Ex-Premie.Org |
Forum I Archive # 6 | |
From: May 28, 1997 |
To: Jun 4, 1997 |
Page: 1 Of: 5 |
Jim -:- New Yorker article -:- Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 20:21:08 (EDT) Jim -:- Premie newspeak -:- Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 10:41:04 (EDT) ___Chris -:- Re: Premie newspeak -:- Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 15:02:16 (EDT) ___Jim -:- Re: Premie newspeak -:- Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 16:12:25 (EDT) burke -:- OP the nun -:- Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 00:35:43 (EDT) ___Bill Cooper -:- Re: OP the nun -:- Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 06:12:13 (EDT) ___op -:- Re: OP the nun -:- Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 03:18:05 (EDT) Jim -:- David Smith -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 21:54:08 (EDT) ___Deena -:- Re: David Smith -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 22:39:45 (EDT) ___Brian -:- Re: David Smith -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 22:56:29 (EDT) ___JW -:- Re: David Smith -:- Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 02:21:25 (EDT) ___burke -:- Re: David Smith -:- Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 02:35:54 (EDT) ___PS -:- Re: David Smith -:- Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 16:39:10 (EDT) ___JW -:- Re: David Smith -:- Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 17:32:29 (EDT) Deena -:- You know... -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 07:52:25 (EDT) ___Deena -:- Re: You know... -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 07:58:10 (EDT) ___Brian -:- Re: You know... -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 09:06:42 (EDT) ___Just one more thing... -:- Re: You know... -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 09:39:17 (EDT) ___Deena -:- Re: You know... -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 10:10:57 (EDT) ___Jim -:- Re: You know... -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 16:05:25 (EDT) ___Anon -:- Re: You know... -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 18:09:15 (EDT) ___Deena -:- Re: You know... -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 19:50:56 (EDT) ___Deena -:- Re: You know... -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 20:39:21 (EDT) ___Brian -:- Re: You know... -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 20:55:41 (EDT) ___Jim -:- Re: You know... -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 20:59:10 (EDT) ___Jim -:- Re: You know... -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 21:03:04 (EDT) ___JW -:- Re: You know... -:- Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 01:09:29 (EDT) ___JW -:- Re: You know... -:- Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 02:00:34 (EDT) ___burke -:- Re: You know... -:- Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 02:40:23 (EDT) ___Brian -:- Re: You know... -:- Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 07:09:45 (EDT) ___Jim -:- Re: You know... -:- Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 11:49:13 (EDT) ___JW -:- Re: You know... -:- Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 12:07:50 (EDT) ___Anonamo -:- Re: You know... -:- Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 22:37:44 (EDT) ___Anonamo -:- Re: You know... -:- Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 22:44:49 (EDT) ___Anonano -:- Re: You know... -:- Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 22:50:51 (EDT) ___Jim -:- Re: You know... -:- Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 23:11:33 (EDT) ___JW -:- Re: You know... -:- Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 12:11:36 (EDT) ___Anonamo -:- Re: You know... -:- Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 14:58:15 (EDT) ___PS -:- Re: You know... -:- Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 18:51:24 (EDT) ___Chris -:- Re: You know... -:- Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 19:20:41 (EDT) ___JW -:- Re: You know... -:- Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 19:38:14 (EDT) ___burke -:- Re: You know... -:- Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 23:13:45 (EDT) ___Jim -:- Re: You know... -:- Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 00:31:20 (EDT) ___Jim -:- Re: You know... -:- Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 00:33:13 (EDT) ___burke -:- Re: You know... -:- Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 01:13:37 (EDT) ___Brian -:- Re: You know... -:- Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 20:02:02 (EDT) ___Buddha -:- Re: You know... -:- Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 21:45:48 (EDT) Anonamous -:- No rules rule -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 00:16:45 (EDT) ___Jim -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 01:20:05 (EDT) ___Anonamo -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 01:44:52 (EDT) ___op -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 01:58:01 (EDT) ___op -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 02:03:32 (EDT) ___Bill Cooper -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 04:55:13 (EDT) ___Brian -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 07:09:11 (EDT) ___op -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 07:45:52 (EDT) ___op -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 09:09:22 (EDT) ___Deena -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 10:00:04 (EDT) ___burke -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 10:27:32 (EDT) ___Brian -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 12:12:35 (EDT) ___Deena -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 12:36:16 (EDT) ___Bill Cooper -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 19:27:37 (EDT) ___Deena to burke -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 19:54:05 (EDT) ___burke -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 20:58:10 (EDT) ___JW -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 01:40:46 (EDT) ___Anonamo -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 21:54:25 (EDT) ___Jim -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 22:36:29 (EDT) ___Bill Burke -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 02:09:11 (EDT) ___JW -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 12:41:04 (EDT) ___Anon amo -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 15:10:38 (EDT) ___Brian -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 20:15:44 (EDT) ___B. J. -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 22:31:21 (EDT) ___B.J. -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 22:40:37 (EDT) ___B.J. -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 22:45:06 (EDT) ___Chris -:- Re: No rules rule -:- Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 22:51:02 (EDT) |
Date: Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 20:21:08 (EDT)
Poster: Jim Email: To: Everyone Subject: New Yorker article Message: I talked with Kurt Anderson today. He advises that the magazine will definitely be publishing the piece, probably sometime over the next few weeks. Apparently, M's going to be speaking at the Avery Hall, or some place like that, at the end of the month and they might want to publish to coincide with that momentous occasion. (The theme, I'm told is 'a few hours of peace for those who haven't figured out this is all bullshit yet'). I asked Kurt if he thought I'd like the article. He offered, first, that it certainly isn't the article I, Jim, would have written. ( Well, of course.) He said he cut his brother and sister -- long-time gurunoids -- a little more slack than I might have. Nonetheless, he made it clear in his article that following Maharaji's nuts and that the whole thing's ridiculous. I told him that so long as he did that the rest is small change. So, there it is. I can't wait.
|
Date: Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 10:41:04 (EDT)
Poster: Jim Email: To: Everyone Subject: Premie newspeak Message: I can't believe how easy it was for Maharaji to confuse us with this notion of 'experience'. Here's OP misusing the term to avoid further thought: ' As to deeper interpretations of who he is, they are no good unless it's a personal experience.' Which premie hasn't? Mili, Chris, OP, A, Tane -- they've all gotten stuck on this one transparent ruse. Why can't they see through it? Why can't they see that, on the simplest level, this sentence makes no sense? I can't recall anyone actually arguing the point with me when I was a gurunoid. Yet I also can't imagine what I'd have said. I mean, the point's so obvious -- 'interpretation' is a mental function. Thinking. Analysis. Reflection. Consideration. You know. Experience? What's that? The front line of sensory input, I guess. Hey, I know (again, he reaches for Oxford) 'experience: 1) actual observation of or practical acquaintance with facts or events; 2) knowledge or skill resulting from this' I mean, ask Paul, he'll say he
'experiences' Jesus. Now that wouldn't have anything to do with
his beliefs would it? Of course it does. Oh this is all so
stupid. I can't believe I'm caught in a dialogue that's on such
a pathetic level. I'm going to play a little guitar. This is
ridiculous.
|
Date: Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 15:02:16 (EDT)
Poster: Chris Email: To: Jim Subject: Re: Premie newspeak Message: Why play guitar? What's the logic of it? What is the personal 'experience' of music? I am glad there is more to life than 'facts' and 'events'. CD
|
Date: Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 16:12:25 (EDT)
Poster: Jim Email: To: Chris Subject: Re: Premie newspeak Message: Why play guitar? What's the logic of it? What is the personal 'experience' of music? I am glad there is more to life than 'facts' and 'events'. CD How inane, Chris.
|
Date: Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 00:35:43 (EDT)
Poster: burke Email: To: Everyone Subject: OP the nun Message: Today I was at the Train station waiting for someone at 7:00 am and a woman came up to me and wanted to talk to me about god! I thought, fasten your seatbelt lady. she told me about how she became a Jehovas Witness
Of course it is
typical messiah flaw to say some thing like |
Date: Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 06:12:13 (EDT)
Poster: Bill Cooper Email: To: burke Subject: Re: OP the nun Message: When I was having a bad time a few years back a couple of Jehovahs witnesses knocked at my door. I used my usual palaver saying things like *I'm a born again atheist * etc but I was actually touched by their qiet sincerity and so I thought what the hell and invited them in. I spent six months having a jw come around and explain the whole JW universe as we worked through a couple of books. They invited us for meals we met other Jw's everyone was really nice. I even started thinking that it might be true. Then accidentally one day in town I met an ex JW. He had a really good grasp on why JW was a cult he worked for a UK charity called outreach. At the time I thought ok so JW is a cult but although disillusioned with Maharaji I never thought of it as a cult and so got back into it again. What I have found for myself is that even when you see the craziness in other systems, cults,religions its really hard to see it in things which are really close to you that you have made a large emotional investmentf . I mean reading it through again that last line seems so obvious but sometimes its the most obvious that we have problems with. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 03:18:05 (EDT)
Poster: op Email: To: burke Subject: Re: OP the nun Message: Yes, I had some fantasies about becoming a nun - marriage to Jesus and all that (Yashua, sorry - by the way, who won your contest?) So you're not far off on this one. In your eternal line of women giving themselves sexlessly and
virtuously to God, what about the gopis? Rather racuous set of
nuns, don't you think?
|
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 21:54:08 (EDT)
Poster: Jim Email: To: Everyone Subject: David Smith Message: OP asked me to elaborate on my discussion with David Smith. First, he did NOT sound like he'd had a lobotomy. His diction was okay and ...well, how does someone sound when they've been lobotomized? I mean he was flat, impervious to reason and unexcitable. But I didn't hear any hospital sounds and don't they always institutionalize those guys? Hell, I don't know. Anyway, did I say he was flat? Yes, but how flat, you ask. Oh my god! Two hands on temples (perhaps unconsciously protecting my own frontal lobes). Oh my god! He had the curiosity of a bic pen. No, I want to be fair. Make that a cordless phone. I told him he was being villified for all the world to see right on this web site. That didn't phase him. He had no interest in checking this mess out. Such is the grace. He told me he couldn't pass along a message to M. It wasn't his place. He knew his place and that wasn't it. He kept telling me to write him. I kept asking what if M didn't answer. He kept saying write another letter. (At one point I remember feeling grateful that I wasn't paying for this call). His interest in my end goal -- of establishing some communication with M -- was 'well-controlled' to say the least. To that end, did I say he was flat? Mr. Smtih, unlike Deena, told no funnies. After all, what could be funny? Funnies are when M tells a joke. Those are funnies. I felt he was saving himself. Mr. Smith was as warm as roadkill and NOT the furry kind. He was as cordial as a rotten mango. (Know what a mango tastes like? Don't answer -- that's the first question they use to get you into cults. Stay away from all Mango talk!) Mr.
Smith reminded me of ...... I felt that he was already screwing
up his barogon as we got off the phone. I can't wait for his
fiftieth birthday party. We're all invited and I hear it's going
to be something else. Cake, cookies (right, OP?) and you name
it. Songs. Soda water. You can wear a tie, you can NOT wear a
tie. Your call. We're talking PARTY!!
|
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 22:39:45 (EDT)
Poster: Deena Email: To: Jim and all Subject: Re: David Smith Message: Hey Jim, do you think op meant that M looks 'tired and worn' because he is on a dry drunk and his compulsive-obssesive behavior is taking it's toil? Maybe he just needs a drink, just one tiny drinkee wouldn't hurt? When I look at his picture I'm reminded of the time he was at arm's reach from me and addressed me personally to go to Rome. He was pathetically insecure as he insisted I should go because it was going to be a wonderful event. Of course I thought it was his humility I was witnessing but I remember a twinge, a question as to his own uncertainty in his voice as if trying to convince himself. He was extremely relaxed at the time, so perhaps this is the real M...descriptions of Gurus in cults include that very same insecure personality as well as the arrogant meglamania and narcisstic behavior. My spelling sucks. Grade 9 just doesn't cut it. Grovel, grovel, grovel....oops, I floated for a few seconds....it happens, triggers that thrust ex-cult members into past mind sets. But it happens so infrequently., thank who? Just who do I thank now that I don't thank God? It is so inconvient being agnostic! I won't be on the forum for a while, just
had some extra time today and I've had fun. See ya all again! I
love you guys....I know that's a strong word, but I mean it...but
of course I'm not at the point where I can feel love for people
who would sooner off me than let me continue to share my ex-cult
feelings and thoughts. The so-called world I never trusted,
supports that I am sane now. Only premies are unsupportive of my
discovery that Maharaji is a cult leader Mind you, my husband is
a premie and the only exception so far. By loving me he supports
me as I am, even though at first he was repulsed by that, now he
must be questioning in some small recesses of his being. I say
this because I know he is attracted to the change in me. Not
trusting M can't be all the bad is what he is witnessing. Maybe
someday, watching a video or when he is at an event he'll have an
awakening and eventually he'll be able to leave too. I wish he
knew how great it feels to be free.
|
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 22:56:29 (EDT)
Poster: Brian Email: To: Deena Subject: Re: David Smith Message: But it happens so infrequently, thank who? Just who do I thank now that I don't thank God? It is so inconvient being agnostic! You can still say 'Thank God!', according to the bylaws. You just can't expect to hear 'You're Welcome' is all. By loving me he supports me as I am, even though at first he was repulsed by that, now he must be questioning in some small recesses of his being. I say this because I know he is attracted to the change in me. Perhaps I should let you in on a guy secret. He's attracted to
fallen angels, like all men. No longer saintly, you now become
extremely sexy. Jesus felt that way about Mary Magdalen and her
foot-fetish, probably. Even guy-saints have one-track minds ya
know.
|
Date: Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 02:21:25 (EDT)
Poster: JW Email: To: Jim Subject: Re: David Smith Message: This is not related to David Smith, who is, by the way, a sad, robot-like, zombie with sadistic tendencies (and does the "rotten mango" statement mean he was or was not cordial?), but you said he didn't have any funnies and I just read one in Mother Jones Magazine that I thought I would post.
|
Date: Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 02:35:54 (EDT)
Poster: burke Email: To: JW Subject: Re: David Smith Message: good one! If it passes I can do the delivery. He's coming next week. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 16:39:10 (EDT)
Poster: PS Email: To: Jim Subject: Re: David Smith Message: Jim, In 1974, after three years in the ashram, I was transferred to the Boston ashram.I believe David Smith was the 'general secretary' at the time. I couldn't believe how rigid and uptight he was, and as a result, everyone else. It was like a prison. Perhaps I should be grateful, it motivated me to move out. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 17:32:29 (EDT)
Poster: JW Email: To: PS Subject: Re: David Smith Message: Very interesting that Smith was so uptight as early as 1974. I had a lot of dealings with him in the late 70s and the early 80s and he not only was extremely uptight then, but, as I have posted before, there was a certain part of his personality that enjoyed hurting people that were vulnerable to him and he seemed to relish doing it. Like you, his methods of treating people was really the thing that got me to doubt that GMJ was who he said he was.
|
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 07:52:25 (EDT)
Poster: Deena Email: To: Everyone Subject: You know... Message: You know what I really like about Jim on this forum? I like how he is himself....comletely.He enjoys debate and doesn't deny his feelings of rage and amusement. On the other hand, premies who first post sincere and humble expressions of themselves, very quickly become everything Maharaji's love, contentment, fullfillment, peace, supreme bliss isn't! The venomous, crude, condescending and often base animal instinct takes over and transforms them. Truely, if you go back in the archives and follow each premie from first to latest post, it is as if they become unrecognizable. At an event where M is speaking the premies gather with the sweetest of anticipations and the love that explodes when he first walks out on stage is overwhelming. At that moment, in the realm of knowledge, in Maharaji's world, the illusion of this petty and trivial passtime of discussion with ex-premies becomes clearly meaningless. I'll give my husband that much, he's enjoying life too much to lose that feeling that is so precious to him by bothering to waste his time being here. Now, about Jim. It is
clear why he is here. I can't figure out how he has the status of
leader on this forum. I don't think he has done anything to
deserve that honor. Sorry Jim. But frankly, I'd be surprised if
any of the ex-premie's here were interested in following anyone
after their experience with M. It amazes me how sweet people like op,Mous, etc. can become as vile as Jim when that is part of Jim's personallity but they on the other hand probably don't show this in their personality, except on this forum. But I'm only quessing here, maybe if I were to visit their homes I'd discover that practise of knowledge and having a Perfect Master doesn't mean choosing bliss over the way the world eats you up and spits you out, as M always talks about. If I were to say anything to premies, it would be: this is an ex-cult, ex-premie site that you visited and found a forum where disscussion was welcome from premies. But the fact that it is an ex-cult, ex-premie site doesn't excape your understanding of what that means. People like myself, ex-premies, who obviously are here because they feel M is the leader of a cult, are at different stages of understanding the programmiing and it's effects after leaving a cult. If you can imagine for one moment, that if you discovered that in fact, Maharaji is a fraud, anger and the need to understand what happened in your life would be your motivation for particpating in a forum such as this. If I have a question, it would be the same one many ex-premies have asked..... what is a premie's motivation for participating on this forum with ex-premies? I'm fully aware that there is the
possibilty that premies will just chalk up this post to Deena's
defense of her friend Jim. But Jim doesn't need my help. He's
just fine. He is my friend, as JW, Brian, Scott, Gunther's mom,
and others I'm forgetting to mention but consider friends. They
have been there for me, and because my need to share my doubts
and confusion wasn't answered with "It's just your mind, go
practise and everything will be fine" I am alive today and
enjoying the freedom of not being in a cult. And yes, I am
grateful....grateful to the ex-premies who have reached out and
shared...... and been supportive.
|
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 07:58:10 (EDT)
Poster: Deena Email: To: Anon, Douche... Subject: Re: You know... Message: Anon, Douche...I just remembered... you guys aren't forgotten, and you are certainly appreciated...I tend to remember people I've spoken to on the phone or had alot of e-mail contact with. Sorry. I know there are other people to thank as well but you know who you are and I hope that you accept my thanks even though it's not by name. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 09:06:42 (EDT)
Poster: Brian Email: To: Deena Subject: Re: You know... Message: Gotta agree with you about Jim. I've spoken to him on the phone and know how much laughter is in his voice. Things like that don't come across in text though. He has a useful sense of the absurd, which is handy on forums like this where premies mouth practiced truths while ignoring entirely the inconsistancies in their own statements and retreating to vagueness - ala Opie. He also likes a good fight (the lawyer in him) - ala Mili, and is intolerant of gibberish (the ex-premie in him) - ala Chris and MJ. He's also funny as hell at times. People either get his sarcasm, or they don't. Not surprising to me that premies don't get it, though. It's not on tv. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 09:39:17 (EDT)
Poster: Just one more thing... Email: To: Everyone Subject: Re: You know... Message: The last few days I've been having fun test driving cars only Maharaji could afford to own. For years I received pleasure from knowing that he rode in luxury and comfort that I didn't feel was necessary in my own life. When I looked around me the majority of premies struggled to afford the cost of getting to programs(as they were fondly known to be called by M in the old days. Now the term event is used when M doesn't slip and call it by it's old name..it would seem.program was a little too close to the truth of programming} As I was saying, the plush leather seats and smooth driving comfort is what you would want for the one in your life who you believe has given you the most precious gift. My monthly checks to the Malibu address ( which like many premies wasn't the only donations made. There is the cheques to Elan Vital to support plane and land projects and the monthly contribution for the community video library, and of course the money donated at the events to support that cost. If the house needed reparir and rebuilding too well...gee even the lowest income premie would be happy to contribute a few dollars to make sure M has everything taken care of. And having seen that dedication over the years come from premies, like I use to be, I never made the connection that M lives a life of luxury most premies will never know. Sure, a very few live well off in a worldly sense and still can afford to travel all over to see M. No matter if a premie can only afford to go see M once every few years, the longing to do that will make any available money allocated to what is considered worthwhile in a premies life. In the ashram premies denied themselves to serve M. Many people still do. M wouldn't want to own in my old car, nor would he want to wear David Smith's torn underwear, (trust me, I washed them, and he was in dire need of a new wardrobe) My point? It's that for the first time in my life I would enjoy going into debt to drive a luxury car everyday and not save my pennys for less than an hour program with M where I can experience the ultimate feeling in this life and be reminded that it's within me all the time....expensive addiction when you gear your life that way. Sure, I know, a car is just a car. But then how come for 25 years M has never denied he buys the best because that is what he enjoys. Oh, I forgot. He doesn't need to deny his or his familys needs 'cause his master is dead and doesn't cost him anything. That is conveniant isn't it. And he knocks people who follow dead masters...at least it's a hell of a lot cheaper! That is if you don't need a middleman like Billy Graham or the Pope etc. What can I say. You'll never get a premie to admit there is a price tag connected with the fulfillment in their lives. They'll rationalize that away. But I've seen premies drop everything to go see M. I've witnessed premies barely having enough money to do that and call it Grace when you see them at the program with that blissed out smile. They feel it is all perfect whether they go or not. After all, he is in their hearts even if they can't be with him. Fact is they need him. Fact is without him they do feel lost. In other words, M and his teachings has a hefty price to pay and when premies aren't meditating they feel something is missing and they tell themselves that they should meditate. They live alot of the time with that I should stuff in their lives. And they pine, long and even are frustrated when they hear about events they can't get to....but the longing is so sweet, that pain isn't suffering because it's the only pain worth feeling. So premies are paying emotionally if not financilly. I've heard it in their voices and I've seen it in their eyes for many years now. I for one, don't miss that addiction. Oh yeah, my
husband shows great interest in the sanity of living with an
ex-premie...maybe his sanity is in staying with me despite his
programming. He's enjoying this ex-cult member very much it would
seem. And I am enjoying that he is secretly an ex-premie in his
own right by the very act of staying with me. What premie would
unless he had serious doubts?
|
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 10:10:57 (EDT)
Poster: Deena Email: To: Brian Subject: Re: You know... Message: Yeah, doesn't he have a great laugh? Sorry Jim but it's true. Jim's voice is one of the warmest kindest voices I've ever known and that definately does not come across on this forum, which just shows how judgemental and condescending we all can be at times. I find that since I admit I don't Know (as in Knowledge) that some of that attitude is wearing off...it is pretty heady stuff knowing the Truth and recognizing the Perfect Master. Kinda explains the bobbing back in forth between the humility of not feeling worthy of such an awareness and the condescending and judgemental attitude that bible thumps...oh, sorry, there is no official bible,,,just the same thing M says over and over for the last 30 years...what's that called again? Oh yeah, programming...no, can't be, must be Truth, oh I am getting so confused here, help Baji, HELP! My son is mocking
me because I keep saying that this is my last post....I just
don't have time for this and yet here I am! He's a great kid, and
I'm happy he shares my joy of leaving a cult....bye for now...
|
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 16:05:25 (EDT)
Poster: Jim Email: To: Deena Subject: Re: You know... Message: Thanks Deena. The leader trip is, of course, a joke. Not worth anything but a few laughs. I wonder though, why you didn't run this post by me as usual before it went up. Did you feel rushed? Becuase I thought we dealt with that feeling. I thought I explained to you that being rushed is an emotional reaction not to be succumbed to by a properly rational mind. But, take mind, I also see that you are learning and for that I thank you. Yes, you can have the guest house the last week in August. Really, Deena, I do appreciate this post. You're right all the way. I just want some of these fuckers who claim that they're into rationality to walk the walk. OP, you are fully right, for my money; rationality's all about letting logic press its full weight in a discussion. Yet you haven't done that at all. Back to Deena -- no, back to Deena as an example. I've talked with Deena a few times. We've argued. In a lot of ways she's like some of those hyper-aggresive chicks that dominated the mission in the beginning. Opinionated and outspoken. But the point is we actually argued. Do you know what that means? We considered each other's points fairly and openly as we made our own. WE subjected ourselves to possible persuasion by the other. At least that's what it seemed -- well, seems, of course -- like to me. OP, you strike as one with a basically genteel personality. Maybe even lighter than Deena in some ways. Who knows? But the big diff between you two is that you're not trustworthy. She is. Here's an example. In argument we're always tempted to advance some point to protect another. Everyone does it. It's natural and spontaneous. The problem, though, is that in doing so we often transgress some other point we also depend on. Hence, inconsistency or, to be perfectly frank, hypocrisy. I've experienced talking with Deena and getting to points where I can't help but notice and point out her inconsistencies. When I have, she's always looked at my comment openly and has either made a reasonable counter-argument or, instead, has conceded. I've tried to do the same. You, OP, play the other way. Not willing to concede anything you've gone to increasingly absurd lengths to protect this point or that. My only question to you is do you really need me to spell these out for you OR, for a change, can you be honest enough to self-criticize a bit. A car without reverse is useless. The first thing Maharaji did to all of us when he got us in his garage was try to ruin that gear. Deena, I'm completely with you that these premies have shown such hypocrisy here. But what can you do with a hypocrite who doesn't want to even see his hypocrisy? See, I ask OP stuff like I just did because I still have some lingering hope for her. I still think she has enough pride to not be shamelessly hypocrtical. I guess, I'm just trying to shame her into 'right action' or 'right words' or whatever you want to call it. My biggest sin on this board
has just been that I lose my temper. I long for the mythical
premie who I can lead into reason. Sort of a telescoped version
of my own evolution. I want to see it all over again. Again and
again. Is that a sin? I don't think so. Am I setting myself up
for disappointment? Apparently.
|
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 18:09:15 (EDT)
Poster: Anon Email: To: Deena... Subject: Re: You know... Message: Re. Your story about MJ's luxury cars. I distinctly recall a satsang MJ gave when he referred to one of the luxury cars he was given (it was either the latest top BMW or Aston Martin I don't exactly recall). He said 'you will never have a car like this in your lives' addressing his premie audience. I remember thinking that it was rather a condescending thing to say. In fact it really surprised me. I have a friend who lives in India a lot, his comment was that despite their apparent 'spirituality' Indian people who get a lot of money indulge themselves the most tastelessly with any materialism that comes their way. They LOVE earthly riches. MJ has succeeded but I don't think he represents the the average top BMW client at all! What he appeared to say on that occasion was that he assumed that he would be the richest man 'materialistically' and that premies would always have less money. That was not a very kind thing to say. It was a real put down. Almost tyrannical. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 19:50:56 (EDT)
Poster: Deena Email: To: Jim Subject: Re: You know... Message: Me-ow (cat: feline, known to purr contentedly and lash out viciously in defense) Sometimes I
avoid op because a cat fight could erupt- something men are known
to enjoy, I can hear the hooting and hollering now. But it's not
worth my energy. You're
right, I am a know it all, from a family of know it alls, and I
can be impossible to talk to because I have a habit of wanting to
be right so I don't listen. You nailed it on the head. Not
flattering, but true That's why it was so incredably difficult
for me to admit I was wrong about Maharaji. I too long to witness the aspirant process in reverse. Obviously in my husband it would be nice. Am I setting myself up for disappointment too? I'm willing to give it some time. George Carlin was on Larry King Live the other night and spoke about his wife who passed away 3 weeks ago. In the 70's they were substance abusers and she got sober overnite but it took him much longer. When Larry asked if she tried to get him to quit, he said she was always in his corner and respected him for his intelligence. In his own time he quit. New tactic for us? Maybe for me in my situation but understandably too boring for you. Asking forgiveness for my boldness and humbly bowing down in you cyberr presence, I respectfully sign off. I am not worthy, I am not worthy. PS...thanks for making me laugh, you made a few
roaringly funny funnys. You are right up there with Bugs Bunny in
my books Jim. Now don't tell me you don't like him either? And
watch First Contact, humor me please, for me?, I promise you'll
have some good laughs if you follow the dialoge. And you'll be
happy to know that Captain Kirk (and his Stratford syle of
overacting) is not in this movie, which, as Martha Stewart would
say, is a good thing.
|
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 20:39:21 (EDT)
Poster: Deena Email: To: Jim Subject: Re: You know... Message: You know I was thinking about the Ann Johnson type comparison you made about me, and I realized that when it came to service for Maharaji, I suppressed that tendency in myself to be a know it all. Backstage, with instructors that stayed here, and generally in the community, I found myself humbled by the fact I believed the Lord was who I was serving. If anything, I was following David Smith's lead of being flat in all areas of my life except my passion for Maharaji. Problem is, I felt lousy and didn't even know it. When I first received knowledge, I had a dream in which I saw Maharaji stumbling because he was drunk and he was smoking a cigarette as well. I remember waking up trying to rationalize how I could have such a disrespectful dream. I decided that it was to show me his teachings were going to blow all my concepts. Too bad I didn't take my doubt serious enough to consider the possibility that in fact, my master could be a fraud. My son wants to say something now: Hi Jim. Seeing as we're on the topic of smoking, I wanted
to tell you that I have smoked a few cigarettes, like the taste,
but will quit now because of my health. What are your views on
smoking? Do you think Maharaji wants us to smoke?
|
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 20:55:41 (EDT)
Poster: Brian Email: To: Deena Subject: Re: You know... Message: Hi Jim. Seeing as we're on the topic of smoking, I wanted to tell you that I have smoked a few cigarettes, like the taste, but will quit now because of my health. What are your views on smoking? Do you think Maharaji wants us to smoke? Hi, Deena's son. I gotta jump in here, cause I can I guess. MJ wants us to do anything that we want to do, as long as it doesn't cause him any irritation and we do it at his Lotus Feet. Things that are laced with high doses of adoration are fine, but cash is preferred. It is best that you save your cigarette money and just send it to him directly, so he can do the most good with it. < grin > |
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 20:59:10 (EDT)
Poster: Jim Email: To: Deena Subject: Re: You know... Message: You know I was thinking about the Ann Johnson type comparison you made about me, and I realized that when it came to service for Maharaji, I suppressed that tendency in myself to be a know it all. Backstage, with instructors that stayed here, and generally in the community, I found myself humbled by the fact I believed the Lord was who I was serving. If anything, I was following David Smith's lead of being flat in all areas of my life except my passion for Maharaji. Problem is, I felt lousy and didn't even know it. When I first received knowledge, I had a dream in which I saw Maharaji stumbling because he was drunk and he was smoking a cigarette as well. I remember waking up trying to rationalize how I could have such a disrespectful dream. I decided that it was to show me his teachings were going to blow all my concepts. Too bad I didn't take my doubt serious enough to consider the possibility that in fact, my master could be a fraud. My son wants to say something now: Hi Jim. Seeing as we're on the topic of
smoking, I wanted to tell you that I have smoked a few
cigarettes, like the taste, but will quit now because of my
health. What are your views on smoking? Do you think Maharaji
wants us to smoke? Deena, I reread my 'she's-a-housemother-but-she's-okay' left-handed compliment to you. Thanks for taking it in the spirit intended. How else could I explain to these dweebs that you're no one's lackey without giving them a sense of how dangerously combative you are 'in person'? It's all service. Don't take it seriously. Good. Now that we've cleared that up, don't smoke. I hear
it's not good for you.
|
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 21:03:04 (EDT)
Poster: Jim Email: To: Brian Subject: Re: You know... Message: Hi Jim. Seeing as we're on the topic of smoking, I wanted to tell you that I have smoked a few cigarettes, like the taste, but will quit now because of my health. What are your views on smoking? Do you think Maharaji wants us to smoke? Hi, Deena's son. I gotta jump in here, cause I can I guess. MJ wants us to do anything that we want to do, as long as it doesn't cause him any irritation and we do it at his Lotus Feet. Things that are laced with high doses of adoration are fine, but cash is preferred. It is best that you save your cigarette money and just send it to him directly, so he can do the most good with it. < grin >
Get your
own gopis, Brian. How 'bout Burke? NO -- forget I ever said
that. I don't want to start that shit again. (You know what you
do when you start shit again? Think about it.)
|
Date: Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 01:09:29 (EDT)
Poster: JW Email: To: Anon Subject: Re: You know... Message: Maharaj Ji has always been totally into cars -- anything on wheels really, and then anything expensive, with wings. I remember one time while the Boeing 707 was being worked on Maharaj Ji had gotten a Lear Jet to go somewhere for a festival. Anyhow, he was leaving in two or three days and he wanted the interior to be redone to put in a sofa/bed and some other upholstered furniture in the place of some of the seats. He knew that that was almost impossible to do in that time, but the premies worked around the clock, without sleep, to give him what he wanted. I remember thinking how much he only thought about himself. I had to rationalize it such that he was giving the premies the opportunity to give themselves totally to him. What a pile of crap. He just wanted it because he wanted it and to hell with premies or anyone else. What utter arrogance. But if you have thousands of people willing to do anything just to spend time with you, to kiss your feet, and give you everything they own, including their lives, well I guess that would tend to make you arrogant.
|
Date: Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 02:00:34 (EDT)
Poster: JW Email: To: Jim Subject: Re: You know... Message: "Am I setting myself up for disappointment?"
|
Date: Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 02:40:23 (EDT)
Poster: burke Email: To: JW Subject: Re: You know... Message: but he would make such a fine god! why limit your love? Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 07:09:45 (EDT)
Poster: Brian Email: To: JW Subject: Re: You know... Message: You know, every time you post some story about something you heard MJ say in person, I find myself amazed that anyone 'got' to spend so much time around him. It was something I always wanted when I was involved with DLM, but never figured out how to be allowed to do it. Maybe I would have seen through him sooner if it had happened. Don't know. But I was probably self-excluded by not naturally choosing to do whatever was required in the first place. I was never one to volunteer for any extra credit homework in school either. Anyway, I enjoy the stories you incrowders post :) Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 11:49:13 (EDT)
Poster: Jim Email: To: JW Subject: Re: You know... Message: Fine by me. I think I called Amous an asshole first, though. That's on page 111. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 12:07:50 (EDT)
Poster: JW Email: To: Brian Subject: Re: You know... Message: I was around GMJ very seldom. Just festivals, ashram meetings and a couple of times in Miami, but even then in groups that were fairly large. I actually avoided a number of chances to be around him, because I found it confronting. I found him pretty unattractive and a little weak in the gray-matter arena, and during the period I was in Miami, I heard constant reports about him screaming and bitching a lot because he didn't like what was going on, from people like Dennis Marciniak and Ira Woods, and since I feared the wrath of the Lord, I stayed away.
In some cases
people has special skills, like being a trained pilot or trained
as a professional chef. But I think Anon was correct that
usually if you were humble and just practiced knowledge, you
would be unlikely to have gotten noticed for the "darshan-type"
service assignments.
|
Date: Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 22:37:44 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamo Email: To: Deena Subject: Re: You know... Message: I think I'm going to cry Deena. That's soooo touching. Your loyalty and support for Jim Heller makes my knees weak. Fact is, I'm peeing my pants right now in envy that I could ever hope to instill in another human-being the same admiration you just displayed for your brother-in-arms. Now let me tell you about myself. I can certainly become as vile as the next person when provoked. That is MY background. I am not a saint and wouldn't want to be one. When I see bullshit I won't stand for it, now as I wouldn't before I received Knowledge. When I see the way Heller treats unsuspecting premies you gleefully stumble into this rats-nest, it appauls me. He has no respect for the valid experiences of these people and bends and twists the answers they give to his questions. He lures them into the discussion in the name of being open-minded, when in fact he, and the rest of you, are the most closed minded bunch of misenthrops I've ever stumbled upon. Don't get me wrong I have a very sweet experience of life, that is my boat and my keel, and that luckily isn't touched by the stupididty that gets spewed here. What is it, did you think just because someone has Knowledge that their balls suddenly shrivel up and they walk around in a catatonic state of bliss? I guess a gentle, sweet 'premie' would be the easiest for you guys to push around wouldn't it. I have no use whatsoever for the bullshit that people put in these pages. You offer no proof for the maligned explanations you give of past occurrances and have no one to be accountable to for your statements. And Deena you so pompously give your 'explanations' of the 'stages' of recovery you're in from the cult. What crap! You seem to think that being a mother is the seat of all wisdom. I'd like to ask just why you got involved in the first place? Did you know what you wanted to get out of it? If you received Knowledge in the last 20 years, you should have had ample time to check it out before you jumped in. Did you get involved because you husband was involved? Where do you begin to take responsibility for your own actions? So this is a support group for ex-premies is it? I thought it was a forum for open discussion and exchange of ideas. I'm here 'cause I've got a few ideas of my own. ;-)
|
Date: Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 22:44:49 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamo Email: To: Jim Subject: Re: You know... Message: Thanks Deena. The leader trip is, of course, a joke. Not worth anything but a few laughs. I wonder though, why you didn't run this post by me as usual before it went up. Did you feel rushed? Becuase I thought we dealt with that feeling. I thought I explained to you that being rushed is an emotional reaction not to be succumbed to by a properly rational mind. But, take mind, I also see that you are learning and for that I thank you. Yes, you can have the guest house the last week in August. Really, Deena, I do appreciate this post. You're right all the way. I just want some of these fuckers who claim that they're into rationality to walk the walk. OP, you are fully right, for my money; rationality's all about letting logic press its full weight in a discussion. Yet you haven't done that at all. Back to Deena -- no, back to Deena as an example. I've talked with Deena a few times. We've argued. In a lot of ways she's like some of those hyper-aggresive chicks that dominated the mission in the beginning. Opinionated and outspoken. But the point is we actually argued. Do you know what that means? We considered each other's points fairly and openly as we made our own. WE subjected ourselves to possible persuasion by the other. At least that's what it seemed -- well, seems, of course -- like to me. OP, you strike as one with a basically genteel personality. Maybe even lighter than Deena in some ways. Who knows? But the big diff between you two is that you're not trustworthy. She is. Here's an example. In argument we're always tempted to advance some point to protect another. Everyone does it. It's natural and spontaneous. The problem, though, is that in doing so we often transgress some other point we also depend on. Hence, inconsistency or, to be perfectly frank, hypocrisy. I've experienced talking with Deena and getting to points where I can't help but notice and point out her inconsistencies. When I have, she's always looked at my comment openly and has either made a reasonable counter-argument or, instead, has conceded. I've tried to do the same. You, OP, play the other way. Not willing to concede anything you've gone to increasingly absurd lengths to protect this point or that. My only question to you is do you really need me to spell these out for you OR, for a change, can you be honest enough to self-criticize a bit. A car without reverse is useless. The first thing Maharaji did to all of us when he got us in his garage was try to ruin that gear. Deena, I'm completely with you that these premies have shown such hypocrisy here. But what can you do with a hypocrite who doesn't want to even see his hypocrisy? See, I ask OP stuff like I just did because I still have some lingering hope for her. I still think she has enough pride to not be shamelessly hypocrtical. I guess, I'm just trying to shame her into 'right action' or 'right words' or whatever you want to call it. My biggest sin on this board has
just been that I lose my temper. I long for the mythical premie
who I can lead into reason. Sort of a telescoped version of my
own evolution. I want to see it all over again. Again and
again. Is that a sin? I don't think so. Am I setting myself up
for disappointment? Apparently. Really, your sincerity almost sounds real. Hey, virtual sincerity to go with your virtual machismo! ;-)
|
Date: Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 22:50:51 (EDT)
Poster: Anonano Email: To: JW Subject: Re: You know... Message: You gt it wrong Jaydub. Didn't call Jim a 'fucker'. Called him a 'prick'. Just wanted to set the record straight, he's a 'prick' not a 'fucker'. OK? ;-)
|
Date: Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 23:11:33 (EDT)
Poster: Jim Email: To: Anonamo Subject: Re: You know... Message: Well, A, you're really something, aren't you? What's this? ' When I see the way Heller treats unsuspecting premies you gleefully stumble into this rats-nest, it appauls me.' Are you suggesting that anyone posts here without reading a bit of the discussion first? Preposterous. Then you say: 'He has no respect for the valid experiences of these people and bends and twists the answers they give to his questions.' Now, this is such a silly premieism. I'm always
amused by it. If you substituted 'opinions' or 'beliefs' for
'experiences' you'd never say this, would you? It's okay to
disagree with someone's beliefs, right? Just not their
'experiences', right? See M fucked you over big time when he screwed up your vocabulary. He expropriated the word 'experience' and splashed it all over everything. As if to say, 'that's mine, the rest is mind' and that was that. Even when I lived in the ashram I knew that was kind of wierd. I knew that whatever one experiences, your mind immediately begins analysing and contextualizing it. Unavoidable. So why not call a spade a spade and look at what beliefs have settled in? Premies are pathetically laughable when they rigidly stammer 'experience, experience' as if to ward off all introspection. Remember that word, 'introspection'? Remember how you said you valued it so highly and were SO committed to it? Well, isn't introspection a thought process? Now, before you start giving me any of that premie funny money I think I'll check Oxford. Here it is: 'introspection: the examination or observation of one's own mental and emotional processes, etc.' So how do you examine your mental processes, bud? Are they up for grabs? Like, are you looking for possible mistakes or, instead, do you just hold everything in there sacred somehow? Ah, but these are tricky questions aren't they? BLACK MAGIC!!! Spooky! (Mr. Music, a little 'twilight zone' theme, will ya?) We are going to ask you ....QUESTIONS! Ah HA! Yes, that's right! Questions..... to make you.......THINK!! Ah Ha!! Maybe, A, if you feel so strongly about the nefarious trap's
we have in store for the unsuspecting premie lambs like yourself
who have fallen into our evil clutches, you should post a big,
fat warning over on Harlan's page. 'DON'T GO TO THE EX-PREMIE
PAGE! THEY'RE TALKING! REPEAT -- DON'T GO TO THE EX-PREMIE
PAGE! YOU MIGHT BE ASKED QUESTIONS! WE CANNOT PROTECT YOU FROM
ALL THESE QUESTIONS. THEY ARE LIKE VIRUSES AND MAY BE FATAL TO
YOUR FAITH! INSTEAD, IF YOU MUST, INTROSPECT ON YOUR OWN, FIRMLY
HOLDING YOUR TRUTH WITH BOTH HANDS. JAI SAT CHIT ANAND!'
|
Date: Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 12:11:36 (EDT)
Poster: JW Email: To: Anonano Subject: Re: You know... Message: Thank you; I stand corrected. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 14:58:15 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamo Email: To: Jim Subject: Re: You know... Message: Singing that same old song again Jim. How's it go now... 'the ONLY valid metric for truth comes from 'rational' analysis'. Did I get it right? How would you explain the fact that placebo drugs can sometimes cure people better than scientifically designed ones? If you were a researcher would you disregard the people who've been cured by placebo just to prove your point? Or would you accept the possibility that something has just happened beyond the realm of your sphere of mental scrutiny. But that would take at least a little humility, wouldn't it? First let me say there is a difference between intellegence and wisdom. Of the two, intelligence is the currently accepted cool thing. Wisdom gets less air-time. The primary questions that I seek to answer regarding Knowledge is, 'Does it feel good? Has my deepest thirst to be fulfilled been quenched?'. To these I can answer a definite 'yes'. And to say this, I have definitely not forfeited my ability or desire to look rationally at life or Maharaji. This is called BALANCE. You on the other hand have forfeited your right to simply feel without grinding that feeling through the mulcher of 'intellegent thought'. To quote you from your last posting '...whatever one experiences, your mind immediately begins analysing and contextualising it'. Let's call a spade a spade Jim: Sounds like you've got a hyperactive mind. Say, do you do a complete analysis on whether or not it feels good to take a dump in the morning (or whenever it happens for you). When you have a good meal that someone has lovingly made for you does it first pass through your brain before it hits your toungue? Your imbalance demonstrates an INCREDIBLE lack of wisdom. The problem with this approach: intelligence invented the atomic bomb and lack of wisdom caused it to be used. But Jim you're not a cold calculating automoton without a heart, I can see that. Maybe if you were sitting face to face with the people you condescend to, your humanity would be given the opportunity to speak. I think it's the virtual nature of your interactions here that permit you to be such a misenthrop. You know that 'push-button war' syndrome where you never get to see and interact in a real way the people you've just abused. Yeah, yeah I know Jim you feel you've been abused by Maharaji so all's fair here. I'd say be introspective yourself and DON'T draw the line of scrutiny from your neck up and waist down. :o)
|
Date: Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 18:51:24 (EDT)
Poster: PS Email: To: Jim Subject: Re: You know... Message: I agree that premies use 'experience' as their mantra to ward off any real questioning. The current issue of Cybersangha (the alternative Buddhist journal) has a great article about the cultuaral myths and distortions we bring to the practice of any religion. The author suggests that using only one's 'experience,' by itself, is a dangerous practice(Buddihism for example has a long tradition of using reason and experience to base its practice. People experience all sorts of crazy things, i.e talking in tongues, believing the CIA, Mafia, or spacemen are following them,etc. ad infinitum. Experience is easily manipulated (as ex-premies know). 'I have to trust my own experience' is the premie way of saying that challenging their belief in MJi is off limits. It is like a well encapsulated delusion in that reason, or questioning may exist in other areas of one's life but not there. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 19:20:41 (EDT)
Poster: Chris Email: To: PS Subject: Re: You know... Message: You can be deluded by rationalism taken to the extreme. Why were people like Socrates and Pythagoras persecuted when they were alive? Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 19:38:14 (EDT)
Poster: JW Email: To: Chris Subject: Re: You know... Message: You can be deluded by rationalism taken to the extreme. Why were people like Socrates and Pythagoras persecuted when they were alive? Anything taken to the "extreme" has it's problems,
as Plato taught regarding "moderation." But Socrates was
presecuted because he taught ideas that were thought to be
dangerous to the state, (and also because he was impious and
supposedly corrupting the youth of Greece) not because he was
"too rational."
|
Date: Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 23:13:45 (EDT)
Poster: burke Email: To: PS Subject: Re: You know... Message: How would you describe the practice of , hmmm, practise of buddhaism, practice of meditation, practice, let me find the dictionary. To do frquently or as a rule. So what do you do frequently? What did
buddha say to I hope you are inclined to
respond.
|
Date: Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 00:31:20 (EDT)
Poster: Jim Email: To: Chris Subject: Re: You know... Message: You can be deluded by rationalism taken to the extreme. Why were people like Socrates and Pythagoras persecuted when they were alive? I don't know Chirs but that's a DAMN good
question!
|
Date: Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 00:33:13 (EDT)
Poster: Jim Email: To: burke Subject: Re: You know... Message: How would you describe the practice of , hmmm, practise of buddhaism, practice of meditation, practice, let me find the dictionary. To do frquently or as a rule. So what do you do frequently? What did
buddha say to I hope you are inclined to
respond. What the fuck are you talking about?
|
Date: Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 01:13:37 (EDT)
Poster: burke Email: To: Jim Subject: Re: You know... Message: howdy ps made a claim that
buddhaism has a long tradition of using reason AND experience to
base its practise. I have yet to find anything about Buddha
that isnt Id like to see one buddhist in my lifetime show the ability
no offense meant |
Date: Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 20:02:02 (EDT)
Poster: Brian Email: To: Chris Subject: Re: You know... Message: You can be deluded by rationalism taken to the extreme. Why were people like Socrates and Pythagoras persecuted when they were alive? It wouldn't be very
rational to persecute them after they were dead, Chris. It would
be like being devoted to them after they're dead. Right, Paul?
Right, MJ?
|
Date: Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 21:45:48 (EDT)
Poster: Buddha Email: To: burke Subject: Re: You know... Message: Hey Pal, We all know that life is suffering, no? We all seek to allieviate our suffering, no? Us folks simply take it one step further and believe that there is a way to escape life's suffering and that that is through the path of righteousness, (not self-righteousness), in thought, word and deed. What's so illogical about that? The
B.
|
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 00:16:45 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous Email: To: Everyone Subject: No rules rule Message: So Jim, your faith in guiless premies has been shattered. What is this world coming to? You re so full of shit I can hardly sit on my chair. You re pretty good.
Say, are in public relations, you seem to know If you want
sincerity asshole, first give some respect to the people I can
say this about the others members of F-troop, at least they
display Get it straight asshole, I m not evading your questions, I m
just going to I ask this of the other premies who visit
this dank little corner of cyberia, ;o|
|
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 01:20:05 (EDT)
Poster: Jim Email: To: Anonamous Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: So you're afraid to talk about Maharaji? That's okay, you're not alone. Why come HERE though? What's your goal? To contribute to the DISCUSSION or maybe to distract it? See, you could hang out on Harlan's page. He censors anything critical of Maharaji. You wouldn't feel so threatened. But here? What exactly do you expect? This is, after-all, an EX-PREMIE page. See that picture at the
top of this board? What does that tell you? We're ANALYSING
You know what I think? I think
you're flailing Mili-style. I particularly Long after
you're gon
|
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 01:44:52 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamo Email: To: Jim Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: So you're afraid to talk about Maharaji? That's okay, you're not alone. Why come HERE though? What's your goal? To contribute to the DISCUSSION or maybe to distract it? See, you could hang out on Harlan's page. He censors anything critical of Maharaji. You wouldn't feel so threatened. But here? What exactly do you expect? This is, after-all, an EX-PREMIE page. See that
picture at the top of this board? What does that tell you?
We're ANALYSING You know what I think? I
think you're flailing Mili-style. I particularly Long after
you're gonI'm coming. Yes, I'm definitely coming. No
I'm going. Oh God Jim This isn't an 'ex-premie' page. It's an 'everything you want
to Emotion??? Explode??? Oh, do you mean because I
used some strong words? Say Jim, just because someone doesn't submit to a stream
of diahretic cross- ;-)
|
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 01:58:01 (EDT)
Poster: op Email: To: Jim Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: Long after you're gon What's that about? I was reading along and the rest of your words seem to have fallen off the edge. RE your top-of-page logo - Analyzing? In your DLM-style haircut-and-tie garb? It could be a security meeting. So don't point at the logo, or I'll start raving about the machismo and racist implications again. You want me to define 'rational discussion'? I think it has something to do with following a line of thought to it's logical conclusion, without chewing up the person who has opposing views. Literally. I find it very hard to discuss politics with a crocodile, because I have to spend so much time dodging his snapping jaw. Tell Deena I grew up just fine without her help, thank you very much. And I was the first kid on my block to find out about Santa Claus. Tell us again about your conversation with David Smith. You left for a holiday right after that phone call. Did it mean anything to you? You never mentioned it after you got back. But then, can we trust anything you say, or do we always have to find the tongue hiding in your cheek on our own? By the way, exactly how am I a liar?
|
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 02:03:32 (EDT)
Poster: op Email: To: Anonamo Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: Hi Amo, or Namo: I asked you yesterday - do you have an e-mail address I could where I could send you something? If you don't want to post it here, you could send it to Chris and he can forward it to me. You wouldn't mind, would you Chris? This debate is ever-n'ending.
|
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 04:55:13 (EDT)
Poster: Bill Cooper Email: To: Jim Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: Hey it must be lets slag off Jim Week. My Go . My Go. Why did you never answer any of the questions I posted to you a few nights ago ? I dont think you want a rational discussion. Myself I'm feeling a lot better
since I've tried to take it all as a joke. Ok its not going to
work all of the time , but I think we owe Maharaji the favour not
to take him at his word, eg seriously. Its all an absurd joke and
we have all had the piss pulled rotten out of us.
|
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 07:09:11 (EDT)
Poster: Brian Email: To: op Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: RE your top-of-page logo - Analyzing? In your DLM-style haircut-and-tie garb? It could be a security meeting. It isn't all that great of a image, since the angle it's drawn from is too direct. The man is pointing at a picture on the wall. See the picture? Recognize anyone? BTW,
Scott, you gotta trim that toothbrush mustache. It's sagging
badly.
|
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 07:45:52 (EDT)
Poster: op Email: To: op Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: Long after you're gone What's that about? I was reading along and the rest of your words seem to have fallen off the edge.RE your top-of-page logo - Analyzing? In your DLM-style haircut-and-tie garb? It could be a security meeting. So don't point at the logo, or I'll start raving about the machismo and racist implications again.You want me to define 'rational discussion'? I think it has something to do with following a line of thought to it's logical conclusion, without chewing up the person who has opposing views. Literally. I find it very hard to discuss politics with a crocodile, because I have to spend so much time dodging his snapping jaw. Tell Deena I grew up just fine without her help, thank you very much. And I was the first kid on my block to find out about Santa Claus. Tell us again about your conversation with David Smith. You left for a holiday right after that phone call. Did it mean anything to you? You never mentioned it after you got back. But then, can we trust anything you say, or do we always have to find the tongue hiding in your cheek on our own?By the way, exactly how am I a liar? That < > at the top of the post was supposed to contain Jim's unfinished long after you're gone That's
what the question is about - just what were you getting at that
went unfinished??
|
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 09:09:22 (EDT)
Poster: op Email: To: op Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: What gives? The words still don't appear. I need Scott to figure this one out! At the bottom
of Jim's post appear the words 'long after you're gon' and then
nothing. I've tried to post them as a quote twice, and both times
they disappear from my post. Let's see if they show up now,
simply as part of a paragraph.
|
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 10:00:04 (EDT)
Poster: Deena Email: To: op Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: Try not using full quotation marks but the single one underneath like this 'blah blah' does that do it? Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 10:27:32 (EDT)
Poster: burke Email: To: Anonamous Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: You said, having the admiration of other people on this wabsite is no great feat. Sheesh! I have to disagree.This is a tough crowd. why dont you try being
funny on this website. You are mad at someone who dares hate someone you
love. If you date
someone and you go hang around thier |
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 12:12:35 (EDT)
Poster: Brian Email: To: burke Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: Write your story again. Don't worry about posting it. Just keep writing it until it loses its power over you. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 12:36:16 (EDT)
Poster: Deena Email: To: burke Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: Burke-where is the history lesson about the jews, I'd like to read it? Also, I was really disappointed when you said you tried to write your story etc. I, for one, need to read your story. Every person here has helped me to be free of the programming I allowed to occur (no one forced me to watch over 400 videos) I want to be have every trace erased, if possible....your story is essential. Please share when you are ready. And write as if only the ex-premies are reading it. Ignore the premies for that post because it isn't for them. It's for you first and us fellow ex-Borgs too. I'm familiar with the
rage...it is good to scream as loudly as you can, it feels so
good. I don't find myself needing to these days, so I know it
helps. Your comparison to ex-lovers in relationships is right on.
Looking forward to reading more.
|
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 19:27:37 (EDT)
Poster: Bill Cooper Email: To: burke Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: If you have had personal contact with Maharaji and you are writing here, then you know you owe it to yourself all the ex premies who write or just read and all the premies who visit this site for whatever reason to come straight and tell us what you know. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 19:54:05 (EDT)
Poster: Deena to burke Email: To: Bill Cooper Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: I take back what I said about the should share...Brian is right, write for yourself and keep writing until it doesn't overpower you anymore. If you want to share with us, that is a different thing. But you don't owe us anything. You don't owe anyone anything. M did that to you long enough. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 1997 at 20:58:10 (EDT)
Poster: burke Email: To: Deena Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: thanks im exhausted im frozen it might take a while I'll be here but i might be quiet for a while im not trying to tease and i know you know that
|
Date: Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 01:40:46 (EDT)
Poster: JW Email: To: Anonamous Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: So Jim, your faith in guiless premies has been shattered. What is this world coming to? You re so full of shit I can hardly sit on my chair. You re
pretty good. Say, are in public relations, you seem to know
If you want sincerity asshole, first give some
respect to the people I can say this about the others members of
F-troop, at least they display Get it straight asshole, I m not evading your
questions, I m just going to I ask this of the other
premies who visit this dank little corner of cyberia, ;o| "You're so full of shit I can hardly sit on my chair."
"I'm not avoiding your questions, I'm just going to play by my rules and not yours."
|
Date: Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 21:54:25 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamo Email: To: burke Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: You said , having the admiration of other people on this wabsite is no great feat. Sheesh! I have to disagree.This is a tough crowd. why dont you try
being funny on this website. You are mad at someone who dares hate
someone you love. If you date someone and you go hang around thier
You say I don't know Maharaji. What makes you say that and how would you know? I ask you, how intimate do you know him? Is your level of 'intimacy' based on the hearsay of sore losers like Mishler? Heller? Are you familiar with the circumstances aroud Mishler's departure, and his grasp for power? I've read postings on this site giving negative spins on everything Maharaji does from spending time with the people who love him, to having a jet to travel to be with those people. Then there's that bogus story out of Nigeria which was a complete red-herring. The editorial license taken on this page is appauling. This is is exactly why the web has such a hard time gaining credibility -- i.e., NO ACCOUNTABILITY. In other words you and the rest of F-Troop can get on your blow-horn and spin the story in any direction you want without having to be accountable to anybody but yourselves. And you call it democracy in action. I call it totally irresponsible! You know, a negative slant could be spun about Mother Theresa if you bring in enough malice of intent, half-truths, and 'quoted notables'. Of course feeding the poor is a hands down winner in the qualifications for sainthood. Making people happy by showing them inner peace is a little harder to measure and therefore less of a qualifier. So Knowledge didn't work for you guys. So instead of admitting maybe it just wasn't for you and moving on, you find a soap box to spout off, spinning the events so far out of proportion that it's laughable. I find myself saying, 'My God, was this guy at the same event as I was?' Here's an interesting thought Burke: You really don't know for sure whether Maharaji is for real or not, do you? (Go ahead say you REALLY are, then give me your proof, not heresay. While you're at it explain why it works for me. And please don't give me that, '... it's because I've forfeited my ability to think', crap. That's too pat an explanation and very one-dimensional.) Fact is, you have to believe that he's not for real because that's the only way you can justify it not working for you. I'll tell you why it didn't work for you and it does for me... It's because you and I ask different questions of life; so why the hell would you think we'd be satisfied by the same answers? And Maharaji undeniably answered a very deep and personal question for me. There are mountain-tops you don't even know exist, so why don't you stop pretending you've seen them all just because you've been to the top of all the one's you know about? By the way, my name IS Anonamous, with an 'A' (my mother used to get so pissed when people spelled it with a 'Y'). I sometimes go by Anonamo. ;o)
|
Date: Mon, Jun 2, 1997 at 22:36:29 (EDT)
Poster: Jim Email: To: Anonamo Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: 'I'll tell you why it didn't work for you and it does for me... It's because you and I ask different questions of life; so why the hell would you think we'd be satisfied by the same answers?' Good to hear from you again, A. I wonder if you handle all differences of opinion this way. You answer your own questions and I'll answer mine? Pretty funny. Anyways, ...well, I guess there's no talking with you, right? I was about to ask you why you're posting here and what interaction you'd accept from others. But that's one of my questions, isn't it? Maybe you could ask yourself, if you have a moment. What are you doing here? Recently, Scott and I have
been talking about this forum and whether 'no rules' is best.
I've argued that that standard's too loose as, although you might
not think so, this is in fact a DISCUSSION board. You've
afforded such a perfect example of someone who's unwilling or,
perhaps, unable to respect this simple idea, I'd forgive Scott if
he does one of those trace things to see if 'you' are not me
having a little fun. Scott, this isn't me. (Well, THIS is, but
you know what I mean.)
|
Date: Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 02:09:11 (EDT)
Poster: Bill Burke Email: To: you Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: Im going to give you an unpronounceable name like princes new name. you are ;o) I appreciate your efforts to make this page snappy
I finally recognize that m is a
person who is burdened His only hope is that
kabir is right that if you There is one slot left in the Pantheon of Gods. If you dont know, it is the fat god of
Happiness that If Maharaji can pull off genuine happiness, its going
to As pissed as I am at his endless
shit, this is what he When I am in that place within, I rest,
I become me, Thats why I hesitate to write him
off,Ive watched his sorry you asked?
|
Date: Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 12:41:04 (EDT)
Poster: JW Email: To: Anonamo Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: Talk about "red herrings," "Nigeria?" (I think something about that was posted here but there wasn't one person who posted who put any credence in it whatsoever), "Mother Theresa," please. The reason there is credibility here is because there are ex-premies who have personal "experience" with GMJ and his knowledge, and they speak from such "experience." I really think that it's the fact that there is some credibility here because we have seen and "experienced" what GMJ says and does that upsets you so much.
|
Date: Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 15:10:38 (EDT)
Poster: Anon amo Email: To: Bill Burke Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: Keep watching Bill. :o)
|
Date: Tues, Jun 3, 1997 at 20:15:44 (EDT)
Poster: Brian Email: To: JW Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: The Nigerian story is factual. Just a different Maharaj Ji though. Some Nigerian cult leader ran afoul of the corrupt government there and got some press over it. You can find the story by searching the web for 'maharaj ji'. It's hard to keep all these Lords straight sometimes... Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 22:31:21 (EDT)
Poster: B. J. Email: To: Anonymous2 Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: OK, Oh ye of such great accuracy, first, for starters, would you mind spelling your name correctly. Anonymous is spelled a-n-o-n-y-m-o-u-s, not anonomous. Second, instead of making blanket accusations about the accuracy of the claims made by participants here, would you kindly point out a single specific lie or misinformation before proceeding any further. Otherwise, you begin to sound a bit too much like a spin doctor, "with much sound and fury, signifying nothing," to borrow a phrase from old Willy S. B. J.
|
Date: Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 22:40:37 (EDT)
Poster: B.J. Email: To: A Mouse Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: Just a humble suggestion: Since we already had someone on this board who used the code name Anonymous, why not use the name: A Mouse, just so we know who you really are? B. J.
|
Date: Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 22:45:06 (EDT)
Poster: B.J. Email: To: A Mouse Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: Actually, if A Mouse doesn't exactly have a 'ring to it' for you, how about Amos, that would do. B.J. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Wed, Jun 4, 1997 at 22:51:02 (EDT)
Poster: Chris Email: To: B. J. Subject: Re: No rules rule Message: Booby Joerge, What's the matter with the name 'anonomous' ? What right have you to meddle with family tradition? Are you a spelling bee hopeful or strict discipline person? Do you share an Oxford dictionary with Master Heller? How dare you defend blanket indiscretions. Break out of your rigid mind game. Back To Index -:- Top of Index |