Forum V: Archive
Compiled: Tues, Jan 30, 2001 at 13:25:46 (GMT)
From: Jan 24, 2001 To: Jan 29, 2001 Page: 3 Of: 5


Jim -:- Maharaji in Oxnard -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 14:20:16 (GMT)
__ Helen -:- Maharaji in Oxnard -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 22:35:10 (GMT)
__ Way -:- Warning to Jim -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:51:28 (GMT)
__ Joe -:- Maharaji is a LIAR, but what is Turner? -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:30:06 (GMT)
__ __ AJW -:- Turner's in a mess Joe. -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 11:15:04 (GMT)
__ Sandy -:- Jim is hedging his bets -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:06:22 (GMT)
__ __ Steve Quint -:- You're Joking, Right? -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 21:24:44 (GMT)
__ __ __ Sandy -:- Yes and No, sincerely -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 00:36:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Steve Quint -:- Sincerity Without Humility Is Meaningless -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 16:48:39 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Michael Dettmers -:- Don't abuse sincerity, Sandy -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 16:31:17 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Kelly -:- Hi Michael. Talking of drivel... -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 18:21:32 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Michael Dettmers -:- The package has not yet arrived (nt) -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 22:39:47 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ bill -:- Yes and No, sincerely -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 04:12:13 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- See? You did it again! -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 00:50:48 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ baz -:- plot -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 01:51:01 (GMT)
__ __ cq -:- Jim is part of the divine plan too, Sandy ... -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 20:39:34 (GMT)
__ __ AJW -:- Thus spake the Lard. -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 20:31:50 (GMT)
__ __ JHB -:- Sincerity? Don't make me puke! -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 19:48:36 (GMT)
__ __ __ Sandy -:- There some bad in the best of us -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 00:42:13 (GMT)
__ __ Francesca -:- Don't get your hopes up Sandy -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 17:09:40 (GMT)
__ Kelly -:- Maharaji in Oxnard -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 15:40:19 (GMT)
__ __ Marianne -:- Revisionism -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 17:20:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ Kelly -:- Revisionism? This is Abridged Too Far! -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:20:22 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Marianne -:- Legal misrepresentation??? -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:36:34 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ LL.B at the Bar -:- Legal opinion misrepresentation??? -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 00:33:57 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Marianne -:- Greetings Catweasel--damages for cult fraud -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 12:11:18 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Brendan Murphy -:- Such a long Bow you draw!! -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 12:35:48 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Marianne -:- Where do you practice? -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 13:30:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Brendan Murphy -:- Where do you practice? -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 14:42:41 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Marianne -:- Feel the need to squelch me, do ya Brendan? -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 15:09:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Brendan Murphy -:- I Feel the need to ask for the truth Marianne -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 15:41:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Marianne -:- What are 'punitative' damages, pray tell? nt -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 15:50:08 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ gerry -:- Legal opinion misrepresentation??? -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 01:16:16 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Brendan Murphy -:- Legal opinion misrepresentation??? -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 03:56:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Kelly -:- Legal misrepresentation??? -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:51:22 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Marianne -:- Does it identify who does the editing? -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 19:01:08 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Ian Dury -:- Dunrite Productions -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 21:29:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Patrick Conlon -:- EV spin doctors are secret -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 19:26:08 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Marianne -:- Oh, the words are VERY important to this lawyer -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 19:42:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- Maharaji's 'satsang' has always been edited -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 20:01:41 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joy -:- Maharaji's 'satsang' has always been edited -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 22:37:58 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- call it 'ongoing revisionism' - -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 21:13:26 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Patrick Conlon -:- Marianne, Fraudulent misrepresentation -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 19:53:50 (GMT)
__ __ __ Sandy -:- Revisionism -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 17:44:12 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Lurker #27 -:- Revisionism -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 17:54:52 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ gerry -:- Revisionism -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:17:43 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Lurker#27 -:- gerry - different strokes. . . NT -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:27:59 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Sandy -:- Revisionism -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:02:28 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- What you're doing, Sandy, depends on one thing -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 23:38:37 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sandy -:- My motive is not based on fooling anyone. (nt) -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 00:44:27 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Mickey the Pharisee -:- My motive is not based on fooling anyone. -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 05:00:51 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Lurker #27 -:- Revisionism -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:24:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sandy -:- Revisionism -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:40:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Lurker #27 -:- Sandy - one last concept! -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 21:37:17 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sandy -:- To L27 -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 00:49:11 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- And what a dumb concept it is! -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 23:48:49 (GMT)
__ Way -:- No, Rawat, you're not even the filament -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 15:30:18 (GMT)
__ __ Brian Smith -:- I absolutely love this post, as the truth always -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 07:38:59 (GMT)
__ __ bill -:- blacklight, insane fuck-nt -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 04:18:56 (GMT)
__ __ Disculta -:- Grateful, but not to him -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 15:47:11 (GMT)
__ toby -:- Maharaji in Oxnard -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 15:16:25 (GMT)
__ __ Sandy -:- Maharaji in Oxnard -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 15:56:02 (GMT)
__ __ __ baz -:- four techniques -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 20:41:21 (GMT)
__ __ __ JHB -:- Appropriate responses to assistance -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 23:01:15 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Sandy -:- To JHB -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 00:57:04 (GMT)
__ __ __ Joy -:- Maharaji in That Fancy Aston Martin Has a Pricetag -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 22:52:18 (GMT)
__ __ __ Tim G -:- Cul-de Sac...Sandy -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:53:07 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Sandy -:- Tim -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:58:38 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ gerry -:- Wake Up you gas bag... -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 17:04:48 (GMT)
__ __ __ Way -:- To Sandy -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:40:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Sandy -:- To Way -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:56:49 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ baz -:- To Way -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 21:11:59 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ janet -:- how does showing or telling people -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 09:40:28 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Sandy -:- Well, since you put it like that.... -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 12:45:47 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Way -:- no, no, no, those are not options! -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 17:21:27 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jean-Paul -:- m is superficial -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:08:59 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Francesca -:- Very true Jean-Paul -- great post! (OT) -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:35:13 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jean-Paul -:- no need saviour -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 20:57:31 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Disculta -:- exactement Jean-Paul! -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:44:32 (GMT)
__ __ __ gerry -:- You buttwipe Sandy -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:08:31 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- Oh Stoooonoooooorrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!! -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 23:55:22 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- That's my recillection too, Jim -nt- -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 04:45:32 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- What exactly do you remember, John? (nt) -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 20:00:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- Not a lot, I'm sorry to say -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 22:08:25 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Sandy -:- Buttwipes get rid of shit, you need 'em pal -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:19:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ janet -:- animals don't use toilet paper, and only -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 10:00:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ gerry -:- Having a little relapse, sheep? -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:29:06 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Sandy -:- Having a little relapse, sheep? -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:43:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ toby -:- high sandy -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 11:35:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ baz -:- well said -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 01:34:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ gerry -:- baz, you do know... -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 16:35:31 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ baz -:- reply sent to wrong message -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 20:47:50 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ gerry -:- Yeah, yer right, sheep, can't beat your logic, -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:59:13 (GMT)

Jean-Paul -:- Guru dead? -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 07:41:08 (GMT)
__ JTF -:- Thanks, this is great--a sample -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 09:10:55 (GMT)
__ __ Scott T. -:- Thanks, this is great--a sample -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 10:23:58 (GMT)
__ __ __ JTF -:- Kramer?...this is an interview with.... -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 10:39:48 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Kramer?...this is an interview with.... -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 15:38:40 (GMT)
__ __ JTF -:- Kitsch...an explanation of cult arrogance -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 09:22:25 (GMT)
__ Steve Quint -:- Guru dead? -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 08:16:43 (GMT)

Kelly -:- Maharaji is a Moron... -:- Thurs, Jan 25, 2001 at 23:18:14 (GMT)
__ Charles S -:- All part of the 'Radhaswammy Whammy'... -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 19:57:55 (GMT)
__ __ Francesca -:- Great post Chas! n/t -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 23:42:57 (GMT)
__ AJW -:- Last Chance Saloon -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 10:42:57 (GMT)
__ __ Kelly -:- Last Chance Saloon -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 13:50:11 (GMT)
__ __ __ AJW -:- It's collapsing alright Kelly. -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 10:12:58 (GMT)
__ SB -:- Maharaji is a Moron... Yeap -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 05:56:45 (GMT)
__ Marianne -:- Audacity of 'Remember me when you die' circa 2001 -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 03:57:46 (GMT)
__ __ Windflower -:- I guess we could call it .... -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 21:55:24 (GMT)
__ __ __ Marianne -:- Greetings, lapsed Catholic (I suspect) -nt -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 12:01:33 (GMT)
__ __ salam -:- Your e-mail (OT) -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:17:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ Marianne -:- Done --nt -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 17:31:11 (GMT)
__ Robyn -:- great post Kelly! -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 03:47:58 (GMT)
__ __ Kelly -:- Bridge freezes before ...duh? -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 15:55:24 (GMT)
__ __ __ Robyn -:- Bridge freezes before ...duh? -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 01:40:52 (GMT)
__ Tim G -:- M for Meglomania -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 00:40:07 (GMT)
__ Forum Admin -:- Maharaji is a Moron... -:- Thurs, Jan 25, 2001 at 23:29:49 (GMT)
__ __ bill -:- Egad! I was a bona fide moron for decades!-nt -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 04:47:34 (GMT)
__ __ Kelly -:- Oh well, in that case..Maharaji is also -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 00:09:04 (GMT)
__ __ __ Patrick Conlon -:- Kelly, you are wonderful -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 02:28:39 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Kelly -:- Kelly, you are wonderful -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 14:08:24 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ AJW -:- It's 'service' Patrick. -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 10:52:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ Joy -:- Plagiarized from Buddhism -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 01:02:16 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ X -:- Plagiarized from Buddhism -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 02:21:07 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Are you Chris Dickey reincarnated? -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 13:05:38 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Good call. -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 17:12:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- IF this is CD, then he's a real 'good guy' -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 23:58:21 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- IF X is CD, then he's the misogynist creep ... -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 05:01:37 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ X -:- IF -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 07:49:51 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- ARE YOU CD OR NOT? (nt) -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 15:56:21 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ tim G -:- get real X -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 09:51:37 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Pauline Premie -:- Remember Maharaji when I die -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 01:56:27 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Super Brat -:- Oh Pauline, but you are already saved -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 06:09:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Pauline Premie -:- You lack understanding and synchronization -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 17:55:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ The Church Lady -:- Exactly Pauline, Remember Maharaji when I die -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 02:37:00 (GMT)
__ __ Francesca -:- Way to go, Kelly! n/t -:- Thurs, Jan 25, 2001 at 23:37:22 (GMT)
__ __ __ salam -:- he also sucks because -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 00:13:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Patrick Conlon -:- Salam, Rawat sucks? I am so jealous... -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 02:41:57 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ bill -:- 'inner lips' -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 05:08:22 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Patrick Conlon -:- Patrick's 'inner lips' -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 05:28:39 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ red butler -:- redux -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 15:36:06 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ salam -:- At last, someone else figured it out -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 04:59:22 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- At last, someone else figured it out -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 17:19:34 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ salam -:- dream on, making sense. -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:00:41 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Patrick Conlon -:- G'day mate -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 05:30:06 (GMT)

Susan -:- Bringing Turner's response to active here -:- Thurs, Jan 25, 2001 at 23:05:41 (GMT)
__ Turner -:- Caring -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 01:32:44 (GMT)
__ __ JohnT -:- Caring -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 05:17:41 (GMT)
__ __ bill -:- 'apparently not'.?..not correct analysis-nt -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 04:27:41 (GMT)
__ bill -:- Bringing Turner's response to active here -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 04:58:22 (GMT)
__ Earon Kavanagh -:- Turner: Your assertion on Mike D's baffle-bab -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 03:42:20 (GMT)
__ Earon Kavanagh -:- “the ex-premie formerly known as Ed” -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 02:21:09 (GMT)
__ __ Brian S -:- “the ex-premie formerly known as Ed” -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 06:59:42 (GMT)
__ __ __ Earon Kavanagh -:- Comments to Brian on 'Premie/Ex-premie' -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 08:54:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ JHB -:- Earon - you're a new ex-premie -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 23:32:11 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Earon Kavanagh -:- JHB: Earon - you're a new ex-premie -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 07:56:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Brian Smith -:- Comments to Earon on Brain games -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 22:11:45 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Earon Kavanagh -:- Comments to Earon on Brain games -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 23:11:34 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Brian Smith -:- Comments to Earon on Anger -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 01:29:24 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Earon Kavanagh -:- Brian: Comments to Earon on Anger -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 09:52:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Brian Smith -:- Comments to Earon on understanding -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 18:47:27 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Brian smith -:- Earon I know you are out there, you're not angry -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 09:39:49 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- The 'magic' of words and cross-examination -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 03:26:13 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Brian Smith -:- The 'magic' of words and cross-examination -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 05:47:30 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ JohnT -:- Pardon me for mentioning this ... -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 13:52:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Earon Kavanagh -:- Pardon me for mentioning this ... -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:31:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ ... but did you ever hear -:- ... of shooting yourself in the foot? -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 23:33:19 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Earon Kavanagh -:- ... of shooting yourself in the foot? -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 07:59:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- You lost me ... -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 16:30:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- Why put limits on the power of dialogue? -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 13:51:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Earon Kavanagh -:- Why put limits on the power of dialogue? -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 17:19:09 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ EXiT -:- Comments to Brian on 'Premie/Ex-premie' -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 09:29:24 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Earon Kavanagh -:- To Exit: On Whackin Oneself -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 15:54:59 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- This unfortunate topic deserves discussion -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 00:26:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Earon Kavanagh -:- Jim: This unfortunate topic deserves discussion -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 08:22:52 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ EXiT -:- thanks for coming clean! nt -:- Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 00:58:54 (GMT)
__ Joe -:- What the hell if Turner talking about? -:- Thurs, Jan 25, 2001 at 23:38:08 (GMT)
__ Susan -:- how important? -:- Thurs, Jan 25, 2001 at 23:36:33 (GMT)


Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 14:20:16 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Maharaji in Oxnard
Message:
Here's the latest Hamster Chatter from Oxnard this month:

Amongst all the things that happen in this life, what is the most important? That one that really addresses my existence? Knowing quite well that we come from the same magical dirt, and have the same molecules, as an eggplant. But instead of a purple thing hanging off of a little plant, here a moving, thinking existence was created. A body, eyes, mind, brain, ears. Which can think, feel, touch, see, experience and enjoy.
And what a palette! Doubt and clarity. My goodness, those are incredibly strong things. Opposite to each other, but both, incredibly strong. And with it, a bunch of paint brushes, lots of paint, and an empty canvas. Of course, our first thought is, 'Why do I have to paint? Why can't I just sit here?” Fine. You don't have to paint. You can sit there and look at this white canvas all your life.

Or you could say, 'I'm just going to do what I think I should do.” That's painting by numbers. It makes your life easy, and it works really well, so far you don't show your painting to anyone. Because the other person may say, 'Hey, I did the same thing!”

But think about how incredibly unique you are. You have two eyes, I have two eyes. You have lips, I have lips. You have teeth, I have teeth. You have a nose, I have a nose. So, what's the difference? There are incredible variations, in a combination so subtle that you look different than I do. Nothing is alike. No two sunsets are alike. No two waves are alike, no two snowflake are alike. There are infinite variations.

So here you are. Unique. With an existence to be enjoyed, to be fulfilled. And when I say, 'Enjoy,” I'm not talking about party time. The enjoyment that comes from being fulfilled is different. Being fulfilled means knowing from your heart when that gratitude starts to sing. Your heart dances, and you don't know why.

A long time ago - this is one example I used to give back in the '70's - people would start comparing me to God. 'Are you God?' - that's what they would ask. 'No, I'm not God.' 'So, what are you?' And this is the analogy I used to give. Imagine a big power station. There are big turbines running in there, generating power, and then there are the cables going out from the power station, going to the different transformers, and from those transformers, distributed further. They go into distribution centers and they're distributed even more. Then they go into your city, into your little area and then into your community, and finally that power comes to your house, and, through the wiring in your house, reaches your little outlet.

And from that little outlet it goes through the wires and into the bulb. In the bulb, there is a filament, and when the power goes into that, it lights up. And I would say that's me - the filament. I'm not the power station. The filament is the thinnest part of the whole equation. It is so thin that when the electricity goes through that filament, it lights it up. Whatever it may be, without that filament, there is no light. And if light is what you want, then that's how that is made possible.

[What kind of an answer is that??]

That which is so complicated is made so simple, and Knowledge is the most incredible response to the cry of that heart. Something said, 'I want to be fulfilled.” And someone said, 'Here. Here is a way you can be.” Of all the understandings, that one understanding has to dance. Of all the things that you do in your life, and will do in your life, there will be one that is the most important. And if it is incredibly simple, as simple as taking a breath, then let it be.

So be in that joy. Be content. And then, let it be. Don't make life a mystery that it isn't. Don't make life complicated, which it isn't. It is a very simple rhythm of existence, of coming, of going, of being here. And in this 'being here' is everything. There is you. There is your understanding, there is your capacity to love. There is your capacity to appreciate.

Confusion, believe me, is contagious. There's never been a shortage of it. Once, I was watching this spoof video of mistakes that people have made. And one of them was of a guy who gets the football and starts running. He is really running. He looks behind him, and there's nobody chasing him. He gets to the other end, and he throws the ball down, jumps up and it's like, 'Yes! This is my moment of glory.” And the whole audience is looking at him in total disbelief. He got the ball; he ran with it. There's only one small technicality. He ran the wrong way.

So here you are. This is your moment of glory. You've got the ball. What are you going to do? Some people will ask, 'Is this really a ball? And if this is a ball, how come I've got it?” This is what confusion can do. 'How come I've got it? I wonder what I did in my last lunch break to end up with this ball. '

So what are you going to do? That which doesn't want you to have the ball is tearing down the field, running to get the ball. It's called time; a powerful thing. Nobody has been able to stop the tackle of time. It's strong. It's powerful. But so are you, because you have the ball. Somebody is saying, 'Run that way.' And you're thinking, 'How do I know that's the right way?” The coach is saying, 'Go. Run. Run.” It would have been nice if you had paid attention so you would know which is your side and which is the other side. But now, it's, 'Help, I've got the ball! What do I do with it? This is too much. I don't want the ball. Oh, my god, somebody take it!”

And the big force is coming, with big, eight-foot-wide shoulders, making Popeye look like a little fly. The pounding is heard yards away, the earth is shaking. Those little things that you used to be able to do so easily. That's the earth shaking. I see it in other people, I see it in myself. My eyesight used to be like binoculars. Now, it's not. We think, 'Oh, I just need to get glasses.” To fix it. Maybe it's, 'Oh, my back hurts.' And I take couple of pills. To fix it.

Are you going to run, or are you going to stand in one place and say, 'Oh, my god - what am I going to do with this ball? If I knew it was going to be like this, I would have never picked this game!” But you've got it, so do something.

Then somebody comes and says, 'Look. It's okay. Gather your strength. That big tackler, called time, was always coming. Don't be worried by it. It may seem closer, but it was always running at this speed.' That's one thing that's good about time: it really doesn't accelerate. It stays at the same pace. And what you've got to do is keep your pace clean. Use the tools you've got. That enthusiasm. Those things that seem so tender to you.

Try feeling. Try opening this heart, and, with both hands, try hugging existence. Do you know what that's like? To embrace the advice of the coach who says, 'Don't be so afraid.' To embrace the advice of the Master? And even though whatever the Master gives you is free, the Master's advice is never free. Because if you follow his advice, it will take everything you've got. It will require you to take every moment that you have and put it to use in that enjoyment, in that perfection. Not just bits and pieces of this lifetime, but this whole lifetime.


People might say, 'But what about all the years that have gone by?” No, the day when you awaken is the day you begin to live. The day you form the alliance with the heart is the day you begin to live. That's when the dance happens.

So embrace this life. Embrace this magic. All of it - it's yours. You've got the ball. Run, and score. People come who have run the wrong way. But the game isn't over yet, You've still got the ball. You can still run with it. Run to your heart, and acknowledge your heart. The living will experience the living and there is nothing more living than this breath. There is nothing more living than this heart.

Let the Master show you the shortcuts, so that that which was destined for time can become timeless. That's the quality of the heart. That's what Knowledge is all about. Somebody felt the chain of time, felt the shackles of doubt on their feet, and their heart cried, 'I want to be free.” Other people, may say, 'Oh, yes. We know how you can be more free. We'll chain you more, and then we'll take off a couple of the chains so then you'll feel freer.' If you say, 'But what about the original chains?', they will reply, ' Well, so far you just perceive that you are freer, that's good enough.' No, it's not. Freedom is freedom. It is not something to think about but something to know. It's all there for you to turn within, to accept. To accept the challenge of the heart. And to run. To run with dignity. Not tumbling over yourself, not tripping all over the place. Even if you fall down, don't worry. Grab that ball and run again. Do you best in being conscious. Do your best in being alive. Everything else, somehow, will fall into place.

What's going to happen to you this year? I know one thing that could happen. You could be really happy. That's the possibility that you have been presented with. Take it. Of all the things that might happen, that's possible. And so, make it happen. You've got the ball. Be alive. What more is there?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 22:35:10 (GMT)
From: Helen
Email: None
To: all
Subject: Maharaji in Oxnard
Message:
It's interesting how M sets up the game. He paints the picture that there is one and only one way to be happy--with him and knowledge.

And how life without knowledge is so big and scary.

He's a damn fundamentalist. It's his way or the highway.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:51:28 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Warning to Jim
Message:
There is a post to you from shp about hedging your bets, a few posts below. You should take some deep breaths before you read it.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:30:06 (GMT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Maharaji is a LIAR, but what is Turner?
Message:
I think even premies have to admit that Maharaji lies like a rug.

I listened to his crap in ther 70s and 80s and he NEVER said he was a 'filament.' He DID say he was 'greater than God,' he DID say he was 'THE SUPERIOR POWER IN PERSON,' He DID say he was equivalent to Jesus Christ and Krishna. And I NEVER heard him even ONCE say 'I AM NOT GOD.' He always did a coy wink, wink, trip letting the premies know that's who he was, while at the same time, dressing up as Krishna, having us kiss his feet, and raising not one murmur of protest when he was called 'Lord of the Universe.'

So, Maharaji lies about who he is, or who he thinks he is, he lies about what he did in the past as a 'Master,' he also lies in his personal life by allowing someone else to take the rap when he killed somebody in a car accident, and he also lies when he pretends to be this conservative family man, when at the same time he has a mistress, has sex with his devotees, and takes drugs.

The fact that people like Turner can accept all this and make excuses for him, also says something about people like Turner. Is it delusion, or outright dishonesty? Clearly it's just plain lying when it comes to Maharaji. But what about Turner?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 11:15:04 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Turner's in a mess Joe.
Message:
He's devoted his life to the Lord. He's sincere.

And, as the Lord is infinitely wise and merciful, he wouldn't let Turner spend all those years, believing he was giving himself to the creator when really he was pissing into the wind with the rest of us, would he?

This is the big bit of his life that he's scared to look at.

An image of a person in a room comes to mind. Someone has robbed him, then told him to sit on a chair and not get up or he'll be shot. The robber then leaves, leaving Turner on the chair, thinking there's someone still behind him ready to shoot. Turner sits and sits and sits. People come to the window and bang on it, telling Turner there's nobody there.

But you can't fool Turner. He saw the robber. He saw the gun. He doesn't want to get shot. He's not moving.

The years go by...

You've got to feel sorry for the guy.

And what if he's one of the mugs who's taken out a massive loan to pay the latest installment on a gold toilet seat for the private jet?

Pass the kleenex. Maybe we should have a collection for him.

Anth so happy to have escaped.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:06:22 (GMT)
From: Sandy
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Jim is hedging his bets
Message:
Yep.

Jim Heller, arch-nemesis of Prem Pal Singh Rawat, is doing service to Maharaji by posting his words here and he knows it.
Of course, it is all presented under the guise of scrutinizing and eviscerating the discourse. But Jim knows, perhaps better than most, that even to present Maharaji's words in this setting is also service to him, for so many will be exposed to the message.

Subconscious action by Mr. Heller? Perhaps. But when someone reproduces the words of Maharaji and sends them out to hundreds if not thousands of listeners, it is indeed service, even if the apparent purpose is to ridicule. You knew that, didn't you Jim?

Ever the doubtful, overintellectual, cosmopolitan, jaded, surface partisan for the oppressed minority, you still aren't sure yourself, are you Jim? So you post his words here and it is indeed service. Out of all the people who read your post, I bet at least someone will be touched by whatever sincerity and truth exists in those words, despite all the bad news and bad everything that has happened along the way, plus your own spin.

Very clever, Jim.

Sandy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 21:24:44 (GMT)
From: Steve Quint
Email: the_avenger55@hotmail.com
To: Sandy
Subject: You're Joking, Right?
Message:
Please tell me you're joking. Please tell me the truth.

Steve

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 00:36:40 (GMT)
From: Sandy
Email: None
To: Steve Quint
Subject: Yes and No, sincerely
Message:
He may be posting Maharaji's words thinking he's doing it to dissect it before his audience or let the others tear it apart, as well the words could be.

But even if a drunk heroin addict thief with AIDS lying in the gutter in his own feces can lift his finger and point a seeker to go within to find the truth, the power of that direction surpasses the condition of the pointer. Therefore, I say that whether Jim realizes it or not, he is serving the spreading of Knowledge by printing and sending Mahraji's words out on the internet, even here. For even if one person feels something from it and acts on that feeling, I beleive that goes on Jim's dance card, so to speak.

I find it interesting that as long as I am talking the ex talk, I'm cool with most here, but as soon as I say something in objectivity that does not reek of anti-Maharaji, I get reviled.
Too bad.

I just got this in my e-mail from lightsmith.com

Some here may relate to it:

Subject:
UPDATE from Lightsmith
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 17:07:30 -0600
From: 'LIGHTSMITH.COM'
To: chris@lightsmith.com

Hi y'all,

Greetings to you from here in Minnesota, the THROAT chakra of North America (cough). At least that's some distinction besides setting records as reaching some of the coldest temperatures in the United States and being a place you don't want to visit in the winter. Here we are almost at the end of January, the presidential election is finally over (I think), and we're zipping through just another ordinary month of non-stop personal restructuring and intense global transformation. Yee-hah. Perhaps you're thinking 'I've been working so hard for THIS?'.
Ah, well, the best is yet to come!

This update brings you notice of a few more additions to the Lightsmith site, notably a new page of response from our friends in Spirit and also a message for these times. The new questions presented at the last channeling include comments about what has been a busy dream time for many, a perspective on underground networks and Lemurians, and an explanation of the astral plane. The monthly message is a particularly direct one, and I am going to include it at the end of this note because some people on our list do not have easy access to the web at this time (mail is received on mailstations and such). You can read it here or
check out everything on the Lightsmith site at /www.lightsmith.com.

Before I add the channeling, I wanted to add a few thoughts of my own. The astral energies are lobbying hard for your attention right now. You will likely be presented with an opportunity to polarize with someone or something. DON'T GO THERE. That's how you are pulled into giving your energy to a part of consciousness that doesn't know how to die a peaceful death. You can witness the energy shortage and the panic in the old, controlling structures. In California, it's playing out in a grand
metaphor for all to see. It's occurring throughout the physical and astral levels, so stay conscious of what you are doing with your energies. Don't give them away. Don't even give them your fear if that's up for you right now. Project NOTHING onto another and own every feeling as yours. Process everything as your own opportunity to clear, expand, and move into another reality. Release your attachments and step OUT of the old. That is the main challenge of these first months of 2001. This message was also articulated in the new year's channeling. I'll have a
transcript of that channeling posted in the next few days, so please check back.

I would also like to let you know of a couple of events Michele and I will be doing here in Minnesota. We will be speaking and facilitating a process of alignment with two different spiritual communities. On Sunday, February 18th we will be at the Agapé service which is held at the Center for Performing Arts in Minneapolis. On the following Sunday we will be in Duluth for the Sunday service of the Lake Superior Interfaith Community Church. Please join us if you can.

As always, we appreciate sharing this amazing adventure with you, and we love to hear from you either in a personal e-mail or from your questions. Many blessings...........

Chris

Here is what our Spirit friends had to say:

'Some of what we would like to say in this time we have perhaps said before. However, because of what is taking place in the collective consciousness we would like to reiterate it in some ways and offer a little more direction to people in terms of how to work with what we are speaking of.'

'There is a very strong contraction in the field right now. The
contraction is not one where it is felt just because of winter or the physical experience, but it is a contraction of duality. Duality in the matrix itself is pulling itself into a great tension, rather like the poles are widening. As it does so, those people who are either on one side or the other feel a greater and greater emotional attachment to those places in their consciousness where they are attached to one side or the other by agreement and by design within duality with even greater
tension with the pole. So even greater relationship in their own
unconscious with what has been projected outward and not owned. The nature of duality is a disowning of one aspect, projecting it, and then creating tension with it so there is a charge formed that is a substitute for life.'

'There is only one way out of the separation that is growing in terms of its polarity, and it is not through either of the poles. It is to just step out of that field completely. Most people who have so intimately identified themselves with this as life see this as death to do this. It is actually a step into real life rather than the false illusionary substitute of life. But it does at times feel that you are giving up what is known and familiar, and stepping into the new matrix which is already formed and is ready to receive anyone who wishes to step into it. It is not like it is just a step, it is moving beyond duality. It is
saying 'no more, I do not wish to do this, I do not wish to play in this arena of separation, of fighting, of drama, of duality where there is charge, but not life.'

'One of the ways to begin to do this is to recognize how much stress, how much pain, how much struggle, how much disturbance, how much imbalance, how much grayness, and how much death there is in this place. Recognize it, name it. Allow that it has been your experience, and also acknowledge that there is another experience just beyond the veil. You can use an image of walking out of a building across a bridge, parting a veil, opening a door, walking through a door, up a stairs and into another place. Use the visualization as your meditation of moving beyond this place, however it looks to you and whatever is your image. Step
very deliberately into this new arena, this new place. Gradually, what is holding you in duality will loosen. You will begin to feel less and less of a pull to be there, or to play there, or to remain there.'

'Know that this other place is ready and that you can be there, and you will begin to learn how to be there. It does not operate the same, it is not a polar region. It is a region where all who are present begin to form circles or places in which all can be present and co-create. It is joyful and playful, and it is very creative for that is its nature. There are currents of creation within it that carry intention through to form and manifestation. It is abundant, and it is for all who choose to be part of it, to step into it, to open their root chakras, release survival fears and open to life. We have spoken of it before. It is ready, it is all ready, and you can step into it. Use the visualizations in your meditation times. You will start to feel what it feels like,
you'll know that it is present, and it will be easier to leave the duality matrix that is now beginning to disassemble from within.'

'That is our message, and we encourage as many as can hear this,
perceive this, and recognize this to begin to do it. You will meet others in this other place who have already gone before you. They will assist you, they will be welcoming you, and there will become a new dance of creation. Those in duality who choose to remain attached to their place within it will not perceive this dance, but there will become manifest forms being created out of this new place. These will show up in life. Those in duality will try to discredit them and not make room for them, and yet they will be so wondrous and so alive that those in life and those young people who have not been totally woven into duality will grab a hold of them and grow. Those in duality will not understand how, because they are not funding them so how are they
growing and how do they have life.'

'These questions will begin to open the whole structure of duality. Many will feel like they are losing their minds or going crazy. They will try to get even more control. These next few years will be this drama. Those who have already left duality will not even be much affected by what is happening. Those within duality will feel as if their world is wrenching apart. This will continue. You have a number of years where this will be in transition. Choose now and enjoy these years as the creative energies of creation herself inform you, give you life, abundance, and joy to play with.'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 16:48:39 (GMT)
From: Steve Quint
Email: the_avenger55@hotmail.com
To: Sandy
Subject: Sincerity Without Humility Is Meaningless
Message:
Sandy, I feel like a friend because of prior communication. I'm also concerned about you. Your posts exhibit signs of schizophrenia in my opinion. I'm not a doctor but as a friend I can suggest you get professional help. I know that rawat has damaged people's thinking, including my own. It can be fixed but it takes humility.

If you are sincere and open-minded, please email me and we can continue this off-line.

Steve

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 16:31:17 (GMT)
From: Michael Dettmers
Email: dettmers@gylanix.com
To: Sandy
Subject: Don't abuse sincerity, Sandy
Message:
Sandy,

It’s clear from your posts that you have a problem with Jim. You do not enhance you credibility as a discerning thinker nor as a fair fighter, with me at least, by suggesting that Jim is helping Maharaji by posting excerpts of his speeches on the Forum. In my opinion, nothing discredits Maharaji more than reading what he has said, not only in the distant past, but especially the drivel he is offering up today.

Michael

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 18:21:32 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: Michael Dettmers
Subject: Hi Michael. Talking of drivel...
Message:
I sent the package, has it arrived yet?
I agree with you, there is nothing more revealing about M than the drivel that issues from his own mouth. But, I must say that your revelations on this site come a close second!! for which, thanks. I hope you've got more up your sleeve.??
Love Kelly
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 22:39:47 (GMT)
From: Michael Dettmers
Email: dettmers@gylanix.com
To: Kelly
Subject: The package has not yet arrived (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 04:12:13 (GMT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: Yes and No, sincerely
Message:
Hello Sandy,

Choosing freinds and choosing those whom you listen to for input
requires discretion. People will ensnare in words and in thier creative delusion, seem smart and worthwhile.
rawats little talk is loaded with fraud and it is up to the reader to be able to see that.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 00:50:48 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: See? You did it again!
Message:
I find it interesting that as long as I am talking the ex talk, I'm cool with most here, but as soon as I say something in objectivity that does not reek of anti-Maharaji, I get reviled.

What you do with words is shameless. This time it's 'objectivity'.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 01:51:01 (GMT)
From: baz
Email: None
To: sandy
Subject: plot
Message:
think you may be losing the plot sandy - lets keep it simple
baz
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 20:39:34 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: Jim is part of the divine plan too, Sandy ...
Message:
- though have you ever wondered why the divine plan is making it ever easier to denounce Maharaji as the lying fraud he'd destined to deny being for the rest of his natural ... ?

Phew, talk about karma!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 20:31:50 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: Thus spake the Lard.
Message:
Hi Sandy,

Maharaji doesn't have a message. He just wants you to help satisfy his desires.

He recommends you dedicate your life to him, concentrate on him, love him, finance him, experience 'him' within, give him credit for the fact that you're breathing (unless he's killed you in a hit and run) think of him at the moment of death, etc.

His words, when read without the hypnotic lull of non-critical devotion (it's not in the words, it's a feeling right?) really are empty, contradictory, simplistic mumbo-jumbo.

He's full of crap. He's not wise at all. He's a spoiled brat who believes his own bullshit.

Anth, who is all about several feelings, but not all at the same time because it makes you ill and you get into trouble.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 19:48:36 (GMT)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: Sincerity? Don't make me puke!
Message:
Sandy the sincere wrote:-

Out of all the people who read your (Jim's) post, I bet at least someone will be touched by whatever sincerity and truth exists in those (Maharaji's) words.

Sandy,

Is this one of your serious posts???? Sincerity from Maharaji - are you sure?? No - I can't believe your years here have had no effect on your intellect. Listen, Sandy - Maharaji has no sincerity when he speaks. Got it??

BTW the rest of your post was complete and utter bollocks.

John the amazed.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 00:42:13 (GMT)
From: Sandy
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: There some bad in the best of us
Message:
And some good in the worst of us.

To lose sight of that is more than I choose to surrender, even if I am repulsed and disgusted by some of the reports and actions I have read about him here.

So what I hear you saying is the exact opposite of what Maharaji and EV say. There I cannot utter a discouraging word, and here I cannot utter an encouraging one, without getting ostracized by the dominant social order.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 17:09:40 (GMT)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: Don't get your hopes up Sandy
Message:
It was such insane trash I couldn't read it. At first I thought it was from that vegetable cult guy.

I will pray that pee-pee Rawat never gets Alzheimers, or we are all in for some 'words to remember.'

Yuck!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 15:40:19 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: Jim and all
Subject: Maharaji in Oxnard
Message:
If you think that’s bad, you should hear the un-cut version!!

At the top of this newsletter they say…

“ ….Rather than reproducing selected excerpts, in this issue of Elan we are publishing an abridged and edited version of his talk.”

Having watched the whole thing last night, I was wondering how they would be able to pick anything out of it that might sound half- way decent. The answer is – by editing it of course!! And boy, has it been edited!! Of course all the stuff about Krishna’s gone. He opened with that. If you want to read what he said, it’s in my post below “Maharaji is a Moron”

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 17:20:29 (GMT)
From: Marianne
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: Revisionism
Message:
I see that he also says that back in the bad old '70's, he was asked if he was God, and he denied it. Oh yeah, right.

And they also deleted the part about M telling the premies to think about him at the time of death, didn't they?

Very selective and interesting 'editing'.

Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:20:22 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: Marianne
Subject: Revisionism? This is Abridged Too Far!
Message:
This is NOT Maharaji in Oxnard. This has been edited beyond recognition. I understand now why EV decided to present an edited and abridged version instead of selected excerpts. They could not have found a single excerpt out of the whole mess that would have sounded any good.

When reading through it, I thought. ‘This is not what I remember’, and I only watched it yesterday! So I printed it out and sat in front of the video and compared it. I was shocked…. really shocked.

Ok, they’ve left out all the crass, embarrassing and incoherent bits, including the Krishna stuff. Fair enough, that’s understandable! But, the bits they have kept, have been edited so frequently, a cut about every 8-10 words, and not only that….they have changed words, added words and phrases, corrected his grammar, and paraphrased to such a degree, that there is almost no resemblance to the original.

If I have time later, and if I can bear to watch it again! I’ll do a couple of comparisons. I really do think this is abridged too far!!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:36:34 (GMT)
From: Marianne
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: Legal misrepresentation???
Message:
I wonder -- that's right, EV attorneys, I said I wonder --- if the 'edited' version of Rotwat's talk that is sent through the mail amounts to a legal misrepresentation of what he actually said? To whom is this distributed, Kelly?

Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 00:33:57 (GMT)
From: LL.B at the Bar
Email: Ask Bazza
To: Marianne
Subject: Legal opinion misrepresentation???
Message:
I cannot believe the time you wate under the guise of 'legalese ' spouting the irrational to the unknowing. You claim kudos as a legal expert and then spout that pap?
Mis-representation requires an 'injured party' and 'quantifiable damages'.
So someone volunteers their email adress for a free SPAM every day and THEN they claim for damages? On the basis of an edit? That should be big news to every media outlet in the country 'OK you reporters learn your lines , from now on there is no editing!'
How stupid are you? Go back to your welfare cases and your Court duty attorney roles. You know diddley squat about Civil law you imposter!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 12:11:18 (GMT)
From: Marianne
Email: None
To: LL.B at the Bar
Subject: Greetings Catweasel--damages for cult fraud
Message:
I see you have posted under 2 different names here. That's okay with me. You are wrong on both counts.

I know exactly what I am talking about. Injured party???? Quantifiable damages? Hmmm. I guess you don't read all the posts by people who want to sue because they feel they were fraudulently deprived of funds and assets by the cult. Editing what the Master says might be actionable if it misled someone into giving funds or assets that they would not otherwise have donated had an accurate and complete transcript of his talk been provided. Why delete that stuff about 'think of me at the time of death' and Krishna and Arjuna? Why not send it out for all the premies and aspirants to read?

Go change your litter box, kitty.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 12:35:48 (GMT)
From: Brendan Murphy
Email: None
To: Marianne
Subject: Such a long Bow you draw!!
Message:
That is crap Marianne and YOU know it. Who is Catweasel? Whose money are YOU going to use to raise this useless trivial nonsense above the palor of your own mind. Bet not yours!
As I said No Injured Parties (on the basis of editing an Email version of a speech - their perogative, their intellectual property); No quantifiable damages.
I thought you had more respect for yourself and your profession than to be spinning that pap under the guise of 'legal opinion'
Don't bother answering -it's embarrassing to see this nonsense .
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 13:30:01 (GMT)
From: Marianne
Email: None
To: Brendan Murphy
Subject: Where do you practice?
Message:
Are you an EV attorney? Are you an EV monitor? Do tell.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 14:42:41 (GMT)
From: Brendan Murphy
Email: None
To: Marianne
Subject: Where do you practice?
Message:
Words fail me.EV monitor? Is that like a classroom monitor? Or is it a 17 inch screen? Please get serious. 'EV monitors' in my humble opinion would never communicate with you. Wouldn't they just 'monitor'?
No , I am not an EV attorney. I doubt they even remember my existence. I could be horribly facetious and tell you I practice in my bedroom. The law has many levels of activity doesn't it counsel?
Stop bullshitting Marianne. You are continually grandstanding.Try being yourself.....
PS: I'd say this bugs some people even more than you!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 15:09:54 (GMT)
From: Marianne
Email: None
To: Brendan Murphy
Subject: Feel the need to squelch me, do ya Brendan?
Message:
You don't like what I say, ignore me. Beyond that, one must consider why you are coming here and making these posts. Are you an ex? A premie?

Your post is sexist. Grandstanding? Me? In comparison to whom? I don't think so.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 15:41:01 (GMT)
From: Brendan Murphy
Email: No, this is not personal
To: Marianne
Subject: I Feel the need to ask for the truth Marianne
Message:
Put simply ,I am of the opinion that YOU are misrepresenting the law.
My post to you is not remotely sexist. How did you conjure that one Counsel?
In comparison to who - others who may well be qualified to comment?.
Grandstanding? - thats what I would call it.
You stop bullshitting!- and I'm off your case.
You seemed to have worked out that I at least have some familiarity with the subject matter. Ex? , Premie? What's it matter. Just stop schmoozing the innocents with quasi legal bullshit.
Remember; No misrepresentation(except yours!),
No injured or wronged parties (Voluntary subscription,no fee) and
No right to punitative damages.
The simple answer 'If you dont like it , dont ask for it' Goodnight Counsel.
Copyright implies editorial freedom. (What do you wanna do , take on the right to freedom of speech?)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 15:50:08 (GMT)
From: Marianne
Email: None
To: Brendan Murphy
Subject: What are 'punitative' damages, pray tell? nt
Message:
xxx
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 01:16:16 (GMT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: LL.B at the Bar
Subject: Legal opinion misrepresentation???
Message:
How many Federal Court of Appeals death sentence cases have you argued and won, my friend?

Of course Marianne isn't an expert in civil law. But she sure enjoys jerking your chain.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 03:56:54 (GMT)
From: Brendan Murphy
Email: None
To: gerry
Subject: Legal opinion misrepresentation???
Message:
The point is , you silly fucking loud mouthed school teacher, she's not jerking any-one's chain- hence the comment. She should know better. Oh and we are civilised in this country-we dont have the fucking Death Penalty. Criminal law? You would be surprised Jerry - dont ask too many questions. You might not enjoy the answers,two can play at Marianne's pathetic game.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:51:22 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: Marianne
Subject: Legal misrepresentation???
Message:
Hi Marianne,
This is the EV e-newsletter, and as far as I know, is distributed to anyone who wants it, by e-mail. If you go to the Elan Vital website you can subscribe to it from there, or view it online. I guess only premies would want it!! I'll give you a copy of what he really said when I see you.
Love Kelly
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 19:01:08 (GMT)
From: Marianne
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: Does it identify who does the editing?
Message:
I am very curious about this. Is this also sent through the mail to those not on line?

Thanks, Kelly.

Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 21:29:05 (GMT)
From: Ian Dury
Email: None
To: Marianne
Subject: Dunrite Productions
Message:
Many old-time faithful (Michael Wood and Rich Neel, to name two) who work at Dunrite Productions produce and edit theses videos.

EV MONITORS - say 'cheers' to the boys for me.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 19:26:08 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: Marianne
Subject: EV spin doctors are secret
Message:
Mr Rawat has always said that his words are not important. The EV spin doctors also know that when his words are transcribed they embarassingly idiotic.

And in the Radhasoami tradition the guru's words are not important. What is important is the Radhaswammy double whammy - a combo of kriya and bhakti juju. Take away the bhakti juju and you're left with seeing that your emperor has no clothes. The PWKs are firmly under the spell of that old juju and do not see how moronic the Rev is.

Time to wake up any of you premies whose brains have not turned to complete bhakti mush. Unplug yourselves from that old black magic ''filament'' and operate under your own power.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 19:42:33 (GMT)
From: Marianne
Email: None
To: Patrick Conlon
Subject: Oh, the words are VERY important to this lawyer
Message:
And the words are also potentially very important to government attorneys as well. Especially if they go through the mail and amount to a fraudulent misrepresentation. I'm not saying that happened. I'm just speculating out loud.

Here's a big hug for you, Pat!

Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 20:01:41 (GMT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Marianne
Subject: Maharaji's 'satsang' has always been edited
Message:
Give me a break. The man is incoherent. If they didn't edit the written stuff it would so just how incoherent it is.

Shri Hans Productions, or whoever does it now, has always edited M's 'satsang' to make it at least semi-intelligible. I understand now they edit who sections, like when he tells off-color jokes, or uses to may Hindu terms, which are not supposed to be in vogue now in the cult.

They even used to airbrush the zits off his chubby face. I kid you not. Joy can tell you more about this, as she actually worked for SHIP in the 70s. I don't know if they also tried to airbrush away one of his multiple chins, or perhaps reduce his breast size from 44D to 36B.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 22:37:58 (GMT)
From: Joy
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Maharaji's 'satsang' has always been edited
Message:
Yes, indeed it has always been heavily edited. I worked closely with this for many years and can attest to that (right Cliff??). Whole chunks taken out, sentences reconstructed for meaning and clarity, uh's, ah's, it's like's, you know's all removed of course. I also had the job of transcribing it (like totally divine, man, at the time) and would just try and leave that stuff out before it ever even got to the editor.

Good post, Joe, above. Never heard the word filament either, up to 1981. Can't say anything about after that time, but I can definitely and 100% unequivocally say he NEVER used that analogy from 1973-1980. So he is lying and revising there, as usual. He did however, say stuff like you quoted, and 'Surrender the reins of your life to me and I will give you peace.' Loads of stuff along than line. And stuff about Guru being not just God, but GREATER than God, because Guru SHOWS you God, which you wouldn't have been able to get to before (boy, do I take exception with that now!).

And yes, they did airbrush his zits. Don't know about the booby's, though, I think that's all his natural assets!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 21:13:26 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: call it 'ongoing revisionism' -
Message:
- I remember ooooh, long ago (like 1974, when I was slaving - sorry, premies, serving - in Hansa Graphic, the DLM printers of Maharaji's propaganda in the 70s) when the command filtered down to us that all copies of a particular photo of M wearing a blue turban were to be destroyed.

Why? - you may ask.

Someone, somewhere, said it had something to do with Nostradamus' prophecy about 'the man in the blue turban'

(incidentally, for those to whom the phrase 'man in the blue turban' might as well read 'man in the zebra-striped pyjamas' - I think Nostradamus identified this particular guy as one of several 'antichrists' who were supposed to bring numerous bad-vibe scenarios on the human race. Antichrists did he say? Ah, well, to believe in them, you've got to believe in Christs.)

.
.
.

The above is fact, not fantasy, and there are at least a dozen former (or are they still current?) premies who could attest to it, though why, I wonder, should they even bother to?

Then again, why not? (if 'the truth will set you free')


.
.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 19:53:50 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: Marianne
Subject: Marianne, Fraudulent misrepresentation
Message:
Exactly. You know I can't tell you what we are working on here. But is along those lines.

The problem is that the Rev will say he did not say it. He has been very clear that he will not write a book about K (only idiotic poems) because he does not want anything in writing. The editors also maintain anonymity for the same reason. The church-ladies also refuse to put anything into writing and would never answer my emails.

They are becoming creepier and more conspiratorial by the day and that suits me and my colleagues fine because it can now be proven that a supposed not for profit ''education'' organization is being used fraudulently.

Hugs to you too and I hope those chapped lips are only from kissing the Blarney stone.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 17:44:12 (GMT)
From: Sandy
Email: None
To: Marianne
Subject: Revisionism
Message:
He revised it and he didn't revise it, you know?

He did both.

He said he was he highest manifestation of God, or allowed his pr machine to print it and his mahatmas to preach those words and sentiments.

And at the same time, he answered reporters' questions like that by saying he was just a humble servant of God.

Makes me feel a bit like a blind man grabbing part of the elephant, and thinking I have the whole picture.

Is this calculated? I think so.

Sandy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 17:54:52 (GMT)
From: Lurker #27
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: Revisionism
Message:
Sandy,

First off I think you are a good guy and I respect your beliefs, but how do you incorporate the above filament satsang with what is said about Maharaji on the Elan Vital website. I quote, 'He says he is an ordinary human being, no different from anybody else.'

Is there no sense of cognitive dissonance for you? How can you believe these two things at the same time?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:17:43 (GMT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: Lurker #27
Subject: Revisionism
Message:
I used to think sheep was a 'good guy' too. Now I'm not so sure. He comes here and spouts satsang KNOWING FULL WELL it upsets people. Also he seems bent on justifying The Filament's many documented abuses by any means whatsoever.

Also, Lurker #27, do you REALLY 'respect' sheeps beliefs? I find that kinda incredible.

Shp is a lost cause, a real time waster. I don't know how long you've been lurking, but this guy is a lonely, terminally confused gas bag who is overly fond of the sound of his own 'voice.' Just thought you should know that.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:27:59 (GMT)
From: Lurker#27
Email: None
To: gerry
Subject: gerry - different strokes. . . NT
Message:
fjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:02:28 (GMT)
From: Sandy
Email: None
To: Lurker #27
Subject: Revisionism
Message:
Dear Lurker #27,

Yes, I do definitely feel some cognitive dissonance in the two statements.

Not to defend him, but to try to understand the syntax, I would say that by saying he's 'an ordinary human being' I think that means he eats, sleeps, shits and pees like us. What they do not say is that he is ordinary in the ordinary ways, but he has this particular gift or skill or mastery that makes him a bit extraordinary is one particular way.

The omission of that does definitely create cognitive dissonance.
I think more is necessary than a nod/wink between PWK's and PAM's to attain the clarity I think they are trying to put out.

Sandy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 23:38:37 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: What you're doing, Sandy, depends on one thing
Message:
In order for you to do whatever it is you're doing here, you simply have to fuck with the language. And that's what you do in spades. And guess what, Sandy? You're not fooling anyone.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 00:44:27 (GMT)
From: Sandy
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: My motive is not based on fooling anyone. (nt)
Message:
And motive is what it boils down to, not if the most correct word was used or if the grammer was correct.

You are kidding, right?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 05:00:51 (GMT)
From: Mickey the Pharisee
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: My motive is not based on fooling anyone.
Message:
Please, Sandy, you are only trying to fool yourself. Maharaji is a liar and a fraud. You have been reading here way too long to continue this silliness.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:24:01 (GMT)
From: Lurker #27
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: Revisionism
Message:
Sandy, what you are saying is:

He says he is an ordinary human being, no different from anybody else, but he has this particular gift or skill or mastery that makes him a bit extraordinary is one particular way.

What I'm saying is if he says he is an ordinary human being, no diffferent from anybody else, it means that he is the same as me. There is no difference between us. We are the same. Equal.

But, if he has this particular gift or skill or mastery that makes him a bit extraordinary is one particular way, then he is not an ordinary human being. Then we are not he same. Not equal.

I know these are just words, semantics, but it seems to me that we have a bit of a conundrum here. A big contradiction. And some people (exes here) could interpret it as dishonesty or deceipt. Maharaji is giving them fuel to discredit him.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:40:14 (GMT)
From: Sandy
Email: None
To: Lurker #27
Subject: Revisionism
Message:
L27,

I see what you are talking about and accept its presence as a valid point.

Sandy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 21:37:17 (GMT)
From: Lurker #27
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: Sandy - one last concept!
Message:
Sandy,

Let me finish by saying that I don't believe in words. They don't run my life. It's all superficial surface stuff. What's important for me is, 'Am I centered or not....'

In that respect I think we are the same.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 00:49:11 (GMT)
From: Sandy
Email: None
To: Lurker #27
Subject: To L27
Message:
Lurker #27 responded:

Sandy,

Let me finish by saying that I don't believe in words. They don't run my life. It's all superficial surface stuff. What's important for me is, 'Am I centered or not....'

In that respect I think we are the same.

Lurker #27,

Yes, I think we agree on that. And even in this embroiled paradox, I has felt pretty centered most of the time. The times I didn't were the times when my concepts of Maharaji and his real life behavior collided. That is what I am coming to terms with.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 23:48:49 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Lurker #27
Subject: And what a dumb concept it is!
Message:
You 'dont' believe in words'? Does that mean anything? Besides that you're an old hippie?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 15:30:18 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: No, Rawat, you're not even the filament
Message:
Rawat,

So you're not God, eh? Just the filament, the little thing that is necessary for there to be light, without which no one would have light.

What you are is a thief. If we accept your analogy, then that power source goes to EVERY PERSON's own filament, not just to you, you bastard.

Try to get this into your gigantic head, you are NOT the one and only source of light in this world. People can be grateful for this life without your help. The freedom that people need is freedom from fake gurus like you. The power of this universe is sustaining each person, without your help.

I don't need you to tell me my life is precious and simple. I don't need your so-called short-cuts or you telling me what direction to take in my life. Neither my life nor my heart has anything to do with you, THANK GOD!!!!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 07:38:59 (GMT)
From: Brian Smith
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: I absolutely love this post, as the truth always
Message:
is.... precious and simple.... Thanks Way
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 04:18:56 (GMT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: blacklight, insane fuck-nt
Message:
sfg
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 15:47:11 (GMT)
From: Disculta
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: Grateful, but not to him
Message:
Well put, Toby!

It is quite amazing to read this stuff after nearly two decades! I nearly got hypnotized by the rhythms and nonsensical trance of it. I found that there was a certain filter installed in my brain that could take this crap and translate it into something that could jerk me around emotionally. Fortunately, that particular wiring was very, very weak, a mere homeopathic version of its former self. The predominant wiring now causes me to feel amazement at the arrogance of someone who claims to be THE filament, and be the bestower of gratitude, happiness, connection to the heart. How dare he?

Let me say that I am not averse to gratitude, happiness and heart connection. I have built my life around these qualities since leaving the cult. When I was a premie, the version of these that I thought I was experiencing was a coerced version. It wasn't okay to feel what I was really feeling - which makes all gratitude, happiness and heart connection pretty phoney.

However, I do find that real gratitude IS the attitude that makes things work in my life. And I mean gratitude for all sorts of things - including my life, my breath, and the kinds of things for which MJ invokes gratitude, surreptitiously (well, not really) slipping himself in there as the main recipient. As with so many other aspects of life, such as my spiritual experience and my ability to enjoy a connection with a source energy through breath awareness, I have refused to allow MJ's hijack attempt to work in my life.

In other words, first of all, he has nothing to do with my gratitude, happiness, heart connection, source connection, ability to appreciate simply living, breathing or any of the other things he claims ownership of to his followers. Second, I don't have to give these things up to leave him.

Thanks for posting this crap, Jim. It's really worth a thousand of our posts in making it clear why we left.

Love Disculta

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 15:16:25 (GMT)
From: toby
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Maharaji in Oxnard
Message:
yeah, it is obvious,

fat rat is a philosopher,

because all the joy he is talking about is just theory for him.

Why else would he be an alcoholic, addicted to cigarettes,
fucking series of blondes?

I mean a cheap story teller thats all.

Amazing.
and No he is not god anymore just a fat wire.
he just did't notice that he shortcircuited a long time ago
and there is no more use for him(just garbage)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 15:56:02 (GMT)
From: Sandy
Email: None
To: toby
Subject: Maharaji in Oxnard
Message:
Hi Toby,

Let's say you are lost in your car on the side of the road somewhere in a remote location. You have all your maps unfolded out on the seat, you have the name of your destination on a piece of paper, but you have temporarily lost your sense of direction and your points of reference.

A dark blue Aston Martin screeches up next to you in a cloud of dust. Rock and roll music - Frampton - is playing very loudly on a state-of-the-art sound system, the pungent scent of hashish smoke is billowing out of the windows, there are obviously a few very beautiful women in the car shreiking and laughing with pleasure and fun, and the little guy behind the wheel leans out his window smiling and asks you if you are lost, if he can be of any assistance. you can't tell if this guy is Puerto Rican, Chinese, Mexican, Mulatto, Indian, or what, and you don't care. But there he is smiling at you offering to help you. He did not have to do that. And he is not demanding any compensation for the help. Turns out he knows the neighborhood you are lost in and guides you out of there with just a few turns and directions, which you gratefully jot down on a scrap of paper, not wanting to lose one turn and be going around in circles again.

So after you get to where you were headed, or even just get back on a familiar road, what grateful traveler is going to judge and curse that little guy for his fancy car, his traveling companions, his hash smoke, or his loud music? Anyone who has any sense of appreciation at all will be grateful for the directions and not judge he who pointed the way out of being lost.

Everything else is another matter, and some of those matters bother me too. But we were all lost travelers at a point in each of our lives, and Maharaji pointed us inside. That was good direction yesterday, today and forever. Whatever else are issues with him are independent of that fact.

Don't even try to pidgeonhole me as a premie, ex-premie or anything. Labels can limit and kill expression. Just deal with what is here in black and white on your screen and whatever else you can pick up in between the lines. As with masonry, it's what's inbetween the rows that hold the whole thing together. Bricks stacked without mortar will fall over in a stiff wind, and words without the mortar of love, sincerity and committment to the truth will also fall over in a stiff wind of doubt or attack.

Sandy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 20:41:21 (GMT)
From: baz
Email: None
To: gerry
Subject: four techniques
Message:
gerry

like many people who recieved k in the 70s I had heard of
some of the techniques before, and even tried 2 of them
without much success. although I know it was not the same
for everyone,I personally experienced a lot during and after
recieving k . why? probably because the whole cult mystique
thing made me take four 'stupid, techniques seriously enough
to experience them.it didn't cost me a penny (or a dime)and
over 25 years later I still think there is something to k.
as for m I guess the joke is it doesn't really matter who he
is

barry

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 23:01:15 (GMT)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: Appropriate responses to assistance
Message:
Sandy,

I have been helped by many people in my life. Sometimes it's been like you describe - a stranger giving directions when they didn't need to - and I'm grateful to them.

But of course you are talking metaphorically. OK, here's how I would be grateful. If a meditation teacher taught me how to meditate, stayed accessible so that he could answer my questions, and encouraged me to give my love to the source within, or to all living things (but not to him). Then if the meditation did the stuff, I would be grateful.

But Maharaji doesn't work that way does he?

John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 00:57:04 (GMT)
From: Sandy
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: To JHB
Message:
Sandy,

I have been helped by many people in my life. Sometimes it's been like you describe - a stranger giving directions when they didn't need to - and I'm grateful to them.

But of course you are talking metaphorically. OK, re's how I would be grateful. If a meditation teacher taught me how to meditate, stayed accessible so that he could answer my questions, and encouraged me to give my love to the source within, or to all
living things (but not to him). Then if the meditation did the stuff, I would be grateful.

But Maharaji doesn't work that way does he?

John.

John,

No, he doesn't seem to operate that way. He's got the 'triangle' and all that. The tradition of Perfect Masters - if you or I believe in them or not is not the issue here - is that they say to drop everything and follow them. It's documented. I don't know why, but that's how history records the lives of such people, or those who claim to be such people.

There are meditation teachers out there who fit the description you said you would like to have.

Sandy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 22:52:18 (GMT)
From: Joy
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: Maharaji in That Fancy Aston Martin Has a Pricetag
Message:
Hi Sandy. Just want to say I appreciate your analogy and feel like it's pretty heart-felt (and sort of accurate).

Just want to add that it's a helping hand with a hefty price tag. Yeah, you can follow him out of the darkness, but does he leave it at that? No, there are all sorts of tentacles to then lasso you into his group and into him, forevermore. You're not just out of the desert, you're out of the desert and into something which is much more sinister and *seems* like the light, but actually is something else altogether.

I would suggest you pay close attention to what Disculta is saying. She's saying you CAN experience all this stuff by yourself, without the aid of Guru or anybody else. And my experience post-Knowledge has been that ultimately you feel much better about yourself, and are a much more whole person, when you do.

I'm coming to the conclusion that being a premie is for people who don't have very good self-esteem. It's easier to just let Maharaji guide you than try and find your way yourself, because you don't believe you can do it. But ultimately you get caught in his trap and if you rely on your own instincts and efforts instead, you are a whole human being at the end of your journey, and not a brainwashed cult-member reliant on someone else for your realizations and experience. Take back (or keep) your own power on the spiritual journey, never give it away.

Love,
Joy

P.S. Been a Deadhead for years also, and what a long, fun trip that was--but I certainly haven't surrendered the reins of my life to Jerry Garcia!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:53:07 (GMT)
From: Tim G
Email: timgitti@indigo.ie
To: Sandy
Subject: Cul-de Sac...Sandy
Message:
Hi Sandy...your analogy just didn't stand up for me .In fact the blue Aston Martin brought me down a long cul-de-sac that took a while to get back from. I already knew that life was precious before the 'guru's intervention'..still do. But he led me into a thicket of guilt, authority, loss of dicrimination and the espousal of a pathetiacally simplistic and uncaring life view. I promise you that there is much more depth to life than the vision that m purports to offer,
I DONT agree with people calling you an arsewipe for giving your current views however but I DO feel that for your own good you should try and de-programme yourself and read the book of your own life rather than trying to attain the aspirations of another's.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:58:38 (GMT)
From: Sandy
Email: None
To: Tim G
Subject: Tim
Message:
Tim,

Thank you for the non-judgemental and compassionate message.
I will take it to heart.

Sandy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 17:04:48 (GMT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: sheep
Subject: Wake Up you gas bag...
Message:
Look sheep, Tim's post was VERY judgemental. Can't you see that? No you can't because you have your head up your ass. You are just jerking people around here. You love the attention and you can't resist out gassing with what you perceive is your 'higher wisdom.' It aint wisdom, clown, it's regurgitation.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:40:54 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: To Sandy
Message:
Sandy,

Your analogy does not apply to Maharaji at all. He does not pull up in his car, give correct directions, and then speeds away. He pulls up in his car and says: 'Hey, you lost? I'm your man. Just follow me. Keep on following me. And give me some gas money.' And then he pulls away. Do you follow, or not, and if so, for how long?

By the way, your ongoing and personal argument with Jim gets in the way of any serious discussion here. I wish you would take it to Anything Goes.

Your idea that Jim is actually doing service to Rawat is absolute hogwash. Jim is damning Rawat by his own words. Rawat clearly is indicating by his talk at Oxnard that he is the source of God in this world, and that is exactly what damns him.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:56:49 (GMT)
From: Sandy
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: To Way
Message:
Maharaji has also said that he wants us to have the same experience he is having, and I take that to be having our filaments shining bright too. You forgot to mention that.

I understand what you mean by him saying to follow and gas moeny, but those are options. I never gave that much and don't feel chained to follow, evidenced by my presence here. If I were 'chained' to his car, how could I do this with you?

There is this big argument going on. Is Maharaji Good or Bad?
Did he do this? Did he know that? And if so, when?

It is obvious that Maharaji is very human, only higher profile and therefore more easily recognizable to those who can be objective about it. I am sure our own shit would look alot bigger too if we were in the limelight.

He is spreading Knowledge. He is also doing human things along the way in his life that many of US find despicable upon first glance or even aftersome scrutiny. So I am seeing that it is all true, the good news and the bad news, in some degree or other, after the exagerration is taken out of both sides.

This is not a defense, but a less violent and angry approach to the situation we have here among us. Even among ex-premies there are blood-and-guts zealots and those who are a bit more mellow about it. No one has the right to say how one should express their feelings and thoughts about this or anything else.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 21:11:59 (GMT)
From: baz
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: To Way
Message:
sandy

you know I started logging on to this site as a disillusioned
premie but I find myself becoming even more disillusioned with
ex-premies. they don't seem to have anything positve to say do
they? next thing you know there will be a new site 'ex-ex-premie.
org'?

ps apparently I can't use baz as a handle because there's already
a bazza in the forum!

barry

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 09:40:28 (GMT)
From: janet
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: how does showing or telling people
Message:
knowledge equate to his profligate waste of--no, lets take one step back--to his wanting our money, more and more and more of it, in the millions of dollars so he can live and operate the way he does? how does showing the techniques, once done person to person, and now done by darkening a room and rolling a video/DVD and having everyone in the room ape him on the screen, 'monkey see, monkey do', translate to frightening us and berating us and coercing us to be cruel to ourselves and our relationships, into not being allowed to build ourselves anchored careers, families, children, incomes, other involvements, other worship?how does what he was charged to show people, equate with what he has used his position to get himself?
do you think you could do it? you know the techiques. could you start showing people the techniques, and then use it to go from asking for their attention to asking for their lives? could you stand yourself asking them to sell all their possession, telling them everything they knew and saw in the world is nonexistent and all they had in the world is you? could you live with yourself asking them, exhorting them, browbeating them, reducing them, humiliating them for not slaving to you enough? could you still do it after learning that they were committing suicide from their despair and stress and ill health as a direct result of following your tirades?could you actually escalate from there, to yelling for more and more money, to asking for cars, houses, booze, dope, smokes, planes, land, thousand dollar watches, million dollar planes, yachts, asking your manager to go out and bring sexy blonde babes you saw in the crowds to wait for you in 4 star hotel rooms, and slip away from your blonde wife and four kids, to go lay them, and then get rid of them? could you get so fat on your own self importance that you didn't give a fuck what happened to anybody, didn't give a fuck what anybody wanted but yourself, didnt give a fuck if the children of your followers were being sexually molested by one of your assigned agents, finally reaching a day when you killed a man with your car and ran away in cowardice from the law?

could you do it, sandy? if the 4 techniques you were shown by your teacher, were the only things you started out to show simple, everyday people around you, in turn?
and what happened , if you yourself never did those techniques anymore, yourself?.
what would you be? would you be worthy of what you extorted, and went on extorting, from those people?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 12:45:47 (GMT)
From: Sandy
Email: None
To: janet
Subject: Well, since you put it like that....
Message:
No, janet, I could not do the things you mentioned, at least not if I was in my right mind.

Besides reading your most confronting and direct post, I was also having some other thoughts this early morning as I prepare to go to work with my older son. We are going to be spending some rare quality time together doing some painting at a friend's new home about an hour away, and I am going to let him drive. That's a big deal for him and he's looking forward to it. It has snowed a little, so he will be especially happy to know that I trust him to handle it, and not say he can't drive because it might be slippery, etc etc. He has to learn sometime and somehwere and I am his father so it's my turn to be in this position. It reminds me of delivering him, and looking into his newborn eyes as I gave him his LeBoyer bath, and telling him that I am his dad and I'll be there for him for his whole life. Now is my chance to really 'be there' as he goes through this exciting time for him. I remember how cool it was to learn how to drive too, so I can still relate, not too old for that.

Then I started thinking as I was getting ready, what would I do and what would I say to my beloved son if someday he came to me and told me he was following a teacher who I discovered had done all the things that you outlined in your post, as well as said all those things that John Tucker documented on his site and then denied having said them? In a way that would hopefully not turn him away from listening to me, I would try to tell him that something is wrong with this picture. Then I would conduct a search of my own with more intensity than I have been operating at here, so that I could present him with facts and documented information to support what I was saying. (That's an interesting phenomenon, that I would take more care and more action for my son's sake or someone else's sake than my own. Where did I learn to not love myself as much as I love others? Note to self: Love yourself too.)

Thank you, janet, for giving it to me between the eyes, but not in an insulting way. That's how I like it. I need courage now.
Strength of heart.

Sandy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 17:21:27 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: no, no, no, those are not options!
Message:
No, Rawat does not present following him as an option. No, no, no. Never, never, never, never. That is all he ever says to his premies. He says: 'Follow me. I am the living filament that is lit. Get your light from me. I am the coach that is telling you what direction to run.' That's all he ever says. He never says that there is a direct link from the Power Source to your own filament that can be lit without the Master. Never.

The facts that you don't give him much gas money and you feel free to post here and you don't feel chained to follow are all options that you have given yourself. But you are going contrary to Rawat's teachings when you do that. He has never once said there are such options. He always says 'Get behind me. Follow me. To your dying day!' And what he does is drive around, with his followers going nowhere.

I'm not telling you how to express yourself here. But I am saying that you are dead wrong when you present Rawat as a friendly man who gives the proper directions.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:08:59 (GMT)
From: Jean-Paul
Email: None
To: All
Subject: m is superficial
Message:
The magician master gives the light ! Follow the master and enjoy (and get crazy and stupid). The others don’t know anything about freedom. The master knows. Il is a scandal. This guy doesn’t know anything about the human mind, knowledge , meditation, the unconscious etc…People who imagine that the four techniques and so called guidance of this master lead to somewhere are condemned to stay stucked with the a big feeling of culpability that m reinforces every time he speaks. Knowledge and happiness stay a dream when you follow m. All the confusion stays the same. There in no real work on oneself. People who practice the technics that m shows look inside and may have nice experiences ( that was the case for me) but in the same time there is no cleaning and no transformation. On day, black forces may come back with a lot of power. That happened to me. Big depression. Deep sadness and anxiety without apparent reason. I could meditate and calm myself but after it was as horrible as before. I got rid of that with buddhist meditation and good teachings from different instructors and a friend. All the suffering and tensions slowly came out. No repression anymore. No more master, money, indoctrinement and beleives. Now I enjoy meditation but the four technics of m, I don’t use anymore. You don’t need them even to see light and nice things. But these things come in times. They are not essential.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:35:13 (GMT)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: Jean-Paul
Subject: Very true Jean-Paul -- great post! (OT)
Message:
Meditation that calms the mind is invaluable, but everything comes back to you if you don't do more than that.

You are right -- there is no way to avoid doing a little work on oneself, being mindful, and seeing things for what they are. Going 'inside' with your eyes closed is only going to get one so far.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 20:57:31 (GMT)
From: Jean-Paul
Email: jfagnaux@hotmail.com
To: Francesca
Subject: no need saviour
Message:
First, I forgott to introduce myself. I live in Brussels, Belgium. I speak french. Who knows, may be old friends will recognize me. (girl from Argentina living in Miami, are you there?)
M says he shows light, true nature. But what we are is also lot of things. Only try to look for light is nonsense. Because the fondation is not clear. No understanding of all our internal forces. We have to look at that, face that and understand their nature. And light and love may come naturally without the grace of anybody.
This last month I dream 2 times that m was dead. I feel he is nearly dead for me in my mind and I feel free.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:44:32 (GMT)
From: Disculta
Email: None
To: Jean-Paul
Subject: exactement Jean-Paul!
Message:
Great post.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:08:31 (GMT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: You buttwipe Sandy
Message:
You fucking hypocrite, lame brain mystic jerk off premie. Get lost. You had your chance. Stop your fucking outgassing here. You're making me sick to my stomach with all your bullshit.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 23:55:22 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: gerry
Subject: Oh Stoooonoooooorrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!
Message:
Stonor,

Would you please get your crew together for a silent vigil or something? It looks like poor Sandy's being bullied again.

By the way, now that you're reading this, tell me the truth. Didn't you tell us that you were here to study the human interaction? My girlfriend's got a good memory, Stonor. Better than mine. We both remember something to that effect. Come on now, please be honest.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 04:45:32 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: That's my recillection too, Jim -nt-
Message:
b
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 20:00:03 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: What exactly do you remember, John? (nt)
Message:
hhhhhhh
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 22:08:25 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Not a lot, I'm sorry to say
Message:
Now, let me think aloud, it may jog your memory too. There was a ding-dong about theisism sparked by your assertion that agnosticism (a term coined by T H Huxley to mean that knowledge of a Supreme Being is impossible) is closer to atheism than it is to Theism. I think some people took the agnosticism to mean dunno or not sure and accordingly argued that you were most certainly wrong. (This is making my head hurt!) You were present then, and Stonor might have been asked what she was about at that time.

Another time, when you were on holiday, Stonor teamed up with an ex (who, for whatever reason had not made his real name known) in an attempt to moderate ex-premie to premie exchanges. Joe had opposed the idea, but Stonor was sure she knew better and persisted. In that exchange I explicitly argued that free speech should not be so fettered; that Stonor's position made it unwise for her to pursue her campaign against what she saw as intemperate ex-premies; and that she should take care to be less extreme in her expression than the objects of her opprobrium.

That embroilment ended when you returned. I recall you made a post whose title referred to choking on your own vomit; her rejoinder was a post whose title referred to force-feeding; I found her language to be the more violent (choking on one's own vomit is a graphic and unpleasant metaphore; so is force-feeding but that also involves premeditated violence against a passive protestor). So I explained to her that self-starvation is the ultimate act of disempowered defiance and illustrated the point with the true story of the Right Honourable Bobby Sands MP.

I have the vaugest inkling (now) that it was around this episode that she claimed to be some sort of disinterested social scientist interested in the dynamics of this forum, who could heal the tempests that periodically erupt here.

IF I am right, then it would have been as the row was brewing. I had made it clear (as I am wont) in a post to an ex that I am no ex - and, challenged, I explained in a post entitled Trouble and Strife (that is cockney rhyming slang for wife, you see) my involvement with the rogue Maharaji.

Dammit! This is hard. So much goes down here! If only the person was candid and co-operable (Yeah, I know; we wouldn't have a problem with her at all if that were the case).

ALSO; Stonor once posted a link to Bully OnLine to guide us in our efforts at cult-busting. Now I'm feeling I'm getting warm... The irony of its subtitle (Those who can, do. Those who can't, bully.) being completely lost on her, it may well have been then that she made her pretentions clear.

I do hope this helps jog someone's memory. Why should Stonor stonewall on this question?

Why?

JohnT
- never a premie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:19:29 (GMT)
From: Sandy
Email: None
To: gerry
Subject: Buttwipes get rid of shit, you need 'em pal
Message:
So that's the deal?
I have to preach the ex-party line
with every breath or be demonized here?
No objectivity allowed whatsoever?
God, this is more oppressive than premieworld!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 10:00:56 (GMT)
From: janet
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: animals don't use toilet paper, and only
Message:
infants, the senile, the paralyzed, the comatose, and the invalid need someone else to wipe their butts for them. they are blameless and at the mercy of the compassionate. If there are none, they lay in their own shit.

from the age of two, on, human beings wipe their own shit away and wash themselves clean out of self awareness and self respect.

only a despicably diarrhetic asshole like maharaji makes others wipe his ass and clean up his shit and demands gold toilets in which to do it.

he does not need, deserve or merit your compassion, sandy. In point of fact, he has nothing but contempt for it. Stop wiping his ass for him Sandy. Your singular life is not toilet paper to your creator. By the way, the Creator does not need toilet paper, nor a toilet, nor any of his creations to wipe his ass or his shit , off him or anything else. He has it all taken care of.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:29:06 (GMT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: Having a little relapse, sheep?
Message:
Re-read your absolutely STUPID post about Jim. Then your goofy satsang about goober in the Aston Martin. Face it: you're a premie. Be happy about that and get the fuck out of here with your satsang bullshit. We've ALL had enough of that shit for a lifetime, and some people here are extremely sensitive to satsang, asshole. Did you miss the big sign at the top of the page? It says ex-Premie, jerk-off.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:43:56 (GMT)
From: Sandy
Email: None
To: gerry
Subject: Having a little relapse, sheep?
Message:
'The Forum is an unmoderated collection of ongoing threaded discussions where ex-premies, current premies, and non-premies express their views on anything and everything related to following Maharaji, practicing Knowledge, and life afterwards.'
-excerpt from Forum intro page

Gerry,

When you are watching the Superbowl this weekend, if you do, will you only appreciate the great plays made by the team that you are rooting for? Or will you give credit for where it is due, if the team you are not rooting for does something really cool?

Like I said up higher, don't even try to label me. That is a very thin argument, calling me a premie, like it is a curse.
I am just calling them like I see them, using both sides of my brain. Open up. Be sure of yourself to have a stand but be garcious enough to give credit where it is due. It is you who seem to be relapsing, calling me a sheep. Am I supposed to snap back into line so that I don't get called names by the likes of you? Is that what you expect me to respond to, your namecalling peer group pressure?

I have already stated my case that I am blown away, pissed off and disillusioned by some of the stuff that has gone down on Maharaji's watch. But I have not lost my complete fucking mind over it. If that is the price to enter here, it is the same price that you claim he demands, so what's the difference? Two sides of the same coin. I want a new coin to flip or have this one cleaned up. It seems to have landed in some shit, so I want to wash it off and see what is really imprinted on the coin, both sides. That may take a lifetime or five minutes, I don't know.
But I sure don't want to go through life like an angry fire ant while all this is being worked out.

If I got to choose what to be thinking about if I get hit by a bus and killed later today, I'd much rather be thinking about how great life is/was than whether Maharaji is really a Master or not. You are obsessed and I am not. Obsession is not a goal of mine.

They say that everything comes out in the wash, which remeinds me that I have some laundry to do. Good day.

Sandy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 11:35:56 (GMT)
From: toby
Email: None
To: Sandy
Subject: high sandy
Message:
nice story ,or philosohy?

Isn't it too bad that the nice guy with the big car
didn't stop for the poor bycicle driver in India ?

OOOps! He just killed him.
And then ran away.
Doubtful character.

You have no idea where you were pointed to.

That is the reason for you to justify m.
you just got caught and you don't recognize that.

Toby

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 01:34:05 (GMT)
From: baz
Email: na
To: Sandy
Subject: well said
Message:
whatever the truth about maharaji knowledge seems to work for
me even after 25 years and cost me nothing
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 16:35:31 (GMT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: baz
Subject: baz, you do know...
Message:
that the four techniques are very common and widely known yoga kriyas, right? And that Rawat has no claim on them as his own whatsoever. And that Rawat used these simple kriyas as the bait to entrap thousands of naive people into thinking he was something special.

And can you tell what you mean when you say 'knowledge works?'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 20:47:50 (GMT)
From: baz
Email: None
To: gerry
Subject: reply sent to wrong message
Message:
gerry

please see message '4 techniques' approx 25 messages back

barry

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:59:13 (GMT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: sheep
Subject: Yeah, yer right, sheep, can't beat your logic,
Message:
you're a lost cause and a waste of time. Why don't you just shut up, you fucking wind bag?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 07:41:08 (GMT)
From: Jean-Paul
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Guru dead?
Message:
Guru dead?

Interesting.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 09:10:55 (GMT)
From: JTF
Email: None
To: Jean-Paul
Subject: Thanks, this is great--a sample
Message:
WIE: Our capitalist culture is also a democracy, and one of the central and seemingly democratic injunctions in contemporary American spirituality is 'Thou shalt not judge.' Many people seem to feel that having a strong opinion in and of itself can cut you off from the experience of a deeper, more intuitive truth. Or alternatively, that all human experience is subjective anyway and there really isn't any deeper truth to speak of.

AC: Well, I think 'Thou shalt not judge' is one of those wimpy, fearful, courage-free ideas. The potential of a human being is in commenting, translating, judging the world. Not only should you not shy away from judging, you should do so as much as possible-as long, of course, as you're not harming someone else by doing that. You see, it is not necessarily important to walk a mile in another person's shoes to know that that person is out to lunch or that their shoes don't fit. It's possible to know those things without actually having to do that. So I think that an unwillingness to judge only reflects a lack of courage and it's the disease of a politically correct culture that is afraid to offend. I think you should critique as much as you are able to observe, and not shy away from it. In a true democracy, you'll get equally strong opinions coming back at you, and you have to survive the clash. It's your prerogative as a free person to spout off and even make an ass of yourself if you like, but you'll get your corrective if somebody equally free is also speaking. And it's not that we should be intentionally offensive to one another; we should be candid. The genuineness of democratic discourse is in candor. It's not in avoiding offense.
For those who want to go directly to this interview just copy and paste this into your browser.

http://www.wie.org/j12/codrescu.html

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 10:23:58 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: JTF
Subject: Thanks, this is great--a sample
Message:
I don't trust Kramer. The underlying philosophy is about 75% Marx and 25% Weber. He doesn't bother to cite either one. Seems a bit underhanded to me. I mean, he's free to say whatever he wants but to say he's a 'trained philosopher' is a bit of a stretch. He also doesn't present much of an argument, mostly just making assertions. Krishnamurti got to the heart of what he's saying much more clearly, and without all the plaigeurism and double talk.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 10:39:48 (GMT)
From: JTF
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Kramer?...this is an interview with....
Message:
Andrei Codrescu
THE DISAPPEARANCE OF THE OUTSIDE
A Romanian exile, social critic and poet talks about consumerism, spiritual subversion and the dangers of the seemingly real.
Interview by Simeon Alev

I guess I appreciated it because my starting point (now-and prior to K)was/is that this is just all bullshit. I guess I'm trapped into the ? of What could I have possibly been thinking and why did it take me so many years to be honest with myself?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 15:38:40 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: JTF
Subject: Kramer?...this is an interview with....
Message:
JTF:

Sorry. It was late at night and I thought you were talking about the Guru Papers stuff. Not very fond of Kramer and Alstad. I mean, I'm against Gurus and Authoritarianism... but most people are.

BTW, I think 'though shalt not judge' is probably a mistranslation. I'm not sure what JC was driving at, but am pretty sure that too much candor wasn't the biggest problem of 1st century Jews in Palestine. It really comes from a more recent notion of 'aesthetics' that probably has it's origins in the French Revolution. Before that, bad people where just encouraged to be ashamed of themselves and 'don't judge' was more like advice not to stone people to death without a trial.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 09:22:25 (GMT)
From: JTF
Email: None
To: JTF
Subject: Kitsch...an explanation of cult arrogance
Message:
Kitsch is the awe that somebody feels about their own amazing good taste and ability to appreciate something. In other words, they're not truly living the experience or appreciating it; they're amazed at how amazing they themselves are for being able to do it.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 08:16:43 (GMT)
From: Steve Quint
Email: the_avenger55@hotmail.com
To: Jean-Paul
Subject: Guru dead?
Message:
In my opinion the article from the above journal worth reading is The Seal Of God.

Steve

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jan 25, 2001 at 23:18:14 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Maharaji is a Moron...
Message:
Maharaji is a moron! FA, please don’t delete this post. I am mindful of your recent edict about not starting threads with a personal attack!!! but if you will bear with me I will prove that this statement is fully justified.

Just to remind you, I am a recent ex, first posted here two months ago…but haven’t been here much lately for a variety of reasons, one of which has been the need for some time to really examine my thoughts and feelings about the whole thing. Another reason is that I have been learning to type so I can keep up with you lot!!

During the last two days I have watched the two most recent satellite re-broadcasts on tape. One from Mauritius and the other from Oxnard California. Why do I do it? Why do I put myself through it? You may well ask! I think I keep going back to it to see if I can find some redeeming feature, some saving grace, I’m looking for some trace of what I originally saw in him and experienced in his presence. This is perhaps in order to justify and excuse myself for going along with it for so long. But, guess what? I found nothing . Just banal, simplistic, repetitive, mindless, puerile, tedious, self important, garbage. On and on he went about thought versus “feeling”…. as if it’s an either/ or situation. I got to the end and thought..”the man’s a moron”

Then, I thought I’d better look up “moron” in the dictionary, just to make sure. The Concise Oxford Dictionary defines it as…
” Adult with intelligence equal to that of average child of 8-12, or (colloquial) very stupid or degenerate person.”
So then I looked up “degenerate”
“Having lost the qualities that are normal and desirable or proper to its kind, fallen from former excellence”

I think that really tells his story. When he was about 8-12 and maybe a little older, he really had something, he had real promise, he had a very attractive personality and he had intelligence. But with intelligence, you use it or lose it…and I think he’s completely lost it!! He’s stuck in his own simplistic concepts. The trouble is he’s got thousands of people stuck there with him. The Shorter Oxford Dictionary defines “moron” as “ A person whose intellectual development is arrested. “ He’s making morons of them all…he made me a moron!!!!

By the way, I don’t know if anyone has mentioned this , but… He opened his Oxnard address , with the “Think of me when you die “ Krishna quote.. Can you believe it? His exact words were…

“I’d like to wish everyone a Happy New Year”. And now I can tell you what can make it happy. Because, when it really comes down to it, it’s one breath, it’s one existence and it’s one understanding. There are many things that happen….. in your life….and many things will.. but it’s one thing that’ll matter the most. In a very simple way Krishna explains this to Arjun, and what he is telling him is this. That at the end of your last moment, remember me…and he goes on to say that what you remember most in your lifetime , you’re most likely to remember that at the very end. So he says….this is not exactly the words… but, to make it easier on yourself, to make this happen, to make this possible…remember me always. That way, no big deal…gives him a solution. I think about that, because I see that in this life so many things are happening, too many. I came back from India………”

Then he went off on another tack, mentioned Krishna again later as the charioteer who will drive you to do battle with the dreaded mind etc. blah blah blah!

I find it incredible that he can say this in 2001 in the USA.

Mindlessly and moronically
Kelly

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 19:57:55 (GMT)
From: Charles S
Email: bctanda@hotmail.com
To: Kelly
Subject: All part of the 'Radhaswammy Whammy'...
Message:
Thank you for the informative post, Kelly.

I just wanted to add a comment. While reseaching the Radhasomi cult/religion on the Indian Background pages of this site, I discovered that in India, many of the peasants believe that when they die, the guru's 'spirit' will actually come to them at death, and 'lift' them up into a higher realm in the afterlife, 'saving' them from the consequences of whatever bad Karma they need to escape from. It is one of the ways in which Radhasoami has borrowed from christianity to turn the guru into a messiah.

The statements by M. about remembering him, and recieving him when you die, puzzled me up until then. Now it makes sense, in a totally screwed up religious way. How can he claim Knowlege in not a religion when he expects the premies to believe in such mumbo-jumbo? It's all part of the Radhaswammy-whammy. They hook you on very universal ideas of love and consciousness of bliss. Then, once they've got you hooked, they teach you to relate eveything good you experience to the guru, and to have faith in him like you would in God. That's where the Bhakti-ju ju kicks in, and you are supposed to have no doubts and stop asking questions, be paranoid of people without 'knowledge', etc. What started out as 'universal' becomes very narrow indeed.

Over the last several years, M. has been quoting scripture quite a bit, and Kabir quite a lot. He wants us to read Kabir, so we understand how we are supposed to be in our 'relationship' with the 'Master'. He's brought back the old devotional songs, tells us to sing 'Arti' like we MEAN it, brought back the foot kissing in Amaroo 'don't come through unless you are ready to show some REAL respect...' As he spends more time in India, it seems he expects us to behave towards him more like the Indians do. Perhaps as he gets older, he wants to be more like his father.

If I had been introduced to Knowlege like that, I would have said it's a religon/cult, no thank you. But it is never talked about honestly. He has some nerve claiming he isn't teaching a religion. Just read about the Radhasoami roots! Non of it is original. He's just watered-down some of the religion, to make it more palpable to western people (to attract larger numbers of donors), and to make it easier to overlook his own excesses of wealth (which traditional Radhasoamies would not approve of). If you read the Indian Background, there can be no doubt that this is a guru-messiah religon/cult.

The Radhasoami's themselves, on the front page of their website, describe themselves proudly as 'India's fastest growing CULT...' Don't fall for M's Radhaswammy Whammy. He's not even honest about what he is doing. Wake up and smell the coffee. Anything he has told you that is good has been said by someone else, and said better, without the strings of bhakti ju-ju attached. You can have all the good stuff, without all the garbage. The truth is FREE, just like you are, if you choose to walk away from Maharaji. Nobody has a copyright on the truth. Don't fall for M's religous cult. Don't be USED anymore. Accept your freedom.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 23:42:57 (GMT)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: Charles S
Subject: Great post Chas! n/t
Message:
888
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 10:42:57 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: Last Chance Saloon
Message:
Hi Kelly,

I really enjoyed your post, and the addendum below, thanks.

What drew my attention was your comment about going back to see if you could find some redeeming feature.

I know a few premies who have had knowledge for years who went to the programme in Paris with the same attitude. It's kind of corny, that they've been following the Fatguru for over 25 years, and still aren't sure about it- and hence, go along to 'Give him a final chance.'

Aside from the whipped up mass emotional sickly buzz that the premies get at a programme (a bit like going to see a 'Boy Band' if you're a 14 year old girl, or watching the Queen ride by if your a sad royalist), there's nothing there. His audience is being distilled down to the Bongos amongst Bongos- the folk who could walk into any meeting of any group anywhere and join it.

Take care

Anth the bongone (boing boing bong)

The bubble has burst and the Emporer is naked.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 13:50:11 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Last Chance Saloon
Message:
Hi Anth,

I’ve been doing that “give him a final chance” thing for the last few years, and somehow have always managed (until recently) to give him the benefit of the doubt. I managed to filter out enough nourishment to feed the delusion and carry on.
I was slowly coming to the strange position of accepting a “master” who I really didn’t like as a person, who seemed to be deeply flawed. Then I started reading here and the “drip” rate speeded up and eventually I woke up.

I hope you’re right and the whole house of cards is about come tumbling down, but the brainwashing is very strong and some premies’ brains are completely washed up!

I’m just grateful I’ve got a dirty mind again!!!

Kelly

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 10:12:58 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: It's collapsing alright Kelly.
Message:
The cult exists to service the Lard. It's got massive overheads and a dwindling income. It can only end one way.

They are in panic at the moment. And they are also dealing with a tempremental, moody, abusive egomaniac, who nobody dare say 'No' to.

Then look at the rising disaffection, as more and more premies find out what he's been up to all these years.

We can sit back and watch the walls come tumbling down.

Anth the optimist

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 05:56:45 (GMT)
From: SB
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: Maharaji is a Moron... Yeap
Message:
Thanks for your post Kelly.

I too like to be reminded that without a single doubt he took me for a ride and that he is wrong and that HE IS NOTHING but a MORON, repeating absurd empty shhhit to keep people in his trip. I have so much material around my house that here and there memories/shit appear to remind me of how moronic his world is, and it feels so good to be free from it.

Yes, we became somewhat morans too because of the simplistic way of thinking he transmitted us but be have the advantage; we are out of the trip, building ourselves, wanting to be truthfull to ourselves, and him? Whatever he does is to perpretate his lies. He lies because of greed and because without the people he is nothing. Can you believe that the ass knows people are dying and he pretends he doesn't hear anything? He is a low, low caliber human being, and no, the best is yet to come for him. He''ll be know alright.

He is making many people extremely angry. I want some of what he took from me, without my permission, with lies.

The time is near. I can feel it. He is done. I am writing a good book: He is going to love it!

MAHARAJI: FREE THE PREMIES!!

Take care Kell

SB

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 03:57:46 (GMT)
From: Marianne
Email: delores@gofree.indigo.ie
To: Kelly
Subject: Audacity of 'Remember me when you die' circa 2001
Message:
Kelly: Thanks for making this post. Is there anyone else out there who is shocked that the Mere Meditation Teacher is referring to Krishna and Arjuna at this late date?

As for this request that we remember him when we die, I have this to say:

How dare you! Are YOU the least bit worried about your own soul, sir? Why would you ask anyone to remember you at the moment of death? Here you are again, putting yourself above our family, friends, spouses, partners, children, etc., insinuating that you are the most important person who existed in our lives, when most of us have never even met you face to face. You know what Maharaji? You'll be remembering US at the moment of your death, and you'll be breaking out in a cold sweat when you do, because you convinced so many people to forsake the most important relationships in life so that we could be devoted to you.

Have you considered what you are going to say to Saint Peter (for those of us lapsed Catholics) when you get to the pearly gates and he asks you why you allowed people to deify you, Mere Meditation Teacher?

Marianne, at nearly 4 am in Ireland, I still have one foot in SF

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 21:55:24 (GMT)
From: Windflower
Email: None
To: Marianne
Subject: I guess we could call it ....
Message:
the Elan Vital last rite of 'Extreme Unctuous'

unctuous \Unc'tu*ous\ 1. Of the nature or quality of an unguent or ointment; fatty; oily; greasy. ``The unctuous cheese.'' --Longfellow,

Yep premie jies... yer last breath will be the rite of anointing by the fatty, oily, greasy...big cheese himself... raw rat!

;-)That's what I'd call hell indeed!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 12:01:33 (GMT)
From: Marianne
Email: None
To: Windflower
Subject: Greetings, lapsed Catholic (I suspect) -nt
Message:
xxx
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:17:03 (GMT)
From: salam
Email: salam_au@iprimus.com.au
To: Marianne
Subject: Your e-mail (OT)
Message:
I tried to e-mail you, but got a returned message. Can you e-mail me.

salam

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 17:31:11 (GMT)
From: Marianne
Email: None
To: salam
Subject: Done --nt
Message:
xxx
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 03:47:58 (GMT)
From: Robyn
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: great post Kelly!
Message:
Dear Kelly,
So glad you finally saw it, saw him for what he is! Congratualtions! :)
For years I couldn't figure out what the road sign, Bridge Freezes Before Road Surface, meant. It boggled my mind but then one day, ping! It was there and I couldn't believe how I could have not understood it all those years! Funniest part is one of my best friends had the same experience with the same sign! Made me not feel quite so stupid, pretty stupid but it is nice not to be alone. I know this is a silly analogy but it happens I guess, you don't see what is right before you. Just thank god it finally clicked for you and that these sites are available so you don't feel alone.
Love,
Robyn
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 15:55:24 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: Robyn
Subject: Bridge freezes before ...duh?
Message:
Hi Robyn,
'Bridge freezes over before road surface.' I'm afraid this was too much for my brainwashed mind. I had to ask my husband. Fortunately he has a degree in physics and has never been a premie, so he was able to explain it to me!!!
Love Kelly
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 01:40:52 (GMT)
From: Robyn
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: Bridge freezes before ...duh?
Message:
Dear Kelly,
I feel it, we are bonding! :)
Love,
Robyn
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 00:40:07 (GMT)
From: Tim G
Email: timgitti@eircom.net
To: Kelly
Subject: M for Meglomania
Message:
Hi Kelly...most interesting! Reading your report of his recent teachings was illuminating and God Bless you for wading through all that tripe. What strikes me with a whack between the eyes is this: We all of course need to breathe to stay alive
But Mr Rawat has the brazen cheek to suggest that he either IS that breath or is directly responsible for it. In a very simple scam he has entrapped us into a clinging need for him. HOW COULD I HAVE BEEN SO STUPID.

This year I have a very ambitious mission....namely to broadcast loud and clear to premies, aspirants and especially the facilities that m uses the cultic nature of his operations. I owe it to myself to do this and don't see why I should be shy of my evaluations....the worst that can happen is that people might disagree.

I started with Oxnard.
Keep up the good work...it feels good.
yours at the Lotus slipper,
Tim

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jan 25, 2001 at 23:29:49 (GMT)
From: Forum Admin
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: Maharaji is a Moron...
Message:
Kelly said:-

Maharaji is a moron! FA, please don’t delete this post. I am mindful of your recent edict about not starting threads with a personal attack!!!

Kelly,

The thing about personal attacks definitely does not apply to our former Master - please attack as much as you like:-)

Forum Admin

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 04:47:34 (GMT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Forum Admin
Subject: Egad! I was a bona fide moron for decades!-nt
Message:
ghs
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 00:09:04 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: Forum Admin
Subject: Oh well, in that case..Maharaji is also
Message:
getting very thin on top!! the only place he is thin!! and he is also very ugly and that smile that I used to see as so blissful is pure self satisfied complacency. He is surrounded by servile unctious sycophants with their own self-interest in maintaining the illusion that he is the 'Master' They are all, him included, the victims of a mass delusion. I don't think he's a fraud, I think he really believes himself to be 'that charioteer' or to use his most recent banal analogy 'that football coach' who tells you, 'you're running the wrong way'

I must be careful I don't think about him too much or I might remember him when I die!! Arrgghhh !

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 02:28:39 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: Kelly, you are wonderful
Message:
I am so glad you are here. Thanks for taking the time to type out the Rev's rubbish. I have got two new tapes of recent events that I cannot bring myself to watch. (If anyone wants to pay me to watch, transcribe and deconstruct them I will.) I'd rather watch a Jacki Chan movie - 2 hours of mindless bliss for $4.

Welcome! I look forward to reading your future posts.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 14:08:24 (GMT)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: Patrick Conlon
Subject: Kelly, you are wonderful
Message:
Yeah, I agree, I think I deserve a bloody medal!! for 'service' above and beyond the call of duty. One thing's for certain,I won't be doing it again in a hurry. Not unless someone pays me!! It is just too mind-numbingly tedious.
I've never managed to watch a Jacki Chan movie all the way through, but then I'm a moron!!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 10:52:05 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Patrick Conlon
Subject: It's 'service' Patrick.
Message:
Your reward will be in heaven, with a few bonus laughs down here on earth.

Anth the Cesarian.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 01:02:16 (GMT)
From: Joy
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: Plagiarized from Buddhism
Message:
I think he's borrowed this 'remember me when you die' thing from Buddhism, which places great importance on your last thought, and the manner of your death. It's something new he's started spouting, since I don't remember him ever saying it before 1982.

It gives me the willies, he's the LAST thing I want to remember when I die (or now). How dare he even have the audacity to suggest such a thing? It's just another in his not-so-subtle inferences to his supposed divinity. If he were merely a meditation teacher or humble servant or ordinary guy, why would it be necessary to remember him when dying? This is indicative to me of a return to his LOTU delusional thinking and yet another demand for devotion/surrender, 2000 style.

Give us a break Maharaji! What aspect of you are we supposed to remember: the womanizing, the drinking/drug taking, excessive materialistic greed, the condoning of child abuse, the evasion of justice in manslaughter? Please enlighten us as to what about you you would like us to remember first?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 02:21:07 (GMT)
From: X
Email: None
To: Joy
Subject: Plagiarized from Buddhism
Message:
>It gives me the willies, he's the LAST thing I want to remember when I die (or now). How dare he even have the audacity to suggest such a thing?

He did also say to feel the peace within yourself for yourself.
Whatever people may think of Maharaji, the fact of death and the mystery of life remain even in the great USA in 2001.

X

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 13:05:38 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: X
Subject: Are you Chris Dickey reincarnated?
Message:
Only one person I know who speaks in such useless, weenie-like non sequiturs and that's CD. Is that you, CD? Why the disguise? Don't you have any respect for the basic forum rules? Hey, don't you have any respect for all the bullshit you've posted over the years under your own name?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 17:12:29 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Good call.
Message:
Jim:

Yeah, it's Chris alright. And I'm pretty sure I'll be more likely to remember some of my old girlfriends when I die, than Maharaji. Like most of use I'll be inclined to remember people I actually knew, death being a real experience rather than a fantasy and all. And if there is a true metaphysical consciousness or awareness I'm pretty sure recollection would just be a distraction. So if it turns out that there *is* something rather than nothing, then it's probably not 'the last thing that you remember' that's important, but the first thing you don't.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 23:58:21 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: IF this is CD, then he's a real 'good guy'
Message:
If CD really has been sneaking back on to the forum in an apparent effort to distance himself from all the other brain-dead things he said to us for a couple of years, then Chris is not a slimy worm or anything of the sort. No, Chris Dickey, a friend of Katie's I might add, is a 'good guy'.

There! That's not abusive, is it?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 05:01:37 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: IF X is CD, then he's the misogynist creep ...
Message:
... who has freaked out a number of women on this forum by his 'cyber stalking'.

I described him to SB (I think, maybe Selene - sorry I'm a bit of a fluffy head on this one maybe it was both of them; and I think Marianne) as a one man argument in favour of anonimity because of the way his snide digs seemed intended to make women (in his only posts over several weeks he picked on three identifiably female posters in succession) exposed and vulnerable.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 07:49:51 (GMT)
From: X
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: IF
Message:
> ... who has freaked out a number of women on this forum by his 'cyber stalking'.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume your post was made out of ignorance rather than misguided intent.

X

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 15:56:21 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: X
Subject: ARE YOU CD OR NOT? (nt)
Message:
ggggg
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 09:51:37 (GMT)
From: tim G
Email: timgitti@eircom.net
To: X
Subject: get real X
Message:
X
thats all very well.....feel the 'peace within' whenever and wherever you can....but it has absolutely nothing to do with maharaji and if it did it wouldn't be the real thing but some second hand concept.
get real
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 01:56:27 (GMT)
From: Pauline Premie
Email: None
To: Joy
Subject: Remember Maharaji when I die
Message:
Joy, it's quite simple, just like our breath is simple.

I know for me, it's just so beautiful to have that understanding to remember Maharaji when I die. That's why I have had the words 'MAHARAJI' tatooed on the inside of my eyelids. I mean, I'm sure I will probably close my eyes before I die, except if I am blown to smithereens by a bomb or something, and when I do, I will see those words and remember him. How blissful.

If I am blown up by a bomb, vaporized in a nuclear holacaust, or hit buy a bus and crushed before I know what hit me, I may not be able to remember Maharaji at that moment, since I might be kind of in shock, you know, so then, I guess my whole life is a complete waste, and I probably will be reincarnated as a maggot or something, which is all we really are anyway, without Maharaji's grace. Yes, we are just maggots on rotting, seething, smelly, infected mounds of rat flesh without Maharaji's grace.

And I'm sure Maharaji didn't steal anything from Buddhism, but since he is a Master in the same way as Buddha, how could you call it stealing when he just said those things in an earlier era of an earlier Mater, you silly, you angry, vindictive, confused ex-premie?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 06:09:33 (GMT)
From: Super Brat
Email: None
To: Pauline Premie
Subject: Oh Pauline, but you are already saved
Message:
HE WILL NEVER ABANDON YOU.

Even if you die of a sudden death that doesn't allowed you to remember HIM on your last breath, you kissed his holy stinking sweet sour feet: You are saved. I am saved too! Amazing how much he loves everybody. What a loving god we have!

It doesn't matter if some don't love him. Wait a minute: I got confused. He is never going to abandon anybody? What about the Rotten Vegetable satsang then? Another lila?

What a joking master. He confuses everybody because he loves us so much, that's it.

Pranam MAHARAJI. LORD OF LORDS. Not a leaf moves without your will. WHOW!

Please give us more satsangPauline. You are so, so clear. I envy you! :)))

SB

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 17:55:01 (GMT)
From: Pauline Premie
Email: None
To: Super Brat
Subject: You lack understanding and synchronization
Message:
Brat, you really are stuck back in those Hindu concepts that were IMPOSED on poor Maharaj back in the 70s and 80s. It has only been by his Hurculean Effort (thank you, Glen Whittaker) that he has moved us into a more stripped-down essence of what he has always taught. It USED to be that kissing his feet would save you, but that ended, I think in about 1990. NOW, it's remembering Maharaji when you DIE that is the key.

And like Turner says, this has nothing to do with love and being a good person. I was thinking about that a few months ago, when I allowed a PAM to fuck me so I could get a close seat at an event. I mean, who cares?

That's why, even though there was a 7.9 magnitude earthquake in India yesterday, and thousands are homeless, some of whom are undoubtedly premies, Maharaji isn't about to squander his meager resources, like his $7 million yacht to help them. That would be just SO 70s!! You ex-premies are so stuck in those stupid humanitarian concepts. They are just SO OVER!!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 02:37:00 (GMT)
From: The Church Lady
Email: None
To: Pauline Premie
Subject: Exactly Pauline, Remember Maharaji when I die
Message:
Pauline, you are so beautiful. I just love your satsang and I just wish you would post more. You and I know that He did not plagiarize anything from Buddhism. He was reading from the diary that He kept when He was Krishna. It is called the ''Bhagavad Gita'' and in Chapter 11 verse 23 He says very clearly that you will come to His most holy plump bosoms when you die if you think of Him.

Pranam Maharaji. Bowly Shriek Satgurudevil Maharaj Ki Jai.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jan 25, 2001 at 23:37:22 (GMT)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: Kelly
Subject: Way to go, Kelly! n/t
Message:
n/t
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 00:13:05 (GMT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: Francesca
Subject: he also sucks because
Message:
He performs fellatio, he is disgustingly disagreeable and offensive plus he is always cheating and swindling someone. (at least that's what my dictionary says).

rawat Sucking Moron

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 02:41:57 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: salam
Subject: Salam, Rawat sucks? I am so jealous...
Message:
You mean he sucked your cock! Does he give good head? Does he know how to keep his teeth out of the way when he gives a blow job?

So that's what you have been trying to tell us all the time when you say over and over again: ''Rawat Sucks!''

You sly old devil you.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 05:08:22 (GMT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Patrick Conlon
Subject: 'inner lips'
Message:
His valet that he has had for decades now is reputed to be gay.
I dont think it is too much of a stretch to figure that our lord ....well, THAT valet is also named Patrick, he would be the one to ask about any proficiencies our lord has in that department.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 05:28:39 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: bill
Subject: Patrick's 'inner lips'
Message:
Probably the other way around. When the Rev can't find a blonde he just has his valet do the job.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 15:36:06 (GMT)
From: red butler
Email: None
To: Patrick Conlon
Subject: redux
Message:
Big M looked around at the empty room. Christ, he hated to be alone, 'Where the fuck was everybody?' Well, he wasn't exactly alone. Patrick was some where in the house, not that it mattered.

Big M reached down and started scratching his crotch. 'What the fuck,' he thought, 'I'm not on stage.' He was starting to not mind this 'alone' stuff so much any more. Maybe the docs where all wrong about the phobias. And he was starting to get a pretty good dong going down there with all his handy work.

'Jesus fuckin christ, the Lord of the Universe and I can't even get laid,” he moaned out loud, 'I didn't incarnate just to jerk off. Where the hell is everybody?'

'I, I'm here, and, and, I can help you' stammered a familiar high pitch voice.

Big M paused a bit and then sauntered down the hall towards the west wing. 'Ah what the fuck,' he muttered to himself, 'a mouth is a mouth is a mouth...'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 04:59:22 (GMT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: Patrick Conlon
Subject: At last, someone else figured it out
Message:
I got a sure throat screeming. What the matter with you guys, sheesh.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 17:19:34 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: salam
Subject: At last, someone else figured it out
Message:
Don't you mean 'a sure throat screening?'

Scott 'just trying to make sense' T.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 18:00:41 (GMT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: dream on, making sense.
Message:
Can not understand it myself.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 05:30:06 (GMT)
From: Patrick Conlon
Email: None
To: salam
Subject: G'day mate
Message:
It's gives more nectar than the other technique.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jan 25, 2001 at 23:05:41 (GMT)
From: Susan
Email: None
To: Turner and anyone else
Subject: Bringing Turner's response to active here
Message:
Date: Thurs, Jan 25, 2001 at 13:29:46
From: Turner
Email: None
To: Susan
Subject: Original, well sort of
Message:
First let me say Susan that I appreciated your post…in spite of you calling me arrogant. Correct me if I’m wrong but the main point I got from it was you asking whether or not I am a caring person. Let me try to expand on that.
I consider myself to be a caring person…who doesn’t…but I’m not about to assert that claim to you. I will admit that there are more caring people in this world than me. However, I do not believe being a premie demands that you be a caring person or necessarily teaches you that. Life teaches you to care not Knowledge. And it is true, most people became premies before they had a wealth of life experiences. Being a premie in the early days put a check on those emotional commitments to others that might have taught them to care for others. Also, you tend to care about people who are in the same boat as you. And many people came to Knowledge because they didn’t want to be in that boat any longer. So distance got created between premies and the rest of the world…rightly or wrongly. There is a price for everything.

One thing that no doubt comes through in my posts is my disregard for the phenomenon gripping our culture today of what I call “self-victimization”. What I mean by this is the tendency to disassociate one’s own actions and decisions from one’s pain, and instead find momentary relief by blaming something external. I think it all started with a focus in the ‘60’s on civil rights, and then, like much of what we have done, we took it to an extreme. We have the Oprah’s and other PC standard-bearers of this movement to blame for this. Although I do not want to discount the good that has come out of “human-rights” movement, I believe the self-victimization phenomenon to be a dangerous one because it only perpetuates pain, and doesn’t get to its root.

If you look at accounts of past Masters you do not necessarily see a pattern of what Oprah and other PC adherents would consider “caring”. Mohammed had multiple wives and waged war against non-believers. Krishna advised Arjuna to kill his family members. Jesus beat up a bunch of people in front of the temple who were only trying to put food on the table for their families.

If you look at caring from an absolute perspective, pain is a great teacher and we are here to learn. You could say even God is cold-hearted the way he allows seeming innocents to be victimized. How can a “victim” learn from their mistakes if their self-victimization only hides the root cause of their pain?

So, before I could answer the question to you of who is caring and who is not, I would need to know first what criteria you use to exemplify someone as caring. Next I would like to know what weighting you give “caring” in your assessment of a human being.

You have probably read my post down below, in which I also liken you to a sociopath, and you thought it was tough to be called arrogant. First, let me say I am well aware that this dimension of communication limits our ability to really get a feel for another person and I have no idea if you are or not arrogant, a sociopath, both, or neither. I hope you are neither.

My take away message from your post above is that 'knowledge' and the practice of it, and the understanding of it, have little to do, and no need for, the human traits of caring or compassion. You seem to be saying that those who spent a lot of time practicing Knowledge instead of developing relationships might be less caring.

Maybe I should ask you, could a person be a serial murderer and a 'good' premie. Does how a person treats his fellow man matter at all in this?

I use the word caring in this sense, a person who feels compassion for others, a sense of responsibility to act in a way that is kind to others, a sense of being a part of a human community, a person who has a conscience, feels sadness and regret if they hurt another person without good justification, and feels empathy. I think I do mean the opposite of a sociopath.

I do think this has everything to do with Ev/Rawat/knowledge. Because I do think that caring, as I stated above, has everything to do with why we are here on the planet. If knowledge, as it is presented today, has absolutely nothing to do with the above qualities than it is a hedonistic ugly sort of spirituality indeed.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 01:32:44 (GMT)
From: Turner
Email: None
To: Susan
Subject: Caring
Message:
Maybe I should ask you, could a person be a serial murderer and a 'good' premie. Does how a person treats his fellow man matter at all in this?

There are murders (don’t know about serial) who have Knowledge and are active premies. Do they feel remorse for their past actions? I don’t know. Would society ever say this person is a caring person? Probably not. Are they more caring than a socially-accepted caring person? Maybe yes, maybe no. The only difference is that they have a way to discover a deeper part of themselves that the so-called caring person does not. So what does the level of caring have to do with Knowledge? Apparently nothing.

Does Maharaji care? Well, he’s spent 35 years running around the globe addressing a need that some people have…a need to feel good inside. Because he has spent this time doing this and not feeding the poor draws me to the conclusion he obviously feels this is more important than that. Does that mean he doesn’t care about poor people? Starving people? People torn by war and disaster? I’m sure it doesn’t mean that. I believe he sees much of that being caused by people not feeling good…which I agree with. So he expresses his caring in the way he believes will do the most good. Don’t all caring people do that?

In one of his examples, he recounted an experience he had giving money to a street vendor. He has consistently over the years expressed that premies should treat others with respect and dignity. The fact that he has been provided for in a standard of living above the norm has made most of you blind to the incredible caring expressed in spreading Knowledge. To me that is foolishness but that is your choice.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 05:17:41 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Turner
Subject: Caring
Message:
the incredible caring expressed in spreading Knowledge

If you believe this, Turner, then do you not also agree that this ex-premie organisation website shows a far more caring attitude than Rawat?

Here, what you call Knowledge is given freely and unconditionally to anyone who wants it. Jost left out in the street, so to speak, for anyone to pick up and practice.

It is, after all, part of the common heritage of all humanity.

JohnT
- not an ex-premie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 04:27:41 (GMT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Turner
Subject: 'apparently not'.?..not correct analysis-nt
Message:
adsf
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 04:58:22 (GMT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Susan
Subject: Bringing Turner's response to active here
Message:
You ask 'how can a victim learn from his mistakes if thier self victimization only hides the root cause of thier pain'

Probably the steps we take as we move beyond a trap ARE steps.
If someone did stop at a step, then you can try to prod the by saying like you did, 'how can you learn if....' (you dont keep proceeding)

I think most people here ARE proceeding along.
And also you should look again at Oprah, she is also learning and changing.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 03:42:20 (GMT)
From: Earon Kavanagh
Email: earonkavanagh@mortimer.com
To: Turner
Subject: Turner: Your assertion on Mike D's baffle-bab
Message:
You wrote, posted Jan 25 on the inactive forum:
To: “the ex-premie formerly known as Ed”
Interesting treatise. I still contend Michael was giving a sizable helping of baffle-gab.

My comments:
First of all there is no 'ex-premie known as Ed' as you cite in punctuations. There is 'Earon (formerly known as 'Ed') Kavanagh' mentioned as a courtesy for those who knew me prior to 1985. Additionally, I have never declared myself to be an ex-premie nor a premie, for that matter. But someone here has stated his position that I am an ex-premie; I don't buy his view. I don't even accept the word 'premie'. You have your opinion regarding Michael's text. I think you're doing a pretty good job yourself. And no one has to agree for discourse to occur, nor be right.

You wrote:
On the topic of contruction/deconstruction of reality, I do not have any arguments with your comments if we view each person as a separate reality. Each then, through discussion and interaction, share their realities with others to construct a “social” reality. But let’s face it, this “reality” is not necessarily absolute.

My comments:
Reality is being constructed anyway. One base reality here is that people are placing text messages on an internet bullitin board. But there are also other realities here, or perhaps we can call them categories of distinction. And I agree, reality changes, if it does.

Much of shared reality takes place in language. Then there is the shared reality that occurs without words, like a good sensual.sexual moment with someone else (or yourself for that matter). The 'I' does not exist without someone pointing out that I am an 'I'. Have you ever had an experience where there was no 'I', no separate reality? 'I' is largely an spoken auditory track that goes on between your ears somewhere. And have you ever had an experience where there was so much 'I-ness' and separate reality? Or have you ever had an experience when you felt one with other(s), in the zone, so to speak? That's right, you probably have, have you not?

One example of changing social reality is that most of the people in this forum formerly held a different view toward m and his movement. That view and its accompanying reality (beliefs, values, actions, traditions) changed with time and the change 'appears' to have accelerated as people have begun telling and sharing their stories on a regular basis.

You wrote:
For example, in a reality devoid of Dettmer’s input, Maharaji the person fulfilled something in me with near tangible precision. And now in light of Michael’s recent input, that same fulfillment occurs. So, there is clearly a missing reality ex-premies are not building into their constructed reality.

My comments:
You experienced something happening within you that you describe by partially using the phrase 'near tangible precision'. You associated that with providing some kind of experience of fulfillment and further associate that (the experience and the sense of fulfillment) with the man you call 'Maharaji'. I take your story as sincere and I honour your story and your experience, just like I would honour and accept anyone else's story. Are you also telling me that your story of above is not priveleged here? Because, if you are, there is also a strong chance that people here would reply that their stories were not privileged in the dominant view that pervaded m-land, that the only story that could be privileged their was the doctrine and dogma. Somebody here might even address this if they read it.

You wrote:
Now, I do recognize that included in the metamorphosis of the ex-premie reality has been an attempt to de-emphasize the relevance of such experiences by claiming them to be psycho-emotionally generated.

My comments:
People , like you, are evaluating and re-evaluating their experiences and associated reality (beliefs, values, actions, traditions of themselves and others associated with 'the knowledge'). They form hypotheses and check them out with others. The more common the stories and hypotheses, the more things get restoried and reconstructed - their paradigm begins to shift. The perception of m and his role, abilities, etc. - reality' - starts to shift. It can go in any direction depending on what stories are exchanged and for how long.

For a long while to speak like this would be frowned upon, put down, etc. There was a dominant view which oppressed alternate views and experiences that did not matched the doctrine and dogma. Now people are telling their own experiences - their own truths. You can tell yours too. But base it on your own experience, as I have faith you will. So if you believe that m, based onyour experience, is important to you and makes a difference in your existence, then I will certainly honour your belief, but I will also tell you that it is (if so) your belief and you alone can live with it, within yourself. Others, including myself, can believe or conclude whatever we wish to. I think you get my drift. I don't care what you or anyone believes as long as your actions don't oppress me or anyone else. The phrase 'don't lay your trip on me' from the sixties comes to mind at the moment.

You wrote:
But you know, “the ex-premie formerly known as Ed”, that is something you just cannot explain away. If you want it to go away about the only thing that will work it is to walk away from it, because it is just too real to deconstruct with your thesis’ and fancy explanations.

My comments:
There is no 'ex-premie formerly known as Ed', nor has there been any such grouping of words by me that can be quoted as such. The only thing that I deconstruct is words, phrases, and ultimately language. Things themselves cannot be deconstructed. Unspoken realities do not exist in language and therefore cannot be spoken. I also invite you to reflect on and give expression to what it is that you are wanting to achieve by your comments. Personally I like inquiring into ideas and distinctions. I have no need or desire to argue or convince anyone of anything. Whatever I experience inside myself is personal and belongs to me.
Cheers,
Earon

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 02:21:09 (GMT)
From: Earon Kavanagh
Email: earonkavanagh@mortimer.com
To: Turner
Subject: “the ex-premie formerly known as Ed”
Message:
You wrote:
To: “the ex-premie formerly known as Ed”
Interesting treatise. I still contend Michael was giving a sizable helping of baffle-gab.

My comments:
First of all there is no 'ex-premie known as Ed' as you cite in punctuations. There is 'Earon (formerly known as 'Ed') Kavanagh' mentioned as a courtesy for those who knew me prior to 1985. I have never declared myself to be either an ex-premie nor a premie, for that matter. You have your opinion regarding Michael's text. I think you're doing a pretty good job yourself. And no one has to agree for discourse to occur.

You wrote:
On the topic of contruction/deconstruction of reality, I do not have any arguments with your comments if we view each person as a separate reality. Each then, through discussion and interaction, share their realities with others to construct a “social” reality. But let’s face it, this “reality” is not necessarily absolute.

My comments:
I agree, reality changes, if it does. Shared reality takes place in language. The 'I' does not exist without someone pointing out that I am an 'I'. Have you ever had an experience where there was no 'I', no separate reality? And have you ever had an experience where there was so much 'I-ness' and separate reality? And have yopu ever had an experience when you felt one with other(s), in the zone, so to speak? One example of changing reality is that most of the people in this forum held a different view toward m and his movement. That view and it accompanying reality (beliefs, values, actions, traditions) changed with time and the change 'appears to have accelerated as people have begun telling and sharing their stories on a regular basis.

You wrote:
For example, in a reality devoid of Dettmer’s input, Maharaji the person fulfilled something in me with near tangible precision. And now in light of Michael’s recent input, that same fulfillment occurs. So, there is clearly a missing reality ex-premies are not building into their constructed reality.

My comments:
You experienced something happening within you that you describe with the phrase 'near tangible precision'. You associated that with providing some kind of experience of fulfillment and further associate that (the experience and the sense of fulfillment) with the man you call 'Maharaji'. I take your story as sincere and I honour it and your experience.

You wrote:
Now, I do recognize that included in the metamorphosis of the ex-premie reality has been an attempt to de-emphasize the relevance of such experiences by claiming them to be psycho-emotionally generated.

My comments:
People , like you, are evaluating and re-evaluating their experiences and associated reality (beliefs, values, actions, traditions of themselves and others associated with 'the knowledge'). They form hypothesis and check them out with others. The more common stories and hypotheses, the more their paradigm begins to shift. The perception of m and his role, abilities, etc. - reality' - starts to shift. It can go in any direction depending on what is exchanged and for how long.

You wrote:
But you know, “the ex-premie formerly known as Ed”, that is something you just cannot explain away. If you want it to go away about the only thing that will work it is to walk away from it, because it is just too real to deconstruct with your thesis’ and fancy explanations.

My comments:
There is no 'ex-premie formerly known as Ed', nor has there been any such grouping of words by me that can be quoted as such. The only thing that I deconstruct is words, phrases, and ultimately language. Unspoken realities do not exist in language and therefore cannot be spoken.
Turner

Cheers,
Earon

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 06:59:42 (GMT)
From: Brian S
Email: None
To: Earon Kavanagh
Subject: “the ex-premie formerly known as Ed”
Message:

I have never declared myself to be either an ex-premie nor a
premie, for that matter. You have your opinion regarding Michael's text. I think you're doing a pretty good job yourself. And no one has to agree for discourse to occur.

This is an interesting statement, I assume that you received knowledge at one point and entered into some agreement with Maharaji to supposedly practice. That sounds like a Premie to me.

I have followed your posts here Ed and you are you are contributing some good things here so far. In case you hadn't noticed this web site is Called Ex-Premie.org. Are you here for amusment or are you entertaining the notion of declaring your freedom from M and the cult.

I am saying this to you because I thought I was perfectly OK with my comfortable stand. Which was 'I never really bought into the idea that M was the living lord' so I am not as Fucked up as the rest of these poor people who bought the whole package.

The truth is Earon as I peeled back the layers of my delusion, I realized that I really had bought all that and more, I was a premie pretending like I wasn't really hooked in. The deeper I dug into this the more I found the hidden hooks and dependancies imbedded in my pysche.

It took some honest and difficult self examination and I saw for the first time I began to see what M really is. He is just another man, he was set up and groomed from youth to portray this role of perfect master. He is a very skilled and successful orator and salesman. And he has been decietful and dishonest.
He is the used car salesman of the of the guru market , he is a huckster and now with his diluted product of knowledge lite he is corny. Who would buy into the video presentation of the techniques anyway, He is so lazy that he will not even get off his butt to give his new recruits a good poke in the eyeballs today. The thrill is gone; what little there really was anyway..

He is also among other things very irresponsible and and needs to be held accountable for misleading us with false information and claims.

I am newly out, I just found the site two months and I have been waking up to the reality of the last 29 years of my life subtly enslaved to the Cult and M.

Your statement of not being In or Out concerns me, you impress me as a man who knows his own mind through your background with Werner Erhard.

Take a look at your wishy washy commitment on this one Earon, I think that you can do better!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 08:54:05 (GMT)
From: Earon Kavanagh
Email: earonkavanagh@mortimer.com
To: Brian S
Subject: Comments to Brian on 'Premie/Ex-premie'
Message:
Hi Brian:
This is a response to you comments to me, posted Jan 25 (at 22:59:42).
I wish I knew how to respond to your statement, and will proceed, feeling it out with myself as I go. I believe I have explained my position quite well and will stand by it as it is. I prefer to play a little brain game with myself both in my personal and professional life. This little brain game is a way for me to observe the choice-points I make and the self-emotional results of making those choice points. It is sometimes described as 'either/or-both/and'. I don't wish to purposely sound too heady, but my stand is to step out of the either/or. I look for the 'both/and' in addition. If might help if I clarify my history a bit as it relates to this matter.

I haven't been involved with m's world nor had much contact with 'premies' since 1979. That's about 21 years. Most of the 'premies' I meet locally (except for a few old cronies of mine) I don't see/feel much vital energy coming from (not here, though - this 'place' rocks). Over the years I occasionally dropped in on a satsang program (maybe 5 times in 15 years) and I stopped into one of m's programs in about 1996. I don't feel like I've been a victim of the cult, at least not for a long time.

But I certainly was a victinm for awhile. After I left in early 1976 after 4 years in an ashram and a lot of involvement I did feel very suicidal, especially since people were dropping like flies around me (yes, killing themselves). Two people that I had lived with committed suicide in less that one year. One I hadn't visited in the mental ward as I had told him I would, and the other I had told to leave the 'premie house' we were living in because he had not paid rent in 2-3 months. Both of these yopund men had some mental health problems which were beginning to surface (most likely triggered by the ashram and community experience, but I don't know that for sure). I took that on personally and blamed myself, although I had little to do with their actions or what led up to their actions. But my guilt was based on 'If only I talked to them more', etc.

Within 6 months of making my escape (literally one night, out the back door of the ashram at the age of almost 23) I began to feel the insane and all-compulsive urge to jump off bridges and balconies, or put a rope around my neck and end it all. One time in late 1976 I went to Toronto. On the way back in a plane I literally held myself to the seat trying to keep myself from opening the door and jumping. Later someone told me my angst was all in vain, because the door wouldn't open because of pressure. Then it became somewhat amusing, but it didn't go away for a long time.

Then, in April 1977, I got married and the suicidal urges turned into having occasional murderous urges toward my wife, who happened to be a wonderful soul and certainly did not deserve to be murdered. I kept that stuff silent, I fought off those urges (suicide/homicide) for over 2 years by sheer willpower. I would force myself to sit and concentrate my mind until the crazy feelings went away. I didn't believe in psychology nor did I trust psychological or psychiatric practitioners, so I didn't get help; I was angry that my father's essential love of life dulled by shock treatment he had received years earlier in a mental hospital.

On the above, at the age of 6, I watched as my father locked me and two siblings in a our house with him and lite it afire with kerosene sprinkled over moss that he was storing. He was talked out the act by the village RCMP, the house burned down, we survived, ended up in the slums for many years, and he got 7 years in the mental hospital and shock treatment (1959). He had built that house with sweat and love 2 1/2 years before.

So I was actually quite alone as I went thru all of this suicidal/homicidal ideation. My wife was very helpful on the suicidal stuff but I never told her I also had the urge to kill her (she's in Sweden now and I hope she isn't reading this - we parted in 1985). I had no one to confide in practically, and I remembered if one had difficulties of an emotional basis there was very little connection to be made in the ashram. It all seemed to be about looking good and devoid of much humanity.

It was a crazy time. Whenever I looked in the mirror my pupils would expand and I would psychically fall into the them as if falling into a bottomless pit. It was madness in my experience. And, of course, since my Dad, who I loved dearly, had supposedly gone insane I held the thought that I was going insane also. But I wasn't gonna let that happen to me. Eventually, by about 1978, it all settled down. But I never walked across a bridge again until 1985 (with a friend).

I looked at this and examined it for years through self-reflection, therapy, encounter groups, the men's movement, the forum, context training, rebirthing, cartharsis, NTL, and a whole lot more, for over 15 years. I began to reflect on how before I went into the ashram I was wilder, spoke my mind, a young but very emotionally confused rebel. But I also had incompletes with my parents. I was angry at my mother still for signing my dad into a mental hospital and I was angry about being deposed as house emporer when my dad came home at my age 13. So there was a lot going on inside me, and stuffing it down with meditation and the other stuff only made it worse. It cut me off from my body and my personal sense of inner power. In DLM I had learned a lot about organizational dynamics (which became the minor for both my degree programs years later). I had also learned marketable skills which later proved valuable. But I also acquired the habit of stuffing down my feelings and being silent.

I also acquired deep feelings of guilt and shame. While living the celibate lifestyle I would occasionally masturbate (anybody here ever do that?), about every 2-3 months. After that I would sink into guilt for about a week and slowly work my way out of it as my energy built up again. Interesting times. Eventually I began to crave intimacy and to follow my own inner voice. So after an earlier attempt I then finally left for good. I didn't have the balls/courage at that time to stand up and tell the coordinator 'Look, it's time for me to move on', so I stole out the back door one evening. A few days later the coordinator phoned and said 'If I had known you were leaving I would have supported you'. But I didn't have the courage to speak my truth, that it was time to go - too much guilt.

But as I have implied, it has been a long long time and I am far away from the anger and the emotional intensity. I don't wish for my experience to dominate anyone elses, but my stand on premie/ex-premie is my stand and that's where it shall remain. I'm not trying to belittle anyone else's use of the terms. The truth is that I have never accepted the word 'premie', ever. In 1971 met a crazy individual who introduced himself as Fakiranand. He kept waxing about inner light (I truly didn't have a clue about what he was talking about - and I was actually quite amused by the whole thing and had fun joking with him and funning him). When he told us that if any of us wanted 'knowledge' we could receive it the next day, I though 'there's something to learn here, and it's free - OK, whatever!!'. It was really that simple. It all happened in less that two days, and the first day I was coming down from an acid trip from the night before.

As far as the term premie/ex-premie goes you can choose how you want to feel about that, or not. It's not going to change anything for me. Your position is yours and you are welcome to it. I will support you in having your own position, but I'm not gonna take it on for me. If you wonder if I am 'out' think about it, I've been out for over 20 years. As far as posting here it 'feels' like the right thing to do. But the truth is that I don't harbor many ill feelings anymore. I did much of my deprogramming work and will do more as needed. I'm sure that your statements to me are part of you doing your work. Hope that clarifies things a bit.
Earon

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 23:32:11 (GMT)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: Earon Kavanagh
Subject: Earon - you're a new ex-premie
Message:
Sounds to me like you're just beginning to unravel the cult conditioning. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's the way it sounds from reading your very heartfelt post.

John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 07:56:01 (GMT)
From: Earon Kavanagh
Email: earonkavanagh@mortimer.com
To: JHB
Subject: JHB: Earon - you're a new ex-premie
Message:
JHB wrote:
Sounds to me like you're just beginning to unravel the cult conditioning. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's the way it sounds from reading your very heartfelt post.
John.

I wouldn't disagree with you on that, mate.
Cheers,
Earon

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 22:11:45 (GMT)
From: Brian Smith
Email: None
To: Earon Kavanagh
Subject: Comments to Earon on Brain games
Message:
Clear as mud Earon,
I wish I knew how to respond to your statement, and will proceed, feeling it out with myself as I go. I believe I have explained my position quite well and will stand by it as it is. I prefer to play a little brain game with myself both in my personal and
professional life. This little brain game is a way for me to observe the choice-points I make and the self-emotional results of making those choice points. It is sometimes described as 'either/or-both/and'. I don't wish to purposely sound too heady, but my stand is to step out of the either/or. I look for the 'both/and' in addition. If might help if I clarify my history a bit as it relates to this matter.

Playing brain games with yourself. Sounds more like mental masturbation to me Earon. Your position is not at all clear Earon
You seem to be intent on having it both ways. There is no freedom or release from the pain and suffering that your post so aptly illustrates by sitting on the fence. Haven't we been mind fucked enough by M and the cult to continue doing it to ourselves.

I dislike labels myself, and I hate to feel pidgenholed, but when it comes to claiming back my freedom from years of enslavement to the cult, I forgo my own opinions on the matter and slap the label of Ex Premie on myself .

Publically proclaiming that I am an EX does not so much categorize me as subscribing to the views of everyone who posts here as an Ex , as it does in giving me my own voice and free will to recognize the difference in what it is like to be an EX as opposed to being a Premie. There is a huge gap between the two and there is an immense freedom in knowing that I am no longer attached to the cult and especially Maharaji even in the most subtle of ways, which are the deepest hooks.

I used to fear Maharaji, right up until a couple of weeks ago, I had a deep ingrained feeling that he was the Lord and if I did not properly respect him he could lower the wrath of God on me.
I am not suggesting that you or anyone else needs to deal with this same issue it was just one of my suppressed agenda's. Use you imagination here fill in the grapic details for yourself if it applies. This was just one of my controlling issue's that keep me in the cult system.

No matter what he or anyone later said about him never proclaiming to be God and even though I openly stated and puppeted the same thing myself,I really bought that lord business I lied to myself and others by apeing the word from the top to stop saying that he was the lord. I never really believed deep down inside that he wasn't, to me he was the Lord of the universe, that is the ticket I bought when got here. I buried it under years of denial about who he really was after he tried to take back The Lord of U thing. The truth is that this was my uderlying motivating factor in keeping me in and introducing others to M and the cult.

I used tell people he was not 'the Lord or anything you know', so that they would not freak out and then they could
just come and check it out and see for themselves, hoping that they would begin to see that yes he is, and come to realize the same thing that I did. After a certain level of interest was established I would support this assumption through subtle references to scriptures, Bible, Gita, Koran and comparing M to those religious dieties as if M was just one more succession in the line of incarnated Divinity. I was doing his dirty work, and very commited to it.

A convincing arguement but very inauthentic, no religion, no past diety, no living Master can ever show you who you really are, what they can do is enslave you to another belief system, another dogma, another obstacle to overcome in your quest to really know yourself. Who you are lies beyond all of the aforementioned and commitment to these things will only take away your free will. You will only know yourself when you have the free will to find yourself if that is what you want.

That is why to move forward with my life, for me I had to leave all of the the cult and M behind me. My first big step was claiming out loud and publically that I am no longer a Premie, That for lack of a better term means that I am an Ex Premie. But it does not stop there just at being an Ex, that affirmation opened up the possibility for me to start being me again. Trusting my own ideas, following my own instincts, becoming my own teacher, and being master of my own life.

I have never declared myself to be either an ex-premie nor a
premie, for that matter.

A very revealing statement Earon, one that I cannot support,
I think that you can commit to more than this, this statement says nothing. Put down the brain games for a while and deal with the gray matter in this position. You really have more to look at here.......

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 23:11:34 (GMT)
From: Earon Kavanagh
Email: earonkavanagh@motimer.com
To: Brian Smith
Subject: Comments to Earon on Brain games
Message:
I sense your anger at my post, Brian. I'm not looking to convince you of anything, just sharing how I look at things. I relate to you much better when you tell your story, without projecting your rage onto me because you don't agree with something that I have said. Having said that, how did you come to leave the cult, only two weeks ago?? Tell me more. I'm listening. And how did you go about leaving?
Earon
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 01:29:24 (GMT)
From: Brian Smith
Email: None
To: Earon Kavanagh
Subject: Comments to Earon on Anger
Message:
.I sense your anger at my post, Brian. I'm not looking to convince you of anything, just sharing how I look at things. I relate to you much better when you tell your story, without projecting your rage onto me because you don't agree with something that I have said. Having said that, how did you come to leave the cult, only two weeks ago?? Tell me more. I'm listening. And how did you go about leaving?
Earon

Earon, I do not know you well enough to be angry with you, and you are trying to convince me of your wishy washy positon of not/in not/out not a premie not an Ex. and I am calling you on it.

I believe if you review my post you will see a considerable amount of self sharing as opposed to what you describe as raging.
This is not a battle of wills, Earon, to see who can finally get the other to agree with each other. My intention is to help each other uncover the truth about how M and the cult affected our lives. Engaging each other in this way can sometimes feel uncomfortable as we expose the emotional hooks and falsehoods that we hold onto.

I was directed to this site 2 months ago. I immediately jumped in and started posting my views as to what I thought was going on and how I did not consider myself to have bought into this thing as much as these poor people out here. I had my own agenda about who I was and it sounded similar to what you are saying about in/out here/there Premie/not premie whatever. I took the position that I did not have any problems with these issues because I am really not commited one way or another to whether or not m is Lord and I was in a cult and I had sacrificed my free will for 29 years etc.
This unwillingness to look at myself from where I really stood is what kept me trapped and diminished as a person who is in control of his own life.

The biggest help to me in getting off my position with these issues was when I was confronted out here on the forum by people who saw through my transparency. I can relate to how you feel about projected anger and rage, This little inquiry we are engaged in is pale in comparison to some of the venting and ranting that I endured for several weeks. I now am grateful to those who took me time to confront on my inauthentic opinions and beliefs.

This confrontation, forced me to confront the truth about M and the cult and myself and now I am a work in progress. I hope that I remain that way always open to more of the truth and willing to endure the most uncomfortable and yes confrontational challenges to stay free.

It wasn't until two weeks ago that I really started to wake up, I started to honestly post some of the revelations and hidden adgenda's regarding to myself in my involvement to the Cult and M.

I started declaring the truth about what was going on.....
This proclaimation of the truth has set me free, One of the first issues that I dealt with was my stand on who I was. When I finally said yes I am an Ex Premie then I could get behind the lies and the deceits that I had kept hidden for so many years.
I got them out, aired them out, and threw them out. I used the forum as a place to edify and confirm the process as I broke free.

I hope you can make the distinction between Anger, Rage and Honest Confrontation of issues, if you are not willing look at the difference and engage and confront your views then you are wasting my time and yours. Honest confrontation is never warm and fuzzy, It is cold and clear.

Now then I hope this sharing of my story helps you relate to me a little better.

Now it's your turn, I have some questions for you.

What are you still holding on to? Why are you sitting on the fence? I would be interested in an honest and self confronted response. You owe it to yourself, there is much on the table that you haven't looked at yet.

And I owe it to you as long as you are on this forum to point out to you what I have found that maybe, just maybe you missed....

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 09:52:01 (GMT)
From: Earon Kavanagh
Email: earonkavanagh@mortimer.com
To: Brian Smith
Subject: Brian: Comments to Earon on Anger
Message:
Brian wrote:
Earon, I do not know you well enough to be angry with you, and you are trying to convince me of your wishy washy positon of not/in not/out not a premie not an Ex. and I am calling you on it.

My comments:
First of all, my friend, I'm not trying to convince you of anything. You are making assumptions. You are simply calling me on the fact that I don't agree with you on everything as you believe it to be, and it won't work. I'm merely stating how I see things. If you don't like it, if it ruffles your feathers, which I believe it does, take a look at your own feathers and see what it is that makes them so ruffly. Perhaps you are the one is trying to convince me that your view is right and then you get pissed off when I don't agree with you.

You wrote:
I believe if you review my post you will see a considerable amount of self sharing as opposed to what you describe as raging.

My comments:
I only pointed out raging on the small piece that I considered to be raging. You're trying to manipulate what I said to display yourself as the good victim and me as your unfair antagonist. I acknowledge that you did some serious sharing and I thank you for that and respect and honour your story.

You wrote:
This is not a battle of wills, Earon, to see who can finally get the other to agree with each other.

My comments:
I haven't implied that it is a battle of wills. I have no interest in battling with wills, but I am certainly capable in doing battle.

You wrote:
My intention is to help each other uncover the truth about how M and the cult affected our lives. Engaging each other in this way can sometimes feel uncomfortable as we expose the emotional hooks and falsehoods that we hold onto.

My comments:
I have no issues with engaging, but you don't set the rules as to how I will engage nor will you get to set the rules as to what the truth is.

You wrote:
I was directed to this site 2 months ago. I immediately jumped in and started posting my views as to what I thought was going on and how I did not consider myself to have bought into this thing as much as these poor people out here.

My comments:
Really, it sounds to me (if I remember correctly that you bought in to the cult for 29 years). I think you are covertly projecting that that is what I'm really doing. But you don't have the jam to come out and say it (although you might now that I have provoked you). I bought in for four years. I stayed around (at a distance)in the community for another 4 years. So I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say that I bought in for 8 years. Then I basically disappeared into being busy and trying to survive. My second child was born in 1980 and I started building my own house in summer of 1979. I completed the house in summer of 1980. During most of that whole period I was also taking tradeschool for a journeyman carpentry licence.

I said earlier that I believe I went to one m program but on further reflection I believe it was 4 between 1980 and 1985. Then another one around 1996. I gave no money since 1975 (I figured that I gave enough in the ashram). I kept the possibility that there might be more value to the whole thing in the future, but like you, I now believe it to be a cult. I have believed that for about 10 years. I don't believe that m is a perfect master. I don't believe that there is any such thing as a perfect master.

You wrote:
I had my own agenda about who I was and it sounded similar to what you are saying about in/out here/there Premie/not premie whatever.

My comments:
If you don't have your 'own agenda' about who you are who else's agenda is creating who you are? Jim's? m's? After all, from the way you write, it seems that m's agenda was creating who you were for 29 years.

You wrote:
I took the position that I did not have any problems with these issues because I am really not commited one way or another to whether or not m is Lord and I was in a cult and I had sacrificed my free will for 29 years etc.

My comments:
Question if you choose to answer. How specifically did you sacrifice your free will for 29 years?
Now that you may have pondered that question let me clarify things. m is not the lord. There is no such thing as a lord. You were in a cult. I was in a cult. Everyone here was in a cult. And? So when are you gonna get off your victim act??

You wrote:
This unwillingness to look at myself from where I really stood is what kept me trapped and diminished as a person who is in control of his own life.

My comments:
Now that you are free I suppose that you can be your own person and walk out of this cyber-den and just live your life from this experience and perspective of who you really are, right? Or are you afraid to?

You wrote:
The biggest help to me in getting off my position with these issues was when I was confronted out here on the forum by people who saw through my transparency.

My comments:
Well, be thankful. At least you were transparent and not opaque about your position.

You wrote:
I can relate to how you feel about projected anger and rage, This little inquiry we are engaged in is pale in comparison to some of the venting and ranting that I endured for several weeks. I now am grateful to those who took me time to confront on my inauthentic opinions and beliefs.

My comments:
I'm quite comfortable with anger and rage, and can provide a good dose of it myself when called for. I think I have a lot more practice that you in the past 15-20 years. I am also told (in a private email) that there are some who can get abusively correct in terms of forcing their views on others here. I won't mention the person's name. But if such a thing occurs I'll deal with it.

You wrote:
This confrontation, forced me to confront the truth about M and the cult and myself and now I am a work in progress. I hope that I remain that way always open to more of the truth and willing to endure the most uncomfortable and yes confrontational challenges to stay free.

My comments:
Well, you sound as though you just joined another cult. I guess I have my answer. You'll just have to stay here for the rest of your life, eh? Kinda like the alcoholic who gives up alcohol and gets addicted to coffee and cigarettes outside the meetings. I guess that's a form of harm reduction though. Switch one cult belief system for another?

You wrote:
It wasn't until two weeks ago that I really started to wake up, I started to honestly post some of the revelations and hidden adgenda's regarding to myself in my involvement to the Cult and M.

My comments:
Congratulations and I mean it. You were in a cult, I was in a cult. We all were in a cult. The cult is still operating. Now that you are thinking about getting off your own victim trip which you appear to have been on for over 29 years (refusing to take responsibility for your life and turning it over to a fat little guy who claims to be god, greater that god, the revealer of god, etc.), you're on a mission. Is that right? But yiou still sound like someone who doesn't want to take rsponsibility. I know that m is a slick salesman, but you were an easy sell for a long, long time. As they say back in Newfoundland 'he (m) saw you coming'. He knew right away that you're the kind of guy that doesn't like to take responsibility for his life .... and he offered you a golden deal. And now you are repeating the pattern by blaming it all on m and refusing to accept the fact that you were a muggee waithing to be mugged. So what's really changed, Brian?? By the way, I've engaged with lots of people including those who are not on a victim trip. So, I imagine we'll contimue this some more.

You wrote:
I started declaring the truth about what was going on.....This proclaimation of the truth has set me free,

My comments:
Whose truth are you talking about specifically? Does that truth exist outside of this web-site?

You wrote:
One of the first issues that I dealt with was my stand on who I was. When I finally said yes I am an Ex Premie then I could get behind the lies and the deceits that I had kept hidden for so many years. I got them out, aired them out, and threw them out. I used the forum as a place to edify and confirm the process as I broke free.

My comments:
So, what you are saying is that you no longer believe in m, in his story, in his power, in his claims, in his background, in his so-called knowledge. You now know that you had been shystered by m, sucked in. You want to tell others to beware of his cult and its sneaky techniques. You regret the 29 years you were associated with him. You consider it largely a waste of time.

You wrote:
I hope you can make the distinction between Anger, Rage and Honest Confrontation of issues, 'if you are not willing look at the difference and engage and confront your views then you are wasting my time and yours'. Honest confrontation is never warm and fuzzy, It is cold and clear.

My comments:
Once again you are making assumptions and trying to set rules for me. You can't have that with me, brian. See the text I have put in quotations. That's your passive-agressive victim trip that's operating and attempting to be in control of others, perpetuating what you claim to hate so much about m and his legions. By the way did you use the same rhetoric to propagate the knowledge back in the old days?

You wrote:
Now then I hope this sharing of my story helps you relate to me a little better.

My comments:
Of course I relate to you much better, and I am separating your story from your attempts to render assumptions as fact, manipulate me and set the rules, but I can deal with that.

You wrote:
Now it's your turn, I have some questions for you.
What are you still holding on to?
Why are you sitting on the fence?

My comments:
You're making assumptions again and attempting to manipulate me into your trip. Your questions presuppose that your theories are so already. You're not talking to a kid here, Brian. If you're going to attempt such tactics at least demonstrate a little grace (not that grace) and pizazze. A little humor might help as well ... never mind ... I'm being rhetorical.

You wrote:
I would be interested in an honest and self confronted response. You owe it to yourself, there is much on the table that you haven't looked at yet.

My comments:
And again you are making assumptions and attempting to set the rules. But let me clarify something. I think it's pretty simple.
I believe you want to hear things a certain way that reinforces your weak position. Safety in like mindedness and all that.

I haven't believed in m for at least 10 years, in his story, in his power, in his claims, in his background, in his so-called knowledge. I believe that I was shystered by m, sucked in for awhile, and I got out early. You didn't have what it takes to do that (or so you seem to be saying, and I could be wrong). I caution others to beware of his cult and its sneaky techniques. I caution others to beware of a lot of other movements as well, including est/forum, now known as 'Landmark Education'. I've spent a lot of time reflecting on what I could take with me and leaving the other stuff behind. There were practical things I learned (e.g., bookkeeping, running a store, some basic carpentry, performing for many years in satsangs and PLA in 1975, confidence for being in front of people, the ability to speak clearly about myself on many but not all things, the ability to coordinate events, the ability to setup and run a community, etc.). There's some other stuff as well, which I can't think of now.

I take those experiences and draw from them. You might consider doing the same in your own way, if there is anything there to draw from. I didn't have the good fortune to have a wealthy parent(s) to support me thru law school, and I didn't have a degree that was almost complete to go back and finish. Nor did I have a parent to go back to and assume the family business. I actually had nothing when I left in 1976. I don't have much now, but I came by what I have slowly, starting from scratch.

You wrote:
And I owe it to you as long as you are on this forum to point out to you what I have found that maybe, just maybe you missed....

My comments:
I appreciate your sincerity, but the chances of you convincing me to adopt your perspective are pretty close to nil. You'll find that out as we continue to engage, but not necessarily on your terms. Oh, and you are making assumptions again.

Engagingly,
Earon

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 18:47:27 (GMT)
From: Brian Smith
Email: None
To: Earon Kavanagh
Subject: Comments to Earon on understanding
Message:
This is really good earon, sounds like we are hitting a nerve here with you, getting a little on the prickly and uncomfortable side of things.
If you don't like it, if it ruffles your feathers, which I believe it does, take a look at your own feathers and see what it is that makes them so ruffly. Perhaps you are the one is trying to convince me that your view is right and then you get pissed off when I don't agree with you.

Believe it or not Earon, this does not upset me or ruffle my feathers, it actually encourages me, I see some progress already in this exchange.
I like this much better than the warm fuzzy stuff like I am me you are you and we are all Ok. That has it's place but not when we are dealing with issues like being in a cult.
At least now we both seem to have concluded that we were in a cult at one time. Good work Earon....
I have no issues with engaging, but you don't set the rules as to how I will engage nor will you get to set the rules as to what the truth is.
Come on Earon, I have no power whatsoever over you to set up some sort of rules and regulations as to how you will engage yourself in any area of your life. The truth just stands on its own, it doesn't follow rules from anyone. The best that we can hope for is to break down our false perspectives enough to see truth clearly. In context here the truth about our involvement in the cult and M. Or do you think you have a better truth and I need to agree with you?

Well, you sound as though you just joined another cult. I guess I have my answer. You'll just have to stay here for the rest of your life, eh? Kinda like the alcoholic who gives up alcohol and gets addicted to coffee and cigarettes outside the meetings. I guess that's a form of harm reduction though. Switch one cult belief system for another?
This is a very childish accusation, you seem to be implying that this conversation that I am having with you suggests that I have turned the riens of my life over to the ex premie cult. I do not even know for sure who set this thing up, I think you had better reexamine your motive here for this statement, Sounds like a cheap shot to me. Not to mention that you are blowing smoke out of your ass with your condescending notion that poor little old me will have to stay stuck here out in cyberspace somewhere forever. For your information, I quit gave up drugs and alcohol 18 years ago, I went to AA for 3 years, I did not spent the rest of my life sitting around in AA meetings getting addicted to cigarettes and coffee, you are over your head on this one and your answer is wrong and you are the one who is drawing assumptions here. Where do you get your ANSWERS FROM ANYWAY?
Congratulations and I mean it. You were in a cult, I was in a cult. We all were in a cult.

The cult is still operating. Now that you are thinking about getting off your own victim trip which you appear to have been on for over 29 years (refusing to take responsibility for your life and turning it over to a fat little guy who claims to be god,
greater that god, the revealer of god, etc.), you're on a mission. Is that right? But yiou still sound like someone who doesn't want to take rsponsibility. I know that m is a slick salesman, but you were an easy sell for a long, long time. As they say back in Newfoundland 'he (m) saw you coming'. He knew right away that you're the kind of guy that doesn't like to take responsibility for his life .... and he offered you a golden
deal. And now you are repeating the pattern by blaming it all on m and refusing to accept the fact that you were a muggee waithing to be mugged. So what's really changed, Brian?? By the way, I've engaged with lots of people including those who are not on a victim trip. So, I imagine we'll contimue this some more.

Here you go drawing assumptions again, I suggest you look around the forum some and research other area's of the site. I am including an excerpt of my first post Dec 7th. You may want to read it in it's entireity in the archives or better yet it is posted in the best of the forum under Perimeter of Chaos. You are way of the mark here if you think that I approaching my life through the position of a victim.

Dec 7 2000
I accept complete responsibility for my own life and for buying into the whole Guru thing, I also know that I can throw the
thing out as well. That is the beauty of it all, and I blame no-one for leading me on. I will always have my own choice
available every second. I have from day one looked more at what is going on within and depended a lot less on what other
people including Maharaji do. I like very much what I discover inside, that is my guide. I can also appreciate engaging and
enjoying the drama that usually can be found going on around everyone and everything in life. That is also my choice and
one that I will continually make and accept responsibility for as well.

Does this sound like a victim talking to you?
I take those experiences and draw from them. You might consider doing the same in your own way, if there is anything there to draw from. I didn't have the good fortune to have a wealthy parent(s) to support me thru law school, and I didn't have a degree that was almost complete to go back and finish. Nor did I have a parent to go back to and assume the family business. I actually had nothing when I left in 1976. I don't have
much now, but I came by what I have slowly, starting from scratch.

Thanks for the great advice my friend, You are preaching to the chior and you have no idea who you are talking to. Like you I never had wealthy parents, and I have no degree, and I still made
my first fortune in my early thirties. Today I own a wholesale import business with worldwide distribution and annual receipts that I have no intention of stating here, but they are substantial in the M'S. I did not get to where I am today through anyone's else's hard work other than my own, and I take full responsibility for my success and my failures in life.

You say that I am coming from a weak position I say that you should examine your position in that regard. Your position is so weak that you cannot even decide what you are, premie or expremie?

Now where is the strenth and conviction in that Earon?

Go back to the drawing board, before you challenge me on my position again, look through the archives,look around the forum I think you will find that I have a little bit more documented evidence of my journey here than you do thus far.
I am going to stop here Earon, I do not want to risk spending all my time out here in this expremie cult and possibly become enslaved to it for the rest of my life.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 09:39:49 (GMT)
From: Brian smith
Email: None
To: Brian Smith
Subject: Earon I know you are out there, you're not angry
Message:
Are you?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 03:26:13 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Brian Smith
Subject: The 'magic' of words and cross-examination
Message:
You are so, so, so, so, so right! Not necessarily about Earon in particular but about the process of sincere, open dialogue. It's almost miraculous what people can do with one another with words and ideas. Yes, Maharaji used them to trap us but yes, we can use them to free us all over again. The trick is, though, that the words have to be able to get in close, past whatever biases and defence mechanisms we may have. To the extent that those barriers are alive and kicking, the process is always going to be confrontational. And, that, despite any knee-jerk hand-wringing, cliched brow-beating, new-age obfuscation or other funny walks people might resort to, is always a good thing.

One thing that invariably comes up in this process is the fretful, disapproving allusion to 'courtroom tactics' which, they accusation goes, might be no more than cross-examination. God am I tired of that criticism! Cross-examination, in my experience, is one of the coolest discussion devices we ever came up with. There's a reason that it's the core tool in any legal system worthy of the name; it's the best way people can overcome confusion and deception, intentional or otherwise. I have seen so much truth squeezed out of people, sometimes willingly, sometimes not, in cross-examination.

Yes, truth. Not just some trick where the helpless witness is suckered into mouthing words they don't really mean or whose connotation takes on a life of their own, cruelly misrepresenting the witness' intent. I never see that. Why? Because, where I practice law anyway, that's not allowed to happen. A witness is always given the chance to clarify what they say so those kind of two-bit tricks just aren't possible. Yes, people get 'tricked' into saying something they didn't want to say. But that's not to say that what they say isn't true. Big difference there. BIG difference.

Brian, good for you for embracing the process. You've got a good mind and it's a pleasure to see you use it (that kind of comment would be ridiculously patronizing and probably senseless were it not for the fact that you just grabbed your mind back from a cult a few weeks ago!).

Earon, too, has a great mind and, like I've said, I've enjoyed reading so much of what he's found and thought about over the years and over the minutes in these dialogues. What's left unknown, at this point, though, is how he really feels about the discovery process available to one and all through this forum. I mentioned to him as have you, in your own way, that he seems, in some ways, to be drawing a line in the sand somehow. Perhaps -- and quite unfortunately, in my opinion -- he's picked up role models that support that kind of restriction. Lord knows that there's a whole new age way of advancing some alleged moral perogative to simply 'back off' when the ideas really confront one another.

You know, the whole Desiderata bullshit -- you live your life (in a bubble) and I'll live mine (likewise) ... blah, blah, blah. Unfortunately, that idea's been developed, polished and spruced up in certain circles so there's a whole fancy vocabulary for saying just that, 'back off' and a shmantzy, pantzy philosophical justification for throwing up that shield. What can I say? I think the advocates of that kind of 'respectful non-confrontation' are wrong. And no, I don't 'respectfully disagree'. I just think they're wrong.

If, and I don't know this for a fact, but IF, Earon is really caught up in that kind of thinking which, as I say, I consider really misguided as it invariably stops the dialogue just when it gets to the best part, then I hope with all my heart that he's got the nimbleness and sincerity to see through that trap and to jettison it as you have. He's a great guy and I just really hope that for him. I hope it for myself, I hope it for him.

Now, yes, a word about Sandy. Sandy, unfortunately, seems to be a lost cause, for now at least, in this regard. I've called him a 'stripped screw' before and I think the term's apt. Sandy is clearly not amenable to true dialogue that actually does something instead of blab and dance around. He has stated more times than anyone would care to count that his head is his own, so to speak. He's offended that anyone would ever even think of getting in there and changing anything. Like an idea, say. He has what appears to be a new age superstition about dialogue. Frankly, for all his able chattiness, he appears frightened of it. Thus he'll do anything, say anything, bend words out of shape, bend them back again the enxt moment, turn them inside out, upside down, all of that to avoid the pith and substance of the confrontation. And that, as we've all experienced, gets old for everyone fast.

Sandy shouldn't rightly be here, in my opinion. I mena, really, compare his participation to either of you two. You guys are sincere in the sense that you're really open to engaging each other, at least to some extent. Sandy, on the other hand, is just open to expressing himself.

Anyway, guess that's about it. Hope you both take this post in the spirit intended. Hope you do, too, Sandy, although I'm not holding my breath.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 05:47:30 (GMT)
From: Brian Smith
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: The 'magic' of words and cross-examination
Message:
Jim, I honestly cannot tell you how much respect I have for you today. Not because of the the acknowledgement you gave me here, but because of your unyielding commitment to get at the truth at all costs.

I have come a long way from my views toward you last week.
I openly apologize to you again for the unwarranted assumptions drawn against your character by me. I really had no basis to spout off, we had never before even directly posted to oneanother.
I was misguided both on site and off by anothers attempt to mount a campaign to provoke you and I mistakenly bought into it.

Now that I see what is going on out here I realize how it can get, and yes actually has to get confrontational to effectively make a difference in reversing our position towards M and The cult. Sometimes it takes someone jackhammering us out of the deep rooted, cement imbedded issues that kept us stuck for so long.

I just want you to know Jim that no matter what methods you are accused of using, I completely trust your motives

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 13:52:33 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Earon Kavanagh
Subject: Pardon me for mentioning this ...
Message:
EK: ... I left in early 1976 after 4 years in an ashram and a lot of involvement ...

I appreciated what you wrote, it is one of the more moving Journeys I have read. I am a guest here, but all the same I'd like to thank you for coming here and writing so frankly. I doubt very much I will be thought presumptuous for expressing that attitude - I'm sure the forum's natural denizens largely share that view!

And it also seems highly likely to me that those natural denizens would not regard you as a guest. You have a right to be here, in a way that I do not. I mention this as it seems to me the effectiveness of this forum does depend in part on recognising that being in a mind-bending cult does give one some insight into how best to help others escape the trap. Not that there are no disagreements here, about tactics and strategy, of course!

You wrote ...
I don't wish to purposely sound too heady, but my stand is to step out of the either/or. I look for the 'both/and' in addition.

and yes, I can empathise, I can see the point in what you say. From time to time here, there have been arguments about the existence of gods and deities, for example, in which I have consistently argued that these ideas are a distraction, can be dispensed with for all practical purposes, and are so open to abuse as tools of social oppression that the right thing to do is vigourously oppose them. But that does not prevent me from writing poetry that uses theistic words and ideas. Nor would it prevent me from praying for my life if I were mortally threatened...

I would not, however, call myself a premie, or even seek to blur the distinction, so I am curious that you would do this in your own case. With the greatest respect then, I would say that English is a social construct, not a private language, and that to refuse to accept the term which describes you as having once been a premie (but no longer) is a misleading use of the language we share.

JohnT
- not an ex-premie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:31:54 (GMT)
From: Earon Kavanagh
Email: earonkavanagh@mortimer.com
To: JohnT
Subject: Pardon me for mentioning this ...
Message:
Hi John!
I think I've sufficiently explained my approach to the topic of 'premie/ex-premie' in my 'Comments to Brian' post.

And as you say, English language is a social construct. But we all give different meanings to the language at different levels. Being from Newfoundland, I may not relate to the term 'Newfy', but I might relate well to the term 'Newfoundlander'.

Descriptions and categorizations of human experience are usually made by 'others' outside of the individual. m was using the word 'premie' to describe those whom others (observers?) might term as 'followers'. There was no such thing as 'premie' until someone accepted the term as a descriptive. As you know, to m, 'premie' means 'lover'. Were you a lover of m, for sure? How about the gopi females that hund around m? Would they see him in the same context of the word lover as you? How about if you were/are a gay man .... would the context be the same if you found m attractive (you know ... in that way)? Now, in what context were you a lover? If you were indeed a lover, how did you know you were a lover, other that by the fact that if you sat down at a program m started his discourse with 'Dear premies' (dear lovers).

So, do you think that m really believed that you were his lover? Or was it spoken for the effect or to achieve a certain outcome? Which, of course, leads me to another question I have been reflecting on this morning. If you were m's lover what kind of lover were you? How did you know you were his lover? And if you are no longer m's lover how do you know that? And, doing a cost-benefit-analysis for a moment, if you were his lover, what were you doing there as his lover in the first place? What was the benefit to you? What did you hope to get? What did you get? Were the benefits outweighing the costs you were paying?

I know ..... a lot of words, eh? But I also ask myself these questions. I never bought the meaning or presuppositions packed into the term 'premie' or lover - it was a linguistic setup for disaster, but more simply I just didn't grok with it. A digression for a moment .... in hypnosis there is something known as a 'yes set'. The idea behind the yes set is that if the hypnotist makes enough statements or questions thatv lead the subject to the word yes enough times, the subject enters a 'yes' state of mind. This is also used now in some sales techniques. If you or I buy that we are m's lovers a whole other set of possiblities open up, that might be more profitable for m than us. I think you might know what I mean by that.

My assumption is that some people bought the lover thing big, kind of like when one buys someone else's seduction discourse, but then feels used after, when you realize the other just wanted to have sex with you. So the question arises, 'Why did you tell me you loved me? Why did you paint this wonderful future of us together?' And, if the other is honest (and stupid) there might come the response 'I just wanted to see what it would be like to sleep with you'. And out come the axe and accompanying rage. Anyway,
it's simply a personal thing for me as far as those words go.

But, John, I just realized something valuable as I wrote this. I was doing my cost-benefit-analysis all along as I lived those four years of ashram life. And when the costs started out-weighing the benefits I moved on (though with great difficulty), and looking back, I'm proud of myself. Thanks for helping me get that distinction about my own abilities. Now, I just need to operate that way in other areas of my life, and on a consistent basis. My suggestion is that if you want to understand my position read it, take it in, reflect on your experience, then try my position on and see and feel what it is like. How might things be different than they are now with your inner experience? That's usually what I do when I read posts that are challenging to aspects of my paradigm.
Best Regards,
Earon

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 23:33:19 (GMT)
From: ... but did you ever hear
Email: None
To: Earon Kavanagh
Subject: ... of shooting yourself in the foot?
Message:
Because, my dear fellow, you just have. It is true I am not an ex-premie. But you made a rather strange assumption, and one which I hope you will see, on reflection, amply proves the point people here have been trying to make.

Welcome! It's fun here, n'est ce pas?

JohnT
- never a premie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 07:59:14 (GMT)
From: Earon Kavanagh
Email: earonkavanagh@mortimer.com
To: ... but did you ever hear
Subject: ... of shooting yourself in the foot?
Message:
JohnT write, in part:
- never a premie

That, my friend is precisely my point.
Earon

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 16:30:54 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Earon Kavanagh
Subject: You lost me ...
Message:
You seem above (Earon Kavanagh -:- Pardon me for mentioning this ... -:- Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 16:31:54) to address me as a premie.

I assumed you misunderstood the sig in my preceding piece (the one to which you were responding). The sig on that piece was - not an ex-premie. You took that to mean I was at one time involved in Rawat's scene - maybe still was.

Am I right, so far?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 13:51:54 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Earon Kavanagh
Subject: Why put limits on the power of dialogue?
Message:
As far as the term premie/ex-premie goes you can choose how you want to feel about that, or not. It's not going to change anything for me. Your position is yours and you are welcome to it. I will support you in having your own position, but I'm not gonna take it on for me.

Earon,

I'm really appreciating reading your posts and I'm looking forward to finally seeing you one of these days. I do wonder, though, about this thing you've got about the word 'premie'. Isn't it jut common sense that, however you might qualify it, you were once a premie? Isn't that simple and inescapably true?

That's the specific question but, more generally, I sense a line in the sand, so to speak, in what you say. As if you'll go wherever reason will take you but there's a limit or something. Past that limit, no matter how good someone's reasons are, you're not going, no matter what? Am I right? If so, why?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 17:19:09 (GMT)
From: Earon Kavanagh
Email: earonkavanagh@mortimer.com
To: Jim
Subject: Why put limits on the power of dialogue?
Message:
Hi Jim,
Good to hear from ya.
I submit that 'being right' and dialogue might not exist in the same space. From my experience whenever I am being right there is little room for dialogue, as dialogue presupposes a spirit that leans toward inquiry and discovery without putting forth judgement. My way is not the right way and either is yours. But there is certainly room in the universe for different views. Knowing that you are a barrister - and I believe, a good one - I will suggest that, within the confines of the courtroom, someone must come out, ultimately, as being right (yes, it can probably be appealed by the one isn't right). The prime directive is to arrive at some form of conclusion. Different views may exist along the process, but ultimately a judging view is laid down. Outside of the courtroom things are somewhat different, particularly in today's world. Dominant views can be told to move aside. Thank god for that.
I expand further on your qustion in my post to John T titled 'pardon me'. Yes, we should get together soon and jam.
Earon
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 09:29:24 (GMT)
From: EXiT
Email: None
To: Earon Kavanagh
Subject: Comments to Brian on 'Premie/Ex-premie'
Message:
I also acquired deep feelings of guilt and shame. While living the celibate lifestyle I would occasionally masturbate (anybody here ever do that?), about every 2-3 months.

Errrrrrr....... every day, for a decade. I thought every one did!

EXiT

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 15:54:59 (GMT)
From: Earon Kavanagh
Email: earonkavanagh@mortimer.com
To: EXiT
Subject: To Exit: On Whackin Oneself
Message:
EXit: you wrote:
I also acquired deep feelings of guilt and shame. While living the celibate lifestyle I would occasionally masturbate (anybody here ever do that?), about every 2-3 months.
Errrrrrr....... every day, for a decade. I thought every one did!
EXiT

My comments:
EXit, I'm laughing my head off at your comments. Believe me, since leaving in '76 I've more that made up for the lost opportunites.

But I must admit, when living in the ashram, I wasn't involved in any circe jerks (where there circle jerks?) nor was I wondering what other people were doing with their hands in private moments. I understood ashram life to be one of celibacy and strove to keep my word. So, the guilt was partially due to not keepinmg my word with myself. But, unfortunately, there wasn't a safe aspace in the ashram to be able to openly approach someone and say 'Hey, I'm having a lot of rouble right now. I've been playing with myself and it's bothering me because I made a commitment to myself to be celibate'. etc.

Jeeeesh, I just thought of something. I guess the celibacy didn't extend to masturbation? So, there was an escape hatch engineered into the loop? Now there is an A HA! moment. I got the rules mixed up and could have been whackin myself several times a day and it would have been ok. I bow my head in humility, no .... stupidity. Oh, well! LIke i said earlier, I've more than made up for it since 1976. And I'm still laughing my head off on this.
Good comments!
Earon

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 00:26:01 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Earon Kavanagh
Subject: This unfortunate topic deserves discussion
Message:
OK, I'll spill my story (??).

I considered the ashram to be what Maharaji told us it was, a place to seriously try to 'realize knowledge' or, in other words, 'surrender' one's life to Maharaji (i.e. God). The world called to us like Ullyses' sirens and we diligent, faithful sincere seekers of truth prayed for the willpower to tie ourselves to the mast. Every moment was a test. The Ashram schedule was our, well, shelter of course.

So, yes, I did, ahem, 'pull at the world' several times over the years I was an ashram premie. And each time, right up until the end when chronic cynicism started to set in, the entire experience was traumatic. Indeed, I once believed that one single act of sullying myself with 'worldliness', as I thought of sex, was enough to cut me off from ever possibly going the distance that Maharaji kept telling us about.

It was no laughing matter. Rather, I racked myself over these incidents for days, sometimes weeks. It was a classic 'fight-the-devil mindfuck and it freaked me out a number of times. I considered my body Maharaji's property. The idea that I could defile it like that, turning so severely against the stated goal, was unnerving. I disgusted myself. Meanwhile, of course, Maharaji and his x-rated cronies were doing whatever.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 08:22:52 (GMT)
From: Earon Kavanagh
Email: earonkavanagh@mortimer.com
To: Jim
Subject: Jim: This unfortunate topic deserves discussion
Message:
Jim wrote:
OK, I'll spill my story (??).

My comments:
Thanks

Jim wrote:
I considered the ashram to be what Maharaji told us it was, a place to seriously try to 'realize knowledge'

My comments:
That's how I understood it and I took it seriously.

Jim wrote:
or, in other words, 'surrender' one's life to Maharaji (i.e. God).

My comments:
In my gut that didn't work for me. I tried that approach for a short while as that was part of the spoken thing that was common. But it wasn't in my gut nor my heart and it didn't work for me.

Jim wrote:
The world called to us like Ullyses' sirens and we diligent, faithful sincere seekers of truth prayed for the willpower to tie ourselves to the mast. Every moment was a test. The Ashram schedule was our, well, shelter of course.

My comments:
Yes, and that is how it was advertised and spoken about, a shelter for people to realize knowledge, and for those who couldn't be in the world. It was sometimes suggested that ashram residents were close to the master in past lives and therefore would have difficulty being in the world, and needed shelter.

This certainly appealed to the part of me that didn't want to take responsibility. Turn your life over (and your $$$ and labor) and don't worry about anything.

Jim wrote:
So, yes, I did, ahem, 'pull at the world' several times over the years I was an ashram premie. And each time, right up until the end when chronic cynicism started to set in, the entire experience was traumatic. Indeed, I once believed that one single act of sullying myself with 'worldliness', as I thought of sex, was enough to cut me off from ever possibly going the distance that Maharaji kept telling us about.

It was no laughing matter. Rather, I racked myself over these incidents for days, sometimes weeks. It was a classic 'fight-the-devil mindfuck and it freaked me out a number of times. I considered my body Maharaji's property. The idea that I could defile it like that, turning so severely against the stated goal, was unnerving. I disgusted myself. Meanwhile, of course, Maharaji and his x-rated cronies were doing whatever.

My comments:
After my occasional masturbation session (2-3 months apart before I'd start pulling at the world) I'd beat myself up (as I mentioned before), like you, for awhile. One of the interesting things was that I couldn't 'give satsang' for at least a week. I could't get off the guilt in front of a room full of people. 'Like Hey! Guess what I've been doing lately? Playing with myself'. Maybe I should have tried it; maybe I'd get a resounding chorus 'Me too'!!!

I wonder what others have to say about the sex thing. I didn't know anything about 'x-rated' people until recently (a matter of days) when I read Michael Dettmers posting. I also heard years later that some people were having sex in the ashram. Boy, did I feel like I was naive back then. I know I was sincere. But I also made sure that I didn't get stuck doing shit jobs, so I guess I was also taking care of myself as much as possible (working the system).
Thanks for talking about it.
Earon

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 00:58:54 (GMT)
From: EXiT
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: thanks for coming clean! nt
Message:
q
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jan 25, 2001 at 23:38:08 (GMT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Susan
Subject: What the hell if Turner talking about?
Message:
More responses to some of the things Turner said, which I personally find kind of revolting.

However, I do not believe being a premie demands that you be a caring person or necessarily teaches you that.

Well yes, and I think that's the problem. Actually from my experience being a premie seems to teach you to be a narcissist, concerned only with your own 'experience' and getting close to somebody you believe is divine, in a very ruthless, ambitious, clubbly atmosphere. Since knowledge appears to have no manifestation into the external world, in the realm of personal relations or anything else, what good is it? You are, of course, free to continue to believe in something that selfish and narrow, as that is up to you. But I think most people wouldn't think that's such a great deal. This is especially true because Maharaji SOLD this trip to us as being a way to manifest peace and love in the world, not as a means of reinforcing the values of personal responsbility, a la Rush Limbaugh. So, again, Maharaji sold one thing that you now claim it isn't and never was. How did something so eternal, the 'truth' get so damn mutable?

. Being a premie in the early days put a check on those emotional commitments to others that might have taught them to care for others. Also, you tend to care about people who are in the same boat as you. And many people came to Knowledge because they didn’t want to be in that boat any longer. So distance got created between premies and the rest of the world…rightly or wrongly. There is a price for everything.

Well, I would disagree, because like I said above, there was at least the statements by Maharaji in the 'early days' that knowledge was a means of manifesting peace and love, and caring and sharing in the world. I know he has done a flip on that, but I think you have the analysis here backwards. And just what did we get for the 'price' we paid?'

One thing that no doubt comes through in my posts is my disregard for the phenomenon gripping our culture today of what I call “self-victimization”. What I mean by this is the tendency to disassociate one’s own actions and decisions from one’s pain, and instead find momentary relief by blaming something external. I think it all started with a focus in the ‘60’s on civil rights, and then, like much of what we have done, we took it to an extreme. We have the Oprah’s and other PC standard-bearers of this movement to blame for this. Although I do not want to discount the good that has come out of “human-rights” movement, I believe the self-victimization phenomenon to be a dangerous one because it only perpetuates pain, and doesn’t get to its root.

Did you also get that from listening to Rush Limbaugh? Maybe Dr. Laura? There really ARE victims you know, Turner. The civil rights movement really is about victimization, and it isn't imagined. And what is the alternative? Is it to blame yourself, or your mind, like Maharaji does, for everything that goes wrong? And just what problems has Maharaji caused? Do you admit that his playing God caused hurt to a lot of people? Do you admit that his sexual predations on his followers might have victimized them?

And what the hell does 'self-victimization' mean? People are victimizing themselves? What the hell is that? I think you have your terms screwed up. Aren't you really saying that people are blaming OTHERS for their problems, rather than themselves as you think they should? If so, again, I think you got the term backwards.

If you look at accounts of past Masters you do not necessarily see a pattern of what Oprah and other PC adherents would consider “caring”. Mohammed had multiple wives and waged war against non-believers. Krishna advised Arjuna to kill his family members. Jesus beat up a bunch of people in front of the temple who were only trying to put food on the table for their families.

Well, I think these are legends, Turner, but I would suggest that you are a little selective about Jesus Christ, one of the 'Masters' equivalent your your 'client' was all about loving your neighbor as much as yourself, turning the other cheek, and sharing, and how we should live with and treat other human beings. I know Maharaji hasn't cared much about this, but he at least used to talk about it as the purpose of why he was here, I guess until he figured he couldn't do that and also live like a King on the limited financial resources available to him.

If you look at caring from an absolute perspective, pain is a great teacher and we are here to learn. You could say even God is cold-hearted the way he allows seeming innocents to be victimized. How can a “victim” learn from their mistakes if their self-victimization only hides the root cause of their pain?

What is you point? Pain is good and God is a jerk? And what is this 'self-victimization' business again? Are you saying people blame themselves instead of God and therefore they don't understand that it's God that's a jerk and not them? What IS this nonsense?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jan 25, 2001 at 23:36:33 (GMT)
From: Susan
Email: None
To: turner
Subject: how important?
Message:
It is the most important I'd say.

I want my children to be healthy, happy, beautiful, intelligent, successful financially.

But they could be all of the above and be sociopaths. They could be all of the above and be cruel monsters to those around them.

I want them to be good, and kind, more than any other quality.

Caring, compassion, a sense of conscience and duty to others, are the most admirable human qualities in my book.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index