Poster: Brian Email: To: Mili Subject: Re: The Guru Message: Scott, that's another great rumor to add to your collection! Jagdeo struck me as a very devoted and serious person. He was a little sore when we played tennis and I whupped his ass, though. You are confused, Mili. You are also an insensitive imbecile. Or maybe you're not. Perhaps you just struck me that way... Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, May 10, 1997 at 20:09:03 (EDT)
Poster: JW Email: To: Mili Subject: Re: The Guru Message: Scott, that's another great rumor to add to your collection! Jagdeo struck me as a very devoted and serious person. He was a little sore when we played tennis and I whupped his ass, though. Mili, for god's sake, please show a little of the sensitivity you claim to possess. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, May 11, 1997 at 06:06:06 (EDT)
Poster: Anon Email: To: Mili Subject: Re: The Guru Message: Scott, that's another great rumor to add to your collection!Jagdeo struck me as a very devoted and serious person. He was a little sore when we played tennis and I whupped his ass, though. Mili, for Christ's sake what if it is true?? Are you gonna be the one who tried to whitewash all these issues?? Can you live with that? I have myself first-hand seen enough weird abuse stuff to at least entertain the possibility that Jagdeo may be a kid-diddler. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, May 11, 1997 at 10:38:21 (EDT)
Poster: op Email: To: G's mom Subject: Re: The Guru Message: I never heard of your accusations against Jagdeo. I do know of some very disturbing situations that happened with a few instructors. I don't doubt your word (the way Mili appears to), and I'm glad you had the guts to report it. Jagdeo is no longer around and hasn't been for years. I don't know what happened to him. What year was the incident you mentioned? Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, May 11, 1997 at 21:02:19 (EDT)
Poster: JW Email: To: Gunther's Mom Subject: Re: The Guru Message: I'd justlike to say that I'm very, very sorry that happened to you. Like any other violation or abuse of human beings that are unable to protect themselves, it also makes me angry. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, May 12, 1997 at 00:30:58 (EDT)
Poster: Gunther's Mom Email: To: JW,and other posters Subject: Re: The Guru Message: Thank you for your kindness. It is appreciated. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, May 12, 1997 at 00:47:38 (EDT)
Poster: Gunther's mom Email: To: op Subject: Re: The Guru Message: This happened to me about 1977. I was 15 I believe. The incident involved fondling only. My friend who was with me told me later he did things like this to her over a number of years. I am trying to put this delicately without exaggeration , he would force her to sit on his lap and it was obvious he found this arousing along with putting his hands on her breasts and buttocks. This is what happened to me. She said other premie kids said the Mahatma Ji was nasty. A sad commentary is when this happened to me I was quite devoted and struggled long and hard to find a benign explanation. I thought Mahatma Ji was so pure that he did not know it was wrong to touch in these areas. I thought maybe I was in my mind. But I kept thinking about what happened and the reality of it. I reported it to an initiator who spent a lot of time with Maharaj Ji. I could tell he took me seriously and he was going to report it. I later reported it a second time because I thought with all the awareness in the media about pedophiles maybe they would listen. And I heard back Maharaj Ji had heard about it way back when. I hope that they at least warned people but apparently they did send him back out on the road which disturbs me. I am concerned about hearing victim blaming stuff from Mili and others. All I can say is I was young and so were the others. In fact I was the oldest. I firmly believed Maharaj Ji was God and had mystical powers.I would have accepted it with little suprise if he had flown about the room. These were the days before children were educated about the private areas of their bodies. I think that pedophiles have always saught out positions of power with access to children. This sort of thing has happened in many other settings. What they share is the betrayal of trust and authority. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Tues, May 13, 1997 at 12:30:30 (EDT)
Poster: JW Email: To: Gunther's Mom Subject: Re: The Guru Message: It is a little more distressing that Jagdeo's pedophile activities were happening, and reported in 1977 and you said you know that Maharaj Ji personally knew about it. The year or so that I was community coordinator in Miami (1979-1980) Jagdeo continued to be in Miami much of the time and was a featured satsang-giver in the community and at the large festivals Guru Maharaj Ji held in Miami and elsewhere during the period. I was never told to warn any parents about him, nor that I should take any precautions whatsoever, and I know he went all over the community at will. I just hope I didn't do anything to facilitate his access to children. Even after I left Miami, I'm pretty sure Jagdeo continued to be a featured speaker, for example at the Guru Puja program in Miami in 1982, which was the last large Maharaj Ji-worship festival I attended. Obviously, this is five years after these things happened to you. But I'm not surprised. Removing Jagdeo from the scene would have raised troubling questions, and Maharaj Ji and his organization rarely took responsibility for anything and usually covered those things up. Even Parlokanand, who was caught sexually molesting children (little boys this time), was quietly sent to San Antonio and then back to India. There were rumors about him, but nothing official was ever said, and certianly he was never prosecuted for what he did, and probably never got any treatment; and he should have, and Jagdeo should have been as well. He was probably also quietly sent back to India since OP says he isn't around now. I just hope he didn't cause too much more damage to little girls in the meantime, and isn't continuing to do so to this day. The typical pedophile is usually not cured and they convince themselves that they are actually doing something nice for the child. Very sick, and that's why organizations have to take swift action to prevent further damage. It is troubling that GMJ was aware that he was sexually molesting little girls, while at the same time he was a public religious leader in his organization, put on the stage to inspire premies and to do propogation. While measures may have been taken to limit his private access to children, it's pretty hypocritical to let him be a featured satsang-giver at Maharaj Ji's program nevertheless. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Tues, May 13, 1997 at 14:47:01 (EDT)
Poster: Gunther's Mom Email: To: JW Subject: Re: The Guru Message: I find this so sad. I really carried hope that they took precautions to prevent this after I reported it. I guess not. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Tues, May 13, 1997 at 15:26:30 (EDT)
Poster: JW Email: To: Gunther's Mom Subject: Re: The Guru Message: I find this so sad. I really carried hope that they took precautions to prevent this after I reported it. I guess not. It's possible they took some precautions, like having someone with him when he was around children, I don't know. But still, it was hypocritical to let him be a religious leader in DLM after your warnings nonetheless. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |