Forum V: Archive
Compiled: Wed, Jun 21, 2000 at 09:23:22 (GMT)
From: Jun 11, 2000 To: Jun 19, 2000 Page: 4 Of: 5


jondon -:- Hare Krishna students sue for 4 mil. -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 22:11:07 (GMT)
__ jondon -:- Actually it was 400 million (nt) -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 22:12:55 (GMT)
__ __ jondon -:- I guess I missed the thread below, sorry (nt) -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 23:25:56 (GMT)

miami vice -:- 2nd miami program -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 20:31:59 (GMT)
__ Elaine -:- 2nd miami program--what?? -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:56:52 (GMT)
__ G -:- empty seats -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:47:11 (GMT)
__ Jim -:- That's a great story -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 01:48:04 (GMT)

Georg Koester -:- Cults, a litmus test -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:40:37 (GMT)
__ cq -:- Cults, a litmus test -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 18:00:18 (GMT)
__ Powerman -:- Cults, a litmus test -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 20:50:08 (GMT)
__ __ Georg W. Koester -:- Cults, a litmus test -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 07:49:02 (GMT)
__ __ __ Powerman -:- Cults, a litmus test -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 14:31:27 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Georg W. Koester -:- Cults, a litmus test -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 18:04:12 (GMT)
__ Gregg -:- Cults, a litmus test -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:54:09 (GMT)
__ __ Keith -:- Cults, a litmus test -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 00:21:06 (GMT)

Jim -:- I'm part of MRC -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:17:20 (GMT)
__ Selene -:- I'm part of MRC - that is hilarious -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:34:45 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- I'm part of MRC - that is hilarious -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:38:57 (GMT)
__ __ __ Joey -:- I'm part of MRC - that is hilarious -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 17:01:49 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- Oh boy, Joey ..... oh boy -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 00:54:51 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Joey -:- Oh boy, Jimmy..... oh boy -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:33:28 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- To Joey from below - and a few other comments -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 03:16:24 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ AJW -:- Pizza (ot) -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 14:51:24 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Maruanne Faithful -:- Pizza (ot) -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 16:34:35 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joey -:- To Katie, a few other comments -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 05:58:59 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- OK, a fuller explanation for the crazy one -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:54:18 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Roger eDrek -:- Jim, you are late on this month's payment -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 04:40:20 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Selene -:- Selenes collection Service at your sevice -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 13:31:11 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Roger eDrek -:- Indeed, I know and see all - I am Omniscient (nt) -:- Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 22:51:45 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Selene -:- ok a little test how big are my boobs these days? -:- Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 23:50:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Roger eDrek -:- Somewhere between . . and -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 00:53:53 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Selene -:- good answer especially for a guy who's -:- Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 02:00:55 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joey -:- OK, a fuller explanation for the crazy one -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 03:09:21 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Roger eDrek -:- Time to get rid of Sick Boy! -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 22:45:20 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Roger eDrek -:- And another goddamn thing, sicko -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 22:55:27 (GMT)
__ __ __ Selene -:- because seriously how could he ever repay -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:42:39 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ (Sir) David -:- Terms of surrender (repost) -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 19:23:38 (GMT)

Jim -:- Does Elaine deserve CQ's forgiveness? -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:41:14 (GMT)
__ cq -:- She isn't asking me for forgiveness. She should?? -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 17:50:04 (GMT)
__ Selene -:- and the winner of this year's Jim award -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:20:24 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- and the winner of this year's Jim award -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:22:21 (GMT)
__ __ __ Selene -:- I got mad at your comment to raina -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:35:42 (GMT)
__ (Sir) David -:- Does Elaine deserve CQ's forgiveness? -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:09:01 (GMT)
__ __ gerry -:- Wanna buy a guitar? -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:20:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ (Sir) David -:- Is THIS from a premie or what!!! -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:10:10 (GMT)
__ Jerry -:- Does Elaine deserve CQ's forgiveness? -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:46:57 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- Does Elaine deserve CQ's forgiveness? -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:52:57 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jim -:- Please forgive my broken HTML (nt) -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:53:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ gErRy -:- Now let's see..how does this work??? -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:11:50 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Gerry -:- OK, grovel, grovel, grovel. -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:59:35 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- What can I say? Peace :) (nt) -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 03:23:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- Hey, what about me? -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 03:22:24 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Gerry -:- Hey, what about me? -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 03:47:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- Thank you, Gerry -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 04:15:04 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Katie should be blocked! (nt) -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 03:23:52 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- Go ahead... -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 03:30:27 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- That, my dear Katie, was a joke (nt) -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 03:32:09 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- I know! Sheesh yourself, Jim! (nt) -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 03:38:36 (GMT)

Happy -:- Hare Krishna sued for child abuse -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 10:07:02 (GMT)
__ Runamok -:- Hare Krishna sued for child abuse -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 14:56:22 (GMT)
__ Jean-Michel -:- Anth ? BTW .... -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 14:16:43 (GMT)
__ __ AJW -:- Anth ? BTW .... -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:01:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jean-Michel -:- Anth ? Maybe Marianne ? -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:14:07 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Marianne -:- Anth ? Maybe Marianne ? -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:43:02 (GMT)
__ __ Elaine -:- Wow,thank you both-----nt -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 14:48:47 (GMT)

bill -:- Boston Event -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 05:17:33 (GMT)
__ jondon -:- Boston Event -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 09:59:00 (GMT)
__ Joey -:- Boston Event -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 06:18:11 (GMT)
__ __ BIl -:- Boston Event -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:04:28 (GMT)
__ Know It All -:- Boston Event -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 05:27:35 (GMT)
__ __ bill -:- Boston Event -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:13:16 (GMT)
__ __ Happy -:- Boston Event -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 09:51:42 (GMT)
__ __ __ Way -:- Re:Boston Event -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 14:07:17 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Bill -:- Re:Boston Event -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:11:34 (GMT)

Jim -:- Just how stupid is this 'heart and mind' idea? -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 02:40:23 (GMT)
__ G -:- heart and mind -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 01:57:51 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- heart and mind -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:08:36 (GMT)
__ Another Anon -:- Just how stupid is this 'heart and mind' idea? -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 11:52:46 (GMT)
__ Anon -:- Just how stupid is this 'heart and mind' idea? -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 09:15:32 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- Sorry, Anon, I really don't buy that -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 14:53:08 (GMT)
__ __ __ Anon -:- Sorry, Anon, I really don't buy that -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 22:00:26 (GMT)
__ __ Zelda -:- Just how stupid is this 'heart and mind' idea? -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 11:56:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jim -:- Are you an idiot, Zelda, or just pretending? -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 14:54:06 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Zelda -:- Are you an idiot, Zelda, or just pretending? -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:28:25 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Keith -:- Does it ever occur? -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 23:49:59 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- No, you lummox, it doesn't (nt) -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 01:48:59 (GMT)
__ __ AJW -:- Four humours -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 11:34:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ Nigel -:- I always thought the four humours were... -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 13:59:38 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ AJW -:- No, they're the four horsemen of the Apocalpse... -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 14:43:08 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ 2' -:- Humidours, not humours -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 18:58:45 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jim -:- Oh shit! You actually fall for that, Anth? -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 14:59:24 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ AJW -:- Jim, your choleric nature is showing -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:16:41 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Sorry, a big, smiley-face 'bullshit' for you -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:25:13 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ AJW -:- Jim, your etheric body is vibrating too fast -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 08:13:39 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ 2' -:- Jim prefers classifying people his own way. -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 19:05:38 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- It's Re-Education Camp for you, former cult teach -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 15:36:31 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ AJW -:- It's time you had another mystical experience Jim. -:- Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 13:58:45 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Because I like you so much, I'll pretend I didn't -:- Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 16:26:15 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Keith -:- Sorry, a big, smiley-face 'bullshit' for you -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 23:55:29 (GMT)
__ Lotus Eater -:- Hamsters -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 04:47:21 (GMT)
__ Keith -:- Just how stupid is ? -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 04:18:18 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- Does Keith have a brain? What's up there? -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:01:18 (GMT)
__ __ __ 2' -:- Jim's Confession? -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 19:17:58 (GMT)

Keith -:- response to n's and p's. -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 21:41:29 (GMT)
__ Keith -:- response to positive 1. -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 00:17:45 (GMT)
__ __ Way -:- further response to positive 1. -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 14:21:30 (GMT)
__ __ Keith -:- response to positive 2. -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 00:34:51 (GMT)
__ __ __ Way -:- further response to positive 2. -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 14:30:30 (GMT)
__ __ __ gerry -:- For me this is not a grey area. -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:28:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ Keith -:- response to positive 3. -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 04:31:57 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Way -:- response to positive 3. -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 14:34:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Keith -:- response to positive 3. -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 23:03:09 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Way -:- Re:response to positive 3. -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 14:45:46 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Keith -:- Re:response to positive 3. -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 16:57:37 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Way -:- Re:response to positive 3. -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 17:40:37 (GMT)
__ __ __ bill -:- grey matter matters -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 03:23:38 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Elaine -:- Guilt -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:32:12 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- You are so full of shit, Elaine, it IS funny -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:50:52 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Keith -:- grey matter matters -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 03:38:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ bill -:- grey matter matters -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 03:46:54 (GMT)

LA-EX -:- 9 objections -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 15:43:16 (GMT)
__ Keith -:- 9 objections -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 08:47:27 (GMT)
__ Way -:- Re:9 objections -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 17:33:19 (GMT)
__ __ bill -:- Re:9 objections -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 18:14:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ Way -:- Re:9 objections -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 18:20:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Bill.... -:- Re:9 objections -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 18:40:39 (GMT)

Keith -:- 10 Positives. -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 10:28:24 (GMT)
__ O -:- 10 Positives. -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 19:50:16 (GMT)
__ __ AJW -:- Two friends -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 11:45:04 (GMT)
__ __ Keith -:- 10 Positives. -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 23:28:59 (GMT)
__ __ __ O -:- 10 Positives. -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 01:15:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ AJW -:- The fuzzy felt board. -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 14:03:09 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Keith -:- heart and mind -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 03:51:25 (GMT)
__ __ Lotus Eater -:- Heart and mind -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 23:05:55 (GMT)
__ __ __ cq -:- Trusting yourself -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 17:18:15 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Daneane -:- Trusting yourself -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:12:16 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ cq -:- Join the club! (nt) -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 17:10:35 (GMT)
__ __ __ O -:- Heart and mind -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 01:00:37 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Lotus Eater -:- Heart and mind -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 03:37:19 (GMT)
__ __ __ Stonor -:- Heart and mind/hand that work together - Hiawatha -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 23:44:00 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ O -:- Heart and mind/hand that work together - Hiawatha -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 01:23:45 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Keith -:- Heart and mind/hand that work together - Hiawatha -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 04:07:59 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Heart and mind/hand that work together - Hiawatha -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 02:44:08 (GMT)
__ __ Anon -:- 10 Positives. -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 22:56:23 (GMT)
__ __ __ O -:- 10 Positives. -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 00:54:18 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Anon -:- 10 Positives. -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 08:18:17 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Nigel -:- Superficial response -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 07:25:00 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ o -:- Superficial response -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 23:04:10 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Superficial response -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 23:30:46 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ O -:- Superficial response -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 15:47:58 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Excuse me O, but your response denies what you -:- Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 02:59:43 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- To O: your response would be appreciated -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:12:00 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Keith -:- Superficial response -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 23:11:18 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ O -:- Superficial response -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 20:18:51 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ keith -:- Superficial response -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 22:55:59 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ X-bill -:- O -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 03:38:25 (GMT)
__ __ gerry -:- 10 Positives. -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 22:19:51 (GMT)
__ __ Hal -:- Best friends.... -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 22:10:00 (GMT)
__ __ __ O -:- Best friends.... -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 22:18:02 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Hal -:- Best friends.... -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 22:23:32 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ O -:- Best friends.... -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 23:07:27 (GMT)
__ __ Keith -:- 10 Positives. -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 21:53:55 (GMT)
__ __ Gregg -:- 'obsever' -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 20:52:57 (GMT)
__ __ __ O -:- 'obsever' -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 21:51:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Anon -:- 'obsever' -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 23:39:00 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ O -:- 'obsever' -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 00:31:58 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Anon -:- 'obsever' -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 08:47:52 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ O -:- 'obsever' -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 18:41:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Anon -:- Phone a friend? -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 23:02:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Keith -:- 'obsever' -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 22:59:20 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ O -:- 'obsever' -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 01:02:42 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ o -:- one more thing -:- Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 01:24:02 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Anon -:- 'obsever' -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 23:10:57 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Gregg -:- 'listen to your heart' -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 01:50:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ Susan -:- well said Gregg (nt) -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 20:58:13 (GMT)
__ Bill...2040 -:- 10 Positives. -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 18:38:03 (GMT)
__ Way -:- Reaction to 10 Positives. -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 17:17:16 (GMT)
__ __ Keith -:- Reaction to reaction to 10 Positives. -:- Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 00:00:59 (GMT)
__ __ Keith -:- Reaction to 10 Positives. -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 21:52:22 (GMT)
__ __ __ Way -:- Reaction to 10 Positives. -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 22:01:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Keith -:- Reaction to 10 Positives. -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 23:55:29 (GMT)
__ __ Gregg -:- Reaction to 10 Positives. -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 20:44:48 (GMT)
__ la-ex -:- 10 Positives. -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 15:38:59 (GMT)
__ __ Keith -:- 10 Positives. -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 21:47:16 (GMT)
__ __ __ Keith -:- correction. -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 22:00:07 (GMT)
__ Jim -:- New Age = Unable to See through Bullshit? (nt) -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 14:55:42 (GMT)
__ JtF -:- 10 Positives.?BULLSHIT!!! -:- Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 11:07:40 (GMT)


Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 22:11:07 (GMT)
From: jondon
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Hare Krishna students sue for 4 mil.
Message:
Found this on yahoo daily news today:

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000613/ts/crime_krishna_dc_3.html

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 22:12:55 (GMT)
From: jondon
Email: None
To: all
Subject: Actually it was 400 million (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 23:25:56 (GMT)
From: jondon
Email: None
To: all
Subject: I guess I missed the thread below, sorry (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 20:31:59 (GMT)
From: miami vice
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: 2nd miami program
Message:
Just wanted to drop a little note from an occasional visitor.
The 2nd miami program did not have enough people to fill the seats-there were actually quite a number of empty seats.
Because Lard gets bent out of shape when he sees empty seats,the organizers called up premies the day of the 2nd program and told them they needed them for emergency service that night.
When they showed up, they were told that their service was not needed, but they were welcome to attend the program,which filled up the seats.
When I asked why they didn't just tell the premies that there were extra seats available for them if they wanted to attend, I was told that the only way they could insure that people would come was if they tricked them into coming with the phony 'emergency service'ruse.
Pretty interesting,huh?
I have heard that before-m gets bent out of shape when the hall isn't filled...
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:56:52 (GMT)
From: Elaine
Email: None
To: miami vice
Subject: 2nd miami program--what??
Message:
What's worse is the lying,period.

I doubt M told the premies in charge to lie - since this seems like it was some secret to be kept from M or something - I don't know -maybe he knew. But whatever - lying is not done by an honorable person who knows who he/she is and stands by the truth.

If what you say is true - and I have know reason to doubt it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:47:11 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: miami vice
Subject: empty seats
Message:
I guess that was one reason for the small halls this time, his egotistical dislike of empty seats, coupled with the fear that not many will show up? Boy, if he were more 'detached' and humble, he would just see the good side, that everyone that wanted to get in could, that they got a big enough hall. Maybe in his mind it's better to fill the hall than for everybody to be able to get in, and maybe that sets up a psychological climate that he wants (competition for seats).

I think I'll do a post on a possible $$$ strategy involved with these 'intimate' programs (translated: the hall is small). How do you charge when there is no admission fee? (besides keeping the ex-premies out)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 01:48:04 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: miami vice
Subject: That's a great story
Message:
How can I leave my computer when there's always a chance to hera something like this? Too good. Thanks.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:40:37 (GMT)
From: Georg Koester
Email: gk1@netwrx.net
To: Everyone
Subject: Cults, a litmus test
Message:
First off I would like to thank you for the wonderful and respectful article on Shabdism or Sant Mat in North America.

Now, I have been subjected to so many influences whose power over me often became only evident in retrospect, that it made me question deeply what to follow and how to find my way through the thicket of ideas from philosophies, religions, dogmas, to the thought of the myriad wisdom traditions today.

Consequently, I have great sympathy for those who sincerely try to find their truths in life, and yet may find themselves stuck on the many by-ways of life.

I want to share the boon of my own inquiry based on an applied faith that is driven by experience through experimentation coupled with critical review. In this process I found a simple way to test the waters, to find out who is genuinely helpful and who displays cult tendencies.

To help others, I put up a web page about cults http://personal.netwrx.net/gk/cult.htm that explains my findings including a link to exit counseling. I hope it will be beneficial to others, in order that their lives be unfettered by thoughts that unnecessarily undermine their experience of freedom.

I draw two conclusions that have served me as a litmus test to differentiate cults from communities:

1) Community does not force one's way upon another.
2) Community does not deny the sacredness of the body, the vehicle of our human experience.

Cults invariably do both. Spare yourself, if you wish, and run, when you notice either being perpetrated on your person.

Sincerely,
Georg W. Koester

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 18:00:18 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Georg Koester
Subject: Cults, a litmus test
Message:
Georg, you say on your site:

'Life is really simple. This page contains few words, but they have served me well. If I were to say it in one word, it would be: 'Surrender.'

Well, over here on this site I think you'll find a lot of resistance to that idea. Why? Simply because a lot of us ex-premies DID surrender - and got burned big time by a con-artist of major proportions.

I can relate to 'surrendering' to an emotion or to an experience, but I also have found that those who try to push the idea of surrendering onto other people often have ulterior motives in doing so. (BTW I'm not accusing you of doing this, but part of me thinks that, somewhere down the line, you must have 'bought into' the philosophy).

To the Western mind, the concept of 'surrender' has very negative connotations. Maybe that's good. Why surrender to another authority figure?

But it's good to see some new input here. Have you had any contact with premies/ex-premies before?

(P.S. 'Stairway to Heaven' as a midi-file for your background music is ... well, ... very brave!)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 20:50:08 (GMT)
From: Powerman
Email: None
To: Georg Koester
Subject: Cults, a litmus test
Message:
I draw two conclusions that have served me as a litmus test to differentiate cults from communities:

1) Community does not force one's way upon another.
2) Community does not deny the sacredness of the body, the vehicle of our human experience.

I don't agree with you on this, Georg. A community has rules, regulations and laws that result in 'forcing its way upon another', and communities around the world deny the 'sacredness of the body'. And, one cult I can think of proposes the sacredness of the body... the late Rajneesh's cult.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 07:49:02 (GMT)
From: Georg W. Koester
Email: gk1@netwrx.net
To: Powerman
Subject: Cults, a litmus test
Message:
Thank you. Good points. Communities have rules, yes, but a person would voluntarily accept them, and have the right of reversal of such a decision. So they are not forced upon you. I admit this can get tricky; hence the need to listen to the body's message regarding what is presented.

Rajneesh may have expressed the sacredness of the body and in so far had no cult. If such is merely a seduction in disguise, a violation of privacy and personal boundaries, it is a violation of the sacredness of the body. Then we have it as you suppose.

Please look to the spirit of what I am saying. My web page article explains more. Your post raises an important issue, how easy it is to be misguided by the seeming innocuousness of one imposter and dissuaded from the genuine precepts that are a foundation for community life. This is the very thing I am attempting to make easier.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 14:31:27 (GMT)
From: Powerman
Email: None
To: Georg W. Koester
Subject: Cults, a litmus test
Message:
Yes, I understand the spirit of what you're saying but suggesting more precision in how you're saying it, especially being clear about what 'community' and 'sacred' means. The common meaning of community includes housing developments on golf courses, and taking signals of comfort or discomfort from your body doesn't necessitate extraordinary reverence or divinity.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 18:04:12 (GMT)
From: Georg W. Koester
Email: gk1@netwrx.net
To: Powerman
Subject: Cults, a litmus test
Message:
Precision often comes at the expense of clarity and vice versa. I did the best I knew at the time with the article that I referred you to.

Again, thank you! How then, if the question interests you, would you recognize and actualize extraordinary reverence and divinity in ordinary life?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:54:09 (GMT)
From: Gregg
Email: None
To: Georg Koester
Subject: Cults, a litmus test
Message:
According to this litmus test, I don't think our ex-guru's group would be considered a cult, although it shares many of the twenty-four characteristics of cults you list on your website.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 00:21:06 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: None
To: Gregg
Subject: Cults, a litmus test
Message:
This subject is so complex. For in a world of people grouping together under a vast array of types, religious, political, social,academic, and so on , what differientiates between healthy and unhealthy groups is so contentious as to defy any simplistic and superficial attempt to sort the chaff from the wheat. Never-the-less, I believe the open communication and dialogue that evolves from those willing to debate these matters together with mutual respect for each others differing views is very worthwhile. Of course I accept that I will express sarcastically and even angrily with those who I really don't respect because I perceive they do not know how to respect others. They see a cult. And cry 'foul' And yet toe such a 'party line' of their own and woe behold those who differ. Such individuals have a real talent as cult leaders . Perhaps unrealised. Healthy dialogue, for me, implies a type of authentic humility. A simple humility. One expression of such humility is the acceptance that I might be wrong and another who I disagree with might be right. Not totally but to some degree. Otherwise one can only learn from those who re-echo or support or extend the 'party line'. Sound like premiedom? Sound like some ex's here too? Me? Yeh, I'm no fool. I'm frail and imperfect too. I'm not trying to grandstand. I'm not putting myself up on some holier than thou pedastal. I'm just trying to point out a few insights.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:17:20 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: I'm part of MRC
Message:
I never inteded to be anonymous. That was kind of a working arrangement, as far as I knew. I agree with myself more than anybody that anonymity here is decidedly the wrong flavour for people standing up for truth and against a paper tiger (or paper Hamster). The rest of MRC can say who they are or not but I can tell you all right here that Joey's idea that MRC is some kind of cult operation is cuckoo.

Was the letter written with the right tone? Not necessarily. But what the hell, eh? Maybe the next one will be a bit different.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:34:45 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: I'm part of MRC - that is hilarious
Message:
And are you too hoping to help Maharaji? What do you want out of this?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:38:57 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Selene
Subject: I'm part of MRC - that is hilarious
Message:
Hey, I really didn't write that part of the letter. Trust me. But help Maharaji? Sure, after he apologizes, pays damages and reparations, etc. Why not? :)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 17:01:49 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: I'm part of MRC - that is hilarious
Message:
Hey, I really didn't write that part of the letter. Trust me

Sure, we'll trust you Jim. But tell us then, which part of the letter DID you write.

But help Maharaji? Sure, after he apologizes, pays damages and reparations, etc. Why not? :)

If you're really serious about those words 'damages and reparations', then why didn't you include it in the letter?

You see asshole, it's a totally different matter in meeting with m to discuss damages and reparations, or compensation, and meeting with him for the wishy washy reasons expressed in this MRC letter...to help 'free us' from the cult's programming.

Did that escape your magna cum laude brightness??
Or are you just winging it as you try to save the ass of one who calls himself Roger Drek (among god knows how many other aliases) ???

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 00:54:51 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Joey
Subject: Oh boy, Joey ..... oh boy
Message:
Didn't you read me? In my ever-so-humble opinion you don't deserve a reply until you extend a full apology to MRC and Drek for your crazy accusations. I didn't say 'grovel', did I? My mistake. You should grovel, Joey. Not 'til then, bud. Not 'til then.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:33:28 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Oh boy, Jimmy..... oh boy
Message:
Jim, you seem unable to deal with the problem at hand.

If you're really serious about those words 'damages and reparations', then why didn't you include it in the letter?

You see asshole, it's a totally different matter in meeting with m to discuss damages and reparations, or compensation, and meeting with him for the wishy washy reasons expressed in this MRC letter...to help 'free us' from the cult's programming.

Did that escape your magna cum laude brightness??

Hey Jim, if you're getting all huffy and puffy about it, we can talk later.

But so far, I haven't seen anything honorable or practically effective in this MRC effort, other than the potential benefits to the cult. Conceived in secrecy and cloaked in terms that are of to the cults benefit...I just can't believe you're part of it.

But your friend 'Roger' HAS YOU so emotionally and psychologically buggered, it's sometimes painful to watch.
I'm sorry this is happening to you.
It's like you're singing 'Moon River' while he's doing it to you.

Very sad.
But hey, not my problem.

My problem is...where do I go for pizza? I'm hungry.
And I've eaten enough drek, to last a lifetime ::))

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 03:16:24 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Joey
Subject: To Joey from below - and a few other comments
Message:
Hi Joey -
Bringing this up from the middle of the forum...

You wrote:
First off it really isn't obvious at all to me who is and who isn't a member of this MRC. I'd really be interested in hearing from a genuine ex who has been posting on the forum under their own name, and has contributed to the writing of the letter to the 'former master'.

Well, you heard from Jim - and I am guessing that you'll hear from other exes. I doubt if you'll hear from the premies involved though - for pretty obvious reasons!

You wrote:
Yes I do have a problem with this campaign and you hit the nail on the head, at least as far as I'm concerned, when you expressed it this way:
Also, I am pretty cynical about the idea of EVER getting an honest response from Maharaji.

That said, because m must really be so desperate these days, it's entirely possible that he might actually respond. In a DISHONEST fashion, designed to keep his cult alive as the 'former cult' cult.

Yes, I agree that that is possible - but what's to lose? I honestly think you have to have more faith in these people - faith in their ability to think for themselves and distinguish dishonest responses from honest ones. You did that, right? Or you wouldn't be here! I have seen lots of other 'premie' or 'on-the-fence' posters here do that. Often they don't publicize it on the forum, but it happens frequently.

You also wrote, re my communicating with recent exes, people 'on the fence', confused premies, etc.:

I believe confused premies and those sitting on the fence are looking for a dialogue with M, because they see it as the only way to keep the dream alive. Their hope is that M will say something or do something that will fix the booboo.

Rather than taking directions from confused premies, it might be better if we offered them some. As far as recent exes are concerned, again I have to repeat that I haven't spoken to one, who has felt that a dialogue of this nature based on the wishy-washy objections to m contained in the MRC letter, to be a positive development.

Well, I have spoken to some recent exes who felt that the letter was TOO strong, and that it was scary. They felt that the letter challenged the cult programming that they still had within them - and that upset them. So in that way, I think the letter is a very good thing.

Joey, my opinion is that everyone who is leaving M - or is even challenging their beliefs about him - is in a different stage, and that we have to accept that and work with people where they are at right now. My feeling is that breaking free is a process - it doesn't happen all at once for most people. I know you don't agree with the Open Letter, but I have spoken to many people who think it's a good letter - and to several people who (as I said) are afraid it goes TOO far.

Also, and as you know, you or anyone else here is free to compose ANOTHER letter to Maharaji, to premies, or to whoever else you want - stating your OWN opinions - and put it up on a web site. (And of course, you are free to state your objections to the current letter on the forum!)

Re 'helping' Maharaji - personally, I would like Maharaji to retire without transferring his supposed authority to anyone else (e.g perpetuating the scam). If the letter 'helps' him do that, then I'm all for it.

I also agree with something else Nigel says - we will just have to wait and see what happens. Yes, it's possible that M will write a BS answer and suck people in - but in that case, they were WILLING to be sucked in anyway. My guess is that he will not respond in any way - guess we'll see! (Wanna put money on it?)

One more thing, Joey, and I REALLY hope you don't take offense at this - will you please lay off of Roger Drek? You are attributing far more importance to him than he wants or needs! I honestly cannot understand why he offends you so much. In fact, you and he actually remind me of each other in many ways (a statement which I am sure you will both find quite offensive!!). Anyway, whatever you choose to think of Roger, or he of you, I see this battle between both of you as a complete distraction from the focus of this forum, which is Maharaji.

BTW, re pizza - you should be lucky you don't live in Southwestern Virginia. The only guy who makes decent pizza here lives way out in the boonies, and is supposedly a refugee from the witness protection program.

Take care -
Love,
Katie

P.S. You wrote:
Especially take care of your shoulder-arm. Ouch...I've had a shoulder injury myself. I hope it heals quickly.

Thanks, Joey. I have to say that it sucks to be in pain like this! But it's going away slowly.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 14:51:24 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Katie and Joey
Subject: Pizza (ot)
Message:
You're lucky you don't live in Scotland, where they deep-fry pizzas.

They also dip chocolate bars (Mars bars) in batter and deep fry them too.

Scotland has the highest rate of heart disease in Europe.

Anth the battered

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 16:34:35 (GMT)
From: Maruanne Faithful
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Pizza (ot)
Message:
'They also dip chocolate bars (Mars bars) in batter and deep fry them too.'

Can i get some royaslties from them?

Marianne Faithful

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 05:58:59 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: To Katie, a few other comments
Message:
Katie,

Just a few comments. You said,

Well, you heard from Jim - and I am guessing that you'll hear from other exes.

If what I heard from Jim is indicative of what I'll be hearing from other exes then I'm in for complete and utter bullshit.
And I still say that this is what this MRC campaign is all about.

One more thing, Joey, and I REALLY hope you don't take offense at this - will you please lay off of Roger Drek? You are attributing far more importance to him than he wants or needs!

I DO take offense.
I don't have one iota of concern or sympathy for this creep. Period.

I know you don't agree with the Open Letter, but I have spoken to many people who think it's a good letter - and to several people who (as I said) are afraid it goes TOO far.

TOO far? In which direction??
Are we helping Maharaji too much, too little, too what??
BTW Katie, strategically speaking, have you ever consided as I have that Gooey might need us more than we need him?

Now about the shoulder. I injured mine just 2 and 1/2 months before the amtext party. As a matter of fact, it was sore even when I was at the residence that day.

But then when I got to look into Maharaji's eyes and all the pain diappeared...until I woke up the next morning.
Then, I had another 6 months to go before I was pain free
The moral of the story. Going to the residence won't do anything for you.
And if the doctors recommend physio...do it:)
Again, I hope your shoulder heals quickly.

Luv ya Princess Lea,

Joey

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:54:18 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Joey
Subject: OK, a fuller explanation for the crazy one
Message:
No this is not a fuller answer to your question. I've already told you that I'm not going to tell you dick about why or how this was decided vis-a-vis the letter because you don't deserve any information. If you don't know why, you're even crazier than I thought. But trust me on this, you are making a complete fool of yourself. If only you know.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 04:40:20 (GMT)
From: Roger eDrek
Email: drek@oz.net
To: Jim
Subject: Jim, you are late on this month's payment
Message:
Jim, I don't want to bust your other knee cap, but you know the rules. You pay me every month or else.

I own you, Jim!

I am Roger eDrek, the most powerful man on the planet.

Sheesh! And people confuse me with my identical twin Rob or is that Joey, my evil twin.

Ah shit, I'm gonna check out those whacky chicks over on Anything Goes. Screw this serious shit.

I promise I'll be a better Anti-Maharaji fighter next week. I'm just not able to give it my all like some of us here.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 13:31:11 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: Roger eDrek
Subject: Selenes collection Service at your sevice
Message:
Wacky chick from AG checking in just letting you know we are not missing you over there Roger. don't hurry.
oh and I am still wondering what you have learned about snooping
into phone lines and computers?? wanna let me know ever?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 22:51:45 (GMT)
From: Roger eDrek
Email: None
To: Selene
Subject: Indeed, I know and see all - I am Omniscient (nt)
Message:
I see everything
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 23:50:03 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: Roger eDrek
Subject: ok a little test how big are my boobs these days?
Message:
I keep trying to keep them down and the damned things keep
growning!!
just trying to lift this UP a bit (oh a pun not intended)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 00:53:53 (GMT)
From: Roger eDrek
Email: None
To: Selene
Subject: Somewhere between . . and
Message:
This Pair
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 02:00:55 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: Roger eDrek
Subject: good answer especially for a guy who's
Message:
never seen em! I almost remember why I liked you.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 03:09:21 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: OK, a fuller explanation for the crazy one
Message:
You're a weenie and you DON'T have a fuller explanation!

You're just pulling a stanislavsky here to save your buddy's ass.

There's a whole more rot behind this MRC sham, how someting like this could ever happen.

I hope it's not too long before we're ALL not afraid to face the full extent of the deception that the cult has subjected this forum to.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 22:45:20 (GMT)
From: Roger eDrek
Email: drek@oz.net
To: Joey
Subject: Time to get rid of Sick Boy!
Message:
Or are you just winging it as you try to save the ass of one who calls himself Roger Drek (among god knows how many other aliases) ???

I've fucking had it with this sick fucking scum sucking creep of a cyber monster troll who is off his medication again. Sure, I should just shut up and let all the gas pass, but Joey is doing more damage to the Forum yet again. Yeah, I've done my bit, too, but this is crazy sick shit. It's either that or Maharaji has inserted one heckuva a mole in the form of Joey.

Joey, you are either:

  • (A) working for Maharaji
  • (B) completely insane.
Which is it?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 22:55:27 (GMT)
From: Roger eDrek
Email: drek@oz.net
To: Roger eDrek
Subject: And another goddamn thing, sicko
Message:
Some people here are really trying to do something for themselves and maybe for other people who are still within the clutches of Maharaji, Joey.

What the hell are you doing other than another one of your public displays that reveals that you ain't quite right?

Joey, I've said it again and again, but you need some professional help. Sure, I hate you, but I feel sorry for you at the same time because you are obviously very hurt and confused or whatever to be acting the way you are.

Give it a break, Joey. Get help or get the hell away from here. I do not think that this can possibly be doing you any good based on your responses and your bringing up this bullshit again and again.

Joey, I'm trying to do something here and so are a lot of people. I know for myself that I've spent a fair amount time and even a little money on this stuff. And, I suspect that therer are others here who have done the same or more. And what about you? What the hell do you do? You just come in here with your crap. Get pissed off if you perceive that you are not getting the attention that you think you deserve and then make a big fucking scene ala some purer than thou bullshit. I bet you made one hell of a premie. Yeah, you were an Amtexter, better than all the rest.

Joey, IMHO, you've got a ways to go before you get free. I guess that maybe we all should recognize that you've been in a destructive cult for too many years and you're having troubles adjusting to the outside world. I suppose you might be like a career criminal whose spent too much time behind bars.

Good luck, Joey. Hope you get free and stop spewing your shit.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:42:39 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: because seriously how could he ever repay
Message:
Do you really think? first of all, there are ten of thousand out there who will never BE repaid or even hear of this letter.
No, I can't see how he can ever be truly called to the carpet.
and I feel this gives him chance at a fake sense of reprieval.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 19:23:38 (GMT)
From: (Sir) David
Email: None
To: Selene
Subject: Terms of surrender (repost)
Message:
I would like Maharaji to apologise publicly for all the
crap he put some very sincere people through. I'd like him to admit that
he has made a very long term and serious mistake by messing around with
people's lives and dictating to them how they should run their lives and
how they should think and feel.

I'd like him to admit that he knows no more about life than the next
man and has run his organisation solely for his own financial reward and
not out of any altruistic sentiments.

I'd like him to admit that he made a very grave error in purposely
making people believe that he was the Lord. I'd like him to verify that
everything in the Bob Mishler interview is the truth and that he only
perpetrated the 'God in human form' myth in order to keep the dollars
coming in.

I'd like him to apologise unreservedly for instilling fear into
people with his contemptable threats of what would happen to them if they
left knowledge.

I'd like him to publicly say that he was very wrong to do this and take
back every word of it and personally reassure all people who have ever
received knowledge that he has no hold over them and that the 'knowledge'
is simply four meditation techniques and people who have received these
techniques are no different to anybody else and they do not have to
practise them if they don't want to.

However, I think it would be easier for Maharaji to give me a million
bucks than do all of the above.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:41:14 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Does Elaine deserve CQ's forgiveness?
Message:
In a post below, cq wrote:

Deplore what he does AND forgive him too???
Hmmmm, wouldn't that be to tacitly condone what he's doing? (which I see as taking advantage of a lot of gullible, though often well-intentioned, people).

I'll think about forgiving him IF and WHEN he gets honest with us - and with himself. Otherwise we're just letting him off the hook.

That ol' crocodile's still after him (and no crocodile tears, please!)

To which, Elaine responded:

You obviously know nothing of the nature of forgiveness.
A worthy topic to explore, cq.

Question: Is Elaine right? Does Chris know nothing about forgiveness as evidenced by his post above?

Q2: If Elaine is not right, what do you think about her arrogant dismissal of Chris? Is it morally wrong?

Q3: If it's morally wrong, should Chris forgive Elaine? If so, why?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 17:50:04 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: She isn't asking me for forgiveness. She should??
Message:
As Jerry pointed out, I obviously know nothing about forgiveness. (lol!)

Silly me, I thought it had something to do with the offender first offering an apology (at least) of some sort, as in:

'I'm sorry'

to which the person offended might say:

'You damn well should be, - but I forgive you. Don't do it again'

Only a masochist would forgive someone who was still offending them.


(and, though I'm not into quoting the bible, the top of Luke 17 might surprise a few people)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:20:24 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: and the winner of this year's Jim award
Message:
for arrogance and interference in everyone's business
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:22:21 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Selene
Subject: and the winner of this year's Jim award
Message:
This isn't email, Selene. Besides, what's this got to do with you anyway? :)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:35:42 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: I got mad at your comment to raina
Message:
after three posts I have calmed down
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:09:01 (GMT)
From: (Sir) David
Email: sirdavid12@hotmail.com
To: Jim
Subject: Does Elaine deserve CQ's forgiveness?
Message:
Would Elaine forgive CQ for not forgiving her for not forgiving him for not forgiving Lord Guru Maharaja?

It's simple!

PS, I've got a lot of spam from premies advertising crap since I put my new email address on this forum. One or two of them say amongst the blurb, 'enjoy this life' and other Haharaji platitudes.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:20:05 (GMT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: (Sir) David
Subject: Wanna buy a guitar?
Message:
PS, I've got a lot of spam from premies advertising crap since I put my new email address on this forum.

Dave, what kind of stuff are they selling?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:10:10 (GMT)
From: (Sir) David
Email: None
To: gerry
Subject: Is THIS from a premie or what!!!
Message:
Well Gerry. here's an example of the spam I'm getting at the email addresses which I've only put on the ex-premie sites:


Please excuse the interruption.

Greetings,

I just
registered for free DSL (high speed Internet access). With DSL
you can talk on the phone and surf the net at the same
time. DSL speed is incredible and up to 50 times faster
than conventional dial-up.

I will get the service free and
get a free modem if my friends sign up too. All you have
to do is click on the link below to register with
FreeDSL.com. Don’t forget to use my email address in the
registration form to give me referral credit.

If you get 10
people to register and download by April 30th, you can get
a free DSL modem too.

There are 3 forms of web
connection at the moment, I believe. Dial-up, DSL and Cable Modem
(including WEBtv). Let me show you how to get DSL for
free and the modem for free also. No catch for the service,
it's free and will be coming to your area soon. Go to the
URL and click on the box above 'More Info'.

Contact me:
thewhizz@netzero.net

Enjoy this life!!


Note the Maharaji platitude at the end. God, don't premies realise they're all talking like robots programmed by the great mindless one!?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:46:57 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Does Elaine deserve CQ's forgiveness?
Message:
C'mon, Jim. How's Chris going to forgive Elaine? He obviously knows nothing about forgiveness, but I'm sure Elaine understands this and is willing to forgive him for it.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:52:57 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Does Elaine deserve CQ's forgiveness?
Message:
I'm not sure I can forgive you for your post, Jerry. First, I'm not sure I understand the first thing about it. Do you? Because maybe if you did, you woudln't mind forgiving me, let's say. Really, man, I don't know the first thing about this shit. It's really complicated, you know? (Well, I don't!)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:53:54 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Please forgive my broken HTML (nt)
Message:
ghfth
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:11:50 (GMT)
From: gErRy
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Now let's see..how does this work???
Message:
Please forgive my broken HTML (nt)

OK forgiven.

And Jim, please forgive recent behavior towards you. I really don't hate you. I don't even dislike you (please tell Laurie.)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:59:35 (GMT)
From: Gerry
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: OK, grovel, grovel, grovel.
Message:
Jeez this is embarrassing. Look buddy I'm REALLY sorry for the way I treated you. Really sorry. You didn't deserve it. It won't happen again. You are right. It was extremely infantile.

Everybody, Jim is a great guy in person, a cool guy and lots of fun to hang with. I was a complete asshole towards him and I'm sorry I inflicted it on everyone here. There was NO excuse for it. IT WON'T HAPPEN AGAIN.

Jim, you're just too funny to stay mad at. And too sharp. I hate it when your right and I'm wrong, but I'm gonna get over that, dammit.

Love to Laurie. Patty misses her. She had a great time with her and wishes I hadn't been such a jerk so she could see her again.

Oh and btw that last outburst wasn't from me. I'm over it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 03:23:01 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Gerry
Subject: What can I say? Peace :) (nt)
Message:
eeee
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 03:22:24 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Gerry
Subject: Hey, what about me?
Message:
I sent you an Xmas card, and I even wished you a happy birthday. Now here you are grovelling at Jim's feet and you won't even answer me! (Maybe it's cause Patty doesn't like Brian - snicker?)

Your fellow cat-lover -
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 03:47:03 (GMT)
From: Gerry
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Hey, what about me?
Message:
You're a sweetie too. So sorry. I wish I could make it up to you, make it disappear, but it happened. Katie, I see you as warm, thoughtful and mature person who really cares about people. It's painful to bring this up again but I guess I haven't adequately expressed my regret.

Shit, I gotta go. I'm getting a little choked up.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 04:15:04 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Gerry
Subject: Thank you, Gerry
Message:
It's really past my bedtime, so excuse me if this is not too eloquent - but thanks very much. I think that maybe what you said was not that bad, but sometimes things just trigger other things from the past - as I'm sure you are aware.

And thanks for what you said about me. I HAVE changed in the past year and a half - not particularly because I wanted to, but these things happen... (Hey, I thought we were supposed to be able to stagnate after we turned 40! I could use a stagnant period once in a while.)

Anyway, like they say:
if we don't hang together, we will all hang separately.

Take care of yourself - and love to you, Patty, Bocephus, and Sparky.

Love,
Katie

P.S. Don't listen to Selene about that 'Walk-In' stuff :)! It makes you crazy - I can testify to that (I had a therapist that was really into it.)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 03:23:52 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Katie should be blocked! (nt)
Message:
fff
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 03:30:27 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Go ahead...
Message:
...then maybe I'll quit reading this crap! You'd better block all the ex-premies from my e-mail while you're at it though.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 03:32:09 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: That, my dear Katie, was a joke (nt)
Message:
Sheesh!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 03:38:36 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: I know! Sheesh yourself, Jim! (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 10:07:02 (GMT)
From: Happy
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Hare Krishna sued for child abuse
Message:
An interesting piece, found on http://www.wturley.com.
Maybe this guy (Windle Turley) would be interested in Jagdeo and Elan Vital?

June 12, 2000

'HARE KRISHNA' SUED FOR CHILD ABUSE

Today 44 young adults filed a $400 million dollar damage suit against the 'Hare Krishna' for sexual, physical and emotional torture inflicted upon them as children. The suit says Plaintiffs were sexually, physically and emotionally abused, along with hundreds of other children, who were kept during two decades at Hare Krishna’s boarding schools.

The suit, filed in the Federal District Court in Dallas, Texas, names the INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF KRISHNA CONSCIOUSNESS (ISKCON) as the lead defendant, along with sixteen other ISKCON entities and seventeen individual members of its GOVERNING BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, including the Estate of the movement’s founder, BHAKTIVEDANTA SWAMI PRABHUPADA. The Plaintiffs reside in various cities in the United States, Canada and England.

Dallas trial lawyer WINDLE TURLEY, attorney for the plaintiffs, said today, 'This lawsuit describes the most unthinkable abuse and maltreatment of little children which we have seen. It includes rape, sexual abuse, physical torture and emotional terror of children as young as three years of age. The worst of the practices spanned two decades, starting in 1972 with ISKCON’s first school in Dallas, Texas. The abuse continued in a half-dozen other schools in the United States and eventually at two boys’ schools in India.

'Although the leadership in ISKCON has long been aware of the mistreatment and abuse inflicted upon little children entrusted to it to raise, the full scope and profound maltreatment of its children has only recently been exposed.

'We believe the facts as they are developed will reveal more than a thousand child victims, many of whom have already taken their own lives or are today emotionally and socially dysfunctional.

'Elements within this new religious movement have attempted to operate outside the child protection laws of a half-dozen states. As a result, a generation of ISKCON children are permanently, and many profoundly, injured.'

The suit also seeks a Federal injunction to force ISKCON to stop all forms of child abuse.

More details of the child abuse and of the plaintiffs’ legal claims, including Racketeering-Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO), are set out in the Complaint. It can be read and downloaded at www.wturley.com.

For more information contact:

Windle Turley, attorney 6440 North Central Expressway fax 214/361-5802
Dallas, Texas 214/691-4025
win@wturley.com

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 14:56:22 (GMT)
From: Runamok
Email: None
To: Happy
Subject: Hare Krishna sued for child abuse
Message:
Now, if using RICO is successful, that might mean something new in terms of prosecuting cult leaders!

RICO was created for prosecuting organised crime.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 14:16:43 (GMT)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: jmkahn@club-internet.fr
To: Happy
Subject: Anth ? BTW ....
Message:
I've linked that info on my new website (Hare Krishna sued for Child Abuse), and I'd like to have some other info available there too, reg Mr Rawat's legal responsibility as DLM's leader in UK and maybe some other countries.

I guess it could be helpful for some victims to know that something could be done ...

Do you have some reference on the issue?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:01:05 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Anth ? BTW ....
Message:
Bonjour Jean-Michel,

There's a law in the UK which states that the leader of any organisation, whose members or officials carry out child abuse in their organisational role, is legally liable for the actions of the abuser. I don't know the name of the law, or any other details, except that it was enacted to specifically deal with child abusers like Jagdeo, who use a position of trust and authority to carry out their despicable crimes.

If, as reported, Maharaji was aware of what was going on, and did nothing about it, this makes him both legally, and morally responsible.

Anth

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:14:07 (GMT)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Anth ? Maybe Marianne ?
Message:
Do you think we could find some references and texts on this somewhere ?

Maybe Marianne ?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:43:02 (GMT)
From: Marianne
Email: MarianneDB@aol.com
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Anth ? Maybe Marianne ?
Message:
J-M: Please email me about exactly what it is your seeking. I'd rather discuss this offline.

Thanks, Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 14:48:47 (GMT)
From: Elaine
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel /Happy
Subject: Wow,thank you both-----nt
Message:
om Hare
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 05:17:33 (GMT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Boston Event
Message:
As I mentioned earlier there was a storm sunday and power was lost here till about noon today. I could not leave with the kids home from school and no power and my wife recovering from an operation. If there was power and school, that would have been fine.

Anyway, I had numerous ideas on how to 'share' at the boston event and settled on handing out a note in a small envelope descreetly during exits from the program and arrivals. After talking with a local premie last week, I was reminded to watch how I tread on thier long running sore.

Here is the leaflet or note. I knew I would be handing it out to some good friends.

****************************************************************

Here are some quotes that are on Maharaji's web site right now.

'Quite a few people wanted to see me as a figurehead. I did not want to be one and I am not one. A few others saw me as a leader and I didnt want to be one and I am not one.'

'People through the years have tried to plave me in a mold, and from the very early years I have not been able to oblidge them.'

To this day some people see me the way they want to. After all, I guess it is rather inconvenient to see things as they really are.'

Well, good news, if you go on the internet, and use the YAHOO search engine, and type in 'Maharaji' in the the search subject, you will find that information about Maharaji that was 'inconvenient' is now available. Seeing 'things as they really are' is what drove Bill Patterson and the majority of the instructors and residence staff and elan vital staff and premies to leave maharaji. That information is now available for you to also have. There IS another side of maharaji and it is no longer 'inconvenient' for you to see things as they really are.

As to the quotes on his web site, I dont recall that WE placed him in a mold. And he clearly told us who he was. The lord almighty. I dont recall him presenting himself as a figurehead or leader. What do YOU recall? NO need to be guilty of 'inconvenience' any longer! Be fully informed.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 09:59:00 (GMT)
From: jondon
Email: None
To: all
Subject: Boston Event
Message:
Nice rainy New England day yesterday. Got to Beantown late, stuck up about 200 stickies:

Just Say Know
The Truth About MAHARAJI Is Out There
www.ex-premie.org

Did not hang out for too long at Copley, did see some blissed out old timers floating about. Asked them if they had come to see M and if he was still considered LOTU. They did not offer any info.

The roommate was home late. Will wait for news of the event to begin to trickle out. As soon as they get in to a group it is like old hens at the roost, they just cackle: who was the closest, who saw M up close, how M was looking right at me, how I was in the camera and will show up on a video.

This blissfulness will last about a week. They will all meditate daily now for about 2 weeks, then life comes back into play. You know: get up, go to work, come home eat, go to sleep, get up, go to work.....Meditation????? oh yeah, maybe tomorrow.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 06:18:11 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: bill
Subject: Boston Event
Message:
Liked the note Bill. Good stuff!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:04:28 (GMT)
From: BIl
Email: None
To: Joey
Subject: Boston Event
Message:
Today I thought, I know Joey objected to the MRC letter, (I didnt know about them) But I bet he likes the handout.

Guess I was right:)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 05:27:35 (GMT)
From: Know It All
Email: None
To: bill
Subject: Boston Event
Message:
bill: So did you actually hand out this leaflet after the event in Boston?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:13:16 (GMT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Know It All
Subject: Boston Event
Message:
You probably know at this point about the storm and how it altered the course of my history. As Way said, act of god!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 09:51:42 (GMT)
From: Happy
Email: None
To: bill
Subject: Boston Event
Message:
I also liked the note, bill. Hope many would read it.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 14:07:17 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: all
Subject: Re:Boston Event
Message:
Thanks for those efforts, which I'm sure were not as easy and comfortable as typing at a computer!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:11:34 (GMT)
From: Bill
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: Re:Boston Event
Message:
Sho Nuff Way,
I had a much more vicious or hard hitting....breathtaking was my term for it, handout that I had worked up but I thought if I direct them to the web sites, there is so much more info and support. So I didnt get into specific bad deeds.

Glad you and Happy saw merit in the approach. the storm kept me from making this one but I decided to mail this out to a number of folks I know. I will include the 9 points also. Maybe something else as well.

Let them read it after the hallucinated 'glow' of darshan has worn off. As Yondon mentioned.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 02:40:23 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Just how stupid is this 'heart and mind' idea?
Message:
I notice that no one here is talking about the 'four humours' (or were there five?) But is this heart and mind shit any better? Like any idea, you have to ask yourself where did it come from, why and how? I say it came from a mixture, or confluence, actually, of naive, pre-scientific myths about the human anatomy and over-wrought cliches about love 'the greatest mystery of them all!'. Long, extended metaphors that were never meant to be taken literally or, if they were, only by long-ago ancestors who, like I said, knew dick about the body.

And then to see the Hamster trading in this shit as if it was literal truth without qualification? And to see new age dreamers, premie or not, eating it up? What did I do to deserve this? Oh, I know. I need to be leeched or something.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 01:57:51 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: heart and mind
Message:
Perhaps the use of the word 'heart' to represent emotions, feelings, etc. came from the notion that they literally came from the heart organ. Emotions effect the heart organ and the general chest area, there is often strong physical sensations there associated with emotions. So people may have easily thought that that's where they come from. This may have contributed to the perception that emotions and thoughts are more separate and independant than they are.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:08:36 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: G
Subject: heart and mind
Message:
Yes, and they were wrong.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 11:52:46 (GMT)
From: Another Anon
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Just how stupid is this 'heart and mind' idea?
Message:
I love it when you talk like that.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 09:15:32 (GMT)
From: Anon
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Just how stupid is this 'heart and mind' idea?
Message:
I notice that no one here is talking about the 'four humours' (or were there five?) But is this heart and mind shit any better?

Are you thinking of that Tamasic, Rajasic and Sattvic stuff? It seems that each culture develops categories to describe human behaviour and I suppose that even this, (which we now see as quaint and archaic thought) was once sort of the exact science of the day in India. Inadequate though it is by todays standards.

What annoys me is that the heart and mind analogy which is now taken to mean something quite simple and reasonable. (ie: that it is generally better for the heart to rule the head than the other way around) has been highjacked and redefined as something with far more bizarre implications.

Maharaji has redefined the good-old heart as something that is only concerned with him and his 'knowledge' and that the useful-old mind is now transmogrified into this tricky demon that is hell-bent on preventing you from enjoying life-with-knowledge at every turn. It is very weird stuff and interesting to probe. That is why I asked O to expand a little on what these two opposing 'friends' are actually saying.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 14:53:08 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Anon
Subject: Sorry, Anon, I really don't buy that
Message:
What annoys me is that the heart and mind analogy which is now taken to mean something quite simple and reasonable. (ie: that it is generally better for the heart to rule the head than the other way around) has been highjacked and redefined as something with far more bizarre implications.

That dichotomy, even in its simplest, apparently most innocuous form, even as an analogy for god's sake (as in 'This isn't for real; it's poetry night'), doesn't serve any good purpose. That is, it confuses more than it helps. Why? Because there is no switch inside that cuts off 'mind' from 'heart' or 'intellect' from 'emotion' or however else you want to phrase it. Not that I've ever heard of anyway.

Also, by the way, you asked:

Are you thinking of that Tamasic, Rajasic and Sattvic stuff?

No, I wasn't thinking of that myth. I was thinking of the medeival european myth about splene, bile, blood, and whatever else.

Ok, here's something I'm sure you'll find interesting:

Hysterica Passio, now known as hysteria, in Shakespeare's time meant 'fit of the mother' (Edgar). Lear makes a reference to this disease in Act 2, Scene 4, line 53 as he himself is on the verge of experiencing such fits. He has been rejected by a second daughter and travels to his third daughter's home for compassion only to find his own servant disrespectedly thrown in the stocks. This mood of hysteria was known as a factor of melancholy. Melancholy along with other diseases was believed to be caused by the imbalance of the four humours.

The theory of humours is based on the four elemental body fluids. The amounts of blood, yellow bile, phlegm, and black bile determined a person's physical or mental health. The logic behind the presence of these fluids was that each fluid gave off vapors that ascend to the brain and the person's temperament was decided by the state of his humours. The perfect temperament was one in which none of the humours dominated. A person with a dominant presence of blood was supposedly happy and generous. A dominance of yellow bile meant that the person was violent and vengeful. If a person were dull, pale, and cowardly it was presumed to be due to an excess of phlegm. Black bile justified someone's gluttony, laziness, or sentiment. Shakespeare's own daughter suffered from hysteria. Shakespeare's son in law was a doctor who diagnosed her as such. The fact that the marriage was in 1607, gave Shakespeare no advantage to accessibility of medical knowledge and practice as most of his works were complete by this time including King Lear.

I was talking about that kind of stuff.

You also wrote:

It seems that each culture develops categories to describe human behaviour and I suppose that even this, (which we now see as quaint and archaic thought) was once sort of the exact science of the day in India. Inadequate though it is by todays standards.

Your last line gives me some comfort but you're not getting all culturally relativistic on us, are you? Each culture and it's 'knowledge' is as good as the next and who's to say otherwise? I hope not because that attitude just throws science out the window.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 22:00:26 (GMT)
From: Anon
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Sorry, Anon, I really don't buy that
Message:
I said:What annoys me is that the heart and mind analogy which is now taken to mean something quite simple and reasonable. (ie: that it is generally better for the heart to rule the head than the other way around) has been highjacked and redefined as something with far more bizarre implications.

That dichotomy, even in its simplest, apparently most innocuous form, even as an analogy for god's sake (as in 'This isn't for real; it's poetry night'), doesn't serve any good purpose. That is, it confuses more than it helps. Why? Because there is no switch inside that cuts off 'mind' from 'heart' or 'intellect' from 'emotion' or however else you want to phrase it. Not that I've ever heard of anyway.

What I meant was that I have heard, for example, someone who is, say, impulsive or hot-headed described as someone who's letting their head rule their heart. I personally don't use this terminology to describe people, but nevertheless I understand what is meant when someone says this offhandedly. I believe that the historic and general use of this analogy is not, in practice, degenerating the English language significantly compared to the huge corruption of language as perpetrated by those who change the meaning of words drastically.

Your last line gives me some comfort but you're not getting all culturally relativistic on us, are you? Each culture and it's 'knowledge' is as good as the next and who's to say otherwise? I hope not because that attitude just throws science out the window.

Not in the least. I don't confuse the mythology and superstitions of past cultures with scientific discovery. Don't worry yourself unduly. If you worry too much about Anth and me getting New Agey you'll be like that Dawkins fellow, who was on the TV a while ago. He was so agitated and exasperated when confronted (on a chat show) with another very eminent scientist, who unfortunately confessed that he believed in God, that I really feared he might suffer some seizure. I am now of no doubt that he must be suffering from a predominance of bile in his humours - come to think of it, probably you and he would both benefit from a trepanning operation to let off some mental steam!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 11:56:33 (GMT)
From: Zelda
Email: None
To: Anon
Subject: Just how stupid is this 'heart and mind' idea?
Message:
Yawn Jim
There is no reply to that unless you have really tried to think with your heart.
If you had done it then you wouldnt be asking the question??
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 14:54:06 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Zelda
Subject: Are you an idiot, Zelda, or just pretending?
Message:
What kind of stupid response is that?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:28:25 (GMT)
From: Zelda
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Are you an idiot, Zelda, or just pretending?
Message:
A reponse way over your head obviously.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 23:49:59 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Does it ever occur?
Message:
Jim, does it ever occur to you, ever, that you might be the most stupid one in the final analysis? For all your endless quotes, (strange for such a free thinker) and verbiage , could it be that your ideas are 'old age' twaddle?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 01:48:59 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Keith
Subject: No, you lummox, it doesn't (nt)
Message:
fff
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 11:34:40 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Anon
Subject: Four humours
Message:
Hi Anon,

The four humours are- choleric, sanguine, melancholic and phlegmatic and, having been trained as a Steiner teacher, I found them a useful way of classifying children's tempraments. Steiner gave lengthy guidelines about how to deal with each humour (everyone is supposed to exhibit dominant characteristics of one of them). His analysis was one feature of his education system that rang true to me.

Anth the choleric

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 13:59:38 (GMT)
From: Nigel
Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk
To: AJW
Subject: I always thought the four humours were...
Message:
...farce, irony, parody and filth.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 14:43:08 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Nigel
Subject: No, they're the four horsemen of the Apocalpse...
Message:
...or was it the four Gospels?

Anth the Forth Bridge

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 18:58:45 (GMT)
From: 2'
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Humidours, not humours
Message:
The Four Humidours led a brigade during the Crusades and again during the Spanish Inquisition, and also made a brave charge at the Apocalypse. They carried only cigars as weapons. No one remembers their names, naturally.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 14:59:24 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Oh shit! You actually fall for that, Anth?
Message:
Sometimes I have to remind myself how I know you people. We were all in a naive, hindu-based cult together, right? Like we didn't meet in school or anything. You didn't live down the street. You didn't date my sister, work in the same warehouse. No, we were in a new age cult together.

So why should I be surprised or disappointed when one of what I thought were the sharper people here writes something so inane? Ok, I'm not. I'm happy. I can look in the mirror and tell myself ten good things about Anth believing this horseshit. Yes I can. Just give me a moment. (There, I'm felling better already. Must be my neighbour's Waldorf education rubbing off!)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:16:41 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Jim, your choleric nature is showing
Message:
Hi Jim,

Waldorf education is full of airy fairy mysticism, but some of it, when put into practice in the classroom, is valuable for both the teachers and the children.

But I'm not sure what your point is here. Choleric, sanguine, phlegmatic and melancholic are useful ways of describing personality types. Maybe your objection is because of the language, or because you mistakenly think I've swallowed the whole package- but if I'd used words like, 'introverted', 'worrier', 'extrovert leader', etc maybe you wouldn't object so much.

My days with Waldorf were a process of sifting through the mysticism and picking out the good teaching practice. Steiners advice on how to treat the extroverts, the bossy boots, the worriers and the 'sit back and watch everyone elsers' was practical, creative, and worked well as classroom practice. It doesn't mean you have to take on board the whole medieval package of philosophy that it's based on.

Anthroposopissed

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:25:13 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Sorry, a big, smiley-face 'bullshit' for you
Message:
But I'm not sure what your point is here. Choleric, sanguine, phlegmatic and melancholic are useful ways of describing personality types. Maybe your objection is because of the language, or because you mistakenly think I've swallowed the whole package- but if I'd used words like, 'introverted', 'worrier', 'extrovert leader', etc maybe you wouldn't object so much.

Anth, this is a classic new-age obfuscation. Either the 'theory' is promulgated for it's truth or it isn't. None of this 'metaphor' shit. That talk just surfaces whenever someone who subscribes to this medeival thinking has to jsutify it somehow. I say that there is nothing at all helpful about such quaint, superficial and ultimately meaningless classifications of personality-types. You know, show me where they're suported in classic astrology. They're not, are they? (Joke!) They're just Steiner make-believe and much as you were able to somehow gerr-rig them and make them 'work' for you, you know as well as I do that there are no such 'four types' of personalities. That's bogus. Simplistic to such a terrible, terrible degree that really, they're words that should never have been thought, let alone uttered. Not seriously, anyway.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 08:13:39 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Jim, your etheric body is vibrating too fast
Message:
Hi Jim,

Describing human personality types in terms of 'four humours' has been common for centuries. It's something Steiner picked up on and adapted to his own philosophical system.

It's not a big deal. I mean, do you have a problem classifying personalities as 'introvert' or 'extrovert'? This doesn't mean that 'there are only two personality types'. It's merely a useful form of description.

Let's put it another way. I've occasionaly eaten in the Hare Krishna restaurant in London. The food is good and cheap. It doesn't mean I beleive all the Hare Krishna stuff. (OK, so I fund their cult in the process, but I fund much worse stuff every day).

Yours sanguinely

Anthapostrophe'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 19:05:38 (GMT)
From: 2'
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Jim prefers classifying people his own way.
Message:
Right? so what?who cares?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 15:36:31 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: It's Re-Education Camp for you, former cult teach
Message:
Anth,

So what that this belief has existed for centuries?

Question: Is it true?

If not, I don't see how it gets grandfathered in somehow. It's useless and who cares how Steiner gussied it up? 'Introvert' and 'extrovert' are two concepts that supposedly derive from some sort of psychological observations, nothing more. The theories extrapolated from those observations are, to the best of my knowledge [limited but you can ask G about this :)], always up for review and tinkering. I think the only reason the concepts survive is that psychology finds there's a certain predictive value to them.

Now where does this medeival belief come from? Wherever it is it isn't simple observation. Indeed, modern physiology blows the actual categories so far out of the water it's not funny. So what are you left with? Some vain possiblity that the 'ancients' were on to some great observation because of their subtle genius (the same one we lost long ago when [we got TV, invented football or simply stopped being 'ancients', take your pick]) which just happened, coincidentally, to ofer greater predictive powers than any simple description of people based on real experience instead? And that, moreover, the 'theory's predictive power is so great that modern psychology, which, of course, can never explain it, has yet to displace it? And all of this is just one, happy coincidence? I say that's ridiculous.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 13:58:45 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: It's time you had another mystical experience Jim.
Message:
Hi Jim,

I've never thought of the four humours as anything more than an easy way to describe, and understand, different types of personality (just like 'introvert' and 'extrovert' and nothing more). This could well have been 'useless' information, but Steiner suggested some very practical teaching methods, based on these types of personality. So, as a teacher, I found it useful.

I'm not sure what you're getting at when you talk about 'predictive powers', neither do I understand what you mean about 'coincidence'.

However- in defence of the 'ancients'- there was stuff they knew which we've forgotten. For example- there was a book by a Harvard astronomy professor, Hawkins I think, 'Stonehenge Decoded', published in the 60s, which proved that the builders of Stonehenge could predict a total eclipse of the sun- an event that takes place every 40 years- to the day. And if the stones had been erected 15 miles to the north or south, it wouldn't have worked. Stonehenge was built two thousand years before the pyramids.

Also, in terms of education- there is little doubt that the hunter gathers of the Mesolithic age, and the Neolithic farmers, received a much better education than most children in todays modern society.

However, like you, I'm happy not to know the name of every plant and animal around where I live, in return for central heating, supermarkets, tv, and double life expectancy.

Anth the ley line

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 16:26:15 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Because I like you so much, I'll pretend I didn't
Message:
read that last post. Okay?

Let's talk about something else. Guess what? Our band's playing at this big summer solstice party this weekend. [This is a secular solstice, to be sure]. The guy built this amazing house out in the country, 35 foot barralled-arch glass ceilings, plam trees running up the middle of a spiral staircase. Out in the country overlooking Shawnigan Lake. Saturday night. Can't wait.

And today, I'm going to have vegetables for lunch. Don't know about dinner yet?

How's life otherwise? Well, my shitty old truck broke down twice this week. Time to get rid of it, I guess.

And I'm trying to exercise, and Laurie's son just got back from Thailand, and, well..... how're you? What's new?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 23:55:29 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Sorry, a big, smiley-face 'bullshit' for you
Message:
Even many respectable and eminent scientists would shake their heads when reading your posts Jim. Shake horizontally that is. Ah well. Behind all this personality stuff though I'm sure you are a really good 'sort'. You know , worthy of a big new agey brotherly hug!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 04:47:21 (GMT)
From: Lotus Eater
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Hamsters
Message:
Dear Jim,
I too, like Loaf used to have a cute fat hamster.

I don't know how you came up with the name, but I like it.LE

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 04:18:18 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Just how stupid is ?
Message:
Of course the common capacity to liguistically distinguish between 'things' is so much twaddle? Of course if can't be seen it doesn't exist , right? And afterall we are just a pack of molecules without free will, right? Or if there is free will it must be a strange creature seeing it seems to be obeying some biological imperitive. Poor suffering Jim. How indeed could the materialistically ruled creation be so cruel to inflict these senseless and mythic dialogues on you? What indeed have you done to deserve this? I really feel for you.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:01:18 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Keith
Subject: Does Keith have a brain? What's up there?
Message:
This is not the product of an operating brain, fella. I don['t know what it is but it's not that. Maybe it's your heart bleating all over the page but I never thought hearts were so wordy. I don't know but I'd get it looked at if I were you.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 19:17:58 (GMT)
From: 2'
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Jim's Confession?
Message:
Jim wrote:
'This is not the product of an operating brain.... I don['t know what it is but it's not that.'
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 21:41:29 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: response to n's and p's.
Message:
Due to heavy commitments I will not be able to respond except briefly until later today.(about 7 hours from now.) But I want to respond quite fully to the posts below. I might have time to respond a little to one or two. But this type of dialogue means a great deal to me. Some very vital points are being raised,imho.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 00:17:45 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: response to positive 1.
Message:
Keith; 1) Maharaji may not be The Only One who doles out a way to go
inside,(meditate) but his methods have and do help many including
myself.
Way; (1) Wording needs to be more specific. What do you mean by 'his
methods'? Do you mean the four techniques specifically or the
other 'methods' of listening and participation (satsang and service)
that go along with them? Also the 'may' is inappropriate since there
is absolutely no doubt about the fact that he is not 'The Only
One...' If the wording here was as specific as possible, this would
probably turn into a valid positive point about meditation itself
rather than about Rawat's cult and particular methods.
Keith; 1)His methods are the four techniques of knowledge. I agree. Maharaji ‘IS’
not the only one who shows a way to go inside. Wording does need to be specific. I
believe it is a valid point to say that all techniques that help people go within and
experience and understand that the efficacy of meditation is to be self realised,are
worthy points,and should not be confused with associated cultish activities.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 14:21:30 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Keith
Subject: further response to positive 1.
Message:
Positive 1 - there is a benefit to the practice of meditation for many people.

However, there is more that could be said about Rawat's particular recommendations about meditation. I personally find the body postures used for light, music, and nectar to be uncomfortable and unhelpful. I also object to the new Holy Name technique of visualizing the master swinging you on a swing. Therefore, I would not recommend Mr. Rawat to anyone interested in meditation.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 00:34:51 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: response to positive 2.
Message:
Keith; 2) There are people who have been so lost, addicted, suicidal,
depressed, alienated, feeling helpless and hopeless, who have found
a reason for living in Maharaji and premiedom. I've known some of
them.

Way; (2) This positive, even if true, is invalidated by the number of
practicing premies who have actually committed suicide. I've
known some of them. A personal friend of mine went to a Miami
program in the mid-80's. A few days after he got home, he shot
himself in the head. As for hopeless people finding some hope in
Rawat, the question is whether it is a real hope or a pipe dream,
not whether they were pepped up for awhile. Many hopeless
people get 'born again' for awhile with fundamental Christianity of
some sort, and then they peter out. Same here. The question is:
does it last?
Keith; 2)Yes I understand that the cookie cutter cuts both ways. You and others (like Jim)
have known premies who have committed suicide. I have known at least two suicidal
individuals who feel Maharaji was /is the reason they are still alive. Someone might
read our words here and go home and shoot themselves in the head. It could happen.
Or someone may become enlightened by our words and thank us for being the
catalysts that saved their lives. Are we culpable or responsible? To what degree? And
to what degree are the recipients of our influences responsible for their own
experiences, interpretations and actions? I am not trying to be clever or evasive by
saying this. My point is that this is is a really grey area . Pipe dream or reality is also a
grey area. Who is to judge? You? I? Is there or can there ever be a final consensus?
Does it last? Surely that is not the point. Of course ‘it’ doesn’t last. When I burn my
finger the pain is real. It doesn’t last. But the pain is not a pipe dream.
I shall continue with this later.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 14:30:30 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Keith
Subject: further response to positive 2.
Message:
Positive 2 is invalid as far as being an intrinsic positive that can be acknowledged by all reasonable persons. The fact that some people follow Rawat and find hope does not distinquish Rawat from Koresh or anybody else.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 16:28:54 (GMT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: Keith
Subject: For me this is not a grey area.
Message:
Someone might read our words here and go home and shoot themselves in the head. It could happen. Or someone may become enlightened by our words and thank us for being the catalysts that saved their lives. Are we culpable or responsible? To what degree?

I would say I would bear absolutely no responsibility for either scenario: suicide or enlightenment. However, if someone did kill themselves after reading the truth about the 'Great King,' I'd say Rawat would bear a large part of the responsibility for that.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 04:31:57 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: response to positive 3.
Message:
Keith) 3) The experiences I had at events were often very inspired and
even sometimes extra-ordinary. Personal positive!

Way) (3) This is entirely personal. If your purpose, Keith, is to outline 10
positives about your own personal experience, then it's okay. But
if you are attempting to illucidate 10 intrinsically authentic positives
about Rawat's cult, then you have to be more general and
all-inclusive. We've all had positive experiences, some at satsang,
some at large events, some on LSD, etc. But the point, I should
think, is what is actually truly of value and recommendable to
everyone. I certainly would never recommend that my nieces and
nephews get high on acid, even though I learned a lot from my
own experiences on that drug. Same with Rawat. I would never
recommend that the young people I know become premies.
Would you recommend it to your children, nieces and nephews,
and other young people???

Keith) 3) No . I would not recommend to people I know that they become premies
with perhaps an occassional rare exception. Afterall methadone is meant to be
preferable to heroin. If you get the point. I was only making a positive point. For me.
The experiences I referred to were a part of my growth and i in no way reget having
them. In fact , some still live within me in a freer , more integrated way. Your
response above infers that no experience gained in relation to Maharaji could be
profound or real or worth valuing. I disagree.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 14:34:56 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Keith
Subject: response to positive 3.
Message:
This positive is valid for Keith only. Some people faint dead away with divine inspiration at Billy Graham crusades. That's fine for them, I suppose. But if the effort here is define the true positives of following Rawat and his Knowledge, then this positive cannot be included.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 23:03:09 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: response to positive 3.
Message:
I shall hold back on posting responses to Ways criticisms of my 10 positives until he responds to my three posts above. Otherwise this dialogue is going to get somewhat congested. Way?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 14:45:46 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Keith
Subject: Re:response to positive 3.
Message:
Keith,

I think the main objection I have to your list is that it is personal to you, and does not critique Rawat intrinsically, so to speak. The fact that you would not recommend that young people in your acquaintance become involved with Rawat speaks loud and clear.

I very much enjoyed most of my five years in the ashram. But what I enjoyed was my own experience in my own little community very far removed from anything having to do with Prem Pal Singh Rawat and his supposed grace.

Your story is that Rawat was one of several influences and you did not experience the heavy early days of the cult. A journey entry from you, in which you also discuss Krishnamurti and your other OZ swami would be most interesting and a most welcomed addition to the journey section here!

The effort to define the positives of Knowledge is interesting, but I think this effort will eventually come down to the fact that there are certain natural graces in life and Rawat is not the source of grace.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 16:57:37 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: Re:response to positive 3.
Message:
Way. I think this process of analysing and re-analysing the positives will lead nowhere. Not because of any unwillingness on our parts to openly discuss,but rather because there is too much that can't be easily conveyed in words. I agree with you. A 'journey' entry might be more constructive.I'll consider that. But let me just say in passing that the idea of Maharaji's 'grace' having to do with my experiences as a premie was only rarely believed by me. Grace for me does exist but is not linked to someone especially. And I have a video where Maharaji dismisses the idea that it is his grace that the premie is experiencing. Although he didn't go far enough along that track as usual. Also during the Maharaji lite years of my involvement the techniques of knowledge were simple and had no 'extra's' attached, like imagining Maharaji on a swing.Lol.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 17:40:37 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Keith
Subject: Re:response to positive 3.
Message:
Keith,

I agree the topic is best concluded now, although for a different reason than the one you give. Life has its positives, whether you are in a cult or not. Rawat's cult has no real positives. It is an empty trip that leads nowhere except an exit point. Let's take the exit, dust ourselves off, and be on our way.

The admission by Rawat that grace isn't his is an example of the sort of thing he says from time to time that are designed to perpetuate his cult by saying just enough of the truth to get by. As you say, if he were serious about that, he would say more - enough to undermine his own mission in life.

It might be interesting, if you were so inclined, for you to watch that video again and make a transcription for us of the particular quote you mention, or other similar things that Maharaji has said. I got rid of all the videos I had in my possession, and wouldn't have the stomach to watch them anyway at this point. Once you lose your openness to Mr. Rawat and his message, his speeches become vapid and painfully boring.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 03:23:38 (GMT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Keith
Subject: grey matter matters
Message:
Greetings and Salutations at the Lotus Feet of Satguru!

No grey area in this matter Kieth!
Of course I can judge.
He said plain and simple that he was the ultimate lord and we were to have no exceptions to his rule. Not one breath were we to forget him and heavy guilt and his condemnation hung like a sword over our heads. He said at hans jayanti that '..we might do something small that WE think is nothing and Guru Maharaj ji would never forgive us EVER.'

And on and on. I wont bother to get into the whole argument of why he was clearly responsible for the deaths of a FEW people I personally knew. I am sure in IRAQ, there are those that have nice things to say about saddam and how he 'saved me from suicidal thoughts' or some such comment that would have been waved in front of anyone saying that saddam caused many suicides.

I go read contrarian monetary sources for opinions that run against the majority so I also like some contrarian posts here.

'pipe dream or reality' you mentioned, well, THAT can be judged also. Of course the eastern religious dogma leaves you with no option to judge because if it is just a non self aware oneness and your whole 'progress' is in an invisible journey 'inside' where only YOU can see the mile markers and the signs that say
**Welcome to Oneness Central**
And to explain away their madness and inconsistancy in thier human behaviour, the great spiritual pretenders say 'you cant judge the master and what you see is the garbage inside yourself that is just reflected back to you by the perfect mirror that the master is.'

Real nice. but we certainly CAN judge, and clearly without a lot of grey in the mix. The evidence in this case is stacked up to the ceiling.

Of course for me, I would have had a hell of a time without this forum. It was hard enough WITH the forum. Well, I guess that is how it is for the 'fanatical' ones hmmmmmm?

Goodnight:)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:32:12 (GMT)
From: Elaine
Email: None
To: bill
Subject: Guilt
Message:
bill,
The entire time I was a premie and lived in the ashram - guilt was never a part of my experience. I'm thinking it was bec early on I had had input first from a premie in 1972 that quoted Vivekananda about the 'mind' to me ---There are two doors into the 'mind' ---the front door and the backdoor. The front door is pride and the backdoor is guilt.'

Then there was the story premies told me about Gary Girard at the rez gate -he went against M's instructions(agya?) to stay there while M went away - but instead Gary went surfing - when M came back and G was dripping wet. M apparently slapped him. Saying that, ' I'm not hitting you bec you disobeyed me,but bec you're feeling guilty about it.'

Then another story about Marolyn's dad (Kurt,Carl?) going to a fast food place and eating a fish sandwich - M goes there and sits at the table and says to him not to feel guilty (about eating meat).

Then many years later going to a restaurant with Joan Apter and a friend of mine and there seemed to be VERY limited,
if any,vegetarian choices. I said something like, 'Gee, I guess we should find another restaurant.'
She looked at me like I was a nut and waved her hand saying,'Premies have so many concepts.' We proceeded to enter this expensive,classy restaurant and ordered whatever we wanted. (Can't remember - it was all French. We may have gotten crepes or something. (PS- All I know is I never drank coffee until I hung out with Joan, btw.):)

It is funny to me how everyone feels the elephant differently.
I understand your guilt thing was real - For me, it was totally NOT there. I would talk w/ premies about not feeling guilt bec - it robs you of eternal life or something. :)

Actually, I always said if guilt is occupying your mind and heart then there is no room for the love of God ---and that is the whole purpose - to feel his love.So,Voila, don't feel guilt. They always got big smiles after that one.
( Even back then I didn't say 'GMJ's love.')

Elaine

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 15:50:52 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Elaine
Subject: You are so full of shit, Elaine, it IS funny
Message:
You are such a liar to say that you never experienced 'guilt' as a premie. But then you're new age, right? That means you filt on the surface like a waterbug, right? So, whatever you say. And why not? Life -- including the past -- is whatever you make it!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 03:38:14 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: None
To: bill
Subject: grey matter matters
Message:
You 'know' with such certaintity Bill. No doubts? OK. Good for you. What else can I say? That of course grey matter matters. I've never said it didn't. Maharaji never said those outrageous things to me. Remember I was a part of the Maharaji lite era.
Etc,etc.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 03:46:54 (GMT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Keith
Subject: grey matter matters
Message:
Hi Kieth,
The grey matter was just riffing off your mention of grey areas.
I know someone in town named Harry Grey and his favorite sayings he had made into a booklet called Grey Matter Matters.

I guess I dont want to stifle discussion by saying things in a way that is a posting ender.

Of course it IS the day of the Boston program so I am still in a agressive mood! Like Anon's commented below, I like the discussions you have triggered. I'll have to get around to that leaflet tomorrow. Goodnight again:)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 15:43:16 (GMT)
From: LA-EX
Email: None
To: WAY
Subject: 9 objections
Message:
Way-can you either re-post your 9 objections, or tell me where they are located in the archives?
I'd like to show them to a few people.
Thanks-LA-EX
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 08:47:27 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: None
To: LA-EX
Subject: 9 objections
Message:
La-ex, I wrote you a long e-mail and then lost it whilst trying to send it. Will try again tomorrow.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 17:33:19 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: wwilliam@kumc.edu
To: LA-EX
Subject: Re:9 objections
Message:
Thanks LA-EX,

The 9 objections letter is on the Internet at JM's personal site.

I could also send you the letter through email and you could forward it to whomever you like.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 18:14:54 (GMT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: Re:9 objections
Message:
Way,

Now THAT makes a great leaflet.
Your 9 Objections are really well said.
I read them before and dont know why I didnt think to us them in Boston. Next time.

I Made one for Boston and the only reason I am typeing here and now is that we had a big storm blow out our power yesterday and the kids are off school and there was no power till about noon here. My wife is recovering from last weeks operation and I couldnt leave with the kids and no power. If they were at school and there was power, that would have worked.

With the intense storm coming I unplugged the computer and tv's in case of an electrical surge. Dont know if one happened but better safe than sorry. I regret missing the comrades in the trenches in Boston. I had a good musical evening lined up for us all to follow the days efforts.

I'll post the handout.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 18:20:33 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: bill
Subject: Re:9 objections
Message:
Bill,

Are you sure the power outage was not due to the Lord of Light arriving?

Please do post the handout!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 18:40:39 (GMT)
From: Bill....
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: Re:9 objections
Message:
Kids are clamoring, no time now Way!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 10:28:24 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: 10 Positives.
Message:
Here we go.
1) Maharaji may not be The Only One who doles out a way to go inside,(meditate) but his methods have and do help many including myself.
2) There are people who have been so lost, addicted, suicidal, depressed, alienated, feeling helpless and hopeless, who have found a reason for living in Maharaji and premiedom. I've known some of them.
3) The experiences I had at events were often very inspired and even sometimes extra-ordinary. Personal positive!
4) I've learnt a lot. Again personal positive!
5) Maharaji does allow the poorer premies to attend most events for free if they ask. He is not a prime example of dollar grabbing new age spiritual snobbery and greed. There are stories that contradict the above, even from my own experiences. But in the main it is so.
6) I have and can still in part be touched deeply by Maharaji's words. He does reach a part of me that is greater than my intellectual reaction. He can touch my soul. And I believe the same has occured to a lot of expremies who are now in radical denial. Afterall if he is totally demonic how could it be possible? He is not a great demon. He has simply slipped into a self inflation yet partly inflamed by genuine inspiration.
7) He can be humble at times.
8) He can be wise at times.
9) He can be a vehicle for the transformation of others at times.
10) And He has created something that does more 'good' than bad overall in a world where there is so much negative, selfish and violent behavior.

Each set of negatives or positives awakens an opposite set in my mind. This is, I believe very healthy. Fanaticism,glossed over by clever or not so clever words, obscures truth. People who were fanatical followers of Maharaji had a tendency towards fanaticism
and this does not simply evaporate when one changes teams.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 19:50:16 (GMT)
From: O
Email: None
To: Keith
Subject: 10 Positives.
Message:
Hey Keith
In Miami Maharaji said something very profound(I’ll try to paraphrase).
You have these two friends.One friend who advises you that “you have the RIGHT to be kind,you have the RIGHT to have peace,you have the RIGHT to be fulfilled”.When you are around this friend you ALWAYS feel good.This friend is your heart.
And you have another friend who says “you have the RIGHT to be angry;you have the RIGHT to be miserable;you have the RIGHT to be unkind”.This friend is of course your mind.
So true, huh?So I ask myself,which one do I choose as my BESTfriend?If you’ve ever felt the kindness,peace and fulfillment brought when you allow yourself to be envelped by the currents of your heart it’s a no brainer,“More,more,more of that please”! As a premie I know you know this feeling.But then I'm sure you’ve also experienced being enveloped by this wonderful feeling and an angry or upseting thought creeps in that takes you away from the feeling.What do you do then automatically,you scream,“Stay away, stay away from me”!
So it’s a simple question which friend do you REALLY want to go through life with as your best friend,your heart or your mind?They can both be friends but which friend do you confide your deepest hopes,dreams and experiences?Whose advice do you listen to when push comes to shove?
Who represents these two friends?Maharaji has always represented your heart.Exes have no quams admitting they represent your mind.Isn't it great you get to choose your friends.
Obsever
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 11:45:04 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: O
Subject: Two friends
Message:
O,

This 'two friends' stuff is a load of bollocks.

It's on the same level as fundamental 'devil' and 'god' fighting for your soul, old fashioned christianity.

Mind v Heart is a ridiculously simplistic understanding of how a human being works- and to somehow give the credit of our inner joy in life to Maharaji is really quite pathetic.

He isn't 'our heart' O, he's a confused rich bloke who lives in an eyesore on a hill in Malibu. He is as much your 'heart' as a plaster statue of Jesus in a church, or a plastic Krishna on the sideboard.

He ain't the Lord. His 'knowledge' is not the knowledge of all knowledges, and the peace and satisfaction you get from worshiping him is exactly the same as you'd get if you worshipped a statue, the Rev Moon, or a tree in your garden.

Anth who has plenty of friends, and they don't live in his head.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 23:28:59 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: None
To: O
Subject: 10 Positives.
Message:
Wow. My appointment this morning has been suddenly cancelled and I have unexpected time on my hands. So I'll begin with you or rather your post. I've read the responses so far. The topic is heart and mind. Two friends. Firstly, if they are both friends,as Maharaji has expressed, then they both should be considered as equally significant. If the mind friend is not as trustworthy as the heart friend then shouldn'd he have named the mind an enemy?
Or is that when push comes to shove,one needs to choose?
Or could it be that they can and should function in unison. It is this latter option that appeals to me mentally and intuitively(heartfeltedly). I do not have to choose at all. I only think I have to choose when I'm out of accord with myself.
It is not by a lop sided choice that I get back in accord with myself again. It is rather by a type of suspension of both. Silence. This is when I meditate in my own fashion. Maharaji is not the great doctor who has the only cure for the problem of duality. Knowledge as a set of techniques has helped me as have other methods I've applied myself to. But the simple act of getting in touch with the deeper and more real self for me these days is independent of any adherence to some rigidly followed techniques. Maharaji has created a mythos about 'knowledge' being the 'only supreme' way to transcend or transform confusion into simple clarity or peace. Wrong! Not so! The main point here is that heart and mind are not two unrelated relatives. They are two functions of the one self that can co-relate and merge. The real self as I perceive it can integrate all expressions of itself into a united 'front' or persona or many persona's. We are not fixed mechanical entities. And are not made up of bits and pieces, to have to choose one bit over another.
The negative or overly autonomous intellectual function of mind can be integrated with the intuitions and feelings. Afterall, Maharaji himself expresses a great deal. Is there some duality present? Is he too much in his mind? And how often have you seen Maharaji sitting practicing 'knowledge'? I believe that Maharaji's language in these matters is too simplistic and to designed to get premies to suspend their critical facilties. Premies that I've known do not reconcile this duality. They tend to transcend the duality in a programme or during an event. And then later when the gloss wears off they become fragmented and needing the 'fix' of another video or event,etc.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 01:15:29 (GMT)
From: O
Email: None
To: Keith
Subject: 10 Positives.
Message:
So Kieth you discount the relevance of the distinction between the two.You are of course speaking idealisticly when you say 'the real self can integrate all expressions of itself into a united front'.Somehow they just coexist.
Sounds intelligent and hopeful Keith but your heart can love for no reason and your mind cannot feel love even if it has every reason to love.Nor can your mind make your heart feel love if it doesn't already feel it.These two forces can definitely be at odds with each other.Then what?Which friend has the final say?Which one rules your kingdom?
Or is this too simplistic a line of reasoning for an inteligent guy like you?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 14:03:09 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: O
Subject: The fuzzy felt board.
Message:
O,

You remind me of the Jehovas witnesses with their mobile fuzzy felt board.

I don't know if you've ever had them round, for their lecture complete with visual aids. They put the board up, then they have 'heaven' 'god' and 'Jesus' up the top, with a few fuzzy felt angels, and some fuzzy felt flames and demons down the bottom. In the middle is fuzzy felt you.

Guess what O? If you're good you go up here (point to fuzzy felt heaven with stick). If you don't accept Jesus, you're bad, and you go down there- fuzzy felt hell.

You sound incredibly, simplistically similar. 'Here is bad fuzzy felt mind- if you listen to him you will suffer in fuzzy felt maya. Here is good fuzzy felt heart, if you listen to him you'll go to heaven with the Lord and drive around in his fuzzy felt Challenger jet.'

O, it's time you thought about this crap that's been gathering dust and fungus in your head for all these years. It would be a terrible tradegy if you lived the rest of your life with your head in such a dark, stupid place.

Anth the fuzzy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 03:51:25 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: None
To: O
Subject: heart and mind
Message:
O, you do not seem to 'grock'(I haven't used that term for donkey's years) to my main point. Do you realise the possibility and not such a difficult one at that, of thinking and 'feeling' in unison. I acknowledge that for so many people , especially in the developed world , the schism between thoughts and feelings is rife. Absolutely. And it would be ludicrous for anyone to deny that fact. But how one reconciles and integrates these 'two' potential friends is what is really open to serious debate. And also how one expresses about these matters. For sure there is no one in my book who has 'The Profound and Supreme' way of expressing about this. And that includes Maharaji. Those who believe that only their method, ritual, guru, scientist, psychologist or spirit has the supreme and best solution is in my eyes cultish, fanatic, stupid, ignorant or a combination af any of the above. What do you think? Can you address my comments directly ?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 23:05:55 (GMT)
From: Lotus Eater
Email: None
To: O
Subject: Heart and mind
Message:
Dear O,
Being reminded how M divided me up into heart and mind makes me feel very angry. That horrible moment when you can't externalise it anymore and acknowledge that the mind is inside you in all its' potency, is truly terrifying and schizophrenic, like you have the devil inside you and K and M is the only thing you have to protect you from you, grrrrrrrrrr, how dare he make me frightened of myself! Lotus Eater
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 17:18:15 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Lotus Eater
Subject: Trusting yourself
Message:
Well said,LE

To quote from 'The Guru Papers - Masks of Authoritarian Power':

'To maintain mental control it is necessary to undermine self-trust. This is insidiously done by removing the ways people can build trust in themselves.'(p.73)

More quotes from the book at http://www.cyberpass.net/truth/quotes_from_the_guru_papers.htm

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:12:16 (GMT)
From: Daneane
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Trusting yourself
Message:
You might be right cq, but I'm not sure I can trust you.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 17:10:35 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Daneane
Subject: Join the club! (nt)
Message:
Join the club! (nt)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 01:00:37 (GMT)
From: O
Email: None
To: Lotus Eater
Subject: Heart and mind
Message:
Didn't think my words were at all frieghtening LE.If you know yourself how can you possibly be frieghtened of yourself?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 03:37:19 (GMT)
From: Lotus Eater
Email: None
To: O
Subject: Heart and mind
Message:
Dear O,
Your response sounds like you didn't read my post carefully enough. Your words reminded me of how Maharaji caused the fear.
How do you feel about that little story you related???LE
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 23:44:00 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Lotus Eater
Subject: Heart and mind/hand that work together - Hiawatha
Message:
Heart and (mind/)hand that work together - 'Hiawatha' by Longfellow
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 01:23:45 (GMT)
From: O
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: Heart and mind/hand that work together - Hiawatha
Message:
I think you are taking some artistic lisence in your interpetation of Longfellow Stoner.Heart and hand I'll buy,IE when your hand is guided by your heart.The same can be said of the mind.Your hand can definitely be the servant of your mind.
And your mind can definitely be the servant of your heart,IE your heart rules.But can your heart ever be the servant of your mind?Whew,that sounds like a recipe for tyanny.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 04:07:59 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: None
To: O
Subject: Heart and mind/hand that work together - Hiawatha
Message:
I've thought for many years now that one of the problems we all have in discussing these matters is the problem of semantics. We use words like 'heart' and 'mind' (including Maharaji) without really defining the words in such a way that there would be no mis-understandings. I believe that it is impossible to define words that are in part 'symbolic' and in part literal with such scientific specificness as a word like 'table'. Does love not exist just because there is no final definitive way of describing what love means? Does anyone have an absolute monopoly on 'The' definition of love? And yet we do use this word. Or is it just another one of those words that actually mean nothing at all? O, my intelligent cyber-buddy, I also can say that my heart should rule and guide my mind and my mind should rule and guide my actions. But I also realise that for some this way of expressing makes little or no sense. And I also realise that there are other angles, other ways of perceiving and expressing this. What I object to and criticise to is premies or any other 'followers' repeating endlessly the expressions of their 'masters'. In fact, I do not object to what you are saying but I would like to challenge you to say it in 'your own words'.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 02:44:08 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: O
Subject: Heart and mind/hand that work together - Hiawatha
Message:
Hi O,

I don't know you, you don't know me. But why did you interpret working together as absolutely some kind of master/servant relationship that was not neccessarily implied?

Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 22:56:23 (GMT)
From: Anon
Email: None
To: O and Keith
Subject: 10 Positives.
Message:
I haven't read the other reactions to your post yet 'Obsever' but I have to immediately say that, from what you say, your thinking appears to be very dualistic indeed.

What your so-called heart says in this, dare I say, not-so-profound example, is clearly no more valid than what your so-called 'mind' is telling you. I propose that to suggest that one should 'choose' between the two - mistrust one over the other - is dangerous cult-think.

A truly balanced person will realise that they indeed have every right to be angry or sad when it is appropriateto the occasion, just as they, of course, have the right to be kind, peaceful and fulfilled on other occasions. The one does not exclude the other as you insinuate. Your implication that one is more important than the other, by advising that you should listen to your so-called 'heart' and shun 'the mind', is really misleading, because (as you said) they are both your friends - both a part of you. Your mind is only destructive if you entertain destructive thoughts and ideas. It is a matter of control which is by no means only gained by being a premie, with this supposed exclusive access to ' heart' feelings.

Everybody knows the mind can be destructive . You don't need Maharaji to have positive, healthy thoughts and intentions, or for that matter, to exercise kindness and all the other preferable human virtues that come from increased self-awareness and maturity.

Maharaji has succeeded in convincing many people that they harbour this 'enemy' within and that they need to only follow these 'heartfelt' feelings. (which of course only happen by virtue of his influence). The effect of implanting this dualistic thinking in you is undoubtedly akin to 'dividing and conquering' you. You no longer trust your own faculties so you depend all the more on your conqueror to define good and bad on your behalf.

You say that your mind tells you that you have the 'right to be unkind' in the same sentence as saying that it is telling you that you have the 'right to be angry'. You seek to paint an overtly negative picture of the mind. Some people have very kind 'minds' - it is merely a quirk of language which makes one say 'he has a kind heart'. (By the way have you EVER heartd anyone say 'I have the right to be unkind' ??? - Only lunatics!!)

I believe that it is an extremely simplistic and unsatisfactory notion (and merely serves those - religions and gurus in particular- who seek to control others by getting them to fear their very own thoughts) to thus divide a person into good and bad. People are angry, unkind, miserable, kind, happy etc. for many, many reasons - none of of which are mentioned in your unhelpful analogy of having these two, equally implausible friends within. You then extend this travesty of a painting of reality to include Maharaji as the crowned representative of the 'Heart' and 'Exes' as those of the mind. Well, I rather object to being included in your Heironymous Bosch type vision, as being one of the latter since I have no wish to be involved with your flawed, divisive theories.

I agree with you that your mind probably does have the potential to 'take you away from that feeling'. But I see this as something to be possibly thankful for, when 'that feeling' is so clearly dependant on you maintaining a state of mental denial and delusion.
I aspire to heartfelt feelings which are integated with all aspects of my being. I sense that premies need to realise that their mind is not something to fear and that they should be just as wary of the emotions they feel when in the dizzy atmosphere of a satsang meeting.

One may well define feelings of the 'heart' towards one's creator as being emotions of peace, exultation, gratitude and fulfilment, but to think that one's mind is a sinister opposing force to this, and to shun it fearfully is extremely sad. I meet many premies, and the more I discuss these things with them, the more it is apparent that they have fears motivating them that came purely through their involvement with Maharaji. The most obvious is the subliminal fear that is implanted from the outset of 'knowledge' which mysteriously prevents even a disenchanted ex from revealing the techniques to anyone. So deep runs the fear, masquerading as respect.

Finally, it is a minor point, but- do you really see premies as examples of people who are particularly less miserable, prone to anger and unkindness or unfulfilled than others? I think this is questionable. For me practicing knowledge and trying to surrender to Maharaji put me through some awful traumas and I became deeply unhappy in some ways, although I may have been superficially blissfull at the same time.

BTW Keith ...thanks for taking the time to compose the two lists. Since everyone has different perspectives, from one extreme to the other, it probably serves the forum well to have people contributing whose opinions occupy the middle ground, so to speak, and you have successfully stimulated some topical discussion.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 00:54:18 (GMT)
From: O
Email: None
To: Anon
Subject: 10 Positives.
Message:
Whew!A long response to a simple question Anon.
It's really quite simeple.Anger,misery,unkindness don't feel as good as kindess,peace and fulfillment.Yes we all have the right as free men and women to the advice of both friends so I'm not saying make one the enemy or fear one.Just recognize whose advice brings the greatest joy and soothes the soul?
Also Anon just a question about your bliss,was it really only superficial?I haven't had a deeper bliss than when I surrender to my heart.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 08:18:17 (GMT)
From: Anon
Email: None
To: O
Subject: 10 Positives.
Message:
Also Anon just a question about your bliss,was it really only superficial?I haven't had a deeper bliss than when I surrender to my heart.

Sorry for the long answer. Here's a shorter one:

No, it was not always superficial but it has become clear in the course of time that my 'meditational' contentment delayed me from addressing dormant frustrations and unresolved questions.

'The peace of contentment is the peace of death' - Jesus (reputedly)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 07:25:00 (GMT)
From: Nigel
Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk
To: O
Subject: Superficial response
Message:
O, you write:

Anger,misery,unkindness don't feel as good as kindess,peace and fulfillment

Really, your reply to Anon's well-considered response is so superficial (basically a restatement of your original assertion), I hope he feels it was worth his while.

If you really equate 'anger, misery and unkindness' with the mind, and 'kindness, peace and fulfilment' with Maharaji, I suggest you have a big problem:

Your thoughts and emotions are both products of the same nervous system - but we were emotional creatures before we were thinking ones in our early development. If you feel a personal need to abandon all discrimination and recapture those early crib-state sensations and substitute M for benevolent, parental provider, then that is your choice. But don't kid yourself that the powers of good are arraigned behind M in some cosmic battle with the mind, or that 'looking within' is an act of kindness.

That is just your mind telling you that, your mind writing all these forum posts, your mind putting a crooked spin on the way you interpret your inner sensations and your mind which kids you those sensations are beyond the grasp of the non-premie or ex-premie.

And it was M's mind which taught you to imagine it might be otherwise.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 23:04:10 (GMT)
From: o
Email: None
To: Nigel
Subject: Superficial response
Message:
You are jumping to conclusions Nigel.I equated my heart with my heart,not with Maharaji.I did say Maharaji represents my heart,and what I meant by that is he advocates for it.IE he reminds me there is untapped wealth there.
And then on the other side of the issue there's exers.You sing the praises of the powers of the intellect over this fuzzy thing called the heart.But then you use those same powers to come up with gems like the impulses of the heart are some function of the central nervous system.So love is just some nervous twich is it Nigel?You sound like a fun guy.
Where do you get the idea I have a 'personal need to abandon all discrimination and recapture those early crib-state sensations'.Are you are so eager to put premies into your nice little box so you can ridicule them?I said quite clearly both my mind and my heart are friends.That means I am not abandoning either.That means I'm not going to let my central nervous system have the final say either.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 23:30:46 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: o
Subject: Superficial response
Message:
O, you wrote:

And your mind can definitely be the servant of your heart,IE your heart rules.But can your heart ever be the servant of your mind? Whew,that sounds like a recipe for tyanny.

And I commented, to which you have not replied:

I don't know you, you don't know me. But why did you interpret working together as absolutely some kind of master/servant relationship that was not neccessarily implied?

Now you're telling Nigel;

I said quite clearly both my mind and my heart are friends.That means I am not abandoning either.That means I'm not going to let my central nervous system have the final say either.

What's it going to be, O, or is this the usual premmie doublespeak?

Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 15:47:58 (GMT)
From: O
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: Superficial response
Message:
Sorry stoner I didn't have a lot of time yesterday to answer.Why the servant/master relationship?Well because I have been indoctrinated into a dangerous cult and that;s the only way I'm allowed to see the world.Just kidding.
I said it because your hand does not move by itself,it is moved by the brain,or the wind.For non-autoreflex actions the brain doesn't control itself,it is controlled by something else.Maybe the mind,maybe the heart,maybe the consiousness,open to debate.There is where it gets dodgey and there is the arae rife for debate.We all have our theories but who knows?So one of the parties controls the other.Thus the master/servant analogy.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jun 15, 2000 at 02:59:43 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: O
Subject: Excuse me O, but your response denies what you
Message:
Excuse me O, but your response denies what you yourself have written. Does 'k' always conflate mindless arrogance with ignorance through 'the breath?' I wouldn't have believed it a few months ago if someone had tried to tell me! 'A little learning (might) be a dangerous thing,' but a little of m's 'k' can be deadly to the heart and mind. I truly feel sorry for you.

Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 02:12:00 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: O
Subject: To O: your response would be appreciated
Message:
To O: your response would be appreciated :-)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 23:11:18 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: None
To: o
Subject: Superficial response
Message:
Good response O. At least the ex's will keep you on your toes and get you using those brain neurons. See O , that's one of the things I really disliked about premiedom. Everyone listens to the one great voice. Maharaji. There was no challenging debate as goes on here (some of the time). open debate and heartfelt questioning were discouraged. I brought this up to a travelling instuctor just before my final break and he said ,'what would happen if premies were allowed and encouraged to express their minds openly? It would be utter chaos.' That says it all!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 20:18:51 (GMT)
From: O
Email: None
To: Keith
Subject: Superficial response
Message:
I personally have always felt the freedom to discuss ideas with premies.I have done so with every premie I've gotten close to.Problem is its hard to find people amongst any group,premies or otherwise,with enough intelectual prowess to go the distance.When I find them I love the interaction ,unless they are abusive snobs about it,I won't mention any names.
But I know what your talking about.I have never been one to fan the flame of doubts amongst premies,just as I don't tend to do that around anyone else with beliefs.But as rule I believe Maharaji has always promoted us challenging belief.Do you remember all the times he warned about concepts.Another reason I don't incite doubt among premies is because I funamentally do not doubt Knowledge based on years of practising it.And I trust Maharaji as my master based on my experiences with Knowledge and his uncanny ability to guide me along the 'path of Knowledge'.
I have of course wondered about his persoanl life but end up giving him the latitude to have one.You see its entirely possible to discount someone's capabilities in one area because there is doubt about them in another.President Clinton is a good example of that.Just because he got head from someone other than his wife does that mean he wasn't a capable president?What's the requirement for a president?We all have different ones and it's changed over time.What's the requirement for a Master?We all seem to have different ones there too.Mine is pretty simple.That he shows me the truth and cares for my well-being which Maharaji most certainly without a doubt has done.Some will no doubt argue he doesn't care about them but I've seen differently.Every change he's made has benefited me.
Cheers Keith
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 22:55:59 (GMT)
From: keith
Email: None
To: O
Subject: Superficial response
Message:
I'll get around to responding to this thoughtful post in a new thread. Otherwise we'll run our of index space.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 03:38:25 (GMT)
From: X-bill
Email: None
To: O
Subject: O
Message:
Hell O,
The advice to feel your breath combined with the view that there is a kindly, quirky, power that hopes you will find lots to love here and (by the way), watch out for all the obstacles that get in the way of living beautifully. The obstacles can trip you up and even halt you in your progress of following your dreams.

That kind of advice, handed out once with no strings attached would have been nice!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 22:19:51 (GMT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: O
Subject: 10 Positives.
Message:
O, your post is a perfect example of the duality promulgated in M's cult. I can't add much to what Gregg said, but would like to reiterate that it is not an either/or situation. As long as you cling to to this false dichotomy you will be a slave to both, whipsawed back and forth. No fun riding the bliss/bummer roller coaster. It fosters a dependency on M which is not healthy or conducive to growth.

Have you seen any enlightened people amongst M's devotees? Elaine admits she hasn't. What about you?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 22:10:00 (GMT)
From: Hal
Email: None
To: O
Subject: Best friends....
Message:
can get you into an aweful lot of trouble. As a youth all my scrapes with the law happened in the company of a best friend.

Those people in Jonestown were really following their hearts when it was suggested that they leave the U.S. and follow Jim Jones to S. America. How do you know that it's the 'heart' you're following. When people say heart in my opinion they're just following emotion. ' I know we only met 2 hrs ago but my heart tells me that we should get married.'
Get my point? No doubt premies would condescendingly say something like well you just know , or it's 'that' experience but I just don't buy that 'heart' stuff anymore without a darned good logical thought process going alongside it.

My heart tells me 'be free', ' don't sell your sovereignty to anyone again', and my mind agrees!

Hal

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 22:18:02 (GMT)
From: O
Email: None
To: Hal
Subject: Best friends....
Message:
So you do take your heart's advice even though as a general rule you don't trust hearts.Hmmmm,quite a pickle Hal.Quite a pickle.You must be running everything past your other friend before you conclude a decision.So which friend has the most say in your world?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 22:23:32 (GMT)
From: Hal
Email: None
To: O
Subject: Best friends....
Message:
Aww come on O. I'm no lawyer, you know what I mean!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 23:07:27 (GMT)
From: O
Email: None
To: Hal
Subject: Best friends....
Message:
Come on Hal it's a fair question,which one has the final say in your world?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 21:53:55 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: None
To: O
Subject: 10 Positives.
Message:
Also will respond later to your interesting post. Thanks.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 20:52:57 (GMT)
From: Gregg
Email: None
To: O
Subject: 'obsever'
Message:
What if you could learn to love both friends?

This way your happiness is not dependent on your ability to shut away your 'negative' friend in a dark closet while you live in blissful ignorance.

The mind and the heart are both gifts from God...or from 'the creative force of the universe' as evolutionist/philosopher Frederick puts it.

In the post-premie years, accepting who we are, ceasing the active suppression of our thinking parts, we know a deeper happiness, one based on living life fully, not on trying to grasp the elusive bluebird of happiness.

I'm not putting you down; I'm saying this is how it's been for me.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 21:51:05 (GMT)
From: O
Email: None
To: Gregg
Subject: 'obsever'
Message:
Agreed embrace and love both friends but how many BEST friends is it possible to have?I don't know about you but I don't have room on my dance card for more than one.Which is the one you love the deepest and whose advice you tend to accept more readily?Which is the one whose counsel you value the most because they are most in synch with you and your rythm.A best friend is a treasure to have.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 23:39:00 (GMT)
From: Anon
Email: None
To: O
Subject: 'obsever'
Message:
Ok, so you're not going to drop this who is your best friend line of questioning. My answer would be that it is a matter of trust. In the case of Maharaji, obviously as a premie one knows (ie: is strongly convinced) that one is following one's heart by following his advice. I thought this and thus was inspired to and follow his advice to surrender the reins ofmy life etc. in the ashram. To do this there was trust involved. That trust grew because I had had good feelings from knowledge and credited him as the donor of these experiences etc. I later felt let down after my experience in the ashram went sour and also perceiving various hypocrisies and cultic mechanisms at play eroded my trust. So now it is harder to trust him or perceive him, as I once did, as my best friend.

I guess another analogy is that of the Pied Piper, who once was trusted but later mistrusted. Therefore if one equates the 'alluring voice' of his pipe to the alluring call of the heart, one can see how those children who, albeit too late, realised they were led astray, ceased to trust him as their benefactor, best friend or whatever you want to call him. It makes no difference.
I maintain that it was my heart that compelled me to get real about Maharaji and question him, you will probably insist ad infinitum that it was the mind. I don't think you will find many here who are prepared to say that their heart tells them to trust Maharaji as their best friend.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 00:31:58 (GMT)
From: O
Email: None
To: Anon
Subject: 'obsever'
Message:
Anon I simply asked which 'friend' has the final say in your world,your heart or your mind.Forget about Maharaji,forget about things external to you.Between your heart and mind which is your best friend?
Or like Lotus Eater does your rejection of him not allow you to diferentiate between these two friends?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 08:47:52 (GMT)
From: Anon
Email: None
To: O
Subject: 'obsever'
Message:
Anon I simply asked which 'friend' has the final say in your world,your heart or your mind.Forget about Maharaji,forget about things external to you.Between your heart and mind which is your best friend? Or like Lotus Eater does your rejection of him not allow you to diferentiate between these two friends?

I do not embrace the simple analogy of the heart being a better friend than the mind. I think that such a simplistic notion, far from offering a simple and clear analogy, does not do the complex and marvelous workings of a human being justice by any means. So I am reluctant to say that I give one 'the final say.'

However, since you insist on conducting your line of questioning within this analogy, I believe that, on the matter of my 'rejection of him', my heart rules my head. Essentially, my best friend is ME, whether you call it heart or soul or conscience or consciousness or whatever. So OK, I am saying that my heart has the final say if you will.

Let me ask you - can you describe, or expand a little on the way you differentiate these two 'friends'. Please give some examples of what these two friends tell you that is so conflicting.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 18:41:56 (GMT)
From: O
Email: None
To: Anon
Subject: 'obsever'
Message:
Sure.Some examples of the conflict might be you really need and want to take a holiday but have a hard time justifying the time or money.You know somebody who you have every reason to not care about,IE they don’t conform to your own acceptable standards,but you still like them.You are faced with a career decision that means a cut in pay and less security but it’s what you really want to do.Or how about you spend all your time fulfilling your familial and societal obligations and duties because it was ingrained in you since childhood that it is good to do that but you never get around to doing what’s good for you.
All of these require one or the otehr friend to have the final say.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 23:02:54 (GMT)
From: Anon
Email: None
To: O
Subject: Phone a friend?
Message:
'Observer' said:
Some examples of the conflict might be you really need and want to take a holiday but have a hard time justifying the time or money.You know somebody who you have every reason to not care about,IE they don’t conform to your own acceptable standards,but you still like them.You are faced with a career decision that means a cut in pay and less security but it’s what you really want to do.Or how about you spend all your time fulfilling your familial and societal obligations and duties because it was ingrained in you since childhood that it is good to do that but you never get around to doing what’s good for you.
All of these require one or the otehr friend to have the final say.

I think all of these choices would require me to have the final say and me to take responsibility for the outcome.
The way I would put it is that none of these examples demand anything more than one exersizing some straightforward conscious decision making. One's ability to make prudent decisions is proportional to the degree to which one can predict the outcome of either course of action. I ask myself should I do this or that. After some consideration I make a decision to the best of my ability.

As for saying that one of two particular friends have the final say...well let's just say that I prefer to take full responsibility for the decisions I make, which are daily of the nature you describe ...I really is of no use to me to consider that I am consulting inner friends. I just weigh up what's best. Sure I might consult my conscience - sure I might exercize my integrity, sure I might ask an external friend for advice, sure I might have to get my priorities straightened out - sure I might have to resist being impulsive etc. - but the final say is mine not some best friend's.

Are you saying that your better nature, your intelligence is your best friend?..I can just about buy that 'poetic' manner of speaking - but do you see that this 'two friends' way of describing ones inner dialogue sounds very schizophrenic??

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 22:59:20 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: None
To: O
Subject: 'obsever'
Message:
O. You are right. If we could put the semantics aside, all of us, and realise that 'we' all experience dualities and conflicts in our lives at some time or another and that there are differant parts of oneself regardless of the labels we use to describe them , and that we do make choices sometimes, one part over another, or one set of considerations over another, or more doing what one feels or needs rather than reason or conditioning might dictate, then surely there can be no argument between us. I think what some of the ex's here object to is the way heart and mind concepts are tied into a trust of Maharaji and his ideas as against thinking for oneself. Indeed if I were to use this conceptual model of heart and mind , as I do sometimes , I would also extend it to 'the crowd within'. A human being is rather more complex than having just two vying or complimentary parts. But I again stress, that for me, the attempt to reconcile the 'parts' and aspire towards 'wholeness' or 'unity' is more important than compartmentalising.erhaps you would agree with that anyway. Do you?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 01:02:42 (GMT)
From: O
Email: None
To: Keith
Subject: 'obsever'
Message:
I agree with most of what you said Keith.We are a whole comprised of many parts.I do think it is unbalanced to think that if you support being aware of these multiple aspects it leads to scizophrenia.And its equally as stupid to think that because someone holds one aspect in higher regard means they abandon the other.Its just a case of being aware of what makes you tick and setting some guideposts to follow.
I hold the heart in high regard because after following all my fancy ideas and intelectual musings at the end of the day I find my comfort in the refuge of the heart.As for what Maharaji has to do with it,nobody before him told me the refuge was there and nobody but him reminds me how good a place it is.Silly me that I need such a place of refuge,huh?
I really resnt the constant stereotyping of exers that if someone feels this way they have abandoned their intelligence.Personally I love thinking.I do it most of the time. :)
regards
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 01:24:02 (GMT)
From: o
Email: None
To: O
Subject: one more thing
Message:
I'm not saying poeple can't discover and appreciate the the refuge of the heart without Maharaji.I try and carry on without listening to him all the time,I really do.It's just that after awhile I find myself losing interest in going there.And believe it or not after a while I start to feel a little empty,whether I realize it or not.Then one day I find myself listening to him again and realizing again what a treasure there is in that old soft spot and instead of shunning it I need to explore it.
So hey kids,if you don't need that kind of encouragement and still keep the dorrway well oiled ,more power to ya.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 23:10:57 (GMT)
From: Anon
Email: None
To: Keith
Subject: 'obsever'
Message:
Very well put Keith. Thanks.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 01:50:56 (GMT)
From: Gregg
Email: None
To: O
Subject: 'listen to your heart'
Message:
If you re-read Anon's response, you will learn that it was his HEART that helped him free himself from a dubious guru's influence. For me, it was also my heart...and my mind.

MY MIND!!! Oh, the horror! No, just my brain. Think about stuff, you know? Like what kind of backpack to buy? Only one's spiritual path is a more important decsion. Think about it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 20:58:13 (GMT)
From: Susan
Email: None
To: Gregg
Subject: well said Gregg (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 18:38:03 (GMT)
From: Bill...2040
Email: None
To: Keith
Subject: 10 Positives.
Message:
HI Kieth,

Maybe you want to rewrite the sentence 'people who were fanatical followers' and 'had a tendency towards fanatacism.'

I think you may want to take another look at the 'devotees' and
gopi's and give it another go.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 17:17:16 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Keith
Subject: Reaction to 10 Positives.
Message:
These 10 positives needs a lot of work.

(1) Wording needs to be more specific. What do you mean by 'his methods'? Do you mean the four techniques specifically or the other 'methods' of listening and participation (satsang and service) that go along with them? Also the 'may' is inappropriate since there is absolutely no doubt about the fact that he is not 'The Only One...' If the wording here was as specific as possible, this would probably turn into a valid positive point about meditation itself rather than about Rawat's cult and particular methods.

(2) This positive, even if true, is invalidated by the number of practicing premies who have actually committed suicide. I've known some of them. A personal friend of mine went to a Miami program in the mid-80's. A few days after he got home, he shot himself in the head. As for hopeless people finding some hope in Rawat, the question is whether it is a real hope or a pipe dream, not whether they were pepped up for awhile. Many hopeless people get 'born again' for awhile with fundamental Christianity of some sort, and then they peter out. Same here. The question is: does it last?

(3) This is entirely personal. If your purpose, Keith, is to outline 10 positives about your own personal experience, then it's okay. But if you are attempting to illucidate 10 intrinsically authentic positives about Rawat's cult, then you have to be more general and all-inclusive. We've all had positive experiences, some at satsang, some at large events, some on LSD, etc. But the point, I should think, is what is actually truly of value and recommendable to everyone. I certainly would never recommend that my nieces and nephews get high on acid, even though I learned a lot from my own experiences on that drug. Same with Rawat. I would never recommend that the young people I know become premies. Would you recommend it to your children, nieces and nephews, and other young people???

(4) Again, too personal and not a true positive. Every single human being is learning a lot, sometimes in very painful ways.

(5) This is ridiculous. He has several large homes, a personal jet, a pleasure boat, several luxury cars, designer clothes, all gained at the expense of other people's donations. He is indeed a 'prime example of dollar grabbing new age spiritual snobbery and greed'.

(6) Rawat's speeches are simplistic pep-talks in which he says the same thing over and over and over again. If this inspires you somehow, then that says something about you, but it does not say anything about Rawat's intinsic value as an inspirational speaker. Many people have listened to him, at public programs for example, and have been very turned-off. I do acknowledge that there is something inherently pleasant about satsang or listening to a sermon, and people who are open to the speaker will gain a benefit. Rawat is not an exception to this general rule, but he is not a superior example by any means, either.

(7) 'He can be humble at times.' This is damning with faint praise, as one immediately wonders about all those other times. Also, calling the master 'humble' is a tricky question. Whether he is truly humble toward God is not for you or I to judge, as we could not possibly know.

(8) Again, damning with faint praise. And, like 7, we do well to gauge our own wisdom, not the wisdom of others. Some people think Rawat is a wise man, others do not. Who can truely judge and therefore make this claim?

(9) Not understandable. Exchange the word 'He' with the word 'prison' or a thousand other words and you have a true statement. So what? This point just isn't understandable as stated.

(10) This is a very debatable point, one that I disagree with. The fact is that most people who receive Knowledge reject Rawat. The number of Americans who have received Knowledge must be something like 60,000. Off those, less than 8,000 consider Rawat to be the master that he claims to be. And Rawat has done absolutely nothing whatsoever to counteract the 'negative, selfish, and violent behavior of human beings on this planet.

Keith, your 10 negative points (below) are better stated than these positive ones, although they are redundant to each other in many ways, and in general they simply state that Rawat is a fraud! As such, they invalidate the 10 attempted positive points. Therefore, you are not really taking the middle road with a balanced viewpoint. You are actually arguing against yourself in a logically inconsistent manner. And, another point: what you call fanaticism is merely self-consistency. I grant you that some exes are angrier than others, but that is a personal difference that should be respected, since people have experienced varying degrees of hurt and disillusionment. I see you as someone who is struggling to hold on to some of the illusion, which is understandable. It is a process, one that we are all engaged in. You yourself admit that there are two opposite 'sets' in your mind. It's time to integrate, reject what is false and become whole in truth.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 13, 2000 at 00:00:59 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: Reaction to reaction to 10 Positives.
Message:
Way,you have so addressed each of my ten positives in detail , so that I feel somewhat overwhelmed. Because even though I want to respond to each of your criticisms it is getting a bit 'much'. Perhaps I shall copy your post to my database and work on responses one by one. I'll try that.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 21:52:22 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: Reaction to 10 Positives.
Message:
Way, I respect your well thought out posts but I can see we shall have to agree to disagree on some points. And yet there are some things you say that really get me questioning my own views. That's good. Just give me time to respond to you in the way you deserve. I find you and la-ex especially estimulating. No offense to the many other fine posters around these parts. This is still one of the more interesting forums on the net for me.
Anyway I've got to run now.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 22:01:29 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Keith
Subject: Reaction to 10 Positives.
Message:
Keith,

I am not at all adverse to acknowledging the positive side to the practice of Knowledge. I think you are making a possibly valid effot. I know there were many positive things for me personally. But we have to state these positives carefully and give credit where credit is due. Like O points out in this thread, Rawat always tries to identify himself with 'the heart' and 'the truth.' But Rawat takes false credit for these things, and people like O accept the equation just like Rawat wants. No, no, we must distinquish.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 23:55:29 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: Reaction to 10 Positives.
Message:
Way, you like to make the point that I need to be very careful in the words I use to express what I do. Of course I agree. Oh if only I had the luxery of time undistracted by a demanding twelve year old,phone calls and countless other daily issues. And I would say this sorely applies to many who post here. If only they could be more careful in the way they express. Some choose not to. It is their choice to express in ways that are so emotive and inbalanced that only truth suffers in the end. I would choose to scrutinise my words more carefully. And I appreciate you pointing out to me the need for this. I'll try.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 20:44:48 (GMT)
From: Gregg
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: Reaction to 10 Positives.
Message:
Good points! I especially like this question: Would you recommend Rawat's trip to young people you know?

I'd never exactly thought of it that way, but I too have had good experiences with Guru Ji and LSD...and although I'd recommend neither to young people, I'd much rather they choose acid than cult life. Most people get tired of LSD pretty quickly, but some people have spent decades in cults. Much more dangerous stuff.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 15:38:59 (GMT)
From: la-ex
Email: None
To: Keith
Subject: 10 Positives.
Message:
Keith-I have just read,rather quickly, your 10 negatives and 10 positives and feel that you are onto something.I think your perspective is well balanced and thoughtful, and agree with some of your comments about extremists on any side.I will comment more after I read and digest them further.
Would you consider working on these and polishing them up?
I think your approach, which definitely points out many of the major flaws, but also acknowledges some of the positives,could really reach a lot of the premies who are wondering what to do.
I am a recent ex, as it seems you are, and I feel that too much negativity from the ex-side only reinforces what m says about the exes-that they are negative,caught up in the past, angry for no reason etc..We all know this is bullshit, but it is possible for us to fall into this trap, which m can then exploit, as he tells the few remaining loyal premies to stay away from us because we have nothing of value to say.So, what I am saying is,I think you are well thought out,willing to listen and dialog, and it is this type of willingness to dialog that I think can bring sense to a lot of people out there.
As a recent ex, in touch with a number of premies who are still involved,I can tell you that there are a lot of premies who are sitting on very uncomfortable doubts and questions about m.
They don't necessarily speak them publicly, but they are there.
This site can be very powerful in showing them another side, and I think that relevant dialog is an integral part of that.
I think that your 10p's and 10n's (kind of sounds like david letterman's 10 reasons to...)are helpful, and combined with things like the recent letter from the MRC and the 9 points from Way, could and should be sent to instructors and community contacts all over the world.
Thanks, let's talk again-
LA_EX
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 21:47:16 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: vayukeith@netscape.net
To: la-ex
Subject: 10 Positives.
Message:
A few words la-ex. I feel your 9 objections and my p's and n's and any other such listings could be worked on and used to some advantage. I am willing to discuss this with you further. My e-mail address is above if you want to contact me that way. Although I have no qualms about it being in the open here.
Your post is the easiest to respond to as we seem to be in sympathetico with each other. I'll catch up later.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 22:00:07 (GMT)
From: Keith
Email: None
To: La ex and way
Subject: correction.
Message:
Sorry. Too much of a hurry. I realise the 9 objections were way's and not la-ex's. I think therefore that the three of us could enter into a dialogue about doing something worthwhile with these listings. They could be of some help to both premies and recent ex's.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 14:55:42 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Keith
Subject: New Age = Unable to See through Bullshit? (nt)
Message:
fffffff
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 11:07:40 (GMT)
From: JtF
Email: None
To: Keith
Subject: 10 Positives.?BULLSHIT!!!
Message:
This allows you to ignore the fact you were conned. It is very difficult to admit to ourselves that we spent so much time and energy falling for Rawat's God scam. These experiences you mention are nothing different than those reported by members of other foolish cults.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index