|
Ex-Premie.Org |
Forum II Archive #
6 |
From:
Feb 13, 1998 |
To:
Feb 20, 1998 |
Page:
2
Of:
5 |
|
Rick -:- Miss Y -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 08:53:32 (EST)
___Nigel -:- Re: Miss Y -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 20:26:47 (EST)
Selena -:- love and respect aren't the same thing -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 17:32:18 (EST)
___Scott T. -:- Re: love and respect aren't the same thing -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 19:48:00 (EST)
___Scott T. -:- Re: love and respect aren't the same thing -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 00:06:57 (EST)
___VP -:- The Terrible Twos -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 07:37:12 (EST)
___Scott T. -:- Re: The Terrible Twos -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 09:37:00 (EST)
___JW -:- Re: The Terrible Twos -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 13:00:06 (EST)
___VP -:- Re: The Terrible Twos -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 13:48:45 (EST)
___VP -:- Re: The Terrible Twos -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 14:04:25 (EST)
___VP -:- English 101 -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 14:19:22 (EST)
___JW -:- Re: The Terrible Twos -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 14:33:42 (EST)
___Student -:- Re: The Terrible Twos -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 18:43:15 (EST)
___Student -:- Re: The Terrible Twos -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 18:49:53 (EST)
___Selena -:- Re: The Terrible Twos -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 18:51:05 (EST)
___JW -:- Re: The Terrible Twos -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 19:24:08 (EST)
___Jim -:- Re: The Terrible Twos -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 19:39:13 (EST)
___Nigel -:- Sid -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 21:49:30 (EST)
___VP -:- Evolution -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 22:28:21 (EST)
___premie? -:- Re: Sid -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 22:31:34 (EST)
___Mr Ex -:- What is a mature premie? -:- Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 06:03:16 (EST)
___Jim -:- Re: What is a mature premie? -:- Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 10:49:48 (EST)
___Student -:- Re: The Terrible Twos -:- Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 14:46:44 (EST)
___Student -:- Re: What is a mature premie? -:- Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 14:56:28 (EST)
___JW -:- Re: The Terrible Twos -:- Thurs, Feb 19, 1998 at 01:58:28 (EST)
___Mr Ex -:- Re: What is a mature premie? -:- Thurs, Feb 19, 1998 at 12:13:35 (EST)
___Student -:- Re: What is a mature premie? -:- Thurs, Feb 19, 1998 at 15:26:48 (EST)
___Student -:- Re: Evolution -:- Thurs, Feb 19, 1998 at 17:00:12 (EST)
___Premmey -:- Re: What is a mature premie? -:- Thurs, Feb 19, 1998 at 17:54:03 (EST)
Anon -:- LA community circa 1975 -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 16:58:39 (EST)
___Scott T. -:- Re: LA community circa 1975 -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 17:18:20 (EST)
___Anon -:- Re: LA community circa 1975 -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 17:35:15 (EST)
___Scott T. -:- Re: LA community circa 1975 -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 17:46:34 (EST)
___Scott T. -:- Re: LA community circa 1975 -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 09:54:54 (EST)
Brian -:- White Pages, Journeys additions -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 12:11:34 (EST)
Jim -:- New Yorker Piece -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 10:41:51 (EST)
___John Cavad -:- Re: New Yorker Piece -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 11:17:16 (EST)
___JW -:- Re: New Yorker Piece -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 13:28:59 (EST)
___Jim -:- Re: New Yorker Piece -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 15:22:58 (EST)
___Jim -:- Re: New Yorker Piece -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 19:23:14 (EST)
___Miss 'Y' -:- Re: New Yorker Piece -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 21:09:34 (EST)
___Jim -:- Re: New Yorker Piece -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 21:20:26 (EST)
___Miss 'Y' -:- Re: New Yorker Piece -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 21:56:39 (EST)
___Jim -:- Re: New Yorker Piece -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 22:55:33 (EST)
___Mili -:- Re: New Yorker Piece -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 03:06:02 (EST)
___ex-mug -:- Re: New Yorker Piece -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 03:27:03 (EST)
___Miss'Y' -:- Re: New Yorker Piece -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 08:25:01 (EST)
___ex-mug -:- Re: New Yorker Piece -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 11:56:55 (EST)
___Jim -:- Re: New Yorker Piece -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 14:14:16 (EST)
___StephenB -:- Re: New Yorker Piece -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 23:32:55 (EST)
___Miss'Y' -:- Re: New Yorker Piece -:- Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 00:23:55 (EST)
___Jim -:- Re: New Yorker Piece -:- Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 10:58:44 (EST)
___Brian -:- Re: New Yorker Piece -:- Thurs, Feb 19, 1998 at 07:37:26 (EST)
Mr Ex -:- Surat Shabd Yoga and Paramhans ... -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 10:25:51 (EST)
___Anon -:- Brian please read this. -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 16:41:59 (EST)
___Scott T. -:- Library of Congress Reference -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 17:14:35 (EST)
___Anon -:- Re: Library of Congress Reference -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 17:20:50 (EST)
___Scott T. -:- Re: Library of Congress Reference -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 17:50:55 (EST)
___Brian -:- Re: Brian please read this. -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 23:32:11 (EST)
___Anon -:- Re: Brian please read this. -:- Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 07:15:08 (EST)
___Brian -:- Re: Brian please read this. -:- Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 07:51:37 (EST)
___Anon -:- Re: Brian please read this. -:- Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 12:53:20 (EST)
Mili -:- Jim's Fundamental Confusion -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 02:38:24 (EST)
___Miss 'Y' -:- Re: Jim's Fundamental Confusion -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 22:17:41 (EST)
___Mili -:- Re: Jim's Fundamental Confusion -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 09:54:08 (EST)
___Scott T. -:- Confusion: A slight correction -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 10:20:36 (EST)
___Jim -:- Re: Confusion: A slight correction -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 14:19:28 (EST)
___Scott T. -:- Re: Confusion: A slight correction -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 15:17:50 (EST)
___JW -:- Re: Confusion: A slight correction -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 18:40:47 (EST)
___JW -:- Re: Confusion: A slight correction -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 18:46:32 (EST)
___Jim -:- Re: Confusion: A slight correction -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 20:11:16 (EST)
___Scott T. -:- Re: Confusion: A slight correction -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 20:22:47 (EST)
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 08:53:32 (EST)
Poster: Rick
Email: rtaraday@hotmail.com
To: Everyone
Subject: Miss Y
Message:
Miss Y,
What is it you want to say here at ex-premie.org? Reacting to Jim is nice, he ain't perfect and never claimed to be. Being sarcastic to Jim, about Jim... okay, that's amusing, but Jim doesn't operate a cult. Maharaji operates a cult and claims to be God; people believe this and change their lives and give him their money. Then they get pissed when they realize he ain't God. Do you think he's God? Do you think he doesn't operate a cult? Are you a devotee? Do you have the great gift of devotion? Is that what you want to say?
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 20:26:47 (EST)
Poster: Nigel
Email:
To: Rick
Subject: Re: Miss Y
Message:
Miss Y,
What is it you want to say here at ex-premie.org? Reacting to Jim is nice, he ain't perfect and never claimed to be. Being sarcastic to Jim, about Jim... okay, that's amusing, but Jim doesn't operate a cult. Maharaji operates a cult and claims to be God; people believe this and change their lives and give him their money. Then they get pissed when they realize he ain't God. Do you think he's God? Do you think he doesn't operate a cult? Are you a devotee? Do you have the great gift of devotion? Is that what you want to say?
Well put, Rick. From the style, I think you will find that until recently Miss Y was posting as 'a premie'. She will no doubt correct me if I'm wrong, but the style is identical.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 17:32:18 (EST)
Poster: Selena
Email:
To: Everyone
Subject: love and respect aren't the same thing
Message:
I jusst read an interesting quote in a book:
'Love and respect aren't the same thing. Love is fusion. As a baby, you belong to your parents, you're an extension of them; and fusion is good for the survival of infants. Respect is differentiation: you belong to yourself, and you're an extension of no one. Differentiation is essential for the happiness of adults'.
No wonder the new term for darshan is 'showing respect'. Good marketing strategy. Although, it seems to me both M and premies prefer the love definition over the respect one, and fusion over individuality.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 19:48:00 (EST)
Poster: Scott T.
Email:
To: Selena
Subject: Re: love and respect aren't the same thing
Message:
I jusst read an interesting quote in a book:
'Love and respect aren't the same thing. Love is fusion. As a baby, you belong to your parents, you're an extension of them; and fusion is good for the survival of infants. Respect is differentiation: you belong to yourself, and you're an extension of no one. Differentiation is essential for the happiness of adults'.
No wonder the new term for darshan is 'showing respect'. Good marketing strategy. Although, it seems to me both M and premies prefer the love definition over the respect one, and fusion over individuality.
Selena:
Gee, wish I'd figured that out that balance a long time ago. Would have avoided a lot of wound reconstruction.
-Scott
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 00:06:57 (EST)
Poster: Scott T.
Email:
To: Selena
Subject: Re: love and respect aren't the same thing
Message:
Selena:
'Love and respect aren't the same thing. Love is fusion. As a baby, you belong to your parents, you're an extension of them; and fusion is good for the survival of infants. Respect is differentiation: you belong to yourself, and you're an extension of no one. Differentiation is essential for the happiness of adults'.
I've been pondering this for awhile... and am not sure I know how to cut it? I understand the bit about infancy and fusion. If we were 'fused' in the womb then a re-experience of fusion would be reassuring. I guess that we begin a process of differentiation as soon as we 'pop.' So the fulfillment comes in bringing that process under our control. At one end of the spectrum, when we're helpless, we seek re-assurance. At the other we seek fulfillment, like the big smile a child gets when he/she stands on his/her own two feet w/o support. Then steps. etc. etc.
But, what I'm thinking is that opportunities arise from bonds and from freedom. This is a tough one. Wouldn't complete freedom also be complete lack of purchase--like a space-walker or something? Nothing to grasp. No direction. The freedom to spin all your wheels at once, and go nowhere?
All of this is why I sort of gave up on freedom, and started to think in terms of sovereignty, instead. Sovereignty is the capacity to be bound, and to be released, or let go. If you have mastered this you are more than 'free.' You don't have to be bound... you don't have to be free... but you can be both.
-Scott
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 07:37:12 (EST)
Poster: VP
Email:
To: Scott T.
Subject: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
We do begin the process of differentiation when we are born, but most babies don't even begin to see that their parent is not just a physical extention of them until a lot later. (I can't remember the exact figure, but I believe-someone correct me if I am wrong-that seeing the adult as a seperate physical being starts at around 5-6 months?)
Even when the child understands that the adult is seperate physically he/she will still believe that they are both experiencing the same emotions until much later.
The process of becoming a seperate emotional being manifests itself into what has often been called 'the terrible twos'. The child wants to be independent and at the same time wants to remain a baby. This can be a terrible struggle within the toddler's psyche that can result in tantrums, crying jags, etc. I think that this is akin to what we feel as we let go of M. There is a struggle between wanting to move ahead with our own lives and make our own choices and wanting to be 'safe' and loved (not that M ever loved one of us-sorry, everyone).
We aren't two anymore and I do agree with you that we can have both love ( love and this devotion sap aren't the same thing- sorry premies) and be a grown-up in the world making our own choices. We don't even have to give it a name , (but you can if it makes you feel good) just realize this and live it.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 09:37:00 (EST)
Poster: Scott T.
Email:
To: VP
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
VP:
We aren't two anymore and I do agree with you that we can have both love ( love and this devotion sap aren't the same thing- sorry premies) and be a grown-up in the world making our own choices. We don't even have to give it a name , (but you can if it makes you feel good) just realize this and live it.
I'm not sure where I stand, ultimately, on the devotion thing. Wouldn't you have to call what Simon Peter did, devotion? Of course, if we can trust the accounts, Peter's devotion was in part legitimated by his witnessing the resurrection. Prior to that he was pretty self protective.
I chose to use the word 'sovereignty' because I'm a political sociologist, and because there's this big 'to-do' over the concept of Liberty as a basis for civil society. Sovereignty also means being able to 'exit' when you feel the need. Most of the great leaders that I credit with having 'good charisma' were willing to let people go, and to let go of their power over people. In other words, they respected our sovereignty.
-Scott
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 13:00:06 (EST)
Poster: JW
Email: joger02@aol.com
To: VP
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
We do begin the process of differentiation when we are born, but most babies don't even begin to see that their parent is not just a physical extention of them until a lot later. (I can't remember the exact figure, but I believe-someone correct me if I am wrong-that seeing the adult as a seperate physical being starts at around 5-6 months?)
Even when the child understands that the adult is seperate physically he/she will still believe that they are both experiencing the same emotions until much later.
The process of becoming a seperate emotional being manifests itself into what has often been called 'the terrible twos'. The child wants to be independent and at the same time wants to remain a baby. This can be a terrible struggle within the toddler's psyche that can result in tantrums, crying jags, etc. I think that this is akin to what we feel as we let go of M. There is a struggle between wanting to move ahead with our own lives and make our own choices and wanting to be 'safe' and loved (not that M ever loved one of us-sorry, everyone).
We aren't two anymore and I do agree with you that we can have both love ( love and this devotion sap aren't the same thing- sorry premies) and be a grown-up in the world making our own choices. We don't even have to give it a name , (but you can if it makes you feel good) just realize this and live it.
Very well said, VP. And what you are saying is in line with those who have studied the devotion/surrender phenomenon in relation to cult leaders like Maharaji. Essentially, for the 'experience' to continue for the devotee, and the related taking advantage of the devotion to continue for the 'master,' the 'devotee' has to maintain a role with the master that is essentially that of a child.
What happens is the devotee accepts a simplistic solution to the meaning of life and life's contradictions and problems, is not allowed to question that, and then gets to feel superior to others for having the solution. Since questioning and objectivity are relinquished, there is a certain good feeling that comes from this, perhaps a better feeling than one has ever had. [By the way, I think Miss Y is an excellent example of this phenomenon -- simplistic, illogical solutions, and attendant feeling of spiritual superiority over others e.g. ex-premies and the 'people of the world.']
The problem is this 'devotion/love,' although it feels 'safe,' is very immature and truncated. A part of the devotee wants to grow up, but since a mature love relationship with the master is impossible, because the devotee has likely never even met the master, that need has to be repressed, of the devotion relationship would be lost entirely. So, devotees will protect it, either by making illogical, revisionist arguments like Miss Y, or more usual, refuse to discuss the issue at all, prehaps get angry and name-call, especially to ex-premies who have gone through the process and come out the other side.
Therefore, M has an interest in doing things like giving darshan, dancing at programs, having devotional love songs sung to him, etc., because it reinforces the immature love relationship. But this is a problem for him too, because those things tend to scare interested people away, despite aspirant/introductory programs that carefully hide that stuff. Because he keeps losing devotees, he needs new ones, and he also needs to try to hold on to the ones he has. It's a real dilemma for him, and I surmise, according to Malibu Mole, that it's also very frustrating for him as well.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 13:48:45 (EST)
Poster: VP
Email:
To: Scott T.
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
VP:
We aren't two anymore and I do agree with you that we can have both love ( love and this devotion sap aren't the same thing- sorry premies) and be a grown-up in the world making our own choices. We don't even have to give it a name , (but you can if it makes you feel good) just realize this and live it.
I'm not sure where I stand, ultimately, on the devotion thing. Wouldn't you have to call what Simon Peter did, devotion? Of course, if we can trust the accounts, Peter's devotion was in part legitimated by his witnessing the resurrection. Prior to that he was pretty self protective.
I chose to use the word 'sovereignty' because I'm a political sociologist, and because there's this big 'to-do' over the concept of Liberty as a basis for civil society. Sovereignty also means being able to 'exit' when you feel the need. Most of the great leaders that I credit with having 'good charisma' were willing to let people go, and to let go of their power over people. In other words, they respected our sovereignty.
-Scott
Scott T.,
It sounds like you are saying that sovereignty is freedom with responsibility to yourself and to others. If this is true, I am all for it. I don't believe in walking out on your responsibilities just because they don;t 'feel good' or appeal to you anymore or just because the going gets hard. I do think that there are times when a situation is unhealthy for one person or another in the relationship (whatever kind) and that is a different story. Thanks for your posts!
On the devotion issue, I think of devotion to a cult, or any other form of obsession, as being very one-sided. I am very 'devoted' to my family, to my job, to other causes that I believe in (I like to use the word 'love' for these things rather than 'devotion') but the difference is that I am loved and valued in return. In the case of M, he needs and values others as a means to an end-not for the inherent value that they possess as a human being.
I agree with you about Simon Peter.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 14:04:25 (EST)
Poster: VP
Email:
To: JW
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
JW,
Well put! That's exactly what I was getting at above. I am sure that what I am about to say will anger someone out there, but it was my experience. Many of the premies who I knew were practising back in the 70's were very child-like. I think that this was partly why DLM appealed to me and why premies were so irresistible to be around.
Irresistible until there was a controversy. Until there was a problem or an adult situation to be handled-something that you needed your mind for. Then it was a whole different ballgame. The premies I knew often couldn't figure out how to fend for themselves in situations like this, because they were used to being a child and wanting/ needing to have their needs met by M. They could get into some serious funks at times like these. Sort of like a two year old will do.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 14:19:22 (EST)
Poster: VP
Email:
To: all
Subject: English 101 (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
Oops! That last sentence should read: ' In the case of M, he needs and values others as a means to an end- not for the inherent value that they possess as human beings.' VP
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 14:33:42 (EST)
Poster: JW
Email: joger02@aol.com
To: VP
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
JW,
Well put! That's exactly what I was getting at above. I am sure that what I am about to say will anger someone out there, but it was my experience. Many of the premies who I knew were practising back in the 70's were very child-like. I think that this was partly why DLM appealed to me and why premies were so irresistible to be around.
Irresistible until there was a controversy. Until there was a problem or an adult situation to be handled-something that you needed your mind for. Then it was a whole different ballgame. The premies I knew often couldn't figure out how to fend for themselves in situations like this, because they were used to being a child and wanting/ needing to have their needs met by M. They could get into some serious funks at times like these. Sort of like a two year old will do.
I agree entirely. A lot of us got involved with M right at the juncture in our lives when we were on the verge of having to become adults, something that seemed daunting to me, for example, especially given the complicated and confused state of the world, with the Vietnam war, racial tensions, nuclear weapons, and the like. M and his cult felt very attractive because the premies seemed to be free from concern about all of that. Yes, they seemed child-like, accepting of me without having to prove I was worthy of their acceptance, etc. That was very attractive to me and I mistook that child-like quality with the experience of truth and love.
Of course, as time went on, most of that feeling went away, and M became much more demanding, negative, and dark. He started talking about surrender, that your mind was the devil and that all kinds of terrible things would happen to you if you even left the ashram, let alone the cult. Service was grinding on, and M wanted more and more from the premies.
So, what had been motivation that seemed essentially positive, became essentially negative, sort of like my recollection of the Catholic Church in my youth, in which 'sin' and 'hell' we the motivating forces to keep on on the straight and narrow, despite lip service to a 'loving' god. I found the same with M, and reacted in much the same way. I got high at programs, but in between I longed to have my life back, but was scared by what M threatened, into staying and serving him. Even now, the thought of that period kind of gives me the creeps.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 18:43:15 (EST)
Poster: Student
Email:
To: VP
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
JW,
Well put! That's exactly what I was getting at above. I am sure that what I am about to say will anger someone out there, but it was my experience. Many of the premies who I knew were practising back in the 70's were very child-like. I think that this was partly why DLM appealed to me and why premies were so irresistible to be around.
Irresistible until there was a controversy. Until there was a problem or an adult situation to be handled-something that you needed your mind for. Then it was a whole different ballgame. The premies I knew often couldn't figure out how to fend for themselves in situations like this, because they were used to being a child and wanting/ needing to have their needs met by M. They could get into some serious funks at times like these. Sort of like a two year old will do.
This is my first post - ever. As a brief introduction, I'll just say I've loved Maharaji since I was 3, had Knowledge 15 years, and practiced regularly for about 1 year.
I agree with VP about the child-like reference. There are positive and negatives that go with being child-like. A child is primed for learning, for enjoyment, and for evolution. There is also the natural need to assume responsibility more and more as one matures.
This duality could better be viewed as a balance. A productive, critical thinker who holds onto some child-like qualities chooses to keep a sense of wonder and curiousity within themselves. Only a child-like heart knows the thrill of life. Knowledge is not required to maintain this particular balance. This kind of balance can be found in happy, healthy adults all around you.
A person who is off balance, with or without Knowledge, will have difficulty leading a happy, healthy life. On one side you can find the adult-child that will not assume responsibility. Conquering this form of laziness is a personal challenge that I am witnessing in a friend now.
On the other side you find the workaholic that has no child left in their heart. There is no thrill. There is only responsibility. I have a premie friend like this who looks to Maharaji as his only source of joy.
Maharaji is not a psychologist. He does not offer to solve personal imbalances.
Another post referred to the Malibu Mole who claims Maharaji is experiencing frustration. Apparently he is presenting himself filling two different roles, that of the parent/Guru to 'old-timers,' and that of the spiritual sensei to the new-comers.
Maybe this is true. With so many premies nurturing a love relationship with him, it would be very painful for them to give up darshan, dancing, singing devotional songs... Much like a parent has trouble giving up hugs and kisses. Fortunately for parents, puberty weans children off of the clinging.
Ex-premies have trouble seeing that love relationship as safe. Clinging to Maharaji is only damaging is a premie ignores the opportunity to mature. We have to be critical thinkers, but I still hug and kiss my parents.
Maharaji evolves. His role to premies evolves. Premies must evolve.
If you want to question Maharaji's role to his premies, fine. Maybe they need to do the same thing. Why practice Knowledge? Why have a relationship with Maharaji in the first place?
It is an opportunity to evolve as a human race.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 18:49:53 (EST)
Poster: Student
Email:
To: Student
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
Correction:
Clinging to Maharaji is only damaging IF a premie ignores the opportunity to mature.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 18:51:05 (EST)
Poster: Selena
Email:
To: Student
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
Student
Thanks for your thoughtful post.
When I started this thread, I had in mind some of
the premies I know, and how they refuse to
think critically; the very term seems to be a
profanity. I am happy to read input like yours.
It makes me see that not all premeis refuse to think.
Maybe I just know some extreme cases. I hope that's what it is.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 19:24:08 (EST)
Poster: JW
Email:
To: Student
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
Correction:
Clinging to Maharaji is only damaging IF a premie ignores the opportunity to mature.
Thanks also from me for your throughtful post. I just have one or two questions.
Does Maharaji actively promote the 'opportunity to mature?' And if so, how? Does Maharaji actively promote this, even if it means the premie 'matures' out of the relationship with M? Have you ever heard M say that rejecting him to go on to something else as part of an individual's growth is a good thing? Somehow, I never heard M ever suggest that individual growth and development was the goal in regard to him and knowledge. Rather, the goal was just to understand more how incredible K is, and how devoted or 'grateful' you should be to HIM.
And by 'mature,' do you include in that thinking M is god, or the lord of the universe, and then 'maturing' and realizing he isn't, but is just a man who teaches meditation? Is that the kind 'maturing' you mean? Is that what it means to be a 'mature premie?'
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 19:39:13 (EST)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: Student
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
Hi Student,
Thanks for your post although I'm a bit confused. What do you mean you've 'loved him since 3, had Knowledge 15 years and practised regularly about 1 year'? Could you explain?
I appreciate your thoughts about balance. Yet I wonder if it really works like you say. That is, I don't think one needs to cultivate childlikeness. Indeed, that kind of artifice is antithetical to childrens' natural state, isn't it? Instead, I think we're lucky if we can just stay involved with things that turn our crank. It's the things, then, that make us happy and enthused, not any effort to be or appear that way.
You say 'Maharaji evolves.' No one could argue otherwise. That's what life's all about. The question, though, is where is Maharaji evolving from. In other words, was he or was he not a 'perfectly realized soul' or 'Lord' or 'satguru' or whatever when he claimed to be at age eight?
If he wasn't, then what was he? If he was just a regular eight year-old, then nothing he's done since can bootstrap him up into respectable avatarship, can it?
At the risk of repeating myself, I like to compare Maharaji to Sid Vicious who, by the time he died, had actually learned to play bass a bit. Started as a complete know-nothing, kept on playing and, before you know it, actually turned into something of a rudimentary musician. Being Lord of the Universe, on the other hand, doesn't work that way. If Maharaji wasn't that, way back when, then he simply is a fraud and nothing he can do, short of admitting that simple point, can enlighten his followers about anything.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 21:49:30 (EST)
Poster: Nigel
Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk
To: Jim
Subject: Sid (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
>At the risk of repeating myself, I like to compare Maharaji to Sid Vicious who, by the time he died, had actually learned to play bass a bit. Started as a complete know-nothing, kept on playing and, before you know it, actually turned into something of a rudimentary musician. Being Lord of the Universe, on the other hand, doesn't work that way. If Maharaji wasn't that, way back when, then he simply is a fraud and nothing he can do, short of admitting that simple point, can enlighten his followers about anything.
>
M as Sid Vicious? Love it. Good analogy. It all falls apart, though, when you remember that the Pistols did their best stuff (Anarchy, God save the Queen) BEFORE dear old Sid mastered his arpeggios. I'm not quite sure what that means for M, though.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 22:28:21 (EST)
Poster: VP
Email:
To: Student
Subject: Evolution (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
JW,
Well put! That's exactly what I was getting at above. I am sure that what I am about to say will anger someone out there, but it was my experience. Many of the premies who I knew were practising back in the 70's were very child-like. I think that this was partly why DLM appealed to me and why premies were so irresistible to be around.
Irresistible until there was a controversy. Until there was a problem or an adult situation to be handled-something that you needed your mind for. Then it was a whole different ballgame. The premies I knew often couldn't figure out how to fend for themselves in situations like this, because they were used to being a child and wanting/ needing to have their needs met by M. They could get into some serious funks at times like these. Sort of like a two year old will do.
This is my first post - ever. As a brief introduction, I'll just say I've loved Maharaji since I was 3, had Knowledge 15 years, and practiced regularly for about 1 year.
I agree with VP about the child-like reference. There are positive and negatives that go with being child-like. A child is primed for learning, for enjoyment, and for evolution. There is also the natural need to assume responsibility more and more as one matures.
This duality could better be viewed as a balance. A productive, critical thinker who holds onto some child-like qualities chooses to keep a sense of wonder and curiousity within themselves. Only a child-like heart knows the thrill of life. Knowledge is not required to maintain this particular balance. This kind of balance can be found in happy, healthy adults all around you.
A person who is off balance, with or without Knowledge, will have difficulty leading a happy, healthy life. On one side you can find the adult-child that will not assume responsibility. Conquering this form of laziness is a personal challenge that I am witnessing in a friend now.
On the other side you find the workaholic that has no child left in their heart. There is no thrill. There is only responsibility. I have a premie friend like this who looks to Maharaji as his only source of joy.
Maharaji is not a psychologist. He does not offer to solve personal imbalances.
Another post referred to the Malibu Mole who claims Maharaji is experiencing frustration. Apparently he is presenting himself filling two different roles, that of the parent/Guru to 'old-timers,' and that of the spiritual sensei to the new-comers.
Maybe this is true. With so many premies nurturing a love relationship with him, it would be very painful for them to give up darshan, dancing, singing devotional songs... Much like a parent has trouble giving up hugs and kisses. Fortunately for parents, puberty weans children off of the clinging.
Ex-premies have trouble seeing that love relationship as safe. Clinging to Maharaji is only damaging is a premie ignores the opportunity to mature. We have to be critical thinkers, but I still hug and kiss my parents.
Maharaji evolves. His role to premies evolves. Premies must evolve.
If you want to question Maharaji's role to his premies, fine. Maybe they need to do the same thing. Why practice Knowledge? Why have a relationship with Maharaji in the first place?
It is an opportunity to evolve as a human race.
Student,
Thanks for that post. I would like to say that I think this kind of dialogue is very good. (Assuming that you will continue to answer tough questions and not just offer some thoughts and then disappear.) I am struck with wonder at a couple of your insights:
'Only a child-like heart knows the thrill of life. Knowledge is not required to maintain this particular balance.' and 'On the other side you find the woraholic that has no child left in their heart. There is no thrill. There is only responsibility.' I can relate to these statements.
I am a little confused as to what M does offer now. If you have been reading, I was exposed to M during the DLM days when M was perfect master who was going to explode the peace bomb. At this time he DID offer to solve personal imbalances-that was kind of the whole point. I have tried to ask other premies on here this question in all sincerity (what is M offering now?) and have been evaded each time. You said it was a chance to evolve and I am already evolving all of the time, with or without M, so maybe you could elaborate on this point a bit.
I can accept that all people change and evolve, M included. I just think that a person who has made certain promises and portrayed himself as something to his following goes and changes this agenda or evolves as a person, it would behoove him to discuss this.
My final question for you now is this: How is the human race going to evolve if they practise K? If they have a relationship with M? I asked another premie on here earlier if EV was taking any pro-active steps to make this a better world. (DLM was claiming to do this in the 70's and I think that it never materialized.) I also asked if practising K was the way that the world would be changed. What are your thoughts? VP
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 22:31:34 (EST)
Poster: premie?
Email:
To: Nigel
Subject: Re: Sid (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
>At the risk of repeating myself, I like to compare Maharaji to Sid Vicious who, by the time he died, had actually learned to play bass a bit. Started as a complete know-nothing, kept on playing and, before you know it, actually turned into something of a rudimentary musician. Being Lord of the Universe, on the other hand, doesn't work that way. If Maharaji wasn't that, way back when, then he simply is a fraud and nothing he can do, short of admitting that simple point, can enlighten his followers about anything.
>
M as Sid Vicious? Love it. Good analogy. It all falls apart, though, when you remember that the Pistols did their best stuff (Anarchy, God save the Queen) BEFORE dear old Sid mastered his arpeggios. I'm not quite sure what that means for M, though.
It means M might commit suicide, along with his mistress/girlfriend, in a seedy hotel room in New York, by gorging himself on large quantities of burfi.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 06:03:16 (EST)
Poster: Mr Ex
Email:
To: Student
Subject: What is a mature premie? (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
>Clinging to Maharaji is only damaging IF a premie ignores
>the opportunity to mature.
Of course, you’re absolutely right! Premies and exs will agree.
BUT
As I’m a very practical person, I can’t resist elaborating on what is really a ‘mature’ premie, you’ll correct me if I’m wrong.
What is a mature premie:
Obviously the ‘mature premie’ practices knowledge as he’s been taught by his master (meditation), he comes to watch videos regularly, he helps his master out of gratitude, he goes to see him when he can.
1/ A mature premie has understood that devotion is something private between himself and his master: he won’t talk about it, he will keep his emotions inside, he will express them in front of his master only when it’s allowed (pranam, dancing on the stage) in a reasonable and correct way, he will ‘behave himself’.
2/ A mature premie will help his master the way he is offering it. Meaning doing ‘service’ in Elan Vital, or one of these private special projects (if you don’t know about them, I’ll invite you to one of these private meetings), or financially supporting EV, the lands, one of the residences, the EV Foundation.
He won’t speak about maharaji’s personal support, because he’s been given his account # and he knows he can send as much money as he can, this is a direct service and there is no need to speak about it.
3/ A mature premie won’t talk about knowledge to anybody. He will invite the persons he knows could be interested by maharaji’s teaching, and let them make up their mind. He will let grace do it’s job if the person is ‘open’.
4/ Knowing that maharaji needs his help in order to do ‘his service’ which is bring knowledge to interested persons, he will be very proud to have a good job, to make as much money as possible without getting lost ‘in this world’ (which is still a big challenge for most of the devotees). He will dedicate a reasonable amount of his income to Maharaji’s needs, and be a reasonable person regarding his own needs.
Etc etc He will be a good boy, or a good girl.
Maharaji is a good father after all.
No need to say what that type of Kosher repressed behavior implies.......
This is a very reasonable lifestyle after all.
If devotion to Mr Rawat is what you want, then you have it.
You are really a good premie if you get to find a balance in all this, which is completely questionable.
AND finding what you wanted in the first place!
What was it?
Did you find it?
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 10:49:48 (EST)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: Mr Ex
Subject: Re: What is a mature premie? (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
Beautiful!
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 14:46:44 (EST)
Poster: Student
Email:
To: JW
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
Your first question refers to what Maharaji 'actively promotes.' I won't debate semantics. The best reference I can remember from videos is Maharaji's encouragement to 'evolve.'
The only way to understand Maharaji's perspective would be to listen to him for yourself. When is the last time you heard Maharaji speak? Remember, he matures too.
I can only respond from my own understanding of life. I said earlier that clinging to Maharaji (at the expense of maturing) is damaging. Clinging to anything, (food, t.v., spouse,...) at the expense of maturing is damaging. The process of maturing is unique to every person.
Changing jobs could mean maturing to one person. Getting married, having a child, getting a divorce, any of these things could mean a person is maturing, depending on what that person is going through.
I would never presume, even to another active premie, that their growth needs to include viewing Maharaji a certain way or putting labels on him. My personal concepts and feelings of God are just that, personal and (in my own mind) unique to me.
My relationship with Maharaji does not even require me to agree with every word out of his mouth. I have no problem disagreeing with people I love dearly. I still love them, as long as our disagreements don't reach to the core of my values.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 14:56:28 (EST)
Poster: Student
Email:
To: Mr Ex
Subject: Re: What is a mature premie? (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
>Clinging to Maharaji is only damaging IF a premie ignores
>the opportunity to mature.
Of course, you’re absolutely right! Premies and exs will agree.
BUT
As I’m a very practical person, I can’t resist elaborating on what is really a ‘mature’ premie, you’ll correct me if I’m wrong.
What is a mature premie:
Obviously the ‘mature premie’ practices knowledge as he’s been taught by his master (meditation), he comes to watch videos regularly, he helps his master out of gratitude, he goes to see him when he can.
1/ A mature premie has understood that devotion is something private between himself and his master: he won’t talk about it, he will keep his emotions inside, he will express them in front of his master only when it’s allowed (pranam, dancing on the stage) in a reasonable and correct way, he will ‘behave himself’.
2/ A mature premie will help his master the way he is offering it. Meaning doing ‘service’ in Elan Vital, or one of these private special projects (if you don’t know about them, I’ll invite you to one of these private meetings), or financially supporting EV, the lands, one of the residences, the EV Foundation.
He won’t speak about maharaji’s personal support, because he’s been given his account # and he knows he can send as much money as he can, this is a direct service and there is no need to speak about it.
3/ A mature premie won’t talk about knowledge to anybody. He will invite the persons he knows could be interested by maharaji’s teaching, and let them make up their mind. He will let grace do it’s job if the person is ‘open’.
4/ Knowing that maharaji needs his help in order to do ‘his service’ which is bring knowledge to interested persons, he will be very proud to have a good job, to make as much money as possible without getting lost ‘in this world’ (which is still a big challenge for most of the devotees). He will dedicate a reasonable amount of his income to Maharaji’s needs, and be a reasonable person regarding his own needs.
Etc etc He will be a good boy, or a good girl.
Maharaji is a good father after all.
No need to say what that type of Kosher repressed behavior implies.......
This is a very reasonable lifestyle after all.
If devotion to Mr Rawat is what you want, then you have it.
You are really a good premie if you get to find a balance in all this, which is completely questionable.
AND finding what you wanted in the first place!
What was it?
Did you find it?
What did I want? Did I find it?
A different perspective, a way to step out of day to day situations and take a peaceful breath, a way to focus on the peace and quiet inside when I need to... and reminders of how important this opportunity is...
Yes.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Thurs, Feb 19, 1998 at 01:58:28 (EST)
Poster: JW
Email:
To: Student
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
Your first question refers to what Maharaji 'actively promotes.' I won't debate semantics. The best reference I can remember from videos is Maharaji's encouragement to 'evolve.'
The only way to understand Maharaji's perspective would be to listen to him for yourself. When is the last time you heard Maharaji speak? Remember, he matures too.
I can only respond from my own understanding of life. I said earlier that clinging to Maharaji (at the expense of maturing) is damaging. Clinging to anything, (food, t.v., spouse,...) at the expense of maturing is damaging. The process of maturing is unique to every person.
Changing jobs could mean maturing to one person. Getting married, having a child, getting a divorce, any of these things could mean a person is maturing, depending on what that person is going through.
I would never presume, even to another active premie, that their growth needs to include viewing Maharaji a certain way or putting labels on him. My personal concepts and feelings of God are just that, personal and (in my own mind) unique to me.
My relationship with Maharaji does not even require me to agree with every word out of his mouth. I have no problem disagreeing with people I love dearly. I still love them, as long as our disagreements don't reach to the core of my values.
I saw a video of Maharaji speaking at a program in Long Beach in 1996. He didn't say anything much different than I heard him say 15 years ago. The only difference I noted is that he substituted the word 'gratitude' for what he used to call 'devotion.' He said nothing at all about personal development or doing any kind of evolving. He said to experience 'that beautiful place inside' and to have gratitude to him. He also said he couldn't understand why anyone would do anything else. Then there were many devotional love songs sung to him and he danced and the premies went nuts. It seemed still very much a personality devotional-type of scenario.
The reason I asked the question had to do with whether one 'matures' at the direction of M as a 'master' or really in spite of him. And I would agree that clinging to M is probably damaging. I think it was to me. I found that to mature I had to leave him entirely, because his whole trip seemed to keep premies, and me, on an immature basis. Actually, when I was a premie, he openly disparaged getting personal growth or fulfillment anywhere than from him. If he has 'evolved' from that, that can only be an improvement.
To the extent you can disagree with M, and are willing to take the good and reject the bad parts of him and what he does, that sounds very healthy to me.
But my main question you didn't answer. Has M ever suggested that to 'evolve' you might need to leave him and the practice of K entirely? Anyhow, that's what I think happened to me, by the way.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Thurs, Feb 19, 1998 at 12:13:35 (EST)
Poster: Mr Ex
Email:
To: Student
Subject: Re: What is a mature premie? (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
>What did I want? Did I find it?
>A different perspective, a way to step out of day to day
Why would you escape?
>situations and take a peaceful breath, a way to focus on >the peace and quiet inside when I need to...
No need of Mr Rawat to do that!
>and reminders >of how important this opportunity is...
What do you mean?
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Thurs, Feb 19, 1998 at 15:26:48 (EST)
Poster: Student
Email:
To: Mr Ex
Subject: Re: What is a mature premie? (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
If you don't understand the benefits of a fundamentally different perspective from inside then I'm sure you'll keep the one you have.
Remember to enjoy.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Thurs, Feb 19, 1998 at 17:00:12 (EST)
Poster: Student
Email:
To: VP
Subject: Re: Evolution (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
Offering Knowledge has always been Maharaji's agenda and it always will. The love relationship between premie and Maharaji adds inspiration through a devotion that scares so many. Critics will always question devotion.
Evolution through Knowledge...All I can tell you is that I am not a stagnant being when I am practicing Knowledge. I no longer feel that I just have to 'play the cards that I've been dealt' in this life. It is my life. I refuse to waste any moment of it. Knowledge makes me fully appreciate that statement.
In savoring each moment of my life through the practice of Knowledge, I find myself giving more than taking in relationships with people I care about. I find myself needing less, and enjoying more. I find myself being grateful more, and frustrated less. I see obstacles as learning experiences. I see tragedy as part of a natural cycle. I can be grateful for the natural cycles of life and death.
Sometimes I direct that gratitude toward Maharaji. Sometimes I call it grace. Sometimes I call it my own clarity. I don't call it luck anymore. I'm not superstitious.
For me, that is an evolution. Without Knowledge, these lessons would have to come on a logical level instead from my 'inside.' I feel these lessons, they are not explained to me.
I believe Moses 'felt' the ten commandments and then shared them. It begins with the feeling.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Thurs, Feb 19, 1998 at 17:54:03 (EST)
Poster: Premmey
Email:
To: Student
Subject: Re: What is a mature premie? (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
If you don't understand the benefits of a fundamentally different perspective from inside then I'm sure you'll keep the one you have.
Remember to enjoy.
I am impressed by the depth of this statement, aren't you?
Remember also that a stitch in time saves nine and a watched pot never boils.
Enjoy, and don't you ever forget it, either.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 16:58:39 (EST)
Poster: Anon
Email:
To: Scott T
Subject: LA community circa 1975
Message:
Scott wrote: 'I have to say that another friend of mine in the LA community succumbed to schizophrenia after receiving Knowledge. If anyone remembers him it was Valentine Vargas. Don't know what became of Val. Knowledge and meditation seemed to deepen his confusion, rather than help it. -Scott '
I lived at 2017 North Argyle Apartments, Hollywood with Vargus (if it is the same guy) in 1975. It was a crazy scene. Does anyone rememeber this place and the premies that lived there. I remember there was a Satsang hall that we used to go to in the back of some guys truck, and there was a Baskins and Robbins next door.
It was a hell of a time.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 17:18:20 (EST)
Poster: Scott T.
Email: stalking@freewheeling.com
To: Anon
Subject: Re: LA community circa 1975
Message:
Scott wrote: 'I have to say that another friend of mine in the LA community succumbed to schizophrenia after receiving Knowledge. If anyone remembers him it was Valentine Vargas. Don't know what became of Val. Knowledge and meditation seemed to deepen his confusion, rather than help it. -Scott '
I lived at 2017 North Argyle Apartments, Hollywood with Vargus (if it is the same guy) in 1975. It was a crazy scene. Does anyone rememeber this place and the premies that lived there. I remember there was a Satsang hall that we used to go to in the back of some guys truck, and there was a Baskins and Robbins next door.
It was a hell of a time.
Anon:
I remember it very will. I lived there. Do you recall Craig and the boys from 'Wire and Wood?' Richard Lavi?
-Scott
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 17:35:15 (EST)
Poster: Anon
Email:
To: Scott T.
Subject: Re: LA community circa 1975
Message:
Scott wrote: 'I have to say that another friend of mine in the LA community succumbed to schizophrenia after receiving Knowledge. If anyone remembers him it was Valentine Vargas. Don't know what became of Val. Knowledge and meditation seemed to deepen his confusion, rather than help it. -Scott '
I lived at 2017 North Argyle Apartments, Hollywood with Vargus (if it is the same guy) in 1975. It was a crazy scene. Does anyone rememeber this place and the premies that lived there. I remember there was a Satsang hall that we used to go to in the back of some guys truck, and there was a Baskins and Robbins next door.
It was a hell of a time.
Anon:
I remember it very will. I lived there. Do you recall Craig and the boys from 'Wire and Wood?' Richard Lavi?
-Scott
You bet. I think if I get to carried away with memories here I will no longer be Anon. However Vargus was a really nice guy, an artist if I recall. We became quite good friends. Richard Levi was also a cool guy and a good painter. I shared an apartment with a hang gliding expert for a while who built his own glider in the apartment! We had to take the window out to get it out and down to his VW bus.
I knew many of the musicians. I was one of the English guys there. We ended up there after driving from the Orlando festival. There were a bunch of us including Johnathon Mills (son of Sir John Mills, the actor) who had stayed in Daytona Beach with a premie called Stacey Gonder (another whole scene with those Krishna Dancers etc.)
As well as Wire and Wood (who were very good) I also remember the guys from Jiva who were the sort of Premie Rock Stars of the day. They were signed to Dark Horse records (George Harrison) They faded into obscurity I guess.
I am sorry to hear Vargus went off the rails, he was a nice gentle soul. I was only just 18 at the time . So it all seemed very amazing to me meeting all these characters!
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 17:46:34 (EST)
Poster: Scott T.
Email:
To: Anon
Subject: Re: LA community circa 1975
Message:
Scott wrote: 'I have to say that another friend of mine in the LA community succumbed to schizophrenia after receiving Knowledge. If anyone remembers him it was Valentine Vargas. Don't know what became of Val. Knowledge and meditation seemed to deepen his confusion, rather than help it. -Scott '
I lived at 2017 North Argyle Apartments, Hollywood with Vargus (if it is the same guy) in 1975. It was a crazy scene. Does anyone rememeber this place and the premies that lived there. I remember there was a Satsang hall that we used to go to in the back of some guys truck, and there was a Baskins and Robbins next door.
It was a hell of a time.
Anon:
I remember it very will. I lived there. Do you recall Craig and the boys from 'Wire and Wood?' Richard Lavi?
-Scott
You bet. I think if I get to carried away with memories here I will no longer be Anon. However Vargus was a really nice guy, an artist if I recall. We became quite good friends. Richard Levi was also a cool guy and a good painter. I shared an apartment with a hang gliding expert for a while who built his own glider in the apartment! We had to take the window out to get it out and down to his VW bus.
I knew many of the musicians. I was one of the English guys there. We ended up there after driving from the Orlando festival. There were a bunch of us including Johnathon Mills (son of Sir John Mills, the actor) who had stayed in Daytona Beach with a premie called Stacey Gonder (another whole scene with those Krishna Dancers etc.)
As well as Wire and Wood (who were very good) I also remember the guys from Jiva who were the sort of Premie Rock Stars of the day. They were signed to Dark Horse records (George Harrison) They faded into obscurity I guess.
I am sorry to hear Vargus went off the rails, he was a nice gentle soul. I was only just 18 at the time . So it all seemed very amazing to me meeting all these characters!
Anon:
I was the third artist in that group: Richard, Val & Scott. I think Richard was the sanest of the three, but that's not saying a great deal. I moved out to Balboa Island after that, and that's when I really started to drift away. Val came out to stay with me a few times, and we even painted some watercolors together. His problem was not just MJ, but also the fact that he was from the Argentine during the Peron era. All of that pretty much messed him up.
-Scott
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 09:54:54 (EST)
Poster: Scott T.
Email:
To: Anon
Subject: Re: LA community circa 1975
Message:
Anon:
I was only just 18 at the time . So it all seemed very amazing to me meeting all these characters!
I think I remember you, though that memory has to compete with quite a few 'characters,' against which we all appear in bas relief.
I don't recall the names, but there was a couple, who used to play in Bole Ji's band. The woman was beautiful (Laura?), and the guy was an Okie who played guitar on the level of Jimmy Page. There was an outspoken jeweller, who lived next door to me, and who made his living selling his wares at swap-meets. He had long talks with the bugs, attempting to convince them to leave him alone. Didn't you used to wear a scarf, or something?
-Scott
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 12:11:34 (EST)
Poster: Brian
Email: brian@ex-premie.org
To: Everyone
Subject: White Pages, Journeys additions
Message:
I've updated the White Pages, breaking them into 4 pages to speed up loading.
Updated entries for:
William O. West
Bob Ingram
Added entires for:
Robyn D'Anna
Luis Sanchez
Scott Talkington (Jones)
Also added a Journeys entry for:
Scott Talkington
Here's a link to Robyn D'Anna's entry too, while I'm thinking of it.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 10:41:51 (EST)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: Everyone
Subject: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Kurt Anderson emailed me today saying that the piece about Maharaji is finally going to run the week after next.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 11:17:16 (EST)
Poster: John Cavad
Email:
To: Jim
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Kurt Anderson emailed me today saying that the piece about Maharaji is finally going to run the week after next.
Please keep us posted, thatnks.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 13:28:59 (EST)
Poster: JW
Email: joger02@aol.com
To: Jim
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Kurt Anderson emailed me today saying that the piece about Maharaji is finally going to run the week after next.
Jim, did a 'fact checker' ever contact you regarding the information you gave for the article? Kurt told me one would 'definitely' call me because he was 'definitely' using stuff I gave him and no one has contacted me. I guess I'll believe the article when I actually see it.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 15:22:58 (EST)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: JW
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Hey Joe,
No, I never heard from a fact checker. My thought is they're running the piece as a sidebar to their extensive Clinton coverage: 'Are Monica Lewinsky and Monica Lewis (Maharaji's FRIEND) one and the same?'
My response to Kurt:
>I think it's finally going to appear, the week after next.
>
>Kurt
>
Kurt,
A further note. The talk on the ex-premie 'street' is pretty skeptical.
'We've been burnt so many times, why should we believe him?' But then ex's
always talk like that.
By the way, I only found out recently that Michael Bolton himself first
learned to emote excessively (not unlike your brother) as a singing premie.
Rich, huh?
Jim
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 19:23:14 (EST)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: Jim
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Kurt replied and so did I:
>By the way, I only found out recently that Michael Bolton himself first
>
>learned to emote excessively (not unlike your brother) as a singing premie.
>
>Rich, huh?>>
>
>'Burned' how? Like there are a lot of positive stories in the media on
>Maharaji? That said, as I've told you, the piece concludes lots more
>positively than you would write it. My bottom line is: no ashrams, no
cult-
>like coercion post 1982, no Jonestown, no Heaven's Gate--it's a lot less
>creepy tha, say Scientology or Rev. Moon.
>
Kurt,
The 'burn' comment was a joke (although, I must say, it's good the
magazine's finally going to run the piece. My family and half the criminal
lawyers in Victoria think I was just making shit up. 'So where's the New
Yorker article you keep promising us, Jimbo?'
I hate 'Jimbo.' Wouldn't you?)
But your bottom line concerns me. Well, the piece is written and we'll just
have to see. I'm sure it will be well-written. I've really enjoyed a number
of things you've done. And I even agree that being a premie is probably
better than being a Scientologist or Moonie. .... Or is it?
Did you know that Greta Van Susteran's a $cientologist, as they say? Weird,
huh? And Moonies? At least they have big weddings.
Kurt, is it possible that you've curbed your tongue a bit because of your
siblings? That would be absolutely understandable if true. Maharaji's
culpability is apparent with even a bit of historical context. We premies
joined a cult and wasted various amounts of time, money and energy on his
empty promises. There aren't too many ways to cut that.
If the mob starts donating lots of money for noble causes does that
vindicate their past? It's one of those situations, I think. The premies
today -- like your brother and sister -- will do all they can to make you
think the past is irrelevant. I don't think it is, especially not when
Maharaji bunkers up in Malibu, hiding from those who would question him --
like yourself -- but with a hand stuck out through his fence for donations.
This past year Maharaji had a gathering in Australia where he revived a
practise his people have spent several years laughing away as some quaint
Indianism -- he had his followers line up to kiss his feet. Ask your
brother and sister about that.
As the website gets more traffic we're hearing story after story of people
whose minds and aspirations were fucked up by the one-time Lord of the
Universe. A lot of them since got things happening for themselves. That's
not to say that his lack of accountability isn't dreadful.
I guess it depends on how much you want out of life. A bunch of idealistic
kids, for the most part, wanted as much as they could get. But only if it
was real. Maharaji trapped us for years and still exploits anyone as much
and as indiscriminately as he can. Sure, his grip has weakened. But that's
not to his credit.
Take care,
Jim
P.S. Will I ever get my book back?
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 21:09:34 (EST)
Poster: Miss 'Y'
Email:
To: Jim
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Why does the angel of darkness always concern himself that God doen't know that he's alive nor answers his correspondence? Why one so bitter blames every one but himself for were he is at? Why does he say such hurtful things to his fellow commrades in pity and when they acknowledge the pain he inflicts, then the all to familiar typical Jimbo escape 'I was only joking' I guess Jimbo is just a poor pitiful victim who has had no control over his life and was forced for so long, with no free will ,totally powerless to do what he wished ! Everyone take amomment and say poor little Jimbo , poor little boy ,poor lost soul!Why does he propagate' such ' love(NOT)? Misery sure loves company! Wait a go Jimbo! I just can't wait for your witty spuing forth of that ever so dismal out look that is so characteristic of Shri JIMBO, but we should and are truly thankful for in your darkness the light truly shines brighter! Could the light even exist if there were no darkness,for this we thankyou!Hail jim booo! Name , email address Omitted like all the other cowardly posters on this forum !
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 21:20:26 (EST)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: Miss 'Y'
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Hey Miss Y, my email's on the white pages:
heller@islandnet.com
And my name's 'Jim.'
What's yours and where's yours (not that I care)? Light? Darkness? Hail? Who are you? Prince Valiant?
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 21:56:39 (EST)
Poster: Miss 'Y'
Email: JSCA@Bliss.com
To: Jim
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Why is does your surname contain the name of that place you perpetuate ? A coincidence ? Me thinks not! Oh by the way JIMBO I was only joking, Isn't that the way it goes?
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 22:55:33 (EST)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: Miss 'Y'
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Brilliant! Absoltuely stunning!
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 03:06:02 (EST)
Poster: Mili
Email: mili@cheerful.com
To: Miss 'Y'
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
OK, surprise, everyone - please get off Jim's case. He is just acting in good faith according to the data he has been presented with (Mishler interview). I think he went through some real pain because of it, and is still struggling.
Inquiry should be directed at whether the data in Mishler interview is trustworthy, or is it all an ancient Mataji scam?
Jim, chill out. Premies, chill out.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 03:27:03 (EST)
Poster: ex-mug
Email:
To: Miss 'Y'
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Why does the angel of darkness always concern himself that God doen't know that he's alive nor answers his correspondence? Why one so bitter blames every one but himself for were he is at? Why does he say such hurtful things to his fellow commrades in pity and when they acknowledge the pain he inflicts, then the all to familiar typical Jimbo escape 'I was only joking' I guess Jimbo is just a poor pitiful victim who has had no control over his life and was forced for so long, with no free will ,totally powerless to do what he wished ! Everyone take amomment and say poor little Jimbo , poor little boy ,poor lost soul!Why does he propagate' such ' love(NOT)? Misery sure loves company! Wait a go Jimbo! I just can't wait for your witty spuing forth of that ever so dismal out look that is so characteristic of Shri JIMBO, but we should and are truly thankful for in your darkness the light truly shines brighter! Could the light even exist if there were no darkness,for this we thankyou!Hail jim booo! Name , email address Omitted like all the other cowardly posters on this forum !
Hi Miss 'Y'
Sounds to me as if you have a
few doubts about big GM judging by
the tone of your posting.
Just before the 'penny dropped' about my
true feelings re.GM, my reaction to ex's
was similar to yours.
Jim and the rest of us ex's have good
reason to be a little upset about
the way GM led us up the garden path,
so to speak.
Were you around GM in the 70's?
Ever in his ashram?
Jim and a lot of us were around at the
time of GM as 'Lord of the Universe'.
If you are a recent convert then
you have probobly bought in to
the latest revisionist preaching
of GM and EV.
By the way, are you saying that GM is god?
It sounds that way from the first sentence of
your posting.
All the best
ex-mug
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 08:25:01 (EST)
Poster: Miss'Y'
Email:
To: ex-mug
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Why does the angel of darkness always concern himself that God doen't know that he's alive nor answers his correspondence? Why one so bitter blames every one but himself for were he is at? Why does he say such hurtful things to his fellow commrades in pity and when they acknowledge the pain he inflicts, then the all to familiar typical Jimbo escape 'I was only joking' I guess Jimbo is just a poor pitiful victim who has had no control over his life and was forced for so long, with no free will ,totally powerless to do what he wished ! Everyone take amomment and say poor little Jimbo , poor little boy ,poor lost soul!Why does he propagate' such ' love(NOT)? Misery sure loves company! Wait a go Jimbo! I just can't wait for your witty spuing forth of that ever so dismal out look that is so characteristic of Shri JIMBO, but we should and are truly thankful for in your darkness the light truly shines brighter! Could the light even exist if there were no darkness,for this we thankyou!Hail jim booo! Name , email address Omitted like all the other cowardly posters on this forum !
Hi Miss 'Y'
Sounds to me as if you have a
few doubts about big GM judging by
the tone of your posting.
Just before the 'penny dropped' about my
true feelings re.GM, my reaction to ex's
was similar to yours.
Jim and the rest of us ex's have good
reason to be a little upset about
the way GM led us up the garden path,
so to speak.
Were you around GM in the 70's?
Ever in his ashram?
Jim and a lot of us were around at the
time of GM as 'Lord of the Universe'.
If you are a recent convert then
you have probobly bought in to
the latest revisionist preaching
of GM and EV.
By the way, are you saying that GM is god?
It sounds that way from the first sentence of
your posting.
All the best
ex-mug
Flushing Meadows '73 , Lived in four Ashrams,Lived with Jimbo as well , Doubt count as of late, zero Sorry if you misread my tone,you know if you dropped a penny you can always pick it up or I'd be glad to give you one of mine!
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 11:56:55 (EST)
Poster: ex-mug
Email:
To: Miss'Y'
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Why does the angel of darkness always concern himself that God doen't know that he's alive nor answers his correspondence? Why one so bitter blames every one but himself for were he is at? Why does he say such hurtful things to his fellow commrades in pity and when they acknowledge the pain he inflicts, then the all to familiar typical Jimbo escape 'I was only joking' I guess Jimbo is just a poor pitiful victim who has had no control over his life and was forced for so long, with no free will ,totally powerless to do what he wished ! Everyone take amomment and say poor little Jimbo , poor little boy ,poor lost soul!Why does he propagate' such ' love(NOT)? Misery sure loves company! Wait a go Jimbo! I just can't wait for your witty spuing forth of that ever so dismal out look that is so characteristic of Shri JIMBO, but we should and are truly thankful for in your darkness the light truly shines brighter! Could the light even exist if there were no darkness,for this we thankyou!Hail jim booo! Name , email address Omitted like all the other cowardly posters on this forum !
Hi Miss 'Y'
Sounds to me as if you have a
few doubts about big GM judging by
the tone of your posting.
Just before the 'penny dropped' about my
true feelings re.GM, my reaction to ex's
was similar to yours.
Jim and the rest of us ex's have good
reason to be a little upset about
the way GM led us up the garden path,
so to speak.
Were you around GM in the 70's?
Ever in his ashram?
Jim and a lot of us were around at the
time of GM as 'Lord of the Universe'.
If you are a recent convert then
you have probobly bought in to
the latest revisionist preaching
of GM and EV.
By the way, are you saying that GM is god?
It sounds that way from the first sentence of
your posting.
All the best
ex-mug
Flushing Meadows '73 , Lived in four Ashrams,Lived with Jimbo as well , Doubt count as of late, zero Sorry if you misread my tone,you know if you dropped a penny you can always pick it up or I'd be glad to give you one of mine!
Peace,
Sorry if I misread your tone.
Thanks for the penny offer :-) likewise from me.
all the best
ex-mug
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 14:14:16 (EST)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: Miss'Y'
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Miss 'Y':
You started off ranting about the cowardice of posting anonymously. Who are you? Saying that you know me, while we don't know who you are, is pretty pathetic. Well?
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 23:32:55 (EST)
Poster: StephenB
Email:
To: Mili
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
OK, surprise, everyone - please get off Jim's case. He is just acting in good faith according to the data he has been presented with (Mishler interview). I think he went through some real pain because of it, and is still struggling.
Inquiry should be directed at whether the data in Mishler interview is trustworthy, or is it all an ancient Mataji scam?
Jim, chill out. Premies, chill out.
I for one, can vouch for the sincerity of Bob Michlers interview. Although I did not hear the interview in person at the time, I did speak with Bob Mishler at a mutual aquaintances' house shortly after the interveiw. I personally found Mr Mischler, pompous and very full of himself (as always) but quite sincere about the topic of the interview as printed in this forum. I was in the procces of breaking away at that time. He did give lots of good information. The friends house I was at was one of MJs bodyguards untill the Astrodome. Stories of parties with alcohol and many other things to curl a premies' hair were discussed. Though 20 years ago, I remember it as certainly enough for me to question what the heck was going on! MJ doesnot live anything like any Saints I know described in history.
StephenB
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 00:23:55 (EST)
Poster: Miss'Y'
Email: crothfam@idirect.com
To: Jim
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Miss 'Y':
You started off ranting about the cowardice of posting anonymously. Who are you? Saying that you know me, while we don't know who you are, is pretty pathetic. Well?
Who is Miss 'Y'? or is that MIS-(TRE)-Y or just another Mr-ex ,anon,vp,cd,abcd,efgh or just plain old 'i'or just a playful premie?( not confronting his adult self?hmmm) I'll show you mine'IF'you'll show me yours ! A coward ? only to my 'self'! No trips from me no grand illusions of superiority, just a plain old human being fortunate to have had and still experiance a love that can not be denied .A devotee Oh if only I could be! A premie considered by the Ex's ,an Ex considered by the premies, A soul without a flag? Who pray tell is Miss'Y' and why do' I 'ask, for if I knew ,I'd be Satguru! But each day the beauty of this life is to be lived to it's fullest and to be true to one's own self,and live each day without regret , for lifes to short and tomorrow has no guarranties, for I'm one of the lucky ones to have known Satguru! No offence is meant by these words of mine for I am just a visitor here and not a prisoner of words that confine. Be at peace for that is a noble purpose, a goal,a state of mind and seek that which is Devine! Oh by the way the Misstrey ends for this is just plain old' Diver Dan' not affraid of you, but of me ,ahh but don't we all love just a little mystery?'Just kidding Jimbo, it's a just a joke,get it!!Pathetic only for a day. Now I've shown you mine ,naked as babe, unfortunately not as innocent, let the games begin ,the arrows fly or just a simple Hi? A traveller!
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 10:58:44 (EST)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: StephenB
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Stephen,
First, as Mili already knows, it's a complete joke to question the authenticity of the Mishler interview. I've got the tape itself, for God's sake! Rick sent it to me two years ago.
As for your stories, please share them. This is not just regular gossip. When Maharaji paraded as the Wizard of Oz anyone who saw anything backstage behind the curtain is doing a public service sharing it. Even trustworthy second-hand reports, clearly identified as such of course, are fair and welcome.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Thurs, Feb 19, 1998 at 07:37:26 (EST)
Poster: Brian
Email: brian@ex-premie.org
To: Jim
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Kurt Anderson emailed me today saying that the piece about Maharaji is finally going to run the week after next.
In sorting through the Forum I archives, I came across Kurt's original post. It's dated April 22, 1997. Your White Pages entry is dated March 19. What a year!
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 10:25:51 (EST)
Poster: Mr Ex
Email:
To: Everyone
Subject: Surat Shabd Yoga and Paramhans ...
Message:
Here is something interesting about m's hidden lineage.
This confirms some of the information previously published on the
web-site ....
(very helpful for me)
http://www.inlink.com/~rife/tmsma1
Appendix One THE NEW PANTHS: SHABDISM IN NORTH AMERICA There are now several popular religious movements in North America which owe their existence, either partially or wholly, to the Radhasoami tradition of India. The spectrum ranges from immediate connections, as in Eckankar and the Divine Light Mission whose founders have taken initiation from one of the Satgurus, to associative influences where sects have borrowed (and, in some cases, plagiarized) writings and spiritual lineages from Radhasoami. All of these new panths , though, have one thing in common: they give significant emphasis to the Shabd , the transcendent power which is believed to be the creative and sustaining force of the universe (it is also known as the 'Audible Life Stream' or the 'Music of the Spheres'). And though there are groups which speak of this 'Sound Current' which are both anterior and exterior to the Radhasoami tradition, all of the new movements under discussion have based their knowledge and writings on Radhasoami's own particular interpretation of Surat Shabd Yoga, the practice of uniting the soul with the internal sound energy. In this article, I will describe the relationship of these American religious movements to the Radhasoami tradition and then will examine the reasons why there is such a strong tendency in these new panths to deny their living religious heritage. The Radhsoami Tradition of India The name Radhasoami has been generally applied to those gurus and gaddis (the seat/residence of a saint, living or deceased) who trace their spiritual lineages back to Shiv Dayal Singh (1818-1878), the proclaimed founder of the movement who resided in the city of Agra, in the Uttar Pradesh District of India. 'Soamiji Maharaj,' as Shiv Dayal Singh was called by his disciples, came from a family of Nanak-panthis and was primarily influenced in his religious upbringing by the nirguna bhakti poetry of such Sants as Kabir, Nanak, Paltu, and most significantly Tulsi Sahib of Hathras. What distinguishes Soamiji's teachings (and subsequently those of the Radhasoami tradition) from Vaishnavism, Tantrism, Goraknathism, Saivism, and other forms of Indic piety is essentially the emphasis he gives to three cardinal precepts: 1. Satguru, both as the Absolute Lord (nirguna) and the living human master (saguna). 2. Shabd, which encompasses both varnatmak (spoken or written) and dhunyatmak (transcendent melody) expressions of the Supreme Lord (Sat Purush). 3. Satsang, the congregation of earnest devotees of the truth. Upon Soamiji's death, several of his disciples served as gurus, resulting in a proliferation of satsangs. Today there are at least thirty different Radhasoami centers in India with direct lineage connections to Shiv Dayal Singh. For the purposes of this paper, however, we will only be concerned with two of the largest and most influential of these: Radhasoami Satsang Beas and Ruhani Satsang. For it is these two sects which have been instrumental in the development of a number of popular American religious movements. Ruhani Satang and its parent Radhasoami Satsang Beas trace their lineages back to Shiv Dayal Singh through Jaimal Singh, Soamiji's only Sikh successor who eventually settled on the banks of the Beas river in the now thriving farm community of the Punjab. After Jaimal Singh's demise in 1903, his chief disciple and successor, Sawan Singh (1858-1948), founded a spiritual colony in honor of his guru. It was Sawan Singh who has been the most pivotal force in the spread of Shabd Yoga related panths in North America. His impact can be directly seen in the teachings and writings of the Divine Light Mission, Mishra's Yoga Society, Dr. Bhagat Singh Thind's metaphysical groups, and the Movement for Spiritual Inner Awareness (M.S.I.A.). Although when Sawan Singh died, he was eventually succeeded (via Jagat Singh) by his grandson, Charan Singh, a number of his disciples founded their own movements. Eminent among these was Kirpal Singh who established Ruhani Satsang in Gur Mandi, Old Delhi. Kirpal's influence on popular Shabd Yoga groups in America is second only to Sawan Singh's. Both Walter Baptiste and Paul Twitchell (the late founder of Eckankar) were disciples of the Delhi master and have incorporated his teachings into their respective organizations. In the following section, we will examine some of the more prominent panths in America which have an affiliation in one way or another with the Radhasoami tradition of India through the aegis of Sawan Singh or Kirpal Singh. Dr. Bhagat Singh Thind In the early part of this century, many Sikhs immigrated by way of Canada to the United States. Outstanding among these was Dr. Bhagat Singh Thind, who was both a spiritual teacher and an activist for Indian rights. He was involved in the famous 1923 court case 'United States vs. Bhagat Singh Thind,' wherein he attempted to escape restrictive racial causes by arguing that Indians are Caucasian. During the twenties and thirties, Thind wrote a number of books and conducted classes throughout the country on metaphysics. Thind claimed at that time, as he did before his death in the late 1960's, that his spiritual inspiration came from the Sikh religion. According to Kirpal Singh, however, Thind was actually an initiate of Sawan Singh of Radhasoami Satsang Beas and derived his teachings from him without due reference. Instead of utilizing Sikh doctrines, Thind was allegedly borrowing Radhasoami precepts, and in so doing was covering up his real religious theopneusty. Comments Kirpal Singh: When I went to America there was one gentleman, he's passed away now, a Sikh gentleman who was giving talks on payment. His name was Dr. Bhagat Singh Thind. He married a French lady. He was initiated by Baba Sawan Singh, I know, definitely. When he wrote his first book, Radiant Road (sic: Thind had written several books before 1939) he sent a copy to Baba Sawan Singh. He gave it to me. It was a copy of what I had written. I wanted to meet him but he always evaded me. I was in America four months, I asked him for his program but he would change his program. We never met. He said he never even saw Baba Sawan Singh, and never knew that Radiant Road , his book, is the exact translation of a portion of the book I had written. Part of the reason Thind has been accused of plagiarism over his book, Radiant Road to Reality (1939), was not because he used similar concepts as found in Radhasoami but because of the style and form with which he conveyed his message. The confusion over which book he actually plagiarized from ( Sar Bachan Radhasoami , Gurmat Sidhant, or With A Great Master in India ) sidelights the real issue: Why would Dr. Bhagat Singh Thind wish to employ almost all of Radhasoami's specific parmarthi doctrines but deny their origin and his disputed association with the satsang? It is a question which we will examine at length in the last part of this article, for the denial of allegiance, as we shall see, is not an uncommon occurrence, especially with certain neo-gurus and movements. Paul Twitchell and Eckankar Perhaps the most controversial of the new panths associated with Radhasoami and Ruhani Satsang is Eckankar. Today the group, under the leadership of Harold Klemp (the present 'Living Eck Master') and Darwin Gross (the previous Master) does not admit that their founder, Paul Twitchell (1908-1971), was initiated by Kirpal Singh in 1955, although there is overwhelming documentary evidence to support it. Rather they claim, as did Twitchell from about 1966 onwards, that their founder was initiated by Sudar Singh of Allahabad and Rebazar Tarzs, a Tibetan monk supposedly over five-hundred years old. Though these claims would usually go by undetected (from lack of primary materials), this book (1978, 1979, 1983, and 1988) and the SCP Journal: Eckankar, A Hard Look At A New Religion (1979) have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Paul Twitchell was indeed a follower of Kirpal Singh, as well as Swami Premananda and L. Ron Hubbard. Sudar Singh and Rebazar Tarzs, though their existence is factual to some extent as 'cover names' for real gurus, are actually mythological characterizations of Twitchell's genuine and imagined biography. In order to start a 'new' movement, Paul Twitchell attempted to cover up his previous association with Kirpal Singh (while continuing to use him and the books of Dr. Julian P. Johnson as his primary source) and tried to create a mythology which made him and his group, Eckankar, a fulcrum for a unique and superior spiritual revelation. Today, the movement has somewhere between thirty and fifty-thousand paid members. Most 'Eckists,' as followers are usually called, have never even heard of Kirpal Singh, Ruhani Satsang, Radhasoami Beas or Dr. Julian P. Johnson. According to the materials published by the group, most members are informed that Eckankar is the fountainhead of all religions. Though its inception only traces back to 1965, the movement's living masters have taught that, if anything, Sant mat, Radhasoami, Shabd Yoga, and other forms of Indic spiritual discipline based upon the 'Sound Current,' are offshoots from the ageless path of Eckankar. However, the hidden history behind Paul Twitchell's life and work has recently been coming more well-known to the reading public which will inevitably lead to a confrontation between what is 'believed to be true' and what is 'actually the case.' John-Roger Hinkins and M.S.I.A. In 1968, John-Roger Hinkins, a Mormon and ex-high school teacher, started his spiritual ministry. He was associated with Paul Twitchell and Eckankar, having been a mail correspondent member, and, to Eckankar's records, a second initiate. In several long, personal interviews with John-Roger at his house in Mandeville Canyon, I learned that he did not see his connection with Paul Twitchell as a master/disciple or teacher/student relationship. Be that as it may, the fact remains that his group and his teachings are almost exactly the same as Eckankar's, not even excepting particular Twitchellian nuances. It should also be noted that M.S.I.A.'s organizational structure is almost parallel to Eckankar's with regard to initiation, discourses, and cosmology. John-Roger is known to members of M.S.I.A. as the physical manifestation of the Mystical Traveler Consciousness (a concept quite similar to the Satguru in the Radhasoami tradition and the Mahanta in Eckankar). According to Roger's account, the mantleship of the MTC was passed on to him in or around 1963. During this time, Roger claims to have met Sawan Singh, the late Radhasoami Satsang Beas master. 'J.R.', as he is affectionately called, holds that the Great Master of Beas was the previous carrier of the Mystical Traveler Consciousness and passed on the 'keys to the Kingdom' to him on the inner spiritual planes. However, 'J.R.' at that time did not recognize the luminous being as Sawan Singh. It was only later when he saw a photograph of the guru that he placed the picture of the Great Master with the powerful entity he encountered in meditation. John-Roger's group has grown considerably in the last ten years, and now has centers throughout the United States and in several countries across the globe. M.S.I.A. publishes its own newspaper, The Movement , and runs several sister-organizations, the most visible of which is Insight Transformational Seminars. Divine Light Mission Of all the movements under discussion, the one that fewest people know has a connection to the Radhasoami tradition is the Divine Light Mission. As Juergensmeyer notes: It is reported that the 'Divine Light Mission' of the boy guru, Shri Hans Maharaji , is derived from Radhasoami teachings and the Radhasoami community. According to some accounts, the father of the present boy guru had been a follower of one of the Radhasoami branches, but split off from them to start his own following. With the emergence of Balyogeshwar (alias Guru Maharaji), the mission came to the attention of the general public in India and North America. The movement had its biggest impact in the early 1970's when it attracted thousands of devotees. The initial growth, however, has since subsided, and the group is currently enjoying a relative stability, with neither a significant influx of new members or a substantial exodus. The most striking parallel between the Divine Light Mission and the Radhasoami Tradition concerns their teachings on the 'Divine Word,' the inner-spiritual melody. Both groups employ meditational techniques for initiates to concentrate their attention on this current of 'light and sound' which is believed to free the soul from its attachment with the physical body. Though both groups have similar theological teachings concerning the nature of this 'Divine Word,' each differ in their own way on how exactly to approach the Supreme Abode. Walter Baptiste, Dr. Ramamurti Mishra, and Ray Stanford There a number of lesser-known individuals and groups which have had alliance with Radhasoami. Walter Baptiste, for instance, was initiated by Kirpal Singh in the mid-1950's. He now runs a yoga facility and a vegetarian restaurant in San Francisco, where his wife gives classes on Hatha Yoga. Baptiste also conducts spiritual counseling, and, I am informed, gives initiation using the same five holy names ( panch nam ) that all Radhasoami satsangs linked with Jaimal Singh (including Kirpal Singh's Ruhani Satsang) have given out as their meditation mantra. Other people have been influenced by Radhasoami but in less dramatic ways. Dr. Ramamurti Mishra, the famous yoga teacher, was initiated by both Sawan Singh and Baba Somanath. But their impact should not be overestimated as Mishra has adopted many gurus. Nevertheless, he does teach Nada-yoga (union of the soul with the interior/primordial sound) and lays emphasis on much of the Radhasoami teachings. Today there exists a multitude of organizations which reveal a striking compatibility with Radhasoami teachings concerning the 'Sound Current.' And though perhaps most of these movements have no direct link, they have somewhere along the line utilized practices or beliefs from the many Radhasoami publications. Groups in this category include: A.U.M. (Association for the Understanding of Man), whose founder, Ray Stanford, was initiated by Charan Singh of Radhasoami Satsang Beas; Morningland, which appears to have been influenced by some of Eckankar's distinctive doctrines; and Jerry Mulvin, former professional bowler and long time follower of Eckankar, who now claims to be an enlightened master and competent to 'connect' disciples to the sound current (for a hundred dollars, no less!). Genealogical Dissociation: Emergence and Repression in the New Panths An important question arises when one reviews the startling tendency inherent in many of the new panths and their founders to deny their religious heritage--a denial which has taken on the form of name-deletions, plagiarism, and cover-ups. Why? Though there may indeed be many answers [like SCP's skepticism of Eckankar's late founder: 'Twitchell was a one-eyed man who preferred his own fabrications to the truth' ], it becomes quite apparent on closer inspection that there is one fundamental reason. Simply put, it is not that the new panths are in all instances concerned with suppressing their historical roots, but rather that they are overly anxious about their own distinctiveness as a new movement. It is primarily because of this emphasis on becoming established as a separate entity that the given group and its founder disconnect instead of integrate the past out of which they arose. This severance, which has its basis in developmental psychology, I have coined as 'genealogical dissociation.' Ken Wilber, in his books, The Atman Project and Up From Eden , sees this predisposition towards disunion as an underlying psychological problem in man's development, both individually and socially. When attempting to
differentiate from a particular state of awareness or stage of development, for instance, man has two options: either integrate the lower order where the emergence takes place or repress it. If it is integrated, then that stage remains conscious and pliable; if it is estranged or disconnected, however, then it turns unconscious and threatening. In terms of the mind/body dualism, Wilber explains it thus: The mind/body dissociation was a natural result of the increasing death-terror that emerged with the mental-egoic phase, around 600 B.C. As the mind began to emerge in a clear way for the first time in history, the ego, in flight from death, simply alienated, dissociated, or repressed the body. And it did this for a simple reason: the mental-ego is composed of ideas, and ideas seem permanent, unchanging and fixed, whereas the body, composed of mortal flesh, obviously dies. For example, all real trees grow, live and then die--but the word 'tree', the symbol 'tree', stays the same. So if ideas seem fixed and unchanging, whereas bodies are fleshy and mortal, and you're in flight from death, which of those two do you identify with? The minds, of course. You identify with words, symbols, concepts--the ego--and you deny, alienate, repress the mortal body. Ideas become the new immortality project, and the body becomes the new threat, the new enemy. Applying Wilber's elucidation to the development of new panths (specifically Eckankar), we can see that it becomes a 'fear' of losing that emergence--that step forward--which prompts suppression or attempted annihilation of the lower order where the differentiation first took place. In our case, historical-religious genealogical dissociation. This disunion in many of the new panths (e.g., like Paul Twitchell's denial of his association with Kirpal Singh and Ruhani Satsang), springs forward not so much out of ignorance but out of hope for a separate, distinct and lasting survival--an autonomous tradition. But as Freudian and Jungian theories about personality maturation demonstrate, the unconscious or shadow self cannot be disregarded because it is part of the entire organism. It, quite simply, must be dealt with. Religiously, we can see the attempt for 'integration' in the early history of Christianity, especially with the influence of St. Paul. There was an effort on behalf of the newly emerging Church to include (not obliterate) parts of the Judaic religion and culture. Thus, even today Roman Catholicism acknowledges its indebtedness to the Jewish heritage. And so is the case with Radhasoami (particularly the Beas branch in the Punjab and Sawan-Kirpal Mission) towards Sant mat. There is both an acknowledged link and a proud remembrance in Radhasoami and Ruhani Satsang of its ancestry with the medieval nirguna bhakti poet-Sants. In the context of some of the new panths, however, there is an endeavor to dislocate, dissociate, and even destroy their antecedents. Instead of an admission to their actual religious heritage, we instead find a denial of it--even in the very face of incredible contradictory evidence. Take, as an illustrative example, the case of Paul Twitchell and Eckankar. When the group first started, Twitchell did not completely deny his association with his guru, Kirpal Singh. In fact, in many articles Twitchell wrote at length about his admiration for the Ruhani Satsang Master. However, from about 1966 onwards we find an accelerating cover-up. What prompted this shift of allegiance? The answer is perhaps simpler than we might expect: the growing popularity of Eckankar. When Twitchell came to grasp the significance of his new religious movement--the fact that it could draw in thousands of followers-- he decided to subvert anything which would hinder Eckankar's progression and potential popularity amongst the masses. He wanted his group to be self-determining, marking its own future course as a viable spiritual tradition. And the most serious threat to this much desired autonomy, at least to Twitchell's purview, was his past. Hence, Twitchell invented a new mythology, one which intertwined fact, fiction, legend and imagination into a confused complex that exhibited only one truly consistent theme: the Living Eck Master (in this context, Paul Twitchell) as Hero. Now the disturbing problem in all of this is that Eckankar's attempt for a neo-mythology is not based upon some prior authenticated historical tradition, but upon its founder's own creative impulses. Impulses which at times plagiarized whole chapters from copyrighted Radhasoami Satsang Beas texts, lied about biographical details, and commenced vast cover-ups concerning the origin of Eckankar's doctrines. However, it is not solely a repression of the past which prompted Paul Twitchell to deny his spiritual roots, but rather his heightened concern for the future, for the continuing growth of his new movement. It was this obsessive anxiety which outweighed--instead of integrated--Twitchell's authenticity to his actual past, the real heritage which brought forth his group Eckankar in the first place. Though the psychological modus operandi of 'emergence by repression' is age-old and is itself instrumental in the evolution of religion, in the case of some of the new panths (particularly Eckankar), it remains an essentially immature and disunifying attempt for genuine autonomy.
NOTES
1. Paul Twitchell and Dr. Bhagat Singh Thind are two significant examples of spiritual teachers who have extensively plagiarized from Radhasoami texts. See Plagiarism in Review for a more in-depth look.
2. Most of this research is based upon my eight trips to North India. First, in the summer of 1978 with Professor Mark Juergensmeyer of the University of California at Berkeley; and, most recently, in January of 1990, where I saw for the first time Twitchell's extensive correspondence with Kirpal Singh. See The Delhi Connection for more information.
3. I have employed the word panth (lit., 'way, path, or course') because of its neutral and non-derogatory meaning and use--in contradistinction with the word 'cult', which, if anything, has become the mass media's buzz word for the religiously off-beat.
4. The term Shabd has a variety of meanings depending in which context it is used. In Radhasoami terminology, Shabd represents the eternal 'force and vitality which permeates the whole universe; it is the cause and sustainer of the entire creation.' Refer to Glossary of Radhasoami Faith (Agra: Sant Das Maheshwari, 1967), page 227, under the word Shabd.
5. It should be noted that the phrase 'Audible Life Stream' did not come into popular usage until Julian P. Johnson's The Path of the Masters (1939), a book which has been extensively plagiarized.
6. Surat Shabd Yoga (lit., 'the union of the soul/consciousness with the internal spiritual sound') is an ancient discipline designed to enable the soul (or consciousness) to ascend beyond the body to higher spiritual regions by means of the internal sound or life current. It appears that Shabd Yoga has its roots in the pre-Vedic period of India. However, the yogic practice has only become clearly articulated and well-known in the last five-hundred years. Major works which describe or illustrate Shabd Yoga techniques include: Hathayoga Pradipika, Nadabindu Upanishad , and the writings of the nirguna bhakti poets of the Sant tradition such as Anurag Sagar (attributed to Kabir but most likely of a later time period) and Ghat Ramayana by Tulsi Sahib. However, the clearest and most detailed treatment of Surat Shabd Yoga practices comes from Shiv Dayal Singh's Sar Bachan (including both the prose and poetry volumes), the main scripture of the Radhasoami movement.
7. This is the first paper of its kind which has examined the close link between the Radhasoami tradition and such popular American religious movements as the Divine Light Mission, Eckankar, M.S.I.A., and Dr. Bhagat Singh Thind's group. Those scholars which have been pioneers in opening up this area of investigation include Professor Mark Juergensmeyer and Dr. J. Gordon Melton.
8. I have spelled the word 'Radhasoami' (with the 'o' instead of the transliterated 'w') in deference to the Soami Bagh Satsang in Agra which consider it an affront not to spell the words Radha and 'Soami' together (thereby dropping the capital in the last word). The Beas Satsang and other branches spell it variously and do not mind how 'Radhasoami' is spelled. In almost all cases, I have followed Soami Bagh's procedure for spelling, primarily because of their vocalness in the matter. For more on this small, but interesting, controversy see S.D. Maheshwari's Correspondence with Certain Americans (Agra: Soami Bagh), Volumes One through Five; and Lekh Raj Puri's Radha Swami Teachings (New Delhi: Pvt. published, n.d., 1967?).
9. Ibid. My spelling is again in deference to the Soami Bagh Satsang in Agra.
10. There exists a controversy between the 'Beas' and 'Agra' satsangs over whether or not Tulsi Sahib was Shiv Dayal Singh's guru. The 'Beas' satsang (and those connected with them, including Tarn Taran and Ruhani Satsang) argue that Shiv Dayal Singh was indeed initiated by Tulsi Sahib of Hathras at a young age. The 'Agra' satsangs (which include Peepal Mandi, Soami Bagh, and Dayal Bagh) deny any spiritual connection between the esteemed masters, claiming instead that both were swateh Sants (born perfect) and did not, therefore, need the assistance of any guru.
11. Refer to P.D. Barthwal's The Nirguna School of Hindi Poetry: An Exposition of Medieval Indian Santa Mysticism (Benares: Indian Book Shop, 1936) and Dr. Mohan Singh's Goraknath and Medieval Mysticism (Lahore: 1937).
12. The colony is named Dera Baba Jaimal Singh and is one of the largest spiritual communities in all of India.
13. Charan Singh had the largest following of any Radhasoami guru in the world before his death on June 1, 1990. He had initiated over one million and two-hundred thousand people in his thirty-nine year reign as Sant Satguru.
14. Mark Juergensmeyer, 'The Ghadar Syndrome,' Sikh Studies: Comparative Perspectives on a Changing Tradition (Berkeley: Graduate Theological Union, 1979), page 182.
15. My parenthesis; Thind had written several books before 1939, including House of Happiness (Salt Lake: Pvt. publication) in 1931.
16. Kirpal Singh, Heart to Heart Talks, Volume One (Delhi: Ruhani Satsang, 1975).
17. Although Kirpal Singh claims that Dr. Thind plagiarized from Gurmat Sidhant (which was originally published in Punjabi with Sawan Singh's name as author), most of Thind's literary 'borrowing' comes from Julian P. Johnson's With a Great Master in India (1934). See Plagiarism in Review for more on this topic.
18. In 1977, I talked with Mrs. Thind about her husband's relationship with Sawan Singh of Radhasoami Satsang Beas. Mrs. Thind was informed by her husband that he did not know of Sawan Singh; rather, he claimed to have been initiated by a Himalayan priest and was a disciple of Guru Nanak in a previous incarnation. Although Mrs. Thind had met Kirpal Singh personally and knew about the supposed connection of her husband with the Radhasoami Satsang in Beas, she was never told by Dr. Thind that such a link ever existed.
19. 'Mahanta consciousness', as used in Eckankar terminology, means the Divine Master within. It is very similar in usage to the esoteric term 'Radiant Form' as spoken of in Radhasoami teachings. 20. See Plagiarism in Review . 21. See Part Five. 22. Already several hundred devotees have left Eckankar because of the findings presented in earlier editions of The Making of a Spiritual Movement and SCP Journal's 'Eckankar: A Hard Look at a New Religion.' In fact, several world-wide memos have been issued by Eckankar's international headquarters in Menlo Park, California, warning its membership against the 'untrue' accusations of researchers 'who have not done their homework.' See Preface. 23. Personal interview with John-Roger Hinkins at his home in Mandeville Canyon (1978). 24. Roger's cosmology is exactly the same as Paul Twitchell's. This is unusual because of Twitchell's own creative implantations. Compare the following charts: Eckankar's cosmology (as found in The Spiritual Notebook by Paul Twitchell, dated 1971]: 1. Physical/Thunder 2. Astral/Roar of the Sea 3. Causal/Tinkle of Bells 4. Mental/ Running Water 5. Soul/Single Note of Flute 6. Alakh Lok/Heavy Wind 7. Alaya Lok/Deep Humming 8. Hukikat Lok/Thousand Violins 9. Agam Lok/ Music of Woodwinds 10. Anami Lok/Sound of a Whirl pool. M.S.I.A.'S cosmology (as found in The Sound Current by John-Roger, dated 1976): 1. Physical/Thunder 2. Astral/Roaring Surf 3. Causal/Tinkling of Bells 4. Mental/ Running Water 5. Soul/Sound of a Flute 6. {Regions above Soul are not named in the book--only the Sounds} Sound of Wind 7. Humming Sound 8. Ten Thousand Violins 9. Woodwinds. The previous cosmologies are almost exactly the same. Twitchell came up with his own unique schema of how the universe is structured, giving a particular sound to each level. John-Roger copied the same verbatim. Both cosmologies, however, represent a radical departure from the Radhasoami esoteric version. 25. I made this observation to John-Roger personally (in 1978, op. cit.) who told me that he had great love for Twitchell and his work. Roger went on to say that he does garner ideas (and organizational procedures) from other spiritual teachers and traditions, while remaining true to his own personal direction and understanding. John-Roger has been the subject of an intense scandal for the past ten years. See The J.R. Controversy and The Criminal Activities of John-Roger Hinkins (UCSM, Volume One, Number One and Volume Two, Number Two) for more on J.R.'s nefarious escapades. 26. Personal interview with John-Roger Hinkins at his home in the summer of 1979. 27. Ibid. 28. Insight Training is quite similar in structure to EST, the popular seminar group founded by Werner Erhard. 29. Mark Juergensmeyer, 'Radhasoami as a Trans-National Movement' (unedited version); unpublished. In confirmation with Juergensmeyer's contention that Guru Maharaji's father was associated with one of the Radhasoami sects, I was informed personally in July of 1978 at Sawan Ashram, Old Delhi, India, by Bhagwan Gyaniji (who was a disciple of Sawan Singh and personal secretary to Kirpal Singh) that Balyogeshwar's father was indeed initiated by Sawan Singh of the Radhasoami Satsang Beas and later branched off to start his own movement. It also appears that Balyogeshwar's father was a disciple of another Sant mat guru named Sarupanand, who worked in the tradition of Sri Paramahans Advait Mat --a surat shabd yoga lineage apparently connected to Shiv Dayal Singh which was founded in the latter part of the 19th century and is now centered in Guna. 30. Ibid. 31. Telephone interview with Harold Ross, personal follower of Walter Baptiste (1978) and one-time follower of Radhasoami Beas, Soami Bagh, and Eckankar. 32. This same mantra of the 'Five Holy Names' is also given out by John-Roger Hinkins of M.S.I.A., though in an altered fashion. 33. Personal letter from Dr. Ramamurti Mishra to the author, dated October 30, 1980. 34. Ramana Maharishi stands out as a classic example. 35. See Plagiarism in Review . 36. Radhasoami, though much of its terminology is from tantric-yogic schools of thought, has a distinctive vocabulary. Phrases such as 'Ringing Radiance' and 'Audible Life Stream' have come into popular usage because of their frequency in Radhasoami Beas publications. 37. Woodrow Nichols, 'Eckankar: The Ancient Science of Deception' (later incorporated in SCP Journal--Eckankar: A Hard Look at a New Religion (Berkeley, 1979). 38. The phrase 'genealogical dissociation' is a useful one in that it clearly illustrates what happened in the evolution of Eckankar in the late 1960's and early 1970's. Twitchell attempted to severe his past by not only denying his genuine religious heritage but also by implanting a new spiritual genealogy--one which allegedly traces back to the Master Gakko, who brought the true teachings of Eckankar from the planet Venus. 39. I am not utilizing developmental psychology in order to 'reduce' Twitchell's motives to a Freudian or Jungian paradigm, but rather to establish a sympathetic foundation where new religious movements are not just relegated to the academic outposts of 'social aberrations.' Instead, like most traditional religious groups, these new movements represent basic human drives and emotions. If phylogeny in some way recapitulates ontogeny (or vice versa; refer to Carl Sagan's Broca's Brain , 1979), then groups such as Eckankar can be more fully understood in light of human psychology. This, of course, should not be solely an attempt to reduce religion to its neurological roots, but as a partial means for a clearer understanding. See Ken Wilber's Up From Eden (New York: Doubleday, 1981) for more on this perspective. 40. Ken Wilber, op. cit. 41. Although in Twitchell's case ignorance does play a part. Eckankar's founder had a short and, oftentimes, inaccurate memory. Once when questioned about his personal guru, Rebazar Tarzs, Twitchell forgot who he was. This could be due to the fact that Rebazar Tarzs is a fictional character, and his autobiographical byline changed year-to-year with the growth of Eckankar. 42. This 'integration' of Judaic culture and religion by the Roman Catholic Church, though, must be contrasted with its 'dissociation' of certain Gnostic schools in the Second Century A.D. The Church also tried to destroy some of its own religious roots, including the highly mystical texts produced by 'heretical' Gnostic authors. 43. Even though the Church has many times persecuted its religious brothers and sisters in the name of God, anti-semetism, though now formally disdained, has much of its impetus and basis in Catholic history, theology and tradition. 44. The Radhasoami Satsang in Beas has even established a 'Mystics of the East Series' which is designed to publish monographs on the life stories of famous Sants in the medieval nirguna bhakti tradition. 45. The secretary of Eckankar once issued a world-wide memo declaring that the works of Julian P. Johnson (from which Twitchell was accused of plagiarizing) were not copyrighted. This, of course, is false since Johnson's Radhasoami books were all copyrighted and remain so today. 46. Including 'The Flute of God' which was published in installments in Orion Magazine in the mid-1960's. 47. By 1967, Twitchell had shifted his center of operation to Las Vegas, Nevada, to avoid heavy taxation. 48. See SCP Journal--Eckankar: A Hard Look At A New Religion (Berkeley, 1979). 49. Twitchell's paranoid concern reached a pinnacle when he wrote a personal letter to Kirpal Singh in late 1971, threatening the Ruhani Satsang Master with a lawsuit if he continued claiming that Eckankar was derived from Sant mat teachings. Twitchell died of a heart attack shortly after the letter was received in Old Delhi, India. 50. See my article, 'The Hierarchical Structure of Religious Visions,' op. cit. Final Note: This paper was first presented to the American Academy of Religion's Western Region Conference at Stanford University on March 26, 1982.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 16:41:59 (EST)
Poster: Anon
Email:
To: Mr Ex and Brian
Subject: Brian please read this. (Re: Surat Shabd Yoga and Paramhans ...)
Message:
Here is something interesting about m's hidden lineage.
This confirms some of the information previously published on the web-site ....
(very helpful for me)
Yes, but there are still some historical errors on the background page which need to corrected.
Ok, you guys are finally discovering the stuff written by David Lane and Mark Jurgensmeyer which is of course very relevant and interesting since they are uniquely well-informed on the matter. I was in contact with Lane a few years ago. The thrust of my questions to him was, who were Shri HansJi's main influences? The short is answer is probably Sarupanand who was a lesser known Guru, not directly in the Radhasoami line. If anyone of you Californians are interested, as I certainly am, perhaps you would go down to the UCLA melvyn library where, Lane informs me, there is a book called 'Shri Paramhans Advait Mat' I would be very interested to know what it says.
Anyway here is what David Lane wrote to me. I have tried to get hold of this book but it is very difficult making full use of the online services of the 'melvyl library system' from the UK. I did however order and read all of the other the books that Lane and Jurgensmeyer have written on the subject.
As I pointed out in my post below (entitled 'Radhasoami connection') this site still portrays Shri Hans' guru eroneously as being the well-known Radhasoami guru AnandSwarup. I want to correct that. This is evidently not the same man as Sarupanand as I have pointed out to Brian who obviously hasn't got around to correcting that bit of the 'Background History' yet.
(Brian, do you finally see the relevence of that section about Kirpal Singh that I put in my 'Journeys' entry, and which you saw fit to remove because you personally did not understand the relevance? Believe me it is highly relevant, though I confess that to appreciate why, I had to wade through all the aforementioned books which took ages.) I now see that I am no longer alone in pursuing this line of enquiry.
----------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 23:09:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Lane
Subject: Re: maharaji
thanks for your nice note....
The Divine Light Mission is essentially a branch-off of the Shri Paramhans
Advait Mat Group in Guna.....
Sarupanand was Hansji's guru......
Hansji was also apparently initiated by the late Sawan Singh of Radhasoami
Satsang Beas.
There is a book entitled Shri Paramhans Advait Mat published in India (Guna)
and available at UCLA in Los Angeles, CA., which tells about their lineage....
It is quite informative.....
keep in touch
dave
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 1996 10:32:19 -0800 (PST)
From: David Lane
Subject: Re: Book on Divine Light Mission
thanks for your note. I am in London on sabbatical and doing some research.
If you cannot connect via melvyl you may want to try other library systems in the USA....
Try gopher and I think Harvard and Berkeley have the book as well.
Yes, it would be delightful to meet. I am in London, but my stays here
are punctuated with frequent trips to Paris and the South of France (surfing!).
keep in touch.
Juergensmeyer's book is quite helpful. I was his assistant on that project for many years.
My book on Radhasoami focuses on succession disputes--it was published by Garland is also available through inter-library loan (I have also included it in full on the Net).
thanks
dave
--------------------------------------
In Mark Jurgensmeyer's book 'Radhasoami Reality The logic of a modern faith'(Princeton ISBN 0-691-01092-7) I notice that there is the following footnote:
For a summary of Maharaji's teachings, see Jeanne Messer, 'Guru Maharaji and the Divine Light Mission' in Robert Bellah and Charles Glock, eds; The New Religious Consciousness (Berkeley:University of California Press,1976),pp.54-55.
Anon
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 17:14:35 (EST)
Poster: Scott T.
Email: stalking@freewheeling.com
To: Anon
Subject: Library of Congress Reference (Re: Surat Shabd Yoga and Paramhans ...)
Message:
Hi:
Living in the 'NetPlex' has it's advantages. I discovered the following reference in the Library of Congess. We civilians can't check out the book, but my committee chair is a Wilson Fellow and can check out books from the LIbrary of Congress. Will see if I can get access:
Title: Shri Paramhans Advait Mat : a life sketch of the
illustrious master of the mat.
Edition: 1st ed.
Published: Shri Anandpur : Shri Anandpur Trust, 1975.
Description: viii, 730 p., [1] leaf of plates : col. ill. ; 25
cm.
LC Call No.: BL2018.7.S3 A387
Dewey No.: 299 B
Notes: Translated from Hindi.
Includes quotations in Hindi.
Subjects: Advait Anand, Swami, 1846-1919.
Sant Mat -- Biography.
Other authors: Shri Anandpur Trust.
Control No.: 78908403
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 17:20:50 (EST)
Poster: Anon
Email:
To: Scott T.
Subject: Re: Library of Congress Reference (Re: Surat Shabd Yoga and Paramhans ...)
Message:
Hi:
Living in the 'NetPlex' has it's advantages. I discovered the following reference in the Library of Congess. We civilians can't check out the book, but my committee chair is a Wilson Fellow and can check out books from the LIbrary of Congress. Will see if I can get access:
Title: Shri Paramhans Advait Mat : a life sketch of the
illustrious master of the mat.
Edition: 1st ed.
Published: Shri Anandpur : Shri Anandpur Trust, 1975.
Description: viii, 730 p., [1] leaf of plates : col. ill. ; 25
cm.
LC Call No.: BL2018.7.S3 A387
Dewey No.: 299 B
Notes: Translated from Hindi.
Includes quotations in Hindi.
Subjects: Advait Anand, Swami, 1846-1919.
Sant Mat -- Biography.
Other authors: Shri Anandpur Trust.
Control No.: 78908403
Cool.
If you get hold of it I am really keen to know what it says about Sarupanand. Mind if I email you privately?
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 17:50:55 (EST)
Poster: Scott T.
Email: stalking@freewheeling.com
To: Anon
Subject: Re: Library of Congress Reference (Re: Surat Shabd Yoga and Paramhans ...)
Message:
Cool.
If you get hold of it I am really keen to know what it says about Sarupanand. Mind if I email you privately?
No problem. Have attached my email address.
-Scott
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 23:32:11 (EST)
Poster: Brian
Email: brian@ex-premie.org
To: Anon
Subject: Re: Brian please read this. (Re: Surat Shabd Yoga and Paramhans ...)
Message:
Here is something interesting about m's hidden lineage.
This confirms some of the information previously published on the web-site ....
(very helpful for me)
Yes, but there are still some historical errors on the background page which need to corrected.
Ok, you guys are finally discovering the stuff written by David Lane and Mark Jurgensmeyer which is of course very relevant and interesting since they are uniquely well-informed on the matter. I was in contact with Lane a few years ago. The thrust of my questions to him was, who were Shri HansJi's main influences? The short is answer is probably Sarupanand who was a lesser known Guru, not directly in the Radhasoami line. If anyone of you Californians are interested, as I certainly am, perhaps you would go down to the UCLA melvyn library where, Lane informs me, there is a book called 'Shri Paramhans Advait Mat' I would be very interested to know what it says.
Anyway here is what David Lane wrote to me. I have tried to get hold of this book but it is very difficult making full use of the online services of the 'melvyl library system' from the UK. I did however order and read all of the other the books that Lane and Jurgensmeyer have written on the subject.
As I pointed out in my post below (entitled 'Radhasoami connection') this site still portrays Shri Hans' guru eroneously as being the well-known Radhasoami guru AnandSwarup. I want to correct that. This is evidently not the same man as Sarupanand as I have pointed out to Brian who obviously hasn't got around to correcting that bit of the 'Background History' yet.
(Brian, do you finally see the relevence of that section about Kirpal Singh that I put in my 'Journeys' entry, and which you saw fit to remove because you personally did not understand the relevance? Believe me it is highly relevant, though I confess that to appreciate why, I had to wade through all the aforementioned books which took ages.) I now see that I am no longer alone in pursuing this line of enquiry.
----------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 23:09:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Lane
Subject: Re: maharaji
thanks for your nice note....
The Divine Light Mission is essentially a branch-off of the Shri Paramhans
Advait Mat Group in Guna.....
Sarupanand was Hansji's guru......
Hansji was also apparently initiated by the late Sawan Singh of Radhasoami
Satsang Beas.
There is a book entitled Shri Paramhans Advait Mat published in India (Guna)
and available at UCLA in Los Angeles, CA., which tells about their lineage....
It is quite informative.....
keep in touch
dave
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 1996 10:32:19 -0800 (PST)
From: David Lane
Subject: Re: Book on Divine Light Mission
thanks for your note. I am in London on sabbatical and doing some research.
If you cannot connect via melvyl you may want to try other library systems in the USA....
Try gopher and I think Harvard and Berkeley have the book as well.
Yes, it would be delightful to meet. I am in London, but my stays here
are punctuated with frequent trips to Paris and the South of France (surfing!).
keep in touch.
Juergensmeyer's book is quite helpful. I was his assistant on that project for many years.
My book on Radhasoami focuses on succession disputes--it was published by Garland is also available through inter-library loan (I have also included it in full on the Net).
thanks
dave
--------------------------------------
In Mark Jurgensmeyer's book 'Radhasoami Reality The logic of a modern faith'(Princeton ISBN 0-691-01092-7) I notice that there is the following footnote:
For a summary of Maharaji's teachings, see Jeanne Messer, 'Guru Maharaji and the Divine Light Mission' in Robert Bellah and Charles Glock, eds; The New Religious Consciousness (Berkeley:University of California Press,1976),pp.54-55.
Anon
(Brian, do you finally see the relevence of that section about Kirpal Singh that I put in my 'Journeys' entry, and which you saw fit to remove because you personally did not understand the relevance? Believe me it is highly relevant, though I confess that to appreciate why, I had to wade through all the aforementioned books which took ages.) I now see that I am no longer alone in pursuing this line of enquiry.
First off, this is very sloppy wording that implies to those who do not know differently that I saw fit to remove part of your Journeys entry for my own personal reasons.
I do not edit peoples Journeys entries other than to clean up obvious typos (words run together due to missing spaces, etc) and to format them into paragraphs. I do not remove phrases from them, whether I see any relevance or not. Journeys entries are the one area outside of the Forum where people say whatever they want to.
But neither do I take on any responsibility to maintain the links that people might include in their entries.
Your Journeys entry was modified by David with a part of it removed and made into a separate page on the site. He then linked to that new page from your entry. I only know about this because you told me after I removed that page, and modified the link so that it would point somewhere relevant to the surrounding text. You expressed your unhappiness at where it now points and I told you to send me an entirely new entry and I would update it.
You haven't seen fit to do that for whatever reason.
As for the page in question, I will or won't restore it based on some future evaluation of it. I am busy with other areas of the site at present, and will get to the history stuff when I can devote the time required to do it right. You either will or will not approve of what is there afterwards.
Secondly: I'm tickled pink for you that you derive so much personal enjoyment and satisfaction by knowing Hans Ji Maharaj's guru's name. You perhaps find some personal proof there that MJ must be a fraud. I have already arrived at that conclusion through personal experience that didn't require wading through books. To each his own.
I have told you in email that I will get to the history pages when I get to them - or words to that effect. You are free to post anything you want here, as is everyone else. But no amount of pressure exerted through this forum for me to make the immediate changes that you deem necessary to protect this site's credibility will in any way sway me to hop right off and fix your pet sentence on a badly flawed page. You will note that the page in question makes no reference to Millennium. I should stop what I'm working on and fix that too?
We don't get to vote on how I spend my unpaid time ensuring that credibility. It is my responsibility. Your concern is noted. Again.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 07:15:08 (EST)
Poster: Anon
Email:
To: Brian
Subject: Re: Brian please read this. (Re: Surat Shabd Yoga and Paramhans ...)
Message:
I told you to send me an entirely new entry and I would update it. You haven't seen fit to do that for whatever reason.
Ok Ok. I'm not that bothered about it; if I were I would have emailed you my 'Journeys' entry of course. As it stands it's not a high priority for me. I am busy also. I will get around to it.(sound familiar)
regarding:
I'm tickled pink for you that you derive so much personal enjoyment and satisfaction by knowing Hans Ji Maharaj's guru's name.You perhaps find some personal proof there that MJ must be a fraud.
Very funny. I don't think it is petty of me to take some responsibility to correct that bit, as I said, because I was the one who told David Stirling that it was Anand Swarup when he asked for that information. Of course it doesn't prove anything about Maharaji being a fraud. It is not my sole intention (nor do I see why it should be this websites) to prove Maharaji a fraud.
You will note that the page in question makes no reference to Millennium. I should stop what I'm working on and fix that too?
I would say that it is a higher priority to address mistakes that are already published than to start adding other stuff. Just my opinion. Of course it is a matter of credibility to a degree.
It isn't my intention to hassle you, but as somebody who has offered some input towards this site I think I am entitled to be as slightly persistent in my objections as I have been, especially if I perceive them to be taken lightly.
Ok so my concern is noted. I took the trouble to compose and email you a corrected version of that paragraph. It couldn't possibly be construed as a hassle to insert that especially as I have provided the text for you.
I would like you to appreciate that I am also slightly irritated to have spent time writing stuff like this which is shelved.
I really won't mention this again as I think your efforts are actually applaudable and I don't want to seem over-critical. It would be good if we could resist the temptation to engage in a slanging match about what pompous idiots we think the other is etc.
No hard feelings.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 07:51:37 (EST)
Poster: Brian
Email: brian@ex-premie.org
To: Anon
Subject: Re: Brian please read this. (Re: Surat Shabd Yoga and Paramhans ...)
Message:
Look, maybe I'm being over-sensitive. I don't mean to. I have a keen sense of awareness of what the site isn't right now versus what I want it to be, and I feel driven to get it there. So I'm putting in long hours working on parts of it, and partitioning my own desires regarding the rest of it behind a mental wall marked 'This I Do Later'.
I'm also aware that other people are affected by the results of my efforts. But rather than freeze-up at the responsibiity that involves, I downplay its importance so that I can make decisions about whatever is in front of me at the time, get something accomplished, and then move on to the next thing on the list.
The last thing I can afford to do is to take a scattered approach to site-building by running around patching cracks in walls that are going to come down later anyway.
I am very unhappy with the History pages. But pretending that they're good enough for now so that I can work on other parts undistracted seems to work for me. Maybe I just hate being reminded what hasn't been done yet since that makes it harder to concentrate on what I'm currently attempting to do.
The problem is that I agree with you about the History, and I agree with others about the Techniques, etc, but can only do one thing at a time if I want to leave a trail of finished work behind me when facing such a long trail of unfinished work stretching out ahead.
I'm aware of your contributions, although maybe not all of them, and I appreciate them for having helped make the site I inherited so much more than the site I first browsed one year ago. I also understand that you have high standards, and that you sometimes can get irritated to not see them realized at each point along the way and abhor compromising them.
Just try to be patient with me if you can, and I'll try to be more tolerant of any apparent criticism in the face of long hours of effort. For the last week I've been plodding through the Forum I archives on a post-by-post basis trying to make some sense out of what is there and fix what's broken. It's a mess, and I'm a bit weary of the hand editing of the HTML files. Each one seems to have been worked on with a different editor and I can't use the utility that I wrote for Forum II archives until I have gotten them into a standard format. In the meantime, I'm repressing desires to veer off to something more glamorous and immediately gratifying. So I'm a bit testy I guess.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 12:53:20 (EST)
Poster: Anon
Email:
To: Brian
Subject: Re: Brian please read this. (Re: Surat Shabd Yoga and Paramhans ...)
Message:
Look, maybe I'm being over-sensitive. I don't mean to. I have a keen sense of awareness of what the site isn't right now versus what I want it to be, and I feel driven to get it there. So I'm putting in long hours working on parts of it, and partitioning my own desires regarding the rest of it behind a mental wall marked 'This I Do Later'.
I'm also aware that other people are affected by the results of my efforts. But rather than freeze-up at the responsibiity that involves, I downplay its importance so that I can make decisions about whatever is in front of me at the time, get something accomplished, and then move on to the next thing on the list.
The last thing I can afford to do is to take a scattered approach to site-building by running around patching cracks in walls that are going to come down later anyway.
I am very unhappy with the History pages. But pretending that they're good enough for now so that I can work on other parts undistracted seems to work for me. Maybe I just hate being reminded what hasn't been done yet since that makes it harder to concentrate on what I'm currently attempting to do.
The problem is that I agree with you about the History, and I agree with others about the Techniques, etc, but can only do one thing at a time if I want to leave a trail of finished work behind me when facing such a long trail of unfinished work stretching out ahead.
I'm aware of your contributions, although maybe not all of them, and I appreciate them for having helped make the site I inherited so much more than the site I first browsed one year ago. I also understand that you have high standards, and that you sometimes can get irritated to not see them realized at each point along the way and abhor compromising them.
Just try to be patient with me if you can, and I'll try to be more tolerant of any apparent criticism in the face of long hours of effort. For the last week I've been plodding through the Forum I archives on a post-by-post basis trying to make some sense out of what is there and fix what's broken. It's a mess, and I'm a bit weary of the hand editing of the HTML files. Each one seems to have been worked on with a different editor and I can't use the utility that I wrote for Forum II archives until I have gotten them into a standard format. In the meantime, I'm repressing desires to veer off to something more glamorous and immediately gratifying. So I'm a bit testy I guess.
I hear you.
Putting in the time you do without being paid would drive me insane let alone testy. No..correct that...I just couldn't do it period.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 02:38:24 (EST)
Poster: Mili
Email: mili@cheerful.com
To: Everyone
Subject: Jim's Fundamental Confusion
Message:
That's it, folks - the title of the post is the message. Get it?
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 22:17:41 (EST)
Poster: Miss 'Y'
Email: JSCA@bliss.com
To: Mili
Subject: Re: Jim's Fundamental Confusion
Message:
That's it, folks - the title of the post is the message. Get it?
Sheer Profoundity! I see at least one other, sees JIMBO 'Hell'er's true inner turmoil manifesting it's self. Oh ,um Sorry Jimbo ,only joking!
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 09:54:08 (EST)
Poster: Mili
Email: mili@cheerful.com
To: Jim
Subject: Re: Jim's Fundamental Confusion
Message:
Your tirade against rationality, Mili, might as well be against math or electricity. All the evil geniuses of the twentieth century, I'm sure, have depended on both. So what?
I am not saying that rationality is a good or bad thing. I agree with you that it is just like math, or electricity. If rationality is just a method, a cognitive technology, what is the basis of morality then?
Jim, the conclusion of this argument, however strange it may appear to be, is that irrationality is the basis of morality.
Get it?
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 10:20:36 (EST)
Poster: Scott T.
Email:
To: Mili
Subject: Confusion: A slight correction (Re: Jim's Fundamental Confusion)
Message:
Mili:
In regard to: Jim, the conclusion of this argument, however strange it may appear to be, is that irrationality is the basis of morality.
If I might be so bold as to offer a slight correction, I'd say that non-rationality, coupled with the rational, is the basis of morality. Irrationality, by definition, can't be the basis for anything, because it doesn't allow result to follow cause.
-Scott
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 14:19:28 (EST)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: Scott T.
Subject: Re: Confusion: A slight correction (Re: Jim's Fundamental Confusion)
Message:
Reciprocal altruism explains morality at an instinctive, sub- or pre-cognitive level. Rational to the extent it 'makes sense' but not as the result of an actual thought process. E.g. maternal love is 'moral', makes good sense for both mom and the kids (i.e. is 'rational') but isn't taught or calculated.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 15:17:50 (EST)
Poster: Scott T.
Email:
To: Jim
Subject: Re: Confusion: A slight correction (Re: Jim's Fundamental Confusion)
Message:
Jim:
Well... I think so. But it's more than a little controversial. What about systems of morality? The Scottish moral philosophers? The so-called altruistic genes? 'Giving one's life for a friend?' The guy confronting the tank in Tiennanmen? Simply referring to these phenomena as 'reciprocal altruism' avoids the whole issue of methodological individualism. How did such group oriented systems evolve? What occasioned the 'quantum leap' to the discovery that what was good for the group is good for the individual. How did the stuff get programmed? Reciprocity explains the difference between the relationship of Robinson Crusoe to Friday vs. Crusoe's relationship to the environment, but if we go to larger systems we need a magic wand of some kind, like culture. And how do cultures come into being?
To take a very simple example, why do people vote, when their impact on the outcome is so minimal compared to the cost of going to the polls? There is simply no rational calculation of advantage that would support such an individual act of altruism. There are mutual benefits to voting, but you can get those even if you don't vote. Saying that this is pre-cognitive expresses precious little about the process.
-Scott
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 18:40:47 (EST)
Poster: JW
Email:
To: Scott T.
Subject: Re: Confusion: A slight correction (Re: Jim's Fundamental Confusion)
Message:
To take a very simple example, why do people vote, when their impact on the outcome is so minimal compared to the cost of going to the polls? There is simply no rational calculation of advantage that would support such an individual act of altruism. There are mutual benefits to voting, but you can get those even if you don't vote. Saying that this is pre-cognitive expresses precious little about the process.
-Scott
Well, first of all, the majority of people don't vote, at least in the U.S. And the 'voting class' is older, richer and whiter than the general population of potential voters.
Those who vote tend to have the most to protect and/or lose by what elected officials might do. Hence, they are more interested in who gets elected and what bond measures, etc. are passed. If there is interest, there is more likelihood that one will vote. It is generally a consideration of self interest.
Although one vote can be considered inconsequential, I think there is still a self-interest in contributing to a result that a voter wants. This demography also has an idea of itself as 'good citizens' and voting is a part of that. This is a psychological benefit. Also, I think there is a fear among many voters that their vote could, in some unlikely scenario, make the difference. It's the same rationale people have for playing the lottery, but the payoff is certainly different.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 18:46:32 (EST)
Poster: JW
Email:
To: Scott T.
Subject: Re: Confusion: A slight correction (Re: Jim's Fundamental Confusion)
Message:
To take a very simple example, why do people vote, when their impact on the outcome is so minimal compared to the cost of going to the polls? There is simply no rational calculation of advantage that would support such an individual act of altruism. There are mutual benefits to voting, but you can get those even if you don't vote. Saying that this is pre-cognitive expresses precious little about the process.
-Scott
Well, first of all, the majority of people don't vote, at least in the U.S. And the 'voting class' is older, richer and whiter than the general population of potential voters.
Those who vote tend to have the most to protect and/or lose by what elected officials might do. Hence, they are more interested in who gets elected and what bond measures, etc. are passed. If there is interest, there is more likelihood that one will vote. It is generally a consideration of self interest.
Although one vote can be considered inconsequential, I think there is still a self-interest in contributing to a result that a voter wants. This demography also has an idea of itself as 'good citizens' and voting is a part of that. This is a psychological benefit. Also, I think there is a fear among many voters that their vote could, in some unlikely scenario, make the difference. It's the same rationale people have for playing the lottery, but the payoff is certainly different.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 20:11:16 (EST)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: Scott T.
Subject: Re: Confusion: A slight correction (Re: Jim's Fundamental Confusion)
Message:
Scott,
A whole slew of evolutionary psychologists theorize mightily about how such a simple directive such as reciprocal altruism can explain the myriad subtleties of morality, small-scale and large. I really like their theories. They make a lot of sense to me especially as they explain -- or attempt to explain -- the broader social effects of this key function of natural selection. The Reciprocal Altruism ('RA'?) kicks in at a micro-organism level and extends out past the individual through the culture at large. Dawkins explains this succintly in a River out of Eden.
As for voting, it might not be irrational for us to vote if one considers the secondary effect of voting which is to maintain the custom and keep everyone else going to the polls. Further, even if that weren't true, and it was actually 'economically' unssportable for the individual to vote, that's not to say we all know that. People who haven't figured that out and who mistakenly think their vote is worth casting are making a rational choice based on a faulty premise. Still rational.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 20:22:47 (EST)
Poster: Scott T.
Email:
To: Jim
Subject: Re: Confusion: A slight correction (Re: Jim's Fundamental Confusion)
Message:
Jim:
A whole slew of evolutionary psychologists theorize mightily about how such a simple directive such as reciprocal altruism can explain the myriad subtleties of morality, small-scale and large. I really like their theories. They make a lot of sense to me especially as they explain -- or attempt to explain -- the broader social effects of this key function of natural selection.
I haven't heard of 'evolutionary psychology.' Will have to check into it. It sounds almost like a contradiction in terms. Is this related to the 'human ecology' point of view?
-Scott
Back To Index -:- Top of Index