janet -:- what order are the techniques supposed to be done -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 09:25:55 (GMT)

__ PatC -:- The four kriyas are sometimes called gyanyoga -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 18:07:45 (GMT)

__ __ Gregg -:- That's some healthy shit you be talkin' about, bro -:- Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 00:05:53 (GMT)

__ __ __ PatC -:- Gregg, if a woodchuck could chuck chakras, how -:- Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 01:01:18 (GMT)

__ __ Katie Darling -:- The four kriyas are sometimes called gyanyoga -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 09:41:58 (GMT)

__ __ __ PatC -:- ''Flying Yoga?'' Now that sounds exhilirating -:- Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 01:15:38 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Katie Darling -:- Baby cakes, I'll have you flying in no time. -:- Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 03:05:48 (GMT)

__ __ janet -:- that explains something significant 4 me -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 07:38:37 (GMT)

__ __ __ PatC -:- You're a poet. Be careful with your imagination -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 08:18:27 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ janet -:- afew fine tuned points -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 11:23:05 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- a few fine tuned points re imagination -:- Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 01:18:49 (GMT)

__ __ Bin Liner -:- Wow , Pat , your 'K' is so interesting .... -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 00:36:31 (GMT)

__ __ __ PatC -:- We got screwed and the lube was bhakti juju -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 01:08:55 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Cynthia -:- Pat's Above Post re: four kriyas A MUST READ!!! -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 16:11:00 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Socalled ''meditation'' is not important -:- Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 02:02:12 (GMT)

__ Jerry -:- What difference does it make? -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 15:41:59 (GMT)

__ __ Cynthia -:- Jerry, PatC knows a lot about this... -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 16:16:32 (GMT)

janet -:- jagdeo post: by sucha, bill fwds to anth -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 08:50:20 (GMT)

__ AJW -:- thanks janet -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 11:05:43 (GMT)

__ suchabanana -:- Violent abuser in the ashram - 'Tiny'./ A New Leaf -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 17:20:16 (GMT)

__ __ Francesca -:- I didn't have first-hand knowledge of this -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 05:40:34 (GMT)

__ __ JHB -:- Brighton and Leeds Ashrams and being here -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 21:22:16 (GMT)

__ __ Jim -:- You do realize that no one has to agree with you? -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 18:46:43 (GMT)

__ __ __ suchabanana -:- On sharing meals: ice cream, peas and lentils... -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 22:30:25 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Jim -:- Here's a question for you, Such -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 23:30:01 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ suchabanana -:- Here's one possible answer set[of many]for you,Jim -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 07:37:49 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- OK, but here's ANOTHER possible answer -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 21:51:52 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Suchabanana -:- WHO asked me, remember?........ You're Welcome... -:- Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 02:47:39 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- OK, you've got a point there -:- Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 03:02:36 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ suchabanana -:- that incl the rest,+ you forgot to say 'thank you' -:- Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 16:58:19 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Touchy, touchy, TOUCHyyyyyyy! -:- Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 17:12:35 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ suchabanana -:- admission Not equal to'I'm sorry':bit much of you? -:- Tues, Apr 24, 2001 at 02:02:38 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- I'm sorry but not for what you think -:- Tues, Apr 24, 2001 at 03:09:01 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ suchabanana -:- Ok, now have some ice cream with your mince pie... -:- Tues, Apr 24, 2001 at 18:25:14 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Good post, Such -- we're almost in full agreement -:- Tues, Apr 24, 2001 at 18:56:18 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ suchabanana -:- now, r.e. food for our ex-premie sisters and bros -:- Tues, Apr 24, 2001 at 20:23:40 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ suchabanana -:- that We Really tried -- and exercised some Care. -:- Tues, Apr 24, 2001 at 20:58:13 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- There are many ways to skin a cat -:- Tues, Apr 24, 2001 at 23:14:12 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ such -:- and still be nice to the good people. Amen. (nt -:- Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 06:43:19 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Swami Ji that was a beautiful post but... -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 08:25:04 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ suchabananer -:- OK, ok, brother -- here's the ticket: -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 18:06:48 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Thank you, Swami Ji -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 18:50:01 (GMT)

janet -:- more history of Hans and Radhasoami -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 05:50:58 (GMT)

__ Jean-Michel -:- Best parts and more already on EPO!! -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 07:56:54 (GMT)

__ __ Jerry -:- Best parts and more already on EPO!! -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 15:50:26 (GMT)

__ __ __ PatC -:- ''Spiritual yoga'' vs ''holistic health yoga'' -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 01:06:33 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ la-ex -:- Pat, can you see M doing hatha yoga asanas? nt -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 04:02:08 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ janet -:- yah--'swirled completely around'--remember??nt -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 10:46:26 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Luke Pewk -:- You Know Who can put both his legs behind his neck -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 08:29:36 (GMT)

__ __ __ Jean-Michel -:- Dharamdasi ? -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 20:47:36 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Well, that doesn't help -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 23:32:09 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Jean-Michel -:- Never took h name as a breathing exercise -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 09:45:40 (GMT)

__ __ cq -:- Think this might be a new one for you, J-M: -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 12:18:03 (GMT)

__ __ __ Dermot -:- Charan Singh -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 15:37:33 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Charan Singh -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 16:02:57 (GMT)

__ __ janet -:- i am telling them about our roots to join forces. -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 09:09:01 (GMT)

__ janet -:- more history of Hans and Radhasoami -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 05:56:48 (GMT)

la-ex -:- the incredible power in simply telling the truth -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 03:59:00 (GMT)

__ Wildflower -:- Reference the Charnanand stuff for me? -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 14:35:59 (GMT)

__ __ Francesca -:- in the thread started by la-ex -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 16:07:50 (GMT)

__ __ Francesca -:- It's all over this active page ... -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 15:59:08 (GMT)

__ kev -:- Good post :-nt -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 09:44:52 (GMT)

Deputy Dog -:- Sandy, maybe we don't have the whole story -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 03:03:35 (GMT)

__ AJW -:- I also wonder... -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 11:09:20 (GMT)

__ __ Sandy -:- AJW -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 12:47:50 (GMT)

__ Sandy -:- DD, we definitely don't have the whole story -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 18:42:49 (GMT)

__ __ JHB -:- Sandy, care to respond to my response from below? -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 19:00:33 (GMT)

__ __ __ Sandy -:- Only you know if you have responded adequately in -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 19:08:39 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Gregg -:- Jesus Christ! -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 23:08:33 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ JHB -:- Look, Sandy -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 21:04:28 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Sandy -:- Look, Sandy -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 12:55:47 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ JHB -:- I think you asked the question -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 14:45:17 (GMT)

__ __ Jim -:- And YOU, Sandy, didn't answer DOG's question -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 18:55:21 (GMT)

__ __ __ Sandy -:- Of course I could be missing something, Jim -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 19:01:56 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Bin Liner -:- Why're you talking 'teacher' ? -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 22:15:32 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- You said it, Bin. Dog, Sandy and other fringe PWKs -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 23:30:53 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Jim -:- You missed his point entirely -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 19:23:33 (GMT)

__ Jim -:- You're sniffing up the right tree there, Dog -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 03:32:31 (GMT)

__ __ Deputy Dog -:- You're sniffing up the right tree there, Dog -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 04:34:51 (GMT)

__ __ __ Jim -:- Try again, Dog -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 16:33:43 (GMT)

__ __ __ Jerry -:- Talking to somebody else -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 15:32:55 (GMT)

__ Gregg -:- How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 03:13:28 (GMT)

__ __ Deputy Dog -:- Gregg, I've never been into devotion (nt) -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 03:19:40 (GMT)

__ __ __ PatC -:- Dog: ''I've never been into devotion'' - then you -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 08:25:12 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Mark -:- Dog: ''I've never been into devotion'' - then you -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 18:22:16 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Shaktiput -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 16:58:26 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Gregg -:- Wonderful account of the Bliss Years, Pat -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 14:38:36 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Helen -:- Wonderful account of the Bliss Years, Pat -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 16:26:40 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Marianne -:- Wonderful posts, you 3 -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 17:09:54 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie Darling -:- Wonderful posts, you 3 yes and my biggest drip -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 09:55:28 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Thanks guys. Unlike Pauline I never lived in a car -:- Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 02:13:17 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ la-ex -:- Pat:poetic...your Journey will be great....nt -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 16:10:45 (GMT)

G -:- The dirt of Amaroo (Panoramic pics of Pavilion) -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 01:20:05 (GMT)

__ Roger eDrek -:- Which one is the Koolaid stand? (nt) -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 19:46:52 (GMT)

__ Marianne -:- The Pavilion? Are you kidding? -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 13:53:10 (GMT)

__ __ cq -:- and 'Amaroo' apparently means 'journey's end' (nt) -:- Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 18:31:05 (GMT)

__ __ __ G -:- 'a most beautiful place' -:- Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 23:07:54 (GMT)

__ __ janet -:- no- the pavilion is the COMMERCIAL, SOCIAL HUB -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 12:11:47 (GMT)

__ __ __ la-ex -:- janet-it's not that far away from becoming reality -:- Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 01:02:46 (GMT)

__ __ G -:- The Pavilion is ... -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 23:39:17 (GMT)

__ __ __ G -:- ... a place to buy stuff -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 00:03:33 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Marianne -:- ... a place to buy stuff -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 01:11:11 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Marianne, I think Jonestown occurred to most of us -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 01:16:46 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- That was one of the final drips for me. -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 01:39:46 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- By the time the Argentine cult compound happened -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 01:52:59 (GMT)

__ salam -:- Thanks bum -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 02:44:11 (GMT)

__ __ G -:- SORry -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 02:57:26 (GMT)

__ __ __ salam -:- Are they doing it on purpose -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 12:14:45 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ G -:- Your turn, and you should thank me. -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 23:47:13 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ salam -:- My turn? -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 16:09:19 (GMT)

__ __ __ janet -:- can you put the pan into mpeg format so it pans -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 06:27:53 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ G -:- alternative to mpeg -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 23:51:37 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ janet -:- webtv can't do that with our browser-- -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 11:03:29 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ G -:- they updated the Pavilion panorama -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 00:11:34 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ janet -:- tried it. cant use that either. sigh.....nt -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 12:18:24 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- use the left and right arrows on mine.....nt -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 22:59:06 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Janet, you need a PC - eMachines for 399 NT -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 18:56:16 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- Hey EV, how about a look inside those shithouses? -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 00:44:40 (GMT)

Ulf -:- letter from M. P aragon / 11 may 1978 -:- Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 23:43:25 (GMT)

__ Bryn -:- AAAArgh! -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 15:53:08 (GMT)

__ Cynthia -:- I can't decide which paragraph is the worst, Ulf.. -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 15:41:32 (GMT)

__ __ Cynthia -:- P.S. M Paragon CENSORED my Satsang once....! -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 16:02:21 (GMT)

__ Babs -:- We called it Satsang -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 00:04:53 (GMT)

__ __ Mercedes -:- We called it Satsang -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 03:54:56 (GMT)

__ Kev -:- letter from M. P aragon / 11 may 1978 -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 00:00:38 (GMT)

__ __ la-ex -:- As bizarre as it is, it actually is helpful in.... -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 01:39:13 (GMT)

__ __ __ bill -:- Yes, it was exactly rawat's rap that we copied..nt -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 01:52:21 (GMT)

cq -:- What 'Knowledge' ISN'T -:- Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 18:49:21 (GMT)

__ G -:- I'm trying -:- Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 19:31:46 (GMT)

__ __ cq -:- I'm trying -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 11:32:08 (GMT)

__ __ __ G -:- the docs -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 23:02:49 (GMT)

__ __ __ JHB -:- Great stuff, Chris -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 13:39:51 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ cq -:- effective worship strategy -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 14:39:43 (GMT)

Wildflower -:- Revisiting Life Beyond M -:- Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 14:34:39 (GMT)

__ Wildflower -:- Revisiting Life Beyond M -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 16:58:05 (GMT)

__ PatC -:- Revisiting Life Before M - back to my roots -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 08:35:38 (GMT)

__ Tony(Aussi Ji) -:- Revisiting Life Beyond M -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 00:39:31 (GMT)

__ Bryn -:- Revisiting Life Beyond M -:- Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 19:49:58 (GMT)

__ Joe -:- I think it depends on what you did before the cult -:- Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 18:59:54 (GMT)

__ __ JHB -:- This is a great post -:- Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 22:54:25 (GMT)

__ Gregg -:- Revisiting Life Beyond M -:- Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 16:04:13 (GMT)

__ __ Mercedes -:- Revisiting Life Beyond M -:- Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 23:41:26 (GMT)

__ __ __ Helen -:- Revisiting Life Beyond M -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 04:01:06 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Marianne -:- Revisiting Life Beyond M -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 09:58:31 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Gregg -:- Wow! -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 01:15:15 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Katie H. -:- Confession - I was a teenage premie :) -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 14:28:33 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Marianne -:- Confession - I was a teenage premie :) -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 14:36:54 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie H -:- Confession - I was a teenage premie :) -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 14:54:32 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Gregg -:- Thanks for your stories, K and M! (nt) -:- Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 00:10:23 (GMT)

salam -:- Sandy -:- Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 04:39:07 (GMT)

__ Katie H -:- To Sandy -:- Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 12:42:14 (GMT)

__ __ Mel Bourne -:- Sandy - please read -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 10:18:51 (GMT)

__ __ __ salam -:- and Mel -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 15:57:36 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Mel Bourne -:- and Mel -:- Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 11:07:03 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Moving back into the ashcan, Mel? -:- Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 23:34:44 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ salam -:- I feel guilty now -:- Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 18:09:50 (GMT)

__ __ __ Nigel -:- Mel, two questions - no answer required... -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 17:39:00 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Mel Bourne -:- Mel, two questions - 3 answered... -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 23:55:36 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Moldy Warp -:- Mel, two questions - no answer required... -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 22:52:37 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Nigel -:- Quintessence? - there's a name to conjure with.. -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 01:53:49 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Moldy Warp -:- Quintessence? - there's a name to conjure with.. -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 01:58:59 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- King Crimson: In the Hall of the Mountain King -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 02:47:28 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JHB -:- You're thinking of Peer Gynt by Grieg -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 10:18:38 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Nigel -:- ..or possibly 'The Devil's Triangle'... (ot) -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 11:16:23 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Nigel -:- You mean 'In the Court of the Crimson King'? nt -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 09:21:52 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- It was ''In the Court of the Crimson King'' -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 17:39:26 (GMT)

__ __ __ Katie H -:- Hey Mel -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 15:15:36 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Mel Bourne -:- Hey Mel -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 15:30:47 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Bobby -:- Hey Mel -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 17:20:29 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Mel Bourne -:- Hey Mel - Thanks Bobby (NT) -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 00:38:30 (GMT)

__ __ __ Susan -:- Hi mel -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 14:49:46 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Nigel -:- But WHY is life a 'gift'? -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 20:11:48 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Mel Bourne -:- Hi mel -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 15:15:16 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Susan -:- hmmmm -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 16:41:35 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Mel Bourne -:- hmmmm -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 23:22:46 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Jim Sander -:- Hi mel...I understand your point, but how about... -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 16:34:06 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Mel Bourne -:- Hi mel...I understand your point, but how about... -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 00:05:57 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Mark -:- Hi mel...I understand your point, but how about... -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 18:24:59 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie H -:- Jim's questions, Mel's answer -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 15:14:59 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Mel Bourne -:- Hi mel...I understand your point, but how about... -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 00:12:03 (GMT)

__ __ Sandy -:- You have connected with me -:- Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 15:58:00 (GMT)

__ __ __ Katie H -:- Hey Sandy -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 15:04:31 (GMT)

__ __ Katie Darling -:- To Sandy -:- Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 15:23:55 (GMT)

__ __ __ Sandy -:- Katie D. -:- Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 16:08:07 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Mark -:- Katie D./ Solutions -:- Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 18:03:49 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Sandy -:- Katie D./ Solutions -:- Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 20:08:15 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Mark -:- Katie D./ Solutions -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 16:52:15 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ la-ex -:- Katie D./ Solutions-Isn't it interesting that m... -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 01:06:51 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie H -:- Isn't it interesting that m... -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 15:56:43 (GMT)

__ Mr. Mind -:- Sandy's need to believe -:- Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 12:10:27 (GMT)

__ __ Jim -:- So, so true, Mr. Mind -:- Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 16:01:27 (GMT)

__ __ __ Robert Setton -:- Am I waiting for M to fall? -:- Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 22:58:50 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Mullumbimby Mole -:- Fuck off Catweasel -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 03:09:55 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Lesley -:- Fuck off Catweasel -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 20:30:01 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ MOLEdy Warp -:- Mullumbimby Mole - post it ! BTW any relation? nt -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 14:32:29 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Oh, go on, Mullumbimby, post his real name NT -:- Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 04:27:43 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ janet -:- your attitude is despicable, offensive, snide. -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 09:58:47 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Holy rolling seraphim and cherubim, Janet! -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 17:13:16 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ JHB -:- Heavy stuff, Janet! Bravo! -:- Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 13:30:26 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Jim -:- You've lost both your moral center and mental edge -:- Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 23:35:12 (GMT)

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 09:25:55 (GMT) From: janet Email: None To: Pat C Subject: what order are the techniques supposed to be done Message:

in? This is the first I have heard you enlighten us that we were taught them in the wrong order. you say we learned it backwards. So what is forwards? initiate me again, Mahatma Patrick ConlonanandJi!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 18:07:45 (GMT) From: PatC Email: None To: janet Subject: The four kriyas are sometimes called gyanyoga Message:

The four techniques which Rawat calls ''Knowledge'' are an adaptation (or perversion) of the last four techniques of the seven kundalini yoga kriyas. He teaches them almost backwards and ignores the other teachings that are part of that tradition. The first three techniques are yoga asanas which are done before sitting down to meditate using the last four kriyas. The last four are then done in this order: pranayama (breath), talabya (tongue), prakash (light) and finally shabd (music) and are called gyanyoga. Here are the reasons why they are done that way and how they are traditionally done. Maharajism is a mockery of traditional yoga. The yoga tradition from which socalled 'Knowledge' derives not only cautions against teaching the techniques to superstitious or god-fearing people but also insists that 'tapas' be done before being initiated. 'Tapas' means purification or mental and physical hygeine: straightening out one's life (making amends for past wrongs one has done) as well as doing some house-cleaning on one's thinking, ridding oneself of fear, self-doubt, anger and practicing absolute honesty, self-confidence, optimism and positive thinking and living a physically healthy life, doing exercise such as hatha yoga or tai chi, eating fresh, clean food and getting regular sleep. They teach that without tapas the techniques are ineffective and can enhance mental problems. The word 'gyana' means conscience as well as consciousness and a clean conscience is a prerequisite for pure consciousness. Traditional gyanyoga teachers also insist that the techniques be done in the correct order and in the correct physical manner in which they have been taught for thousands of years because, if they are not done correctly, they can cause stress and tension to build up and actually create mental dis-ease. Yoga is about health not hallucinatory imaginings. Maharajism teaches the techniques incorrectly in order to make a big impression on ignorant people. For instance teaching people to do the ''light'' technique first can make a big impression on gullible peasants and trippy acid-heads but it is NOT the first technique in traditional yoga. I can speak about the difference I found from my own experience of doing the techniques Rawat's way and the traditional way. For two years before I got K, I did them the traditional way and made slow but sure progress. Then along came Rawat with the Mahatma circus and it was like a big bang. Wow! The vibe was powerful for me and I thought there was more to Maharajism than simple yoga. So I got K and then had darshan and I was hooked. Doing the techniques his way (especially the eye-squeezing bullshit which he used to teach) was very uncomfortable for me and I often reverted to the traditonal way but of course, as I became more brainwashed by darshan and Rawat's socalled ''satsang,'' I began to feel guilty about doing them my way. After all he was the lord god almighty in human form and I had better obey him. He knew better than some old yogi who had been dead for thousands of years. Didn't he? For the next ten years I did them Rawat's way religiously and would often end up with headaches, or a stiff neck or feeling angry and irritable or so spaced out that I couldn't function correctly in the world. When I began to pull away from him emotionally and psychologically 17 years ago, I went back to doing meditation my old way and felt more relaxed and calm. The fact is that the way he shows them caused me to force things instead of just relaxing and letting things happen naturally. Since showing Chuck and Andy the traditonal techniques in their traditional sequence, they have found the same thing. Rawat's ''Knowledge'' is a perversion of tried and trusted mental exercises designed to keep the brain clear and healthy. He has taught them in such a way that they force people to do the most dramatic of the techniques (light and music) in order to create the false impression that they are more than what they are. It is divine show business. Theatrical nonsense. Doing the techniques incorrectly physically and incorrectly sequentially can create real tensions and even bodily discomfort. Quite a few exes have talked about this. The four techniques that are called ''Knowledge'' are actually the last four of seven kriyas used to release the ''kundalini shakti'' in the central nervous system. I do not agree with the Hindu ideas about chakras and only use them because I have not yet found my own words or a western scientific explanation. This is the traditional explanation. Kundalini shakti means ''coiled energy''. Supposedly the energy is trapped in the lower half of the spinal cord and needs to be released, uncoiled. The first is in the lowest part of the spinal cord, the coccyx and is supposedly the center of the survival instinct (fear, fight/flight) that is common to all animals. The second is the mass of nerves which are attached to the genitals and are all about sexual desire. The third is in the spinal cord behind the navel and is supposedly the center of will-power and appetites. If the kundalini energy becomes blocked here because of greed or hunger for power then supposedly love cannot be experienced. If the kundalini is raised up to the heart chakra it evolves into strength of character, bravery, generosity. So the first technique in raja yoga is pranayama: to sit comfortably, relax, close the eyes and observe the breath. The relaxation that comes from doing this puts you in touch with the socalled heart chakra. This is the nerve center in the spinal cord behind the heart and it is the center of feeling. Pranayama is done to release joy, love, compassion and also romantic love. In shakti yabyum (what westerners incorrectly call 'tantric' sex) you do pranayama all through the sex act and it turns it from a mere physical act into a consciousness-raising experience. Pranayama often happens spontaneously during what we call ''falling in love'' and ''making love.'' With lovers and in darshan I have sometimes felt as if I am being breathed by my object of devotion. The next technique is also used in yab-yum in order to make sex ''divine.'' This is what used to be called the Nectar technique or kechari mudra or talabya kriya. Kechari is when you put your tongue behind the uvula and let it rest on solf palate at the back of the nasal cavity. Talabya is when you curl the tongue backwards and let the bottom of the tip of the tongue rest against the edge of the hard palate where it meets the soft palate. A yogi was expected to always do the talabya but to strive for kechari. In both cases all that is happening is that intense effort and concentration are required to do them. This effort is what creates such inner strength of purpose that, when you start to feel how strong you really are, it releases all fear and timidity and can result in a sensation of melting or intoxication. The goal of gyanyoga is satchitanand which means perfect-concentration-bliss (not truth is the consciousness of bliss as Rawat said.) The talabya kriya is used to focus the mind on a slightly tingly or sweet sensation at the tip of the tongue. It is know as the ''mother of yogis'' because it can be done anywhere and anytime and keeps one centered in oneself and prevents the mind from becoming scattered or spaced out. It concentrates the mind until it is neat and tidy and strong. Without this strength and determination it is said in traditional yoga that you should not proceed to the third kriya which is called Light or prakash because you will become spaced-out and absent-minded. Rawat taught this as the first kriya because it can be the most dramatic especially if the eyeballs are touched and produce phosgenes. But he should have taught us to do the tongue kriya first to prevent spaced-out mental weakness. But of course that is why guruism is dangerous and primitive, designed to create that spell of enchantment between guru and devotee. It creates mental confusion to do it without first doing the breath and tongue kriyas. Also there does not have to be a break between techniques. Once you have begun observing your breath you will probably be aware of it through all the following techniques. You can, but do not have to, stop doing the tongue kriya when you move onto the Light kriya. The light kriya is done by placing the index finger on the forehead just above the eyebrows and resting the thumb and middle fingers on the bridge of the nose. The eyes should not be touched. This chakra is the nerve center that has to do with the senses (sight, hearing etc) and is associated with the lower half of the brain where most of what we call the mind (thought, memory) in the west is located. I am not comfortable calling it Third Eye or Causal Plane or any of the unscientific Hindu names. I use this kriya to clear my mind until I am observing my own pure consciousness. Because I am agnostic I prefer not to label this consciousness as god the way it is in Hinduism. I'm satisfied with calling it clarity of consciousness. Different people will call this different things. Some people do see or rather ''feel'' a ''light brighter than ten thousand sun.'' Yogis caution against looking for light and teach that it is only necessary to concentrate on the tip of the index finger and watch and wait without expectation. This is the most problematic kriya for me to talk about because I believe that it should only be taught in combination with jana yoga (philosophy, science of mind.) When the experience is strong it is easy to see why primitve people will call it god and say that they are one with it. Ancient yogis believed that satsang (company of truth) kept them from becoming deluded into thinking that they alone were god. The ancient Greek philosophers gathered at symposia to discuss philosophy and keep one another from becoming too fanciful. The thinking behind this a quite democratic and egalitarian. Yogis also cautioned against having concepts of deities because it would create a duality (me and god) and because it could lead to delusions. My hunch is that this is taught as the first tech of Knowledge not only because it is the most dramatic but because it is confusing if not preceded by the breath and tongue techs which relax you and release feelings of love. That feeling of love is then supposed to be directed at doing the light kriya. I sometimes wonder if it is taught that way by gurus in order to direct the love toward them. The love becomes frustrated and needs an outlet. That happens in darshan. It's only a hunch but it sounds probable enough given how unscrupulous most gurus are. The fourth technique is Music, shabd kriya, and is associated with the top of the brain which seems to be used for nothing. At least it has not yet been shown by scientists to have any useful function but it is the biggest part of the brain. You can put your elbows on a barragon or a pillow folded to be firm and thick enough so that you can rest your arms while placing your thumbs gently into your ears. You can also put your elbows on your raised knees as long as you are comfortable and the spinal cord is still straight. Put the thumbs in the ears softly with no pushing and place all your other fingers on top of your head. The sound that you hear is a bit like the sound that you hear when you listen to a seashell. In ancient paintings of Vishnu, he is leaning on a barragon holding the symbols of the four kriyas. A conch-shell is used for shabd. Focus on the sensation of your fingers resting on your head lightly. It will seem that the sound is in the dome of the brain. When one's consciousness is lifted to this level one experiences samadhi or nirvana. Emptiness, peace, calmness, stillness. I am not enthusiastic about the old Hindu concepts and have only used them because that is the traditional way of teaching it. Some of it sounds quite plausible but some of it also sounds a bit imaginary. I do not think of the kriyas as some sort of chakra/kundalini thing when I use them. I am content not to have an explanation of them but do them correctly in the correct sequence and see what happens. I'm sure we will find western words to describe the phenomenon one day. But I am not a scientist. I do meditation simply as a way of maintaining a healthy mind in a healthy body. I prefer not to speculate in religion or theology. I don't know what god is or if it is something separate from human beings. I prefer talking about it as life. I'm also sure that when I find the answer it will be just exactly what I always wanted and will feel like coming home, putting on a comfy pair of slippers and relaxing. To me it is important not to practice meditation as a duty or a ''religious'' obligation but to do it because you want to do it. Maharajism brainwashed us into thinking that we HAD to do it and it took a lot of the enthusiasm out of doing it. I do it as a healing regimen. It is traditionally used in combination with ayurvedic massage and saddhus sometimes drink bhang lassi (cannabis in warm milk) to open their hearts and relax them. Shakti yabyum sex (socalled 'tantric sex') is also used to raise the consciousness. Yoga is basically a holistic body-mind health regimen used to increase awareness of and enjoyment of life.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 00:05:53 (GMT) From: Gregg Email: None To: PatC Subject: That's some healthy shit you be talkin' about, bro Message:

Especially the part where you say 'I prefer not to speculate in religion or theology. I don't know what god is or if it is something separate from human beings.' Sounds like you're a Buddhist practicing Hindu meditation (and congregating with Anglicans, right?). I'd disagree with you about chakras, though, insofar as you call them analagous with nerve centers. Different traditions differ somewhat on chakra location, associated colors and shapes, etc. Although they may be real, and are definitely a useful meditational tool, I think that chakras are something that you could not locate when disecting a cadaver. Interesting speculation about the order of the four techniques! While we were cult members, of course, such speculation could never ever happen. Although at the time we believed ourselves to be in a 'spiritual group,' not a cult, the fact that discussion of dogma was so verboten clearly proves the cultic nature of Maharajism. I mean, even in the most laid-back premie communities, could you imagine what would happen if a premie speculated that the Four Techniques were something other than the revealed-by-the-Perfect-Master way of perceiving God?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 01:01:18 (GMT) From: PatC Email: None To: Gregg Subject: Gregg, if a woodchuck could chuck chakras, how Message:

many chakras would he chuck? I believe in chakras only as far as I could throw them which would be hard since they're so slippery. The chakra/ganglion theory is the only one I find the least bit plausible being a materialistic minded person but I really don't give them a second thought. Even if it turns out that there's something to them (like acupuncture lines) I doubt if I would bother with them as my main approach to meditation is to develop concentration, patience and perseverance - plain old dhyan aka Ch'an in China and Zen in Japan. For bliss I prefer Anglican church music and Victorian poetry. Just an old fogey armchair yogi.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 09:41:58 (GMT) From: Katie Darling Email: None To: PatC Subject: The four kriyas are sometimes called gyanyoga Message:

Pat, thanks a lot for this. I feel that some of the craziness in our minds as exes is that we know there was something there (even if we disavow it) and yet we know it wasn't quite what it was advertised to be. Before K I was practicing hours of yoga and pranayama and I was in great health. I spent long periods focusing on my breathing, and it was quite an incredible doorway to new realms of me after 17 years in a particular identity that didn't quite suit my soul. I was quite supremely healthy at that time, having voluntarily given up a lot of the things that had been stressing my body out, and putting a lot of loving consciousness into food and my yoga practice. After K, since I was soon in ashramville, my yoga practice was frowned on and eventually practically banned by Ira Woods. I knew in my deepest self that this was wrong, but it seemed to be the Rawat way -'and though I try every day, to walk your golden way...' I deeply regret that I lost the beautiful, integrated state of health I had gained to become a guru addict. When I tried to go back to yoga, I was never able to quite access the same flow, because I had become ill. I have been practicing ever since, but have rarely hit that pleasurable healthy feeling. Now I have these incredible yoga ropes and swings, and am starting to develop a kind of flying yoga which is a lot of fun, though. I take responsibility for letting go of my health to follow a guru. Following a guru obviously seemed much more compelling at the time. Nothing seems more compelling than health - in the holistic definition you give it - now, though. love ktd

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 01:15:38 (GMT) From: PatC Email: None To: Katie Darling Subject: ''Flying Yoga?'' Now that sounds exhilirating Message:

Woo woo, Katie. I love it. Only in Marin. I'm so fat now I have to hold my breath to tie my shoelaces whereas 30 years ago yoga enabled me to do auto-f******o. I could kick Guru Feelgood for making me deel guilty about doing yoga.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 03:05:48 (GMT) From: Katie Darling Email: None To: PatC Subject: Baby cakes, I'll have you flying in no time. Message:

I mean it. When you come over to our house, I will hook you in the swing with all the necessary straps (before eating) and I'll show you the weightless version of yoga. I need that version because though I'm thin it's better on my joints. Actually, my official term for it is 'liqueflying.' love, kd

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 07:38:37 (GMT) From: janet Email: None To: PatC Subject: that explains something significant 4 me Message:

i had been doing TM for a year before I came to satsang. I was doing a hatha yoga regimen every day and sometimes twice, at morning and evening, before settling in for my 20 minutes or longer of meditation. Doing yoga and TM moved me to walk away from the classic western diet and go to health foods, and about two weeks before i first attended satsang, I began a strict macrobiotic grain fast after having studied some of the books by georges oshowa. I remained faithfully on that strict fast all throughout the two solid weeks of satsang i sat thru waiting for knowledge at the pully ashram and harrisburg/ state college, PA, in 73. I think i also continued doing my yoga asanas each evening then too. by the time i was accepted for knowledge, I was exceedingly silent inside and apparently powerfully grounded by the fast and the yoga, though i didnt compare myself to others around me, other than to poitely decline fruit at the ashram as it was 'too yin' for my fast. Once in the Knowledge session (trebinanand, somewhere in PA, may 15th, 1973) I became terribly rapt and attentive. The light technique didn't give me much of a revelation, other than to see darting bolts of lightning in a black sky. But the sound technique was universe-altering. I copied the mahatma and placed my thumbs in my ears, fingertips on the top of my head, andwas riveted and astonished to hear, in succession, seven successively more complex realms of audible consciousness, that match the descriptions of the chakras or the subtle bodies: first a simple, unbroken, high sound like water singing in pipes, or tiny bangles jangling together, then they faded way as if passing thru some kind of membrane of silence dividing one realm from another, and the second realm sounded like a throbbing vibration, more visceral and intimate than the first. another zone of silence, and then a sound like the babbling of many rich patrons, murmuring in animated conversation in a vast, expensive restaurant. another interval of silence, and then more voices, this time gayer and happier, light, more affectionate and joyous and detached. another interval, and then a new realm, where the tones were more like perfectly tuned and portentous instruments, each one a 'voice', iterating something riveting immediate to pay attention to. and then the last hush, and i heard and felt something like what Eden must have sounded like: rushing breezes, a pristine world, the ocean surf on a virginal beach, birds of awesome plumage crying in the vast sky, happy, peacable animals chittering to each other in the bushes and trees, and one male voice and one female voice, alone together in paradise, unhurried, celestial, radiantlyenraptured with one another and all creation... and i sat there, astonished and bewitched and transported far, far away--and all at once, the sound and the energy in me gathered up, like a diver pacing out to the threshold of the high board, and rising into----- and then i was sucked into what i can only describe as the One and ALL. i went in.i knew everything everywhere. i knew why. i knew how it came to be and how it was going to turn out. questions i had carried all my life exploded with all the answers i ever wanted to know. i felt everyone in creation, their states, their thoughts, their emotional states, their beliefs, their view of their lives and themselves. It could have gone on forever. except that the guy beside me cleared his throat and jarred me. and in 'coming back down' to be annoyed with him, I lost that place. But i could never forget i had been there and touched it. it knew me, and i was welcome there for as long as i liked to be there. The second time i went there was the first time i bowed to kiss MJ's feet. It has not happened since. Your explanation of the proper preparation explains a lot to me of why i had such a whopper experience in the Knowledge session. I had been doing all the recommended practices in some measure regularly for a year before the date. Hmmmmmmm. maybe such isnt such a banana after all! oh suchie.....can i talk to you?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 08:18:27 (GMT) From: PatC Email: None To: janet Subject: You're a poet. Be careful with your imagination Message:

I am so much more cautious than you and seldom attempt to describe my subjective world (except with other consenting adults and then they usually shoot me down in flames and tell me, ''Enough with the fireworks already.'') To me you got high because you were so dedicated, so single-minded. Fasting also aids focus even if only on hunger. The aim of yoga is perfect concentration. Passionate poets, fanatical artists, deaf composers and mad mathematicians also get it. You said your bliss ''could have gone on forever. except that the guy beside me cleared his throat and jarred me. and in 'coming back down' to be annoyed with him, I lost that place.'' No matter how imaginative my experience of bliss is, being as unflappable as possible is my best way of going through life. Another ingredient of the science of mind (jnana) or mental health (tapas) is to develop stoicism and master the imagination lest you lose your independence and be subject to the whims of others.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 11:23:05 (GMT) From: janet Email: None To: PatC Subject: afew fine tuned points Message:

when i say 'fasting', i don't mean i wasnt eating at all. i mean it in the sense of to hold fast to something. I was eating all i wanted. it was just whole grains and bancha tea and nothing else for two weeks, like the books said. I didnt go hungry. the fast did ground me and get me very, very, as you say, stoic. unruffled. stable as a tree. I've had other friends go on it too, and it had the same affect on them, and they werent premies. as to my description of what i heard, where i went--remember-i didnt know what to expect. i didnt make this stuff up. it just unfolded the way i told it. i didnt know about the chakras at that time, or the seven realms. BUT I TAKE YOUR POINT AS TO LETTING IMAGINATION LEAD YOU ON. BOY, HOWDY. that's nother story for another day.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 01:18:49 (GMT) From: PatC Email: None To: janet Subject: a few fine tuned points re imagination Message:

Janet, when I took acid I soon realized that there was more to my imagination than I had ever expected. It is easy to get lost in it so my main focus is to develop concentration, patience and perseverance.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 00:36:31 (GMT) From: Bin Liner Email: None To: PatC Subject: Wow , Pat , your 'K' is so interesting .... Message:

...being a peasant I fell hook , line & sinker for the rawat version . That there's 'something in it' , it 'works', is the baseline sticking point for so many people when they're trying to make sense of rawatworld . We got screwed .

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 01:08:55 (GMT) From: PatC Email: None To: Bin Liner Subject: We got screwed and the lube was bhakti juju Message:

Yep, we fell for some good old revivalist religion.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 16:11:00 (GMT) From: Cynthia Email: None To: PatC Subject: Pat's Above Post re: four kriyas A MUST READ!!! Message:

Thanks, Pat, for your explantion of the techs above. This explained a lot to me that I never understood before about m's techs. Prior to my introduction to goob, I was never interested in yoga or any eastern religions, so I can see why so many of us were simply screwed--I had nothing to compare goober's techs to, and by the time I got k I was a died-in-the wool gopi. I still find that paying attention to my breath while sticking my tongue back provides me with the ability to be very focused upon anything I may be working on that requires concentration. Also, if I am experiencing a lot of anxiety I can relieve/release it using both of those techs. I don't do any techs regularly, however. I've never been able to get my tongue anywhere near my uvula. By forcing it while a premie, I got tremendous headaches, so when I find myself with my tongue back now, I don't allow myself to force it, thus, I feel no pain. I remember many Mahatmas who said ''no pain, no gain.'' Your post above, IMO, would be helpful to other exes like me who know very little about ancient yoga practices versus m's knollige. Maybe it could be placed somewhere on this site as background information regarding Rev Rat's bastardisation of these techs. Thanks again, Love, Cynthia

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 02:02:12 (GMT) From: PatC Email: None To: Cynthia Subject: Socalled ''meditation'' is not important Message:

Thanks, Cynthia. Funny how most people have enjoyed life for perhaps two million years without it. If it were a requirement for human life I'm sure we would have been born with a meditation button on our foreheads or in our belly buttons. I take all these Indian spiritual concepts with a large dollop of salt.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 15:41:59 (GMT) From: Jerry Email: None To: janet Subject: What difference does it make? Message:

It would take a real effort at magical thinking to suppose the order in which you practice these techniques is going to determine the effects of them. But since we learned them 'backwards', why don't you practice them from nectar forward and see how blissed out you get?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 16:16:32 (GMT) From: Cynthia Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Jerry, PatC knows a lot about this... Message:

I was taught light, music, holy name, nectar. I didn't practice for over 16 years and when I went back to M I started doing them in this order: holy name, with nectar; then nectar with holy name; light, then music. It really doesn't make a difference to me because I don't meditate or ''practice'' anymore--I can't do it without thinking about the Captain Rat. Pat Conlon does know the history of the techniques, though, and I believe he has explained how Capt. Rat reversed the order. That's all... Cynthia

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 08:50:20 (GMT) From: janet Email: None To: Everyone Subject: jagdeo post: by sucha, bill fwds to anth Message:

Suchabanana posted this in a thread where it is ot and so might be missed. It is about Jagdeo so I post it here for you. .................... The Truth and full extent of what I know r.e. this matter: Back in the mid-1970s, a credible and well-placed premie friend/insider reported to me that he had been in Denver and in Malibu, where there had been official discussions and concerns expressed by parents and teachers alike about Jagdeo performing so-called 'Knowledge sessions' with premie children. He said that at the school, Jagdeo had been closing the door and turning out the lights and conducting some kind of junior knowledge sessions with the children. He also said that this subject Did, in fact, come directly to Maharaji's attention at that time, and that maharaji thereupon told Jagdeo to stop doing these junior knowledge sessions anymore. That's it; that's all I know. However, that means: Maharaji personally knew at least something about this matter -- if perhaps not the actual sordid facts. I hope what I have related has helped somehow. Let us ALL conduct ourselves with empathy now for each other, please. Evil is the absence of empathy [quote from the Nuremburg trials]. Peace,

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 11:05:43 (GMT) From: AJW Email: anthginn@yahoo.com To: janet Subject: thanks janet Message:

I'd missed that post from such'. It's another little piece of the puzzle that seems to be forming a disturbing picture. I knew he had been doing sessions with the lights out in Denver, but didn't know that here had been complaints about it. It's interesting that it is also suggested Maharaji told him to stop doing these 'sessions'. I suspect there's a lot more dirt that's been swept under the carpet on this topic. I'm starting to think that, once the problem is aknowledged by everybody, maybe there's a better way to deal with it than out here on a public forum. Anth

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 17:20:16 (GMT) From: suchabanana Email: None To: janet and Everyone Subject: Violent abuser in the ashram - 'Tiny'./ A New Leaf Message:

In addition to the sexual abuses committed by some of the so-called 'mahatmas' [great souls, huh?!], I personally witnessed daily violence inflicted upon the ashram brothers by a person in a position of authority over them. There was a huge chunky guy named Gregory Rheinhardt, nicknamed 'Tiny.' He used to routinely bully the smaller, passive and weaker ashram brothers. His method was to walk up to them and punch them very hard in the arm [or other parts of the body], or whenever he would pass them in the hall. I roomed with him for a short awhile, but soon had enough of his torment of others and moved to another location. [Wisely, he didn't dare try his violent bully game on me.] Then, he would inflict even more pain on them by hitting them on their bruises. Also, while most of us were emaciated, eating our skimpy rice, lentils, and occasional veges with chopsticks, my bros reported to me that Tiny was taking ashram funds and going out and binging at restaurants. Did anyone else experience violence [or other forms of abuse: verbal, psychological, or emotional] in the ashrams or premie houses, or within the organization DLM/EVI? ------------------------------------------------------ P.S. FV/FAs: TURNING OVER A 'NEW LEAF': Please, Let's not use FV to imitate the verbal, psychological, or emotional abuses many of us experienced or suffered/endured silently in the cult. [In fact, many of us have fallen short, on this account - either by instigating or responding in kind to posted forms of personal harassment.] At all the colleges where I have taught [and at the non-profit organizations where I have served on the boards of directors], while promoting a healthy environment of free inquiry and expression, they ALL have official guidelines prohibiting discrimination and various forms of harassment. Such guidelines include prohibitions against discrimination or violence/threats, and against publishing or saying things to degrade other human beings based upon one's race, gender, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, or disability/medical condition. The guidelines also prohibit the publishing and/or posting of profanities directed against any other members of the community, or otherwise creating a hostile work or learning environment. This is now standard practice at government agencies in the Western nations, as well as at most universities and reputable large businesses. This is the 21st century, after all. In official proceedings, such as public hearings or in court, many things which have been posted here would absolutely not be tolerated. While the EPO Forum is not a court of law, it IS a Court of Public Opinion. If we are to maintain any public credibility or respectability, and if we would wish to create a space where many others might choose to participate [but perhaps hesitate], I think it would be in the best interests of all if we would turn over a new leaf -- of civility and fellowship amongst each other. Most of us have that capacity and a broader, respectable vocabulary [especially without resorting to profanities] -- don't we? Also, intellect and feeling [in the form of kindness/compassion] coexist together. A human being simply can not exist without a brain OR a heart. We should therefore listen to both, and not be harshly judgmental of those who at times tend to favor one or the other. We have not walked in each other's individual shoes, either. I would hope that we would all consciously endeavor to respect and appreciate each other for we are individually, not who [or what or how] we would like another person to be. None of us is the ultimate authority. Each person here brings something unique to the table -- and their own essence, which is worthy of our respect - if we would only try to Listen with openness and sensitivity. The FAs have recently informed me that some new forum guidelines are in the works. I sincerely hope that they will take my informative suggestions into serious consideration effectively. Thank you, my dear brothers and sisters. That's all for now, friends. Ciao! [More revelations are in the works...] Peace and lentils [see, that's where the 'lentils' came from - joke r.e. ashram dinners] -- da lil' swami

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 05:40:34 (GMT) From: Francesca Email: None To: suchabanana Subject: I didn't have first-hand knowledge of this Message:

But in one of the brothers' ashrams in LA (about 1978), one of the premies named Kevin used to hit the brothers who fell asleep over their baragons while meditating. I hear that he hit them pretty hard. A lot of people were shocked, and felt like it was a boot camp tactic. But none of us addressed it, or did anything about it. Hopefully someone at the house did, but I didn't really hear what happened after that. I was new to the ashram and wasn't in any type of authority position, so I was a good cult doggie and said 'oh my' and kept on trucking.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 21:22:16 (GMT) From: JHB Email: None To: suchabanana Subject: Brighton and Leeds Ashrams and being here Message:

Such, I was in two ashrams. I don't recall any abuse at Brighton, but Leeds was full of politics, and although I never saw the type of bullying you refer to, I was refused permission to visit my brother, also a premie, when he was first admitted to hospital diagnosed with schizophrenia. To my credit (not much was in those days), I left the ashram so that I could visit him. Regarding your request for standards here, it's a bit like going into a crowded pub and standing on the bar and asking everyone to stop swearing, telling risque jokes, and arguing with each other. It ain't gonna happen. The pub landlord throws out the worst trouble makers, but as long as the customers keep coming, the pub stays in business. John living 10 miles from the nearest pub.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 18:46:43 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: suchabanana Subject: You do realize that no one has to agree with you? Message:

Your intentions might be admirable, Such, but your preaching has some sort of weird edge to it. Not everyone's going to agree with you about how people should communicate with each other here but you don't seem to realize or accept that. Rather, you come across as some sort of militant peacenik, hypocritically wagging your finger about being judgemental. If you want to express yourself in a certain way, pursuant to your ideals, your values, fine, do it. You want to exemplify a 'better way' to discuss matters, fine, do that too. But, much as you might not like it, you have to accept the fact that others may disagree. Like me, for instance. I'm completely happy not just discussing religion here but even doing so disrespectfully. This is NOT a safe zone in that respect and I'm happy it's not. If you want a safe zone where no one's allowed to raise more than an eyebrow, if that, at someone else's religious or spiritual views, it already exists. It's called the Recent Ex's Forum. It was designed for that very purpose. This place was not. This is not a court, a government agency, a college or a non-profit organization. It's a free-wheeling discussion board for former followers of Maharaji. That's it. So, for example, this is not a place where any premie could or should reasonably feel that he or she could present their views comfortable in the knowledge that they won't be ridiculed or laughed at. You want that, you've come to the wrong place. And it's not your place to decide who's joke's funny, who's isn't, who's post is too 'disrespectful', who's isn't. Yet you seem so preoccupied with that. At a certain point, Such, you're going to have to accept the fact that this forum might not be exactly the way you want it. Have you considered that?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 22:30:25 (GMT) From: suchabanana Email: None To: Jim Subject: On sharing meals: ice cream, peas and lentils... Message:

Dear Jim ji: Funny coincidence, I was just coming in from gardening and was about to address a few more related things. Bingo! If ever We do disagree, can we at least agree to do so Most Civilly and brotherly? Also, you wrote: 'And it's not your place to decide who's joke's funny, who's isn't.' Well, OK with me, and then same for you, too. Also, lil' swami is now definitely Old Agey and also follows ancient traditions [not 100-year old theories] - so by comparison and relativity, you are the one who is New Agey, sonny. How 'bout some respect for one's elders, too. Hey, you want to bash cult? No problemo, muy amigo. You got Carte Blanche or Mastercard? [They don't take American Express or 'Smartcard' here] You think I am big fan of one who stole away many More years of my life? And you should try the Lazee-Boy Armchair Traveler chair we have been manufacturing. Most comfortable for the lower lumbar and other vertebrae. [You see, I have backbone, too, Jim ji.] You know, in the ashram, I kept my vows [except for sneaking a smoke one time - and then feeling guilty]. But we were denied many many things - some of the simplest pleasures of life. One lil' vice was ice cream. It became kind of a premie thing, do you recall? I remember one time on a very hot smoggy summer day in LA [100+ degrees Fahrenheit] Marolyn [aka Durgaji] (or maybe Star) gave me and Michael Nouri some money to go buy ice cream as a treat with dinner. Michael, 2 other brothers, and I got in his VW microbus and drove to Baskin-Robbins. We were supposed to get 2 gallons of ice cream. Anyway, they were having a 2-for-1 sale. So we bought 4 gallons of ice cream. On the way home, we stopped the van, broke out some plastic spoons, and we selfishly consumed 2 entire gallons of the ice cream in about 5 minutes. [We had been so soooo deprived for a long time.] Then, completely stuffed to our lil' hearts' content, we threw away the evidence of the containers and proceeded home with the other 2 gallons. When we got home, the house was so hot inside that Marolyn, Star, and Kathy had prepared a makeshift table in the backyard. We walked back and there before us was a huge banquet of food -- they had gone to the store and bought every fruit and vegetable imaginable, and Marolyn was serving a veritable feast. Michael and I handed her the ice cream, and she said, 'Now, boys, sit down and enjoy the feast we have made for you.' We were already so full, but now so embarrassed,too. So, out of respect for our dear sisters, we sat and ate and ate -- it was physically almost painful. 'What's the matter? Aren't you hungry, Michael, such, et al?' 'Oh, sure we are.' 'Ok. Here, have another helping...' Oy vay... haha You know, I used to deliver ice cream to the residence. M. and his family had ice cream whenever they wanted it. As I recall, Prempal liked Baskin-Robbins jamocha almond fudge for awhile there. [This was before there was Haagen-Das] Anyway, later in Houston at the Rainbow Inn and the Peace Plant [Coca Cola factory], we used to sneak out and go to the nearest Baskin-Robbins - by day and when satsang was over, it was usually full of premies. One night, Bulbous Guano ji came in to talk with us. He said we should not be eating ice cream, but giving every last cent left to Maharaj ji. He accused the ashram premies of 'basking in their desires and robbing Guru Maharaj ji.' Even then, I thought, 'Hey, mister, that's easy for you to say -- you hypocrite.' Have you seen recent picture of Satpal? He is most definitely Bulbous Guano ji now, isn't he? Does he look like he is denying himself or his family food? But weren't We all supposed to be Family, too? Yes, point is, we were so deprived back then -- and some of us, too, for many more years. Now, however, da lil' swami is providing regular helpings of insightful dessert here for everybody. If you don't like dessert, please, don't eat it. It is for those who enjoy mango ice cream, ladus, coconuts, pineapples, healthy ripe bananas, melons, apples-oranges, and rice pudding, etc. You know, some ashram brothers were more than 6 feet tall, yet weighed only 125 lbs. My ribs and bones used to stick out from malnutrition. Wasn't that abuse, too? Some of the sisters actually put on weight -- but maybe because they were tasting when preparing the food. Anyway, many of us still carry around old wounds. [I think you do, too -- and I feel compassion for your anger that clearly covers so much pain of betrayal.] In retrospect, we are survivors, just like veterans of the wars. In military, when you are wounded they give you a medal -- called Purple Heart. What medals did we get -- m.'s devoted premies? None that I can see. So, I have taken 'lentils' as a symbol for all so affected -- and I wear these 'lentils' proudly, as a badge of courage. You know, Jim ji, I got these 'lentils' the hard way -- the old-fashioned way. I Earned them. Maybe you did, too, huh? So, when I am sharing a meal with the ex-premies here, please, if you want to eat, too, then there is plenty of peas and lentils and dessert for you, too. But, when people are eating and enjoying their meals, please don't spit on that food. You will only give others bad indigestion that way. And then karma will be -- they may puke it right back, or after dinner pass gas or take a dump on you, too. If you don't like lentils, there is other food out there. Hey, some people like roast pig. But it is said that we become the company we keep. It is also said that 'you are what you eat.' So, enjoy this healthy vegetarian food. Or, there are other places here to eat. Also, I am a professor -- true. You know, when students want to take my upper division classes, they have to first pass a series of prerequisites and show me their grades to be admitted with the instructor's approval. Truly, I have literally taught thousands and thousands of students, but I have never ever seen such a bad report card as the one you have shown to me: e.g. 'ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff'. Each of those 'F's is a failing grade. You know, in kindergarten it is almost impossible for 5-year-olds to flunk 'sandbox'. But they grade on social factors: works and plays well with others, respects others, appreciates diversity, behaves and does not bully others, uses appropriate language, is neat and clean, ability to follow instructions and/or accept constructive criticism, etc. That is kindergarten in this life, Jim ji, not even elementary school, let alone middle school, high school, college, graduate school. That is how civilization socializes the behaviours of its young. Yes, the very same social engineers who created Progressivism and humanism -- and the atheist John Dewey who espoused evolution and formulated some of these same criteria [noted above] and methodology in the public schools. Even Dewey asserted that man by nature was social and altruistic, not antisocial and selfish. He contended that personality developed through social communication. He wrote,'In social feeling we merge our private life in the wider life of the community, and in so doing, immensely transcend self and realize our being in its widest way.' For Dewey, anthropology had demonstrated that primitive man, natural man, lived in a cooperative, tribal situation. In decrying the competition and ruthlessness of 19th century capitalism and establishments, Dewey wrote, 'We must follow the order of nature, not the order of convention.' While I must empirically and knowledgably disagree with some of Dewey's personal disillusionment with spirituality, I concur with his focus on evolutionary development and progress via social relations: 'the conception of a SOCIAL HARMONY of interests in which the achievement of Each Individual of His [Her] Own Freedom should contribute to a like perfecting of the powers of All through a Fraternally organized society is the permanent contribution...' So, Jim ji, we are modeling behaviours here, too. Let's not model or engage in poor conduct, bad language, bullying or cruelty, or dirty tricks. If so, then Shame on us, Jim ji. Truly, this world needs a Lot more kindness and compassion -- including here, too. Ok? I have a new moniker for you, m'boy, if you would indeed be worthy. How about 'Gentleman Jim', for a change? And I am sorry if, in the process, ever I offended thee, too. I read and absorbed your communication. Now, I hope you got the point this time, too. Peace and lentils, swami suchabanana

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 23:30:01 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: suchabanana Subject: Here's a question for you, Such Message:

So, Jim ji, we are modeling behaviours here, too. Let's not model or engage in poor conduct, bad language, bullying or cruelty, or dirty tricks. If so, then Shame on us, Jim ji. Truly, this world needs a Lot more kindness and compassion -- including here, too. Ok? This is the stickler, Such. No reason why you and I couldn't get along except we spark over this issue. You want more 'kindness and compassion' herer and I think we've got just the right amount. So here's my question. In a thread below, Gregg, a gentleman in all respects, nonetheless posted the following to Sandy, subject 'Jesus Christ!': I feel stupid. Everyone else on the Forum knew that Sandy was a premie, but I thought...'Well, he's having his doubts, so I'll cut him some slack.' But with this analogy Sandy has blown all of his crediblity: 'If you are drowning and a mate throws you a rope, it was also the captain who saved you because he authorized the rope to be thrown and the ship to be stopped long enough to pick you up...' Listen up, Buddy: if you've actually read the material on this site and still believe Prem Pal Rawat, a pathetically misled boy-man, is the Master of your soul, you are even more deluded than your master. Captain? Yes. Good analogy. Exactly like L. Ron Hubbard, who sailed his ship of fools around the planet and then into oblivion. I can't believe anybody could be so stupid. I guess most of today's premies are as clueless as Sandy, but few of them post here. To remain ignorant of Maharaji's shortcomings is the choice of most premies. But those who are aware of M's sad reality and still choose to follow him, like Sandy...I canna understand this. This is the kind of post lacking in 'kindness and compassion' you're talking about, right? So what do you say to Gregg? That he should bite his tongue? Say nothing? I mean he's just called Sandy 'more deluded than [his] master', a 'fool' and even 'stupid'. Extremely disrespectful by any account. If you could rewrite this post for Gregg, how would you do it?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 07:37:49 (GMT) From: suchabanana Email: None To: Jim Subject: Here's one possible answer set[of many]for you,Jim Message:

First of all, Gregg didn't use any profanity {e.g. 'yer so f---ing stupid'}, did he? Also, he is not being facetious about or mocking someone's medical therapy or medication, for example. {e.g. 'Perhaps you'd better switch your mental illness medication, you nutcase'} Similarly, he is not using sweeping derogatory adjectives that stereotype beyond premies {i.e. 'typical New Agey idiotic thinking'}. Morever, he called those who followed Hubbard a 'ship of fools', but he did not refer to Sandy that way directly; so that analogy is open to various interpretations. It is also an expression, and was the title of a best-selling novel. Also, Gregg himself begins by stating 'I feel stupid.' He is thereby putting himself and Sandy on the same human level of fallibility, not necessarily beneath him. Incidentally, the colloquialism 'clueless' does not appear in my giant Webtster's Dictionary nor in my Thesaurus. Hard to find a civil synonym. And I don't sense any viciousness, vulgarity, or nastiness in Gregg's tone, but rather apparently well-grounded frustration. {e.g. no 'f--- off, you dumbshit', or 'show me yer tits'} Furthermore, if there is an objection to be filed by a Willing Combatant or Debater, then that objector would logically be Sandy, not me. [operative word here: Willing] Perhaps Sandy's so-called 'Captain' is God - not Maharaji. [I frankly don't have time (or the desire) to read all these FV posts, so I am only referring to the section you actually quoted. I don't know the precise context -- and I'd lose what I have already written here if I start searching for that thread, too] However, you have asked, and so [this time] by way of illustration, here is a politer Hypothetical rephrasing of that particular quoted section - with a little bit more sensibility: 'I feel stupid. Everyone else on the Forum knew that Sandy was a premie, but I thought...'Well, he's having his doubts, so I'll cut him some slack.' But with this analogy Sandy has blown all of his crediblity: 'If you are drowning and a mate throws you a rope, it was also the captain who saved you because he authorized the rope to be thrown and the ship to be stopped long enough to pick you up...' Look, Sandy: if you've actually read the material on this site and still believe Prem Pal Rawat, a pathetically misled boy-man, is the Master of your soul, then I fear you may be even more misguided than your master. Captain? Yes. Good analogy. Exactly like L. Ron Hubbard, who literally sailed his ship of diehards-in-denial around the planet and then into oblivion. With all respect to you as a person, I can't believe anybody could be so naive. I guess most of today's premies are as gullible and out-of-touch with the obvious as Sandy, but few of them post here. To remain ignorant of Maharaji's shortcomings is the choice of most premies. But those who are aware of M's sad reality and still choose to follow him, like Sandy...I can not understand this.' Personally, I think Sandy is very close, Jim (he is where other EXes I know were just awhile ago, and he is moving at His own pace, following his own beat, and providing an interesting forum and opportunity for good dialogues here). But it is my present opinion now that practicing kindness and listening, too, opens up another person to considering one's own points of view far better than personal attacks or crude putdowns -- witness me and you. I like Sandy, and I think Gregg made some Excellent points - with which I wholeheartedly agree. The key, brother, involves the semantics, care, and tone of one's methodology -- factors which are not lost on the other person's sensitivity. I would rather woo and allow the other person the dignity of their own personal space -- instead of making a premie defensive and insulted by being derisive or in-their-face. A friend and I have had some success lately outside the forum with 5-6 premies in the last month, 3 of whom have now exited and have moved on in their lives, and 2 who are seriously questioning and no longer regard m. as the master of their fate, but merely a teacher of meditation techniques [which they still enjoy] who has made a number of mistakes. They were adamant and in denial at the first, but now they are making their own journeys. I would not think of berating them; they have come a long way. No reason to drive them back or hurt their feelings -- we were premies, too. Also, the longer a person has been in the cult, sometimes it is harder to make the break completely; it may occur in stages. After all, especially for people who have spent 20-30 years in the cult, please understand that has been a Huge investment of their lifetimes. [Also, a lot of the newer people don't have these ingrained concepts about m's alleged divinity that we were spoonfed.] Dealing with the wasted aspects of that personal investment (and its attendant sacrifices) can be very painful. Also, in Sandy's case, he is being pulled in all directions -- due to his specific very difficult personal situation. I don't envy him at all. I feel sadness and compassion for poor Sandy and his family; I was in such a situation, too. Naturally, Jim, there are infinite approaches one can take, simply with the adroit and careful selection of words. Some people are trained to attack, make their opening/closing arguments, cross-examine, win points, etc., while others may be trained to empathize and earn the other's trust [and confirm that they are not a threat in any way], and then a person may tend to open up more to consider things which would otherwise have been inconceivable, or suppressed and denied within them. However, I am not into mincing words beyond what I have already suggested here. [I save mince for my holiday pies.] I can't speak for Sandy, Gregg, you -- only me, of course. But I have found honey catches more honeybees. The milk and honey of basic human kindness in the way we address other such well-intentioned people can never likewise be condemned, regretted, or shamed, too. You know, after some failed attempts at diplomacy [with consequent frustration] I tried a different, harsher approach with you in this germane situation. But my own big bosses (Mike, Raph, and Gabe) finally contacted me and said, 'swami, what are you doing?! Put on your inner spectacles and clean out the wax in your ears. Our instruction to you was 'Use the Quip', Not 'Use the Whip.'' haha. Oh well, perhaps we're both still honestly trying here to do what we feel is right. However, the ends don't justify the means. Rather, the same means are the path to the same corresponding end. If you can empathize or brighten someone's day, then they are more likely to listen to you. And then, there are those people who seem hopeless or who bite the helping hand extended in return. But, do not forget the saint who, seeing the drowning scorpion, kept reaching his hand in to pull it out of the water. And every time the saint had almost succeeded, the scorpion stung him, and he pulled his hand back - and the scorpion fell back into the water. Then, someone said, 'swamiji, why are you wasting your time here?' And the saint responded, 'Look, I know it is the scorpion's nature to sting, but it is my nature to try and save it from drowning.' Similarly, we should not abandon hope, all who enter and endeavor here. Success may be measured in many different ways, depending upon one's relative perspective. I hope we have shared something refreshing here. Unlike yourself, I clearly don't have the inclination to spend as much time and be such a regular ex-premie devotee here. But I thought it polite and perhaps productive today to respond appropriately - so we could share our mutual concerns. Later, Peace and lentils

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 21:51:52 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: suchabanana Subject: OK, but here's ANOTHER possible answer Message:

Such, Another possible answer, and a good one at that, in my opinion, would have been something to the effect of: 'Yes, Gregg's obviously berating Sandy here. He calls him 'deluded', 'ignorant', 'clueless', 'stupid' -- unbelievably so, in fact. He calls his 'master' captain of a 'ship of fools' and thus, by clear implication, calls Sandy a 'fool' as well. He suggests that Sandy's never bothered to read the website, that's the onyl possible explanation he could imagine for his, Sandy's, level of 'ignorance'. In fact, he accuses Sandy of simply being ignorant by choice just like his fellow premies. For Sandy's 'master', of course, Gregg has even worse ridicule. He's a 'pathetically mislead boy-man', a 'Captain' only in the sense that notorious cult leader, L. Ron Hubbard, was, leading a 'ship of fools around the world and into oblivion'. His is a 'sad' reality which Sandy has to excuse to overlook. Gregg's disrespect and frustration with Sandy is further indicated by saying things like 'Listen up, Buddy' or by suggesting that Sandy no longer deserves any 'slack' having now finally 'blown all his credibility.' In short, it's clear that, in Gregg's mind, at least yeserday when he actually posted this, Sandy had crossed some sort of line with him. What I get from this post is Gregg saying 'Hey look, Sandy, I've TRIED to be as patient as I can. I've given you every benefit of the doubt and tried to give you the room to think this through in your way, on your time, with respect even. However, even I have my limits. I can't just go on and on and on giving you the benefit of a doubt I not longer have, Sandy. You just don't strike me as someone who's considering all the data available in good faith. I don't trust you to do that anymore and yes, that has an unavoidable impact on whatever possible respect I might otherwise have for you. I DON'T respect you, Sandy. You seem to be willfully avoiding the truth and no, I don't respect that. In fact, you're bothering me. I know this is a public forum, in many respects. I know you'll probably keep posting here no matter what I say. I know there's little I can or even should want to do about that. But I'll tell you something right now: your posts, the very expression of your ignorant and, in my view, cowardly, cult apologisms [Gregg, did you really say that? 'Apologisms'? Weird! - ed.] bothers me. I won't hide it. I find it offensive that someone like yourself could avoid the truth as you are here. I wish you wouldn't. You're pissing me off.' That's my interpretation of Gregg's post. (Again, Gregg, feel free to tell me if I got it wrong and if so where and how.) So, question, Such: is there anything wrong with Gregg saying all that? Not to me there isn't. YOU might have a different impression of Sandy. To use my 'stripped screw' metaphor, YOU might not have tried to tighten this screw before thus YOU might not understand the natural frustration of your friend who, at one point, throws his screwdriver to the ground and says 'fuck! This thing's stripped!' You might need to get there yourself one day but that's not to say your friend isn't entitled to feel and express his frustration like that. Now, the screw example only goes so far. A screw's an inanimate object and there does seem to be something a little unfocussed, perhaps unreasonable, about someone yelling at it just because someone else ruined its head, made it harder to connect with. But Sandy's a human being. I don't, for the life of me, buy into the idea that he's as helpless as a screw in the circumstances. These guys ACT like stripped screws but they're really not that at all. It's just the way they choose to deal with things. So, yeah, as far as I'm concerned, it's completely fair and reasonable to scream and yell at them when they've exhausted goodwill here. You might not want to. Fine, that's your call. If you never experience any emotions when you discuss things (that's a joke, Such), that's your business. But please, don't try to police how others express themselves. No one's interested except, of course, people like Sandy who want carte blanche to utter the stupidest things without sanction or ridicule here. Well, like I said, I'd rather stop posting altogether than to have do muzzle my own natural reactions like that. You know, Sandy doesn't have to come here. He doesn't have to 'put up with' whatever you think is so unfair in his treatment here. But he does and so be it. Your suggested improvements to Gregg's post -- and I understand that we only have them in this case because I specifically asked -- are just YOUR ideas. Personally, I think that if he'd spoken as you suggested, rather than as he did, it would have been a fine post, I'm sure, it just wouldn't have been Gregg's. It would ahve been Gregg filtering himself through Such's screen and limiting or colouring his sentiments accordingly. Ok, so you, Such, think that that's the best strategy for getting through to people like Sandy. Again, Such, that's YOUR idea. Personally, I don't agree at all. If I ever come face-to-face with a 'flat earther' I don't expect it'll be too long before I'm expressing my utter disdain and lack of respect for their views. To say 'it isn't personal' at that point is misleading and beside the point. It WOULD be personal, in a way. I AM personally put off by people who believe a certain level of bullshit when, like Sandy here, there's really no excuse left. So I LIKE conveying that disdain at times. I'm not the least bit interested in masking or diluting it. Hardly. You must admit, Such, it's all a bit of a line-in-the-sand question. Gregg posts a bunch of really nasty things to Sandy and you're in there picking away at each one, trying to show how this one here isn't all THAT bad, this one here might be worded a little better. Such, you simply don't have to be worrying yourself about this shit. You're not a Motion Picture Industry ratings board member screening each new film for each word or gesture which may or may not warrant a particular rating. We're all adults here. We can do it ourselves. So, in summary, I think you'll have a lot better time here, as will others, if you simply sit back and post your own sentiments in your own words, your own style, and let everyone else do the same. Thanks.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 02:47:39 (GMT) From: Suchabanana Email: None To: Jim Subject: WHO asked me, remember?........ You're Welcome... Message:

You wrote [r.e. Gregg's post]: 'This is the kind of post lacking in 'kindness and compassion' you're talking about, right? So what do you say to Gregg? That he should bite his tongue? Say nothing? I mean he's just called Sandy 'more deluded than [his] master', a 'fool' and even 'stupid'. Extremely disrespectful by any account. IF YOU COULD REWRITE THIS POST FOR GREG, HOW WOULD YOU DO IT?' Peas and lentils,

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 03:02:36 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Suchabanana Subject: OK, you've got a point there Message:

Sure, maybe this is a bit silly. It's absurd for me to fault you for doing what I asked you to, basically go through Gregg's post with a fine tooth comb. Granted. So scratch that part. I tried to deal with this in the post above but obviously not well enough. But, looking past that, what about the rest?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 16:58:19 (GMT) From: suchabanana Email: None To: Jim Subject: that incl the rest,+ you forgot to say 'thank you' Message:

I spent time on my weekend being conscientious there with you, and what did I get? As it turned out, just playing your game, with a hidden trick - another illogical thrown brick - that undermined the basis of your whole presentation. And, yes, I know the meaning of the word 'frustration'. Indeed. Next time you have a request on my day off, perhaps I'll be 'on vacation.' So, shame on you, Jim ji, for trying 'that' with me. Just Try and Remember the lessons of 'sandbox' and 'How to Win Friends and Influence People' -- and bear in mind, of course, the Golden Rule. Peace, da lil' ol' swami

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 17:12:35 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: suchabanana Subject: Touchy, touchy, TOUCHyyyyyyy! Message:

You're funny, Such. For someone so earnest in his advocacy of peace and lentils, you're extremely touchy. Here I was trying to talk with you, clearly, frankly. I was trying to be fair. In fact, when I noticed that I'd unintentionally set you up, as it were, regarding comments on Gegg's post, my example of a justified but disrespectful blast at foolishness, I admitted it and asked you to look beyond that to the point behind it. But apparently that's asking a bit much of you. Too bad.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 24, 2001 at 02:02:38 (GMT) From: suchabanana Email: None To: Jim Subject: admission Not equal to'I'm sorry':bit much of you? Message:

?? You wrote: 'I...set you up, as it were, regarding comments on Gegg's post'. intentional/unintentional dubious: motive. Give up playing the slider blind-side 'sucker-punch', kid. Then -- that's called Integrity. For, without fundamental integrity, No argument holds water. And a sucker punch that also violates its own thesis is most meretricious, in the final analysis. Good night. Lease and rentals,

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 24, 2001 at 03:09:01 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: suchabanana Subject: I'm sorry but not for what you think Message:

I'm sorry alright. I'm sorry that I was stupid enough to ask you to essentially pick apart Gregg's post and then to fault you for doing so. Anyone reading the thread, though, would first, get what I was trying to do and, second, understand that there was no 'sucker punch' as much as a rhetorical mistake on my part. Oh, I guess if I wanted to be hard-ass about it I could say that your very willingness to engage in that kind of line-item scrutiny proved the point somehow, that you think there's a place for such tinkering. But, again, that would be pretty bizarre for me to argue seeing as I asked to do just that. I'm not trying to 'entrap' you, Such, just talk, believe it or not. But if you can't accept my explanation in this regard, that IS too bad. I thought we could work this out perhaps. Instead, you're getting all paranoid, refusing to grant ME any benefit of the doubt regarding my intentions. Look, Such, as far as I'm concerned, I don't need to fight dirty. I'm very comfortable in my belief --whether you agree or not -- that your proposed regimen of kindness and patience, or however you wish to think of it is both unworkable and undesirable. I don't need to cheat to prove it. I don't like cheating anyway. So why not just accept my explanation and be done with it? Am I sorry? Sure. I apologize. But not for anything more than what I've described. You want 'sucker punch', you'll have to get it somewhere else. Anyway, back to your analysis of Gregg's post: First of all, Gregg didn't use any profanity {e.g. 'yer so f---ing stupid'}, did he? No, he didn't. However, he did call Sandy a whole bunch of disrespectful names such that I can't see how any profanity would make his comments qualitatively different. Also, he is not being facetious about or mocking someone's medical therapy or medication, for example. {e.g. 'Perhaps you'd better switch your mental illness medication, you nutcase'} Similarly, he is not using sweeping derogatory adjectives that stereotype beyond premies {i.e. 'typical New Agey idiotic thinking'}. Okay, two things. First, I take it that you're saying I've said just that above, 'Perhaps you'd better switch your mental illness medication, you nutcase'? I don't think I've said quite THAT to anyone. My guess is that you're just paraphrasing from memory. I'm sure that you don't mean to make it sound harsher than you remember (do you?) but I don't think I've ever said just that. Remember, just last week you were accusing me of saying that you'd 'slept with mahatmas' or something. I dunno other than to say I never said that. So, you be careful too. Careful with the quotes. But yes, I've told people who I thought were attacking me unfairly and who I knew, by their own admission, to wrestle with rash mood swings and the like that maybe they should revisit their prescription or something. I have, at times, said so sarcastically. I don't see anything inherently sacred about this issue. If someone's manically attacking someone, then they're asking for that kind of response. My thought, anyway. Morever, he called those who followed Hubbard a 'ship of fools', but he did not refer to Sandy that way directly; so that analogy is open to various interpretations. That's a bit of a stretch. You suggest there are other 'interpretations' you can think of. Even if there are, and I don't know that there are, Gregg was most certainly referring to Sandy here. That was his whole point, to shame him. It is also an expression, and was the title of a best-selling novel. So what? Relevance? Point? What? Also, Gregg himself begins by stating 'I feel stupid.' He is thereby putting himself and Sandy on the same human level of fallibility, not necessarily beneath him. That's pretty funny. Gregg's saying he feels stupid because he still believed that Sandy had some credibility here. Now you know as well as I do that that's a very, very different use of the word than how he throws it at Sandy. Gregg says that he 'can't believe [Sandy] could be so stupid' as to still follow Maharaji after all he's read about him here. It's a scathing insult. If there's one thing clear in Gregg's post, it's that he is most definitely NOT putting himself anywhere near the same level as Sandy. You're dreaming on that one, Such. This is a contempuous put-down of Sandy, whether you like it or not. Incidentally, the colloquialism 'clueless' does not appear in my giant Webtster's Dictionary nor in my Thesaurus. Hard to find a civil synonym. Are you serious? You can't be serious. Are you actually saing you don't know the term? Well, I've got good news for you, Such. Webster's online dictionary defines it as: completely or hopelessly bewildered, unaware, ignorant, or foolish Respectful? I think not. And I don't sense any viciousness, vulgarity, or nastiness in Gregg's tone, but rather apparently well-grounded frustration. {e.g. no 'f--- off, you dumbshit', or 'show me yer tits'} Again, you're dreaming. Gregg goes out of his way to blast Sandy as someone who's finally blown the last of his credibility, someone who's more deluded than his 'pathetic' master. Here, maybe I should just repost it again, so you don't have to go get it: I feel stupid. Everyone else on the Forum knew that Sandy was a premie, but I thought...'Well, he's having his doubts, so I'll cut him some slack.' But with this analogy Sandy has blown all of his crediblity: 'If you are drowning and a mate throws you a rope, it was also the captain who saved you because he authorized the rope to be thrown and the ship to be stopped long enough to pick you up...' Listen up, Buddy: if you've actually read the material on this site and still believe Prem Pal Rawat, a pathetically misled boy-man, is the Master of your soul, you are even more deluded than your master. Captain? Yes. Good analogy. Exactly like L. Ron Hubbard, who sailed his ship of fools around the planet and then into oblivion. I can't believe anybody could be so stupid. I guess most of today's premies are as clueless as Sandy, but few of them post here. To remain ignorant of Maharaji's shortcomings is the choice of most premies. But those who are aware of M's sad reality and still choose to follow him, like Sandy...I canna understand this. How you can say that isn't nasty or viscious is beyond me. Vulgar? No, it's not vulgar. But two out of three isn't bad, is it? Imagine someone saying something like this to you out of the blue. Don't forget the title, 'Jesus Christ!' You'd definitely think you'd just been ridiculed, nastily, viscously ridiculed, no doubt about it. People don't generally talk to one another like this. You're right about one thing, Gregg's 'well-grounded frustration'. But he's most definitely giving it to Sandy. The question is, is it fair? I think so. Furthermore, if there is an objection to be filed by a Willing Combatant or Debater, then that objector would logically be Sandy, not me. [operative word here: Willing] Now you're really confusing me. I thought your whole point was that you WERE the (current) Patron Saint of Abused Posters. Isn't that the whole reason we're even talking about this? So what? You're not? Fine, let me know and then we can just give this up altogether. Of course, you won't have any reason to get on my case in the future, then, unless I say something offensive to YOU, right? Or are you saying that there's this whole category of 'unwilling' combatants or debaters here? Please explain. Who're they and how did you decide Sandy wasn't one of them? Perhaps Sandy's so-called 'Captain' is God - not Maharaji. [I frankly don't have time (or the desire) to read all these FV posts, so I am only referring to the section you actually quoted. I don't know the precise context -- and I'd lose what I have already written here if I start searching for that thread, too] Not sure that much, if anything, turns on that. My overall point, Such, is that perceived unreasonableness, gross unreasonableness, even, which is how premies often come across here, not just to me but to anyone who talks with them long enough, triggers some pretty scathing responses -- and, in the immortal words of Stuart Smalley, that's okay. My opinion, in any event.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 24, 2001 at 18:25:14 (GMT) From: suchabanana Email: None To: Jim Subject: Ok, now have some ice cream with your mince pie... Message:

Ice cream. Also, check out what's been happening to Sandy most recently. He said his wife wants to separate from him, because of his criticism of m. In truth, Sandy's presence here as a well-intentioned, avowed premie who openly criticizes m. for his shortcomings and the cult abuses is actually an encouragement for other premies to question the veracity and basis of so many things they have refused to consider or investigate for themselves. Truly, the cumulative effects {and layers] of cult indoctrination and brainwashing can be most severe, and painful for one to look at in the mirror of truth, using both hemispheres of one's intelligence. If this site/forum were all exes there would be no dialogue except among the exes [like preaching to the choir]. However, this forum provides a place where premies, too, can openly explore and express their concerns about the guru and his personality cult -- something that is clearly Not permitted [or else does not appear] on the EVI endorsed and censored/edited sites. Therefore, respectul conduct by Ladies and Gentlemen may elicit an even greater turnout and more consequent responses -- as others reading here take those first steps that lead to their own discoveries -- and begin new journeys. You know, when premies go on-line, it is only natural that they will be curious to use a search engine on 'Maharaji' or 'Guru Maharaj ji'. And what will they find? hahaha Then, they come here - and what do they see?: the information posted [Oh, my Gosh!!!] and then this forum. They will first observe and take their cue by how people like Sandy are treated, too. If we reduce the personal attacks [premies are not the enemies], then they will feel more comfortable to discuss their own concerns about m. and his cult business amicably. And then, if they want, they can have that referral, too, to the recent exes forum. But, understand this: we represent the end-product of the transition and evolution that they will see. So, which is better -- an impression of ex-premies as vipers or decent and honourable people? So you see, Above tactics is Strategy, Jim ji. [And poor tactics defeat the purpose of the strategy.] I am always looking at the big picture, too. Lastly, a few careless words written in anger or frustration may be difficult to retract and can have a lasting negative effect, whereas careful and considerate expressions can never be regretted later nor righteously condemned. And in a free forum, such matters themselves are naturally open to analysis and legitimate criticism -- and revision. Peace,

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 24, 2001 at 18:56:18 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: suchabanana Subject: Good post, Such -- we're almost in full agreement Message:

Such, I agree with almost everything you say. That is, I agree that premies aren't the enemy -- initially, anyway -- and that their treatment here must bear, to some extent anyway, on other premies' inclination to post themselves. Where we disagree, though, is on what to think, how to act, what to say, when that initial presumptive respect wears thin. Discussions are based on assumed good faith but premies who post here often flout that. Not always, not everyday. Sometimes some premie will post in good faith one day but no the next. I know for myself that I lose all patience, respect, whatever you want to call it, when I think the person I'm talking with is just dicking me around. Sure, it's my call and maybe I'm wrong at times but I'm pretty confidant that I make that call accurately, especially after I've gotten to know someone a bit to the extent one can here. Anyway, once that respect evaporates my tone changes. I get angry, frustrated, disrespectful and sarcastic. Whoever I'm talking with then deserves it, at least in my opinion. As for how that looks to outsiders or even any premies who pop by, one could speculate left and right on this. It just might be more illustrative of the trap they're in to see how shameless ridiculous (and thus ridiculed) their fellow premies are here. I personally think that would be more sobering than any false respect or even more respectful tone, at least for some. I know I've heard that from many people over time, that seeing their fellow premies shuck and jive as they so often do here really woke them up a bit to their predicament. In any event, there's also just the good, honest dimension of telling it like it is, calling all spades spades and not worrying about it beyond that. That kind of honesty is always my favorite way of communicating. I don't even like to think about tailoring my expression one way or the other unless it's absolutely necessary. Sometimes it is, yes. But I don't think that this forum, where we delve into, poke fun at and generally rip to hell the farcical cult we belonged to -- and Lord help anyone who comes to defend it! -- is one of those places. If anything, I think we've all earned the right to kick, slash and burn at the effigy of our former Lord and Master. Like I say, anyone who gets in the way should know, seeing that they're coming to an ex-premie forum in the first place, that they're going to have to brace themselves for a rough enough ride. So be it. If they want to defend the cult here, that's what they get. I think that's fair and even desirable.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 24, 2001 at 20:23:40 (GMT) From: suchabanana Email: None To: Jim and Everyone Subject: now, r.e. food for our ex-premie sisters and bros Message:

Regarding the fellowship of the exes: Our brothers and sisters here don't need a kick in the groin [or a dagger twisted] from anyone -- exes come in all sizes and shapes, with their own journeys made and in progress, their own horizons to explore -- which will of course be different than ours. Their clipped wings are growing out again, and many are already aflight, delighting in the freedom and extensive panorama of life which unfolds when they have removed those cult blinders. And sometimes other exes have a valid concern to share politely with some [or one] of us, and the appropriate response should not be 'kick, slash, and burn'. Rather, let's open up to listen, reflect, and learn. Now frankly, directed profanities or personal attacks against others based on gender, ethnicity/race, medical disability, orientation are naturally considered off-base, offensive, and/or unacceptable among respectable people, anyway. There are so many better ways to appreciate the wealth of both the diversity and universality of experience that all of us -- individually and collectively -- in synergy, bring to the table here. Please, let's all be honourable, kinder and more careful around those who have shared with us their wounds and weaknesses and the steps of their journeys -- particularly in those areas where we know they are already hurting inside. Then, we can hold our heads up and take some measure of pride -- that in the doing, we have been honourable and fair -- and that we Really tried. Peace, da lil' swami

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 24, 2001 at 20:58:13 (GMT) From: suchabanana Email: None To: suchabanana Subject: that We Really tried -- and exercised some Care. Message:

Then, We can hold our heads up, and take some measure of pride, that in the Doing, We have been Honourable and Fair, and that We Really Tried -- and Exercised some Care. Peace,

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 24, 2001 at 23:14:12 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: suchabanana Subject: There are many ways to skin a cat Message:

Such, I completely appreciate your sentiments above. I feel like I CAN hold my head up, etc. etc. and that's WITH a fairly long history now of giving the cult and its apologists shit at every opportunity. You know, you might like Pacobel (sp?), I might like the Sex Pistols. I think we're just going to have to leave it there. I'll try not to preach to you; hopefully, you'll do likewise and we can just kind of move on.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 06:43:19 (GMT) From: such Email: None To: Jim Subject: and still be nice to the good people. Amen. (nt Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 08:25:04 (GMT) From: PatC Email: None To: suchabanana Subject: Swami Ji that was a beautiful post but... Message:

I would take it so much more seriously and respectfully if I knew who you were.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 18:06:48 (GMT) From: suchabananer Email: None To: PatC Subject: OK, ok, brother -- here's the ticket: Message:

Pat ji, First, what's your email address? Second, whatever I reveal to you off the forum is confidential [just between you-me], your word of honor as a gentleman. P.S. Also, I would have composed something totally different [i.e. above], were it me. Further, ritualized indoctrination and brainwashing are the cult's modus operandi. The cumulative effect of the longterm reinforcement of thousands upon thousands of samsaras [mental impressions] of bogus guru concepts is hard to shake for most longtime premies. One of the worst of m's [and the cult's] offenses on the grand scale was deliberately inculcating trusting people with the mistaken belief that one's own inner experience was somehow directly connected to and dependent upon miragey. That's the Key of the poor premies' dysfunctional codependency. I have been having great meditations -- such beautiful light whenever I close my eyes, such wonderful insights flowing freely -- without clouds of delusion. I am truly thankful for such grace and mercy that has been showered by my Creator upon me. Peas and lentils, da lil' swami [a very reclusive individual, who chose long ago to forsake fame and fortune in his profession[s] for his own privacy and serenity]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 18:50:01 (GMT) From: PatC Email: pdconlon@yahoo.com To: suchabananer Subject: Thank you, Swami Ji Message:

I thought your post to Jim was very carefully and seriously worded and it let me see another side to you behind the little jokes and banter. Like you, I am a peace-loving man and would prefer it if we could all be polite and kind all the time. I realize that is not possible on the internet but I try not to stoop too low with the exception of my treatment of Rawat. As far as I am concerned I cannot bring him low enough. I wish you peace and joy.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 05:50:58 (GMT) From: janet Email: None To: Everyone Subject: more history of Hans and Radhasoami Message:

from the yahoo club 'Radhasoami studies' (where i am now a member posting as a 'cousin from the lost branch of the family, hoping to cross pollinate their realizations with ours:) http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/thealcaponeradhasoamiclub this is their club for ex's. and our boy's smirking face is on their front page. go see. join. post! lets all make some trouble! ( not for them-- for gurus) they call themselves ex=satsangi's. they know us already. we're family, after all.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 07:56:54 (GMT) From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: janet Subject: Best parts and more already on EPO!! Message:

Check this !! EV, Rawat & DLM's roots unveiled No secret anymore ...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 15:50:26 (GMT) From: Jerry Email: None To: Jean-Michel Subject: Best parts and more already on EPO!! Message:

Hey, JM, what do you think of the idea that Maharaji has more ties to the Dharamdasi cult than he does to the Radhasoami? The one thing I can't get over is the fact that Radhasoami detest breathing techniques, or so it says on page 29 of Radhasoami Reality. If that's the case, how do you tie our boy to them?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 01:06:33 (GMT) From: PatC Email: None To: Jerry Subject: ''Spiritual yoga'' vs ''holistic health yoga'' Message:

Jerry, I am not as interested in guruism as I am in pre-bhakti yoga so I have probably not read as much about the gurus as you have. But, in my research into dhyana yoga, I have read something about the bhakti-gurus. Prior to Kabir there seems not to have been much attempt to sell yoga to the masses. Until then it was the pursuit of eremitic or monastic saddhus and sanyassis. For instance Patanjali and Siddhartha apparently only preached to monks in an attempt to reform the monasteries and rid them of religion/superstition and return them to pure dhyana. Kabir, a low-caste Hindu orphan adopted by Muslims, supposedly lived for 120 years - yeah right - more Hindu hyperbole and historical revisionism. That alone tells me that any records of him or his main disciple Dharam Das are probably a mixture of hyperbolical semi-truths and outright myth. Kabir learned Patanjali yoga from his guru. He then turned around and ridiculed his guru for teaching hatha yoga and simply extracted the satnaam and shabd kriyas from his guru's teaching. Kabir was not interested in yoga as a holistic body/mind health regimen but for the ecstatic effects obtained from two kriyas which he quickly labelled ''God.'' When Kabir praised his Master he was talking about himself in the third person much as the current megalomaniacal guru, Rev Rawat does. Kabir absolutely despised the asanas (bodily exercises) and pranayama (breathing exercises.) Dharam Das inherited Kabir's role as Master but I do not know of any current Dharamdasi cults. There may be some. There are tens of thousands of ''panths'' (cults) in India. Guru Nank was a contemporary of Kabir but twenty years younger and so overlapped with Dharam Das. I have read that Nanak had either heard of or even attended Kabir's satsangs. What these medieval gurus all have in common was that they began to preach yoga to the masses and included bhakti-guruism as a way for non-self-motivated peasants to attain single-mindedness through devotion. It was the beginning of all the modern householder panths which exist today: the Sikhs, Radhasoamis, Sant Mats, Advait Mat etc etc etc. They turned yoga into a revivalist religion. All of these panths despise total (Patanjali) yoga especially the asanas and breathing exercises. Most of them teach shabd (music) and some teach the simple breathing yoga known as satnaam (Holy Name or tranquil breath kriya.) They were not interested in the intellectual and mental health aspects of total yoga but only in those kriyas which produced ecstasy or satchitanand which they labelled ''God.'' So when you say, ''Radhasoami detest breathing techniques,'' I think you mean that the religious yoga cults (as opposed to the holistic health yoga tradition) pooh-pooh ''breathing exercises'' as being physical and not ''spiritual.'' It is interesting in that it took Muslims to extract the ''spiritualism'' from Hindu holistic mind/body health yoga and turn it into a revivalist religion.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 04:02:08 (GMT) From: la-ex Email: None To: PatC Subject: Pat, can you see M doing hatha yoga asanas? nt Message:

chuckle, chuckle...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 10:46:26 (GMT) From: janet Email: None To: la-ex Subject: yah--'swirled completely around'--remember??nt Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 08:29:36 (GMT) From: Luke Pewk Email: None To: la-ex Subject: You Know Who can put both his legs behind his neck Message:

and is very fit and healthy thank you very much if you really want to know. And PatC says: Yes, while keeping both forks of his tongue in each cheek.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 20:47:36 (GMT) From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Dharamdasi ? Message:

I haven't read any of their documents ... Wuld you try to analyze their teachings and claims ?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 23:32:09 (GMT) From: Jerry Email: None To: Jean-Michel Subject: Well, that doesn't help Message:

JM, I was hoping you knew more about them. I haven't been able to find out much about them other than they're a cult, similar to the Radhasoamis, who trace their lineage back to Dharam Das, who was a devotee of Kabir. I first heard about them while reading Radhasoami Reality. There isn't much said about them other than they're a branch of the Kabirpanthis, who consider themselves to be direct followers of Kabir. The difference noted between them and Radhasoamis is that the Dharamdasis include breathing excercises in their initiation, something the Radhasoamis detest. These breathing excercises are said to be influenced by association with the Nath Yogis, a group that practices hatha yoga, which has a focus on breath control. The goal of these hatha yoga practices is to transmute the body into it's cosmic essence, or 'Body Of Pure Light'. This idea of transmutation of the body into it's cosmic essense is an idea also cherished by Radhasoamis, who are said to have gotten the idea from the Dharamdasis who, supposedly, passed it onto the Radhasoamis through Tulsi Sahib, who is said to have a connection to Shiv Dayal Singh, the founder of the Radhasoamis. This interconnection of groups and their influences upon one another seems endless and would take a true scholar to fully comprehend. What it all leads me to believe is that, while Maharaji may have been influenced by the Radhasoami tradition, I don't think that is the only influence he and his lineage have been subject to. And the fact that there is no clear mention of Maharaji or the masters listed on his website (with the possible exception of Swarupanand) to the Radhasoami lineage, along with the fact that Radhasoamis detest breathing excersises, I wouldn't be so sure that Maharaji comes directly from them.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 09:45:40 (GMT) From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Never took h name as a breathing exercise Message:

I guess that's always been a misinterpretation. Due to Rawat's unability to explain it properly IMO. Though his way to 'explain' the 3rd technique evolved a bit since the 70s, until he got now totally lost in his 'baby rocking' fantasy. My opinion is that these Dharamsadi are part of the myriad of groups more or less rooted around the Sikhs and Kabir panthis traditions. The links with Shri Nangli Sahib (Swarupanand & Dayal) and Radhasoami (Sawan Sing) are enough to understand the recent links with other groups, and the origins of Shri Hans' illumination ......

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 12:18:03 (GMT) From: cq Email: None To: Jean-Michel Subject: Think this might be a new one for you, J-M: Message:

Thanks to Janet's link, I've followed up a few more connections and found that there's a huge amount of material at http://radhasoamis.freeyellow.com/index.html detailing Radhasoami Beas 'Secret History'. They include the following lineages: RADICAL REVISED BEAS LINEAGE TREE Pre Swami Ji lineage : Tulsi Sahib d.1843 Girdhari Das d. 1861 ________________________________ Beas lineage : 1856-1861 appx. Girdhari Das (possible)** 1861-1878 Swami Ji, 1878-1884 Salig Ram 1884-1903 Jaimal Singh 1903-1907 Sankar Misra 1907-1913 'Buaji' Maheswari Devi 1909-1915 'Babuji' Madhav Sinha(overlap) 1915-1948 Sawan Singh 1948-1951 Jagat Singh 1951-1990 Charan Singh 1990-current Gurinder Singh End Beas Gurus ______________________________________ Note** Jaimal may have been initiated by Girdhari Das (a Tulsi Sahib disciple), not Swami Ji. ______________________________________ Agra lineage : 1861-1878 'Swami Ji' Shiv Dayal Singh 1878-1898 'Hazur' Rai Saligram 1898-1907 Brahm Sankar Misra 1907-1913 'Bauji' Mahewari Devi 1909-1949 'Babuji' Madhav Sinha * *(overlap woman guru) End Agra Gurus ________________________________ (PS I wonder if that 'Charan Singh' is any relation to the CharanSingh we knew?. Oh, and one last thing - have you any idea what Jagdeo's real name is? - you know, the one on his passport?)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 15:37:33 (GMT) From: Dermot Email: None To: cq and All Subject: Charan Singh Message:

Just been browsing the forum this Saturday afternoon ( no , I'm not a regular again but soon will be I hope) and noticed the references to a 'Charan Singh'. I'm not sure if JM's dossiers mention CS but I couldn't find them when I looked some time ago. I was going to mention CS on the forum at one point but the matter slipped my mind. Before I got K in '73 I was (for a year or so ) reading the literature and books of RSS, Beas .Everything I read referred to CS as the current living Perfect Master. A few years later ( 74-75) when I was an ashram premie I wrote two mega-length letters to both M and CS hoping to assuage my doubts about whether in fact I'd found 'MY' master and to ask both (1) Can there be more than one master on the planet at the same time (hahaha) and (2) their 'take' on Krishnamurti's ( who was also a very big influence as far as I was concerned) blunt advice to ' drop all gurus like hot potatoes ' Of course Rawat was too busy to answer someone who was trying to dedicate mind, body and soul to him ( and hadn't he already told me 'to leave no room for doubt in my mind' ?) but I did receive a reply from a Mrs someone or other ….the personal secretary of CS. She assured me that CS had personally read my letter and thanked me on his behalf for corresponding. CS pointed out that Nanak and Kabir were contemporaries and both Perfect masters. (I suppose this is true, I never checked the history books.) So, yes, according to CS,, there can be more than one Perfect master at the same time. Regarding my individual ' discipleship' I was advised to ' just follow my heart' and all will be revealed. At the time I took this to mean that M was the one for me. The letter made no direct reference to either M or Krishnamurti As a footnote….when I was in Leicester ashram working for 'Divine Sales' , I had to go to Birmingham one day for something or other. I met up with some 'householder' followers of Charan Singh so obviously , as fellow fanatics, we exchanged notes. How much meditation we did, what about 'nectar'?, why does M accept any scumbag and CS is more choosy? etc etc. They conceded ( or more accurately, I browbeat them into submission with superior 'satsang' ) that M was the master for the whole world on a par with ,say, Jesus and CS was just around for the refined types of limited number. As it stood RSS,Beas probably had more western devotees but I wasn't aware of this at the time. Anyway, that's what I know of Guru Charan Singh ….a kindly looking geezer with a long white beard and turban head dress. Best Wishes to one and all. Cheers, Dermot.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 16:02:57 (GMT) From: Jerry Email: None To: Dermot Subject: Charan Singh Message:

Yes, Dermot, Charan Singh is a bonafide master of the Radhasoami tradition. It's understandable that he would agree that there can be more than one perfect master at a time since his master, Jagat Singh, shared the title with 4 other acknowledged perfect masters of the Beas Branch, simultaneously, all of them chosen by their master, Jamal Singh. Whole of singhing going on here, isn't there? Nothing like keeping it in the family. Being perfect in every which way must be genetic or something.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 09:09:01 (GMT) From: janet Email: None To: Jean-Michel Subject: i am telling them about our roots to join forces. Message:

JM- i have read everything on the site, and now i have gone to yahoo and joined the radhasoami club there to mix it up, and let them know that we are a lost branch of the family and we have all the same cult trappings they have. they have an ex's club too, and are just as disgusted with kirpal and sawan singh as we are with prem pal. their ex's front page has a changing, morphing face of all the beas gurus they are debunking, and our own fatboy, in crown, is one of the faces in the rotation. they know. i got earnest replies to my posted messages. i have invited whoever is interested to come over here and have a look, and to feel free, cross- comparing their experience with ours. the more the merrier, and the more lies and veils we can rip up. divide and conquer, unite and win. one of the most famous machiavellian techniques was/is to keep your enemies so nickel-and dimed with petty cares that they never have time or energy or the presence of mind to become aware of, much less communicate with each other and thus mass against you. I am a big believer of blasting that vain hope to smithereens. So i am acting as the messenger to bring the two branches together, whoever wants to do it, and share ideas and info and experience. It is astounding to see our terminology and culty beliefs on someone elses site. It blows the 'specialness' we were taught we had, sky high. In my opinion, anything and everything that helps to take apart all that conditioning is to be celebrated. so i posted this, not just for the historic record, but for additional, eye opening revelations that help dispell our brainwashing and give it context personally. they are now curious about the familial relationship between our two cults and histories, and some of their people are going back into their own archives to cross reference whatever they can find on Hans and DLM in their own books and journals and diaries, for their own, and our mutual enlightenment on the bond. we are all their spiritual cousins, having a common ancestor in the last century, going back to kirpal singh, sawan singh, sarupanand and the beas ashram.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 05:56:48 (GMT) From: janet Email: None To: all ex's and premies Subject: more history of Hans and Radhasoami Message:

this is a post lifted directly from the yahoo club 'Radhasoami studies', which any of you are welvome to join as I have. Here's the most detailed post i read tonight: Prof. David Lane (author of 'The Radhasoami Tradition' and webmaster of The Neural Surfer website) has made some comments regarding the connection of Divine Light Mission with Radhasoami groups (notably that Shri Hans was also initiated by one of their Gurus, Sawan Singh) and the Advait Mat group (which is the subject matter of the 'Paramhansa Advait Mat' Book ). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 'The Divine Light Mission was essentially a branch-off of the Shri Paramhans Advait Mat Group in Guna..... Sarupanand was Hansji's guru......Hansji was also apparently initiated by the late Sawan Singh of Radhasoami Satsang Beas.There is a book entitled Shri Paramhans Advait Mat published in India (Guna) and available at UCLA in Los Angeles, CA., which tells about their lineage....It is quite informative.....' -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 'Gyani Ji at Sawan Ashram in 1978 told me that Hansji had been initiated by Sawan Singh in the 1920s, but later left due to some personal problems (I think Gyanji said something about sex, but such gossip is notorious in India and not be relied upon unless there are many sources). The Advait Mat group is indeed different than Radhasoami, although my friend Aaron Talsky suggests that the founder of Advait Mat may well have been initiated by either Shiv Dayal Singh or one of his successors (Talsky did some research on this issue while in India, but I have not seen the verification so it remains speculative). Sarupanand is mentioned by DLM and there was indeed a split off after his death and if I am not mistaken this group also mentions Hansji.' -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 'Advait Mat is different than Radhasoami in terms of lineage (except that the founder may have been at one-time connected to the early leaders of Radhasoami). Hansji was clearly a follower of Sarupanand of Advait Mat. Hansji is also reported to have received initiation from Sawan Singh of Radhasoami Beas, as reported by Kirpal's personal secretary at Sawan Ashram, Gyanji (who I personally interviewed in July of 1978 on this issue). Hansji's doctrines are clearly reflective of Advait Mat (especially the pressing of the eyeballs, and the shortish hair--versus Beas's Sikh lineage gurus). I visted one of the Advait Mat centers in Delhi. A letter to their headquarters in Guna may reveal more.'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 03:59:00 (GMT) From: la-ex Email: None To: Everyone Subject: the incredible power in simply telling the truth Message:

Once again, I have seen the incredible power of simply telling the truth. I would also like to thank anyone, especially those people who have been around m for any length of time, for sharing their stories and perceptions of him. First it was Mike Dettmers telling us about the procurement of women for maharaji, and his callous treatment of them. Add to that the shocking descriptions of almost daily drinking habits, and the comic relief of a guru with a bad cigarette habit, who gets jealous of his devotee because the devotee has quit and he can't. Followed by the story of maharaji accidentally killing a man on a bicycle, and having sampuranand's house boy take the rap. Mike Donner telling us about maharaji giving darshan to a woman at Deca, so he can 'check her out' for possible extra-curricular activities, while she's blissing out on the darshan. And m patterning his daily routine around drinking. Getting stoned at the residence. Marilyn's affairs, and m having people spy on each other to see what they're up to. And now Charnanand, with his relationship problems. This is especially interesting, as he was thought of as the one true saint of maharaji's, by many premies. Premies would often cite Charanand as the one premie who was truly surrendered. He was the one who was truly content in simply practicing knowledge and living the surrendered life. He was really doing it, unlike us mere mortals, struggling with our crazy minds and worldly desires. And now we hear about the comic scene of mahatmji trying to leave the maharaji scene with a premie babe in a vw beetle, with Mike Donner trying to talk him out of it. Too much. Too funny. But then you think about it. Lies on top of lies on top of lies. No one ever really living it, because no one could. Did m ever meditate regularly? I saw a woman in Australia ask him if he meditated one hour a day, and he couldn't answer her. Later on, that Q&A was edited out of the video from amaroo. Why would you want to surrender to m? I guess because he told you to. But then you have to ask the question: Who or what is he surrendered to? On what authority did he ever speak? Why did we listen for so long? How quickly the myths fade when simple truths are spoken. How quickly maharaji's power over you fades as you allow them in. THANK YOU, to all those who have spoken out. Your words have helped countless people untangle themselves from the tangled web of deceit woven by the 'master'.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 14:35:59 (GMT) From: Wildflower Email: None To: la-ex Subject: Reference the Charnanand stuff for me? Message:

I don't always have time to read here, and I missed this one somehow along the way. Can you either fill me in on the Charnanand story or tell me where it is archived? I'd like to know the details on that one. Thanks!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 16:07:50 (GMT) From: Francesca Email: None To: Wildflower Subject: in the thread started by la-ex Message:

entitled 'how do you thik he'll play the jagdeo thing?' But it's further on, after we get through chewing up the instructors for their shopping sprees and Gucchi taste. At some point in this pile-on Pat Conlon described what it would be like to sex with Guru C, as we've taken it about as far as anyone wants to go with it without getting totally ewwwwed out. A must read. It's also mentioned in other places further up the chain by Jim and other, since the revelation in the la-ex chain was too much for us all. We were still reeling. One of the saints. Oh well.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 15:59:08 (GMT) From: Francesca Email: None To: Wildflower Subject: It's all over this active page ... Message:

in various threads. None of it would be any further than the recently gone inactive page. I'd look it up for you -- but I'm leaving in a few and it wouldn't take much effort to find it, if you're really interested. He was screwing around big time. Donner has a great story about having to talk him out of taking off with a woman who had a bit of money. What would she want with him?? --f

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 09:44:52 (GMT) From: kev Email: None To: la-ex Subject: Good post :-nt Message:

asadsg

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 03:03:35 (GMT) From: Deputy Dog Email: None To: Sandy Subject: Sandy, maybe we don't have the whole story Message:

Sandy, If there are two consistent die-hard apologists for M on this site, it’s probably you and I (well maybe the Cat). But has it ever occurred to you, that we never went through any of the really heavy stuff that went down in the ashram during mid 70s. The stuff that is discussed at length in the threads below. You didn’t receive K until 1978 when the really heavy stuff was over, and I was either at the library or down at the local bar trying to pick up chicks when it was happenning. So do we really know of what we speak? Do we have the right to judge? Do we have the whole story? I know for a fact that your perennial nemesis and antagonist Mr. Jim Heller was there. I can remember when Jim was in the ashram and really into it, a real devotee. So are we missing something? There are a lot of really angry people posting here. Maybe they know something we don’t. Just a thought. And then again, maybe people have always been angry. I know it’s easy for me to be glib about it all, because I didn’t give up much. I always did it myyyyyy way. I was just thinking that maybe I don’t have the whole story and shouldn’t be so smug and self righteous about it all. What do you think? Could you feel the same way? Now having just incriminated myself please let me say this. I was always into K and valued it, and I understand about surrender and becoming an empty vessel and letting go and all that. So what’s the difference? Why didn’t I get burned? Well, to my mind, there is a difference between kneeling down and bending over. Maybe that was my saving grace.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 11:09:20 (GMT) From: AJW Email: None To: Deputy Dog and Sandy Subject: I also wonder... Message:

Hi Dog and Sandy, I also wonder if you had any of the intense stuff that went on at the residence around the Captain, or at the private conferences he conducted? Anth the overweight

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 12:47:50 (GMT) From: Sandy Email: None To: AJW Subject: AJW Message:

Anth, I was never at any private conferences and never did service at the reesidence. That is why I was so grabbed by all this, another side I had not seen. Let's see, I got K in 78 and I cam here in 98-99...so after 20 years of blue skies and sunshine, I hear the behind the scenes stuff. Didn't kncok me over, but it stopped me in my tracks. Sandy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 18:42:49 (GMT) From: Sandy Email: None To: Deputy Dog Subject: DD, we definitely don't have the whole story Message:

And that's why it feels like pieces are missing in the puzzle, because they are, big ones. I don't see myself as an apologist. I respect the right of Jim and anyone else to their own experience. You have brought up a good point. The ashram issue can really only be discussed with any authority by those who witnessed or lived it. We can empathize and take any actions we deem fit. Sandy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 19:00:33 (GMT) From: JHB Email: None To: Sandy Subject: Sandy, care to respond to my response from below? Message:

Sandy, We had an exchange lower down about feelings where I felt the need to clearly let you know that I've had astounding experiences doing meditation (what I didn't tell you was that some of them were before I came across Maharaji). Anyway, you then asked:- If a drunk saves your life and then he needs you to bail him out of jail on a vagrancy charge are you going to let him rot there because he is a drunk? Does the fact that he saved your life have any juice? I responded:- If that same drunk came round to your house every day after you bailed him out of jail and asked for money to feed his drink habit, how long should your gratitude last? I think I've paid for the meditation methods over and above the effort Maharaji went to to teach me them. In money $30,000 approx. In career damage, difficult to say. And in being indoctrinated to think that this world has no value, human relationships are chains, having a family is spacing out, and truth is something that can only be found by not thinking, well, I really do think I've expressed my gratitude more than enough. Anyway, Maharaji didn't save my life, he got one of his staff to show me how to meditate. Big difference. So, Sandy, in view of the effort Maharaji went to to teach me how to meditate (very little overall), don't you think I've expressed my gratitude sufficiently? John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 19:08:39 (GMT) From: Sandy Email: None To: JHB Subject: Only you know if you have responded adequately in Message:

gratitude and appreciation and even cash. The thing abou the drunk was not a good example. In some cultures, when someone saves your life you owe them yours and serve them for the duration...an old fashioned but interesting concept. Now you get 15 minutes of fame and that's it. The thing you said about it wasn't Maharaji it was one of his mahatmas, that was cheesy, dude. If you are drowning and a mate throws you a rope, it was also the captain who saved you because he authorized the rope to be thrown and the ship to be stopped long enough to pick you up...I believe it's maritime law. Aside from all the friction, I was touched by your retelling of some of your personal experiences and I appreciate your sharing of them.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 23:08:33 (GMT) From: Gregg Email: None To: Sandy Subject: Jesus Christ! Message:

I feel stupid. Everyone else on the Forum knew that Sandy was a premie, but I thought...'Well, he's having his doubts, so I'll cut him some slack.' But with this analogy Sandy has blown all of his crediblity: 'If you are drowning and a mate throws you a rope, it was also the captain who saved you because he authorized the rope to be thrown and the ship to be stopped long enough to pick you up...' Listen up, Buddy: if you've actually read the material on this site and still believe Prem Pal Rawat, a pathetically misled boy-man, is the Master of your soul, you are even more deluded than your master. Captain? Yes. Good analogy. Exactly like L. Ron Hubbard, who sailed his ship of fools around the planet and then into oblivion. I can't believe anybody could be so stupid. I guess most of today's premies are as clueless as Sandy, but few of them post here. To remain ignorant of Maharaji's shortcomings is the choice of most premies. But those who are aware of M's sad reality and still choose to follow him, like Sandy...I canna understand this.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 21:04:28 (GMT) From: JHB Email: None To: Sandy Subject: Look, Sandy Message:

First of all Maharaji did not save my life, so the analogy was always off the wall. Secondly, I didn't say it was only the mahatma, I was trying to explain to you the level of Maharaji's effort to help me. (So it wasn't a 'cheesy' comment.) All Maharaji did was send a Mahatma to London to teach the meditation methods. Now please clearly and simply answer the question - did Maharaji do anything more than that to teach me these particular methods of meditation? Just try to weigh these things up. He tells us he's the Lord, tells a few guys to teach meditation, and I'm supposed to feel grateful for the rest of my life?? I've done far, far, more for him than he ever did for me, and any independent person listening to this debate would agree with me. So where's his gratitude to me? He doesn't even answer my emails. John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 12:55:47 (GMT) From: Sandy Email: None To: JHB Subject: Look, Sandy Message:

Now please clearly and simply answer the question - did Maharaji do anything more than that to teach me these particular methods of meditation? -JHB JHB, How the hell should I know? Did any of his words ever inspire you or lift your spirits? Were you ever down and then you thought of him and felt better? Were you ever confused and then something about him or Knowledge clear your head? Only you know the answer to your question, and I'm not being obtuse here. It's just a fact. DID he do anything else for you? I used to think he was really watching out for us in spirit, just like the saying goes about the eye on the sparrow. And when I believed that, good things seemed to happen more often, either by my own faith or by a real presence or both. I don't feel that as much anymore. Sandy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 14:45:17 (GMT) From: JHB Email: None To: Sandy Subject: I think you asked the question Message:

About being grateful to the drunk who saved my life, and how quickly I could dump someone who showed me how to meditate because of his person lifestyle. So I was trying to answer you. Let's put it another way. Imagine a teacher who taught the same methods of meditation, but charged a small fee for his time and overheads. Never said he was anything special, never asked for devotion, never said human relationships would send me to hell, never said this world was illusion, and didn't make such demands on me that restricted my education and career. Now if I then had the same experiences I had from meditating (and why wouldn't I?), I would feel naturally grateful to him, and offer him something to express my gratitude. And if he then said, 'No, I don't need anything - to know that you enjoy meditating is enough thanks for me'. I think maybe I could have grown to love such a teacher much more deeply than I ever imagined I loved Prem Pal Singh Rawat. Yes, it's just my imagination about how a good teacher should behave. But don't you think such a teacher would be more worthy of respect? But anyway, it's only meditation, nothing more. John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 18:55:21 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Sandy Subject: And YOU, Sandy, didn't answer DOG's question Message:

God, is this going to be a blind swordfight or what? Dog doesn't answer my question, you don't answer Dog's question .... Sandy, why don't you read Dog's post again and really look at what he's asking you. You side-stepped it. He's not asking you just about whether or not you can comment on the ashrams, per se, but rather whether or not you could be 'missing something'. Here, read it again: You didn’t receive K until 1978 when the really heavy stuff was over, and I was either at the library or down at the local bar trying to pick up chicks when it was happenning. So do we really know of what we speak? Do we have the right to judge? Do we have the whole story? I know for a fact that your perennial nemesis and antagonist Mr. Jim Heller was there. I can remember when Jim was in the ashram and really into it, a real devotee. So are we missing something? There are a lot of really angry people posting here. Maybe they know something we don’t. Just a thought. And then again, maybe people have always been angry. I know it’s easy for me to be glib about it all, because I didn’t give up much. I always did it myyyyyy way. I was just thinking that maybe I don’t have the whole story and shouldn’t be so smug and self righteous about it all. What do you think? Could you feel the same way? Furthermore, it's not at all the case that, just because you supposedly respect my right (or anyone else's) to 'my experience' -- ridiculous cult jargon -- that that means you're not a cult apologist. Yet, that seems to be your argument.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 19:01:56 (GMT) From: Sandy Email: None To: Jim Subject: Of course I could be missing something, Jim Message:

That fact is intuitively obvious to the most casual observer, but for your sake here it is in black and white. And besides what I may be missing in this interchange, all of us are missing something, or we would never have looked for a teacher to show us what we were missing in the first place. Where are you at with that nowadays? Have you given up on the dream because Maharaji let you down? Poor excuse for a seeker of the ultimate truth. Clear enough for you NOW?? Sandy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 22:15:32 (GMT) From: Bin Liner Email: None To: Sandy Subject: Why're you talking 'teacher' ? Message:

Most people here are talking Satguru , the Superior Power In Fucking Person . When God lets you down I'd say that's a very good reason to can the dream . It suddenly occurs to me that you don't give a rats arse for Rawat yourself . You just like stirring the shit.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 23:30:53 (GMT) From: PatC Email: None To: Bin Liner Subject: You said it, Bin. Dog, Sandy and other fringe PWKs Message:

who sort of hung around in the background and did not give money or get involved in the cult via service do not know what they are talking about. If you truly loved Rawat and wanted to dissolve your ego into his, then you did service, put your money where your mouth was and surrendered. If you were truly devoted you moved into the ashram. Fringe premies treated rawat like a whore at worst or a mistress at best. Some of us gopis loved him as our husband or wife.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 19:23:33 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Sandy Subject: You missed his point entirely Message:

Dog's suggesting that, on reflection, you might find that you're being 'smug and self-righteous' on account of the fact that your relatively late entry in the game makes it impossible for you to judge Maharaji as well as those of us who were around earlier. What do you say to that? As for your question, I don't believe there's anything such as 'ultimate truth'. To me that phrase stands for something which only exists in the imagination of someone who considers himself spiritual. So I don't call myself a 'seeker of ultimate truth'. So I can't answer your question.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 03:32:31 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Deputy Dog Subject: You're sniffing up the right tree there, Dog Message:

I know for a fact that your perennial nemesis and antagonist Mr. Jim Heller was there. I can remember when Jim was in the ashram and really into it, a real devotee. So are we missing something? There are a lot of really angry people posting here. Maybe they know something we don’t. Just a thought. And then again, maybe people have always been angry. I know it’s easy for me to be glib about it all, because I didn’t give up much. I always did it myyyyyy way. I was just thinking that maybe I don’t have the whole story and shouldn’t be so smug and self righteous about it all. What do you think? Could you feel the same way? Dog, Two things. You've used me as an example so allow me to follow up on that. Please, Dog, you have to admit that there was nothing particularly 'angry' about me then. Come on, you know that. If anything, I was a bit happy-go-lucky, liked to fool around. Then there were the times I'd get all hell-bent on 'realizing knowledge' and would parrot the 'strong' satsang of the day. But even then I was kind of easy going. You have to know that. But can I comment on you, Dog? I always liked you, you know that too, but, to be honest, I never felt you had the faintest idea about what this guru was all about. He'd be screaming at the top of his lungs that we were ... well, I'll find you something. These were all things m said when you and I knew each other and lived in the same community: Maharaji telling premies how to pray to him ( November 8, 1978 in Kissimmee, Florida): 'Like I was saying yesterday, you say: 'If You could find any place, any point, anywhere, anything, if You could just find a little place for me, then just please stick me in somewhere, because I want to be on Your boat, and I want to be with You so desperately. I am already indebted to You. Don't expect anything from me, I will do whatever I can by Your Grace, but don't expect -- I'm already too much indebted to You.' 'How can I ever repay You, what can I ever do? And I can't pay You even if I have the whole wealth of this entire world: When I can't even pay You with that, Guru Maharaj Ji, then what have I got, what is there that I can give to You?' 'And You give me so much. You give me that affection. You give me that Love and I keep taking it. I never even think about, oh Guru Maharaj Ji, what can I give You? I mean, if there are people that can be called 'the worst' then here I am, it's me. If there is somebody who is the worst of the bunch, here it is, it's me, and the more You see that it's me then please help me more, please.' 'And, even what right do we have to plead to Guru Maharaj Ji? Who are we, you know, who are we that we can even plead to Guru Maharaj Ji and say please, or talk to Guru Maharaj Ji, or look at Guru Maharaj Ji? But we do it.' -Maharaji speaking about the necessity of faith in him (August 27, 1978, Philadelphia, PA): 'Guru Maharaj Ji has not only promised us, but given us more than he has promised. Always. And as that battle begins, the things get even more intense. And if that faith is not there, if that faith is not completely in Guru Maharaj Ji, you're going to fall in so many fragments that you wouldn't be able to count them yourself. ' - Maharaji speaking about how the Knowledge techniques are worthless without his grace (November 12, 1977, Rome): 'You know, some people might say, 'Well, anybody can tell this Knowledge to anybody.' Oh yeah, sure, in the German newspaper a long time ago, in the German magazine, they have disclosed everything. And I am pretty sure that people sat down and tried it out. What else have they got to do? They see something, see the name, name is like the guarantee, the name is like the good thing behind the product, and there they are and they go, 'Oh man great, this is mission, this is what they say, this is what they do.' And on the other hand, I am a hundred per cent positive they didn't get one bean worth out of it. Because that's not the way it works. It's just not the way it works. It's only by Guru Maharaj Ji's grace. And that's a fact.' - Maharaji speaking about working at a job versus going to his events: 'If I were a premie and I had a job the only reason why I would work and save up some money is to be able to go to festivals. I mean that really sums it up. Why? Because, yes, you are going into this world. You know, it's like you're walking into the fire with a fire suit on. To be able to come, to be able to make yourself stronger and stronger and stronger and stronger, so that when the time comes then Guru Maharaj Ji can give you the grace of becoming an initiator; if not an initiator, of giving you any service. You know?' (November 13, 1977, Rome) 'You know, this is like what I said; that man I could work, I could have a job, I could do this, and I could do that, but the only reason that I would even want to work is to be able to just come to these satsangs and enjoy them. So what else is there in this world?' (November 8, 1978. Kissimmee, Florida) This was just a fast grab from the quotes section of the site. But you get the picture. Dog, like I said before, you just weren't there, man. You were always wryly detached from the whole show. I can't recall you ever giving satsang. Did you? It couldn't have been that often, if you did. Instead, you were just this kind of detached guy at the back of the hall, just kind of there, you know? Now, as I've tried to say in the past, I've got a whole theory about that position you took on the periphery of the cult that's really quite flattering to you, namely, that you had too strong a survival mechanism to actually fall into this thing. If this were Jonestown I'd probably have drunk the koolaid and you'd probably be one of the guys who got shot trying to run away. Good for you! Unfortunately, I think you've turned that inherent strength into a weakness. The only way you COULD stay on the edge so long was by developing this habit of squinting, if you will, at what was really happening. Well, you've been squinting ever since and you don't even know it. Sorry to say, Dog, but that's honestly the impression you give. You've adopted this mode of simply surfing on all this new age / spiritual / maharajism shit and it's just so damned second-nature to you now. That's what it seems like. You know, there's someone else on this forum who knows you and would likely have some very telling observations of his own regarding you. Wouldn't you want to open things up a bit and let him or her (you know who I mean) have their two cents worth? Sincerely, Jim

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 04:34:51 (GMT) From: Deputy Dog Email: None To: Jim Subject: You're sniffing up the right tree there, Dog Message:

Dog, like I said before, you just weren't there, man. You were always wryly detached from the whole show. I can't recall you ever giving satsang. Did you? It couldn't have been that often, if you did. Instead, you were just this kind of detached guy at the back of the hall, just kind of there, you know? Wow, it's nice to know what a marvellous effect my satsangs have had. You can't recall my ever giving satsang? Well, I was banned from giving satsang for a year or so. Then I kind of lost interest. Maybe that was when you were around. You were a happy-go-lucky kind of guy though. Do you miss that? I have had a deep experience of K though, despite what you think. Why do you think I defend it so on this site? Never had much of a devotional experience though. Always liked M, but he was always over there and talking to those people. I do recall the talks at Kissimee, I just never felt he was talking to me. I guess I'm one of those bongo, Lone Rangers he now ridicules. Never took it personally. And no, I'd rather not let that other person have their two cents worth. That would definitely blow my cover. In fact I don't think I can even keep posting because my computer is sick. Thought I'd share my thoughts. Thanks for responding. Dog

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 16:33:43 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Deputy Dog Subject: Try again, Dog Message:

Dog, You didn't comment on my theory: Now, as I've tried to say in the past, I've got a whole theory about that position you took on the periphery of the cult that's really quite flattering to you, namely, that you had too strong a survival mechanism to actually fall into this thing. If this were Jonestown I'd probably have drunk the koolaid and you'd probably be one of the guys who got shot trying to run away. Good for you! Unfortunately, I think you've turned that inherent strength into a weakness. The only way you COULD stay on the edge so long was by developing this habit of squinting, if you will, at what was really happening. Well, you've been squinting ever since and you don't even know it. Sorry to say, Dog, but that's honestly the impression you give. You've adopted this mode of simply surfing on all this new age / spiritual / maharajism shit and it's just so damned second-nature to you now. That's what it seems like. Well? Seriously, would you turn your mind to this for a bit and really answer me please? What do you think of this?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 15:32:55 (GMT) From: Jerry Email: None To: Deputy Dog Subject: Talking to somebody else Message:

I think you and me were a lot alike as premies, with one difference, I never gave satsang. I also never had an 'experience' in meditation. I did sort of have a darshan experience, once, but that's about all I can recall. All the quotes just posted by Jim, I recall being exposed to in And It Is Divine, but never by Maharaji in person, (as an active substance abuser, it was diffficult to have enough funds for that and travelling at the same time). But like you, when I read that stuff, I figured Maharaji was talking to somebody else. I figured he was talking to those people who had.... THE EXPERIENCE! I wasn't one of those people, but I beleived, one day, I would be. So, those words didn't mean that much to me. The words that did were, 'experience, then believe'. This I heard from the horse's mouth. So, I stayed at it as best I was able, to get that experience so talked about, so cherished, in my life. But you had the experience, so how did you figure he was talking to somebody else? The proof was in the pudding for you. What I don't understand about you, Dog, is if the criteria for Maharaji's legitamacy was in the 'experience', and you were having it, how did you figure Maharaji was talkig to somebody else, and not you?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 03:13:28 (GMT) From: Gregg Email: None To: Deputy Dog Subject: How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Message:

In other words, this could be a fascinating discussion amongst quasi-premies on the meaning of devotion. I'll just sit back and watch, if you don't mind.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 03:19:40 (GMT) From: Deputy Dog Email: None To: Gregg Subject: Gregg, I've never been into devotion (nt) Message:

ggggggggggggggg

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 08:25:12 (GMT) From: PatC Email: None To: Deputy Dog Subject: Dog: ''I've never been into devotion'' - then you Message:

HAVE NEVER EXPERIENCED KNOWLEDGE. Maharaji's ''Knowledge'' is a combination of shaktipat (contact high from mahatmas, satsang, service, meditation and darshan etc) and diksha (initiation into the practice of four gyanyoga kriyas which he teaches in a incorrect sequence, backwards.) I practiced three of those kriyas for 2 years before I ''got Knowledge.'' Why? Because I wanted to get as high naturally as I did on acid. My yoga practice was very dry and my personal life was in a mess when M came along. Half the commune I was living in ''got K'' and, later that year, went to India. When they returned they were high, sick with hepatitis and amoebic dysentry but high. I picked up their shaktipat (literally energy transfer) and went to satsang with them and heard ''Lila...the game has just begun'' sung by an angel and got more shaktipat. So I went and ''got Knowledge.'' Two months later my work permit in UK expired and I had to go back to South Africa. I was so ignorant that I thought K and M (whom I had not yet seen) was a hippie phenomenon and did not even know that there were Indian premies in S Africa. (There had been three resident South African female mahatmas, Bais, and hundreds of premies since 1966.) So I practiced K by myself. It was still dry and tedious but I persevered because I was determined to find my own psychedelic high. (I experienced on acid what I considered perfection. I don't mean all the imaginary stuff. I mean the feeling of health, vibrancy and perfect clarity, understanding and contentment - sat chit anand. That was what I wanted to re-capture by yoga. When I was as clear and calm as that then everything clicked into place. Love was the answer to all my social problems; happiness was the solution for my existential angst and resentment of mortality. There seemed to be no limit to what I could grasp with pure intelligence. After one trip I even understood the theory of relativity and Gerard Manley Hopkins' sprung verse began to make sense.) But I was still in touch with premies in UK and they told me about darshan. So I went back to UK and did first aid service in the Palace of Peace and M came one day and sat on the stage where previously only mahatmas and members of the Holy family had sat. He bounced on stage with his beautiful blond Californian wife with legs all the way up to her armpits and a smile like a Beach Boys song. I nearly collapsed with shaktipat. Nearly ten years of longing and sick puppy devotion followed. The more longing and devotion - the more shaktipat, the more bliss in satsang, service, meditation and darshan. I became a darshan addict and travelled all over Europe, Canada and US, giving up jobs, family, friends, wife and kid, two husbands and the comfort a stable roof over my head. I lived out of a suitcase and slept on floors in sleeping bags like Pauline Premie. But man o man did I get high! To cut a long story short: I also am into consciousness altering practices. You call yours ''Knowledge.'' I call mine gyanyoga. There is absolutely no way to tell if we're experiencing the same thing so why call it ''Knowledge'' and begin to imagine that all premies are experiencing the same thing? In between darshan fixes my life was a mess, I was miserable and my only joy was the occassional peek into Brahman's ''Palace of Jewels'' I had when practicing K. Those peeks were few and far between and most of the time my practice of K was fraught with religious rigidity, superstitious fears, unnecessary conflicts with my own intellect and desires and an increasing feeling of being a worthless piece of shit not only in the eyes of society but also of Maharaji. But slowly it dawned on me that I was getting everything I needed in the comfort of my own home without having to travel everywhere in search of a darshan fix and then having to waste my time standing in endless lines like a squashed communist and listening to interminable hours of drivel from dysfunctional cult officials and then have to sit through Rev Strangelove's poetry and bad rock'n roll. I had what I wanted and I didn't need a Master anymore. I dropped out for 17 years and only went back last year because I thought ''Knowledge'' was terrific and wanted others to have it. But I had taken a vow never to reveal the techniques so obviously I had to co-operate with M and do it his way. Well, his way stinks. There is no need for a Master for something as personal, subjective and ephemeral as ''Knowledge.'' It is something best imparted in a spirit of mutual interest between friends like sexual pleasure. And even if there were a need for a master, I would prefer someone a little wiser, more competent, more responsible, less greedy and a whole lot more honest and straightforward than the Master of Wiggle and the inventor of the famed Wobble Dance. So, if you didn't have devotion then you didn't get ''Knowledge.'' I don't know what you got but it sure wasn't the same as I got. I'd like to end this with a quote from John Brauns' (JHB) post to Sandy: ''I felt love for Guru Maharaji. I felt devotion for him. I also loved the feeling when my breath buoyed inside me and I floated within it. I loved it when I seemed to be between thought and consciousness. I cried when it seemed like layers of myself were unfolding in blissful ecstasy up my spine. I was struck dumb when the sound of an uncountable number of perfectly tuned, incredible fine, guitar strings rushed through my most intimate self. I was amazed when I came up against myself in the experience of one hand clapping, and I knew that this was all I wanted.'' Thank you, John, for that beautiful prose poem. It beats anything Rev Feelgood or his ELKers have ever written.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 18:22:16 (GMT) From: Mark Email: None To: PatC Subject: Dog: ''I've never been into devotion'' - then you Message:

Brilliant, aromatic, & lucid explanation of the vortex we swam in for so many years. Astral energy is tremendously powerful. And since astral spiritual experience is far more powerful than 98% of traditional life experience, it is as addictive as great drugs or any other out of body stuff. no wonder we woke up 5-25 years later, scratching our heads . . .

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 16:58:26 (GMT) From: Jerry Email: None To: PatC Subject: Shaktiput Message:

There is absolutely no way to tell if we're experiencing the same thing so why call it ''Knowledge'' and begin to imagine that all premies are experiencing the same thing? Good point, Pat. There is absolutely no basis for inferring that the 'experience 'is the same for everybody, so why speak of it as something that's universal, when it's purely subjective. I like what you said about shack-tee-poot. Yeah, if anything kept me coming back, it was the energy I felt being around premies, drawn from the belief that we were a part of something as momentous as the day Christ was born. Yeah, ideas like that, and being in contact with people who felt the same really got me high. But I never related that high to the 'experience'. To me, that could only be when you felt you'd been touched by God. While I always felt I was on the brink of that happenning, I never felt that it actually had, so as far as I was concerned, I wasn't really experiencing K, just getting high off of those I believed were. I have to say, Pat, I really appreciate your sound understanding of eastern thought and your clear expression of it here on the forum.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 14:38:36 (GMT) From: Gregg Email: None To: PatC Subject: Wonderful account of the Bliss Years, Pat Message:

We were all 'chasing the dragon,' as the junkies say, trying to capture that elusive yet overwhelming surge of energy, that loss of self; that liquid oneness with God and His devotees. And like you say, the feeling can be experienced in the privacy of your own living room. Yet, for most of us, it really takes quite a few years of practice before the experience becomes readily accessible, more than a seemingly random breath of Grace. To join DLM back then was like taking acid: a quicker, almost instantaneous initiation into something kind of like enlightenment. However, like acid, premiehood had its downside. Neither taking drugs nor throwing one's lot in with a (fraudulent!) guru is a good life strategy. Some acidheads never left drugs of one sort or another. And some premies still secretly cling to their belief in an omnipresent omniscient and everloving Guru Maharaj Ji, who will one day rise from EV blandness and shake his shaktibooty on stage once again.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 16:26:40 (GMT) From: Helen Email: None To: Gregg/Pat Subject: Wonderful account of the Bliss Years, Pat Message:

These are great posts. Pat, I think that post should be posted as your journey. It's fabulous! I think it's great that you guys and JHB are able to articulate those blissful experiences. After all, that is what hooked us, and those experiences *were* great, (well, some of them were, some of them were just plain weird)! After all, there was a whole generation of us thinking that this was the ultimate of what life could offer, and what life was all about. We thought this was it, so we totally immersed ourselves in the experience...and there was a lot of reinforcement to pleasure ourselves forever in the eternal bliss of God consciousness. And booger to those who tried to get us to come down off of our high! Unfortunately, we eventually had to come down and clean up our rooms, and ask ourselves what the hell happened? And more seriously, alot of us never made it back and were burned up in the process, or freaked out and are now dead. The problem was, once you give your mind over to a psychadelic/blissful experience and prize that above anything else, you become so vulnerable to a charleton like Maharaji who can dangle that carrot in front of you. You've forgotten the plot by that point. Pat, you're the only person I know who can put a reference to Gerard Manley Hopkins in the same post as psychadelic drug experiences. I salute your creativity!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 17:09:54 (GMT) From: Marianne Email: None To: Helen, Pat, Gregg Subject: Wonderful posts, you 3 Message:

Gregg and Pat (and JHB too), your descriptions of the highs that could be achieved from meditation rang true with me too. I don't know how you are able to conjure up these verbal descriptions of the experience. The other thing that struck me about your post Pat, was the part about being a darshan junkie who gave up his real life so that you could engage in full time adoration. That was the Achilles Heel of the whole thing for me. Of what value is the realization that encourages people to abandon their own individual lives, and physical and emotional well being? Conversely, of what value is the realization that encourages people to accumulate gross riches and ignore the condition of their fellow man? Some of the premies who have visited here recently smack of these attitudes. To my mind, we are one part of a whole. Ignoring individual development or turning a blind eye to one's community are both recipes for disaster as far as I'm concerned. It is this see saw effect which demonstrates the spiritual bankruptcy perpetuated by Captain Rawat and his organization, Elan Vital. Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 09:55:28 (GMT) From: Katie Darling Email: None To: Marianne Subject: Wonderful posts, you 3 yes and my biggest drip Message:

of all, I am just remembering, was the fact that people left their kids to move in the ashram, and MJ ALLOWED IT! There was no way I could talk my way around how wrong that one sounded. Yes, wonderful posts, and real recovery for me means reclaiming the bliss - such as it was - and it was, to some degree - as my own here and now, and integrating it in my real life.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 02:13:17 (GMT) From: PatC Email: None To: Katie Darling Subject: Thanks guys. Unlike Pauline I never lived in a car Message:

Couldn't afford one. Neither did I have to sell a kidney to get to darshan. I just sold my private parts for an hour or two. My mother always used to say of me in those days: ''You'll survive World War Three because you know how to live on nothing.'' Those days were fun but I was freaked most of the time because I had no home and I value my domestic bliss more than any other kind of bliss.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 16:10:45 (GMT) From: la-ex Email: None To: pat Subject: Pat:poetic...your Journey will be great....nt Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 01:20:05 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: Everyone Subject: The dirt of Amaroo (Panoramic pics of Pavilion) Message:

Here's a better look at the 'Pavilion' area at Amaroo (better than the 'Panorama' at www.amaroo.org). I set the background color to a lovely dirt orange to match Amaroo's decor. . Pavilion As a safety precaution, I included a 'Forum V' image that you can easily click on to return to Forum V, in case you get stuck in the mud or are just feeling creeped out. For the unfortunate souls at Amaroo, their escape route will be more difficult.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 19:46:52 (GMT) From: Roger eDrek Email: drek@oz.net To: G Subject: Which one is the Koolaid stand? (nt) Message:

asdf

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 13:53:10 (GMT) From: Marianne Email: None To: G Subject: The Pavilion? Are you kidding? Message:

Is the main area where people congregate in Amaroo in order to listen to Captain Rawat known as The Pavilion?!! Well friends, the location at Jonestown where everyone sat to listen to Jim Jones run off at the mouth, and where the cyanide laced koolaid was dispensed, was also known as The Pavilion. Now tell me, is there some big important chair up there that no one else sits on but you know who? These pics you posted look like early shots of Jonestown. Yes, I know, I know, many people disagree with my comments about this, but I gotta point out the comparisons when they strike me. It makes me feel ill to look at these pictures. Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 18:31:05 (GMT) From: cq Email: None To: Marianne Subject: and 'Amaroo' apparently means 'journey's end' (nt) Message:

erowur0

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 23:07:54 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: cq Subject: 'a most beautiful place' Message:

I've heard the 'journey's end' definition from Elan Vital, but there are web pages that state 'Amaroo is an Aboriginal word for 'a most beautiful place'' or 'Amaroo - a beautiful place', like Amaroo Trinity Beach Resort, here's a bird's-eye view. Now that place really is beautiful. Rawat calling this crap beautiful is worse than saying that a dog is a duck. And he really did say 'this place is so beautiful'. I'm gobsmacked, and I'm not even British.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 12:11:47 (GMT) From: janet Email: None To: Marianne Subject: no- the pavilion is the COMMERCIAL, SOCIAL HUB Message:

its all about money and creature comfort. the pavilion is like the mall: its the first thing premies will reach when coming in on the entrance road. It's a warren of food stalls and outdoor eating tables at the center of the spread, a social and commercial draw for people to spend their money, munch and sip, sit around and gab and get oriented. in deifferent directions on roads and walking paths, out from the hub, will be the amphitheater, with natural carved stone terraces to sit on, to watch googoo on the stage, [ think ancient greek theatre or Redrocks in colorado], in another direction the Fine Dining building, in a different direction from the hub, the Conference center, in still another, the campgrounds with the tents to house 1800. BTW--the food stalls and espresso carts will all be brought in and manned and run for profit by outside private businesses, not premies, from australia, who were approached to provide their services to the attendees. but yes--it seems like Jonestown, upscaled. as far as one can do so in the outback. Remember when we all used to dream of having a remote premie piece of land, where we could just go away from the world, and be alone, with maharaji and each other and Nature? and would never ever have to deal with 'the world', to spoil the mood? this is that , realized, about 25 years after it was first dreamed about. The next to last step will be if they make it a permanent city, or settlement, where premies and maharaji go to live, permanently, and shut out the world for good. the last step will be a jonestown/heaven's gate scenario, for him and those who want to make the ultimate escape from the world and reality.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 01:02:46 (GMT) From: la-ex Email: None To: janet Subject: janet-it's not that far away from becoming reality Message:

I have heard a number of instructors and a couple of ev lifers say that m has told them that if they stick with him, they will get a small retirement stipend and a place to stay in amaroo, when they get older. One instructor, Julio Castro, when offered this by m, told him that he didn't want to live there in the middle of nowhere with the marsupials... He said m was hurt. I said 'good for you' Julio..say what you feel to the fat man... But my impression is that is where m will be spending more time, and having more upper level meetings. Also, more permanent living quarters for lifers...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 23:39:17 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: Marianne Subject: The Pavilion is ... Message:

Actually, 'The Pavilion' is where PWKies are permitted by The Speaker's Grace to give Him their money via purchases of food (like fly-covered pizza) and I would suppose also various types of trinkets (like videos, written materials, photos of clouds and birds, CDs of new age music, t-shirts, mouse pads, kalidoscopes, etc.) Still ... very creepy that they use the same word. The main area where they listen to 'You Know Who' is called 'The Amphitheatre'. Here's a large view and a small view, brought to you by salam. That wording is also creepy. The Romans first constructed amphitheaters for combats of gladiators and wild beasts. This is like a strange twist, nobody will die (I hope), but the dirt, the torture, the prominent seat for the perverted 'great king'. Maybe Commodus (or Rawatus) should be another nickname for Rawat, hell, he even has a commode emblem on the first page of www.maharaji.org. You know, when I was putting together the pictures I thought of Jonestown, I've seen pictures of Jonestown and there are similarities. It was an emotionally difficult task, so be nice to me today, I haven't gotten over the ordeal. I'm not kidding.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 00:03:33 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: Marianne Subject: ... a place to buy stuff Message:

Yes indeed, this is what they say: 'The Pavilion here will be the 'meeting place' of the conference centre, but there's no meeting without eating, right? Ten of those buildings you see will each have different types of food with prices to suit every pocket. And coffee bars of course. There will be foreign exchange facilities, and several places to buy a video, audiotape or publication.' Where is the kool-aid stand?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 01:11:11 (GMT) From: Marianne Email: None To: G Subject: ... a place to buy stuff Message:

G, I am always nice to you! You've done lots of hard work bringing us these vistas and I appreciate that. Glad the JT comparison struck home with someone else (but sorry it had to be made in the first place). Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 01:16:46 (GMT) From: PatC Email: None To: Marianne Subject: Marianne, I think Jonestown occurred to most of us Message:

A remote, isolated compound in a tropical area where the land is cheap and the is no interference from law-enforcement agencies. I don't for one minute think the Kool-aid will be spiked with poison but Rev Strangelove's satsang sure will be.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 01:39:46 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: PatC Subject: That was one of the final drips for me. Message:

I don't think the kool-aid will be poisoned either, but the similarities between Amaroo (and 'la tierra de l'amour') and Jonestown helped push me out of the cult. I don't know what happened to 'la tierra', maybe Rawat sold it. I kept trying to figure out a rational purpose for these lands, they just made no sense to me. The supposed reason Rawat gave for them was that they would provide an idyllic place - with no distractions from the 'dark world' in which we live - to listen to his royal buttness and to 'practice k'. But then I went to both of these hell-holes. Once each. In 20/20 hindsite, it's so obvious that Amaroo is a crazy cult compound. Jim asked before 'what do you do there?' between Rawat's rants. I did a lot of sitting, doing nothing, feeling very bored. At 'la tierra' I sloshed through a totally amazing amount of mud. In some areas the mud was well over peoples' ankles, I'd say about half way up the calf. I did a lot of walking. At Amaroo I ate crummy pizza that flies had probably landed on. There were flies landing on the food where the food was sold. The meditation area was a fly-invested open field with a few trees. At 'la tierra' I got a 'k review' from Charn in a little hut-tent, I sat on a mat on the very damp ground. I was very unimpressed by him, it seemed like it was just a job to him.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 01:52:59 (GMT) From: PatC Email: None To: G Subject: By the time the Argentine cult compound happened Message:

I was already getting to lazy to travel and rough it and Amaroo has never appealed to me. Perhaps in the old days when premies actually enjoyed each others' company and the vibe was high I may have enjoyed it (I enjoyed Kissimee twice) but the modern PWKs are so shallow and boring that I would die of boredom unless I could go catch some snakes. (I used to collect snakes as a teen.) Now my hobby is to debunk Hindu snake-oil salemen.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 02:44:11 (GMT) From: salam Email: None To: G Subject: Thanks bum Message:

I was gonna do it. how come you got little squares everywhere? Sheesh, this place needs someone to run it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 02:57:26 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: salam Subject: SORry Message:

I didn't know you were working on it. I do give you credit for the idea, since you did it for the ampitheatre, that's where I got the idea from. I guess we're not synchronized, eh? Our 'well-financed international organization' (Rawat propaganda) is not so organized. I think I have the little squares problem fixed, try it again. I had not checked it in Netscape. I didn't have border=0 in the table tag. Thanks.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 12:14:45 (GMT) From: salam Email: salam_au@iprimus.com.au To: G Subject: Are they doing it on purpose Message:

Looks like EV is adding more scenes. do you think that they are expecting us to do their work for them. Bet you the can't wait for the next one. Hey the changed the amphitheater movie. check it out. Your turn or mine. Maybe we should co-ordinate working on all the images and presenting them in a standard format, e-mail me. Lets get synchronized. Wounder what janet wants.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 23:47:13 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: salam Subject: Your turn, and you should thank me. Message:

You don't know what I spared you from, working on The Pavilion reminded me of Amaroo and of pictures of Jonestown. Your turn to work on The Amphitheatre, I'm still recovering. Feel free to add 'The Pavilion' to your web site. You could do saves or I could email you the pics on Monday. I can add 'The Amphitheatre' to mine if you don't mind.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 16:09:19 (GMT) From: salam Email: None To: G Subject: My turn? Message:

shit. What about everyone one else. Why me lord, why me? you always throw the shit my wah.( aha, but now I have protection). no really, can lift my head for the next two weeks, by then Amaroo will be history. I have downloaded the whole site in case it disappears.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 06:27:53 (GMT) From: janet Email: or salam To: G Subject: can you put the pan into mpeg format so it pans Message:

across the images in a line like a 360° turning around in place? a simple scroll to the left oughta do it, eh? or a slider bar you can operate onscreen that lets you pan back and forth across the vista at will? cmon. get creative you guys. you can doo eet mon!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 23:51:37 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: janet Subject: alternative to mpeg Message:

It would be simpler and faster to just put all the large pictures together on a web page, you could then use the browser's slider bar to pan. I just put them on different pages for speed in downloading and in case someone's PC is memory constrained. I'll work on a combined web page.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 11:03:29 (GMT) From: janet Email: None To: G Subject: webtv can't do that with our browser-- Message:

if i go onto a website that has a 'slider bar' coded into the html or javascript, i can use that , but our mozilla browser doesnt have one like you're used to on a mac. i was thinking an mpeg format that fills the screen with the images one at a time, strung together in horizontal pan, and once it loads, you could control the direction of the pan l to r or vice versa, and the speed at which it pans. surely someone can do it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 00:11:34 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: janet Subject: they updated the Pavilion panorama Message:

It's in quick time format and does what you were suggesting. See http://www.amaroo.org/panorama/index.html

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 12:18:24 (GMT) From: janet Email: None To: G Subject: tried it. cant use that either. sigh.....nt Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 22:59:06 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: janet Subject: use the left and right arrows on mine.....nt Message:

Ok, it's not a smooth pan, but it's good enough. I don't know how to convert it to an mpeg. Why do you want to look at that hell-hole anyway?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 18:56:16 (GMT) From: PatC Email: None To: janet Subject: Janet, you need a PC - eMachines for 399 NT Message:

j

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 00:44:40 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: Elan Vital Subject: Hey EV, how about a look inside those shithouses? Message:

Elan Vital monitor, Ok, so you have a panorama of the campground now on your panorama page where you so proudly(?) show off Rawat's cult compound. You are carefull to add 'Amid the sea of tents, you can see some of the six new bathroom blocks constructed over the last year.' Wow, so the poor PWKies don't have to do # 1 or # 2 (or whatever else) out in the woods. That's good, that's real good. But how about a view inside those bathroom blocks? Are they up to par or are they sub-standard? Do they have modern toilets and sinks with running water, proper lighting and ventilation, or are they just glorified outhouses? And how about a side-by-side comparison of the golden shitters for Maha The Butt and what the PWKies have to use? When are you going to tell the PWKies that Rawat PERSONALLY OWNS AMAROO? Oh yes, and a 106 foot yacht. Do I have to do it? Catch my drift? Sincerely, G

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 23:43:25 (GMT) From: Ulf Email: None To: Everyone Subject: letter from M. P aragon / 11 may 1978 Message:

Hi all just saw this , cant keep it to myself , got to ``share`` Dear brothers and sisters Jai satchitanand. Really, guru maharaj ji is so merciful and kind, he gives each and every single one of us the oppertunity of offering our lives back to his lotus feet. Its so incredible when, by his grace we recognise that the life is his, because with that recognition we can then care for this life as Maharaj jis personal property, and by his grace really utilize it to serve his lotus feet. Once again in Malibu, Maharaj ji made it so clear to all of us that his purpose, his aim, his life, is to spread this knowlegde: and that thats our aim in serving him. Sometimes in the conference with maharaj. ji when he would be speaking about propagation, i would just be completely overwhelmed to see maharaj jis love for this suffering world. Maharaj ji has so much compassionate love and mercy he is getting ready to drop like a gigantic peace bomb upon this world. In his satsang he compared D.L.M. to a big factory, he called it the `` liberation factory`` , where a person enters through a door ; ignorant, filled with the impurities of this world: is put on a conveyor belt where there are slowly and gradually, step by step, transformed: and then ultimately, by his grace liberated. We are so fortunate to witness his glory, to serve him I know for myself i just feel so blessed to serve him as a simple pawn on his chess bord, allowing his grace to blow me move by move like a tiny leaf in the wind, dancing free;happy to land where he wills :content knowing maharaj ji, my life is your play. Maharaj ji` in control and has always been completely in control I see for myself its simply a matter of relaxing, trying my very best to surrender and allowing Guru maharaj ji to make all necessary changes, because thats his responsibility. We are completely helpless. To trust , to relax:thats our effert. Really Maharaj ji will take care of the rest. he`ll soften us if we need softening, teach us , correct us, uplift us. He`ll do it all. He loves every one of us so very much.. Somrtimes it can be a but frustating because there is no way we can ever repay maharaj ji for what he is doing for us. There is really no way that you can actually say, `` thank you`` to guru maharaj. ji , except to say , `` thank you `` with our whole life, with every breath. And as maharaj ji said in London,,, Just remember that it is your efforts, your little efforts , thats going to really bring it togheter for you : thats really going to make maharaj ji happy because you will be happy Because you will have then realized and fulfilled the desteny. The speck, that little speck, then would have become everything, because it would have merged with infinity, it would have then merged with the most incredible , most undescrible thing that there is. It is so beautiful that such a simple thing as our happness could please our lord So, by his grace be happy loving and serving the most incredible most undescrible lotus feet of our Guru Maharaj.ji Jai Satchitanand Your brother at his lotus feet Michael Paragon

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 15:53:08 (GMT) From: Bryn Email: None To: Ulf Subject: AAAArgh! Message:

Hi Ulf, I am making slow progress into the real world..until this!! I used to idolise this guy, and felt priveliged to drive him around when he was in the 'community'. I used to talk like this! This is no joke. I have been mind-gutted. I must tread carefully. This guy used to impress me!? I have heard it said that only a hand that has been raised in anger can be raised in blessing. Well I am very angry. The blessing will have to wait. Micheal Paragon to me your name is synonomous with terror, pain, and complete self delusion. Oh Mrs Paragon, why your son he such a catastrophe to the world? Speak up friends of the real Micheal Paragon. love Bryn

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 15:41:32 (GMT) From: Cynthia Email: None To: Ulf Subject: I can't decide which paragraph is the worst, Ulf.. Message:

Hi Ulf, How are you? Thanks for posting this letter. Reading that took me back to the time when I spoke just like that. I was an industrial strength Church Lady--even before I moved into the ashram...the community coordinators never let me give satsang to aspirants or at public programs because I couldn't control my ''speak.'' I'd always end up talking about being a speck of dirt under his feet, gushing about how wonderful surrender was. We all did talk like that back then and it was because goomraji talked like that and all of his instructors, too. This is a great letter to use as an example of how deeply embedded that cult thinking/speaking became. It would be interesting to know what the new PWKs would think about this. I hope you're well, Ulf, Love, Cynthia

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 16:02:21 (GMT) From: Cynthia Email: None To: All Subject: P.S. M Paragon CENSORED my Satsang once....! Message:

I just remembered this. I was the Asst. Comm. Coordinator in Gainesville, which had about 200 premies in 1980. Paragon was there in the front row and I was giving satsang. This was after the airplane project had been revealed to all the premies, and I started talking about it a bit in my satsang and he looked sternly up at me, shook his head, and put his finger over his lips, to get me to shut up about it. I got truly pissed off. I shortened my satsang, and got off the stage. He told me in private that even though most premies knew about DECA at that point, it shouldn't be spoken about in satsang. I told him he shouldn't be censoring my satsang and that the premies had donated a lot of money. I felt that they deserved to hear about it. Of course, premies loved to hear darshan stories, and I had a lot of them--we used to eat those stories up. He just looked at me as if I was nuts, talking to an instructor like that. I made him speechless! Whoo Hoo! I just remembered that little episode...I guess my ego was emerging and I was allowing it to because I left that ashram the following January. Cynthia

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 00:04:53 (GMT) From: Babs Email: ralphie@ralphiescafe.com To: Ulf Subject: We called it Satsang Message:

I suppose those words would sound shocking to today's people-with-knowledge-lite, or to people who never succumbed to a cult mentality at all, but unfortunately that kind of drivel is all-too-familiar to those of us who were premies in the seventies. We ALL wrote and spoke like that. All the time. I feel so sorry for our relatives and friends who were subjected to this cultspeak. We didn't just talk the talk, however. We spent every waking moment attempting to dissolve our foreheads at the lotus feet. We fell asleep praying for darshan dreams. The amount of damage that was done to thousands of naive, gullible, idealistic young people is immeasurable, inconceivable. We were abused, all of us.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 03:54:56 (GMT) From: Mercedes Email: None To: Babs Subject: We called it Satsang Message:

'we were abused, all of us' Thanks for those words Babs. Actually my mom was telling me not too long ago that when I started with the cult and subsequent years my way of speaking changed and I was constantly using 'those words' as she put it. I was weird to them so the abuse for me came both ways through m and dlm and my family. There is not doubt we were brainwashed again and again and today the scenario has changed but the intention is the same. When will it end? Dear friends of mine are going to Amaroo they can't see this whole thing for the sham that it is. I'll be in the woods this weekend I am so glad!!! Mercedes

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 00:00:38 (GMT) From: Kev Email: None To: Ulf Subject: letter from M. P aragon / 11 may 1978 Message:

Thanks for that little bit of late night reading Ulf. I did not know whether to laugh or cry or be sick. Hope I don't have nightmares. goodnight, Kev

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 01:39:13 (GMT) From: la-ex Email: None To: Kev Subject: As bizarre as it is, it actually is helpful in.... Message:

understanding the bizarre mindset that so many premies had in those days. We tend to forget, but then something like that comes back, and you wonder...did I really say and believe that stuff? What did my friends and fanily think? Why didn't they commit me sooner? It's similar to the one when Mike Dettmers first came online and assured everyone that he no longer looked at m as lord, after 1974. Someone produced one of his satsangs from Rome 1977, and he had to admit that it wasn't quite like he had remembered it to be.(not a personal attack, MD, just an observation) What strikes me as so similar is the absolute belief that you can never ever repay m, even after you give him everything in your life, even your thoughts and desires...so you just give him more and more, even though you can never repay him....he is so kind to let you do this.... Did anyone ever really believe this shit? Or was it just m's satsang that everyone tried to copy? It would be interesting to find Michael Paragon now, and if he has a wife or girlfriend or kids, show that letter to them, and have him explain it to them....you know, especially the lotus feet stuff....

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 01:52:21 (GMT) From: bill Email: None To: la-ex Subject: Yes, it was exactly rawat's rap that we copied..nt Message:

sdfh

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 18:49:21 (GMT) From: cq Email: None To: Everyone Subject: What 'Knowledge' ISN'T Message:

As the man said (1998 at Curacao, Netherlands Antilles): 'Knowledge is not spiritual, nor is it a religion.' Which raises the question - 'why then does is EV registered with the IRS as a church, with all the attendant benefits/privileges that church status affords it?' (such as not having to file an annual tax return). A lot of research was done into this issue last July, and is on EPO's 'best of Forum' page, here: Has anyone yet applied for the relevant documents? (whaddya mean - you thought you'd leave it up to me? Ooops, - didn't I think I'd leave it up to someone else? I did.) Well, any feedback/progress anyone?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 19:31:46 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: cq Subject: I'm trying Message:

I haven't received anything yet.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 11:32:08 (GMT) From: cq Email: None To: G Subject: I'm trying Message:

I had the following all typed up and ready to post last night when suddenly the forum wasn't accepting any new messages; archiving time, I guess. Anyway, about the docs - how long since you applied for the info - and who to? If it was EV, it might take forever. However, the same request (for copies of the charity's three most recent informtion returns, its exemption letter, and its approved application with supporting documentation) can also be made to the following address: IRS, Chief, FOIA Branch, c/o Ben Franklin Station P.O. Box 795, WASHINGTON DC 20044 (a fee is charged for reproduction and mailing costs). It certainly would be interesting to see their form 990 If you haven't tried this yet, mind if I do? Or should it be done anonymously? Advice/feedback welcomed. ___________________________ Incidentally, here's a bit more info that might be relevant: from http://altreligion.about.com/religion/altreligion/library/weekly/aa042100c.htm To be granted the distinction of 'church' by the IRS, another form must be completed by the religious group - Schedule A of form 1023. This form requires some extremely specific information about the history, beliefs, and associations of the group. Some of the questions - and requested paperwork - include: * A brief history of the development of your group, including the reasons for its formation. * A copy of your written creed or faith, if your group has one. * A description of your faith's formal code of doctrine and discipline for members, if you have one. * A description of your form of worship. You must attach a schedule of worship services for the current year. * An explanation of how your group attracts new members. Space provided on form for answer. * Number of active members in your group and average attendance numbers for a worship service. * Additional religious services, such as weddings, funerals, and baptisms, that your group conducts. * If the group licenses ministers, the requirements for ministerial candidates. * Number of hours and amount of compensation that minister and church officers devote to church work. The IRS has admittedly made it difficult for some groups to attain church status for tax purposes. According to the instructions for Schedule A: 'In determining whether an admittedly religious organization is also a church,the IRS does not accept any and every assertion that such an organization is a church. Because beliefs and practices vary so widely, there is no single definition of the word “church” for tax purposes. The IRS considers the facts and circumstances of each organization applying for church status.' ********************************* The IRS requirements do indeed go further: click here for link to the following quote 4.In determining if a religious organization is a church within the meaning of IRC 170(b)(1)(a)(i), 508(c)(1)(A), or 6033(a)(2)(A), consider if the organization has the following characteristics: A.A distinct legal existence; B.A recognized creed and form of worship; C.A definite and distinct ecclesiastical government; D.A formal code of doctrine and discipline; E.A distinct religious history; F.A membership not associated with any other church or denomination; G.A complete organization of ordained ministers ministering to their congregations; H.Ordained ministers selected after completing prescribed courses of study; I.A literature of its own; J.Established place of worship; K.Regular congregations; L.Regular religious services; M.Sunday schools for the religious instruction of the young; N.Schools for the preparation of its ministers; and O.Any other facts and circumstances that may bear upon the organization's claim for church status. ************************************

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 23:02:49 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: cq Subject: the docs Message:

'Anyway, about the docs - how long since you applied for the info - and who to?' I've tried the IRS twice, but not the address you gave in your post; I think that address is worth a try. The first time I got information on a different but related Elan Vital. I think it was a private foundation set up just in case, I still have the info. The second time they said they were 'unable to locate these documents' but 'we can affirm that this organization received exempt status in December 1971 and is currently exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.' I haven't tried EV. Are they required by law to provide the information within a certain amount of time? If they delayed too long, maybe that could be dealt with legally. 'If you haven't tried this yet, mind if I do? Or should it be done anonymously? Advice/feedback welcomed.' I haven't tried that route, I don't mind at all. When making the request, I think you would need to provide your address, I don't know if they would send it to a PO box. I suppose you could use another name. If you get info and post it, then if you are concerned, you could post it anonymously.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 13:39:51 (GMT) From: JHB Email: None To: cq Subject: Great stuff, Chris Message:

Surely someone a little more local than I am should be able to get copies of all these documents. I'd be very interested in how we should worship! John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 14:39:43 (GMT) From: cq Email: None To: JHB Subject: effective worship strategy Message:

The minister was preoccupied with thoughts of how he was going to ask the congregation to come up with more money than they were expecting for repairs to the church building. So he was annoyed to find that the regular organist was sick and a substitute had been brought in at the last minute. The substitute wanted to know what to play. 'Here's a copy of the service,' the minister said impatiently. 'But you'll have to think of something to play after I make the announcement about the finances.' During the service, the minister paused and said, 'Brothers and Sisters, we are in great difficulty; the roof repairs cost twice as much as we expected, and we need $4,000 more. Any of you who can pledge $100 or more, please stand up.' At that moment, the substitute organist began playing 'The Star-Spangled Banner.'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 14:34:39 (GMT) From: Wildflower Email: None To: Donner Subject: Revisiting Life Beyond M Message:

Welcome back and hope you are settled in after your two week vacation. Right before you guys left you responded to my post on the above topic and said you'd take it up on your return, so here's your invitation, despite comments from some that this topic is inappropriate for this forum. (Hey, guys, if that is so, can we start an alternate forum which covers it???) Personally, I still feel a need for a connection with something larger than my little mind-self in my life, which is part of what brought me to m in the first place. [The other part of what brought me was wanting an emotional vacation from unresolved issues in my past. I got the vacation, for which I am grateful. I believe I created it myself using m and k as tools, because that was what I needed at the time, and like any artist my subconscious used the available materials. When I became disillusioned with m, the issues I was vacationing from immediately came back up. Now I've faced them in therapy and in 12 step and I am much better for it.] In terms of an experience of something greater than myself, due to my long relationship with m I feel I have now graduated from needing any kind of personal guru-type leader in my life. (When I was involved with m, I clearly did need that. That's why I was attracted.) I am open to learning from teachers of all kinds, but only if the teacher openly encourages questioning and has a clear, openly acknowledged sense of his or her own shortcomings. The other thing essential to me now, which m's version of spirituality discouraged, is having a practice which is totally integrated with the rest of my life. Hey, marriage, parenting, career - I need all the perspective I can get. This life stuff is damn hard. In that regard, Quakers and 12 step methods have served me well. Grounded American Buddhists like Jack Kornfield are good, too, although a lot of forms of Buddhism have a guru component I can't handle. Pat C's post (archived during your vacation, I believe, Donner) on the original k techniques as practiced for thousands of years was also really helpful. I also find artist expression of any kind helpful. My 15 year involvement with Waldorf schools has been useful in this regard, although I will say that there are many very rigid true believers among the Steinerians, and they elevate the words of this dead man to guru like commandment tablets. That limits the potential of their schools as well, unfortunately. Anyhow, I look foward to hearing about your journey on life beyond m.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 16:58:05 (GMT) From: Wildflower Email: None To: everyone Subject: Revisiting Life Beyond M Message:

Thanks to all who have posted here. It's been really, really nice to hear all of your experiences!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 08:35:38 (GMT) From: PatC Email: None To: Wildflower Subject: Revisiting Life Before M - back to my roots Message:

Psychedelic experiences brought me to M and K and I still believe they showed me more of clarity, understanding and joy than anything Guru Goodbar showed me. They led me to gyanyoga and that's what I still enjoy and I enjoy it a whole lot more doing it the right way (not backwards) without all of Rev Strangelove's Hindu mumbo-jumbo of ''Knowledge Ultra Heavy'' or the new revised aromatherapy version of ''Knollidge Lite.''

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 00:39:31 (GMT) From: Tony(Aussi Ji) Email: None To: Wildflower Subject: Revisiting Life Beyond M Message:

G'day Wildflower, I relate a lot to what you say in your post. I have been out for about six months now and have been enjoying the freedom. However in the last couple of weeks I have been noticing a void inside and have been wondering what I should do to fill it. I have a good family life and a good job and no money worries. I also have a passion for restoring old timber boats.All these things are great.BUT.Before coming to Knowledge I had the same void inside and K did fill it until the realisation of it being a cult dawned on me and I knew it was time to get out. I defintely do not want to read about how to fill this void,I tried that before K and just filled my head with a load of spiritual crap.I don't want to join anything that is related to spirituality either.I definely don't want to follow another Guru or the like. There is one thing that always sticks in my mind and that is.WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR IS INSIDE. This is what I am going to pursue.I have still benn practising my version of the third technique and this helps to fill the void for me.Obviosly it does'nt fill it completely yet,but I am working on it. Cheers Tony.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 19:49:58 (GMT) From: Bryn Email: None To: Wildflower Subject: Revisiting Life Beyond M Message:

At the moment, as a result of much 'revisiting' I discover that I was well fucked up, long before I ever got in the cult! The story continues. I like this subject. love Bryn

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 18:59:54 (GMT) From: Joe Email: None To: Wildflower Subject: I think it depends on what you did before the cult Message:

Hey, now I am REALLY wondering who you are, but I think I might know. If so, hi. I think when people leave the cult, they have to work through REALLY getting out, which takes some time even after someone physically leaves. I think for me it was more quick, because I left the ashram and the cult at the same time, back in 1983. I left from the cult taking up most of my life to being entirely outside of it, and believing Maharaji was the incarnation of god, to believing he is a fraudulent cult leader. I couldn't pretend that I was still involved, or holding some kind of residual belief, so I was forced to do the work of understanding what the hell happened. So, lots of analysis, lots of therapy, etc. In that sense, it might be harder now for people to make the break, because most premies don't really have much to do with knowledge or Maharaji most of the time. Or at least it seems that way. The cult more exists inside their heads, unless they are in the hierarchy, or one of the church ladies. So, you really have to want to make the break, and physical separation doesn't have the effect it once did. I know I then set out to try to repair the damage to my life. This was the process of making friends, getting a career, repairing the damage to the relationship with my family, and working on understanding what had happened to me, and how I could have been so deceived. But really, I think 'Life Beyond M' really began for me, when I recall feeling the way I felt before I was ever in the cult, and it was so comforting and refreshing. I got re-aquainted to the person I had been before. Then, I think it's just logical to move on from there. If someone got into the cult because they believed it was a spiritual path, they might go back to that. If they did it to develop as a person, then there's that to pursue. I know for me, I got into the cult because it was the chance to help bring peace to the world, to end suffering and war, etc. So, after I got out, it was logical for me to put my attentions into social and political work, and that's what I find the most fulfilling. I feel no need, whatsoever, for any kind of a spiritual path, a teacher, or some kind of 'practice.' But I wasn't interested in that before the cult either. I do, however sometimes feel the need for 'community,' and my boyfriend Kevin and I talk a lot about that. We have a 'community' of friends, and I find 'community' in some of the social and political work, as well. But I don't think it will ever be as intense as a community you are involved in in your 20s, in which everyone is fervently focused on the same thing. Of course, that doesn't even exist in the Maharaji cult anymore.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 22:54:25 (GMT) From: JHB Email: None To: Joe Subject: This is a great post Message:

When I first came to Maharaji's cult, I wanted to get high, get all the yogic powers, remove my fears, overcome my shyness, be a devotee of the living lord (not when I first came across Maharaji, but very shortly afterwards). Now I'm out, I'm no longer so shy, I get high naturally often enough, don't care about yogic powers, and don't want to be a devotee. So going back to my original aims isn't really on. Then again, I'm not looking for too much now, except the love of a good woman (or is that too much:-)) Joe, I like your line 'The cult more exists inside their heads' when refering to current cult members. I've been wanting to start a thread on this since Mike Finch first posted but I haven't got my thoughts together yet. Basically, I want to define what being in Maharaji's cult means now. Can't do it now cos it's sleep time:-) John

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 16:04:13 (GMT) From: Gregg Email: None To: Wildflower Subject: Revisiting Life Beyond M Message:

I can relate to much of what you've said. For example: 1. I also learned much of value during my years with M and K. Not that M isn't an fraudulent egomaniac, but while I was (like you) sweeping emotional issues under the rug, I got something out of the devotional/meditation trip. 2. I still seek to nurture a connection with a deep everpresent inexplicable Presence (or maybe Absence is a better word...soft vibrant Nothingness) 3. I have an American Buddhist teacher...the teachings, being mostly Tibetan, probably involve too much of the guru for the guruphobes here, but there is definitely no guru-worshipping. 4. I went to a Quaker college and go to meeting every few years. 5. I'm involved in education (I'm a public school teacher with a MA in alternative ed) and know a couple of rabid Steiner believers.) But, mostly, like you, I have a life, and, like most of us, there are...issues. I can no longer afford to ignore relationship problems etc. and feel that if spiritual practice has no bearing on this process, it is not authentic. Hiding under a blanket propped up on a barogan was symbolic of our half-assed practice, the other cheek being: life itself. Last time you posted I felt that there was too much going on to address these issues, but...it's been pretty quiet here at EPO recently, and I've always felt that premies should know that leaving their faux guru does not necessarrily mean an end to spiritual practice.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 23:41:26 (GMT) From: Mercedes Email: None To: Wildflower Subject: Revisiting Life Beyond M Message:

My exit being so recent I am still trying to figure out the spiritual component, I fing refuge and a deep experience in the mountains, it is the same experience I felt with knolige and it is all mine, I feel that my HP envelops me when out in nature. I enter the cult when I was 18 so now I have the task of figuring out who I am, what I like, dislike, etc. Therapy and group help me tremendously. Mercedes loving the outdoors specially the mountains

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 04:01:06 (GMT) From: Helen Email: None To: all Subject: Revisiting Life Beyond M Message:

I think Joe is onto something when he says it depends on what you were like prior to getting in the cult. When we try to get back to ourselves, I think we go back to the things that resonated for us in our earlier years. Regarding spirituality, I think I tried too hard all those years. Giving up on the notion of life after death has been strangely liberating. When I believed in karma and lifetimes and reincarnation and all that, i was in a holding pattern, thinking I had all the time in the world. Now my favorite phrase is 'make it happen.' One of my good friends is a dedicated Vietnamese Buddhist and says 'make it happen' all the time. It's like a breath of fresh air. We don't have to wait for some mysterious enlightened state to happen to us when we are worthy. life is here now and the world, so vilified in our premie days, is pretty incredible. Getting out to listen to some good music or striking up a conversation with the person sitting next to me on the bus,when I can work up the nerve to get out of my little shell, can be such a blast. If there is a genetic blueprint of your whole body within one cell and the whole universe is so vast, surely there is something spiritual about that even if it's 'just science.' I don't even try to figure it all out anymore.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 09:58:31 (GMT) From: Marianne Email: None To: Wildflower Subject: Revisiting Life Beyond M Message:

Hi Wildflower. How are you? I have been out of the cult for a long time, but entered when I was 16, stayed til 20, lived in an ashram, and considered myself completely devoted to Captain Rawat. The posts made in this thread can give you an idea of the many different ways for you to sort out who you are today and where you want to go. One of the massive benefits of being out of the cult is that no one solution fits all. You are free to find your own way, complete with great successes and abject failures. Like Mercedes, since I was so young when I got involved, I had no prior life experience as a frame of reference to guide me. But I did know that I wanted to do something that really helped other people, and materially changed the conditions in their lives, unlike the faux and totally self serving 'help' supposedly offered by Captain Rawat. I worked in community groups with prisoners, Native Americans, women's groups, etc. It was difficult making the leap to work with new groups after realizing the shallowness of the cult. I also had trust issues about working with these groups. I gradually found organizations that shared my goals, had good people in them, and were doing something of significance, if even only on a small scale. I made my expectations small, because being in the cult taught me that any group that professes that it is the one that can cure the world's ills on a massive scale is not to be trusted. I gained new friends, who helped push me in new directions in my life. Reshaping your life in the shadow of having left the cult is a long term process. Sometimes the cult think shackles are embedded far deeper than we realize. You are on your way to that new life. The lessons you learned getting into and out of the cult were valuable ones that will stay with you forever. I don't think any of us should be ashamed to say we were involved and left, precisely because the lessons -- although coming at a steep price -- made us stronger people who won't be led around by the nostrils by another charlatan again. Good luck on your journey. Warmest regards, Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 01:15:15 (GMT) From: Gregg Email: None To: Marianne Subject: Wow! Message:

Marianne, I didn't know you'd been involved at such a young age. It's like me, at 16, taking acid and worhipping Timothy Leary. A very impressionable age! I don't think taking drugs or worshipping gurus is so bad, for a while, but at 16...that's when you should be sorting out emotional/political issues without crazily distorting drug/guru issues. And what do today's teens freak out on? Is it good to freak out?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 14:28:33 (GMT) From: Katie H. Email: None To: Gregg Subject: Confession - I was a teenage premie :) Message:

I got knowledge when I was 16 too, Gregg. I think Susan was even younger. (The cut off date back in the early 1970's was 13.) I went through the 'trying to become enlightened through LSD' stage when I was 14 and 15 - and that's one of the reasons I was attracted to the M trip - no drugs. I don't know much about today's teens - the ones I do know all have pretty good parents who are raising them well, which I think makes them far less susceptible to overuse of drugs or following gurus. My 16-year-old nephew is REALLY into computer games - but he also does a lot of other stuff. Computer games are like his meditation, though! Take care, Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 14:36:54 (GMT) From: Marianne Email: None To: Gregg Subject: Confession - I was a teenage premie :) Message:

Katie's and my stories are very, very similar. Right, Katie? Whenever we post about our cult involvement, we mention that to each other. We came from similarly dysfunctional family situations too, which made us prime pickings for DLM/EV.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 14:54:32 (GMT) From: Katie H Email: None To: Marianne Subject: Confession - I was a teenage premie :) Message:

Hi Marianne - Yes, our stories are eerily similar! Actually, I got into M with my two best friends at the time (along with several other friends) and we all had really weird families. Our mothers were all absent in some way (drunk, living in another city, or dead) drunk, or dead; our fathers were unbelievably disconnected. As I've posted here before, it did help me in some ways to have the structure of the M cult, especially since many of the premies I knew were really good people. I needed to meet some adults who weren't weird! I was lucky that I didn't move into the ashram, OR get married and start having kids at age 17-18. Both my best friends went the early marriage/devoted householder route, and that is something that is hard to extricate yourself from. Have a good trip home, Marianne! Love, Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 00:10:23 (GMT) From: Gregg Email: None To: Katie H Subject: Thanks for your stories, K and M! (nt) Message:

x

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 04:39:07 (GMT) From: salam Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Sandy Message:

With all due respect, please stop posting stupidly about the bible and gugu hahaji. I am not sure what place you're in neither I want you to change, but am darn sure I don't want to be there. Now repeat after me: gugu hahaji is a moron, gugu hahaji is a lier, gugu hahaji is nothing but an ugly prick, gugu hahaji has no power what so ever. gugu hahaji [put what you like] cheers Salam

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 12:42:14 (GMT) From: Katie H Email: None To: salam Subject: To Sandy Message:

Hey Sandy - I read a lot of your posts last night and now cannot find the one I wanted to respond to - you said something about how talking about some of the things you've heard on this forum is causing you problems in your personal life - with your wife and other premies. I am one of those people who is 'cursed by the ability to see both sides of every question' (well, most questions.) It sounds like you are the same way. When you post here, you tend to argue with the ex-premies - I am guessing that you also argue with premies off-line as well. I don't envy the position you are in - it sounds like it's tearing you apart. I do have some thoughts about the situation you are in, which you can take or leave. First, we spend a lot of time on here discussing Maharaji's character. Frankly, I don't think that ANY of us, except maybe Michael Donner and Michael Dettmers and others like them, can make any assumptions about what Maharaji is like as a person - good or bad - because we don't KNOW him. I never had any personal contact with him, and I would guess that you haven't either. I think all we do here is make assumptions - you do it, and I do it too. I think the one thing we can decide is whether we want Maharaji for a 'teacher' or 'master' or not. You seem to base a lot of your feelings about this on prophecies made by other people, and on the experience you have when practicing the knowledge meditation. Personally, I do not believe in making decisions because of prophecies - because there is a prophecy for everything and said prophecies can always be interpreted to fit whatever situation. I used to be into Edgar Cayce's and others end-of-the-world prophecies, and I still have some remnants of that kind of thinking that I haven't examined and eradicated. IMHO (and of course, you may disagree), these so-called prophecies just create more negative beliefs - and that's the last thing ANY of us needs. You say that practicing knowledge (meditating?) is the only thing that brings you peace these days. I don't have a problem with that, and I don't think that many other people here would have a problem with that either. I don't know if you read Brian's post below about different views of Maharaji and different views of knowledge (it was a good one - in answer to one of your posts), but he believes, and I believe that the knowledge meditation and Maharaji are not inextricably linked. Brian has direct experience of this - I do not. We were TAUGHT to link it to Maharaji (by being grateful, by picturing him when we meditated, by having altars), and that is why many of us cannot separate it. But again in this case, I think linking K with Maharaji is another assumption - and one that needs to be examined. I'm just writing this post to you because it sounds like you are having a hard time - and it is difficult to read your posts here and not realize that. And I feel that you have a lot of personal beliefs that are causing you pain - not to mention a lot of cognitive dissonance caused by trying to reconcile these beliefs with what you hear on this forum! - and that at least some of these beliefs are assumptions which are not based on experience. In my experience, it's been really helpful to examine my own deeply held beliefs - most of them are about myself - and realize that many of them are not based on reality. Sometimes this is a painful process (like when I realized that I was actually an adult and had to stop thinking 'when I settle down, I will do...'!), but it is liberating. Anyway, take care, Sandy - Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 10:18:51 (GMT) From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Sandy Subject: Sandy - please read Message:

Hi Sandy I read your post below and can relate to how you feel. I was also pleased to read the Katies’ responses which were obviously very supportive, and I even thought Jim’s post was uncharacteristically mild! I just wanted to say that I’m experiencing similar turmoil and am trying to come to terms with the image of Maharaji portrayed here (especially in light of the Donner/Dettmers revelations) and my own image of Maharaji and the positive experiences of Knowledge that I’ve had. The important thing that I am keeping in mind at the moment is that, whatever Maharaji’s apparent shortcomings maybe, they don’t have to undermine my experience of Knowledge. In other words, no matter how spooked I feel about what people are saying about him, my personal experience of Knowledge is a completely separate issue, and, if you have had positive experience there is no reason for it not to continue. How you deal with your relationship with Maharaji is entirely personal. The logic taken on this site is that if Maharaji is as flawed as shown, then it is not possible to trust or love him. A very powerful argument, but in my view, a sincere love cannot be snuffed out so easily. This kind of love is not blind to imperfection and need not make irrational allowances for it, but it can co-exist. If you have a genuine love for Maharaji, then enjoy it. Your compassion and sincerity shows through, Sandy, I wish you the best. Mel - the confused cult apologist

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 15:57:36 (GMT) From: salam Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: and Mel Message:

You realize that your ass is trash after this post. Only a friendly gester. See you on the no-no intersection. Salude.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 11:07:03 (GMT) From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: salam Subject: and Mel Message:

Salam My 'ass became trash' when I first started posting here ! Mel

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 23:34:44 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Moving back into the ashcan, Mel? Message:

Mel, How can your 'ass be trashed' if no one knows who you are?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 18:09:50 (GMT) From: salam Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: I feel guilty now Message:

and sorry for you guys with beliefs in gugu hahaji. Really, you must have a hard time. But that is life. Enjoy it but expect a payback. Am bad.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 17:39:00 (GMT) From: Nigel Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Mel, two questions - no answer required... Message:

Hi Mel, A seemingly honest post - and I doubt you presently have much appetite for an online grilling. But you are posting here, in public, which sort of makes your business our business... I am puzzled however, why you (a) still give Knowledge a capital 'K', unless that is merely force of habit. (Ok, I realise exes do the same, but I mean more the implied specialness of 'Knowledge', as opposed to any number of go-within, chill-out, get hypnotised, biofeedback-based, deep-relaxation alternatives which may or may not involve the same Hatha techniques, but which bring about identical, serotonin-flow-facilitating, feel-good moments.) And (b), why love any obviously deeply flawed stranger in the first place? Has he REALLY earned your love, or might this be just one more dysfunctional habit aquired - along with many others - in your (our) impressionable late teens/early twenties? To answer either (a) or (b), what evidence can you base your judgements on beyond this: M passes on an ancient recipe ('truth is inside you' = 'K' = watched breath and fingers placed so) - that's all - and usually by proxy or videolink. How much reciprocal love does that merit? You argue it still possible to love a flawed Maharaji. Of course it is possible. Show me an unflawed Maharaji and I'll fly you to his next event on the back of Jim's favourite unicorn. (And that is a promise.) But is it either desirable or necessary to love your own, or any flawed Maharaji? One final Q: if special K is really that special, why are you even, by your own admission, in turmoil? Don't reply (unless you want to) but I think you should give these questions some careful thought. Sandy too. Take care - and I hope the scales keep falling...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 23:55:36 (GMT) From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Nigel Subject: Mel, two questions - 3 answered... Message:

Hi Nigel I saw your picture on the Latvian nights pics, nice to put a face to a name after all these years. I cannot comment on how I'd imagine you or other ex's would look, but I guess we're all getting well into middle age! But to your questions.... 1. Yes, using a capital 'K' for knowledge is force of habit, but when I thought more carefully about this, I must admit that I do value the techniques and think they are worthy of a capital letter as a mark of respect, but thats my thing. 2.'..why love any obviously deeply flawed stranger in the first place?' An interesting question. Firstly, I think that most premies loved Maharaji before discovering any of the apparent flaws. Had premies known about these, they may not have regarded him with such affection. At the moment I suspect that a lot of premies are re-examining their feelings toward Maharaji, and the turmoil that people like Sandy and I are experiencing is part of that. One final Q: if special K is really that special, why are you even, by your own admission, in turmoil I don't know whether you have been through a divorce or relationship breakdown during your time as a premie, but I have, and I'm sure many other premies and ex's have. These clearly are emotionally traumatic experiences. When going through these situations, though, I always felt that practising knowledge (note small 'k') tended to give me an immediate relief from the pain I was experiencing and helped me keep the emotional 'wound' clean. I firmly believe that had I NOT been meditating that all the more destructive complications associated with these kinds of breakdowns would have been more dominant. So it's not a matter of Knowledge being an immediate permanent 'cure-all' (as you would seem to suggest), merely a way to assist in the healing process. I view the turmoil of my feeling relating to Maharaji in a similar way and use Knowledge in the same context. Mel

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 22:52:37 (GMT) From: Moldy Warp Email: None To: Nigel Subject: Mel, two questions - no answer required... Message:

Answer to Q (b)- 'why love any obviously deeply flawed stranger in the first place? Has he REALLY earned your love, or might this be just one more dysfunctional habit aquired - along with many others - in your (our) impressionable late teens/early twenties?' (can't think of answer to Qa at the mo): Because you (a) want to have someone extra special to love and they are hard (but not impossible) to come by in real life. (b)spent too long staring at Quintessence album covers whilst trying to reach the first bardo courtesy of a microdot. (c)hadn't realised that real life reciprocated love is what you are looking for.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 01:53:49 (GMT) From: Nigel Email: None To: Moldy Warp Subject: Quintessence? - there's a name to conjure with.. Message:

I once blissed out to King Crimson, but I was very young at the time.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 01:58:59 (GMT) From: Moldy Warp Email: None To: Nigel Subject: Quintessence? - there's a name to conjure with.. Message:

Oh believe me - I'm conjuring. And King Crimson - well if it's bliss you're after... look no further

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 02:47:28 (GMT) From: PatC Email: None To: Moldy Warp Subject: King Crimson: In the Hall of the Mountain King Message:

One of the best trips I ever had with a little bit of dynamite tantric sex thrown in.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 10:18:38 (GMT) From: JHB Email: None To: PatC Subject: You're thinking of Peer Gynt by Grieg Message:

Nigel got the King Crimson album right:-) John the knows a few classic tunes.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 11:16:23 (GMT) From: Nigel Email: None To: JHB Subject: ..or possibly 'The Devil's Triangle'... (ot) Message:

...on the 'Poseidon' album, which was ripped-off wholesale from Holst's Planets suite (Mars). Or just possibly Pat is remembering another prog-rock outfit - can't remember who, some American bunch who did a hey-man-that's-really-heavy version of Grieg's Hall of the Mountain King. Aah... such pretentious bollocks it truly all was.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 09:21:52 (GMT) From: Nigel Email: None To: PatC Subject: You mean 'In the Court of the Crimson King'? nt Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 17:39:26 (GMT) From: PatC Email: None To: Nigel Subject: It was ''In the Court of the Crimson King'' Message:

Thanks Nigel. I'm an illiterate when it comes to modern music but I know what I like when I hear it and I loved King Crimson. Wasn't the Pier Gynt thing (which I still enjoy, John) done by Hall and Oates? Yes, pretentious twaddle - ''The Gallant Gallstone'' stuff. Now, as for opera and oratorios....

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 15:15:36 (GMT) From: Katie H Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Hey Mel Message:

Good to 'see' you here - and thanks for the honest post. I, too, agree that the experience of the knowledge meditation is a separate issue from one's feelings about Maharaji. About loving Maharaji - I also agree that you can love someone who is fallible, flawed, and imperfect. I still love and care about my ex-husband, even though I am VERY glad not to be married to him anymore. I didn't have to hate him to get a divorce, thankfully. I never really loved Maharaji because I didn't know him at all. I was devoted to an image in my head that turned out not to be real. But I've read Michael Dettmer's posts about M, and he appears to have real compassion for Maharaji, even though he's truthful about M's shortcomings and doesn't regard him as a teacher. (I think part of real love is being honest - not sure if the people around Maharaji realize this.) Take care, Mel - Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 15:30:47 (GMT) From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Katie H Subject: Hey Mel Message:

Hi Katie I still read here quite a lot, but do not post unless to make an occassional point that I think important, like in reply to Sandy's situation. I'm not really into fearsome arguments anymore! Warm regards Mel

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 17:20:29 (GMT) From: Bobby Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Hey Mel Message:

Hi Mel, Over the years I've enjoyed your posts. I too tend to stop by here and read some of what is posted, hoping to connect with posts I find enjoyable, relateable or interesting. I'm not into the bickering or fighting, though I confess some enjoyment from time to time, kind of like watching a soap opera. Funny how in the end we come to terms with our own inclinations, perhaps inner nature or ground. We find our home ground in psychological, spiritual or emotional terms, perhaps all three together or in combination. I think Joe expressed that in a way in response to Wildflower here somewhere in a recent thread. Seems accurate to me. Best to you, Bobby

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 00:38:30 (GMT) From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Bobby Subject: Hey Mel - Thanks Bobby (NT) Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 14:49:46 (GMT) From: Susan Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Hi mel Message:

i just want to say something. I remember my feelings of love for Rawat was a premie. My feelings were real. A lot of the experiences I had then were very meaningful to me. I have come to believe that my love and sincerity were given to someone who wasn't at all what I thought. I think he took an active role in 'decieving' me about who and what he was. But my love, it sure felt real. I think the logical problem here is saying to yourself, 'I know I felt something real' and then making the next leap, 'he must be what I thought, and what he said'. Why do does that have to be true? I no longer love Rawat, but I love many many people( I don't have to kiss any of their feet either), and I still feel that life is a gift. What I do not have is any belief in Rawat as anything but a cult leader. I think what Rawat's trick is that he does talk about some very universal human things, most importantly that life is a gift, it is beautiful and precious, and be grateful. But then he tricks us into being grateful to him? That is the con. The message is real...at least that part of it. But you could have known that if you had never met the guy. In fact, it would have been better if you had learned this lesson anywhere but from a cult leader, better to learn the lesson from another person who doesn't ask you to worhip him as the superior power in person, but instead just joins you as a fellow human and you enjoy life together. Hope that helps.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 20:11:48 (GMT) From: Nigel Email: None To: Susan Subject: But WHY is life a 'gift'? Message:

Hi Susan, That was a great post and I hate to quibble here, but I really don't understand it when anyone, premie, ex, or non-starter refers to life as a 'gift'. For one thing, 'gift' implies a giver (and by logical implication a requirement for gratitude). I love my life, love my friends and love my lover, but I see no giver anywhere - not even by some kind of philosphical inference - so buggered if I'll feel gratitude to anyone, especially with so many charlatans around willing to usurp the 'giver-of-life' crown, or Bible-thumpers acting as self-appointed spokesmen for the same. Show gratitude where gratitude is due, I say. (And big thanks and kudos to you for your dogged persual of justice in the face of much indifference and personal slight re. the Jagdeo shit.) That's all. Good post, BTW;)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 15:15:16 (GMT) From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Susan Subject: Hi mel Message:

Hi Susan 'I think the logical problem here is saying to yourself, 'I know I felt something real' and then making the next leap, 'he must be what I thought, and what he said'. Why do does that have to be true?' I don't think it necessary to make that leap, in my view the experience of love is the thing that is important, maybe because there seems to be so little of it around. What we conclude or extrapolate from this experience, though, may or may not be true and is really only speculation, in my view. I remember the thing that originally attracted me to receive knowledge was the obviously genuine love that premies had for Maharaji. It's was absolutely palpable. Now the image has become tarnished does the love have to tarnish as well? Maybe it does, but should it? I guess this is very easy for me to say, but maybe if I had had your experiences I would probably see things exactly as you do. Mel

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 16:41:35 (GMT) From: Susan Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: hmmmm Message:

This is interesting. What we conclude or extrapolate from this experience, though, may or may not be true and is really only speculation, in my view. I remember the thing that originally attracted me to receive knowledge was the obviously genuine love that premies had for Maharaji. It's was absolutely palpable. Now the image has become tarnished does the love have to tarnish as well? Maybe it does, but should it? genuine love that premies had for maharaji. I see it more as a sincere love. Genuine, to me, implies that the love wasn't based on a misconception. I think the misconception was that Rawat has some unique and special divinity, personal relationship, and special spiritual powers to show spiritual truths. I know I thought more than that, I truly thought he was the equivalent of a Jesus, Krishna, Buddha, a that he was a saviour, a messiah, that he could hear my prayers in a real way. I thought he knew who I was. But in a sense my love was genuine, in that I really felt it. But I do not think it was genuine, in that it was seriously misplaced. He was any of the things I wanted or hoped he was. So I would use the word sincere. I do not think Rawat was genuine, so I do not think of my love, or the premies love, as genuine. I think if there was any kernel of genuineness it was in the connections I felt to some of the other premies. But I feel the same sorts of connections to people I love in my life now. I think that 'spiritual' human connection is there for many people, and that premies have no unique monoloply on it. In fact, I think premies by thinking they are unique in this lose out on big parts of what life has to offer. I think truly, I would feel this way whether I had ever dealt with the Jagdeo issue or not. For me it was one drip of many, and I am certain it was not the only reason I found my way out.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 23:22:46 (GMT) From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Susan Subject: hmmmm Message:

Hi again Susan 'But I do not think it was genuine, in that it was seriously misplaced.' I don't think misplaced love makes it any less genuine, and you are the only one who knows whether your love was genuine or not, but I can understand your feelings of betrayal under the circumstances. I certainly don't believe that premies have any kind of monopoly on 'spiritual' love, either. Mel

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 16:34:06 (GMT) From: Jim Sander Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Hi mel...I understand your point, but how about... Message:

all of the obvious deceptions, distortions and deletions that are now being exposed by so many fromer PAMS? I agree, you may love m, and although he may be flawed, very flawed,you can still love him. But what about this lying thing? Even if you take away the scandalous stuff, on the grounds that you can't really prove it, or maybe it was all misunderstood, or whatever... How about the very provable things, like the outrageous claims that he made, that he now says he never made. The great predictions and prophecies which never came true? The 'I'm god, but maybe not god' routine that went on for years, and still does, in subtle ways... The using and manipulating of premies that went on, always leading to his financial gain. His denying these things now, or blaiming mahatmas for them, or calling his critics negative unhappy people. You have to admit, m distorted many things...how can he be presented to the public as someone who is honest or trustworthy? I have seen many instances where he has deliberately lied to his own students...how can they turn around and tell the public that he is a teacher worthy of their trust? Just wondering...not a personal attack on you or your feelings, but I do have these questions, and find no real answers from premies, m, or ev. JS

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 00:05:57 (GMT) From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Jim Sander Subject: Hi mel...I understand your point, but how about... Message:

Hi Jim I guess the points that you have mentioned could come under the polite title of 'flaws', and I've debated these issues with ex's on this forum for about two and years now, so I'm well aware of them and also acknowledge them. I know this may seem a rather superficial answer, but if you are really interested in my views, arguments etc, they are all in the archives and you can read them. Mel

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 18:24:59 (GMT) From: Mark Email: None To: Jim Sander Subject: Hi mel...I understand your point, but how about... Message:

Ever notice how no body answers your questions,Jim? I laugh out loud every time I read these questions.They are SO RIGHT ON and to the point.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 15:14:59 (GMT) From: Katie H Email: None To: Mark Subject: Jim's questions, Mel's answer Message:

I can see both sides of this one too. I think Jim's questions are really right on as well - and deserve an answer. However, I can see why Mel hasn't answered them - he has answered them before, for one thing, and he has clearly stated that he is currently 'in process'. It's difficult, if not impossible, to give an honest and complete answer when you are processing something. BTW, to Jim - I hope you will consider writing a Journey entry, and including these questions in it!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 00:12:03 (GMT) From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Mark Subject: Hi mel...I understand your point, but how about... Message:

Hi Mark 'Ever notice how no body answers your questions,Jim? I laugh out loud every time I read these questions.They are SO RIGHT ON and to the point.' Rather an unfair remark if you're applying it to me Mark. I just got out of bed (it's a nice sunny morning in Australia!) after making my posts last night before going to bed and I'm just catching up with things. Be careful your 'ex' premie preconceptions don't colour the fact of the matter as they obviously have in this case! Mel

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 15:58:00 (GMT) From: Sandy Email: None To: Katie H Subject: You have connected with me Message:

Seeing both sides and being able to even relate to both sides...you have really made contact with me at a time when I felt especially alienated. Thank you very much for saying what you said about having that same thing going. You nailed where I am at, also that I challenge premies as well as exers. Not to be an asshole, but because I am seeing it all wide angle lenses on, while some scream at me telling me how weak, indecisive, idiotic, amoral, etc....none of which I see as being who I am. As for the rest, the prsonal stuff and all that...we all have our private things going on...it's just that that and this happening at the same time are really a sudden school zen lesson for me to get through in one peace... My being said 'YESSSS!' as I was reading your recognition of our common experience of seeing both sides. A weight was lifted, a thing was shared. Gracias. Sandy Sandy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 15:04:31 (GMT) From: Katie H Email: None To: Sandy Subject: Hey Sandy Message:

Wow, glad something I said made you feel better. Yes, it is OK to be in between two camps, or to see both sides of a question (although, as I said, sometimes that can be a curse :)!) Father Mickey once said something that really helped me. We were talking about loss of faith in a higher power, and what to do about it, and he said 'God isn't going anywhere.' I tend to feel dogged by time, and that I have to do something NOW or else I'm going to miss out - his statement really made a lot of sense to me. Take care, Sandy - Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 15:23:55 (GMT) From: Katie Darling Email: None To: Katie H Subject: To Sandy Message:

Hi Sandy. I thought I would add my Katiean energy to the above post. I was 'the Observer' way below who tried to protect you from someone's over-enthusiastic attempts to fix you. I have no idea what you are going through, but what Katie describes - a strange conflicting reality where you are between two 'camps' - may be your experience. If this is so, I want to let you know that it's okay to be between two camps. I know you know this, and are very assertive in protecting your right to be, believe, and say exactly what you want. But I just thought it might help for someone who posts here to say that your uncertainty is acceptable and makes a lot of sense, considering the changes you are going through. I've been through the same changes, and I didn't change from premie to ex-premie in a magic moment, like receiving the 'un-knowledge' or something. I did get disenchanted with Rawat, as I think you are experiencing to some degree. But it took a long time for my inner being to reorganize in such a way that I knew what to do with my 12 years of certain practices that had been, to some extent, a doorway into good places for me. This part of the journey is very personal. Some people just didn't enjoy Knowledge so it's a relief to let it go. Others loved it, and easily claim it as their own. Others kinda like it, but are open to exploring other paths to see what else is out there. I'm one of the latter group, and I found that I was able to find ways to tune in and connect (partially involving breath) with my Source that really worked for me, and not just because someone in authority was telling me the method was the secret key to all. The practices I do now are very much grounded in my body, and include my emotions, mind and the more subtle dimensions. It feels really good to be with my whole self, instead of going through the dichotomy of going 'up, up, infinitely up' (MJ quote) into the Knowledge experience, then crashing down, down, infinitely down (KD quote) into the 'real life' experience. That transcend/crash thing drove me nearly crazy, made me sick and disintegrated my being. So I guess what I'm saying is that I support you in keeping what works for you. I agree with Katie above that it's really good to examine the beliefs that may be welded to the pure 'experience' - ruthlessly deconstruct them, in fact. I don't think that this is the best place to do this any more than you have already done, because there is a habit of attack and defense that is actually non-conducive to either side really getting into self-examination (at least while the exchange is firing the adrenals). I'm not saying don't come to the forum, just acknowledging that to really deconstruct some of the mythology that you may (or not) still be attached to regarding MJ and K, or whatever else, you might do better in a more supportive, allowing atmosphere - like a good friend or therapist or something. And I'm not saying you're fucked up and need therapy.... What am I saying? Basically, I send you good wishes. love Katie Darling

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 16:08:07 (GMT) From: Sandy Email: None To: Katie Darling Subject: Katie D. Message:

I just got double-whammied with positive energy from two Katies! Frist Katie H. relating to seeing both sides and now you saying it's OK to be between two camps. Wow. I did not realize how long and hard I have been laboring under the opposite idea of it NOT being OK to be inbetween. I feel pressure from both sides to make that final and irrefutable choice and abandon forever the other side of the story, something that my human sensibilities will not at this time allow me to do. Your post was very helpful in this moment and has further taken weight off me that I did not even know was there. So thank you again for reminding me it's OK to be wherever I am at....I really had started to forget...everybody gets worn down after a while, and a real friend is someone who reminds you who you really are. That shined through your post and the other Katie like sunshine after days and days and days of clouds. Sandy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index