Ex-Premie.Org |
Forum III Archive # 13 | |
From: Jun 18, 1998 |
To: Jun 25, 1998 |
Page: 5 Of: 5 |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 13:47:16 (EST)
From: Iola Email: None To: Everyone Subject: The hole in me Message: MJ tells the story of the person who wants to be initiated. His Lord just tells him to stand still, observe and keep quiet while he dips the bucket full of holes into the well. The ignorant one keeps watching the master pull out the bucket only to have the water pour out of it. Finally the ignorant one says you can't draw water with a bucket with holes. I don't even want you Knowledge. The master then says, see you can't even keep quiet. My friend remind me last night the you and I are like that. All I know is that I'm going to miss the 'HIGH' and the 'LORD>|.' I almost wish I could go back--but as MJ said 'Once you know, you know. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 14:06:59 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Iola Subject: Bad news, Iola Message: I almost wish I could go back--but as MJ said 'Once you know, you know. Iola, I think you will ALWAYS feel like that. Always. We borrowed a lot against reality when we fell for Maharaji's seduction. Take a look at those kids (us) in the LOTU video. Deluded or not, we were ecstatic. We had, we believed, one the biggest lottery of all. I think we're just fooling ourself if we think we'll ever have dreams that even approach that fervour. However, life itself, real life, isn't so bad. You know, I'm quite a bit into Darwinism and evolutionary psychology, partly because I do believe that we've evolved with the necessary hardware/software to enjoy our time here. That's why I think that optimism, in sime way, is actually inbred. We don't need some stupid philosophy to prop it up. Strip the old paint and what do you find? There's actually some good wood down there. What we ex's can get, as a consolation prize for wasted time and shattered dreams, is a lot of laughs. We've lived a nice little slice of the Divine Comedy (no pun intended). And now, in some way, we're writing our modern screenplay. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 15:23:08 (EST)
From: PaulR Email: pgrobinson@hotmail.com To: Iola and Jim Subject: Bad news, Iola Message: Dear Jim, Thank you for your post which really hit the sweet spot. Dear Iola, I am not so intellectual as Jim to state it that way, but I have experienced the same. I have loved M so much and I still do so. After 20 years of not going to meetings, I still think of him with great affection. this doesn't mean I think he is doing good with his life or the lives of those who are dedicated to him. I DON'T. I believe that your ('hole') feeling of loss is a healthy and natural result of your ability to love well. If you had posted; 'I don't feel anything (regrets etc) then I would be concerned for your emotional or mental health. I feel that I could write a thousand pages on this but I won't I have come to understand that the nitty gritty of real life is our purpose, not the avoidance of it. Today I use my resources of Love and materials more effectively than I ever could with M. I've decided to write it down to share later. I really enjoy seeing your posts here, and it always helps me to read them. regards pr Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 15:53:55 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: PaulR Subject: Bad news, Iola Message: Iola: I gotta say that I rarely even think about M, and when I do it is almost never with nostalgia. Perhaps this is because I've been trained as a 'wandering intellectual.' I trash around in everyone else's business and point out all their questionable assumptions. Therefore, my mindset doesn't indentify the feelings I had with M as 'safe' but rather is 'dangerous' and 'risky.' I once had a dream, in the Portand Premie House, about leaping obliquely off a cliff (at about a 20 degree angle) and every time I jumped the cliff would extend out to catch me where I came down. I miss that feeling a bit, but it WAS a dream. Leaping directly off the cliff at 90 degrees, Id have fallen. I now work very hard to build bridges, but at least I know where I'm going, sort of. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 18:13:16 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs To: Jim Subject: Bad news, Iola Message: Dear Jim, This is you at your best, in my opionin! Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 14:10:11 (EST)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Iola Subject: The hole in me Message: There is no 'Master'. There never was and there never will be. That is the inescapable conclusion I have come to. God there may be. But a living God on Earth? Once you can accept that it's never been the case and and is not supposed to be the case; then you can see that any connection you have with God is your and yours alone. No master comes into it. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 14:41:45 (EST)
From: Al Email: None To: Sir David Subject: The hole in me Message: It is very understandable to go into a period of mourning the loss of such a sincere devotion as yours has been...and the highs are very addictive and this again is not unlike a withdrawal symptom that is also common when people leave a cult. Betrayal stirs alot of anger and that is all part of the process too. Sometimes it amazes me that all the so very different cults have the same traits for those recovering. That's why it helps to get advise from an expert in cults when it becomes too much. Triggers and flashbacks are not easy to cope with. Don't be afraid to reach out and get help. There is alot of great living to be lived without the extreme highs and lows of being with Maharaji. And as far as having a Master...I personally don't miss the duality of heart and mind that battles constantly. If I could slam M for anything, above all else, it is the way he continues to teach about this when it just doesn't exist! You are in a delicate phase of discovering for yourself what you believe or don't believe. You will find that your life will be more fulfilling than it ever was when you were a devotee...being free of a master. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 14:42:56 (EST)
From: Al Email: None To: Iola Subject: The hole in me Message: I meant the above post to you Iola. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 14:49:29 (EST)
From: John Email: None To: Iola Subject: pardon me, that's a dumb story Message: That story is so typical of a cult leader's story!! totally inane! Trying to brainwash you into thinking that our reason and judgement are 'evil'!! Like, why the hell was the master using a bucket with holes in it? Huh? Where is the wisdom in that? Oh! I'm sorry, I guess I'm getting into my head again, aren't I? The reason M doesn't want anyone listening to him with their 'heads' is that he has an 8th grade education, and all he knows is what he heard his Dad say. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 16:10:40 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: John Subject: M's ignorance Message: John: How dare you imply that M is not creative, just because he lacks education. He is quite capable of plagiarizing from almost anyone, regardless of their educational background, though he sometimes gets the concepts a bit jumbled. And to tell the truth, M is actually a good deal more coherent than Franklin Jones (Da Free John) in spite of the latter's relatively advanced educational accomplishments. But then, who isn't more coherent than Da Free John? -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 16:25:39 (EST)
From: John Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: a hole = ??? Message: Okay, wise guy, I've heard that story my whole life about the bucket with the holes in it. Tell me, WHAT does it mean? Other than the master is an idiot for using a bucket with a hole in it!! Oh, actually, it's coming back to me, the moral of the story...yes ... if a bucket has holes in it, the bucket will not be able to carry water. Is that the lesson? If a bucket has a hole in it, it will leak!!! Yes, how simple and how profound!! but there's more!! If a bucket cannot carry water, then it is of no value. If we leak, we are of no use to the master. There's an obvious sexual meaning to 'holes'. If we pursue sex, then we are like a bucket with a hole. Which means we will leak all our energy. Oh, but wait a minute, celibacy is no longer a requirement, so it can't be that. Ah, I'm still stumped. Please Scott, give me your interpretation. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 16:32:56 (EST)
From: bftb Email: None To: John Subject: a hole = ??? Message: Actually this story when used in the context of the Guru/Devotee tradition is somewhat more insidious then what you're thinking. I took the story to mean : 'When the goo says shut-up and listen.You shut up and listen' This story is more about learning obedience to the master then any symbolism we can apply to the holy bucket. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 17:06:55 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: John Subject: a hole = ??? Message: John: How should I know what it means? My point was that he ripped it off from someone else. Or do you think he made it up himself? Personally, it reminds me of the system of stoplights in Northern Virginia. Just because you're forced to stop at one, for about 20 minutes, doesn't mean you're going to make the next one. It's the source of a lot of road rage. But, they've come up with a solution thank God! No, they're not going to adjust the sequence to make it more efficient. That would be too easy. Instead they've installed cameras to catch people who just can't wait any longer. Nice source of revenue too. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 17:36:45 (EST)
From: eb Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: My Interpretation (Nasty) Message: The well represents the eternal womb, the darkness, the wet, the yin. The bucket symbolizes a broken condom. Now the problem is, BM tries to bring us to ecstasy, but we don't have enough patience and he ejaculates prematurely. Then we bitch about it. There you have it, pure and simple. TGIF eb Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 17:50:03 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: John Subject: a hole = ??? Message: I agree with bftb, that story means, that BM says, no matter what stupid thing I do and no matter what your common sense tells you, ignore it and do exactly as I say or as I think I say, without question, without your own personal input, and completely disregard and discount your own personal experiences and better judgment. So if I tell you to be quiet and you think you should speak up to point out how inane and stupid I am, don't. This is the perfect recipe for a charlatan to do whatever in the hell he wants and never be questioned. This has been basically BM's ideology from the beginning. It's dangerous and stupid, but it really hasn't changed. It's a commandment: 'MINDLESSLY FOLLOW ME.' Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 18:02:03 (EST)
From: Judex Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Maharaji's tales Message: Yes Scott I think I mentioned once he told a story only a few months ago which came out of Stephen Levine's 'Who Dies', which is full of zen stories (and some are delightful) - which got them from previous sources, of course. The story involves a man hanging off a cliff, tigers below, and the root he is clinging to is gradually snapping. He looks up to the clouds and says 'is there anyone there' and a voice from the clouds says 'let go and I will catch you' and he pauses for a moment and says 'is there anyone else up there?' And you know what, he blew the story (for me) by using the wrong intonation (I guess because it's not his story). Then again he gets most of his inspiration for satsang, it seems, from Kabir, Nanuk and Tulsi-das (sp?) material - which he would have a great deal of access to. Also from his own life such as flying his plane (something we can all relate to). He's a teller of tales allright but I think he's getting tired. He probably needs a few years off (unless he really does believe he has to save x amount of people in the world from ignorance). Personally I think he's addicted to the stage persona, like a rock star, but is wearying of the trip. Seeing his daughter (Daiya?) becoming a 'star' must be interesting for him to watch - perhaps educational. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 17:52:30 (EST)
From: Judex Email: None To: John Subject: the well story Message: just want to add that since Iola was only using part of the story to illustrate her point - the rest of it that follows is that after the master says, you can't even remain quiet, he says, you are full of doubt and like a bucket with holes in it, cannot contain anything I give you. Therefore when you are free of doubt (you wll no longer be like the leaky bucket). So it wasn't as easy as the guy thought, he thought oh, that's easy, all I have to do is keep quiet and I can have this knowledge. M also used the analogy of the clay pot that can't have a hole in it or gradually all the contents will leak out. This was leading aspirants to understand that whatever he gave them like the seed, they had to grow it, they were responsible for it. I used to wonder what mine had become...a 5' spindly little thing with one or two leaves. Yet doubt was never my problem, I don't think. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 21:00:22 (EST)
From: Lg Email: None To: John Subject: pardon me, that's a dumb story Message: Where is the wisdom in that? It drained out of the bucket :) Stay in your head John, I like it. Lg Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 15:38:53 (EST)
From: Paul Email: None To: Iola Subject: The hole in me Message: Iola: Whatever you've experienced has been within you and is still there. Like all good cult masters, M gets premies to identify all good feeings(love,highness, insight, etc.) with him. Devotees become Pavlov's Premies (i.e.darshan=ringing bell). You will find that you can still meditate and that there is far more available to you, than when you were suffering from the tunnel vision of M and K. Paul Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 16:17:42 (EST)
From: VP Email: None To: Iola Subject: I saw that video, Iola Message: I was really struck by how differently you and I perceived that video. When I saw M tell that story I thought, 'What a really dumb story. Maharaji is being so very condescending to talk about followers like none of them could have any patience.' As I have been watching the videos, I see a recurrent theme throughout all of them. Mahraji relishes the PUT DOWN. If he has a oppurtunity to point out how stupid, unenlightened, etc. the people in the audience are, HE EATS IT UP. It is VERY disturbing to watch. He smiles, but there is also some anger in his eyes. He is pissed off at all of us for being such boneheads. He is irritated that he has to be so enlightened and be surrounded by imbeciles. If it weren't for the money (and maybe the fact that he gets to put people down) I doubt he would do it. Look in those eyes, it ain't LOVE, baby! 'Here in America people ask, 'What is a master?' In other places, people understand what a Master is but in America, I HAVE TO EXPLAIN IT.' ( BM is clearly put out about having to do this) Another minor example of this is when BM states over and over that we are not worthy of this gift of K 'You don't deserve it, No you don't. You really don't. You really really don't' He is relishing what scum we are yet he is pissed off to say it, too. He is the ultimate passive aggressive. That's my take, Iola. Sorry that you are feeling sad. VP Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 20:20:07 (EST)
From: Joy Email: None To: VP Subject: I saw that video, Iola Message: VP, I think your observations are really accurate. Looking at videos now -- the few I have seen in the last couple years, and the one time I tried to attend a program (lasted five minutes before walking out) -- this has been my main impression, that BM is definitely annoyed and pissed off with the rest of us, thinks us WAY beneath him. His attitude is SO condescending and arrogant it almost defies belief. But what really mystifies me is how people eat it up and then love him back. We must all have pretty bad self-esteem on some level, to have someone treat you so condescendingly and talk to you like you're a five-year-old knucklehead, and still feel puppy-like love and devotion for them. But what truly amazes me, more than anything, now that I see it in the proper way, is how he continues to get away with it. Money and ashram issues aside, how can anyone with that holier-than-thou, insulting attitude get people to love him so much in return? Maybe somebody with an advanced psychology degree out there can explain that for us. . . . Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 20:35:18 (EST)
From: Judex Email: None To: Joy Subject: I saw that video, Iola Message: Joy Money and ashram issues aside, how can anyone with that holier-than-thou, insulting attitude get people to love him so much in return? In my humble (better still make that bowing, scraping, dung-eating) opinon, it is because we believed we were less holy - that's why we believed in a god-like master in the first place - therefore by reinforcing this split between us he keeps the relationship going. Hey, maybe he needed it just as much! Also, collectively, the human race is probably full of a great big guilt shadow by now eg from defiling/deluding ourselves (drug & alcohol abuse), having people starving in the world while in the West people die from over-eating, pollution of our beautiful world, all these polarities which a Master can turn into a paradox or even a new paradigm by saying - well it's only the physical world and it will all end - just concentrate on what's inside which can never be hurt, stolen, deceived etc. The Messiah figure attempts to heal the collective darkness but M's way of doing it is to accept that it's all crap anyway, which I find pretty disheartening and hard to live with. I want my life to be a good experience now, and he is the same to me as the religions who promise heaven afterwards, with no guarantees. This heaven he talks of inside - what if you don't experience it? He has to keep talking you into that place with Satsang. Is it at all real - or does it show that he has no faith in life itself, created by the real god. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 23:05:55 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Judex Subject: Some thought about Guru Papers Message: Judex: RE: 'Money and ashram issues aside, how can anyone with that holier-than-thou, insulting attitude get people to love him so much in return?' In my humble (better still make that bowing, scraping, dung-eating) opinon, it is because we believed we were less holy - that's why we believed in a god-like master in the first place - therefore by reinforcing this split between us he keeps the relationship going. Hey, maybe he needed it just as much! I just started reading The Guru Papers. They have analyzed the guru/disciple relationship pretty well, but I think your statement is more to the point. The problem is that the authors of The Guru Papers make a huge mistake in attempting to expand upon that insight to say something about the larger society, and authoritarianism in general. My god, they don't even know the classic literature in the field! At any rate, their notion that the guru maintains control by interfering with the individual's self-trust is as good an explanation as any. I mean, he clearly does reinforce the split (which apparently deludes him as well). That explanation for domination has been expressed before... by Karl Marx. He called it 'alienation' and the mechanism, which he saw as ideology, results in 'false consciousness.' Different words, but the same basic concept. They clearly have never read Marx, or almost anyone else for that matter. I think Marx's concept of 'alienation' (which he express more clearly in his writings prior to Kapital) applies very nicely to guru/disciple relationships. Not so nicely to the society, writ-large. Too bad the authors never bothered to read anyone who has done research on authoritarianism in the past. Might have saved them a lot of time, and probably changed some of their ideas about Control. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 23:16:25 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Oh oh! Message: My god, they don't even know the classic literature in the field! Scott, you decidedly intelligent friend to us all, do you know what this looks like? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 01:00:10 (EST)
From: NDYW Email: None To: Jim Subject: Oh oh! Message: Scott, you decidedly intelligent friend to us all, do you know what this looks like? Let me guess: like an effete intellectual snob who thinks he knows it all. How the fuck do yoy know what these people have read, Scott? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 01:45:46 (EST)
From: NDYW Email: None To: Scott Subject: Further more Message: ...Too bad the authors never bothered to read anyone who has done research on authoritarianism in the past. Might have saved them a lot of time, and probably changed some of their ideas about Control. Boy is this snotty or what? Suppose you read Control also? Have you, huh? Have you read it? How do you know the authors did not research their topic? I suppose it all just came to them in a dream. Or maybe they channelled it, hmm? Get a grip, pal. Your head's getting a little swollen here. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 02:36:30 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: NDYW Subject: Further more Message: NDYW: I knew you'd figure this was 'snotty' but to me it's a matter of responsibility. Just because you like what they say (and I like MOST of it) doesn't mean they should be let off the hook. They don't mention any of Weber's ideas (like legitimation, or ideal types, or even rationalization), and they don't cite him anywhere so I don't see how one can avoid the conclusion that they don't know shit about him. It's this 'blinders on' specialization, while claiming to make valid generalizations, that I object to. It's not merely because it offends some vague sense of propriety, but because it's dangerous, reckless, and irresponsible. In short, it's an abuse of power. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 02:26:42 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Jim and NDYW Subject: Oh dear! Message: Jim and NDYW: I have spent the last five years in a discipline where it is not cool to just regurgitate whatever you think about something of importance without reading what others have said before you and making some reference to that research. Either they have never read Marx, or they've read him, disguised his work, and passed it off as their own. I can see the gleam in their eyes as, after having found this shortcut through the woods that Marx found in the 1830s and 40s, they say to themselves, 'We know the KEY that unlocks the secret of domination! We can solve ALL the world's problems! We'll be famous!' This is precisely WHY it is important to pay attention to what others have done. Now, I'm not knocking their work on guru/disciple relationships. It is very possible that they went through the same process as the young Marx, when he began to think about the role of religions. But had they read Max Weber (who challenged many of Marx's assumptions) they'd have known that there is a lot more to the story of authoritarianism than alienation (or lack of self-trust). It is not effete intellectualism. It's responsibility. According to scientific method one is not 'allowed' to generalize from a single set of social circumstances to society at large, precisely because of the consequences of making a mistake. Marx's little mistake led to Stalin. Kramer and Alstad have been working on a vastly magnified theory of social control which they plan to append to this volume, so there is definitely a larger agenda. They play VERY fast and loose with their generalizations. For instance: They state clearly that they believe that anything coming out of an authoritarian social structure must be tainted by that flaw. Why? How does any organization, culture, society start from anything other than an authoritarian base? Had they read Weber, or had they even bothered to look up 'legitimation' in the dictionary of sociology, they'd have seen that their assumption was false. I don't see how you can believe that someone could say something profound about authority without some sort of reference to Weber, even if you disagree with him? If you don't insist on at least this level of responsibility from your intellectual community what insurance have you against THEIR tyranny? I am just amazed that you are willing to let them get away this, merely because they diagnosed YOUR situation accurately. Didn't Maharaji win your trust in precisely this way? The American Revolution had lofty principles, and a Constitution with the potential to change the relationship between power and citizens, but it would not have succeeded had it not been for the role of Washington. Make no mistake, Washington was an authoritarian who voluntarily stepped down. There is no way around this dilemma. Rulers must rule. 'Citizens' are critical, but there must be a balance, and you don't get off the hook by saying that Washington represents 'authority' but not 'authoritarianism.' All power relations are two way. This is even the case for absolute monarchs and dictators. But you can't have a situation where leaders operate at the whim of those they rule. Tocqueville called this 'tyranny' as well, for good reason. If you don't know about Weber then that's one thing. For Kramer and Alstad not to know about him is quite another. (NDYW, if they don't mention any of his ideas, and they don't cite him anywhere, one has to assume they haven't read him, and don't know about him.) It is my role to point this out to you. You can ignore it if you like. I won't bring it up again. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 03:57:19 (EST)
From: Judex Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Oh dear! Message: Scott you have made some excellent points about responsibility. I don't see the point of attacking the way you say something, either. To belittle you in order to attack your point is authoritarian, to me. I also agree that it's not as simple as I said. It never is. It was just one point and there must be about a million. Like with everything. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 04:21:29 (EST)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Judex Subject: Oh dear! Message: And the point about gurus encouraging and creating a lack of self trust is a VERY valid point. Maharaji has done this all along. He has continually belittled people's ability to think for themselves. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 04:42:49 (EST)
From: Judex Email: None To: Sir David Subject: Oh dear! Message: Yes, certainly. He says 'trust what's inside of you' but it takes him saying, trust it. He makes sure of that. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 09:25:13 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Sir David Subject: Oh dear! Message: David: And the point about gurus encouraging and creating a lack of self trust is a VERY valid point. Maharaji has done this all along. He has continually belittled people's ability to think for themselves. I agree completely. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 09:23:23 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Judex Subject: Oh dear! Message: Judex: Thanks for the support. I think that in the case of the guru/disciple relationship it is almost as simple as you said. I also think that the theory of alienation is an aspect of Marx that has a great deal of validity. He's not a popular guy right now, but some people are re-considering his earlier work, before he went off the deep end with it. Anyway, I half expected the reaction I got. It's a good example of how any of us can be beguiled by an ideology. Kramer and Alstad are attempting to make a contribution, by bringing in ideas from psychology and applying them to social relationships in the large. But they are also, perhaps unwittingly, weaving an ideology. (Or at least helping to do that.) It's important to insist that they put all their cards on the table. They also begin to use the Marxist concept of 'primitive accumulation' on page 13, which they refer to as 'agricultural accumulation.' They didn't even bother to change the name significantly. The fact that they seem so familiar with these concepts suggests to me the possibility that they have been plagiarized. Either that or they have been impacted subconsciously by some people in their social environment, and they are not even aware of the fact. Incidentally, Heidi and Alvin Toffler are Marxists. They have been for a long time, and are somewhat uncomfortable with the attention paid to them by Gingrich. He showers them with praise, which they accept and appreciate, but are somewhat ambivalent about the fact that he doesn't seem to know 'from whence they came.' Or maybe he does? Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 13:28:56 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Scott, Please Calm Down Message: Scott, with all due respect,,,,,,,I think you might be thinking The Guru Papers are supposed to be something they aren't. Alstad has a Phd from Yale and has taught in the humanities for years. So, your suggestion that she, at least, hasn't read Marx and Weber is just plain silly. I mean, I read Marx in high school and Weber in college as an undergraduate. They are hardly obscure. Now, I know you are an academic, so you might be like other academics I know, like my sister, who think the backs of cereal boxes should be footnoted, but that isn't what Kramer and Alstad are about, and they state that clearly in their introduction, specifically on page xix: 'This work presents a point of view and ideas that we want to stand or fall on their own merit. Though over the years we have examined many other viewpoints, this is not a work of research or scholarship, and it does not use references to other people to bloster its perspectives. Our major concern is clarity--namely, that anyone who cares to follow the train of thought will understand it, whether in agreement or not. The goal is to appeal as much as possible to people's firsthand experience and reasonableness. We do this to be aligned with the spirit of the book, which we hope will foster self-trust as a foundation for living.' Now, you might think that they should have written a different book, but don't they said plainly what they are doing so I don't think it's fair to assume they are ignorant of other opinions, just because the names aren't mentioned. So, I think it's fine if you want to disagree with their viewpoints, and I think that's why they wrote the book, as an ongoing discussion of these issues. Frankly, I don't agree with everything in the book either. I do think that their explanation of the guru/devotee relationship is right on, certainly in line with my own experience, and what's so great about their book is that they put into words, so clearly and completely, what I have seen myself, but never could really articulate because I was too close to it. Since their goal is clearly stated to appeal to 'people's first-hand experiences' I think they succeeded, at least they did for me. So, I think your criticisms are kind of out of line. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 15:10:39 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: JW Subject: Better happy than right. Message: Joe: I read that statement in the intro and simply decided that it made no difference. I started to see the Marxist outline and my alarm bells went off, and I ceased to trust their objectivity. I then started to look for any references to Marx, and found almost none. They do seem to ignore some really basic objections to their own explanation of things, and they are clearly not proposing an analysis of guru/disciple relationships only. In fact, I would say that their hidden agenda is to establish a point of view that is almost religious, in the same sense that Marxism became a 'secular religion.' Another pattern I've noticed is that they seem to feel that paying lip service to a point of view is the same as dealing with it. They are awfully gabby about the difference between authority and authoritarianism. Why are they so gabby? Is there something missing? Perhaps they have read Marx and Weber, but not understood Weber? Maybe they intend to make a complete break with the traditions in this area of discourse. But why should I automatically go along with that, given their larger agenda? I should point out that it is extremely tedious to have to deal rigorously with Weber, Habermas, Foucault, Piaget, Arendt, Dewey, Peirce, et al. It is a damned nuisance. But they utilize the kudos of academe without any of the restrictions? Where is that? Perhaps I've become elitist as a result of 'crosspressure' (a Marxist concept). It's a possibility. The irony is that I'm sympathetic to their intent, and am somewhat disappointed to see it inadequately defended. I had hoped for instance, that they could tell us how to create more democratic labor unions like the International Typographical Union, or how to reform the Teamsters. Alas, I don't think they can. I might be wrong, but they don't seem to understand the problem in any depth, thinking that it all has to do with a simple change in attitudes. I have a problem with their justification that they want to appeal to first-hand knowledge. There are a lot of academics who would like to be free of the restrictions of those disciplines. It would allow them to say whatever the fuck they want to, without the necessity of providing an elaborate defense, and especially a peer review. They could then build a following. I think this is what Da Free John has done. It is also what Robert Blye has done with the 'men's movement.' Much as I like Blye and his entourage I think we pay too much attention to him. I don't know of any of my colleagues who would think that an appeal to 'first-hand knowledge' is sufficient justification to simply set sail on their own, using concepts borrowed from others and adapted more or less subjectively. It hides too much. But maybe I'm wrong. Oh well, if you don't take a stand you may never learn anything. It is entirely appropriate to demand that they make some statement about the derivation of their terms and concepts in the interest of being 'transparent' if they intend to say something fundamentally relevant about power and society. At that point they may go ahead and use the terms without citations. They need not be as rigorously pedantic as Habermas, which would probably make them all but unintelligible. But not making such a statement is, in my opinion at least, tantamount to taking advantage of their audience (no matter what their justification). I submit that they know this already, and have avoided responsibility. The money and license are tremendous incentives. So, my advice is to read them as providing an explanation for domination in the Guru/Disciple relationship, and be prepared to ignore what they say about the larger society. Their justifications, and license for making those extended arguments are not valid for me. Nevertheless, in the midst of all this ink they might have an important idea, not thought of by anyone so far. Maybe it is important to be free of academic restraints in order to give such an idea room to breath. It is difficult, but I will reserve judgment on that score until I've finished the book and have had an opportunity to discuss them with my peers (you guys). First-hand knowledge certainly deserves a say (he said reluctantly). Better to be happy than right. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 17:17:52 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Better happy than right. Message: I don't disagree, Scott, but that ISN'T the point you were making earlier that I said was unfair. I agree, read the book and disagree with any part of it you want. I just disagree with your earlier dishing of the book because it didn't contain references. But maybe you read the introduction after you wrote that. Who said the book is objective? Certainly it has a point of view which the authors freely admit.d. And that's why the introduction DOES make a difference. I think they are presenting a theory. And people who read the book are testing it with their own experiences. I think you believe they should have written a different book. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 17:27:59 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: JW Subject: And Further. Message: The introduction is also important because the authors state that the work is not one of scholarly research. Indeed, if that were the case and it contained all the references you say are important and book would be 1000 pages long and no one would read it, not only because of the length, but because of having to wade through thousands of references and footnotes. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 17:43:34 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: JW Subject: And on anand... Message: Joe: Well, here's the thing. Making the caveat that they are writing the book as an appeal to first hand knowledge is valid as long as they stay in the realm where we HAVE first hand knowledge. Clearly, we have such knowledge in the area of master/disciple relationships. Most people, you and I included, do not have first hand knowledge of the establishment of new cultural, social, or political paradigms, which is by definition a theoretical work. That IS what they're up to. I don't think it's particularly relevant to say that this is not a work of academic scholarship. So what? It IS a work that's concerned with the theory of society, and the power relations within it. They seem to make some good points, BTW, but it's a bit underhanded to use the 'first hand knowledge' justification for taking short-cuts. As I said, what they need is an opening chapter where they discuss their 'priors.' That's just being honest. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 23:23:12 (EST)
From: Peter Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: academic objectivity?? Message: Scott, You seem to have a lot of faith in the objectivity of academia and how much better/stronger that process is than just throwing a set of ideas out into the popular arena (as with The Guru Papers). I don't. In my experience, any area in which theories are not readily testable tend to be dominated by the most vocal, strident, and egotistical academics. Someone mentioned earlier how if two ideas are equally plausible, the simpler one is preferable. This rule is usually reversed in academia. I do believe that academics have helped us as a society slowly move toward truth and understanding. I'm just not sure that the contribution is any greater than that of 'popular' authors. That doesn't mean that popular authors shouldn't try to be clear and honest. Just that if they do what it takes to satisfy you that they've been clear and honest, they may put me to sleep. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 11:21:45 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Peter Subject: academic objectivity?? Message: Peter: I agree that a lot of academe is pretty biased, especially in sociology departments which are heavily dominated by the left. But, would you call Tocqueville 'popular,' I wonder? Or Jefferson? I also think that public policy researchers make a stab at objectivity, as part of their professional elan. The French have a term for the sort of irresponsible popular pseudo-intellectual. They call them 'video intellectuals.' I think you know the type. They have an ax to grind, which they hide behind their back. There is a type of responsible intellectual who also dialogues on a popular level. Walter Lippman is an example that comes to mind. But the Lippmans are now few and far between, partly because intellectualism in this country does not enjoy sufficiently high esteem that people are willing to clean it up. It is a viscous cycle. Perhaps people are afraid and intimidated to boot. This suggests to me that we might be in need of some internal reform, as a community. Max Weber had an interesting maxim regarding how one ought to approach research. If you conduct a piece of research, or a theoretical analysis, and the results confirm what you believed prior to the undertaking... do it again, because it's probably wrong. If it disconfirms your beliefs you're probably right on the money. It might be useful for academe to apply that maxim from time to time. It might raise their credibility, and make them more acceptable in the 'popular' arena. As I think you know, a have a close colleague who writes popular books that are also objective and responsibly footnoted. Some examples include: Jews and the New American Scene, Union Democracy, The First New Nation, Continental Divide, American Exceptionalism: A Double-Edged Sword, and Political Man. You might disagree with him, but he gives you handholds if you want to take him to task. He doesn't talk down to his audience, nor does he hide his ax behind his back. I have a certain model of the socially responsible intellectual, and Kramer and Alstad don't seem to meet that standard. I may have changed my mind by the time I finish the book, but right now I'm skeptical. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 13:07:23 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: academic objectivity?? Message: Max Weber had an interesting maxim regarding how one ought to approach research. If you conduct a piece of research, or a theoretical analysis, and the results confirm what you believed prior to the undertaking... do it again, because it's probably wrong. If it disconfirms your beliefs you're probably right on the money. It might be useful for academe to apply that maxim from time to time. It might raise their credibility, and make them more acceptable in the 'popular' arena. Scott, This doesn't ring true with me at all. Not a bit. Why does it appeal to you? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 18:31:07 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Jim Subject: academic objectivity?? Message: Jim: This doesn't ring true with me at all. Not a bit. Why does it appeal to you? If you think about it, what the maxim basically says is that we are NOT objective, and probably can't be. So, be suspicious if something works out the way you thought it should. You may have influenced the conditions so that it turned out that way. Try it another way and see if you get the same result. I have some problems with the second part of the maxim too. But, at least you know that YOU didn't influence the conditions. In that sense the result is objective. If you are also confident that your method was kosher it ought to be more acceptable. Perhaps you are not familiar with the phenomenon of otherwise-excellent researchers unwittingly influencing their results. There is no magic wand that insures rational objectivity. We are all influenced by our ideology and beliefs. PLUS, if Weber said it, it MUST be true. What's the matter with you? -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 13:34:33 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: And on anand... Message: Most people, you and I included, do not have first hand knowledge of the establishment of new cultural, social, or political paradigms, which is by definition a theoretical work. That IS what they're up to. I don't think it's particularly relevant to say that this is not a work of academic scholarship. So what? It IS a work that's concerned with the theory of society, and the power relations within it. Well, Scott, I couldn't disagree more. I think people do have first-hand knowledge of living in authoritarian systems of all varieties, and I don't agree that taking the authoritarian guru/disciple relationship and using that theory as a basis to discuss other authoritarian systems is 'by definition theoretical' for that very reason. We ALL have personal experiences living in such systems and I think it's completely fair for Kramer and Alstad to make that theory, although many, including me, will not agree with all of it. I don't think a discussion of 'priors' is necessary or even relevent to what they are doing, especially because they explain clearly why they don't. Moreoever, I don't think the 'priors' would add anything to the book, except maybe some confusion, or give it the look of pseudo-social-reasearch, when it clearly isn't. It would also make it less likely the book would be read. See, I think they are breaking new ground on the authoritarin theory. I came away from it seeing that the guru/disciple relationship has characteristics that exist in all authoritarian systems. Now, I don't therefore conclude that all authoritarian systems are bad, but I do think they do a great job pointing out the negative points and provide a viable way to view those systems that I think adds a lot to the discussion. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 15:09:32 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: JW Subject: And on anand... Message: Yeah, Scott, and Richard Dawkins can kick Gould's big fat ass out of the ballpark. So there. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 09:42:42 (EST)
From: Katie Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Some thought about Guru Papers Message: Hi Scott - I knew you'd have a LOT to say about the Guru Papers. I forgot that they didn't use citations, though! I can see both sides of the question here - I also work in an academic discipline and understand the need for citations. BUT, I don't, like Scott, work in a discipline that is related to that of the authors of the Guru Papers, so their lack of citations didn't bother me that much. In Scott's defense, I would have to say that if he wrote an article without citations (like one of the Guru Papers chapter) and tried to submit it to any peer-referreed journal, he would get slammed, and accused of ignorance, plagiarism or worse. Scott, you probably already know this, but I think it's important to recognize that the Guru Papers, despite their lack of citations, have helped many of the people who post on this site, and probably many other people as well. I actually found the second half of the book, especially the part on 12-Step groups, to be the most helpful to me. Of course, I don't agree with everything they said, but they provided what you might call a 'second opinion' for me on issues where my thinking was fairly rigid. This resulted in my becoming more open-minded, which was all to the good. Just my thoughts, Katie Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 09:58:16 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Katie Subject: Some thoughts... Message: Katie: Thanks for pointing out the restrictions with which an academic has to cope. Usually those restrictions are not as rigid if you publish for the popular press, and I would not hold Kramer and Alstad to such rigid standards. But not mentioning Weber is like talking about great American presidents without mentioning JFK or FDR. It is a glaring omission. As I said, I think they are probably valid in dealing with the dynamics of guru/disciple relationships, where psychology is an almost exclusive mode of control. I think Marx's early work on religions led him to the same conclusion. I just think it's important, when reading something like the Guru Papers, to be aware of their basic framework. That would give you the ability to see where they depart significantly from traditional Marxism, for instance. They appear to allow hierarchies for example. They pay them a lot of lip service. However, I don't see how the basic conclusions about social dynamics would actually allow anything like an effective hierarchy to exist. Bucky Fuller was opposed to hierarchies, on non-Marxist grounds. That's what 'No More Second-Hand God' is about. I hope I'm still open to arguments in that area. I just insist that they be above-board, or at least that they not omit Oxygen from the periodic table. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 10:20:48 (EST)
From: Katie Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Some thoughts... Message: Hi Scott - I think you should write to the authors and see what they have to say about this (I have read an interview with them, and Diana Alstad seems to be a very receptive person, even though the interviewer was very biased against both of them). Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 10:35:36 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Katie Subject: Some thoughts... Message: Katie: I might do that. First, however, I owe it to the authors to at least finish reading their book. They give an overall view of where they're taking this argument in the introduction and the first chapter, so I think my comments are a valid criticism. I've checked the book for references, and haven't found many. They also don't mention Hannah Arendt, who wrote 'Origins of Totalitarianism,' and is fairly prominent in this field. They don't mention Kohlberg, who is often used by Habermas when he tries to bring psychology into the study of sociology and social philosophy. They also don't mention Piaget, who wrote a lot about power and paradigm shifts. They mention Marx, but only in the context of talking about communism. Basically, the only people they cite are themselves. It would make a good joke to open a seminar on authoritarianism. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Jun 22, 1998 at 00:01:43 (EST)
From: VP Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Fundamentalism vs. Revisionism Message: Scott, I understand your point. I don't think it only applies to the publishing world. I was taking a painting class and the professor told me that my work reminded him of Kandinsky. He had a fit, because I didn't know who Kandinsky was at that time. I was read the riot act and completely embarrassed. I thought that he should have been glad that I wasn't intentionally ripping the guy off. Anyway, I thought that I had created these images and this style myself, and I did. This was to my credit; however, the style was not original. Someone thought of it before I did. I should have been informed about this person because he was a famous painter. If I wanted to be an artist, creating original images, it is important for me to know what came before. I assume it is the same for theorists. Saw some pottery recently that was in the style of Palissy (Majolica with raised animal images). The guy who manufactured it was furious when I mentioned the similarity to him. He was obviously ripping something off and didn't like my knowing about it. I'm pretty sure that Kramer and Alstad aren't trying to rip anyone's ideas off, but I don't think a brief statement of who they based their work on (if anyone)would have detracted from the work. (Check out THAT syntax) I do think that they have some good original ideas (provided that they don't belong to Weber, who I have not read, sorry.) I would be curious about what you (and others) think about the fundamentalism vs. revisionism portion of the book. This is the part that I had the hardest time accepting. I guess that is because I was thinking of Christianity while I was reading it. I have a HARD time accepting Christian fundamentalist thinking. Kramer and Alstad state that the fundamentalist position make more sense than does that of the the revisionists. (This premise make more sense to me when I apply it to DLM-fundmentalist vs EV-revsionist, though.) Let me know your take if you have time. VP Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 17:25:07 (EST)
From: Stephen Harris Email: mulcyber@pacbell.net To: Katie Subject: Some thought about Guru Papers Message: I suppose I will have to read The Guru Papers just for chapter 12 Any particular group probably violates the 12 Traditions. Part of their purpose is to prevent heirarchies from forming which I noticed was involved with authoritarian practices. 'Principles before personalities' is not always practiced so their are always problems so coming up with organizations, spirtual or not. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 19:25:09 (EST)
From: Katie Email: None To: Stephen Harris Subject: Guru Papers and 12 Steps Message: Dear Stephen - Regarding hierachies: I think it's almost impossible to keep hierarchies from forming in ANY group - AA or whatever. It's a noble goal but people are human, after all. It is good to at least try to make the effort not to do it (as in the 12 Traditions). I did like the 12-Step chapter in 'Guru Papers' very much. They are relatively respectful of AA, unlike some other authors, but they don't agree with the underlying premises (or what they think to be the underlying premise.) I think you would find it interesting. Regards from Katie Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 21:54:40 (EST)
From: Stephen Harris Email: mulcyber@pacbell.net To: Katie Subject: Guru Papers and 12 Steps Message: Good. I got my response from Katie. I can take my nap now. :-) And rest in peace. I will check to see if the library has it. I still need to pick up Last Call. Bye Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Jun 22, 1998 at 00:25:32 (EST)
From: Judex Email: None To: Katie Subject: Hierarchies Message: just to add to this discussion a tiny bit - there was a job advertised in our local paper the other day which described the company as 'non-hierarchical'. Is that another sign of the changing times? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 22:07:51 (EST)
From: VP Email: None To: Joy Subject: I saw that video, Iola Message: Joy, I agree with you that the videos now could appeal to someone who has a lack of self esteem. In one I recently watched-an introductory (Santa Monica public event), BM is talking about how there is a whole world out there but how we get into our own 'little reality' of ' what YOU have to do, what YOU have to accomplish.' The way he says it is so condescending. Basically he is just describing us as NOTHING. I really took issue with it. I was pretty offended by the smug attitude. I think if someone watching it thought, 'yeah, my life isn't shit! He's right--I mean nothing.' then maybe his message would really appeal to that person. I personally value my life a lot more than that. I'm glad that you value yours more too, Joy. I wonder if the message was the same sort of condescending stuff back in the DLM days. Did he talk to you premies like that then? Everything I ever heard was very carefully monitored (except for the listening when I was sneaking around which I don't remember very well). I mostly remember that he was the perfect master and that he was going to bring peace to the world. Was he always making fun of everyone's life, experience, existance? If I had heard that kind of stuff, I doubt I would have been that interested. Watching these videos has been so enlightening. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 19:15:48 (EST)
From: Mirabai Email: None To: Iola Subject: To Iola from Mirabai Message: To Iola, I'm just letting you know that I wrote a post for you under your thread Devotion just incase you missed it. regards mirabai Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 12:41:18 (EST)
From: Jean-Michel Email: jmkahn@hol.fr To: Everyone Subject: Shri Maharaji was right! Message: 'A greedy guru and his envious disciple compete with each other for a place in the circles of hell.' (From Hans Yog Prakash, page 8) The transcript is almost over. Please register NOW for your free email copy! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Jun 22, 1998 at 04:32:27 (EST)
From: bb Email: None To: Jean-Michel Subject: Shri Maharaji was right! Message: Hi JM! I have a copy already but thanks for the offer. Jean-Michel the great. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 12:30:39 (EST)
From: RT Email: broke To: Everyone, Katie, Judex Subject: RT sings One Foundation :) Message: -Been There, Pun That- 1980’s followers will recognize this Sat-song by Done Foundation. The Downsize of the Holy Fame What was divine is becoming devoid Due to desires of Balyog-eschwoid. With the downsize of his Holy Fame, Traditional instructions began to wane Began to wane, began to wane (The profit speaks. Ain’t it a shame?) With the Downsize of the Holy Fame Traditional instructions were bent for gain. Maharaji has new inner plants: To place himself within aspirants! Now 3rd technique - see Master swing Long term goal: makes the cash box a-ring cash box a-ring, cash bucks a-bring (A donation thing, what would Kabir sing?) 3rd technique: He’s The Inner Dude Inflating the Knowledge for Self-Gain is Crude. Problems of berthing a plane disappear When the longing for Holy Fame appears Buy Sat Guru! I saw the line Of products designed with my heart in mind. My heart in mind, my heart in mind (VISA is fine sir, just sign on the line) Buy the Visions’ ™ Products Divine Made in America by Devoted Mind. Speaking from our hearts, yes, was the way Hours of meetings, sharing the way. Video intros now have a script Natural intelligence? Out - has been stripped Has-been a-stripped, has-been a-stripped (Brainwashed from dozens of video clips) Why are programs are cancelled today? The Premies Play Dumb with Little to Say. Parents who want their kids in this “heaven Can start brainwashing them 1 year after seven. 'Twas, “Eighteen years - and you’ll meditate But the early years he’ll indoctrinate Indoctrin-eight, Indoctrin-eight (Destiny or fate, please don’t Master-Bait!) Parents who want their kids in this “heaven Can start the brainwash just after seven. Visions ™ sells CD’s, ties, calendars- Products designed for Cult Souvenirs. The older devotees are all cast in stone When he does a dance what mind left is blown. mind left is blown, mind right is blown, (both sides are blown, when bare feet are shown) The older devotees are all set - in stone, Thousands go nuts when he dances alone. His Instructors offer the chance Of VISA deductions for Amaroo Ranch. Buy Sat Guru! Buy Aussie land Fly me for hours, give sunburned anand. Sunburned anand, sunburned anand (He walked on This Sand - 12 ounces, a grand) Sat-Amaroo has bought Premie land Fly 18 hours, and in line you’ll stand. This master speaks truths and distortions are free: Love God in your heart BUT devote to me. “Give me your love and I’ll give you Peace -He said years ago. Know Truth, with a leash! Truth with a leash, Truth with a leash, (The Palms of the Guru must always be greased) Meditation is nice over time, But devotion’s an option. So, we can resign. With the Downsize of the Holy Fame, The Resigned Lovers began to Arraign.. Dedicated to Ex-premie.org -RT Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 13:01:26 (EST)
From: Al Email: None To: RT Subject: RT sings One Foundation :) Message: Make a recording and play it loud outside programs as premie's enter...loud enough for M to hear as he drives up in one of his many luxury cars. Thank you! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 13:13:35 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: RT Subject: Better all the time Message: Hey RT, I really dig this one. Very clever. Now all you have to do is get in a studio that has the gear to eliminate original vocal tracks (yes, they can do that) and voila! Really, you should think about doing that. Take a couple of your best and put them out. I'd buy one. JW, I'm sure, would buy a case. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 14:12:08 (EST)
From: RT Email: ommmm To: Jim Subject: Thanks Message: Record? oh no - you don't mean.... DEVOTEE KAROKE? Let's wait till one foundation people drop out. I'll supply the lyrics, you draw up the contract, Jim. RT Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 13:53:58 (EST)
From: Iola Email: None To: RT Subject: RT sings One Foundation :) Message: As a new devotional song sings: THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. FROM THE BOTTOM OF MY HEART I SING, THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING. (in the song I mean). Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 11:03:09 (EST)
From: Jethro Email: cadbury@compuserve.com To: Everyone Subject: off topic---my visit to LA Message: I am coming to LA at the end of July for about 10 days with my 10 year old daughter. It would be great to meet up with some of you especially if you have kids around her age. If anyone's inetersted in meeting up or could suggest some activities I'd like to hear from you(no soul-saving premies please). If possible email me privately. Thanks Jethro Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 00:55:16 (EST)
From: Keith Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Just a hi ! Message: Just a short hello to you all . I feel I'll have some fresh perspectives to share in a month or two. Time away can recharge and refreshen the batteries. Keith Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 08:48:55 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs@hotmail.com To: Keith Subject: Just a hi ! Message: Dear Keith, Hello, you and Mirabai have been in my thoughts. I know you are both well and look forward to your return. Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 00:31:51 (EST)
From: imobm, formerly known as Email: None To: Everyone Subject: name change Message: It has been brought to my attention that 'me' is a difficult name to use here...so in memory of Bob Mishler, I will use those initials, not to be confulsed with bowel movement, the name Maharaji is so affectionately referred to on this forum. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 01:04:07 (EST)
From: MT Email: None To: imobm Subject: name change Message: Well then, If we're changing names, I think I'll be Mother Teresa. On second thought, that could be really confusing when I bring up my addiction to sex. Nevermind. eb Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 02:22:38 (EST)
From: Al Email: None To: MT Subject: name change Message: Okay, as I said in my post below, this is the last name change...I'm Al and won't change it again. I figure you all appreciate a simple name. I know you all understand because I'm in my mind, lost and a jackass...just the words you want to hear from your master. That is, if you are a slave. Freedom I cry, freedom! Braveheart, I mean Al, damn. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 08:54:26 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundgos@hotmail.com To: Al Subject: name change Message: Dear Al, This almost puts my in mind of that Paul Simon song except that I can't remember it! :( With Chevy Chase in the video. It's a good name. Robyn eb, How about Madonna, that way you could be spiritual when you wanted and overly sexual also and everyone would understand. The perfect name for your needs I suspect. :) Love, Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 22:10:44 (EST)
From: me Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Participation Meeting Video Message: Just finished viewing September 3rd 1997 Amaroo Participation Meeting of M speaking to people who have received Knowledge. In 25 minutes he tries to do what he's done in every service meeting which is to get Premies not to be ruled by their MIND. And here is a quote: Mind, it always wants to be in control. By the grace and kindness of the Master, he shows that they don't have to be living in its rule. There it is again...mind and heart. And this duality is suppose to be a healthy and sane way to live! He also describes how premies doing service can look like Jackasses (quote unquote) because they are in their mind. He was so charming when he describes this that they all laughed. The whole video he complained, the way he always has, about how service is screwed up but he does it in a gentle way. Or should I say, manipulative. On the invites maybe it should also be mentioned that when you receive Knowledge you will be dependent on Maharaji's grace and kindness to save you from this thing he calls mind. That way if you are confused and doubtful about him you can pray. Might as well tell it like it is. Of course, public isn't suppose to watch this video. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 23:50:54 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: me Subject: Participation Meeting Video Message: Me, Is there any way to have that video copied and made available to others. I, for one, would really like to see it and would be happy to reimbuse any costs. Since I have received knowledge, I guess it's okay for me to see it. Again, though, can you explain what 'participation meetings' are? Does he say WHY or specifically HOW 'service is screwed up?' What is he complaining about, anyway? How are things supposed to be different? And since it's all due to his grace, isn't his own damn fault anyway? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 00:13:51 (EST)
From: Katie Email: None To: JW and me Subject: Participation Meeting Video Message: Isn't this the video that EV had the 'recall' out on? Does anyone know? I think it is, unless this is the new and improved (edited) version. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 00:18:02 (EST)
From: Katie Email: None To: me & all Subject: Participation Meeting Video Message: Here's a quote from an EV brochure that Brian has on the web site: 'As you have been informed recently, the video titled ‘Amaroo Participation Meeting’ (item # 663) that was released in November has been recalled. If you have not mailed it yet, please return it to Visions immediately and upon receipt the revised version will be mailed to you.' Wonder which version you have, Me? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 00:25:00 (EST)
From: me Email: None To: Katie Subject: Participation Meeting Video Message: Perhaps, but definately the edited version. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 00:22:36 (EST)
From: me Email: None To: JW Subject: Participation Meeting Video Message: Participation is THE accepted word instead of calling it a service meeting...another swithero with the language to make it all kosher so newbies don't feel they are being a dog serving it's master but only participating, so sweet and innocent isn't it? The Amaroo program or EVENT as premies are insturcted to call it, another less offesive word...I mean heaven forbid anyone should gather that they are being programmed when they attend a program! Where was I, that day in Amaroo M was there in response to the usual problems that occur when programs are being prepared...and he started off saying he didn't want to hurt anyone's feelings BUT and then while the participants or people who had been doing service sat mesmerized, oohhing that he was so sweet not to want to hurt their feelings he proceeded to slam them in the nicest way. Even the Jackass story was in the kindest tone. But bottom line throughout was the craziness of mind and not to allow that to happen. It's no wonder that premies can't accept anything negative said about M when they believe this stuff. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 00:38:38 (EST)
From: JW Email: joger02@aol.com To: me Subject: Participation Meeting Video Message: Me, Very interesting, but I was wondering if BM said what he thought SPECIFICALLY went wrong. I mean, did the toilets explode? Wasn't his residence luxurioius enough? Did it have gold plumbing fixtures of inadequate luster? Did he stub his lotus foot on something? What? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 02:15:28 (EST)
From: imobm...maybe just Al Email: None To: JW Subject: Amaroo Part 2 Message: Okay, I get what you mean now. Well he basically covered the age old compliant of service not flowing in a way that meant things were actually getting done in an orderly manner. Never giving specifics, maybe that was edited, but continualy harping on the issue of how this gets started and then that and then never getting everything done on time, which is always a BIG deal to M whose programs have to start to the second when he intends them to. He did talk about how ego and power struggles occur in service because people aren't experiencing Knowledge but are in their minds..I agree with you, how can this be when it's his so-called grace that prevents it in the first place? Also, I forgot another important part of the video when he tells the story of how a premie recently wrote about how he finally attended a program after not having seen M in ages and not practising Knowledge either. He demonstrated, with that stunned look he gets, how this person looked in disbelief at M and asked repeatedly Where have I been...and then M talked about how lost he'd been. So, besides being in our minds, acting like Jackasses, (no doubt he talks of us in that fashion if he can refer to his beloved service people looking like that), we are also lost! Sheep get lost not those who think for themselves. I'll sign this: Al.... and I promise no more name changes! Imobm is just too hard to type Al is simple. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 09:05:26 (EST)
From: Katie Email: None To: imobm...maybe just Al Subject: Al is good Message: Thanks for the name change. I was having a real hard time phrasing sentences to 'me' without sounding like I was talking in an obscure dialect! regards from Katie Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 20:43:50 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: imobm...maybe just Al Subject: Al, a question Message: Al: I was recently told by an ex who posts only rarely that M has specific instructions to not look at this site. Do you know anything about that? Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 20:57:45 (EST)
From: me Email: None To: everyone Subject: Of interest to premies Message: In Bob Mishler's interview, he explains how to talk to premies... ================================================================== What I would usually try and tell them was to try and keep some respect for the individual's experience and for their faith in their beliefs. If the family member suddenly challenes that, and says: How could you believe such a stupid thing?, it reflects on the individual as if to deny their experience altogether. These people really do have an experience. They may be mistaken in attributing whatever inner spiritual peace they find within themselves to the Guru. In fact, he really doesn't have anything to do with it, but they are sincere in placing their faith in him. We must try to help them see that the Guru really isn't responsible for whatever positive benefits they are deriving from their belief, and that therefore they shouldn't continue to allow their lives to be dominated by subservience to the Guru. ================================================================== Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 08:08:48 (EST)
From: red heels Email: None To: me Subject: Of interest to premies Message: it was a well known fact that Bob Mishler rarely if ever practiced Knowledge (back then called meditation). how could he possibly know what experience the premies were having, when he was not having it himself? he couldn't. all he knew what what he thought in his head. on the inner experience side of things, the boy was bankrupt. i think it's real cute how the 'ex-premies' here love to roll and slop in Maharaji's mud. even they are attached to Maharaji. so attached in fact they think of him every day, love to talk about him, maybe even try to send him messages. such is the attraction of the Perfect Master, I guess. he is a magnet and even those who claim to hate him are drawn to him. fascinating. loving him is even better. way better. :) :) :) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 08:59:29 (EST)
From: John Hammond-Smyth Email: padded.cell@asylum.com To: red heels Subject: Of interest to premies Message: Thanks for your deep and insightful insight my dear transvestite brother. If you like wearing womens clothes to destroy your male ego, good for you! There a quite a few like you in here. Your knowledge of Bob Mishler's experience or non experience in meditation is most welcome. How well did you know Bob? Were you a close friend or associate of his? You have a VERY deep insight into other people's experiences which of course, has come by Maharaji's grace. It is obvious to me that everything I have ever experienced from doing meditation is due to Maharaji, who is the omnipresent Lord. Only a fool would think otherwise. As our Lord once said, 'Common sense is uncommon.' Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 13:04:22 (EST)
From: red heels Email: None To: John Hammond-Smyth Subject: Of interest to premies Message: so you think I'm a transvestite? that's fun. yes, i knew bob personally in the ashram and 'after' and also had a discussions with him and lived in the house with him a while. when he was there. he was gone a lot. no one but the one who aspires to experience this Knowledge can experience it. oh, what a mean, mean Master, eh? we only get the goodies when we are sincere. for those people, they get everything and more. i believe those who have left that understanding, their hearts cry in a very lonely place deep within, covered in the muck of doubts, judgments and criticisms. bob was at a party in some islands (can't remember which islands) and was having heart trouble at the party. they called in a helicopter to rush him and his pregnant wife to a hospital. the copter crashed and none survived. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 13:56:30 (EST)
From: John Hammond-Smyth Email: padded.cell@asylum.com To: red heels Subject: Of interest to premies Message: Well said brother! By the way, regarding Bob Mishler's helecopter accident, it was implied at the time that this was by the wrath of Maharaji. I can see that you are in some agreement here. Oh yes, which doctor did your lobotomy? He did a great job. I bet the scars don't even show. Perhaps he can do mine too. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 00:50:02 (EST)
From: red heels Email: None To: John Hammond-Smyth Subject: Of interest to premies Message: hehehe now i am a transvestite with a lobotomy? hehehe you all are real cards!! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 00:54:57 (EST)
From: red heels Email: None To: J H Smyth Subject: Of interest to premies Message: and no, i didn't mean to imply that bob's accident was the wrath of Maharaji. i really don't believe that. i actually mentioned it because i had recently read an old thread in the archives where someone asked what happened to bob and asked for anyone who knew to please clarify. so, since i was on the topic of bob, just seemed like a good time to give that otherwise not very important information. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 13:12:03 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: red heels Subject: Of interest to premies Message: and no, i didn't mean to imply that bob's accident was the wrath of Maharaji. i really don't believe that. How do you reconcile this disbelief with Maharaji's claim that 'not a leaf blows [or 'falls' or something] with [his] grace'? Where does omnipotence and omniscience fit in these days for the modern, busy Supreme Lord in Human form? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 08:59:50 (EST)
From: Katie Email: None To: red heels Subject: Of interest to premies Message: Red Heels, you wrote: it was a well known fact that Bob Mishler rarely if ever practiced Knowledge (back then called meditation). how could he possibly know what experience the premies were having, when he was not having it himself? I'm interested in how you know this 'well-known fact' (it wasn't known to me, for example). Also, if it was so well known, how come Maharaji placed Bob Mishler in such a powerful postition for so long? Lila? Just wondering. P.S. It's also thought among many that Maharaji rarely if ever practices Knowledge. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 13:17:36 (EST)
From: red heels Email: None To: Katie Subject: Of interest to premies Message: yes, i knew many who were with bob on a daily basis, and it was often mentioned that he didn't practice much if at all. why Maharaji allowed that? might as well ask why he would give Knowledge to you or anyone else. my guess is that he was giving bob a chance, and bob had some real love for him at least that he was expressing, for a while. it wouldn't be very fun if he was acting 'all knowing' with everybody at all times. there would be no lila at all, just a dictator. Maharaji, that spark that makes him Maharaji, is Knowledge. he is one with Knowledge in a way that does not require practicing. he can practice formally when and if he chooses. either way, he is Maharaji. i have to practice if i want to play the violin or clarinet. the violin need not practice. the clarinet need not practice. if i don't play the violin, and practice sincerely (not just making the bow go up and down and pretend to play), then i will either get music at all from the strings or i will get very sour sounding muzak. same with Knowledge and Maharaji. if i am not a sincere devotee, and i do not practice as the Master has instructed, how can i complain when my beautiful piece in the symphony is not heard? it is my fault only -- not the teacher's fault, not the violin's fault. Maharaji is both violin and teacher. he is doing his part. i must do mine. otherwise, there is nothing for me. less than nothing. and all the worse if i were sincere at one time and now have allowed guile in. then i could be angry, want to smash the violin, want to put down the teacher. but it is not the violin, not the teacher that didn't do his/their part; it's me. and he is so kind, you can find that sincerity again, and if you do, he will again allow you into his classroom, no questions asked. he is more than happy to help you play. it gives him joy to give you joy. he is there for anyone who sincerely wants to know that peace, that joy within. he is my most beautiful and patient Master. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 18:50:54 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: red heels Subject: Of interest to premies Message: RH: You're right of course. The guy's a real PIP. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 11:46:49 (EST)
From: John Email: None To: red heels Subject: better dead than red? Message: I'm starting to suspect this 'red heels' is another bogus premie created by a creative ex? I mean seriously, how could anyone actually say something like this: 'it was a well known fact that Bob Mishler rarely if ever practiced Knowledge (back then called meditation). how could he possibly know what experience the premies were having, when he was not having it himself? he couldn't. all he knew what what he thought in his head' Come on, red, come clean. Who ARE you? btw, I really do appreciate you red. you make me laugh, and we all know laughter is from the heart not the head. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 12:06:22 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs To: John Subject: better dead than red? Message: Dear John, Just my uninformed opinion but I thought red heels was Bruce. Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 13:25:19 (EST)
From: red heels Email: None To: Robyn Subject: better dead than red? Message: Now my name is Bruce, i'm a tranvestite, and an ex-premie?!!!!! hahahahahahaha!!!!! ROFL Tell me more!!! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 01:47:19 (EST)
From: X Email: None To: red heels Subject: better dead than red? Message: starting to sound like Bill Burke undercover on a new mission Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 13:23:13 (EST)
From: red heels Email: None To: John Subject: better dead than red? Message: haha! and you make ME laugh, johnny! now I am an ex-premie as well as a transvestite?!! ROFL (roll over the floor laughing). i think this is going to be fun after all, hahahahahaha. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 13:41:57 (EST)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studo57@btinternet.com To: red heels Subject: No connection at all Message: Well, I've got nothing against you if you are a transvestite. But are you a convincing one? You haven't addresses the issue about people who have good experiences from doing meditation and who do not follow Maharaji. Are you suggesting that only premies have any experience? If that is the case then your argument is already shattered because Bob Mishler was a premie and yet according to you, he had no experience from meditation. Now let's be honest here - most PREMIES don't experience anything from meditation. I know this because I used to live amongst and know many, many premies. So what the hell is a premie? I'd say a premie was just an illusion. There is no such thing. A person THINKS they are a premie because they THINK they have some sort of magical connection to Maharaji. But what about the person who knows he's not a premie (me) and yet has experienced light inside, peace inside and the buzz off nectar? You are saying that this experience is invalid. Well it is invalid to your Maharaji trip. I see no connection to it what so ever. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 13:42:49 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: red heels Subject: Orwell's bastards Message: i think it's real cute how the 'ex-premies' here love to roll and slop in Maharaji's mud. even they are attached to Maharaji. so attached in fact they think of him every day, love to talk about him, maybe even try to send him messages. such is the attraction of the Perfect Master, I guess. he is a magnet and even those who claim to hate him are drawn to him. fascinating. loving him is even better. way better. :) :) :) Red Heels, I remember far too well the point you THINK you're making. After all, I was in the cult too. But, really, bro', if you think about it a bit, what point ARE you making? What is this 'attachment' you're talking about? Does it include love and hate? Say it does. Are you then saying that love and hate are indistinguishable? Just because they can both fall under the same general category of strong feelings? How banal. Thinking like that you might just as easily say there's no difference between black and white (they're both just colors, aren't they?). Or poverty or wealth (they're both just descriptions of financial circumstances, aren't they?). Or thinking for yourself or just parrotting an uneducated cult leader (they're both just ways to use your mind, aren't they?). You get the picture. Or maybe you don't. Whatever, they're both .... Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 13:55:07 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Jim Subject: Orwell's bastards (pt 2) Message: he is one with Knowledge in a way that does not require practicing. he can practice formally when and if he chooses. either way, he is Maharaji. i have to practice if i want to play the violin or clarinet. the violin need not practice. the clarinet need not practice. Ah, you poor fool. Following Maharaji into his nothing talk, his thin soup of euphemisms, grossly-exploited ambiguities, undefined special meanings and bad grammar. (Okay, the grammar's more his problem, than yours. Whatever). Define 'practice'. Do you mean 'practice' as in trying something repeatedly in order to improve one's skill OR 'practice' in the sense of actually performing something? See, all you're doing above -- besides parrotting some of that good old stupid Maharaji thinkee-talkee-feelie -- is playing a little word game. Come on, Red Heels, you can do a little better than that, can't you? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 20:38:14 (EST)
From: Memphis Belle Email: None To: Red Heels Subject: The Violin Message: Hello Red Heels, I am a borderline premie/ex-premie. The way you talked about the violin as being compared to Maharaji's way of practicing Knowledge does not quite make sense to me because you said that M is like a violin. You said he doesn't need to practice because he is the perfect instrument just like the violin is a perfect instrument. How did the violin become the instrument that it is today? I will tell you how. It was made for a purpose. And that purpose was to make a beautiful sound. The process of constructing it was by trial and error at first. Each step was refined by using the ears to judge the sound. It is made of Wood and Strings. It is constucted from the hands of man. It came from an idea in the mind. It was created to produce a pleasing sound. The sound is not produced UNLESS a musician plays it. Now this gets interesting, Lets just make M a violin. If M is a violin, then: He is wood and strings. (of course he's not) He is made from the hands of man. ( Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 20:42:49 (EST)
From: Judex Email: None To: Memphis Belle Subject: The Violin - to M.Belle Message: Keep going Memphis Belle. Just do it again from memory if you lost it. It's very interesting. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 00:54:30 (EST)
From: red heels Email: None To: Memphis Belle Subject: The Violin Message: well, i cannot claim that i am good at metaphors. seemed a good one at the time. point is, the Master is in a position, and the student is in another. but if you are borderline premie/ex-premie, then i guess for you it's just a matter of choosing what you want. listen to Maharaji again and listen with your heart. he really does deliver. but it takes an effort on the part of the student. Maharaji makes effort too, but in another role. he makes the effort for propagation and to serve his own Master. i don't believe the fact that Maharaji and the Knowledge are one is something that can be successfully inspected on an intellectual level, the Knowledge being infinite and the intellect being finite. but who cares? i'm in it for the joy and bliss and love i have come to feel more and more in my heart. and i feel so beautiful when by following his guidance i find myself so often waking up in the morning and my first thought is being grateful to be alive. and then i am grateful to him for guiding me on this beautiful path. i remember years ago waking up and my first thought was, day after day, 'shit, I'm still alive!' Maharaji is turned it all around for me. if you want it, if you want to feel that gratitude for life itself, listen to him some more and listen often and learn that which he wants to teach you. it's the most valuable lesson. if you don't want it, you are free to leave. if you can't make that commitment to your own life, of making the enjoyment of life itself and gratitude for life itself as a priority, it doesn't matter if you live at his residence, in an ashram or by yourself, you won't get anywhere with it anyway, not even if you listen to him 8 hours a day. you have to make that effort. but oh, the rewards! but it's totally up to you. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 01:13:19 (EST)
From: NYDW Email: None To: red heels Subject: oh, the rewards! Message: Oh thank you Maharaji, guru great King! You are the source of my bliss, my love, my self esteem...I give you my graditude that I don't have to say ''oh shit, I'm alive still'' And those thousands and thousands of poor stupid bastards that rejected your great gift...well they can just cut their balls off...or hang themselves...it's all in good humour, your divine leela. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 01:40:02 (EST)
From: Rick Email: None To: red heels Subject: The Violin Message: Why does it have to be that effort? Why can't you make this effort? Or the effort, or just effort with nothing on the side? Why do you talk like you've been programmed by a cult? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 03:04:34 (EST)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: red heels Subject: The Violin Message: Dear Red Heels, you wrote: 'gratitude for life itself as a priority' What kind of vague crap is that? You've been watching too many videos. You're beginning to talk like Maharaji now. Come on now my trannie friend, come clean. You're not really a premie are you? We'll forgive you for pulling our legs. However. if you ARE a premie, you certainly don't have anything from your own experience to say. You're just parroting what Maharaji says. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 14:06:30 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: red heels Subject: Programmed Drivel Message: I thought old Red Heels' post must have been a joke, some ex-premie doing a parody of the way premies talk and say nothing, using the way BM speaks as an example. Red Heel's has learned such programmed talk very well. Anyone who was a premie for more that 15 minutes will instantly recognize the litany of 'thats', 'this's' 'more and mores' 'the heart' and 'so beautifuls,' for example' listen to Maharaji again and listen with your heart. but who cares? i'm in it for the joy and bliss and love i have come to feel more and more in my heart. and i feel so beautiful when by following his guidance and then i am grateful to him for guiding me on this beautiful path. if you want to feel that gratitude learn that which he wants to teach you if you can't make that commitment to your own life, you have to make that effort. Do other ex-premies get the creeps to the same extent I do when I hear such programmed, meaningless drivel? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 14:19:06 (EST)
From: Jethro Email: cadbury@compuserve.com To: JW Subject: Programmed Drivel Message: 'Do other ex-premies get the creeps to the same extent I do when I hear such programmed, meaningless drivel?' Yes, it gives me the creeps and really saddens me.Having said that it also saddened me when I was a card-carrying member. The language changes after every program.....woops sorry event...or is it festival.....do I sound confused? Jethro Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 16:50:28 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: JW Subject: Programmed Drivel Message: Do other ex-premies get the creeps to the same extent I do when I hear such programmed, meaningless drivel? No, Joe, I think it's kind of cute. I would have liked to have heard Red Heels' D/S patter for that matter. 'Oh baby, hit me harder with THAT paddle' or whatever. But, alas, it seems we've lost her. Hey, now I REALLY wonder what 'red heels' means. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 22:41:10 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: Jim Subject: Ice Jim Message: I would have liked to have heard Red Heels' D/S patter for that matter. Jim, are you rapping now? What are you talking about? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 23:13:40 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: JW Subject: Yo! Message: JW, I was just wondering what a premie might say in the midst of some heavy, D/S sex. Hey, it was a perfectly good joke. Don't ruin it. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 19:39:48 (EST)
From: Rick Email: None To: JW Subject: Programmed Drivel Message: Yes, JW; red heels makes my skin crawl. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 22:32:23 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: Rick Subject: Skin Crawl II Message: Me, too. This line is the most remarkable and chilling to me. Wouldn't it have made Richard Nixon proud? learn that which he wants to teach you Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Jun 22, 1998 at 01:37:04 (EST)
From: Rick Email: None To: JW Subject: Skin Crawl II Message: JW: Me, too. This line is the most remarkable and chilling to me. Wouldn't it have made Richard Nixon proud? learn that which he wants to teach you Yeah, I noticed the poison in that line, when you listed it. I can see the Nixon connection, but it takes on a different tone with Tricky Dick accent. I was too infuriated from the entire post it was originally included in, to register how insidious it was. The one that always gets me is when premies say 'more and more'. Whatever it refers to, 'more and more' anything makes me feel like going ballistic. With things getting more slick, it's surprising they don't get a PR person to point out how stupid all this stuff sounds. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Jun 22, 1998 at 00:19:28 (EST)
From: VP Email: None To: JW Subject: Programmed Drivel-beautiful Message: JW, The word 'beautiful' lost its meaning for me for a very long time. This was because the premies around me used it to describe EVERYTHING--for example: She's sooooo beautiful, he's such a beautiful premie, when you receive knowledge it's so beautiful, Maharaji is so beautiful, Durga Ji is soooo beautiful, knowledge is such a beautiful experience, when you experience that love it's so beautiful, etc. After a while I realized that it was okay to use this word again, in the proper context. It began to have some real meaning when I didn't hear it in every sentence all day long. I like to be positive, but sometimes too much flattery of things comes off as very insincere. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Jun 22, 1998 at 00:32:09 (EST)
From: Red Foley Email: None To: JW Subject: Drivel - Bubba Free John Message: indeed! In fact, for an overdose of drivel take a look at that Bubba Free John site (www.adidam.com ?) It's as if it's all written by Holy Lawyers I can't read that stuff. I see the words and phrases, but I haven't the patience to take it in and try to understand it. It's total B.S. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 00:38:50 (EST)
From: red heels Email: None To: Jim Subject: Orwell's bastards (pt 2) Message: jim, dear, i will try. since you ask so nicely. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 00:36:51 (EST)
From: red heels Email: None To: Jim Subject: Orwell's bastards Message: no, i don't get the picture. what is your point? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 02:39:22 (EST)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: red heels Subject: Orwell's bastards Message: Well here's MY point. Why didn't you answer my post about there being no connection between an experience from meditation and Maharaji? I mean, I am a heathen untouchable who has denounced Maharaji and yet I still see light, feel peace and get off on the nectar. Oh I get it - you're going to tell me that Maharaji's grace is the same for everyone, believer or non believer alike. How about the true fact - that there is no connection between Maharaji and what one experiences in meditation. Seems pretty obvious to me. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 21:59:06 (EST)
From: red heels Email: None To: Sir David Subject: Orwell's bastards Message: SD, you are not feeling the love between the student and Master. To me, that is the most precious feeling which if one has not experienced it, or is not experiencing it, Knowledge and the 'cosmic' is very dry. There is a Dance going on. I don't see you dancing. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 22:51:16 (EST)
From: Jethro Email: cadbury@compuserve.com To: red heels Subject: Orwell's bastards Message: 'SD you are not feeling the love between the student and Master. To me, that is the most precious feeling which if one has not experienced it, or is not experiencing it, Knowledge and the 'cosmic' is very dry. There is a Dance going on. I don't see you dancing.' Has it ever occurred to you that many people experience what you are talking about but have no need to make any associations with it? It is not owned by any set of ideas or person. It is a big mistake to make any assumptions about what another is experiencing. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 00:41:38 (EST)
From: red heels Email: None To: Jethro Subject: Orwell's bastards Message: isn't that what you all are doing here? making assumptions about what premies are experiencing? are you then making a big mistake? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 05:52:36 (EST)
From: jethro Email: cadbury@compuserve.com To: red heels Subject: Orwell's bastards Message: 'isn't that what you all are doing here? making assumptions about what premies are experiencing? are you then making a big mistake?' Well speaking personallyI have always had a 'wonderful experience of knowledge'. I just asked myself one day why I was not allowed to speak about my experience, why I had to stare at pictures of PremPal, and why I had to watch videos instead of hearing real live sentient human beings. I asked myself why so many premies decided to end their own lives. I asked why self why Milky Cole(that great Devotee), who when asked by his wife Penny who was raped and almost killed, for some support, told her 'Oh don't complain, it's your karma'. How do I know that?... she told me a week before she overdosed and died. Why when I met an 'aspirant' some years ago and told her about PremPal's early days in India, she told me that she was told that it was all lies made up by 'old premies'. So I showed her satguru has come. You see Red, since I have 'let go' of PremPal, I have to say that meditation is even better.I feel like I have thrown out all the rotten veggies that sometimes hand around in the corner of my fridge. You should try a bit of blasphemy, the nectar gets thicker and more intoxicating. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 11:15:37 (EST)
From: seymour Email: None To: jethro Subject: Orwell's bastards Message: Wotcha Jethro, I was saddened to hear you say... 'I asked why Milky Cole(that great Devotee), who when asked by his wife Penny who was raped and almost killed, for some support, told her 'Oh don't complain, it's your karma'. How do I know that?... she told me a week before she overdosed and died.' but I can believe it. Once you have given you love to the master every one else take second place and you have no time to get into worrying about other peoples problems. I remember Milky. I always liked his Flashy style and one of the few times GM talked directly to me he asked 'Do you know where Milky is?' I could only answer truthfully in the negative although I think at the time I wished I could have served the Lord better by giving the information he wanted to know. BTW does anyone remember George Blodwell. He was another good time premie.( I always liked them the best as they did not seem to let being a member of DLM stop them going to the night clubs after satsang every night.) The last I heard he was a male model. Seymour. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 13:10:01 (EST)
From: Jethro Email: cadbury@compuserve.com To: seymour Subject: Orwell's bastards Message: 'Once you have given you love to the master every one else take second place and you have no time to get into worrying about other peoples problems. ' Yes like your wife being raped and almost murdered and coming to you for a little moral support to help heal......that is tooooo much for such a great devotee. Well here's a quote I just remembered. Prem Pal was asked 'What was the best time for a past perfect master?' Answer:'It was the time of Krishna, because in that time the devotees loved each with he same love that they loved Him' Perhaps Prem Pal could learn something. 'BTW does anyone remember George Blodwell..' Yup, we lived for a while in the same ashram in Kallisia Ave, London. George was great.One of the few who was scared to enjoy himself. I haven't seen him since about 1979. Jethro Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 14:11:48 (EST)
From: Jethro Email: cadbury@compuserve.com To: Jethro Subject: Orwell's bastards Message: Same as previous post with typos corrected. 'Once you have given you love to the master every one else take second place and you have no time to get into worrying about other peoples problems. ' Yes like your wife being raped and almost murdered and coming to you for a little moral support to help heal......that is tooooo much for such a great devotee. Well here's a quote I just remembered. Prem Pal was asked 'What was the best time for a past perfect master?' Answer:'It was the time of Krishna, because in that time the devotees loved each other with the same love that they loved Him' Perhaps Prem Pal could learn something from his own words. 'BTW does anyone remember George Blodwell..' Yup, we lived for a while in the same ashram in Kallisia Ave, London. George was great.One of the few who was NOT scared to enjoy himself. I haven't seen him since about 1979. Jethro Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 12:57:50 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: jethro Subject: Jethro - Please!! Message: So I showed her satguru has come. Jethro, You got a copy of this? I've wanted to see it and WIGM? for years now. Any chance we can get some copies made? I know that JW would pay hadsomely for one. I'd chip in a bit too. Also, that story about Milky's wife is horrendous. Milky, to me, was just a biblical name from DLM old testament stories (anything pre-dating my own capture on April 24, 1973 is 'old testament'). That is, he seemed to have had his most legendary and intimate moments with tubbyji a little before then. I might have heard him give satsang somewhere -- maybe the Ally Pally perhaps -- but I don't recall. What was with that guy anyway? Where is he today? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 13:23:20 (EST)
From: Jethro Email: cadbury@compuserve.com To: Jim Subject: Jethro - Please!! Message: hello jim I haven't seen Milky in years. The last I heard of him was few years ago in Cornwall. Apparently he had written a book which he claimed was channelled by maharaji. I didn't see the book, because the people who told me about it didn't like the fact that I called him an inhuman arsehole. I think he has his own devotees. About the videos, you can email me privately. I would be happy to share anything I have. Oh by the way, in the early 80s(I think) when we were meant to have destroyed all old videos, I refused on the grounds that they were 'part of my heart', so when Susy Bye came to stay at my home I asked her if I should destroy them. She said I could keep them and since she was the divine librarian...I guess it's ok. jethro Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 11:30:30 (EST)
From: Scottt T. Email: None To: red heels Subject: Orwell's bastards Message: RH: isn't that what you all are doing here? making assumptions about what premies are experiencing? are you then making a big mistake? To state the obvious, we have some idea of what premies experience because we've been there. The reverse is not the case. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 14:59:25 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: red heels Subject: Orwell's bastards Message: isn't that what you all are doing here? making assumptions about what premies are experiencing? Absolutely not. I readily admit that the experiences premies are having are sincere and real. I had the same experiences as a premie and still have them as an ex-premie. The distinction I make is that those experiences have absolutely nothing to do with Maharaji. Since he has nothing to do with them, you don't need the devotion/gratitude/worship/cult/religion he is about, and which has been very destructive to a lot of people. In fact, I found that things get a LOT better in life without Maharaji. But as a premie I couldn't have conceived that was possible, so I think we exes know where you are coming from, and why it's kind of sad. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 11:27:29 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Jethro Subject: Orwell's bastards Message: Jethro: It is a big mistake to make any assumptions about what another is experiencing. ...not to mention, somewhat condescending. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 01:01:54 (EST)
From: Rick Email: None To: red heels Subject: Red Heels Message: You arrogant fuck. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 04:08:14 (EST)
From: Sir David Email: David.tudio57@btinternet.com To: red heels Subject: You can't see me dancing??? Message: Actually I do a good 'Twist' and 'Locomotion' to some of the golden oldies. What ARE you on about dear boy? I regularly dance with my children. They are real and not fake. And they dance better than a guru. If you call Maharaji's stuff a 'dance'. Come on man, I wasn't born yesterday. Who are you dancing with? An imaginary Lord. Unless you know him personally, Maharaji doesn't even know you exist. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 08:55:25 (EST)
From: Katie Email: None To: Sir David Subject: Shake it up baby! (off topic) Message: Hey Sir David, Just reading your post made me want to get out that music and dance. Thanks. I think dancing is one of most fun things in tee world, and I'm glad you're dancing with your kids. My niece (age 9) and I really got into dancing to the Go-Go's (remember them?) last time she was here. More fun than going to a program, that's for sure. Keep on twisting! Katie Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Jun 22, 1998 at 00:29:40 (EST)
From: VP Email: None To: Katie Subject: Shake it up baby! (off topic) Message: I am teaching my little ones to waltz, bunny hop, twist, shag and just do what comes naturally. There's nothing like cutting loose to a good song. Recently visited a pizza place in a college town with friends. All of our under 10 year old kids were dancing and singing some old rock and roll/Motown tunes that were playing in the place. The young waiter came over and said, 'I'm surprised that these little ones know all of this old music.' I said, 'What do you think we old farts listen to at home?' It's true, though. My kids like the Stones, Beatles, Janis Joplin, and lots of Motown. You should be dancin'-yeah! VP Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Jun 22, 1998 at 02:32:28 (EST)
From: Judex Email: None To: VP Subject: Shake it up baby! (off topic) Message: Try the 'Presidents of the United States' (now disbanded) which my daughter likes. Did quite a good version of 'video killed the radio star' at the end of that silly 'the wedding singer' movie (but lots of rude words in songs - maybe that's the appeal). yeah, dancin'..... Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 20:43:14 (EST)
From: me Email: None To: Everyone Subject: PUBLIC BEWARE Message: I have in front of me an invitation that is used to invite people to Introductory Video Events... A SPECIAL INVITATION You are invited to attend a very special introductory video presentation. Something in your heart wants to know. This is not about religions and philosophies. This is not about concepts or dogmas. There is no money involved here. No one is going to try to sell you anything. This one is about you. This one is for you. Well folks, it is a for sure thing that Maharaji approved this or even composed it himself. My comments: Firstline...considering you haven't a clue what you are being invited to, because premies are instructed to let M do the explaining, yes, you are curious. Second and third lines...now you know what it isn't SUPPOSE to be, how about being honest here and telling the truth and letting everyone from the start know that they this is about worship and loving Maharaji. Fourth line...true, free until you find yourself willing to go to any lengths to pay for trips to see Mahraji. Fifth line...no, until you actually go to a longer event where there is SO much to purchase and no one is forcing you, but NOT having that video or T-shirt doesn't feel great. Sort of like the feeling when you become a premie and are asked for a donation and even if you can't afford it you are SO grateful that you feel bad for not giving. Sixth line...this is not about you. It's about Maharaji and supporting his lavish lifestyle and insuring that there will always be lovers (translation of premie by the way) to surround him and feed his ego. Wouldn't you be blissful if you had adoring people everywhere you went in the world? Seventh line...what 'one' is for you, ask yourself. It's a secret until you receive Knowledge and if you think about it, you feel doubtful of ANY secrets don't you? Why isn't what this is REALLY about stated on the invite? No shortage of space for the words that are printed. If you receive one of these invitations and you think it is harmless be warned that you are not being told the truth, which you will discover when you go to one of the international events where Maharaji is Master, sitting on a stage being sang to and encouraged to dance in front of you while devoted followers surrounding you are in tears and emotionally charged at the prospect. Is THIS what you want to be involved with? In order to continue here it is necessary for me to remain anon. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 20:48:36 (EST)
From: PaulR Email: pgrobinson@hotmail.com To: me Subject: PUBLIC BEWARE Message: Why do you have to remain anonymous? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 21:00:38 (EST)
From: me Email: None To: PaulR Subject: PUBLIC BEWARE Message: Please respect that I must and that I cannot explain why. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 21:11:02 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: me Subject: PUBLIC BEWARE Message: Hey you, I mean me, Nice to hear from you. Thanks for the 'invitation' which, s you've clearly explained, is absolutely insidious. No wonder poor CD talks like that. Or premieji for that matter. Again, welcome. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 23:03:51 (EST)
From: Katie Email: None To: me Subject: anonymity Message: Dear me - it is really OK to be anonymous on here - lots of people are. Please don't worry about it (if you even are). Katie Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 23:45:51 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: me Subject: PUBLIC BEWARE Message: me, Thanks for posting that. Thanks also for your analysis, all of which rings true. The question I have is how does BM expect anyone to show up to something with an invitation that sounds that idiotic? And didn't he steal that last line 'this one is for you' form Budweiser? I wouldn't be surprised if he wrote it himself. He apparently wrote that 'instructors manual' which reflects the writing level of a fourth grader. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 00:07:46 (EST)
From: me Email: None To: JW Subject: PUBLIC BEWARE Message: Bud's is 'this one's for you' I think? but maybe because people make that connnection without knowing why or maybe they don't even realize that they have, (I admit I didn't, but I probably did, and come to think of it, I did feel thirsty and wanted a beer, I mean to see a video, yah, that's it, that's what I wanted?)and then are struck, not with the idiot manner in which it is written, but by an overwhelming urge to go where the beer just MIGHT be! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 10:19:24 (EST)
From: Paul Email: None To: JW Subject: PUBLIC BEWARE Message: JW I think M knows that for every 100 or 1000 people approached there are so many looking for something. Of those so many, there are bound to be a few willing to attend, of those willing to attend a few will become premies . It really is very much like Amway-get people to attend without telling them what the opportunity is and if you approach enough people your'e bound to get a percentage. Paul Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 14:10:06 (EST)
From: anonymous Email: None To: Everyone Subject: ancient dirt Message: I was reading the stuff here about womanizing and remembered this very weird thing I read. I personally never heard anything about BM womanizing. But I did read this in the Miami Herald in an article a reporter wrote after interviewing Bob Mishcler after the split. There was a reference to Bm having Mishcler and another man play a game in which they poked eachother's penises with sticks while he observed. As I recall. This article would have been published in 1978-1979 if anyone can access the archives. Anyone else remember this? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 14:58:28 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: anonymous Subject: ancient dirt Message: Interesting. I wonder if this reflects a fixation in the Miami area? Recall that Jim Morrison got into similar trouble in the early seventies. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 15:08:44 (EST)
From: Carol Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Scott and forum elves Message: This is weird: I saw your post RE:ancient dirt listed as a previous postabove LOTU from Robyn, but not listed in the space under the Thread where it's supposed to be. Carol Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 23:42:14 (EST)
From: Forum Elves Email: None To: Carol Subject: Scott and forum elves Message: This is weird: I saw your post RE:ancient dirt listed as a previous post above LOTU from Robyn, but not listed in the space under the Thread where it's supposed to be. That happens when your copy of the index is older than the 'mysterious' post. Scott posted after you loaded the index page. When you selected his post to read, the current previous post is shown as previous. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 03:08:37 (EST)
From: Carol Email: None To: Forum Elves Subject: Scott and forum elves Message: Thanks for the explanation! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 17:10:06 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Carol Subject: Scott and forum elves Message: Yeah, right! NOW I understand! -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 15:10:14 (EST)
From: carol Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: post location,Scott Message: As soon as I entered my response to you, your post appeared where it was supposed to be! Carol Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 16:02:27 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: carol Subject: post location,Scott Message: Carol: My guess is that it has something to do with 'ancient dirt,' clogging the gears. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 16:21:03 (EST)
From: PaulR Email: To all To: Scott T. Subject: post location,Scott Message: The software inserts your post after the post of the person to whom you replying. using the time when you submit to place the order. Therefor if more than 1 person is writing a response to a single post all but one of the responses will appear to be out of order to the respondin poster. Because you leave the Index of Posts while you write your post. I think, I think too much; sometimes. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 20:52:10 (EST)
From: PaulR Email: None To: All Subject: Ancient dirt. Message: I really don't see what is so harmful about this eoisode. M was an adolescent, doing an adolescent Master type thing with some willing associates. No one was harmed. It was a private little joke. Let's not start confusing some innocent horsing around with the serious damage which some premies have perpetrated in the name of GM Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 13:07:39 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: PaulR Subject: M's 'innocent horsing around.' Message: Paul: M was an adolescent, doing an adolescent Master type thing with some willing associates. No one was harmed. It was a private little joke. Let's not start confusing some innocent horsing around with the serious damage which some premies have perpetrated in the name of GM It is entirely possible that the incident made Maharaji nervous or embarrassed, and he may have laughed in order to cover that up. Seen in isolation it may not be an incident that documents cruelty, although putting it together with other testimony seems to verify a pattern. However, it does question the authenticity of seeing M as some sort of divine being. And, indeed, someone was harmed. As for being a 'private little joke,' it was indeed little, and all too private. Are you suggesting that the harm that was incident in DLM is to be laid exclusively on the shoulders of premies? Forgive me, but that is utterly ridiculous. 'Innocent horsing around' bullshit. He was giving autocratic direction to his slaves. Where have you been? -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 21:05:30 (EST)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Scott T. Subject: and talking of penises Message: Just before the ashrams folded in 1983, I was doing some gardening in the Herne Hill ashram in London and one of the ashram premies put a tape of Maharaji on to listen to. This ashram sister didn't know I was lurking in the garden. I was amazed at what Maharaji was talking about on this tape. Maharaji was obviously giving 'closed door' satsang to current ashram premies (I had been an ashram premie myself but that was years before) and this ashram satsang was clearly not for my ears. Maharaji was talking about some poor ashram (male) premie who had been unable to keep the celibate lifestyle. Maharaji thought this was very funny. He was saying that the premie just couldn't control himself and kept having to masturbate in order to relieve himself. This poor premie had obviously been in turmoil in trying to be celibate and yet having the terrible guilt of still having the sexual desire. I remember Maharaji's voice quite clearly as if it were yesterday. He said, about the premie, 'He couldn't control himself, he kept trying but he couldn't control himself, so he cut it off!' Maharaji found this really funny. He was laughing about it. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 21:09:34 (EST)
From: Anon Email: None To: Sir David Subject: and talking of penises Message: Get to bed you wastrel! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 21:10:33 (EST)
From: PaulR Email: None To: Sir David Subject: and talking of penises Message: Yes David, That certainly is a different matter, and illustrates that you got to see his sociopathic side early on. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 00:01:49 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: Sir David Subject: and talking of penises Message: ....As if BM was 'the master of his domain!' Seriously, I had an ashram roommate who attempted castration and I know there were others who were successful. That satsang rings a bell, but I don't recall it, but maybe I have repressed it. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 14:38:50 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: JW Subject: and talking of penises Message: I lived with a premie for a while who WAS successful in castrating himself for the Lord. He did this before we lived together in the same premie house. A nice guy, too. A little sullen, but then, as I say, I never knew him before and, come to think of it, wouldn't you be a bit 'off' with your bit off? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 16:24:38 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: JW Subject: and talking of penises Message: Joe: I take it back about M being less evil than Da Free John. They are birds of a feather. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 01:29:49 (EST)
From: eb Email: None To: Sir David Subject: and talking of penises Message: Sir David, Reading your post made me really mad. I know I have a rather twisted sense of humor, but Maharaji must be a real sicko to find that funny. Every so often a post comes along that breaks through the armour around my heart and shows me how truly awful the whole thing was/is. Yours, David, was one such post. Maharaji, this is from the heart: YOU ARE AN ASSHOLE!!!!! eb Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 09:23:12 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs To: Sir David Subject: and talking of penises Message: Dear David, With this subject I thought this was going to be humorous. I remember, I think, JW and another ex talk about knowing male premies who castrated themselves which is horrific big time, but this! Then for that ASS HOLE to laugh and make a joke. I wonder what the reaction was of the female premie who was listening. I can't believe anyone could be so brainwashed and insensitive to miss the intense pain that poor male premie was going through to do such a self destructive thing and how you could still respect, never mind worship BM for his callousness! How did you react? Did hearing that get you closer to seeing things as they were/are? I am floored!!! Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 10:34:29 (EST)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Robyn Subject: and talking of penises Message: Well Robyn, when the ashram sister realised I had been lurking in the garden, listening to the tape, she scolded me most vehemently for listening to this 'ashram only' satsang. I just thought the situation was ridiculous. Some angry, frigid woman telling me off for listening to Maharaji's secret satsang. I was not appalled myself at the time, by Maharaji's callousness over this premie's plight. At the time, I had ambitions to become one of his initiators and I guess I was ready to accept anything Maharaji said. After all, he was the Lord. All the above happened in the summer of 1982. By 1983 Maharaji's trip was collapsing and I slowly started to regain my own mind and realisation that my thoughts and opinions were valid. Later, I looked back on what Maharaji was laughing about and realise what an immature, hypocritical and callous bastard he was. I think that Maharaji should get the Nobel prize for hypocracy. His continual advocacy of celibacy and his outright condemnation of premies who 'indulged in sex' was the exact opposite to his womanising lifestyle. He even had the nerve to give a really heavy satsang in Orlando Hans Jayanti once about premies being hypocrites and getting into a sex trip. He called US hypocrites! His trip was one big mind fuck and he was too ignorant and callous to care about the effect it was having on people. He is trying the same thing again now, it seems. We cannot let him get away with screwing up people any more. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 12:12:45 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs To: Sir David Subject: talking of exposing BM as B.M. Message: Dear David, As I say over and over, being here has been of such a great help to me but that all has very little to do with BM and his organization and now I have a heafty list of people I email who also help me immeasualbly(sp) with these issuse and I could stop coming to the forum as much as I do but the reason I continue is for the reason you stated to help others get out or better yet not get in. That is a very important committment for me. Once my life calms down, soon, soon. I hope to feel even stonger in that committment. Love, Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 12:10:38 (EST)
From: John Email: None To: Robyn Subject: this is very disturbing to me! Message: Robyn: I had the same reaction you and eb and probably most of us ex's had to DAvid's post. In other words wanting to convey to our former guru what an absolute jerk he is. And what's very disturbing to me is that, like David, at the time I probably would have thought nothing of the guru's comments. It really shows how surrenduring your reason and judgement totally fucks up your values. If you have the mindset that whatever the guru says is gospel, then he can say stuff that is totally inane, that is actually cruel, and yet you no longer have the ability to ascertain that. It's not listening 'from the heart', it's listening without a conscience! That's what M really wants his followers to do. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 12:15:54 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs To: John Subject: this is very disturbing to me! Message: Dear John, I can't say for sure but I hope I wouldn't have been able to accept a lot of what I hear went on and still does and am happy I had a much milder experience but really want to be a part of exposing the fat boy for what he is. A cruel and heartless, people using, rich brat. Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 13:50:47 (EST)
From: red heels Email: None To: John Subject: question Message: is there a way to cancel a post once you have started one if you change your mind? i can't see a cancel option... Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 16:18:12 (EST)
From: JW Email: None To: red heels Subject: question Message: If you hit the 'back' button, instead of the 'submit' button, you post will disappear. Once it's posted, you can't retreive it. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 18:57:43 (EST)
From: Judex Email: None To: John Subject: do what I say not what I do Message: If you have the mindset that whatever the guru says is gospel, then he can say stuff that is totally inane, that is actually cruel, and yet you no longer have the ability to ascertain that. It's not listening 'from the heart', it's listening without a conscience! Yes and I believe that's probably where some of the 'disdain' that is mentioned M shows comes from - disgust towards people who would worship anything and everything about you must come out at times (see Life of Brian: the scene where they kiss the sandal?). Especially if you had any guilt, knowing everything about you was not perfect (then why not say - worship what's inside - don't worship me? wouldnt that be the honest thing to say?) These days he spells out - you don't have to leave your family, you don't have to leave your job - (duh because it's inside). But what I felt was so much longing that I wanted to leave everything, abandon everything. I think a part of the internal thinking is - well how did he get this way - it must be by complete surrender/devotion that he has achieved this level of love and grace. Only Charanund out of all of them had something as wonderful as M, I felt. BTW flicking through Kabir's poetry looking for a quote, found this - Between the conscious and the unconscious, the mind has put up a swing: all earth creatures, even the supernovas, sway between these two trees, and it never winds down. Angles, animals, humans, insects by the million, also the wheeling sun and moon; ages go by, and it goes on. Everything is swinging: heaven, earth, water, fire, and the secret one slowing growing a body. Kabir saw that for fifteen seconds, and it made him a servant for life. (this is like the technique we have been discussing) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 17:10:20 (EST)
From: Zow Email: None To: Sir David Subject: gobbling up the twisted facts Message: I was present at the ashram meeting where Maharaji told that story. David's version is inaccurate and taken out of context. And look how far you all have gone with hearsay. What for? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 17:26:52 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Zow Subject: gobbling up the twisted facts Message: I was present at the ashram meeting where Maharaji told that story. David's version is inaccurate and taken out of context. And look how far you all have gone with hearsay. What for? Well, then, Zow, What DID he say? What exactly's inaccurate about David's account? Really, this kind of comment is absolutely worthless. You should know that. If you've really got something to say, say it. As for the hearsay, what do you want? This is a CULT, fella. We were information starved for years. We're just starting to piece it all together. Care to help? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 17:53:59 (EST)
From: JW Email: joger02aol.com To: Zow Subject: gobbling up the twisted facts Message: Zow, I don't think it's legally hearsay, if David heard BM say it with his own words. We have his recollection of what BM said. Does your recollection differ? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 18:17:07 (EST)
From: eb Email: None To: Zow Subject: To Zow--Give It To Us Straight Message: We seek the truth. Really. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 20:57:17 (EST)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Zow Subject: Not innacurate dear Mr Zow Message: My memory does serve me correctly. I just happen to have a very good memory for remembering what people say. It's a bit like a photographic memory exept it's audio. You could call it a tape-recorder memory. I can play back the tape in my mind now and I can hear Maharaji saying, 'He couldn't control himself, he couldn't control himself, so he cut it off!' And I remember exactly the tone of voice he said it in. And the context in which he said it. He clearly found it amusing that this premie had cut off his penis and he clearly was implying how foolish the premie was. Not a hint of sympathy or compassion for the premie. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 02:47:38 (EST)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studo57@btinternet.com To: Zowee Wowee Subject: And furthermore Message: It's pretty obvious that I haven't bent the truth here because from my brief account of what Maharaji said, you immediately reckognised the satsang. It WAS a closed ashram satsang like I said; He DID find it amusing that the premie cut off his penis and Maharaji IS a heartless bastard. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 22:05:25 (EST)
From: red heels Email: None To: Sir David Subject: And furthermore Message: i lived in the ashram before, during and after the time period you mention. i have never heard of this before, so before responding i want to qualify this by saying that it is pure hearsay and i am not going to assume it is true. that said, (1) Maharaji was not the cause of what happened, (2) the guy made his own very tragic choice, and (3) it is a choice that has happened many times in history. the guy needed therapy, or at the very least, to move out. for some reason he didn't choose either one, although the ashram doors were always open for people to leave anytime they chose (unlike real cults). That said, I will ask you a question: Did you see the movie Pulp Fiction? Did you laugh when the guys brains were splattered all over the car? I did. Some of my friends who saw that movie felt guilty for laughing at that. Sometimes when things are so tragic, the only release is to laugh. What else can you do? It feels good to be able to laugh. Does that make me a cruel person? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Jun 20, 1998 at 23:40:01 (EST)
From: Peter Email: None To: red heels Subject: did you go tell everyone? Message: After you saw Pulp Fiction, did you gather your friends together and tell them about the guy's brains getting blown out? As a funny story? I didn't see the movie. But yes, there are some things that, if you laugh at them, that alone is a good indicator that you are a cruel person. Let's say that's not the case here. It's hard for me to imagine that that scene could make a funny story that's not sick. And that's just a movie. Maharaji's story was real. It was not funny in any way. And it was a VERY sick choice to repeat it in satsang. The man needs help. Unfortunately, he's in a position where it's virtually impossible for him to get it. You are so far out on a limb in defending Maharaji for this that the last leaf is tickling your ass. See you on the ground. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 00:16:42 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: red heels Subject: Red Heels Message: 1) Maharaji was not the cause of what happened, Well, that's the question, isn't it? You say he wasn't and others say he was. (2) the guy made his own very tragic choice, Do you have the integrity to cut this bullshit out once and for all and deal with the real question: what was his choice based on? I say it was based on Maharaji's teachings about sex, spirit and 'surrender'. What do you say? (3) it is a choice that has happened many times in history. ???? the guy needed therapy, or at the very least, to move out. for some reason he didn't choose either one, although the ashram doors were always open for people to leave anytime they chose (unlike real cults). And tell me, RH, what possible reason do you think he might ahve had for staying in the ashram? Are you denying that Maharaji laid an incredibly thick guilt trip on premies about moving out? You've seen the quotes. Just read that little Q&A excerpt from 1974. Don't be an asshole. Be honest. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 01:43:50 (EST)
From: Rick Email: None To: red heels Subject: And furthermore Message: Your detachment caused by 'knowledge' probably does result in your being cruel. The scene in Pulp Fiction you mentioned was pathetic and the laughter you refer to is 'nervous laughter'. It's different than finding something funny, unless you found that funny; in which case, you're pathetic. But make no mistake, Guru Maharaji's was a real cult. People's minds were programmed with a structure fueled by delusions. They made real choices in their lives that had real consequences, all propelled by the programming of this real cult. Don't try to sell your sorry sack of shit here. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 11:53:03 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Rick Subject: 'Way wrong' Message: Jim and Rick: This may be somewhat inappropriate, but SNL did a skit about the Heaven's Gate cult that was pretty funny. They were all on this space ship having a party behind the comet, and making a call home to 'rub it in.' The cult member who was on the phone admitted, however, that they were 'way wrong' about that 'castration thing.' Oops! I have to admit, I laughed. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 12:16:53 (EST)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Sick ^2 Message: Jim and Rick: I thought about that SNL thing a bit more, and the thing is that I didn't feel any sense of responsibility for propagating the cult ideology that lead to the Heaven's Gate tragedy. I therefore didn't feel guilty for laughing at the skit (although I admit it was a little sick). The point you guys are making is that M took no responsibility for what that ashram premie did, whereas anyone in their right mind would have done so. The guy just never bothers to reflect on the consequences of his little charade. In that context laughing at the consequences is 'sick squared.' -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 12:49:31 (EST)
From: Jim Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Sick ^2 Message: Scott, Yeah that skit sounds incredibly funny. No, we can all laugh after the fact at the outrageous comic tragedy of Heaven's Gate. Marshall Applewhite or any of his defenders wouldn't have that right. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 13:46:09 (EST)
From: Robyn Email: sundogs@hotmail.com To: Everyone Subject: LOTU,yet another review PaulR Message: To all, If I can't finish this before I tan I'll finish when I get back! I put the video in and ran into my bedroom for something and hear that yelling: Boli Shri Sat Guru Dev ki Maharaji. I'd seen people post parts of that here but didn't really remember it until I heard that and I ran out to see. It brought back so much. I think I said here already today that I am just starting to uncover memories of my indeed thinking BM was god, yet I think, with reservation, never giving myself totally to the idea and not worring about that one way or the other, thank god! I jotted down notes so I will work from them. I was filled with nestolgia until that goffy looking guy was drooling over that flower petal from BM's lay. That's when the laughing started! Funny also was the premie who said his parents were happier with him when he was a druge! That Jesus freak who was yelling into a car of premies and then someone off camera telling her she shouldn't talk to people like that and her defense being...If you don't yell they won't listen, half of them are meditation freaks! To friken funny!! And I can't remember what he was talking about but he motions like he is feeding a child with a spoon holding his arm our and holding him mouth open with a dim whitted look and says ....and your mouth is open just like that. And then they hold that stupid shot for ever. Oh, yeah, that woman who wants to get K at Mellenium(sp) and is getting pretty bitchy cause it looks like she's not going to get it right then. She says to the guy making the dissappointing announcement that she isn't going to grab him by the tie(but that is exactly what she wanted to do :) but she NEEDS to get it right then, they told her thus and so and she is goint to get it!! Wonder how her story turned out! I also noticed that BM had no socks on, he always had socks on when I got darshan, must have been to be more appealing to the US crowd. You guys may know me well enough to know I forget a lot but when that guy was showing the techniques and the word in particular, he spoke about So Hung which I think Carol posted about from that book from BM's dad. Well either I wasn't told about it or I didn't remember it and NEVER did that or followed my breath in and out of my nose. When I did the word, I just followed my breath in the space and action it took that day in my knowledge session when that mahatma brushed past me. That column of energy racing up and down in the center of my body, lining up with the top of my head and where my butt contacted the floor. Thank god I had that experience because I felt it and knew where to consentrate. Also I don't remember any choosing or casting out people from the session. My most favorite part of all is at the end and This part is for you PaulR, there is a list of stuff that DLM owns, I think, maybe like the planes etc well in the list is that DLM owns 1, yeah that is ONE IBM computer and what it is used for. I loved that! PaulR, should I send you specs sheet to them for approval!!! HA! Robyn Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 16:27:41 (EST)
From: PaulR Email: None To: Robyn Subject: LOTU,yet another review PaulR Message: Dear Robyn, It makes my day to know that you had a good laugh anyhow. regards PaulR Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 13:35:44 (EST)
From: RT Email: hmmmmmmmmm To: Every User Subject: Money for 00 Message: Hello, this is good news... From Peter de Jager’s UK article on the Y2K manpower shortage comes the idea to hire Power Users-people who normally enjoy using a computer. If you use applications-there may be $$ here as a freelance consultant. [You have 1 year, 197 days to report to work. Earn back money spent at Programs for Knowledge.] Go to: www.year2000.com/archive/people.html to read the 5 pg story. Money for Nothing! RT Web site of web sites on y2k: www.y2k.com Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Thurs, Jun 18, 1998 at 22:00:39 (EST)
From: RT Email: mmmmmmm To: all Subject: Worst case scenarios , y2k! Message: Off topic, but of value to all, these 5 paragraphs point to conclusions you must draw. Saving $$ for a y2k outage of about a month is wise. Thanks to bb for alerting me to this book on line. Ugly Scenario - from Y2K the book. www.yardeni.com/ 'The list of possible disruptions in the statement adds up to a mighty ugly scenario. It happens to coincide with some of the worst-case scenarios I have been writing about. Just imagine the possible consequences and domino effects caused by the three disruptions listed in the statement: 1.If welfare payments are delayed, social unrest might result. Criminal activity, e.g., looting and robberies, could increase significantly. The phone system could be overwhelmed with welfare beneficiaries attempting to call government offices for their checks. 2.If government tax collection is impaired, many businesses that are government vendors could fail if they are not paid on a timely basis. Bond investors might not receive their coupon payments on schedule. They might refuse to buy more bonds, especially of state and local governments. 3.If air traffic control systems don't function properly, flights will be canceled. This would be bad for business travelers. It would be bad for the air freight delivery and travel industries too. New York, NYC The September 11, 1997 issue of Computer Weekly reported that the governor of New York State banned all non-essential IT projects to minimize the disruption caused by the year 2000 bomb after reading a detailed report that forecasts the millennium will throw New York City into chaos, with power supplies, schools, hospitals, transport, and the finance sector likely to suffer severe disruption. Compounding the city's Y2K risks was the departure of the head of its year 2000 project to a job in the private sector. In July, 1997 a state official told the New York Year 2000 User Group that New York was only 5% of the way through its millennium projects, costing between $100 million and $185 million. New York City is spending $300 million to replace its non-compliant budget and accounting system and on fixing or replacing other systems. Despite these efforts and those being made in the private sector, an independent study of New York's infrastructure has estimated that the city still faces massive disruption for up to a month at the start of the year 2000. The study, carried out by UK-based Corporation 2000, expects the city's hospitals to be reduced to accepting emergency cases only, and schools to be closed for up to a month. Power supplies and telecoms are only expected to be available at half their normal levels, and banks and the stock market will be shut for up to eight days. This story was also covered in the September 12, 1997 issue of the Financial Times: 'New York City faces significant disruption at the turn of the century despite being among the best prepared of the world's cities. According to Variety.com (Jan. 22, 1998), Warner Bros. has purchased a pitch for 'Y2K,' a thriller about computer bugs that send the modern world awry at the dawn of the new century. END Return to Index -:- Top of Index |